Peek around corner

Is there not a command to peek around a corner, rather than stepping out manually, and turning around (putting yourself at risk, and wasting probably more AP than you should)?

Nope. Sorry.

I think it's a good idea though, I wonder if it would be hard to implement.

Do a quick search, one of the large threads that covered this should give you food for thought.

The search is pretty bad, but I did find some discussion. Could you tell me the eventual consensus? Impossible to implement, or unbalanced?

Possible but expensive if sprites need producing.

Not seen as an essential or desirable feature by the devs.

Potentially incredibly unbalanced as it would allow spotting (if not shooting) with limited potential risk of retaliation.

That is from memory, may not be 100% accurate.

Possible but expensive if sprites need producing.

Not seen as an essential or desirable feature by the devs.

Potentially incredibly unbalanced as it would allow spotting (if not shooting) with limited potential risk of retaliation.

That is from memory, may not be 100% accurate.

Yep, I hear you.

I don't think new sprites are required, as it would just be a glance type of thing.

All it would do is combine the action of 'move, turn 90 degrees, move back to original spot, turn to face original direction'. You could treat it as such, but just have it bundled as an action (thereby not upsetting the balance). In that sense, it's more of a convenience and less awkward LOOKING way to do the action, even though (under the hood) it's the same thing.

Just seems like a bizarre movement (visually) to step entirely out from cover, turn and face the enemy, move back, and turn around. Again, it can still do that 'under the hood', but VISUALLY it should just keep you where you are and imply a peek (and change your view cone for a moment as the action takes place).

Potentially incredibly unbalanced as it would allow spotting (if not shooting) with limited potential risk of retaliation.

I don't see how it would be unbalanced as long as you can only look around the corner, not shoot. It would be one of the few ways where you could approach and spot an alien before drawing reaction fire. You could also reduce the advantage of peeking by allowing aliens to detect it, and while they cannot fire they do know where you are and could launch their attack or flank once the AI is capable enough. Extra tactical options are almost always a plus turn-based tactics games.

I agree with ladlon on the sprites and how strange the only possible way to look around corners currently is.

I don't see how it would be unbalanced as long as you can only look around the corner, not shoot. It would be one of the few ways where you could approach and spot an alien before drawing reaction fire. You could also reduce the advantage of peeking by allowing aliens to detect it, and while they cannot fire they do know where you are and could launch their attack or flank once the AI is capable enough. Extra tactical options are almost always a plus turn-based tactics games.

I agree with ladlon on the sprites and how strange the only possible way to look around corners currently is.

I will prove you wrong with exactly two words: squad sight. Unless you lose sight of the enemy after you switch units, in which case the only point is to determine whether or not to run out from behind cover, which also breaks the game because the point of coming around a corner is there's danger, and anyway just because you can't see the alien doesn't mean you don't know it's there. Looking around corners would break the game in half, and now you know why.

It's a tricky business, the whole peeking around a corner dynamic. It has a lot to do with risk. Peeking around a corner should mitigate risk, certainly, but would the risk reduction be so large that peeking around a corner is the correct action to perform every time? Consider a plan-n-go system like Afterlight. In plan-n-go, a solider must take a specific amount of time to perform an action, and even if the solider is told to revert the action immediately after completing it, the opponent has a window of opportunity in which to respond. In an IGOUGO system, the opponent has a dice roll, and if it fails it, that's your lot! That's a HUGE drop in risk, so the most optimal strategy is to hug a corner, peek around it then tuck your head back in, because the enemy has a lot less chance to hurt your solider.

The down side to this is it's not just soliders that can peek around corners. Aliens can as well. Especially as they are all humanoid, and if it was said that aliens shouldn't be allowed to peek around corners, I would say, why not? They can fly between the stars, what makes an alien less capable of peeking around a corner than a human? If aliens can do exactly what human soliders can, and if there's considerably less risk in peeking around a corner than there is in walking around that corner, the alien should do that. After all, to do otherwise is dumb. (Remember that the camping alien we all love to hate is correctly choosing the most optimal strategy for survival - step back, find cover, overwatch, wait for them to come to it, then step back, find more cover, overwatch, wait for them to come to it). Aliens would never put themselves at risk (they barely do now!) and it would be so much more frustrating when an alien who is peeking around a corner calls in heavy support to vapourise your troopers and it's impossible to kill the alien between cover and superior armour protecting it.

They can fly between the stars, what makes an alien less capable of peeking around a corner than a human?

The Reticulan Insurance Company now charges 20% extra on premiums for lifeforms who decelerate rapidly to reduce the detection chances of their invasions. This is almost entirely due to the level of Hyperspeed Whiplash claims that they now receive. Of course, some lifeforms don't even live to make claims, as they stumble around corners in full sight with their neck braces on.

While, I can see the gritty, added realism of corner peeking, it may look a little odd as things stand. As assonasitis points out, there are other factors playing a part in this situation, where gritty realism is already suspect.

Plus most of the corners seem to be see-through/shoot-through at the moment anyway. Plenty of times I don't peek around a corner specifically to avoid getting shot... and then watch plasma fly straight through the wall-corner anyway. I've learned that last spot is basically a "they can shoot you you can't shoot them" spot.

As soon as you spot an enemy you can kill it with your other troops using squad sight as pointed out above.

So you lean round a corner in safety, spot an alien in safety, your other troops then kill it in safety.

If you lose sight of it again once you lean back then you know exactly where it was standing and kill it using ground target shots because it has not had its own turn so it won't have moved.

The enemy gets no chance to prevent you peering out, it gets no opportunity to retaliate against you, it also gets no opportunity to move away from the compromised location.

In a real time game (or real life) peering round would have risks and rewards, in this particular turn based game it has only rewards.

I can see that being incredibly hard to balance out.

I am not saying that the current system is ideal, just that corner leaning is not just a basic feature.

It would need careful consideration to the way the system would interact with the other ground combat systems.

I think it would be reasonable to not have squad sight after peeking. There wouldn't only be rewards as you do reveal your own position to the aliens. The biggest use for it would be just to look if it's safe to cross between buildings or move your other troops up. If it isn't too much work to implement it would be a nice feature to experiment with.

If you lose sight of it again once you lean back then you know exactly where it was standing and kill it using ground target shots because it has not had its own turn so it won't have moved.

This! This is a very important point in this argument.

"Turkey peek" / Corner site / Shooting from cover is another X-com:EU upgrade that I would like added as an OPTION.

To clarify, In X-com: UFO defense if your standing at the corner of a building you can only see at a 45 degree angle (diagonally) meaning that you have to step out of cover into a direct path to see an alien 2 squares away. In X-com:EU if you are at a corner you can see anyone in a strait line as if you are standing in the line beside the building, and you can still shoot at any alien in that line from cover. Which allows you to use the cover of corners and assault more tactically. In the real world there is a name for this, its called a "turkey peek" and they actually teach this in the military. You peek out with your rifle long enough to see and maybe shoot then pull back into cover so you don't get shot in the head.

Now I am aware that in the game this raises two issues, which is why I think it has to be an option you can turn on and off. First, is a lot of people will say walking around the corner into an alien 2 squares away and getting blown away by auto shot is part of X-com and something that could take away from Xenonauts and they are not wrong. It does add to the fear factor that whole leap of "oh crap here I go!" lol. But for the same reasons JS removed added the view to allow turkey peek at corners I want it as well, in that it adds more command control and makes the game a little less about luck and a little more about tactics. Secondly, when you make the player capable of finding enemies like this it will make the game easier, which is in opposition to why some of use love x-com... unless the aliens can do it too. If it is possible for aliens to do it as well aliens will also be harder to kill, but if they can't I would like to level the playing field reducing the number of soldiers I use. This will make my games faster and also more tactical .... sound familiar? lol. Don't get me wrong I want to play Xenonauts like the original X-com in its original state some times, but as Xenonauts is a much improved version, would it not be beneficial to allow more tactical play?

---UPDATE / Correction:

I just played X-com:EU and realized they don't actually turkey peek. When you click fire they step out into the open around the corner one square then switch to shoot cam and fire, after shooting they then step back behind the corner. This "free"/automated move allows for easier line of site and shooting mechanic without them having to create varied cinema screens for the shot cam. ... It would also be easier to duplicate in the original version.... if anyone understands what I am talking about, lol.

If you lose sight of it again once you lean back then you know exactly where it was standing and kill it using ground target shots because it has not had its own turn so it won't have moved.

This! This is a very important point in this argument.

It is also important to note, that can work both ways so it is not really an advantage to one side or the other as long as both sides can do it.

It just makes the game more tactical and cover actually important..... Do aliens not all so get squad site? Could aliens not also use cover? Can aliens not also guess your still there and trough a grenade blindly around a corner? Would it not also make them harder to kill if the are in cover? and would players actually have to be more careful and tactical if aliens don't just run wildly in the open?

I truly believe it makes the game harder more fun and more tactical if both the computer and player are actually using cover instead of standing in the open like its the colonial period and we apparently haven't learned to not stand in the open and shoot, besides don't people just move out and move back anyway? is that not the same, just you risk setting off reflexes more? Its more dumb that you would jump out "here I am shoot me!!" and then hide again, instead of peeking and shooting from cover.

Also in the original X-com aliens could do this and players could not.

http://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Line_of_sight

under blind spots

I have no issue with aliens getting some advantages like longer site range and so on, but I would like to think my solders could be smart enough to us cover.

Actually in the original x-com you could both do it in some situations.

It felt like a bug and was inconsistent.

People already have problems with the aliens being able to kill their soldiers by guessing their location or outranging them.

Adding another mechanic to allow them to kill you without danger of retaliation seems a bit much.

Add on top that it also allows you to kill them without danger as well.

I don't disagree that it could be a useful change.

I am yet to be convinced that it wouldn't be an unbalancing one.

Spending time and resources adding a feature that would add exploitable behaviour and skew game balance is not something I am keen on.

Your point about standing in the open and not using cover is also a little misleading.

Both the enemy and your soldiers do use cover in the majority of situations.

Being unable to peer around corners does not equal total inability to use cover.

For the people complaining about aliens being able to kill their soldiers by guessing their location I see two answers:

1. Make a super duper easy mode where you hit start is strips all the UI away shows an alien with the internet troll face and has one button that says "fire", they click the button the "alien" dies and a sign comes up.. "congratulations you beat the super duper easy mode... now grow a ..... backbone (see cleaned it up) and play the real game! lol

2. Allow those to be turned off on easy mode and if they cry its too hard to play easy they can turn that off too.

So as you can tell I am prone to exaggerate. So yes my point about not using cover is yes also exaggerated and you can hide to heal, pull back and regroup and yes even shoot at 45% angle or a window, but my point while exaggerated is still valid that walking around a corner to see if some one is there is well a bit dumb. I see to a degree you recognize this as well. As far as balance goes it really depends on how well the player uses it since I don't see it needing a tutorial. But if your more tactical and able to use it well you will also more likely play at a harder difficult and give your self handy caps if it makes the game too easy, after all that is where things like Iron man mode come from and the reason you see imposable - iron man - pistols only lets plays on the internet for X-com:EU.

All this being said (because not only do I exaggerate but I am also long winded) I would suggest it is an option you can turn on and off as stated in my first post. Then you don't worry about balance you let the players find it. But I also understand it not being a priority for release this could easily be an after release patch add-on. I do understand you have a lot more pressing matters to work on before release and that this is the kind of thing that could reset a lot of design/balancing work if it is a default setting as well as AI changes. Please understand I am not asking that nor do I expect that much of a change this late in the build.

But I would like to see it as an option some time since its not something I could just choose to do myself.

As a side note, ... I love your signature.

This was proposed long ago, but I believe Chris said it was a programming nightmare and frought with exploitability.

this please..

I feel like the only reason peeking might be exploitable and unattractive to Chris is because of limited sight range. When I play, I mod the game so that everyone, alien and human, have a sight range of 100 (so it becomes 25 at night, which is reasonable). With the game modded this way, the lack of an option to peek becomes all the more irritating, especially since it would NOT be unbalancing in this situation at all. However, by modding the game as I have, I've pretty much made the game completely different from what the creators of Xenonauts envisioned (though it has just as much, if not more, tension, action, and tactical awesomeness than the game with vanilla sight ranges in my opinion).

I find it amusing how the debate ends up mentioning realism and tactics, but still we don't have night vision goggles, binoculars, and can't go prone, things that, in my point of view, are the basic of basics (not only) in ANY military operation, and available in the 70's. Um, going prone has been available for thousands of years, as a matter of fact.

For a vanilla setting, of course.

If i had a troop and one of my soldiers told me he couldn't go prone, i would issue him a brand new combat knife and a sack of potatoes.

Shame there's no such things in Xenonauts oh, wait, no combat knifes??? alas, we have lasers, they cut and cook at the same time, we don't really need them knifes

it would NOT be unbalancing in this situation at all.

Wouldn't it?

The extended sight range doesn't really exclude my view of what makes it potentially unbalanced.

It partially addresses squad sight issues except you could still move someone to a point where they are not in sight of the enemy then level them with indirect area damaging fire.

Your soldiers would still be able to lean out of cover, shoot the enemy then lean back without the enemy having a chance to retaliate.

Anyone who was armed with an area damaging weapon could fire shots near enough to hurt the enemy without putting themselves into a spot that was visible to the enemy.

Depending on grenade range you could still drop stun gas onto the enemy without putting yourself in line of fire.

At the moment in order to do any of those things you have to take risks in order to reap the rewards.

If you remove the risk then you have an unbalanced mechanic.

I would be interested to hear ideas on how the rewards can be balanced out because realism and cool factor don't save a game from exploitable mechanics.

Wouldn't it?

The extended sight range doesn't really exclude my view of what makes it potentially unbalanced.

It partially addresses squad sight issues except you could still move someone to a point where they are not in sight of the enemy then level them with indirect area damaging fire.

Your soldiers would still be able to lean out of cover, shoot the enemy then lean back without the enemy having a chance to retaliate.

Anyone who was armed with an area damaging weapon could fire shots near enough to hurt the enemy without putting themselves into a spot that was visible to the enemy.

Depending on grenade range you could still drop stun gas onto the enemy without putting yourself in line of fire.

At the moment in order to do any of those things you have to take risks in order to reap the rewards.

If you remove the risk then you have an unbalanced mechanic.

I would be interested to hear ideas on how the rewards can be balanced out because realism and cool factor don't save a game from exploitable mechanics.

The thing is, the fear of not implementing/removing features in a game because of unbalance or exploitable mechanics, is what could make the difference between an awesome game and a simple meh game. You can use EU as a perfect example of that, it looks awesome with lots of bling, fluff and stuff, but that's about it. The lack of features makes it boring, repetitive, a good candidate for a shelve in the basement in the short term. All the balancing act firaxis pulled out of the hat has potentially exploitable mechanics.

Now look at 2 other games : jagged alliance 2 and xcom-apocalypse. I would ask, what does JA2 have that makes me, and tons of others, go back and replay it compulsively over and over again? Lots and lots of personality, tons of stuff. Just as the orginal x-com, JA had its share of clones, and none could beat the original, because essential things are not there anymore, things that give it soul. Its still being modded to death, which is incredible. And what about apocalypse? It has its flaws, but they're easily forgettable for pure awesomeness. Potentially unbalancing mechanics like ambushing, flying, the super overpowered late game toxi-gun, you mention it, they're there, and they are awesomely fun, and they don't make the game any easier. And even when people say ambushing is overpowered, well, it's not. Aliens DO have a lot of firepower, and they use it. And things could go from good to a complete wipe in 10 seconds.

This is not rocket science, and it would be a good thing if devs should stop worrying about unbalancing a game because of too many features, instead make them work. Being able to peek corners wouldn't be, in any way, an exploitable mechanic. If its made to simply be a peek, not a full aim snipe from cover, and provide only limited view (the soldier cant really see what's there, just that something is there, alien or npc) it will still be there, awesomely useful as it, but how would that be overpowered? How is that any different from having to walk around the corner to look and then back in? Being forced to do that so we can get shot at is ridiculous, maybe back in the day it was acceptable, but back in the day it was also acceptable having cars without air bags.

About taking risks to reap rewards, you can use that when talking about money investments and whatnot, but NOT in military operations that involve the loss of life. Soldier takes risks, he's gonna bite it really quick, and everyone else will pay for it. And Xenonauts should not fall on the trap of not having enough options for combat and to assist with soldier survivability, also note, people here at the forums talk about challenge, challenge, challenge, but the majority is not even here, and they might care more about an awesome fun and ultra replayable game with plenty of options, something they can enjoy for a few hours after a long day at work, then a bag full of reloads and frustrations.

You know what im talking about, if you read a game preview and its all about challenge challenge challenge, chances are it-will-suck.

And sorry for the huge post, got itchy fingers