Ground Combat Balance - V21 Experimental 6

[kabill]

Not of that incident.

What % of an accuracy boost is bug territory? Trying to reproduce it now the highest I've gotten is 16%.

I'm pretty certain accuracy should increase by +12 for every tile within 5 squares of the target. If that helps?

[frank_walls]

@chris

Reducing the ammo count on other weapons is a bad idea IMO. 20 round assault rifles was already stretching it, making them any less would completely invalidate any kind of authenticity the game still had.

And yes, soldiers today still use single shot for fighting battles. In fact, fully automatic fire is extremely rare unless you are fighting in a city. Engagement ranges past 100m almost require single-shot for any kind of accuracy.

Can't you see the absurdity of 20 round magazine LMGs? and 12 round magazine assault rifles? I don't care if it is "balanced" (and I don't agree that making you reload every 3 shots is balanced anyway), it doesn't feel or sound right.

@everyone

I picked this game up because I wanted a game that accurately depicted and immersed me in an alien invasion during the cold war.

That means period accurate weapons, with authentic (if not real-to-life) characteristics, and a battlescape engine that was not only robust and realistic, but also rewarded squad based tactics used in real life.

The development of this game seems to be moving further and further in the direction of an arcade game with strategy and immersion thrown in as an afterthought. Just like the newest X-COM EU.

I've sat through a lot of design decisions I have not agreed with. I've grit my teeth and lived with it. I always justified it to myself that the developers knew what they were doing and I would adapt. Not this time. This game is starting to not resemble the game I came here hoping would be made.

This isn't a temper tantrum. I'm not demanding changes be made "or I'm leaving" or any other kind of childish ultimatum. Chris can very well do what he damn wants with his own game.

But unless something changes, I've come to realize this game really isn't something I am interested in playing, and I am seriously considering dropping it completely.

I completely agree. If you you're going to make everything appear real, model it all after real items and weapons, then make it play as real as possible. I never bought that other XCom game, because it wasn't XCom. I purchased this because it was exactly what I was looking for. I don't think too many people purchase strategy games like this looking for an arcade-like experience.

[Chris]

Legit, I'm sorry you feel that way. However I think it'd be a mistake to change the game design simply to appease your interest in historical realism. Especially as M-16s used 20-round mags for most of the Vietnam war and, as this game is set in 1978, it's entirely historically plausible to be using those despite your assertions to the contrary. I mean, if you won't even give us credit for the stuff that is historically accurate, what hope do I have of pleasing you?

Besides, using realism as an argument is a completely false economy. If we made a realistic game, the most glaring omission would obviously be the aliens. You must be aware of the absurdity of your position? You must know and accept that we've obviously got to change the "realistic" setting in order to make a game that is playable and fun...even leaving aside the abstractions you have to make to turn a real-time event (war) into a turn-based combat game.

Forgetting the aliens for a moment, if we were being realistic about the combat model, soldiers would be able to see much further than 18 tiles (roughly 29m). Most of the weapons in the game have a useful range of less than 50m, and supposedly elite soldiers miss well over half their shots at that range. Your guys don't even bother taking a look out of the Chinook window as they land, so they have no idea where the crashed UFO is at the start of the mission. You have F-16s, armed with only two missiles (instead of six), shooting down intergalactic warships.

All of those are *major* abstractions. Like, really, *really* big. But you happily accept them because you accept we're making a game and they're necessary for the game to work. But you'll still get worked up about an AR only having 12 rounds in the clip instead of 20? Really? That's the line where the game about aliens invading the earth becomes unrealistic?

If I'd spent the last five years prioritising realism over fun, I doubt playing Xenonauts would be anywhere near enjoyable enough to warrant registering on our forum and discussing the game balance. I think you're getting fixated on small details here.

[Ol' Stinky]

I completely agree. If you you're going to make everything appear real, model it all after real items and weapons, then make it play as real as possible. I never bought that other XCom game, because it wasn't XCom. I purchased this because it was exactly what I was looking for. I don't think too many people purchase strategy games like this looking for an arcade-like experience.

Well, conventional weaponry's a small part of the game. It was always going to be the case that the ballistic weapons get shelved in favour of laser/plasma/MAG weapons, since that basically happens in the original X-COM with laser rifles/heavy plasma. I think the constant resets that come hand in hand with balance testing are distorting the importance of real guns that appear in the game. Look at the research/engineering backgrounds as the game progresses, they turn into something from an old sci-fi comic book. (I approve.) That visual change from realistic to futuristic is what the devs are going for with equipment, too. The names and images of the first guns are fluff, not a commitment to make the game a realistic experience.

Edited March 8, 2014 by Ol' Stinky

[Chris]

To strike a slightly more conciliatory note than in my last post, Xenonauts has already done realism. If you'd been around on the forums long enough, you'd probably understand why I'm reluctant to alter my choices based on realism reasons rather than gameplay ones. A few examples:

The player used to start with four planes, 50 scientists and engineers, 20 soldiers and two vehicles, plus a fully-equipped first base. It's not realistic for the player to start the game with such limited resources as they do now, and it's not realistic that they have to research the Hunter and the Foxtrot, but there was no early-game progression under the old system where you're given it all immediately.

Chinooks (and interceptors) used to have realistic ranges, and speeds. That meant that you couldn't respond to to events happening outside your radar range because you craft just didn't have the fuel to get there, and even if they did they moved so slowly a terror site etc would be done by the time you arrived. The chinook is about twice the speed it should be and has enough fuel to circle the world. But people wanted the game to be like X-Com; they found the game frustrating if they couldn't do anything about events beyond their first base...and it forced them into an early-expansion playstyle. So we changed it.

Weapons and equipment used to have realistic weights, and the soldiers used to have realistic carrying capacity. The result of that was the ability to carry essentially unlimited ammo and grenades into battle. There were no choices to be made - just freely loading your guys down with whatever gear you wanted. Any element of "choice" was totally removed from the game, which is not X-Com at all. That's why Xenonaut soldiers are all feeble weaklings these days.

We were originally going to literally have a T-80 tank as a support vehicle in the game (the same one you see in the desert / soviet maps). It's realistic, right? Why wouldn't the Xenonauts have some proper armoured support? They've got access to jet fighters, why not tanks? The shape of the tank made it impossible to use, but I don't think I have to explain why balance reasons would have led to it being removed pretty quickly if not.

Defenders of realism complained about all of those things at the time, but I'd be surprised if people would tell me I'd made the wrong decision now. Yes, Xenonauts is going to be an X-Com game with a veneer of Cold War realism over the top. I'd love it for the game to be totally realistic, but I hope the examples above give you some idea of why it's more important to prioritise gameplay.

The ammo levels of the advanced weapons appear to work fine these days - i.e. you have to reload them occasionally. It's a pretty rare occurrence to have to reload an AR with a 20-round mag though. It'd be much nicer if a player had to choose between a bit more ammo or a grenade, rather than just picking the grenade every time because one clip (or two at a push) is fine. It's also important to counterbalance the power of burst fire on the AR.

[quiescat]

so i understand the fun is there for the lmg with 10 round bursts, i feel god like! that being said the damage they do is all to much basically i over kill every thing( only on scouts so grain of salt ). realism can eat a D@#K, i want to be able to fire off bullets like a mad man without my machine guns being so brokenly over powered (feels that way to me). if you end up nerfing there damage per shot down, and upping accuracy so killing power stays the same, there useless, in so much that i can get so much more flexible damage out of every thing else* an alien that's died from the first 2 shots of 10 is still as dead as one that takes all 10*. i remember it being posted that they have basically the same damage as an AR( per TU ) but more armor pen. with all that being said i dont know how to change or if it really needs a change. but i trust you guys after all you have done. i will say this in hopes that it helps. in earlier builds the LMG got used for long range suppression. the 10 rounds make it so powerful that i cant suppress any thing its already dead. i think maybe the aim penalty for moving is still needed. in my dreams i would love to be able to fire two 5 round bursts so i can use them to move more then now and use one five round burst to suppress, or stand still and 10 rounds faces off. you might have to lower damage per shot either way, other wise its kinda a rocket launcher that carries 2 rounds instead of 1

with the change to pistol range. not sure if that applies to aliens as well, but the ones inside the craft seem even more defenseless then before as i can take pot shots from way out side there effective range on most UFOs. dont use pistols my self so just as ignored as before.

i never used C4 to kill stuff with and i am guessing its effectiveness on cover is basically the same.its ability to open doors has been over shadowed with he 10 round LMG however whats not to love next to no risk along with sometimes suppressed or dead aliens on the other side if i get lucky.

the stats change did hit me a little hard as i got a guy who is amazing with other stats but has 32 TU this poor SOB may never get see a ufo.

pretty sure this is not the Psionic change. but i have noticed an up tic it panic over all with this update might just be my bad luck with the bravery stat.

other wise i am loving the hell out of your game and hope my ramblings are useful or at least amusing( i suck at writing my thoughts well )

[Doomsdayman]

1st I don't like it that you get people that lack skill and people that have skill mixed. If there was a alien invasion I would give a company (ore what ever it is) like Xenonauts the best soldiers on the planet.

Nr.2 So I assaulted a downed very small UFO and breached it and the aliens let of 6 reaction fires each after I threw a flash bang.

Nr.3 Please let flash bangs suppress more.

[Ol' Stinky]

1st I don't like it that you get people that lack skill and people that have skill mixed. If there was a alien invasion I would give a company (ore what ever it is) like Xenonauts the best soldiers on the planet.

The randomness in soldier abilities is one of the ways playthroughs can feel different. If we did get to recruit the best of the best, there wouldn't be any variation and not much point to the recruitment roster. And soldiers that have mixed skills are specialists. See that recruit with 30 ACC but amazing TUs/RFL? That guy's a great scout, give him a shield but don't let him near an AR. See that recruit with 55 stats across the board? He's boring.

[kabill]

Nr.3 Please let flash bangs suppress more.

I think the issue is that there's a bug with flashbang/explosive suppression, rather than because flashbangs are too weak.

[HammerHead]

Can we please not nerf the gas grenades? I don't bring anything but frags and gas grenades now, since smoke is pretty useless for anything but going out of the dropship and flashbangs never worked for me.

[Doomsdayman]

The randomness in soldier abilities is one of the ways playthroughs can feel different. If we did get to recruit the best of the best' date=' there wouldn't be any variation and not much point to the recruitment roster. And soldiers that have mixed skills are specialists. See that recruit with 30 ACC but amazing TUs/RFL? That guy's a great scout, give him a shield but don't let him near an AR. See that recruit with 55 stats across the board? He's boring.[/quote']

Ok best of the best is a bit to match. But I had 1 guy that was all around 40 on all skills and the other guy was around 70 with all skills ore you get guys that are so high at every skill except 1 skill thats below 40. Would be nice to balance it properly so that 1 guy doesn't have almost everything in the 80 but strength in the 40 ore 30.

Ore how about depending on difficulty level the soldiers skill points.

[legit1337]

@chris

They started using 30 round magazines for the m16 as early as 1966, but during the last stages of vietnam (early 1975) they started phasing in 30 round magazines for m16s for general usage. By 1978 (3 years after the pullout) almost all magazines in use would have been 30 rounds. I'm honestly fine with 20 rounds, I just don't think it should be any less than that.

I don't want everything to be perfectly realistic. As you said... aliens invalidates the entire point of that. Ranges have to be condensed to fit on the battlemap, and some realistic things need to be toned down for balance purposes.

What I do want however is authenticity. LMGs should have lots of rounds and have a high volume of fire, assault rifles should be good all-arounders, shotguns should be good for breaching etc.

What we seem to disagree on is where the line between balance and authenticity should be drawn.

To me, assault rifles having 12 round magazines and MGs having 20 is utterly absurd. You can't honestly claim to be depicting ballistic weapons properly when you have those kind of ammo counts. I understand that you want to make reloading more important, but there are other ways to do that besides throwing immersion out the window.

Make reloading a 90% TU action (so when it does happen, it is a serious thing). Nerf the ballistic weapons accuracy/damage to make up for their high ammo counts. Something, ANYTHING else.

The game should be balanced around ballistics weapons performing authentically (1-4 rounds killing a human), and then balanced from the ground up from there.

If the ballistics are too strong compared to energy weapons, buff the energy weapons, but for gods sake do not nerf the ballistics into something that can't even be believable.

The energy weapon's abilities can be stretched and altered, because it is sci-fi and people don't have a real-life comparison to draw from. But most players walk into the game with a reasonable expectation of what ballistic weapons can do. When that expectation isn't met it kind of destroys "suspension of disbelief".

Edited March 8, 2014 by legit1337

[KateMicucci]

I really don't care for the balance in this build.

With the low shooting costs it feels really arcadey. Tactics hardly seem to matter now. It's just blam blam blam.

The new pistols really don't feel right.

Aliens are terrible, terrible shots. It seems like they don't receive the close range accuracy bonus that xenonauts do either.

The new high power pistols and low alien accuracy means that I can abuse a strategy of running up shielded pistol troops right next to an alien, avoid most of their shots, and then kill them with 2 or 3 pistol shots.

Edited March 9, 2014 by KateMicucci

[frank_walls]

So I just started a new game on normal with the version-6, and I would say it's unplayable (as in not fun). 1st UFO mission with a scout and I lost 4 out of 8 of my guys (I just quit after the 4th). 1 alien reaction fired my guy before I saw him, then when I ran another guy over to see where he was the alien fired 4 MORE reaction shots that luckily missed.

Another alien shot a guy that was crouched outside a window looking in.

I made it to the UFO, opened the door and threw in a flashbang. No one was suppressed, then the 3 aliens reaction fired 1 guy to death. My other guy, a CPL with 72 TU fired a shotgun round from the door, then the aliens reaction fired him to death. ESC>QUIT>EXIT.

Edited March 9, 2014 by frank_walls

[mr_pa]

*** I accidentally posted this in the announcements forum, so this is a copy from that thread.

I've been testing the suppressed effect on aliens in the beginning levels of normal difficulty, V21 E6. Thus far I haven't noticed any incorrect behaviors – no alien has reacted while suppressed, nor has any fired more than two shots during the alien's turn.

Basic armor was given maximum values and ballistic stats were adjusted to create an easier testing environment.

It does seem that shotguns cannot suppress at the moment. I posted a bug thread and a workaround if anyone is interested:

http://www.goldhawkinteractive.com/forums/showthread.php/9174-V21-%28Ex-6%29-Ground-Combat-Shotguns-cannot-suppress

Increasing shotgun suppression values to be even with AR bursts seemed good, although probably too good.

The AR's burst value is 60 and its radius 3.

The ballistic shotgun, laser carbine, and mag carbine all have suppression values of 50 and 2.

The farmer's shotgun has values of 40 and 2, while the plasma carbine has a value of 25 and a radius of 2 (certainly it is intended for the plasma to be 50).

And the flash bang is 100 and 5.

Just been experimenting.

[Max_Caine]

On Shotguns

I've been able to play build 6 for about five hours now and I've got to say that I'm very happy with shotguns. The ability to shoot twice with a shotgun - wether that's 2 normals, 2 snaps or a snap and a normal makes shotties even more important than they already were (to me, anyway) when breaching UFOs and taking on built up areas. Rifles are nice and all, but it's harder to manoeuvre a solider into a good burst firing position than it is to get a guy and his shottie into place, fire twice and zap an alien.

On rifles

Currently rifles have a 4-2-1-1 AP usage (you can get up to 4 snaps, 2 normals, 1 aimed or a burst in a round of shooting if you stand still). While it's unlikely that a player's solider will get the most out of this setup, aliens most assuredly do because they are highly likely to be waiting in ambush for a player's troops. It can be annoying to wait for an alien to go through the motions, and that fourth shot is more frustrating than frightening. May I suggest rather than a 4-2-1-1 setup for rifles, we have a 3-2-1-1 setup instead? I've been playing about with AP figures and a value of 28% for snaps seems about right. 28% doesn't break the TU bank, but it means that aliens aren't blazing away with too many shots and if a player indulges in snapping away they feel it more than they do at the moment while keeping all the options open.

On precision rifles

Last year and the year before that the heavy penalty was upped and upped because people were always taking the sniper rifle in preference to the assault rifle. The AR's shoot and manouevre style wasn't as valuable as a precision rifle and the penalty could be offset fairly easily. Now I see that the precision rifle is sliding back to where it was previously as a preferable choice to the AR. Not quite sure what to suggest there, other than I think there needs to be a slightly larger divide between normal and aimed as with aimed - you get a best bonus to hit out of all the weapons so you should pay for it. Rather than 65%, I've been trying out 70% and it has a small but noticable impact on shoot-and-manoevre with precision rifles, where that should really be the AR's trump card.

[Belmakor]

Is this a balance issue or a bug I don't know...

I am getting really frustrated by the inconsistencies of corners.

I means sometimes I can shoot round them but most times I can't. However, the aliens seem capable of pulling off a head-shot from half way across the map around a corner which I am not able to shoot around.

Either make corners universally able to be shot around and through, or don't. Don't apply different rules to aliens and humans...

[frank_walls]

Is this a balance issue or a bug I don't know...

I am getting really frustrated by the inconsistencies of corners.

I means sometimes I can shoot round them but most times I can't. However, the aliens seem capable of pulling off a head-shot from half way across the map around a corner which I am not able to shoot around.

Either make corners universally able to be shot around and through, or don't. Don't apply different rules to aliens and humans...

Don't know if it's possible, but it would be nice to get a cover bonus when you were behind a corner, but still be able to shoot. That's a pretty common tactic to use corners for cover, but still squeeze off a shot.

[kabill]

Lots of good stuff cut for brevity.

Couldn't agree more with all these points.

[Gauddlike]

Currently rifles have a 4-2-1-1 AP usage (you can get up to 4 snaps, 2 normals, 1 aimed or a burst in a round of shooting if you stand still). While it's unlikely that a player's solider will get the most out of this setup, aliens most assuredly do because they are highly likely to be waiting in ambush for a player's troops. It can be annoying to wait for an alien to go through the motions, and that fourth shot is more frustrating than frightening. May I suggest rather than a 4-2-1-1 setup for rifles, we have a 3-2-1-1 setup instead?

Would that be a different setup for the alien weapons to the human ones or change both?

There is a case for separating the values due to the extra damage the alien plasma rifle does while keeping the slight firing rate bonus for the human weapon.

It would affect the relative damage a little though but alien snap accuracy could go up a touch to compensate for the lost shot.

Balistic Assault: 4x 30 damage = 120 max.

Laser Assault: 4x 45 damage = 180 max.

Alien Plasma Rifle: 4x 65 = 260 max or 3x 65 = 195 max.

After that the human weapons pull ahead on damage but the aliens also start to use their higher damage weapons in preference to the basic plasma rifle.

[Chris]

I'm not necessarily averse to giving the alien weapons a somewhat different TU structure to human ones, as I can see that 4 reaction shots a turn can be an issue. It's just for the first build containing the updated values I wanted to have a level playing field and then work from there.

That said, I'd also consider just increasing the snap shots to 26% across the board as an alternative solution.

Corners are a weird one. It may be a LOS bug, I don't know...it's certainly not an intentional feature. I'll have to give it a good test in the polishing phase and see what's going on.

@mr_pa - thanks for looking into the shotguns. Seems that is a bug we need to fix given I don't want to give shotguns burst fire.

[Skitso]

On Shotguns

I've been able to play build 6 for about five hours now and I've got to say that I'm very happy with shotguns. The ability to shoot twice with a shotgun - wether that's 2 normals, 2 snaps or a snap and a normal makes shotties even more important than they already were (to me, anyway) when breaching UFOs and taking on built up areas. Rifles are nice and all, but it's harder to manoeuvre a solider into a good burst firing position than it is to get a guy and his shottie into place, fire twice and zap an alien.

On rifles

Currently rifles have a 4-2-1-1 AP usage (you can get up to 4 snaps, 2 normals, 1 aimed or a burst in a round of shooting if you stand still). While it's unlikely that a player's solider will get the most out of this setup, aliens most assuredly do because they are highly likely to be waiting in ambush for a player's troops. It can be annoying to wait for an alien to go through the motions, and that fourth shot is more frustrating than frightening. May I suggest rather than a 4-2-1-1 setup for rifles, we have a 3-2-1-1 setup instead? I've been playing about with AP figures and a value of 28% for snaps seems about right. 28% doesn't break the TU bank, but it means that aliens aren't blazing away with too many shots and if a player indulges in snapping away they feel it more than they do at the moment while keeping all the options open.

On precision rifles

Last year and the year before that the heavy penalty was upped and upped because people were always taking the sniper rifle in preference to the assault rifle. The AR's shoot and manouevre style wasn't as valuable as a precision rifle and the penalty could be offset fairly easily. Now I see that the precision rifle is sliding back to where it was previously as a preferable choice to the AR. Not quite sure what to suggest there, other than I think there needs to be a slightly larger divide between normal and aimed as with aimed - you get a best bonus to hit out of all the weapons so you should pay for it. Rather than 65%, I've been trying out 70% and it has a small but noticable impact on shoot-and-manoevre with precision rifles, where that should really be the AR's trump card.

Agree on everything. I've tested snipers aimed shot with as high tu cost as 95%. That way you can only adjust your facing in a turn you want to use aimed shot. To compensate this I upped accuracy bonus of it to 150 and buffed damage a bit. At the same time I nerfed both snap and normal to almost useless accuracy levels. Feels great!

Edited March 9, 2014 by Skitso

[Chris]

Re: sniper / precision rifles, yes, perhaps the aimed shot needs a slight TU cost increase too. I'm not convinced about increasing the damage on it though. It turns open maps into a turkey shoot if the sniper rifle is too powerful.

[Lidhuin]

Re: sniper / precision rifles, what is the idea behind normal and aimed shots with these?

Currently, a high accuracy soldier can make two good normal shots. I think this is reasonable - you need the stats to pull it off and it takes your whole turn to do it. A low accuracy soldier cannot perform this with any degree of reasonable accuracy. Besides being gameplay balanced, it's also realistic.

However, what becomes the point of the aimed shot then? Is it for low accuracy soldiers? They shouldn't be running around with sniper rifles anyway. Is it for move-and-shoot? That's supposed to be used for rifles.

[kabill]

Re: sniper / precision rifles, what is the idea behind normal and aimed shots with these?

Currently, a high accuracy soldier can make two good normal shots. I think this is reasonable - you need the stats to pull it off and it takes your whole turn to do it. A low accuracy soldier cannot perform this with any degree of reasonable accuracy. Besides being gameplay balanced, it's also realistic.

However, what becomes the point of the aimed shot then? Is it for low accuracy soldiers? They shouldn't be running around with sniper rifles anyway. Is it for move-and-shoot? That's supposed to be used for rifles.

I've found this problematic as well. Ironically, a precision rifle is better in the hands of a less accuracy soldier, since they can make up for their low aim with a higher accuracy shot. In contrast, high aim soldiers get much less benefit from the weapon, since they're going to be close to the accuracy cap anyway. Not sure what to do about that. If cover penalties were applied before the accuracy cap, then it would mean that very high aim shots could be used to hit targets better in cover*. On the other hand, that risks rendering cover marginal with experienced high-aim soldiers.

*It's possible this is the case now and I never noticed. It never used to be, though, and I've not checked since I started playing again.