Haven-based battlefield effects

  • 212 Views
  • Last Post 20 July 2017
91stCataclysm posted this 19 July 2017

Hello everyone,

 

I've had an idea about how improvements constructed at havens (Such as mortar/artillery batteries, drone launch and control facilities, etc.) may give a limited-use benefits in combat, meshing together (to a certain degree) the strategic and tactical layer. I'll illustrate what I mean with an example:

 

Player Bob sees over the course of his game that the mist and the baddies it contains are creeping ever closer to one of his havens, Frontier Point. Being a hard-line New Jericho type, Bob puts no stock in (and has no access to) Synedrion mist-repelling technology, and thus his means of keeping Frontier Point safe is sending out troops to deal with the encroaching threat. The constant fighting takes its toll on both his troops and supplies, however, so being the savvy strategist that he is Bob decided to invest resources to setting up a battery of 155mm howitzers in Frontier Point.

Having done that, whenever Bob deploys his troops within a certain limited geographical range of Frontier Point he can have his troops call down an artillery barrage X number of times per mission (or per in-game 24h period) to help even the odds, taking fewer losses while defending his territory and even shifting some troops to other beleaguered locations. 

 

This would give players more options when dealing with trouble near the home-front, and reduce the possible tedium of launching yet another "prevent the nasties from encroaching on front-line havens" and having to fight them with small-arms and grenades.

This could also be a bit of a lifeline to players who screwed up enough to have the enemy at their doorstep in the early game, as at that point there would be very few foes who can survive a barrage.

Other such "remote support options" could include recon drones launched and operated from the haven allowing the player to see points of the battlefield his troops don't have LoS on yet, smoke rounds fired from light artillery or mortars giving friendly troops concealment, strike drones giving the player a 1-use ATGM against particularly tough opponents, etc.

I'm aware of the fact that this may be difficult to balance in order to prevent the game from becoming too easy, and that a certain sense of helplessness (vital for horror) can be lost if a player backed into a corner could simply call down fire from the sky and emerge victorious. Therefore I think that such haven improvements, if they end up being implemented, should either be costly (so the player thinks long and hard about a. whether they should get it and b. whether they should get it at that particular haven) or come at the expense of something else on the tech tree (like in the above example, where bob has sacrificed access to Synedrion tech and mist repulsion in favor of artillery). 

Comments? Suggestions? Rotten vegetables?

  • Liked by
  • Spolokh
Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
Spolokh posted this 19 July 2017

Nice idea.

Airstrike could be very useful and can provide more choices

CaptainGeneral posted this 19 July 2017

Mid/late game when your base is exposed and the creatures are actively countering your existence I reckon off-map abilities could be useful especially if they attack in waves that you have to fend off. As for normal missions, the drivable vehicles will give supporting fire presumably (unless I've misinterpreted that).

91stCataclysm posted this 20 July 2017

Spolokh said:

Nice idea.

Airstrike could be very useful and can provide more choices

Airstrikes as we know them (pilot-bearing jet aircraft takes off, acquired target, launches missiles or drops bombs) seem somewhat improbable in the mid-apocalyptic world of PP due to the immense amounts of resources needed to fly and maintain these aircraft (and God help you if you lose one and need to construct a replacement). For this reason I proposed drone strikes, since UAVs are undoubtedly cheaper and easier to fly and maintain compared to jet Fighter/Attacker craft, even for the larger, armed versions.

That said a primitive, almost WWI tactic of dropping small bombs (probably 60mm mortar rounds) by hand from light, cheap prop-planes similar to repurposed crop-dusters would be doable. However, the only advantage I can think of for this method of bombardment compared to ground-based mortars is the operational range, as accuracy and payload would probably be comparable.

That said, light (60mm) mortars are definitely within the realm of what could be carried and operated from even a light vehicle (think Ford/Toyota pickup), so if such a vehicle carries/accompanies the troops to the combat area then there is no need for "crop-duster bombers", unless the roll they serve is a passive strategic-layer "mitigation" for enemy advance and/or force concentration.

Spolokh posted this 20 July 2017

91stCataclysm said:

Spolokh said:

Nice idea.

Airstrike could be very useful and can provide more choices

Airstrikes as we know them (pilot-bearing jet aircraft takes off, acquired target, launches missiles or drops bombs) seem somewhat improbable in the mid-apocalyptic world of PP due to the immense amounts of resources needed to fly and maintain these aircraft (and God help you if you lose one and need to construct a replacement). For this reason I proposed drone strikes, since UAVs are undoubtedly cheaper and easier to fly and maintain compared to jet Fighter/Attacker craft, even for the larger, armed versions.

 

That should not be jet aircraft. It could be Stuka planes from a museum or some crazy rich warplane fan. Its fierpower fits exactly to UFO style missions and their siren could be the best music you will ever want to hear. Or can be the most horror you can expect if it can belong to the other side. 

Spolokh posted this 20 July 2017

91stCataclysm said:

That said, light (60mm) mortars are definitely within the realm of what could be carried and operated from even a light vehicle (think Ford/Toyota pickup), so if such a vehicle carries/accompanies the troops to the combat area then there is no need for "crop-duster bombers", unless the roll they serve is a passive strategic-layer "mitigation" for enemy advance and/or force concentration.

 

Another nice idea. It perfectly fits to the XCOM mission style in case developer will remember that such mortars never fire in single, except correction fire. They have enormous fire rate and requires a huge amount of [chip] ammo. That can explain a very limited amount of times this strike could be called.

Close