Ground Combat Balance - V21 Experimental 5

[DNK]

Additional idea: each weapon fire mode has an accuracy/strength ratio added to configs.

So, like a standard rifle's single shot might be 3:1 (or 0.75), a sniper rifle might be 9:1 (0.90), an MG burst might be 1:2 (0.33), and a shotgun single shot might be 1:4 (0.20). We then have shot accuracy and time be based on both stats (this makes strength actually important beyond allowing someone to be an ordinance mule).

Then you have the accuracy formula adjusted so that what was originally the accuracy stat's part of the formula is now:

[ACC*ratio + STR* (1-ratio)]

So if you have a sniper rifle with a guy with 65ACC and 50STR, you get the accuracy multiplier as:

65*.90 + 50*0.10 = 63.5 versus current 65

But that same guy with a shotgun is:

65*0.2 + 50*.8 = 53 versus current 65

Same for shot TU modifier (as discussed in prior post).

This means that for each weapon and shot type, the actual user accuracy/speed of use can be more dependent on strength or accuracy skill, depending on config. Shooting an MG in full auto burst mode will depend more on strength and recoil handling (0.33) than being able to scope someone and fire accurately at range, while perhaps a single shot MG (hypothetically) will be a more even balance (0.50) and a single shot sniper rifle is almost all accuracy (0.90).

One last thing: I thought strength was supposed to be changed to act as a multiplier for TU loss from weight, rather than just acting as a ceiling for how much weight you could add on before incurring TU loss. Did that not happen?

Edited February 26, 2014 by DNK

[Max_Caine]

In gameconfigs.xml, the formula for calculating max weight before TU loss is (this is off the top of my head) 6kg+3x(str/10), so there is a multiplier involved, but strength isn't it. There is a recoil value (I don't think this turns up on the tooltips), which applies a cumulative negative 1% modifier for every point of strength the operator is below the recoil value. However, I don't know if that's still in use.

EDIT: changed str/100 to str/10

Edited February 26, 2014 by Max_Caine

[a333]

Overall it seems fun, nothing rage inducing actually.

But i may just be used to the big changes and seen as this game was in a lot less polished state.

10 battles with ceasans and sebillians, alien accuracy seems good. There are lucky hits and close misses, both within expected borders. Stupid playstyles are punished properly. And i've managed to do a flashbang-shotgun saucer cleaning within one turn, which was awesome.

Heavy weapon guys (girls) in a jackal armor are essentially moving turrets, but that's okay. Move into position, then fire. Moving and firing at the same turn is now a privilege of the veterans, with appropriate aim penalty.

I'd like to hear actual developers opinion on why did they move away from percentage TU system of the X-Com and why returned it now. Though I'm sure there is an old thread that describes this already.

[Gauddlike]

To me most weapons already have a system in place for accuracy to affect the AP cost of a shot..

High accuracy soldier uses a snap shot for 30 AP at 60% accuracy.

Low accuracy soldier has to use a normal shot at 40 AP to get 60% accuracy.

It is not the same for burst fire as that doesn't have multiple fire modes however.

I like the percentage based system on paper.

A veteran soldier can fire his assault rifle the same number of times in a turn as a rookie he just does it more accurately and can perform more other actions in the same turn, like moving.

If the rookie wants to fire shots that are as accurate as the veterans shots then he needs to use a higher AP shot to simulate the extra time he needs to aim so will fire less shots.

I think a lot of people are not factoring in the difference in accuracy between veterans and rookies when they suggest there is now no difference between the two.

Sure the rookie can spray and pray the same amount of shots as a veteran if you want to but he will miss with more of them unless you spend more AP to aim.

Comparing that to the flat AP system where you can not only fire more shots but also do it more accurately so the veteran gets a double whammy bonus, as do the high AP stat aliens.

My suggestion is to try the current system and tweak the values to find a good balance.

If a pistol armed soldier can only fire twice in a turn for example then it is not necessarily because the percentage system is being used, it is more likely that the percentage value to fire is too high.

The same would be true on the old flat system if you set the AP cost too high.

Adjust it down and try again.

This is the first version using this system so the values are not final, just a base to work from.

Once the balance is a little more refined then it will be possible to find the problems with this new system, compare it with the old one, and the devs can decide which they prefer to use.

*edit* Additionally I think it would be interesting to discuss somewhere what the ratio of shots, AP cost, and damage for different weapons should be as it actually has more meaning now.

Edited February 26, 2014 by Gauddlike

[TrashMan]

You still get benefit with increasing TU's - other actions aren't % based.

So your veteran can move faster and CAN actually do "more", but he can't fire more. So you get mobility.

[Gauddlike]

One of the reasons Chris originally gave for the balance changes was that he wanted to make the game less about hunkering down in cover and throwing shots back and forth.

I think as TrashMan says this change could really help promote that mobility.

Under the old system any change to the AP costs of movement automatically increased the amount of shots all troops could fire in a turn.

So trying to promote mobility just makes sitting in place more attractive.

That leads to changes like nerfing cover to try and promote mobility by making sitting in one place too dangerous.

That also leads to higher AP aliens who can blast through cover and kill your troops no matter what because weapons balanced for lower aliens to fire one or two shots a turn can now fire four or five, plus they are fired much more accurately.

It also makes higher ranked aliens into bullet sponges who can soak up lots of your fire because they have to be balanced against an unknown amount of firepower.

It also makes your rookies far less useful than they would otherwise be.

The veterans you might be facing them with may be able to throw out three times as much firepower as your rookies so what is an annoying bullet sponge to the vets becomes the work of several turns to take down for the rookies.

Assuming the other stats and better equipment of the higher rank aliens lets them live for several turns.

[legit1337]

You still get benefit with increasing TU's - other actions aren't % based.

So your veteran can move faster and CAN actually do "more", but he can't fire more. So you get mobility.

But firing takes up a proportionately higher TU... a veteran and rookie can move about the same distance on the turn that they shoot.

One of the reasons Chris originally gave for the balance changes was that he wanted to make the game less about hunkering down in cover and throwing shots back and forth.

But that's what a real firefight is. With a flanking force or heavy weapons/explosives to seal the deal.

IMO there wasn't anything broken about the old system and I would like to hear Chris' reasons for the sudden huge change. I honestly don't see the need for it. And the 20 round magazines for machineguns is just stupid no matter how you slice it.

I still stand by my original post btw.

Edited February 26, 2014 by legit1337

[mrxny]

Dear Developers,

I'M REALLY ANGRY ABOUT A DESIGN DECISION YOU MADE. and I'm going to treat it with the same gravity IF YOU THREATENED TO PORK MY MOM. As you can tell I'M WRITING IN CAPS TO SHOW JUST HOW ANGRY I AM

Yours,

An Angry Young Man.

I think the Noob-Burger was referring to me.

[Gauddlike]

But firing takes up a proportionately higher TU... a veteran and rookie can move about the same distance on the turn that they shoot.

But that's what a real firefight is. With a flanking force or heavy weapons/explosives to seal the deal.

IMO there wasn't anything broken about the old system and I would like to hear Chris' reasons for the sudden huge change. I honestly don't see the need for it. And the 20 round magazines for machineguns is just stupid no matter how you slice it.

I still stand by my original post btw.

I agree that the 20 round magazine is too low and will likely be changed when people have tested it and provided feedback, this is after all only the first balance attempt with the propsed new system whilst the old system has had hundreds of iterations.

The fact that even after all those changes the old system still cannot deliver the game balance the devs want is likely why they are trying alternatives.

Having said that the ballistic machine gun currently has a 50 rounds magazine in game which I feel is acceptable.

I might decide they need to be upped though when I come across tougher enemies but I haven't tested enough to decide fully yet.

The game is still in beta and huge changes like this to test alternative systems are quite welcome to me.

I would rather test this system and find out it doesn't work as well as another alternative than stick with the current one just for the sake of it.

That is after all what the experimental branch is for, experimenting.

I imagine a line or two of code and a copy/paste of the old xml file will be all that is required to change this back if required so I am quite willing to spend a bit of time testing it.

I also stand by my own posts.

This system has its merits and deserves testing.

To throw it out without testing it because one or two people don't like the idea behind it is foolish.

Test it and provide useful feedback in a positive manner, even when the feedback is negative, and I am sure Chris will take into account those posts.

Your opening post, that you still stand by, calling decisions retarded and asking 'Seriously, who thought this was a good idea' comes across as negative and whiney.

That is less likely to find a sympathetic ear.

[Gauddlike]

But firing takes up a proportionately higher TU... a veteran and rookie can move about the same distance on the turn that they shoot.

I forgot to address your first point.

If a veteran and a rookie both spend their whole turn firing there is indeed not much AP left for anything else.

Two assault rifle shots at 40% AP would leave a soldier with 60 AP able to move 3 tiles and a 100 AP soldier able to move 6 tiles.

Not much difference but could be important.

However the differences are much more apparent if they don't spend their whole turn shooting.

A 100 AP vet can move 20 tiles with enough AP reserved for a shot while a 60 AP rookie can only move 12, that is a fairly significant difference.

If the shot AP % is reduced further then the differences are even greater.

Lets say you had a pistol at 15% AP to fire.

The vet would be able to move 28 tiles to the rookies 17 with a snap reserved.

That doesn't even take into account the fact that the veteran would be more effective when he does shoot due to the likelihood that they will have higher accuracy so will likely need to fire less shots.

It also doesn't take into account that the veteran could move the same distance as the rookie but when the rookie (60 AP) only has enough AP left to fire a 40% AP snap shot with 80 accuracy modifier the veteran (100 AP) can fire a 56% AP shot with 120 accuracy modifier, on top of his already superior accuracy.

[Chris]

Wow, this has certainly escalated quickly. As a general note, I'm much more likely to take your thoughts on board if you express them politely and in a civil manner.

Solider with a pistol on my first mission , 2 shots in a turn.

Xenonauts ---------------> Recycling Bin

If you post this, for example, I'm just going to discount your opinion. Pistols have a 24% TU cost so you can fire four shots with them, and I'm not going to bother debating on the level of "my guns don't fire enough shots, I'm deleting this game forever" even if your argument is factually correct (which it is not - for the starting squad, the TU costs are pretty much identical to the last build). If you want to take part in a grown-up discussion, then please behave accordingly and register your displeasure without being rude.

So, onto the explanation of the TU cost change. Firstly this is an on / off switch in config.xml and it can be turned off easily. These are experimental builds intended to try stuff out, they're not final builds, so the level of rage it has generated from some users is needless.

However, I think it is a good change. Over the past few builds there have been a lot of people complaining about the late game, where they are fighting aliens with high TUs (Sebby elites used to have 120TU, Caesan elites used to have 100TU etc) because those aliens are capable of firing five or six shots a turn at you. This makes them extremely dangerous, but also boring to watch them spam shots.

The TU level of high-end aliens has been nerfed somewhat, but the point is still valid. A Xenonaut or alien who has 100 TU is more than twice as good as a 50 TU unit with the same stats, because they can move so far and fire so many shots (more than twice as good because they do one or the other or even combine both depending on the situation, giving them more versatility).

Once you factor in the fact that high-level soldiers have better stats across the board, they are ludicrously overpowered compared to standard units. A unit with 100 TU and 100 Accuracy has 400% the combat effectiveness of one with 50 TU and 50 Acc based just on those two stats.

Under the new system, high-TU soldiers are more mobile than their low-TU counterparts. If a 40 TU and a 80 TU unit spend half their TU shooting (producing the same number of shots), the 80 TU soldier can move an extra six tiles than the lower-TU unit. If they spent no TU shooting, it can move an extra twelve tiles....or spend the extra TU shuffling stuff in their inventory, or reloading or whatever.

TU now represents movement ability, rather than being a super-mega-death stat. If you liked it the previous way, it's understandable - you probably realised just how good high-TU soldiers were, then. But they were too good, and people's experiences fighting the end-game aliens that had the same advantage seems to reinforce this. The OG did it the % way and it has some obvious advantages.

There are probably unintended consequences from this change - I hadn't considered the effect it would have on the weight formula, for example. I'm considering leaving it as is, with heavy armoured soldiers moving more slowly but their guns not firing less bullets.

@Asmodean - it's true that the numbers are now different per soldier. You can use the reserve slider to reserve TU for a shot though.

@Legit - I don't see how you think a soldier with 10 TU is as effective as one with 50 TU. If you want to overload your soldiers with ammo and move three tiles a turn, that's your choice...but I doubt it'll be the most enjoyable way to play the game.

MG's weren't changed because they were insufficiently powerful, they were changed because they were boring. A ten round burst is much more fun and feels more satisfying than a five round burst, but the small ammo count and expensive reload time stops them being OP and makes them more challenging to use (particularly when you get Predators). The purpose here is to produce an interesting weapon in gameplay terms that scales through all tech levels rather than an accurate simulation of a modern machinegun.

[vaultdweller]

A ten round burst is much more fun and feels more satisfying than a five round burst, but the small ammo count and expensive reload time stops them being OP and makes them more challenging to use (particularly when you get Predators).

I hadn't thought of it until you mentioned it, but doesn't the MG change somewhat negate the signature benefit of Predator armour? The premise of the armour is that it makes your men into walking tanks, able to move and still fire heavy weapons without penalty. The heavy weapon penalty (and the negation thereof) becomes somewhat of a moot point if it isn't even possible to move and fire in the same turn to begin with. Maybe the new particle cannon offsets this reduction to the Predator's niche (and by the way, I was very excited to see that addition in the release notes!).

[KateMicucci]

I hadn't thought of it until you mentioned it, but doesn't the MG change somewhat negate the signature benefit of Predator armour?

There is a tendency in the game right now to take away the fun of upgrades by making them very expensive and have severe drawbacks.

Scatter laser needs its ammo capacity boosted. Between costing more than a Condor and only having 2 shots they aren't worth it. Rocket launchers are free.

[Chris]

@Vaultdweller - yes, that is a good point. Perhaps we could add a modifier to the Predator to reduce the weapon TU cost...provided the cost of firing a burst doesn't drop below 51%, that would allow them to move and still fire the MGs. Two bursts in one turn is a bit imba, but you're right they shouldn't be static.

@KateMicucci - to be honest, I'd rather reduce the cost of the scatter laser or nerf the rocket launcher than up the ammo capacity. The low ammo capacity means you actually have to think when you use the gun, even if it is very powerful.

[Max_Caine]

Had a chance to play a few missions now - very impressed in general, but I'll save my opinions for later. I'm going to chime in with KM about sciencefuture LMGs but for a different reason. People are going to look at the LMG with it's 5-burst capacity, then look at the sci-fi LMGs with their 2-burst capacity and say "welp! LMGs for me!". It's that drop of three bursts (for me) that's the most painful comparator between the basic LMG and the sciencefuture ones. Perhaps it may be better to allow more bursts but fewer shots? Say, 3 bursts with 7 shots for a 21-shot power cell?

[frank_walls]

It would be interesting if predator armor was very expensive and allowed the player to function like a tank, i.e. high rate of movement and fire. As is I tend to use predators as ammo trucks.

[Solwen]

Hi, I don't know if this is the right place to post about it but since the Experimental 5 i'm experiencing 2 bugs:

1) Flash bang grenades are totally useless now: I tried like 20 times on different aliens (from lowly caesan non-combatant to Sebilian guards) and it failed everytime to supress them, doing only like 5 stun damages

2) Armored car get unlimitted TU after firing first shot. While it's fun to go arround the whole map in 1 turn and drive bying every xeno in the face it's a bit... game breaking.

[Max_Caine]

Solwen, there is a specific forum for reporting bugs, and #2 is definately a bug and then some. Regarding #1, that also sounds like a bug but the basic stun damage in the latest build is 10, so that can go up or go down +/- 5, which means 5 stun is within the bounds of possibility.

EDIT 1:

Frank, so your Preds are Ammo Mules?

[video=youtube;gImLuqCFMSA]

EDIT 2:

Still playing more games to get a better opinion, but I'd like to echo something that Trashman asked for a while ago. Trashman asked for solider AI statlines, and I gotta say, "friendly AI" is more "bumbling idiot who gets in the way or hides in a corner" AI. Could the friendly solider AI be separated out from the civilian AI because the civvie AI is all about hiding and the solider AI should be all about shooting.

Edited February 26, 2014 by Max_Caine

[frank_walls]

Frank, so your Preds are Ammo Mules?

I guess it depends on the build, lol. During Experimental 4 pushing them to the front didn't help because the volume and accuracy of the alien fire would take them out so quickly. I definitely push them to the front in base assualts and when entering UFO's, but I always load them up with ammo, grenades, med-packs, etc. so that my other guys (new recruits) never suffer TU penalties.

[Pimgd]

Playing v20 hotfix, watching a lets play of v21 experimental 4? I think.

v20 has much higher TU costs for firing and movement.

Laser rifle has 20/30/40 in v20, 20/24/28 in v21. Movement costs 4 in v20, 3 in v21.

So I'm basically paying a lot more TU to get the same things done. There's probably a lot more changes between the two, but...

I would rather continue having to spend a lot of TU rather than be forced to spend TU%. You see, I have a squad decked out in wolf armor right now and I play missions by running them forward a couple tiles, keeping 60 out of 80-100 TU reserved. Now I don't know how much TU% a semi aimed rifle shot will cost, but I think I won't be able to move 5-10 tiles anymore and still have enough TU left for two shots. So... what was changed to promote mobility... instead kills it off. Equipping heavier armor is no longer a choice as it turns into a no-brainer (do you want to move 1-2 tiles more, or half the damage you receive if you get shot?). Keeping soldiers alive isn't nearly as important anymore - just carry a load of stun gas grenades, they'll do the trick.

Calculations are harder on the player as well, I think - I don't use the reserve thing because it just doesn't give me the proper control. Right now it's easy to remember 20/30/40, and remembering 20/24/28 is easy as well. I don't want to remember how many points I need for each soldier - because I'm bound to screw up and lose a soldier - because of interface/mechanics issue, not player fault.

Thanks for explaining that the option is configurable - that way we can agree to disagree. I personally already modified the way fuel works in air combat - 200x is just sad as certain things just don't make sense - flying in a straight line without performing any combat maneuvers burning 200x fuel, what? Foxtrot runs are simple - go up to target, let missiles fly, go back to base. But upon reaching the target, you run out of fuel. What's more - you lose a bunch of fuel at the end of each mission (cause of the delay), blah blah blah I could probably rant about that all day... but it is how the game was designed. But I can change it to 20x and be happy and play the game I want to play - and have hours and hours of fun! So that's cool. In the worst case I'll have to edit some more config files.

[Max_Caine]

Early game thoughts.

So, to begin with I had serious problems with my guys freaking out. EU2012-scale problems of my guys freaking out. There's one particular mission that will go down in infamy as the time I lost 6 guys to one sebillian who caused all of my guys to berzerk, panic, or flee. I also learnt very quickly to fire my LMG as the last weapon, because that has a massive suppression range and is as likely as not to suppress the guy who I had sneaking up on the blind side of the alien I'm pinning down with fire. Then I got Jackal armour... and my problems went away. Just like that. My guys aren't being suppressed left, right and center. They aren't freaking out any more. I haven't had a guy freak out since I got Jackal armour for everyone. My guys still get suppressed, but not half as much. I think its important for the game to make it clear that the player will benefit from armour in more ways than just simple protection. Perhaps a line or two in the Jackal entry about how the testers wearing the armour felt far more confident, and a line in the tips section about how armour will help cut down on suppression.

UFO layouts. Eh. I want to love them. I really do. The individual pieces in the Scout and the Light Scout are lovely - vibrant and alive. But the light scout unfortunately looks chaotic and cluttered. I think you may be better off having the pilot's seat as a centerpiece, not only for aesthetic reasons, but as cover for the noncoms who otherwise are dependant on the corners. As for the red console and the orange-ish box thing, they may be better off with one of them in front of the seat, with the other against a wall.

The Scout stuff looks far more symmetrical and pleasing to my eye (anyway), with the cover far better placed to make breaching and defending easier. However, it's a big open-plan cockpit which means that I can just open the door, pull aggro with a shield guy then dakkadakka with LMGs before closing it again. The design is lovely and is well set out for a breach but it's way too abusable for the open door, shut door trick.

LMGs. Holy crap. This is the energiser bunny of guns. It just keeps going and going! I'll reserve further judgement until I meet Androns, as KM's comments about them make me worried.

Regarding % TU. Eh, I haven't seen that much of a difference tbh with the exception of LMGs and burst fire. Pistols still seem to be 12-15pts per shot. I like how I can take extra stuff on an LMG guy and not worry that I'll be overloading him so much I can't fire a shot. In fact, I like that with all the troopers. I can pack an extra shield on my shield guys and not sweat too much about TUs left. Burst fire seems too expensive - I prefer using an aimed shot then following up with snap shot, and LMG fire seems to eat up pretty much all the TU - could that be dropped a tad?

EDIT: Oh, and I always know how many TU I need for a shot, because it's right there on the TU reserve section.

Edited February 26, 2014 by Max_Caine

[legit1337]

So, onto the explanation of the TU cost change. Firstly this is an on / off switch in config.xml and it can be turned off easily. These are experimental builds intended to try stuff out, they're not final builds, so the level of rage it has generated from some users is needless.

The level of rage is for the direction the game is headed with the latest changes. People who disagree with this design decision are mad because now that is has gone live, it is unlikely to be undone.

However, I think it is a good change. Over the past few builds there have been a lot of people complaining about the late game, where they are fighting aliens with high TUs (Sebby elites used to have 120TU, Caesan elites used to have 100TU etc) because those aliens are capable of firing five or six shots a turn at you. This makes them extremely dangerous, but also boring to watch them spam shots.

I never got to the endgame so I didn't experience this. TUs should be capped at 100 anyway...

The TU level of high-end aliens has been nerfed somewhat, but the point is still valid. A Xenonaut or alien who has 100 TU is more than twice as good as a 50 TU unit with the same stats, because they can move so far and fire so many shots (more than twice as good because they do one or the other or even combine both depending on the situation, giving them more versatility).

Once you factor in the fact that high-level soldiers have better stats across the board, they are ludicrously overpowered compared to standard units. A unit with 100 TU and 100 Accuracy has 400% the combat effectiveness of one with 50 TU and 50 Acc based just on those two stats.

I see no problem with this. Veteran soldiers in real life are worth many times their number in F.N.Gs. Soldier performance should be exponential in regards to experience, not linear.

Under the new system, high-TU soldiers are more mobile than their low-TU counterparts. If a 40 TU and a 80 TU unit spend half their TU shooting (producing the same number of shots), the 80 TU soldier can move an extra six tiles than the lower-TU unit. If they spent no TU shooting, it can move an extra twelve tiles....or spend the extra TU shuffling stuff in their inventory, or reloading or whatever.

Not mobile enough. IMO a veteran should be SIGNIFICANTLY better then a rookie, an extra 6 tiles doesn't cut it, and that is an extreme example too. It is highly unlikely that a rookie and a veteran will have a 40 TU difference unless the rookie has shit stats and the veteran is a supersoldier.

TU now represents movement ability, rather than being a super-mega-death stat. If you liked it the previous way, it's understandable - you probably realised just how good high-TU soldiers were, then. But they were too good, and people's experiences fighting the end-game aliens that had the same advantage seems to reinforce this. The OG did it the % way and it has some obvious advantages.

If there was one valid reason for the change in your entire post. This was it.

There are probably unintended consequences from this change -

No kidding...

@Legit - I don't see how you think a soldier with 10 TU is as effective as one with 50 TU. If you want to overload your soldiers with ammo and move three tiles a turn, that's your choice...but I doubt it'll be the most enjoyable way to play the game.

MG's weren't changed because they were insufficiently powerful, they were changed because they were boring. A ten round burst is much more fun and feels more satisfying than a five round burst, but the small ammo count and expensive reload time stops them being OP and makes them more challenging to use (particularly when you get Predators). The purpose here is to produce an interesting weapon in gameplay terms that scales through all tech levels rather than an accurate simulation of a modern machinegun.

So you are saying you don't see the problem with a severely over weighted soldier fighting the same as a soldier who has many more TUs... Under this system there is no reason NOT to overweight your soldiers, seeing as how they pretty much function the same as if they were unencumbered. Movement speed is irrelevant, you know as well as I do that people will move 3 squares a turn if it gives them maximum advantage.

Also why the sudden shift in philosophy? A couple of months ago you basically said you didn't want the game to turn into a grind fest where players felt required to grind out missions or move across maps slowly because that was the "optimum" playstyle. Even when people told you that "min-maxers are going to be min-maxers, don't balance the game around them" you made questionable balance changes so that players wouldn't feel pressure to play the game slow and grindy. But now that the optimum playstyle is over weighting your soldiers and moving slowly across the map your suddenly fine with that because "(you) doubt that would be the most enjoyable way to play the game"?

Machineguns were fine how they were IMO. I don't remember anyone complaining about them. In fact I remember people (myself included) explicitly stating that they were pretty well balanced, and that sniper rifles and assault rifles needed the balancing attention.

A small ammo count on an MG is unrealistic. Its a frickin' MG! It's design purpose is to be a bullet hose! I understand sacrificing realism for balance but there is a point where you go too far. You might as well make assault rifles fire marshmellows, and the alien ships be made out of a alloy called "indestructium".

I vehemently disagree with the % based shot changes, but I may be able to live with it if it's tweaked a little (lot). The MG changes however is where I draw the line...

EDIT: Oh, and I always know how many TU I need for a shot, because it's right there on the TU reserve section.

But now you have to check individually for each soldier before you move, which is a pain. Instead of just memorizing 3 numbers.

Edited February 27, 2014 by legit1337

[StellarRat]

What I'm trying to figure out is why this radical change was made to the firing mechanics in the first place when other smaller changes could have fixed the problem, IMO. The problem was stated (paraphasing) as "high experience soldiers have too many TUs. Multiplied by their improved accuracy it turns them into "super" soldiers that are too good." If the problem was that soldiers eventually gained too many TUs there were a ton of other options that were less comprehensive that could have been tried. My opinion is that the current % solution has all kinds of unintentional consequences that have messed up the balancing. Like the fact that heavily loaded soldiers can still fire, that it's now impossible for any soldier to ever fire two bursts from an AR no matter how good they are, etc...

One thing I really didn't like about the OG is that it basically used the same system to determine fire TU that you have just switched to. It didn't make any sense to me then and it doesn't now. It's extremely counter-intuitive, IMO.

Here are some alternatives that immediately came to mind for me:

1. Put improvement in TU's and firing accuracy on a bell curve. So, new soldiers improve rapidly at first then the increase slows down very quickly when they become "veterans". The formula for this is very simple. Amount of increase = Desired Midpoint/Current Rating

So, let's say the you want your veteran soldiers to have a TU of say 60... Let's say your soldier currently has 50 TUs. To calculate the TU increase of for a successful combat you'd do this calculation: 60/50 = 1.2 TU increase (you can round it off to 1 and store the .2). Now, let's say your soldier has 70 TU to start with: 60/70 = .85 increase At 80 starting: 60/80 = .75 increase and so on. So basically crappy soldiers improve rapidly to "OK" soldiers, but getting to "really good" takes forever and becoming "super" is nearly impossible during the game time span. The speed of increase can easily be changed by changing the desired midpoint, dividing the increase by some number, etc...

2. Simply cap TUs and max. accuracy at 80 or whatever number seems right.

3. Put TUs and/or accuracy increase on a non-linear slope. So, say it takes two combat events to move up one TU, the next one would take four, the next one eight, etc... This means that it would be impossible to have super soldiers during the time span of the game. This type of system has been used successfullly for many years in many role playing games, including Dungeons and Dragons.

Also, I'm wondering if the aliens are suffering under the same new "rules" to calculate firing TUs? I would hope that is case.

The LMG type weapon changes, hmmm... I think instead of making them more powerful, you've actually made them less powerful. By forcing reloads more often, increased TU to fire, and lowering the damage the overall effectiveness is lower than the old one, IMO. I think you should consider changing the ammo count to at least 30 per magazine and increasing the mitigation or damage. Right now, it reminds more of just another rocket launcher. One big shot, then reload. So, the differentitation between the heavy weapon types is decreased. I'm not sure that's what you want. Another thing you could do is give it a reaction fire bonus. Machinegun type weapons are often setup to deny/slow movement across critical areas. Like at the end of city street to prevent the enemy from retreating from houses on one side to the houses on other side while that block is cleared. Giving the LMG, etc... high reaction bonuses would give them a very good niche in the weapons spectrum.

I love the new UFO interiors, BTW.

Edited February 27, 2014 by StellarRat

[mrxny]

Wow, this has certainly escalated quickly. As a general note, I'm much more likely to take your thoughts on board if you express them politely and in a civil manner.

If you post this, for example, I'm just going to discount your opinion.

Discount the opinions of the people that paid you money...

Criticism can always be harsher.

Edited February 26, 2014 by mrxny

[StellarRat]

Wow, this has certainly escalated quickly. As a general note, I'm much more likely to take your thoughts on board if you express them politely and in a civil manner

If you post this, for example, I'm just going to discount your opinion....

Xenonauts ---------------> Recycling Bin

Discount the opinions of the people that paid you money...

There is a difference between an opinion and an insult. I guarantee you that if you tell anyone that their years of hard work deserves to go in the garbage (rightly or wrongly) you aren't going to have much luck getting them to listen to you. Not to mention this is an experimental build and many of the changes may not make into the release version. At least he is willing to listen to the opinion of the community regarding proposed changes. That is not true of many other developers. Several of my suggestions have made it into the game and well as those of many others. Edited February 26, 2014 by StellarRat