Durrr, Jagged Alliance 2 combat is HARD

[denizsi]

I share the sentiments of MisterStone. Except for difficulty of combat, perhaps. JA is way harder, and a lot less forgiving, bust mostly because you have less tactical options. There are far fewer structural places and more landscapes in JA, which often make it a matter of stats, and trying to apply tactics on open land is a game of tedious and difficult cat-mouse.

Also, I'm not sure about this but I think JA has dice rolls or a similar mechanics where outcome of any action in two identical situations in combat can be different. This is not the case with JA2. In a hard to figure way, every minor and trivial change can affect the outcome, but given no changes, the outcome will always be the same.

Despite the options given to players, AI is pretty bad and limited in JA2. 1.13 pretty much shows that.

Note that there's a source-port project that's porting the game to linux and mac, and fixing some of the bugs in game mechanics 1.13 didn't bother with. I don't have it bookmarked; search and you will find.

"It forces you to use exploits like hiding in a house and shoot out of windows."

How is that an exploit?

He must be one of those children "who drink from the stream-lined". Surely, any sign of simple complexity above a certain level of comprehension must be an exploit.

And

I miss only one thing... option to replay your battle in real time... I mean, after battle you will just sit down and enjoy great shootout... with sounds from 1.13 it could be awesome

 

[Livonya]

The one problem with JA2 is that it has such a fantastic combat system that it can ruin your enjoyment of other games that have less strategic systems.

Silent Storm wasn't bad, and I enjoyed it up until the time that the robot armor entered the game. But Silent Storm didn't have any of the other features that made JA2 great.

The thing about JA2 is that it has a LOT of very well done elements.

1) Fantastic combat system
2) Iron Man option that won't be ruined by bugs/crashes
3) Fantastic voice acting
4) Open ended map, but a clear overall goal
5) A sense of humor that doesn't detract from the gritty combat
6) Difficult game play that will reward mistakes with the death of your favorite NPC

There are elements that could have been better, and there should be a load of games that have come along in the last 8 years that have tried to improve on the JA2 model.

I understand that turn based games can be annoying when the combat system is boring, but when done right nothing compares to turn based combat.

The most frustrating thing about BG2 and the BG2 spin offs including Planescape Torment, NWN1, and NWN2 is that the combat system is just garbage.

Squad based games need to be turn based.

I am fine with real time for a game like the Witcher, but squad based games need to be turn based.

- Livonya

 

[sqeecoo]

I dunno, it's a great game, but quite easy once you figure it out. The enemy just starts rushing you, and you just kill them with long range guns during the day and good NVG during the night. They do try to flank in 1.13, but that usually means you just have to put an extra merc on the flank. It wouldn't be so bad if it didn't have so MANY battles - they just start getting tedious at the higher difficulties. Maybe the trick would be to mod the .ini so that the Queen sends very few patrols, but big ones, so you mostly just have to take the cities.

 

[denizsi]

I understand that turn based games can be annoying when the combat system is boring, but when done right nothing compares to turn based combat.

The most frustrating thing about BG2 and the BG2 spin offs including Planescape Torment, NWN1, and NWN2 is that the combat system is just garbage.

I think the problem and half the reason why hardly any game have TB combat any more is that TB combat NOT done right is a chore, something to endure while garbage combat like in those games can still be managed. At least personally, I'd rather play garbage RTWP than badly done TB.

I dunno, it's a great game, but quite easy once you figure it out. The enemy just starts rushing you, and you just kill them with long range guns during the day and good NVG during the night. They do try to flank in 1.13, but that usually means you just have to put an extra merc on the flank. It wouldn't be so bad if it didn't have so MANY battles - they just start getting tedious at the higher difficulties. Maybe the trick would be to mod the .ini so that the Queen sends very few patrols, but big ones, so you mostly just have to take the cities.

The game itself sure could use many improvements outside of combat, but combat itself only needs proper AI I think.

I just remembered a certain ironman game session where, 7 days into the game, I let Reaper get captured alone and have him break out and wipe out the whole sector single handedly, and not with all those LAWs either. Since two platoons of soldiers never left their buildings, all I needed to do was stockpile everything I could get on the roof of one of the buildings, use one LAW to open a hole and attract attention in the opposite building and crouch and stand to take 'em down as they came. I've avoided enemy interrupts using an exploit I've discovered at the time, by attempting to throw something to stand to see the enemies, which rarely got interrupted. Reaper got out with minor wounds. A true monument to the weakness of the AI.

 

[Ion Flux]

It forces you to use exploits like hiding in a house and shoot out of windows.

You mean, use cover? How's that an "exploit"?

Yeah, real soldiers call you a pussy if you use cover.

Oh wait, no they don't.

Edit: By the way, I've had JA2 a.i. lay down on the ground and wait for me to pop my head up in a window and then blow it clean off. So the a.i. really isn't that dumb.

 

[BethesdaLove]

"It forces you to use exploits like hiding in a house and shoot out of windows."

How is that an exploit?

If the A.I. isnt capable of dealing with an ad infinitum repeated tactic, I would loosely define that as an exploit.
Example from my game: Drassen Mine. I took it. The Recapture-Troop arrives and all I have are pistols and 1 SMG. They have rifles. I admit, I had the bad luck of them attacking at night and me not having any NVGs. Solution (not! tactic): hide in the building. A.I runs around , I get interrupts. And that happened in 1.13. It would not be an exploit if a time limit hindered my camping but I would have to restart the game...
So exploit is sometimes a good thing.

Me:
Glad you are playing ironman and cheating. Way to go, fag.

spectre:
How the fuck is withdrawing wounded troops cheating? Enlighten me.

If he plays ironman, he should be playing it like a real samurai. Ironman doesnt allow saving in a battle. So if he leaves after getting shot one time, he actually retries/"reloads" the battle. That is an A.I. defiying trick. They dont follow you. So you have tons of time to regroup/heal.

Me:
All that doesnt change the fact that the "clean the map with the same old tactic" is boring after 5 cities because the weapon and character progression slow down.

spectre:
Poor lad, you realize that you can *gasp* change tactics if you get bored? There's a few to choose from actually.

I could change the tactics but it would be better if the game rewarded this behavior. The ones I used:
1. find a good coverspot and put all your soldiers there and shoot when they come running (rare and dangerous)
2. hide behind a wall and shoot when they come running (works also if they come from above)
3. hide in a building and shoot when they come running (works always)
4. hide on a roof an shoot when they come runnig (doesnt work if another roof close by)

The problem is that the mission design boils down to wiping everything clear and I have a hard time motivating myself to use something else than the above. In SSS (where the Panzerkleins where not the untouchable Tanks from SS) you had Ambushes, Base Defense (awesome mission!) and Sneak missions which gave more change to the gameplay.

BethesdaLove wrote:
Played vanilla. After the first 2 cities its a rinse and repeat crap because the a.i sucks donkey cock.

Edward_R_Murrow wrote:
After the first two cities? Which ones? If you mean Omerta and Drassen or Drassen and Chitzena you're dead wrong. The game becomes much different.

Right now I havent taken 2 squares of Grumm and Meduna but havent noticed any differences from Drassen on.

Me:
Your strategy is then all the same. Hide behind walls and shoot or better yet - climb on a roof...

Edward_R_Murrow:
That works in the first two/three cities. Then you need to think a little more, because it doesn't work against a lot of things. Like any of the SAM sites. Or the door to door (or room to room in the University) combat in Cambria. Or clearing the warehouses in Grumm. Or the Tixa prison. Or the Alma military base. Or the secret research facility. Or anywhere with snipers, mortar teams, grenadiers, gas use, mines, rocket launchers, or entrenched foes. Which pretty much is everywhere besides the introductory areas and the Queen's green patrols. Play a little further, it is definitely different.

SAM sites are the "hardest" because you need to sneak in on one side and cut the wire mesh fence and apply the Hide-Behind-Wall-Tactic (tm). Everywhere else they keep running into my mercs. Snipers seem to have the same view distance as I do so Walk-Near-A-Wall (tm). Mortar team I encountered 2. The fist one was a surprise. The second one didnt fire. Gas strangely never hit me. Always went off inside of building while my mercs where shooting at stuff. Mines I've seen 1 on a SAM site. LAW never shot.

Me:
Being hard is not a quality because you are outnumbered and outgunned.

Edward_R_Murrow:
Ummmm...what? That's kind of the point of the game; you command a small squad of elite mercenaries to take on a third world despot and her forces with guerrilla tactics and more tactical know-how. That's where the challenge comes in; using superior tactics to make up for inferior numbers, and sometimes inferior weaponry.

I would have prefered easier enemies. Ones where you would be 100% sure to win a 1 on 1 with your best merc. Or something along the lines. But certainly easier than the ones I get.

By the way, I've had JA2 a.i. lay down on the ground and wait for me to pop my head up in a window and then blow it clean off. So the a.i. really isn't that dumb.

But it still runs by windows where their mates just dropped dead. Well, the A.I is alright but you get bored with it because of the constant repeating. I guess I am a little to hard on it.

In conclusion of this epic post: JA2 - Overrated. I would by it for 25 bucks. 30 is a stretch. Its 3 movies. I would have picked a good 1 out of 3...

 

[Higher Game]

A trip to GOG is sounding tempting. Like Worm King I'm not a fan of the modern setting, but am willing to overlook it if it's so good.

How's 2 compare to the first one? Should I play the first for completeness/plot reasons (or just because it's good as well)? Are the addons (Deadly Games, Unfinished Business) also worth a punt?

The only thing you get out of playing the first is knowing who Mike is, when he shows up in JA2 to kick your newbie ass.

The best thing to do is hire an uber merc for a single day, only to give his equipment away to a cheaper guy. Hiring someone for a full kevlar set and a proper rifle will give you the edge you need against pistol using baddies.

Xcom generally has better strategic gameplay, but JA2 is better for tactics, and especially for having such a diverse array of equipment and guns.

 

[Serious_Business]

Yeah so I was waiting for the "this shit is overrated, I go agaisnt the mass movement because I am cool and have critical thinking" post. Bravo Codex, you're not predictable at all

 

[HanoverF]

As bad as the AI in JA2 can be, I'd bet it would wipe the floor with the likes of BethesdaLove in a troll off.

 

[Severian Silk]

The 1.13 mod can be brutally hard. The last game I played was ironman on the mdeium setting. I had to quit: it was just no longer any fun.

Actually, I think the middle-ground is what has disappeared somewhat since the Vanilla (or better yet, Gold) version, since the easy modes are now too easy, too.

But all the goodies make it too tempting to uninstall it.

Xcom generally has better strategic gameplay, but JA2 is better for tactics, and especially for having such a diverse array of equipment and guns.

I didn't play x-com that much (the CE edition doesn't work on XP). What constituted strategic gameplay? All the UFO encounters were spread randomly across the globe, with no battle lines or areas of control. To me this seemed kind of devoid of personality and not strategic. Apocalypse tried to give you a strategic map based in a city that you control, but this was mostly meaningless as well.

 

[Zhuangzi]

I challenge anyone who thinks JA2 is overrated to name a game with a better squad level turn based combat system. Can't do it? That's because such a game doesn't exist.

Silent Storm was meh, XCOM is probably better at the strategic level, and the likes of UFO: Extraterrestrials tried but failed horribly (even though I liked the game overall).

I doubt we'll ever see a squad level turn-based game as good as JA2 ever again.

EDIT: in fact the one thing that bothers me about the game now is that I can't bear to have one of my mercs die (except Ira :twisted: ) This is because the voice acting is so good and the dialogue so witty).

Barry: "They are trying to kill me. But I am professional."

 

[Severian Silk]

Silent Storm was too damn slow, and the Panzerkleins killed whatever else remained. And, I'm not a D&D junkie, so ToEE wasn't that enjoyable for me, either.

JA2 is still #1.

 

[Severian Silk]

Also, I'm not sure about this but I think JA has dice rolls or a similar mechanics where outcome of any action in two identical situations in combat can be different. This is not the case with JA2. In a hard to figure way, every minor and trivial change can affect the outcome, but given no changes, the outcome will always be the same.

Both games have dice roles. The seed number is simply retained in the latter. Read up on pseudo-random number generators.

I miss only one thing... option to replay your battle in real time... I mean, after battle you will just sit down and enjoy great shootout... with sounds from 1.13 it could be awesome

In Homeworld you could save your replays and even email them so that other people could bask in your greatness as well. In LSN you can rewind the clock to view past moves. It is an integral part of how the game's multiplayer system functions.

I'm sure the 1.13 developers have been requested multiple times to implement this. It will get done eventually (I hope); but not until after multiplayer has been added (since the two systems are so closely related).

EDIT: in fact the one thing that bothers me about the game now is that I can't bear to have one of my mercs die (except Ira :twisted: ) This is because the voice acting is so good and the dialogue so witty).

I am (nearly always) a save scummer in part for this very reason.

I am fine with real time for a game like the Witcher, but squad based games need to be turn based.

I have found that if the game is set in outer space then real-time is not so bad. Of course, I've never played a turn-based space sim, so I have nothing to compare it to.

 

[Unradscorpion]

So why did panzerkleins ruin the game so much? Haven't played it, just wondering.

 

[Severian Silk]

So why did panzerkleins ruin the game so much? Haven't played it, just wondering.

1. The variety of tactics that you can use is miniscule when compared to regular soldiers. All the tactical depth offered by the engine ends up being pointless. You actually end up with "less game" than you had to start with, and feel totally let down.
2. They kill anything that isn't also a Panzerklein.
3. They appear very early in the game.
4. They make the game totally easy.
5. If all the infantile humor in the game weren't bad enough, they just *had* to insert sci-fi elements into a WWII historical game. Imagine if David Schwimmer were mysteriously transported to Mars at some point in Band of Brothers. That's what it's like.
6. #1 again for emphasis.
7. #1 once more.

 

[Carlos' Bitch1]

If SS had the same combat as Hammer and Sickle, dropped the robo's, etc, it would come very, very close. The fact that I prefer the WW2 weapon set and atmosphere probably makes my view bias, I still believe that it would be a close run race.

The PK's were not as bad as everyone states. Bad, yes. Horrid, no. I played through the game without using any the second time through, and my snipers easily killed off all PK wielding enemies with headshots. They could have been kept out of the game though.

Anyone know of a mod for SS that makes the combat similarly realistic to HnS?

 

[Severian Silk]

Wikipedia says there's a mod that will remove the PKs. Not sure what other realism changes they made.

http://www.strategycore.co.uk/forums/in ... st&p=61034

 

[Jaime Lannister]

Yeah so I was waiting for the "this shit is overrated, I go agaisnt the mass movement because I am cool and have critical thinking" post. Bravo Codex, you're not predictable at all

SoZ: Volourn
Wizardry: me
JA2: BethesdaLove
The Witcher: DarkUnderlord
MotB: racofer, 1eyedking
Fallout: Sarvis, Andhaira, NakedNinja, JoeKrow

 

[Jaime Lannister]

I challenge anyone who thinks JA2 is overrated to name a game with a better squad level turn based combat system. Can't do it? That's because such a game doesn't exist.

I enjoyed Silent Storm better because of the next gen physics. This is a serious post.

 

[RK47]

you need to download a mod to make the game slightly less challenging.

Here are some changes that I liked:
1. You can view % chance to hit
2. Killing enemy = whole gear drop. No longer will the sniper rifle an enemy carrying disappear when you kill him.

 

[Higher Game]

I didn't play x-com that much (the CE edition doesn't work on XP). What constituted strategic gameplay? All the UFO encounters were spread randomly across the globe, with no battle lines or areas of control. To me this seemed kind of devoid of personality and not strategic. Apocalypse tried to give you a strategic map based in a city that you control, but this was mostly meaningless as well.

You placed your own bases all over the world, and location mattered. You also designed your own bases, which made a big difference in base defense missions.

 

[Severian Silk]

You placed your own bases all over the world, and location mattered. You also designed your own bases, which made a big difference in base defense missions.

Yeah, but it was basically limited to, "Kill moar alienz, get more $$$." And, the bases were more or less static and didn't move around a lot.

In JA2 there were multiple considerations: ore from the mines, the threat of SAM sites, different optimal routes to Meduna depending on whether you want to, a) do a speed run, b) turtle and collect cash/equipment/experience, c) acquire the doctor in Cambria, etc.. Also, you had to consider methods of transportation: do you have a car or helictopter; or, do you need to hoof it on foot? Do you only have one car or two? How do you divide your forces based on the vehicles you possess? Finally, you had to time your fund acquisitions with the contracts you signed with the various mercs. Will your contract with Shadow or Scope expire before you reach Meduna, or after?

 

[Zhuangzi]

You placed your own bases all over the world, and location mattered. You also designed your own bases, which made a big difference in base defense missions.

Yeah, but it was basically limited to "Kill moar alienz, get more $$$." And, the bases were more or less static and didn't move around a lot.

In JA2 there were multiple considerations: ore from the mines, the threat of SAM sites, different optimal routes to Meduna depending on whether you want to, a) do a speed run, b) turtle and collect cash/equipment/experience, c) acquire the doctor in Cambria, etc.. Also, you had to consider methods of transportation: do you have a car or helictopter; or, do you need to hoof it on foot? Do you only have one car or two? How do you divide your forces based on the vehicles you possess?

They're both outstanding games, neither of which have ever been equalled. But I will say that after playing JA2 a lot, the combat in XCOM becomes tedious (all that moving around the map looking for enemies - which JA2 does in realtime) and faceless (without unique mercs). I am still waiting for a XCOM type game with the combat mechanics and wit of JA2. Looks like I'll be waiting a long time.

 

[Severian Silk]

The removal of the strategic aspects of JA2 is one reason I'm not looking forward to JA3. (Though it won't be a total amputation--there will still be some strategic considerations in the form of troop movements, etc., as well as some new innovations.)

 

[Lightknight]

They're both outstanding games, neither of which have ever been equalled. But I will say that after playing JA2 a lot, the combat in XCOM becomes tedious (all that moving around the map looking for enemies - which JA2 does in realtime) and faceless (without unique mercs).

You simply dont get the main point of tactical design in XCom, putting realtime in XCom would be stupid, because the maps were quite small, and making it switch in realtime when no aliens are in sight would remove the better part of suspense. Faceless soldiers is another great thing about XCom, what, JA2 has some 40-50 mercs ? In XCom i had hundreds dynamic personas created by my imagination and gameplay process. You ever read any XCom LPs ? People name their soldiers after their RL friends and such, which gives the game almost a narrative feeling. Unique mercs ? No need.

Anyway, i dont know how can anyone really compare these two games with a straight face.