X-COM Firaxis - XCOM: Enemy Unknown + Enemy Within Expansion

[Darth Roxor]

Hey guise? Enough decline yet? No?

Source?

 

[Omicron]

- Squads of soldiers will consist of only 4 members

or are you making stuff up?

 

[Vault Dweller]

Hey guise? Enough decline yet? No?

If true, it means the maps are very small.

 

[Fryjar]

Hey guise? Enough decline yet? No?
- Squads of soldiers will consist of only 4 members

9/10
...or at least I hope so.

Sounds pretty bad overall, but this was to be expected to be honest.

Edit: Even if this is just a troll post, I would be very surprised if your max squad size will be bigger than 6 and deaths anything but infrequent due to the changes to the levelling system. This kind of implementation would make levelling way too tedious with larger squads for today's market and wouldn't be in line with the streamlined approach of the other tactical aspects of the game.

 

[Haba]

Source?

Nothing reliable, after checking up on it.

Gamespy speculation for example: http://uk.pc.gamespy.com/pc/xcom-enemy-unknown/1216147p1.html

 

[Vault Dweller]

Fryjar does have a point. The manual leveling and traits do call for a smaller group (in today's market). That's why you have only one base too - if you only have an RPG-lite party of 4, you don't need 3 bases.

Looking at the screens I can't imagine this system supporting 8-12 XCOM dudes and aliens. It would be a mess.

 

[Grunker]

I'm sure you have a better practical implementation of abstracting the costs of different actions in a turn based tactical computer game up your sleeve. Is it move-and-shoot per chance? Or is it time for a wall of text full of theoretical fantasies with no root in practice?

Nononono mate, you said:

Tactical combat without action points [...] is an oxymoron.

You are saying that it cannot be tactical combat without action points. I find ToEE's combat tactical. I find KotC's combat tactical. They are action-based systems. I played some GURPS today which is maneuver-based and could implemented directly to computer-mechanics, it was pretty fucking tactical. These are just the turn-based games I can name right off the top of my head.

You think action points are best? Hey, fine, whatevs, but it is not the only sysem.

I love action-point systems by the way, I just can't fucking stand idiotic blanket staements like the above.

 

[Elim]

Was this already posted?
Link

 

[Vault Dweller]

Don't worry, it won't stay the same.

 

[damicore]

Hey codex why so butthurt about the ammo thing?
I mean the fact that the whole TU system has been dished (fuck, I can't shoot and then hide my guys anymore?) is shitty streamlining for retards. The 4 agents squad is streamlining for retards. Only one base is streamlining for retards.

But manual ammo reloading? Did that impose some kind of challenge to you? Did the manual handling of ammo add to the tactical depth of the game?

 

[Vault Dweller]

Ammo is a resource to be managed. Different types (AP, explosives, incendiary) played a role early on and when you switched to alien weapons, you needed elerium (and zrbite) to manufacture the ammo, which limited supply.

Unlimited ammo, obviously, doesn't do any of that, and you can't run out of it.

 

[Haba]

Hey codex why so butthurt about the ammo thing? [--]
But manual ammo reloading? Did that impose some kind of challenge to you? Did the manual handling of ammo add to the tactical depth of the game?

Obviously not, but you could occasionally run out of ammo. And it fucks up your immersion as well.

 

[Darth Roxor]

in before a trooper has 30 rockets in his backpack and can spam his rocket launcher throughout the mission.

 

[Mozgoëbstvo]

But manual ammo reloading? Did that impose some kind of challenge to you? Did the manual handling of ammo add to the tactical depth of the game?

Ever played games with accurate manual handling of ammo?

 

[Hellraiser]

Hey codex why so butthurt about the ammo thing?
I mean the fact that the whole TU system has been dished (fuck, I can't shoot and then hide my guys anymore?) is shitty streamlining for retards. The 4 agents squad is streamlining for retards. Only one base is streamlining for retards.

But manual ammo reloading? Did that impose some kind of challenge to you? Did the manual handling of ammo add to the tactical depth of the game?

Four words:

Infinite heavy weapons ammo

Yeah now you don't need to make a choice if you just use those rockets to blast walls and open new paths into buildings/UFOs or if you want to save them up in case four or more fucking snakemen decide to be really close to each other and you want to blast the xeno fucks. Also since ammo is now infinite you don't need to manage it on the dropship. So no more choosing if you want more plasma clips at the cost of only having a few rockets or vice versa. I say that deprives the game of tactical choice but maybe I'm just a potato-overdosed fuck who is talking nonsense and Firaxis is improving x-com by making it more accessible.

Also

Building different bases has been removed, but you still buy satellite coverage (the new radar) and build hangars for interception in different countries.

Buying satellite coverage bros, as in you get access to satellites monitoring UFO activity over countries X,Y etc. So you do use fucking satellites against xenos flying around in very large UFOs armed with fusion bombs and plasma beams which they can use in fucking space.

 

[Infinitron]

Hopefully "heavy weapons" will retain a limited ammo supply. Rocket spamming sounds a bit too ridiculous even in these popamole times.
Heck even ME2 had a different ammo limit for heavies.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I can remember more than a few missions where much of my squad got wiped out, then the remaining guys got into extensive firefights and ran out of ammo and had to retreat to the bodies of their comrades to find more and didn't necessarily make it.

Yep. Ammo was always a factor, especially in Terror From the Deep. It had large maps and plenty of aliens, so you could easily run out if you weren't careful.

 

[Haba]

I see more decline than Incline. Considering that this game is going to get out, I think if enough fans screamed, maybe they will change it.

Yeah, 'cuz that has worked so well in the past... right?

Maybe we should have a petition.

 

[Jaedar]

It's more likely that rocket launchers won't exist, and instead you can buy a rocket launcher perk which you can use once per mission.

 

[janjetina]

Nononono mate, you said:



You are saying that it cannot be tactical combat without action points. I find ToEE's combat tactical. I find KotC's combat tactical. They are action-based systems. I played some GURPS today which is maneuver-based and could implemented directly to computer-mechanics, it was pretty fucking tactical. These are just the turn-based games I can name right off the top of my head.

You think action points are best? Hey, fine, whatevs, but it is not the only sysem.

I love action-point systems by the way, I just can't fucking stand idiotic blanket staements like the above.

At the moment of writing that I was enraged, and when in enraged state and pressed for time I tend to go for hyperbole. I'll try to restrain myself from that and try to be clear in the future to avoid tangential and essentially unproductive exchanges such as the one we are having at the moment.

That doesn't change the (only important) fact that what we have here is a failure to communicate schoolbook case of dumbing down. There is a game (the original X-Com) that implements action points mechanic to simulate different actions (and their time related costs) in turn based combat. There is complexity and tactical challenge in managing those action points. Replacing action point system from X-Com with two actions significantly reduces need for planning, thereby reducing tactical challenge (whether there are other games like TOEE that implement action based systems well is irrelevant, the relevant fact is reduction of tactical chellenge in this case). So, as a result, we have X-Com remake which is less challenging and hence less appealing (or to put it bluntly, less fun) to the fans of the genre.

The same line of reasoning can be applied to the ammunition management.

Playing a tactical combat game, which penalizes small mistakes and requires careful planning (and can even punish you unfairly sometimes) is fun. A bit masochistic, but still fun. Instead of such a game (which has gone nowhere - I can easily play Dosbox version of X-Com whenever I feel like it), we get a crippled copy. Now we are faced with a difficult decision: play the original X-Com or shell out cash for the crippled copy.

 

[Spectacle]

The game is starting to sound like D&D vs aliens. I bet your squaddies will have 10 million hit points so you have to fuck up badly to get someone killed.
Consoletards will still complain that the game is too hard.

 

[Peter]

Inb4 horribly unbalanced 'hardcore mode' is announced.

 

[Mozgoëbstvo]

D&D vs aliens

If only. I need decent D&D after Westgate. Aliens sound tempting

 

[Grunker]

If you want to take pedantry to this extreme

I don't find it extreme to challenge someone when he says IT CAN ONLY BE TACTICAL COMBAT IF X.

I don't disagree with you on any of the other points but I don't really see what they have to do with what I said.

 

[Drakron]

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2012/01/11/the-art-of-xcom-enemy-unknown.aspx

More screens (I know, it says art but there are a couple screenshoots of combat).

Bitch away ...