Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

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

cvv

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 30, 2013
Messages
18,071
Location
Kingdom of Bohemia
Codex+ Now Streaming!
I restarted on Veteran, got to about the same place again. I think you do have to restart this game a few times before you really get your head into the systems and the flow of the gameplay (on both levels). It's different enough to be its own thing that you have to learn.

I'm on my 1st run ever, Veteran. What made you stop the last time? What's to watch out for?
 

samuraigaiden

Arcane
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
1,954
Location
Harare
RPG Wokedex
Also paranoia, it would be cool to lose some of your soldiers because of mutation the Thing style, you know, the guys seem normal then you start having reports of sabotages on bases with you having to get more and more draconian measures to get rid of mutated traitors with major hits to morale.

At some point, you would start wondering if a call for help is genuine or a trap by the Pandora virus trying to mess with your head and allied soldier or even your own turning hostile at any point, especially on bases covered by the fog, in the end you might not be able to even trust your own soldiers. I know it would be hard to balance and most carebears would be annoyed with losing their super power rangers but you know, there was no way this game would make alot of money releasing as an Epic exclusive, if Epic was paying for it, why not going riskier on the mechanics?

Jagged Alliance 1 has this (sorta). One of the mercs you can hire is a psycho who'll kill your other mercs in their sleep, one at a time. It's great.
 

gurugeorge

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 3, 2019
Messages
7,432
Location
London, UK
Strap Yourselves In
I restarted on Veteran, got to about the same place again. I think you do have to restart this game a few times before you really get your head into the systems and the flow of the gameplay (on both levels). It's different enough to be its own thing that you have to learn.

I'm on my 1st run ever, Veteran. What made you stop the last time? What's to watch out for?

Oh it's just that I'd posted earlier that I was playing on Rookie to get the hang of things. I wanted to quickly get a sense of the toys coming up towards the start of the mid-game, but it was getting a bit too easy, so I've started again on Vet, which I think is nicely balanced as a "Normal" setting.

The only difference from Rookie so far as I can tell is that there are like one or two more mobs on Vet, things are tighter at the strategic layer (so you have to actually think about priority in what you want to research and manufacture, and you have to hang on to old hand-me-down equipment, not just reflexively build every shiny new thing for everyone) and you're seeing more and more nasty variants earlier, i.e. the aliens evolve a bit faster. The actual bread-and-butter battlescape gameplay in terms of damages, accuracy, etc., seems to be the same.

The game's mostly good, jump in, but be warned it's VERY NOT XCOM. It really isn't AT ALL like XCOM except in the most superficial looks and UI sense. The real LOS and bullet modelling changes everything, and it takes a wee bit of getting used to - particularly the way cover works (you have to think of it as symmetrical to what you see when you see mobs in cover and you can still plink away at bits of them sticking out; so basically cover isn't a hard percentage reduction like in XCOM, and actually being out of sight is more impoertant (i.e. shooting, ducking back out of sight, which there are usually enough TUs to do). One wishes there was some more detail there, like crouching/prone commands, "hug cover" (for full cover) or "hunker down" (for half cover) command, etc., but it's serviceable as is.

Also the way overwatch works (you get a sort of red "flashligh" painting a LOS cone in front of you, and the length/width of it is adjustable, which is really important - key thing is to not clip the side of something that the mob may be coming around (into LOS, otherwise you'll uselessly hit the edge of the wall or whatever as the mob is hoving into view), and not to extend the overwatch cone any more than you absolutely need to. Also, because the overwatch cone is like a flashlight, it shows you on the ground the shadows of areas where you won't hit).

It's really quite well done and makes the gameplay endlessly variable and engaging, and makes positioning really fine-grained. The model also encourages you to, e.g., shoot limbs that do nasty things off,disable weapons, etc., all that works very well.
 
Last edited:

Parabalus

Arcane
Joined
Mar 23, 2015
Messages
17,432
Good tip for the early game is using bash with heavy weapons. It got nerfed but still often better than shooting (especially the worms etc.) Melee is very good throughout the game, often better than shooting.

Second is to steal aircraft, especially the Synedrion Helios.

If you played XCOM on Legend/Impossible you should comfortably start on Hero.
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2018
Messages
50,754
Codex Year of the Donut
third is to never do scavenge missions because the rewards aren't worth it and it causes enemies to mutate super fast for some reason
 

ArchAngel

Arcane
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
19,882
third is to never do scavenge missions because the rewards aren't worth it and it causes enemies to mutate super fast for some reason
You didn't play for a long time. They buffed scavenge missions and nerfed evolutions in meantime. Also you can fight other enemies there, not just pandorans so it has 0 effect on their evolution speed. Also it is one of the easiest mission in week 1 to level up your guys.
 

Jaedar

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 5, 2009
Messages
9,837
Project: Eternity Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 Pathfinder: Kingmaker
Second is to steal aircraft, especially the Synedrion Helios.
Yeah. Steal many of them, and have them cruise the world in pairs. This way you get to field the maximum squad size (8), while also moving at maximum speed (iirc twice as fast as the second fastest option). The interface support for this is pretty fiddly though, but it's clearly an intended mechanic.
third is to never do scavenge missions because the rewards aren't worth it and it causes enemies to mutate super fast for some reason
When I played you could get lots of resources from these (and occasionally a good weapon from a faction), and they're very easy. Aside from "save lost soldier" missions, they're the best missions you can get, and they become better than lost soldiers as you reach the midgame.

My understanding is that now aliens mutate at a fixed pace, depending only on time, but I may be wrong.
 

gurugeorge

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 3, 2019
Messages
7,432
Location
London, UK
Strap Yourselves In
Is there even any comparable game with PP's aiming system?

https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads...rcenary-company-striving-for-survival.129795/

Better, if you ask me, since you can peek, sidestep, and all that jazz.

That looks cool, and because I like this system I've wishlisted it.

But I think the big problem for this type of system is headshots. How do you make a game with all-human protagonists where a headshot isn't (nearly) an instant kill every time? Or at the very least severely incapacitating and putting-out-of-commission?

It's ok with a game like this where you're playing against aliens, cyborgs and mutants, who knows what the hell their heads are like? But it's jarring right from the start with humans in this game when you can't headshot bandits ferchrissakes :)
 

Parabalus

Arcane
Joined
Mar 23, 2015
Messages
17,432
So what's the point of even having DLC2 (Festering Skies) enabled? Outside of the fun of course.

All the others reward you, this one gives zilch outside of the air combat, even after killing the Behemoth. Looking at the wiki there's only

There are less haven defense missions.
 

ArchAngel

Arcane
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
19,882
So what's the point of even having DLC2 (Festering Skies) enabled? Outside of the fun of course.

All the others reward you, this one gives zilch outside of the air combat, even after killing the Behemoth. Looking at the wiki there's only

There are less haven defense missions.
You get a lot of resources and reputation by fighting them over Havens.
 

lightbane

Arcane
Joined
Dec 27, 2008
Messages
10,156
How do you make a game with all-human protagonists where a headshot isn't (nearly) an instant kill every time? Or at the very least severely incapacitating and putting-out-of-commission?
Depending on the tech level, helmets help. Or you could make the enemies duck or move head away to take glancing shots so that it's not instant kill. If freaky cybernetics are allowed, then stuff like having a metal skull works wonders. Or having a secondary brain hidden in the torso if the target is crazy enough.
 

Parabalus

Arcane
Joined
Mar 23, 2015
Messages
17,432
So what's the point of even having DLC2 (Festering Skies) enabled? Outside of the fun of course.

All the others reward you, this one gives zilch outside of the air combat, even after killing the Behemoth. Looking at the wiki there's only

There are less haven defense missions.
You get a lot of resources and reputation by fighting them over Havens.

But you have to spend on the aircraft and modules, and the behemoth kills havens, reducing trading and discovery opportunities.
 

ArchAngel

Arcane
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
19,882
So what's the point of even having DLC2 (Festering Skies) enabled? Outside of the fun of course.

All the others reward you, this one gives zilch outside of the air combat, even after killing the Behemoth. Looking at the wiki there's only

There are less haven defense missions.
You get a lot of resources and reputation by fighting them over Havens.

But you have to spend on the aircraft and modules, and the behemoth kills >20 havens, reducing trading and discovery opportunities.
Not that much. And you get modules from fights. Behemoth does not always kill havens, it can also just damage them or infest them. And by taking down flyers and getting rewards you also stop Behemoth roaming and send it back to the sea.
 

Parabalus

Arcane
Joined
Mar 23, 2015
Messages
17,432
So what's the point of even having DLC2 (Festering Skies) enabled? Outside of the fun of course.

All the others reward you, this one gives zilch outside of the air combat, even after killing the Behemoth. Looking at the wiki there's only

There are less haven defense missions.
You get a lot of resources and reputation by fighting them over Havens.

But you have to spend on the aircraft and modules, and the behemoth kills >20 havens, reducing trading and discovery opportunities.
Not that much. And you get modules from fights. Behemoth does not always kill havens, it can also just damage them or infest them. And by taking down flyers and getting rewards you also stop Behemoth roaming and send it back to the sea.

Do you have have the numbers to compare resource income with/without the DLC?
 

ArchAngel

Arcane
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
19,882
So what's the point of even having DLC2 (Festering Skies) enabled? Outside of the fun of course.

All the others reward you, this one gives zilch outside of the air combat, even after killing the Behemoth. Looking at the wiki there's only

There are less haven defense missions.
You get a lot of resources and reputation by fighting them over Havens.

But you have to spend on the aircraft and modules, and the behemoth kills >20 havens, reducing trading and discovery opportunities.
Not that much. And you get modules from fights. Behemoth does not always kill havens, it can also just damage them or infest them. And by taking down flyers and getting rewards you also stop Behemoth roaming and send it back to the sea.

Do you have have the numbers to compare resource income with/without the DLC?
No lol, why would I want to do that kind of statistics. But I played it a few times now and overall you get more than you spend. Also new enemy and missions are fun.
 

spectre

Arcane
Joined
Oct 26, 2008
Messages
5,380
How do you make a game with all-human protagonists where a headshot isn't (nearly) an instant kill every time? Or at the very least severely incapacitating and putting-out-of-commission?
Depending on the tech level, helmets help. Or you could make the enemies duck or move head away to take glancing shots so that it's not instant kill. If freaky cybernetics are allowed, then stuff like having a metal skull works wonders. Or having a secondary brain hidden in the torso if the target is crazy enough.
He was speaking in the context of manual aim, where you can pretty much target the head all the time you want; heck, even go hit the face/eyes if the damage model is that detailed. Even if the target is behind, a lot of the time the head might be exposed
(or in fact be the only thing that's exposed). I think it's a good question, and a lot of the games just devolve into headshots galore after the initial to-hit problems are solved (e.g. the notorious case of Fallout, but even Jagged Alliance 2 wasn't free of this problem once you got your hand on some scopes). Not sure if it's worth going out of your way to try and solve this, with a sorta-realistic approach to firefights, every hit from a rifle cartridge should be enough to ruin one's day, even if it doesn't penetrate body armor, it should send the recipient to the ground.
Granted, body armor might have turned a lethal wound into a bruise, but that still puts you out of the fight. Bottom line is, awareness, positioning and who hot first should be the decisive factor instead of the ability to tank hits.

Still, it's not desirable for headshot to be the default move everytime, but I think it's a matter of fudging the numbers on the to-hit chances, so that it becomes a gamble and that center-of-mass shot continues to be the preferred safe bet,
nevermind quicker to line up. I think it can be made to work even with PP's targeting system - the head will always be a small target, too small to be covered by the entire targeting reticle. I think this is how PP implements in currently,
a lot of the time the default shot placement will already give you optimal damage output, so might as well save yourself the time.
This leaves two problems to solve, burst fire and close range shots. It is arguable if burst fire should even be targetable at all (while it's not inconceivable to do so, might be undesirable for balance),
even then, it might be less of an issue because if you want to saturate something with lead, center of mass gives you higher chance to hit, unless we're talking suppressive fire.
On the other hand, CQB is the natural environment where I would expect intentional (or accidental) headshots to happen a lot more, so it might be so there isn't anything to fix here as long
as engagement ranges are kept realistic (a lot of games and media in general tend to have shootouts happening at too short distances) and reaction time is emphasized over precision. This can be hard to pull off believably in turn based,
but RTwP can similate it rather nicely (see: 7.62 High Caliber and UFO After___). I love turn based with all my heart,
but I have to concede that it has its limitations when it comes to realistic firefight simulation.
 

Jaedar

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 5, 2009
Messages
9,837
Project: Eternity Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 Pathfinder: Kingmaker
So what's the point of even having DLC2 (Festering Skies) enabled? Outside of the fun of course.
I have a strong suspicion that the game is best played without any of the dlc enabled. Living weapons is decent enough I suppose, but I dislike ancients and cybernetics and I have a really hard time believing that adding an air game would make the game better. Is festering skies actually more fun? Either way I'm not going to pay 8 euro for it.
 

Parabalus

Arcane
Joined
Mar 23, 2015
Messages
17,432
So what's the point of even having DLC2 (Festering Skies) enabled? Outside of the fun of course.
I have a strong suspicion that the game is best played without any of the dlc enabled. Living weapons is decent enough I suppose, but I dislike ancients and cybernetics and I have a really hard time believing that adding an air game would make the game better. Is festering skies actually more fun? Either way I'm not going to pay 8 euro for it.

It def is fun and worth enabling, I wouldn't play without it (or any other DLC). There's some thought to taking down the later ships.

But unlike the previous DLC, this one seems to be made up of all negative additions, like it really should have part of the base game.

Still, it's not desirable for headshot to be the default move everytime,

This def isn't the case in PP, even against humans, who are fucked up by arm shots much more.
 
Last edited:

spectre

Arcane
Joined
Oct 26, 2008
Messages
5,380
I agree, though you're quoting me out of context, it was a more general statement re: to a more general discussion.

So what's the point of even having DLC2 (Festering Skies) enabled? Outside of the fun of course.
I have a strong suspicion that the game is best played without any of the dlc enabled. Living weapons is decent enough I suppose, but I dislike ancients and cybernetics and I have a really hard time believing that adding an air game would make the game better. Is festering skies actually more fun? Either way I'm not going to pay 8 euro for it.
I would most definitely play the first game without the DLC, there's a bit to take on, and you don't need the additional clutter before you get your bearings.
I'm on the fence about Festering Skies as well, perhaps I just need some more experience with it to see how does it all fit together, but it did feel tacked onto the base gameplay.
Still, an UFO-like game really feels wrong without some sort of aerial combat and this DLC also adds myrmidons (the melee mantis thingie). While these are not exactly Cryssalids,
I'd be sad to see them gone from the game.
 

Jaedar

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 5, 2009
Messages
9,837
Project: Eternity Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 Pathfinder: Kingmaker
I'm on the fence about Festering Skies as well, perhaps I just need some more experience with it to see how does it all fit together, but it did feel tacked onto the base gameplay.
Imo having fighter jets will always feel tacked on until I can order tactical missile strikes during combat.
 

spectre

Arcane
Joined
Oct 26, 2008
Messages
5,380
Yeah, or why suffer an alien base on the ground when you can simply blow it all to hell with a bunch of bunker busters. Or slap some miniguns on your transport ship and clear the LZ,
no more reaction fire fuckery. But as a matter of fact, I was referring to something more straightforward.

The most barebones UFO gameplay, what you do from the very beginning goes something like this - radar picks uf a craft => you intercept the craft => ground mission is generated. And this is basically what you keep doing for the rest of the game.
There is some nuance to it, arguably barely enough: e.g. like only two weapons are really viable and the second one pretty much trivializes the pursuit minigame, but it is connected to the rest of the game (for starters, being the main source of ground missions):
you can observe flight patterns and draw conclusions as to alien base locations, milk supply ships as they land, and later on when you're all set up with hyperwave decoders, you can decide to "allow" aliens to succeed with some missions, etc., etc.
So, what I'm saying is, if this entire algorithm was not in the game from the start and in fact it can be pulled out on a whim by enabling/disabling a DLC, there will be a disjoint between air combat and the rest of the game on some fundamental level.
 
Last edited:

ArchAngel

Arcane
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
19,882
Yeah, or why suffer an alien base on the ground when you can simply blow it all to hell with a bunch of bunker busters. Or slap some miniguns on your transport ship and clear the LZ,
no more reaction fire fuckery. But as a matter of fact, I was referring to something more straightforward.
Laughs in Taliban..
 

gurugeorge

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 3, 2019
Messages
7,432
Location
London, UK
Strap Yourselves In
How do you make a game with all-human protagonists where a headshot isn't (nearly) an instant kill every time? Or at the very least severely incapacitating and putting-out-of-commission?
Depending on the tech level, helmets help. Or you could make the enemies duck or move head away to take glancing shots so that it's not instant kill. If freaky cybernetics are allowed, then stuff like having a metal skull works wonders. Or having a secondary brain hidden in the torso if the target is crazy enough.
He was speaking in the context of manual aim, where you can pretty much target the head all the time you want; heck, even go hit the face/eyes if the damage model is that detailed. Even if the target is behind, a lot of the time the head might be exposed
(or in fact be the only thing that's exposed). I think it's a good question, and a lot of the games just devolve into headshots galore after the initial to-hit problems are solved (e.g. the notorious case of Fallout, but even Jagged Alliance 2 wasn't free of this problem once you got your hand on some scopes). Not sure if it's worth going out of your way to try and solve this, with a sorta-realistic approach to firefights, every hit from a rifle cartridge should be enough to ruin one's day, even if it doesn't penetrate body armor, it should send the recipient to the ground.
Granted, body armor might have turned a lethal wound into a bruise, but that still puts you out of the fight. Bottom line is, awareness, positioning and who hot first should be the decisive factor instead of the ability to tank hits.

Still, it's not desirable for headshot to be the default move everytime, but I think it's a matter of fudging the numbers on the to-hit chances, so that it becomes a gamble and that center-of-mass shot continues to be the preferred safe bet,
nevermind quicker to line up. I think it can be made to work even with PP's targeting system - the head will always be a small target, too small to be covered by the entire targeting reticle. I think this is how PP implements in currently,
a lot of the time the default shot placement will already give you optimal damage output, so might as well save yourself the time.
This leaves two problems to solve, burst fire and close range shots. It is arguable if burst fire should even be targetable at all (while it's not inconceivable to do so, might be undesirable for balance),
even then, it might be less of an issue because if you want to saturate something with lead, center of mass gives you higher chance to hit, unless we're talking suppressive fire.
On the other hand, CQB is the natural environment where I would expect intentional (or accidental) headshots to happen a lot more, so it might be so there isn't anything to fix here as long
as engagement ranges are kept realistic (a lot of games and media in general tend to have shootouts happening at too short distances) and reaction time is emphasized over precision. This can be hard to pull off believably in turn based,
but RTwP can similate it rather nicely (see: 7.62 High Caliber and UFO After___). I love turn based with all my heart,
but I have to concede that it has its limitations when it comes to realistic firefight simulation.

Thinking further about it, the "headshot problem" does seem to be unique to videogames. It's not like you get a lot of headshots IRL, so presumably if the system is set up to be simulationist it's going to mimic that rarity.

How about this: the targeting "circles" wax or wane depending on whether you're aiming for center mass or aiming for an appendage or head? And they wax less the more accuracy you have, and wax least for snipers?
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom