Ground Combat Balance Discussion Build V21 Experimental 4!

Quite a few new balance changes for this build, so I'm making a fresh thread to discuss them. Here's the list of changes:

- Only 25% of aliens are now killed in a UFO crash, or 40% if the power cores explode

- Buffed plasma cannons significantly, but they no longer appear until Warrior rank ("support" troops get Heavy Rifles at Soldier level)

- Increased accuracy on Alien Battle Rifle so it is the same as the normal rifle

- All alien weapons now also do stun damage equal to their normal damage

- Added Alien Assault Plasma weapon (shotgun) to the game, creating a new class of "assault" Androns and Sebillians to use it

- Extended range of the Heavy Plasma Rifle, changed stats so it is a powerful single-shot weapon with no blast radius

- Removed grenades from Sebillian support troops

- Electroshock grenades now explode on contact rather than at end of turn

- Backpack and Belt item movement cost now 4 APs

- Easy mode made easier

- AI troops now have more APs, so should be more aggressive

- Cover modifier increased from 0.75 to 0.9

- Andron armour increased slightly

- Light drone now much better at suppression and has more mitigation, but less base damage

- Alien weapons rebalanced to be more of a threat to end-game armours

- Single shot weapons have smaller suppression radius than before - 2 for rifles and carbines, 1 for pistols and sniper rifles. Burst fire remains at 3.

- Switching items between hands is now free in terms of AP

Balance Update changes:

- Burst fire for rifles now has 60 accuracy, up from 30. This makes it marginally more TU efficient than using snap shots, and significantly more TU efficient when receiving the short-range bonus.

- Burst fire also now correctly does triple the suppression of a single shot, rather than double as previously.

- Alien rifles now use the same TU / accuracy levels as Xenonaut rifles.

- Combat / assault shields now weigh 6kg instead of 3kg.

Edited February 11, 2014 by Aaron

Okay, quick thoughts from a new game and having just finished a light scout map with the starting team. I faced Sebillians, it was on an urban map, Veteran difficulty, I lost one guy.

• Wow, suppression for the bad guys is SUPER EFFECTIVE. I wish my guns (any) were that effective at suppression!
  
• About that suppression thing. I now have another reason to keep my troops spread apart.
  
• Giving Sebbies more AP means they fire more burst shots and more snap shots. They don't ever fire normal or aimed.
  
• Quite a few of my guys who were shot at freaked out, although only one guy ever got wounded (and died in the same shot). Not certain if that's a bug - will keep on playing.

That's all for now. Once I get some armour I may be in a position to talk about stun/suppression again.

Is there no intention to make burst fire actually useful? It seems like with the suppression nerf, you're trying to force it into a suppression role. But burst fire isn't good for suppression either- its too inaccurate to even land within a 3 square radius most of the time.

Soldiers are getting knocked out a lot. When they're revived they have to spend a turn picking up all their stuff that spilled out on the ground. Kinda annoying.

Also still no fix for the shield bug?

Seconded. Burst fire needs to be buffed to killing potential, not remain as a suppression mechanic.

Liking the other changes though.

Suppression from a gun should (emphasis on should) be calculated from the target rather than the bullet path, so if the bullets fly wild it shouldn't matter. Suppression should only be calculated from a target tile for rockets and grenades.

If burst fire is intended to be suppressive, it isn't suppressive enough. On paper, a burst shot from a rifle or LMG should suppress a Caesan noncom or guard, but it doesn't. If I'm paying 40-35 AP for a burst shot which is pretty likely to leave my squaddies ass trailing in the wind, then I expect to suppress, tbh.

Heh, more time spent talking about what's not changed than what has so far (Max_Caine excepted)! The accuracy values were something I was going to look at, I just hadn't got round to it.

Regarding burst fire, I initially disagreed until I realised how few weapons have burst fire now we've changed the carbines to be shotguns - it's basically only rifles. I agree that overall killing power per AP should be at least as good as a snap shot, so I'm proposing an accuracy boost for the burst fire on the rifles up to 60 (from 30).

This means that they are still less accurate than a standard snap shot, but as they fire three shots they have a slightly higher damage efficiency per AP spent. However once you get up close, the kill potential increases significantly as the close range hit bonus is applied three times instead of twice. You can try the new 60 accuracy value if you want and see how it works for you.

However, I don't agree based on the numbers that the difference between snap shots and aimed shots needs boosting. It's already more AP-efficient to add extra zoom levels to a shot, as the accuracy increases 50% for an aimed shot for less than 50% extra AP cost (and it's as much a sliding scale to allow you to spend your AP in smaller chunks as anything else).

When it comes to the aliens, the AI would disagree with you. It doesn't need to maximise it's to-hit, because plasma shots are so powerful. It needs to maximise the number of shots it fires to ensure that at least one shots hits, and it does. The AI prefers burst shots over snap, and will squeeze in as many snap as it can otherwise. There's no incentive for the AI to use higher zoom levels.

It still needs to spend its AP to calculate the most chance of hitting an enemy per AP spent, irrespective of the damage output. Firing 3 shots at 20% is worse than firing one at 100% no matter how strong your weapon is.

I'm not entirely sure what you're suggesting, though - we should make the snap shots cost more relative to higher tiers of accuracy? That just makes it more optimal to spam snap shots. Or we should make the higher tiers of aim cheaper and more accurate? You've just said the AI doesn't need to use them because it's trying to maximise the number of shots taken?

OP updated with additional changes from V21 Experimental 4 Balance Update, discussion can continue here.

And yet it does! Chris, I understand you don't have the time to play and re-play missions because you have a game to finish, which makes this difficult to communicate to you as you're relying on inherantly unreliable ancedotal evidence rather than first-hand experiences, so let me put it another way. Consider that aliens will not fire a shot type below their minimum accuracy threshold, and this threshold is in general fairly high for a minimum - between 30-40% (depending on alien type). If burst fire meets the threshold - say 30%, then calculating the cumulative binomial probability of hitting a target hit by a single shot, using an online calculator, the chance of being hit comes out at 78%! It is far better for the AI to play the cumulative probability game than it is to fire one, more accurate shot. Conversely, it is far worse for humans to play this game as while statistically we might hit with a shot from the burst, ballistic and lasers do not kill like plasma does and watching shots miss is dispiriting and drives a player away from something that "obviously" doesn't work.

For this reason, it looks like the AI maximises the number of shots fired over the accuracy of shots. You can see this most clearly with a weapon like the plasma cannon or the previous incarnation of the heavy plasma. Solider-class Sebillians in previous versions had 80APs, and it carefully portioned those AP out into snap shots because staticially, that's what worked best for it. I would like the AI to be incentivised to use normal/aimed shot in preference to snap/burst, as burst shots seem (emphasis on the word "seem") unreasonably effective for reasons already discussed. Now, I've only done some experimenting in this area, so I am the first to say I am uncertain of the right way to do it. I have tried to disincentivise snap/burst by making burst shots more expensive to shoot (50 AP) and snap shot less accurate (55 rather than 85), but I don't know yet if that's the right way to go about it.

EDIT: I'm reminded of a comment KateMicucci made about LMGs, how KM found that having one LMG was ineffective, but giving everyone LMGs was effective, and a comment by AgentFransis how the late game was easy once you had Predator armour and starting rolling around everywhere toting LMGs. This would be playing the game the aliens do - burst shots a go-go - but mass using weapon that better suited for that game than the aliens can have.

Edited February 12, 2014 by Max_Caine

But Max, why are you against the AI using the most efficient firing scheme possible? Because it simply doesn't use the other single fire modes? You certainly can't blame the AI for being smart. I think my question would be does the AI use aimed fire at long ranges when snap should have a very low chance of hitting. OR, does the math work out that no matter what the range snap is always better?

Concerning - "I'm reminded of a comment KateMicucci made about LMGs, how KM found that having one LMG was ineffective, but giving everyone LMGs was effective" - I don't agree with this at all. In the hands of a soldier with high strength and good accuracy the LMG is very effective.

Edited February 12, 2014 by StellarRat

Yes, I remember that was your comment at the time. Okay, I won't blame the AI for taking the most optimal route - after all, that's what humans do. What I see is an odd converse in action. A player is incentivised to use the more accurate zoom levels because the higher zoom bands are priced closely to lower zoom bands, the cost of non-shooting actions tends to be low, burst fire (for rifles) is highly priced and aliens generally do not die to a single shot so each shot counts. Conversely, aliens are incentivised to fire as many shots as possible, because statisically it doesn't matter if they miss lots, they only need to hit once to either kill or cause serious damage.

I am against the incentivisatation of "MOAR SHOTS" because a variety of things:

• AP shot scaling. As aliens become stronger they gain more AP, which is then funneled into more snap/burst shots.
• Cover frustration. There are numerous reports of being "one-shotted" by aliens "even behind cover". Cover is more valuable if fewer shots against a target are fired, not more.

I do actually have more, but I have to get off this computer now.

So you reckon the aliens should prioritise the most accurate shot they have the AP for rather than the lowest AP shot that is above their accuracy threshold?

Possibly also taking into account how many AP it would leave them and if taking a slightly less accurate shot would allow them to take a second shot?

Of course, regardless what changes take place in accuracy formula, there should be incentive for alien toward more shots when confronted against the shield. After all, their priority should be eating through 100% 80+ buffer instead of some additional accuracy.

Gauddlike, yes, I would prefer that they used that kind of a play style. However... StellarRat's right. This play style for the aliens works. It does. I'd prefer they didn't do it, but I've got to think... is it right for me to ask that something be fixed that isn't broken?

Gauddlike, yes, I would prefer that they used that kind of a play style. However... StellarRat's right. This play style for the aliens works. It does. I'd prefer they didn't do it, but I've got to think... is it right for me to ask that something be fixed that isn't broken?

Maybe the bigger question to ask is if snap shots are always mathematically better for the aliens to take: Why do they have any other firing mode? That also brings up, given that most weapons have at least two modes, snap and aimed shouldn't there be a reason for humans AND aliens to employ one or the other regardless of the type of weapon they are carrying? My guess is that at some range an aimed fire is mathematically superior to a snapshot (or should be.) Perhaps if squad sight shots are taken into account everything is OK? I would think you should lose the range bonus of sniper weapons if you take a true snap shot as they are designed for carefully aimed fire. Edited February 12, 2014 by StellarRat

Personally, I would like to see the TU/hit efficiency of snap shots toned down quite a lot. As max_cain said, the AI seems to take a lot of them.

There will come a certain range where snap shots will simply be more TU efficient then aimed shots, but that range should be like 5 tiles. Until then, aimed and normal shots should offer a greater chance to hit relative to TU.

Otherwise you get a situation like in the OG where full auto was simply the best firing mode no matter what range you were at.

Snap shots should be a close combat firing mode, or a shot of last resort in mid/longrange firefights.

... And for gods sake please buff burst fire accuracy. All it's good for now is wasting ammo and making a lot of cool gun noises.

For assault rifle, this is what the TU/hit efficiency should break down like IMO.

Long Range (yellow tiles) - Aimed shot>Burst shot>Normal shot>Snap shot

Mid Range (>5 tiles, up to yellow tiles) - Burst shot>Aimed shot>Normal shot>Snap shot

Close Range (<5 tiles) - Burst shot>Snap shot>Normal shot>Aimed shot

Quite a few of my guys who were shot at freaked out, although only one guy ever got wounded (and died in the same shot). Not certain if that's a bug - will keep on playing.

I think that's due to suppression drain also affecting morale. Moraleconfig.xml has 1 suppression drain causing 0.25 morale loss at the moment (although I might be reading that wrong), so an alien plasma rifle should cause 55 * 0.25 = ~14 morale loss per shot right now. Right?

For assault rifle, this is what the TU/hit efficiency should break down like IMO.

Long Range (yellow tiles) - Aimed shot>Burst shot>Normal shot>Snap shot

Mid Range (>5 tiles, up to yellow tiles) - Burst shot>Aimed shot>Normal shot>Snap shot

Close Range (<5 tiles) - Burst shot>Snap shot>Normal shot>Aimed shot

I like this. I guess I should ask, what is a "normal" shot?? My experience with guns is either your aiming or not. If you're not aiming it's a snap shot. IMO, only a sniper might have a mid-time shot. In my mind that would be something like get the target in the crosshairs and pull the trigger vs. target in crosshairs, check wind, check range, adjust, get some lead, breathe, pull trigger.

For assault rifle, this is what the TU/hit efficiency should break down like IMO.

Long Range (yellow tiles) - Aimed shot>Burst shot>Normal shot>Snap shot

Mid Range (>5 tiles, up to yellow tiles) - Burst shot>Aimed shot>Normal shot>Snap shot

Close Range (<5 tiles) - Burst shot>Snap shot>Normal shot>Aimed shot

I don't see that as realistic. You want to pay the TU cost of firing two snap shots and get three shots that are more accurate than the accuracy level above a standard snap shot?

And then as you get closer in to the target, the close range bonuses stack to make them even more powerful?

I don't see that as realistic. You want to pay the TU cost of firing two snap shots and get three shots that are more accurate than the accuracy level above a standard snap shot?

And then as you get closer in to the target, the close range bonuses stack to make them even more powerful?

Not more accurate. I was talking about hit chance per TU. The burst, will be less accurate per shot then a snapshot, but you get 3 shots, so hit/TU efficiency will be higher.

A 40 TU burst shot should be more hit/TU efficient then a 20 TU snap shot at any range. At closer ranges the snapshot should begin to outshine the aimed shot (which is normally more TU efficient): the close range accuracy bonuses make the hit/TU efficiency of the snapshot higher because you get to take 2 shots for the price of one aimed shot.

I like this. I guess I should ask, what is a "normal" shot?? My experience with guns is either your aiming or not. If you're not aiming it's a snap shot.

Is there not a shot mode that takes 30 TUs called a "normal shot"? I haven't played for a couple builds but I was definitely there last time I played. For ballistic assault rifles at least.

Edited February 13, 2014 by legit1337

legit - the burst fire accuracy values were doubled in the last update, so they are now already more cost effective than a normal shot at any range (hence the confusion).

Max, I still don't understand the fundamental premise of your argument. You're arguing that because a shot can kill a Xenonaut outright in most cases, it's more beneficial for them to take two shots at say 45% each than it is for them to take a single shot at 95%?

Mathematically that's simply not true, though. The optimal course of action there is to take the single more accurate shot as it's a more efficient way to spend their TU to cause maximum casualties. If the two shots were at 50% then they would be better, but that's not the case at the moment.

Well having just restarted my game with the latest update I have played a night and a day mission and what a difference!

Firstly I'm playing on easy difficulty and the setup I run is 2x shield, 1x lmg, 1x shotgun, 2x sniper and 2x rifleman.

Now I don't game the system by running with multiple shields, i carry one shield and a pistol on my 2 guys.

The recent changes have rendered the combat shield useless, before the update I could do the sensible thing and allow my shield guys to check corners etc for enemies. Now however the shields are gone with the reaction fire from any aliens who see me. The Sebillians seem to have insane accuracy and in my experience rarely miss a shot, even at range, thiswould seem to be opposite to what the UFOpedia article says about them having poor accuracy. With the improved rifle damage, stun damage and the suppresion changes it makes the early game very difficult in ground combat.

The only option I see is to carry multiple shields, which seems a shame to me, as once my shields are gone from reaction fire it is virtually impossible to scout safely. Overall I feel the Sebillians in particular are too powerful now, they have better sight range than my troops at night, the plasma rifles on burst ALWAYS suppress and they have crazy accuracy. I have compared my experience with this new patch to the previous patch and found the aliens to have been buffed too much.

1 lucky shot from a sebillian on a starting soldier is 90% a kill as they seem to do improved damage now, around the 70 per shot mark, in my play. This is more than my starting soldiers hp, on easy I would expect to be able to make a mistake and not instantly lose a soldier.

Note please I'm not a bad player of xenonauts type games but I find easy to be a good way to test entry level mechanics and situations.

[edit] Also it would be useful if you could implement some kind of indicator of whether a soldier is dead or just stunned, in my last GC mission I thought 2 soldiers had been killed, at the end of the mission one dead soldier and I can only assume one stunned soldier.

Edited February 13, 2014 by Kalthon
new info

It turns out that the difficulty modifier for the alien stats, set at 0.5, only affects HP. So even on easy mode the aliens are almost as deadly as they are on the harder settings (they're just easier to kill). Explains rather a lot.