Waladil Posted May 14, 2014 Share Posted May 14, 2014 When I first read about the doing stuff takes a % of TU instead of a static number deal, my immediate reaction was "who in their right mind would ever think this is a good idea?" However, I wasn't playing Xenonauts much then, and I didn't try it myself. Loaded up the game earlier, and was reminded of how stupid that idea seemed to me. But I insisted to myself, "Waladil, you gotta give them a chance. Try it and see how it works." After playing a bunch of missions with it, my reaction is... "Who in their right mind would ever think this is a good idea?" It almost completely negates an entire category of soldier skill, and relegates the usefulness of TU growth to "wonderful, you can run a little bit further now." If I want a rifle-bearing soldier to take an accurate shot, they have to spend 55% of their TUs. So a soldier with low TUs (50) can move 7 tiles and shoot, or a soldier with maximum TUs (98) can move 14 tiles and shoot. An entire game's worth of progression... reduced to 7 tiles of movement. You know, I remember a lot of discussion on these very forums about how much better a TU system is than XCOM 2012's "two action" system. And yet, now it's basically the same system. You can move a bit and shoot once, or shoot twice at lower accuracy. Am I the only one who can't stand this system? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llunak Posted May 14, 2014 Share Posted May 14, 2014 "Who in their right mind would ever think this is a good idea?" People who know the original game? Also people who found it strange that a soldier with 49TUs wasn't able to fire a precision shot from a sniper rifle at all, for example. It almost completely negates an entire category of soldier skill, and relegates the usefulness of TU growth to "wonderful, you can run a little bit further now." If I want a rifle-bearing soldier to take an accurate shot, they have to spend 55% of their TUs. So a soldier with low TUs (50) can move 7 tiles and shoot, or a soldier with maximum TUs (98) can move 14 tiles and shoot. An entire game's worth of progression... reduced to 7 tiles of movement. Not for me. I see a huge difference between a soldier with 55TUs or 75TUs. And BTW those 7 tiles are not "a little bit further", it's twice the original distance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max_Caine Posted May 14, 2014 Share Posted May 14, 2014 Open config.xml. Find the following line: <PercentageWeaponCosts>1</PercentageWeaponCosts> Set that 1 to a 0. Then it should be as you like it. You will have to re-adjust costs in weapons_gc.xml. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skitso Posted May 14, 2014 Share Posted May 14, 2014 Is GH still planning on adding the TU costs in the movement path? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crusherven Posted May 14, 2014 Share Posted May 14, 2014 Yeah, I really don't know how being able to move twice as far before/after shooting is worthless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted May 14, 2014 Share Posted May 14, 2014 I still think the % based system is far superior to the static TU system (though I will not rehash the reasons why). Others disagree, which is fine - but you can't complain too much that an X-Com remake is using the same system that the original X-Com uses. Full discussion is here: http://www.goldhawkinteractive.com/forums/showthread.php/9101-TU-vs-Static-TU-firing-cost Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skitso Posted May 14, 2014 Share Posted May 14, 2014 Hey Chris, are you still planning on adding the shooting TU costs in the movement path? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ventuswings Posted May 15, 2014 Share Posted May 15, 2014 I personally love % TU system Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StellarRat Posted May 15, 2014 Share Posted May 15, 2014 I have mixed feelings about it. Besides the indestructible aircraft this was probably the one of the most controversial decisions GH made during development. There are good balance reasons to have it as a %, but I still think there was a better way to do it. A bell curved TU increase would have better IMO. Anyway, what's done is done. It's far too late to change things like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinHann Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 This thread is going to stay in history now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 Let's not bring it back from the dead, eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.