legit1337 Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 @aaron I agree that the beginning of the game is supposed to feel a little desperate, but come on, half of your funding for a bloc gone in one month? From 80 people killed, really? If governments were that skittish in real life they would surrender unconditionally every time a terrorist sneezed within 300 kilometers of their borders. I think your changes of the initial wave being smaller will help with this though, I will have to playtest it to be sure so I'm reserving judgment. Happy holidays to you boys at Goldhawk. As always keep up the good work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solver Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 While this is a cosmetic issue, I think the casualty numbers in the geoscape should be increased significantly. A big region gets battered by aliens and still experiences less than 100 casualties per month. That's much less than traffic accidents. An alien invasion should feel very threatening, with regions without active Xenonaut protection losing thousands of people per month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooton Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 While this is a cosmetic issue, I think the casualty numbers in the geoscape should be increased significantly. A big region gets battered by aliens and still experiences less than 100 casualties per month. That's much less than traffic accidents. An alien invasion should feel very threatening, with regions without active Xenonaut protection losing thousands of people per month. After a few months I see casualties in the tens of thousands in regions I am succesfully protecting! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solver Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 I've only seen that kind of numbers if you fail a terror site. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooton Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 I've only seen that kind of numbers if you fail a terror site. A failed terror site gives me an extra 40k casualties in wherever it was. Big number in early months when total casualties is around 3000-4000 a month. Not in mid 1980 when I gain funding with 100k casualties in the month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legit1337 Posted December 21, 2013 Share Posted December 21, 2013 I'm starting to get a little frustrated with the stable candidate. I've restarted the game three times now. I've put my base in central united states and every game I've gone a complete month without seeing a single UFO on my radar on all three games. I'm starting to think you should actually put MORE UFOs in the first wave and bring down the chances for geoscape "events" to balance it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwallzyl Posted December 21, 2013 Share Posted December 21, 2013 could someone update the title it should be 2 now not 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legit1337 Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Yes definitely..... I've played some more, and now I'm sure of it. There needs to be MORE UFOs with LESS chance of events IMO. You get an unlucky string of UFOs flying over other territories besides the one you put your base in and it can ruin your game. Economy feels much better though. Definitely feeling the stress early game but it isn't unmanageable. I'm liking the wave system but there should be some sort of system where UFOs occasionally show up randomly in between waves IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vaultdweller Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 You get an unlucky string of UFOs flying over other territories besides the one you put your base in and it can ruin your game. Are you referring to the impact those UFO's have on your national standings due to your inability to stop their missions? If so, then wouldn't more UFO's make that even worse? Or, are you referring to a player getting unlucky and not having access to crash sites due to a lack of interceptable UFOs? If so, then isn't that why two crash sites are generated regardless of player action in the first month? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooton Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Or, are you referring to a player getting unlucky and not having access to crash sites due to a lack of interceptable UFOs? If so, then isn't that why two crash sites are generated regardless of player action in the first month? That's supposed to be removed on higher difficulties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legit1337 Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 Are you referring to the impact those UFO's have on your national standings due to your inability to stop their missions? If so, then wouldn't more UFO's make that even worse?Or, are you referring to a player getting unlucky and not having access to crash sites due to a lack of interceptable UFOs? If so, then isn't that why two crash sites are generated regardless of player action in the first month? I'm saying, there needs to be more UFO's and the chance of "events" happening from those UFOs (and thus decrease in funding) needs to be decreased in order to balance that out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solver Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 How about increasing the Chinook speed just a bit? It's currently taking hours to go to sites even close by. Timing day-night cycles is almost impossible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legit1337 Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 How about increasing the Chinook speed just a bit? It's currently taking hours to go to sites even close by. Timing day-night cycles is almost impossible. I think that might be intentional. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max_Caine Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 I agree with legit. I think the intention with the Chinook's speed is "you can go anywhere on the map, but if you want to cover multiple crash sites before they vanish, you'll need multiple teams". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solver Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 I agree with that being the case for different continents, like a site in Africa and South America. But as it is, I found that even going from a site somewhere around Sudan to a site in Scandinavia is a challenge. Is that intended? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max_Caine Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 TBH, I think the Chinook was faster in v18. I remember Thothkins talking about chaining crash sites together. It may have been slowed down, as I do believe a crash site doesn't vanish so quickly if you lock on it with a dropship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solver Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 It was faster even in v19 I think. Now I find it a bit annoying when the Chinook takes around 4 hours to get to a crash site which is basically next to my base. Terror sites on other continents are reachable but with more than 24 hours of flight time! I'd rather have the chopper be a bit faster, but fuel-limited such that it can't handle multiple sites on different continents. So say with my base in Egypt, it should not be able to first take a terror site in Brazil and then also handle a crash site in USA before going home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commissar Pancakes Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 Perhaps, but then that brings the issue about Chinook range back (though perhaps this is somewhat mitigated by the airstrike option). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solver Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 Egypt-Guinea flight time is at about 6 hours now. I think that is too slow. For Chinook range, I'd prefer it if a trip halfway around the world (from a base to the most distant point from it) took 48% of fuel. That leaves the Chinook with worldwide range and the ability to very briefly enter a patrol state while on the way to a distant mission, but forces a return to base after such a distant mission. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solver Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 Actually it's closer to 8 for Egypt-Guinea. One more reason to speed Chinooks up a bit would be catching landed UFOs. If you spot a landed UFO, it's now impossible to assault it while grounded even if you launch immediately, unless it's pretty much next to your base. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assoonasitis Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 This makes me wonder what the complications would be with basing the speed of the Chinooks off the distance to the staging area such that short flights happen relatively quickly but use a lot of fuel (higher speed burns more fuel, say) and longer flights are slower but use relatively less fuel. Probably more trouble than I'm thinking it would be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solver Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 The idea had crossed my mind, but I think it would not make sense in game and would feel counter-intuitive. Still, I am not a fan of watching the Chinook barely crawl across the map to get to a mission that is within the base's radar range. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dranak Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 TBH, I think the Chinook was faster in v18. I remember Thothkins talking about chaining crash sites together. It may have been slowed down, as I do believe a crash site doesn't vanish so quickly if you lock on it with a dropship. Sites (including terror missions) don't despawn at all while a transport is enroute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Posted January 6, 2014 Author Share Posted January 6, 2014 I'm back in the office now. A few answers to some of the questions I've seen throughout the thread: I would like to put in a system to show the status of interceptors on the map, rather than forcing the player to faff about with the launch screen - here is a little mockup I did some time ago, should be fairly self-explanatory. Also a popup telling you aircraft are ready with a time freeze might be useful, yeah. Also landed missions aren't really working very well right now - it is quite hard to get them, because of Chinook speed etc... but we now have some control over how long missions stay landed, so I will look into tweaking that. I feel like there should be a pretty big reward in terms of Alenium/Alloys for catching a UFO on the ground, compared to a crash site - right now it is double-ish, but I'm thinking even more than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legit1337 Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 @aaron For once I agree completely with what you are proposing. I am excited to play with the new changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.