KickStarter Phoenix Point - the new game from X-COM creator Julian Gollop

[Trans-Financial-Man]

I actually do feel like we are getting something that combines features of old UFO games with nuXCOM stuff. I guess you want specific features?
Because I see inventories, I see multiple squads, I see vehicles, I see ammo, I see a world map that is more like the originals, I see factions...

Inventory is basic. It's slots as opposed to a grid with more control. Multiple squads of super amazing guys who will likely stomp the aliens, vehicles that will either be incredibly op or super niche, world map with loads of insta fill auto stickers and shiny buttons to draw ADHD attention, factions are a bar that goes one way or the other based on arbitrary things you do in the game.

How was any of that stuff in OG X-Com?

 

[Jimmious]

Most of the things you say are your personal guesstimates so I don't know how can we discuss further....
The inventory is definitely much more of an inventory than in nuXCOM and closer to the older games. I don't believe the GRID was the important part of the inventory system as much as the freedom to carry whatever you want etc

 

[thesheeep]

The grid was actually very weird as you couldn't rotate stuff.

 

[Galdred]

When have inventory tetris minigames become incline?

 

[ArchAngel]

When have inventory tetris minigames become incline?

Since Diablo 1

 

[Child of Malkav]

Ok people, educate me about something.
What is the difference between time units and action points and why are the first preferable to the second?

 

[PanteraNera]

I haven't followed the development of this game that closely lately, but I still have to say I don't fully understand the negativity that seems to have gripped this thread recently.

Not just "recently" there was always negativity towards Phoenix Point, from the start. There are just a lot of "incidents" that added up, mainly streamlining or catering for a wider audience. See, the Fig pitch had a visual design, mood, that no longer is (dire, grim, post-apocalyptic, body horror, to name a few keywords) . Julian Gollop stated in an interview that PP is a "horror scifi game" and than they dropped it. In a survey he stated that they will focus on PC that shifted later to gamepad support and later an X-Box release and partnership with Microsoft got announced. The game was marketed by the press and in the official FAQ as "spiritual successor of X-Com" combine that by "the creator of the original X-Com Julian Gollop" and you see a lot of people expect certain things (they never promised in the pitch). Just recently Linux support got cancelt. It is just that they have said or implied a lot of things and did it the other way.

In other words, they want to make the project a financial success, or more specifically David Kaye (co-founder and president of Snapshot games). That is one of the big misconceptions in this thread, Phoenix Point isn't solely Julian Gollops baby but there are others involved in the making of the game. Not only people like David Kaye that probably care a lot more about the financial side of the game, but also an technical director and an art director. When Julian did X-Com it was just him and his brother and not a team of what? 50 people?

While I certainly would have loved them doing the "original vision" it is a no-brainer that the new direction is for a wider audience. And if they deliver in the gameplay department (and by the Backer Builds especially 3 I would say they are going to) they could have a huge impact on the market, if they are financially successful. What most people forget is that since the first Backer Build until now (half a year) the tactical layer has "full-TU-mechanics" you can move, step by step, you can shoot multiple times regarding the weapon (for example a heavy gun once per turn, assault rifle twice and an smg four times a turn), that is a lot closer to X-Com than XCOM. So if they succeed we could see a lot more new games with a TU-system instead of an 2AP-system.

As a disclaimer, I consider UFO: Enemy Unknown the best game ever made, so I suppose I form the a "part of the core audience".

Honestly while Julian seems really to want to please old fans as well, the focus is more mainstream now (that raises a lot of fears for non-mainstreamers).

The reboot didn't have Geoscape

And I can say from first hand experience, boy does it feel good to have the Geoscape back, while it is work in progress (and I liked the initial, realistic looking concept from the Fig pitch way better) it really adds a lot to the feel of the game. BB3 is a lot of fun solely because of the Geoscape.

However, if you can stop during movement and change your mind, while numbers are running down under the hood

It works just like that.

You also have larger teams in this game than in nuXcoms, providing you with more tactical options.

As confirmed with Backer Build 3.

The pillars of UFO's success that ensured endless replayability, which were lacking in nuXcoms, seem to have been retained here.

Yes, but PP will also have a story, I am curious how it will work out and hope it does not hinder replayability.

I also question the attitude that they can't finish the game with all the promised features.

Well I wouldn't put it that way. I say that it is very unlikely that they will be ready to release the game in June 2019 in an polished state. Is that a problem? Not anymore i think, as they are making lots of money with pre-orders, so money (might) not be of a concern. On the other hand, people will say another broken promise (on Fig they aimed for 12/2018), but I rather have them postbone the game for another year than releasing it in an unfinished state.

 

[PanteraNera]

Ok people, educate me about something.
What is the difference between time units and action points and why are the first preferable to the second?

TU-system like X-Com (and Phoenix Point):
Every action uses a certain amount of time units, movement, shooting, aiming and so on, your turn ends if you used up all of your time units.
That means you can move, shoot, reload, change stance multiple times in any order and any combinition.
This gives the player a lot of options to respond to different scenarios.

2AP-system like in XCOM
You have two actions, move and shoot/reload. You can move-move, or move-shoot, or reload-shoot.
Shooting ends your turn (remaining action point will be lost).

 

[Child of Malkav]

Ok people, educate me about something.
What is the difference between time units and action points and why are the first preferable to the second?

TU-system like X-Com (and Phoenix Point):
Every action uses a certain amount of time units, movement, shooting, aiming and so on, your turn ends if you used up all of your time units.
That means you can move, shoot, reload, change stance multiple times in any order and any combinition.
This gives the player a lot of options to respond to different scenarios.

2AP-system like in XCOM
You have two actions, move and shoot/reload. You can move-move, or move-shoot, or reload-shoot.
Shooting ends your turn (remaining action point will be lost).

But, hypothetically speaking, if you had like 15-20 action points wouldn't you be able to do a similar amount of actions that a time unit would allow, like move, shoot, reload, overwatch etc? I'm thinking in terms of Firaxis XCOM games, if you had 20 APs, you could do a bunch of actions like what I mentioned above. Are time units quantifiable in any way? Like, 1 tu = x APs, or it simply doesn't work like that?

 

[Zombra]

Hypothetically speaking, if you had like 15-20 action points wouldn't you be able to do a similar amount of actions that a time unit would allow

Essentially yes. A TU system tends to make each turn much longer, actually limiting responsiveness in many ways. E.g. if you can move twice and shoot twice all in one turn, so can the enemies; so the AI has the opportunity to "blitz" actions without allowing the player to react.

 

[udm]

The main difference between APs and TUs has always been firmly semantic, until FiraXCOM came along and widened the divide. Many board games and PnP RPGs have a similar system to XCOM but they typically describe character actions as being able to be done a number of times, rather than using the term "action points". Then you also have games like Silent Storm and JA2 where you can rack up tons of APs (especially JA2 1.13), and labelling them TUs wouldn't be any different.

 

[Latelistener]

Ok people, educate me about something.
What is the difference between time units and action points and why are the first preferable to the second?

They're just names. Jagged Alliance used action points, but they worked exactly like time units from X-Com. XCOM on the other hand uses the new 2AP system, which was created as a simplified version and where all actions have equal cost, while with time units they're all different.

You can guess some problems already. Smaller actions like rotating and changing stance had to go, as they can't cost as much as shooting, which also resulted in 360 degree view. Stats had to go as with time units different soldiers can have different amount of time units.

2AP is definitely serviceable in some cases, but time units is a whole new world.

 

[Mustawd]

2AP is definitely serviceable in some cases, but time units is a whole new world.

I’d also add that TUs are more simulationist because it is able to take into account things like facing direction. While 2AP’s simplification tends to go the opposite direction and makes combat more gamey.

I personally found 2AP the way XCOM did it to be a lot of fun. But they are very different games.

 

[Child of Malkav]

I think I understand it a bit better now. Knew this was the right place to ask.
Thanks guys.

 

[Jimmious]

2AP is definitely serviceable in some cases, but time units is a whole new world.

I’d also add that TUs are more simulationist because it is able to take into account things like facing direction. While 2AP’s simplification tends to go the opposite direction and makes combat more gamey.

I personally found 2AP the way XCOM did it to be a lot of fun. But they are very different games.

XCOM 2AP are fun indeed, they just make the games feel more like board games rather than "simulation" of combat scenarios.
Which is fine of course, just a lot different that what the old UFO/XCOM games were

 

[PanteraNera]

XCOM 2AP are fun indeed, they just make the games feel more like board games rather than "simulation" of combat scenarios.
Which is fine of course, just a lot different that what the old UFO/XCOM games were

Well, while personally I prefer what X-Com and Jagged Alliance 2 had to offer (multiple actions per turn, per soldier) it actually is "gamey" as well. See from that viewpoint (realism) I would prefer RTwP / WeGO (like E5 or 7,62) or even XCOM 2AP system as actually by limiting the amount of actions (time) it becomes more "realistic" as fewer actions are possible between your turn and the enemies turn (which leads in theory to an more responsive gameplay).

 

[Jimmious]

XCOM 2AP are fun indeed, they just make the games feel more like board games rather than "simulation" of combat scenarios.
Which is fine of course, just a lot different that what the old UFO/XCOM games were

Well, while personally I prefer what X-Com and Jagged Alliance 2 had to offer (multiple actions per turn, per soldier) it actually is "gamey" as well. See from that viewpoint (realism) I would prefer RTwP / WeGO (like E5 or 7,62) or even XCOM 2AP system as actually by limiting the amount of actions (time) it becomes more "realistic" as fewer actions are possible between your turn and the enemies turn (which leads in theory to an more responsive gameplay).

For me the most "realistic" but also not popamolish system is one with simultaneous turns. This is why I'm very eager to try Copper Dreams which supposedly will have one. It's not something that is frequently explored sadly

 

[Achilles]

The big problems with Firaxis' system are: a) that you can't stop the movement without losing one full AP, which Phoenix Point seemingly corrects, and b) the incredibly stupid pod activation system. There's no such fuckery in Phoenix Point, right?

 

[Child of Malkav]

The big problems with Firaxis' system are: a) that you can't stop the movement without losing one full AP, which Phoenix Point seemingly corrects, and b) the incredibly stupid pod activation system. There's no such fuckery in Phoenix Point, right?

I don't think so but from what I've seen as soon as you start a mission you already have vision on a few enemies.

 

[Stavrophore]

You haven't listened to any of my moaning. It's the misleading and distortion of game features we're all angry about. If these guys just came out at the start and said, "it's inspired by Firaxis's exciting reboot of the Xcom series" I don't think anyone would of minded. The codex would of snarked about it and moved on. But they didn't. They specifically said this was a sucsessor to OG X-Com. Then implied we would be getting the game that combines the best features of that game with modern gameplay. We're not getting that. We're getting Xcom 3. Me and others on the Codex feel misled.

You are idolizing original xcom too much. So far there's much of original xcom ideas in PP ie. ballistics[i would say its better than the original one], geoscape, TUs[albeit simplified]. Of course the game is very barebone today, and it will be released in 2020 if Gollop want any resemblance of complex and polished game.

 

[Ezeekiel]

2AP is definitely serviceable in some cases, but time units is a whole new world.

I’d also add that TUs are more simulationist because it is able to take into account things like facing direction. While 2AP’s simplification tends to go the opposite direction and makes combat more gamey.

I personally found 2AP the way XCOM did it to be a lot of fun. But they are very different games.

XCOM 2AP are fun indeed, they just make the games feel more like board games rather than "simulation" of combat scenarios.
Which is fine of course, just a lot different that what the old UFO/XCOM games were

XCOM 2AP is a big reason for why so many players express frustration with it (relating to the RNG), imo. You have very few actions per turn (early on just 1 attack and a move, or a sprint and no attack... Later on possibly a free attack or two based on skills with cooldowns) and few ways of mitigating the RNG (mostly skills/grenades and some mods).
Add a small squad size and lack of flexibility (class-based system with lots of restrictions, no real inventory beyond a few slots, most of which don't allow more than 1 item class or 2).

Such a system works better for very large squad sizes (basically panzer general and such games, not really squads anymore) to keep turn time down, but of course all the slowdowns in xcom (esp. xcom 2) and the sluggish u.i. negate that upside entirely.

The combination of few actions + few units + no solid, readily-available "counter RNG by spending action points/TU" mechanic = every failed shot is extra annoying.



For small squads JA2's system is way superior.
For 12+ guys in a mission old xcom does it better, and is also way more flexible in terms of what tactics you can use/loadouts.

Old U.I.s can be improved, xcom can get kneeling/standing the way JA2 did it (click on and drag your guy up or down to change stance) as well as targetting (point roughly at head height of the enemy to aim for a headshot, torso for center mass, leg height for leg shot if necessary... Right click on target to change single shot accuracy or full auto round count or accuracy if the former is not implemented in-game).

 

[kirin]

You can guess some problems already. Smaller actions like rotating and changing stance had to go, as they can't cost as much as shooting, which also resulted in 360 degree view.

I’d also add that TUs are more simulationist because it is able to take into account things like facing direction.

Given that there are TUs is there any plan to implement directional facing in PP? 360 deg vision means there is no possibility of real stealth play.

 

[Mustawd]

XCOM 2AP is a big reason for why so many players express frustration with it (relating to the RNG), imo. Y

Well it’s part of it. And you listed a variety of issues unrelated to 2AP. IMO 2AP is NOT x-com, but it was also not the biggest issue with the game.

There’s a whole bunch of things XCOM did that casualized the game, and while fun in its own right, made it feel extremely different from its predecessor.

 

[Galdred]

2AP is definitely serviceable in some cases, but time units is a whole new world.

I’d also add that TUs are more simulationist because it is able to take into account things like facing direction. While 2AP’s simplification tends to go the opposite direction and makes combat more gamey.

I personally found 2AP the way XCOM did it to be a lot of fun. But they are very different games.

XCOM 2AP are fun indeed, they just make the games feel more like board games rather than "simulation" of combat scenarios.
Which is fine of course, just a lot different that what the old UFO/XCOM games were

XCOM 2AP is a big reason for why so many players express frustration with it (relating to the RNG), imo. You have very few actions per turn (early on just 1 attack and a move, or a sprint and no attack... Later on possibly a free attack or two based on skills with cooldowns) and few ways of mitigating the RNG (mostly skills/grenades and some mods).
Add a small squad size and lack of flexibility (class-based system with lots of restrictions, no real inventory beyond a few slots, most of which don't allow more than 1 item class or 2).

Such a system works better for very large squad sizes (basically panzer general and such games, not really squads anymore) to keep turn time down, but of course all the slowdowns in xcom (esp. xcom 2) and the sluggish u.i. negate that upside entirely.

The combination of few actions + few units + no solid, readily-available "counter RNG by spending action points/TU" mechanic = every failed shot is extra annoying.



For small squads JA2's system is way superior.
For 12+ guys in a mission old xcom does it better, and is also way more flexible in terms of what tactics you can use/loadouts.

Old U.I.s can be improved, xcom can get kneeling/standing the way JA2 did it (click on and drag your guy up or down to change stance) as well as targetting (point roughly at head height of the enemy to aim for a headshot, torso for center mass, leg height for leg shot if necessary... Right click on target to change single shot accuracy or full auto round count or accuracy if the former is not implemented in-game).

That is a very good point: I think nuXCOM system would have worked way better if they had kept the initial X-COM squad size (or even expanded it a bit).

 

[geno]

Spoiler

At this point I didn't find any Queen, any shotgun or that new equipment for heavys.
Anyway, can you stop the mist? How long can you go assuming you survive to the bugs?