% TU vs Static TU firing cost

[StellarRat]

Out of curiosity: what's your squad's loadout?

Recovery Missions:

One LMG, one rocket launcher, one assault trooper with shotgun, one sniper, 2 - 3 rifleman w/AR's (depending on whether or not I have a vehicle.)

Terror Missions:

For Terror missions EVERYONE gets a rocket launcher and gobs of rockets and if I have a some troops with very high ACC I might take a sniper or machinegunner.

Base Assaults:

Two LMG, two rocket launcher, 2 - 4 rifleman w/AR's (depending on whether or not I have a vehicle.)

Edited February 28, 2014 by StellarRat

[Phiveaces]

I have played near the end with Exp 4, and I don't see how any of it is out of balance. I thought the super aliens, leveling 4 or 5 shots each at my guys, and my guys responding with loads of reaction shots and murderous turns against them.. were balanced. It was exciting! my biggest problem was running out of ammo....

I never lost full squads, but did lose a few Colonels, and all you do is bring a rookie or two each mission... with 12/16 soldiers, 1 or 2 rookies can level up pretty quickly with Mag weapons... especially if you are giving them the easy kills.... and if this is an issue.. just make experience gains related to the others in the squad... a rookie working with a bunch of colonels should level up faster than if he was just surrounded by other noobs....

I said it before... you are trying to fix something that isn't broken, I liked battles late game.... It was even... and balanced ... and I liked it....

While im sure the balance will still be there with %... it will not be as much fun.... move... end turn... move... shoot... end turn.... shoot... end turn.... instead of run... shoot... run.... hide.. shoot... end turn....

Edited February 28, 2014 by Phiveaces

[Skitso]

Yeah, it seems to slow the game down. I can see I'm already starting to adapt and playing more carefully and slower. I'm siding more and more to the original system.

[kabill]

And put a hard cap of no more than 80 on TUs. And a minimum of 50 TUs. 55 for preference. For everyone.

For all my harping yesterday, I can't help but wonder whether this might be a better solution overall, if only because (on paper, anyway) it seems a fair compromise between game balance, high-powered soldiers and simplicity.

Basically, using the flat TU costs for rifle weapons, the difference between a TU 50 and a TU 80 soldier is +1 shot:

50 TUs = 2 snap shots; 2 normal shots (just); or 1 aimed shot

80 TUs = 4 snap shots (if you don't move at all; in practice 3 shots); 3 normal shots; or 2 aimed shots

(I'm not sure what the TU cost of burst fire was changed to, if it was even changed from 40. If it is 40, basically you only ever get 1 shot because its unusual to be able to shoot something without moving at all).

+1 shot between the best and worst soldier doesn't seem too terrible to me, I don't think. It's a fair boost in firepower but I'm not sure its overpowered, either. It also, as it happens, results in the same mobility bonuses as are gained by a 100 TU soldier in the % TU system (give or take a few TUs).

I think I have been converted.

EDIT: Regarding the 'slower play' of the % TU system think I found that somewhat in the few missions I played today (but bare in mind I've not played for months). I'm not sure if that is necessarily the % TU system itself, though, so much as the TU costs for shots at the moment. Chris said he set them in line with what a 50 TU soldier could do previously, but most of Xenonauts is spent playing with soldiers higher than the base-line. I wonder, if the % system stays, whether it wouldn't be better to balance the shot costs more in line with a low-mid tier soldier of the old system? (i.e. a soldier with ~60-65 TUs).

Edited February 28, 2014 by kabill

[StellarRat]

@StellarRat. I'm afraid that's not the point I'm making. The point isn't "oh, the TUs are on aliens are OP, reduce the TUs on aliens". Can you not see that high TUs in a flat cost system are in of themselves OP? You've just now suggested "if the aliens have too high TU, reduce the TU". In doing that you have agreed with me (in my inital post) that TUs in a flat-cost system are OP unless severely bracketed. And that bracket is quite small.

Any balanced system can be disrupted by abnormal values. Look at the Earth, a few degrees of temperature change and we're all dead.

But, here's my main point:

Raw recruit Pvt. StellarRat 50 TUs and Colonel StellarRat 79TUs. How can it possible be that Pvt. Rat aims and shoots his weapon and it only takes 25 TU's while Colonel Rat firing the EXACT same weapon with the same aimed shot takes an additional 15 TUs (40)??? How does that make any sense at all?? If you had to explain that to a complete non-gamer the only thing you could tell them is that "it's for game balance" not that it makes any sense in any other way. If anything a highly experienced soldier should be able to aim and fire accurately FASTER than a less experienced soldier. Some of those competition quick draw guys can probably out shoot me 6 to 1 with a pistol. This % system was one of the dumbest things in the old game and now we are going to have it in the new game when there is a perfectly logical alternative?

Bottom Line: If a diminishing returns experience system would have been in place from day one we wouldn't be having this conversation. No one would have noticed a problem. People might be complaining that elite aliens have too many TUs and Chris would simply reduce the TU stats for them. That would be it.

Edited March 1, 2014 by StellarRat

[Gauddlike]

Also, comparing an absolute elite soldier (all 100's) to a total rookie (all 40's) is a bit deceptive. First of all there's a TU cap atm at 80, second, its very rare to get any stat even near a 100 or even 90. Third, all rookies have some stats that can be as high as 60(?). So a battle hardened, best of the best badass veteran in real world comparison has maybe only 20 TU and/or ACC advance compared to a total newb.

I don't think it is misleading or deceptive to use two extremes to demonstrate a point when the comparison is between two different systems rather than between the rookie and veteran in a single system.

For example a comparison like:

A veteran in system one is 100% stronger than a rookie in system one while a veteran in system two is 50% stronger than a rookie in system two.

That uses the extremes to show what is possible in both systems.

As long as the same values are used for comparison then it seems fair.

The only reason the caps are in place is to try and balance the old system.

The rest of the post also assumes that the rest of the game balance needs to be the same under both systems but that is not necessarily true.

It may be much more possible to get your soldiers to 100 in a stat in the new system because it does not need to have the same anchors in place to balance the power of AP.

Accuracy gains may not need to be capped at 1 point max per mission because veterans will not also be firing more rounds than rookies so their accuracy can be an important sign of their progress.

AP may also progress further than the 80 AP cap in the old system because it doesn't provide such a huge increase in power under the current system.

Only proper testing will decide that.

[KateMicucci]

Raw recruit Pvt. StellarRat 50 TUs and Colonel StellarRat 79TUs. How can it possible be that Pvt. Rat aims and shoots his weapon and it only takes 25 TU's while Colonel Rat firing the EXACT same weapon with the same aimed shot takes an additional 15 TUs (40)???

How does Colonel Rat become a quickdraw champion by running the 100 meter dash every day?

[StellarRat]

How does Colonel Rat become a quickdraw champion by running the 100 meter dash every day?

I'm assuming TU is not just movement speed, it's speed of all actions. However, I wouldn't be opposed to having a movement speed and shooting speed as two different stats. That would be better as a matter of fact. We both that experienced people can perform same jobs much faster than inexperienced people doing the same job. Anyone that's seen a cup stacking contest can attest to this.

Edited March 1, 2014 by StellarRat

[mrxny]

So the current system is far more than something as static as you get x move and shoot once.

And MRXNY I have seen you post several times that you dont like this system but you have not really made any suggestion other than go back to how it was... .

Since everyone is waiting for my suggestion other than "Change it back".

For all you Beef Stews, Misfits, and Undertakers out there.

---

My Changes:

1. Abandon All time units.

2. Make Soldiers Level based (1,2,3 and on) Gain Exp from kills, completing missions.

3. Completely level stat increases across the board when you level up.

4. Break the Abandoned TUs into (3) stats. 1. Shots per turn. 2 Moves per turn. 3. Equipment use per turn.

5. Add to +1 (Shots per turn. Moves per turn. Equipment use per turn) at pre-set balanced level unlocks.

(Example) At levels 1-5 you can only shoot 1 time, Levels 6-10 you shoot twice.

Now you just took away all those formulas, square roots, and percentages.

---

I still support my original "Simply change it back".

I still support soldiers you grinded getting stronger and shooting more. (That's what you protect them for)

I still support a solider that's been on 25 missions being able to shoot his gun more than a rookie on his first mission.

I still support being able to Shoot, throw a grenade, and move ALL in the same turn (My goodness , theyre just a bunch of Zeuses running around out there)

I don't care if Aliens shoot back at me a lot. (I use riot shields, cover, safe distances, and smoke)

Edited March 1, 2014 by mrxny

[legit1337]

Any balanced system can be disrupted by abnormal values. Look at the Earth, a few degrees of temperature change and we're all dead.

But, here's my main point:

Raw recruit Pvt. StellarRat 50 TUs and Colonel StellarRat 79TUs. How can it possible be that Pvt. Rat aims and shoots his weapon and it only takes 25 TU's while Colonel Rat firing the EXACT same weapon with the same aimed shot takes an additional 15 TUs (40)??? How does that make any sense at all?? If you had to explain that to a complete non-gamer the only thing you could tell them is that "it's for game balance" not that it makes any sense in any other way. If anything a highly experienced soldier should be able to aim and fire accurately FASTER than a less experienced soldier. Some of those competition quick draw guys can probably out shoot me 6 to 1 with a pistol. This % system was one of the dumbest things in the old game and now we are going to have it in the new game when there is a perfectly logical alternative?

Bottom Line: If a diminishing returns experience system would have been in place from day one we wouldn't be having this conversation. No one would have noticed a problem. People might be complaining that elite aliens have too many TUs and Chris would simply reduce the TU stats for them. That would be it.

I agree with this 100% and it pretty much mirrors my views on the entire matter.

[Asmodean]

My Changes:

1. Abandon All time units.

2. Make Soldiers Level based (1,2,3 and on) Gain Exp from kills, completing missions.

3. Completely level stat increases across the board when you level up.

4. Break the Abandoned TUs into (3) stats. 1. Shots per turn. 2 Moves per turn. 3. Equipment use per turn.

5. Add to +1 (Shots per turn. Moves per turn. Equipment use per turn) at pre-set balanced level unlocks.

(Example) At levels 1-5 you can only shoot 1 time, Levels 6-10 you shoot twice.

Now you just took away all those formulas, square roots, and percentages.

---

A fine system. It feels like you would get very similar results to the static TU method, but in a more dungeons and dragons style of advancement.

But as it seems to allow similar veteran abilities as the static TU method you will end up with similar end game issues. So why does it work in D&D type games? Well having a huge difference in veterans and rookies is just fine if you only use rookies once and continually advance. No perma-death... or if there is then you have no choice to reload and try again.

The problem with this in xcom is that you can and will loose your veterans... sometimes several. If this forces you back to a team of rookies when fighting aliens balanced for super soldiers then the game goes from hard to impossible. And so you have to reload anytime you lose a veteran. Some people will do this anyways, but it shouldn't feel required. X-com instead is supposed to advance mainly via technology. I hear all the rationals for people being able to perform as super soldiers, but the difference between a rookie and a veteran should not overshadow the awesome technology you get from the aliens. And in this way an end game rookie with super tech is at a disadvantage vs a veteran but still manageable. There is a penalty for loosing a veteran but it is not a complete loss. It is... X-Com

Having said all that I do also miss the feel of advancement in the old system. So any suggestion on how to balance the end game with static TUs would be very interesting to hear.

[legit1337]

A fine system. It feels like you would get very similar results to the static TU method, but in a more dungeons and dragons style of advancement.

But as it seems to allow similar veteran abilities as the static TU method you will end up with similar end game issues. So why does it work in D&D type games? Well having a huge difference in veterans and rookies is just fine if you only use rookies once and continually advance. No perma-death... or if there is then you have no choice to reload and try again.

The problem with this in xcom is that you can and will loose your veterans... sometimes several. If this forces you back to a team of rookies when fighting aliens balanced for super soldiers then the game goes from hard to impossible. And so you have to reload anytime you lose a veteran. Some people will do this anyways, but it shouldn't feel required. X-com instead is supposed to advance mainly via technology. I hear all the rationals for people being able to perform as super soldiers, but the difference between a rookie and a veteran should not overshadow the awesome technology you get from the aliens. And in this way an end game rookie with super tech is at a disadvantage vs a veteran but still manageable. There is a penalty for loosing a veteran but it is not a complete loss. It is... X-Com

Having said all that I do also miss the feel of advancement in the old system. So any suggestion on how to balance the end game with static TUs would be very interesting to hear.

No. Try taking a team full of rookies to cydonia in the OG (without psionics) and you will get your ass promptly handed to you on a silver platter.

I agree having to use rookies when your vets get splashed shouldn't be impossible, but it should be much MUCH harder. Balancing should be done at a point in between rookies and veterans.

[Asmodean]

Now that I think about it... and I forget who mentioned it first in regards to x-com being about tech progression more than soldier progression.

Perhaps this is where we could bring back the thrill of advancement and yes even occasional (very occasional) dominance with the % TU system.

A longer tech tree? more weapons and more armor. Maybe also a bit faster, with a bit cheaper production costs? This way you are constantly upgrading your units, but in ways that rookies benefit too. And your top tier aliens can still keep pace but without over-classing rookies too much. Then assuming you occasionally through into missions earlier aliens with weaker weapons you get the occasional satisfaction of 1 shotting the things that used to scare you.

Not sure what others think, but I see some potential there to bring back the excitement of getting significantly better but in the X-com style race against the alien escalation. And all the while we keep rookies in the game.

[Asmodean]

No. Try taking a team full of rookies to cydonia in the OG (without psionics) and you will get your ass promptly handed to you on a silver platter.

I agree having to use rookies when your vets get splashed shouldn't be impossible, but it should be much MUCH harder. Balancing should be done at a point in between rookies and veterans.

I agree running a team of rookies should be harder. But static TUs made it too hard I think.

In my last game before %TU I had a great veteran team when I met my first sentinels. Maybe it was bad luck but 5 of them were 2 turns away from my landing ship, and they all came that way. They wiped me out.... partly because each one could shoot so many times, cover, distance and smoke couldn't save me. So I thought about excepting my loss and moving on... but then I realized what do I do when I run into these guys with rookies. It's game over!!! So I reloaded... got wiped out... reloaded... got wiped out. I played that board 8 times before I finally got a decent result I could at least carry on with.

From there one is when I realized the end game balance wasn't good. I didn't realize why at that time but the discussions have made it pretty clear. Honestly the right answer may be something that is balanced between the 2 systems. But I think the discussion taking place will help find that balance.

[legit1337]

I agree running a team of rookies should be harder. But static TUs made it too hard I think.

In my last game before %TU I had a great veteran team when I met my first sentinels. Maybe it was bad luck but 5 of them were 2 turns away from my landing ship, and they all came that way. They wiped me out.... partly because each one could shoot so many times, cover, distance and smoke couldn't save me. So I thought about excepting my loss and moving on... but then I realized what do I do when I run into these guys with rookies. It's game over!!! So I reloaded... got wiped out... reloaded... got wiped out. I played that board 8 times before I finally got a decent result I could at least carry on with.

From there one is when I realized the end game balance wasn't good. I didn't realize why at that time but the discussions have made it pretty clear. Honestly the right answer may be something that is balanced between the 2 systems. But I think the discussion taking place will help find that balance.

Of course endgame balance wasn't good. But I think that was a result of aliens being too accurate, and having 120 TUs. Nothing to do with how good veterans were when compared to rookies.

[jeon]

Hmm, the static numbers do have a simplicity to them, even if I don't agree with the majority of the points I have seen from those opposed to % costs. I wouldn't scream and yell if the numbers went back to static numbers, assuming that the range of AP values for both human and alien forces is condensed down. I'm not sure it would give the intended mobility for aliens that are supposed to move faster relative to their shooting speed, but something like that could be easily fixed with the addition of a new value that multiplies the shot AP costs for an alien. It could probably be used on human armor as well to make shots cost more or less ap based on the armor. (I'm thinking mostly just reduced cost on predator to represent ease of firing heavy weapons in it).

Overall though, I'm liking the reduced number of actions per turn. I prefer these shorter turns with more back and forth between me and the aliens, so if we go back I'd still like less shots per turn for both sides.

[Skitso]

As I have understand, in the OG, the %-TU was added in the very late phase of the development for balancing purposes only. They didn't however have the time to think the system all over again and just went with the easiest, fastest and most efficient solution they had that solved the game balance problems they had, thus changing the firing cost system to %-TU. Gold Hawk has the possibility to think this over and use a tought over system instead. I really hope you end up using a system that feels done instead of a rushed one like in the OG.

I prefer the flat cost, but if GH want's to restrict shooting actions per turn/weapon, here's my solution:

TU's could be renamed to speed and just seperate shooting actions to it's own hud element. They don't need to be TU dependant at all anymore. They could be for example small red bar with suitable amount of steps in the weapon screen that vanish when a shot has been taken. The number of steps available in the bar would change depending on which weapon/aim mode is in use. This change would make the new TU system make any sense because as of now, there's no point in using TU's in shooting actions.

Why would we use TU's in shooting actions when they clearly are not suitable to represent those anymore? (variable values)

EDIT: A quick visualization of my idea:

Here a snap shot would be selected and hud showing three shots. All the 56 "MU's (Movement Units) the unit has, could be used in moving and performing other actions regardless of shooting actions executed. If an aimed shot or burst was selected instead, or he had an MG equiped, it could show 1 bar. Pistol would have maybe four bars and so on. This is what I think would make sense if we want to restrict shooting actions per turn. Not by using TU's as they are not suitable for it (for the need of changing the shooting values depending how much a soldier can move, which is stupid) While it would make system simpler, more logical and easier to understand, we could also get rid of TU costs on the target reticle which would reduce clutter on screen.

EDiT: Ugh, I just realised this would simplify moving/shooting maybe a bit too much. I need to think this system a bit more....

Off topic: You can also see my new Skitso's Color Grading mod in use in the picture. Also notable is the graphical bug behind the light scout which is still not fixed.

Edited March 1, 2014 by Skitso

[kabill]

No. Try taking a team full of rookies to cydonia in the OG (without psionics) and you will get your ass promptly handed to you on a silver platter.

This is true, but only because you don't have psionics and (by implication) probably haven't been able to screen your troops for mental weakness. Its psionics which does the heavily lifting at the end of the game to make it easy; soldier stat buffs pale in comparison.

I'm not sure it would give the intended mobility for aliens that are supposed to move faster relative to their shooting speed, but something like that could be easily fixed with the addition of a new value that multiplies the shot AP costs for an alien.

StellarRat (I think) already suggested a simple solution to this above: simply have the relevant alien weapons use a higher proportion of TUs. Since the player (almost) never uses alien weapons, they'll never know; if they do pick up an alien weapon to use, then the difference could be attributed to ergonomics (which is supposed to be the reason the weapons are unusable in the first place).

(Where a single weapon is used across multiple alien tiers, there's no reason you couldn't duplicate them with different stats or something. It's all more cumbersome than a shooting cost variable for aliens, but it would be possible to implement without any additional coding).

Why would we use TU's in shooting actions when they clearly are not suitable to represent those anymore? (variable values)

In a % TU system, TUs are movement speed. Shot TUs in that system represent having to stop/slow down in order to take a shot. The faster you are, the more movement you lose when shooting because a fast soldier could have moved further in the time taken to make a shot compared with a slower soldier. I don't see anything incomprehensible about that: it just makes the assumption that a) TUs = movement speed and b) the act of shooting takes an equivalent amount of time for all soldiers.

With the alternative you suggest, however, you're saying that a soldier who is standing is just as effective at shooting as one who is dashing as fast as they can across the battlefield. I've never fired a gun in my life, but that seems far less intuitive than either of the other possible systems.

[Skitso]

With the alternative you suggest, however, you're saying that a soldier who is standing is just as effective at shooting as one who is dashing as fast as they can across the battlefield. I've never fired a gun in my life, but that seems far less intuitive than either of the other possible systems.

Yeah, as I wrote in the post myself, I realised it's flaws in the process of writing it... Maybe each shot could decrease a flat number of MU's? so veteran units with more MU's could be more potent?

Edited March 1, 2014 by Skitso

[kabill]

Maybe each shot could decrease a flat number of MU's? so veteran units with more MU's could be more potent?

Do I recognize that idea from somewhere?

[Skitso]

[Gauddlike]

As I have understand, in the OG, the %-TU was added in the very late phase of the development for balancing purposes only. They didn't however have the time to think the system all over again and just went with the easiest, fastest and most efficient solution they had that solved the game balance problems they had, thus changing the firing cost system to %-TU. Gold Hawk has the possibility to think this over and use a tought over system instead. I really hope you end up using a system that feels done instead of a rushed one like in the OG.

I would guess that is why Chris has changed to this system during the testing and balance focused beta.

I imagine the original game didn't have access to the number of testers involved at a pre-release stage that this game does.

If people really want a system that is well thought out, has any bugs ironed out, and is well balanced then we are all in an ideal place to test it and put forward ideas how to balance it rather than wasting time trying to come up with alternatives before it has even had a single balance pass.

[DrNoid]

Raw recruit Pvt. StellarRat 50 TUs and Colonel StellarRat 79TUs. How can it possible be that Pvt. Rat aims and shoots his weapon and it only takes 25 TU's while Colonel Rat firing the EXACT same weapon with the same aimed shot takes an additional 15 TUs (40)??? How does that make any sense at all??

Because Pvt. StellarRat has TUs that take 0.2 seconds, while Colonel StellarRat has TUs that take ~0.13 seconds and they both take the same amount of time to aim and shoot their weapon. Assuming each round takes 10 seconds.

[mr_pa]

Just registered to leave a thought on the matter. The game is great and I have enjoyed playing under both approaches.

What if a soldier's rank were to give a slight reduction to the percentages? Perhaps -1% per rank above the first?

A Colonel's cumulative reduction would then be 7%. An action costing 50% TU for a Private would be lowered to 43% for a Colonel.

This assumes that the promotion system has been finalized (which I do not know if it has been).

And I have no experience in balance or design, so my suggestion could be rubbish!

Thanks for discussing this matter with us, Chris.

[Skitso]

Nice idea, mr_pa! I also proposed earlier that different medals could grant more diverse bonuses to make veteran units more important. Medal that is awarded for 5 kills in a single mission could give -2% shoot cost for example...