As everything else, it depends on play styles. I think you will agree with me that PP allows for many different ways to play it. There are actually so many different ways to play it that you might never run into the same balance de problems as other players.
Now, in some cases the problems are just too obvious - 100%, stealth for example.
In others less so - the stacking of buffs on top of the x2 stealth damage. You have to play it to see the problem.
With mobility or speed (depends on where you want to look at it from) you can definitely see the issue when you cast frenzy on an Assault with 25 speed and make him dash.
It has to be tested to come up with the right number, but as a starting point I would say speed stat x 1.5. I think it’s a reasonable point because that’s what casting frenzy does, excluding buffs and dash.
Well damages bonus stack by multiplication? That’s weird and it looks more like a bug.
With addition 250% doesn’t look like a such big deal with 20% aiming penalty, or 240% with no aiming penalty and a quite rare soldier. There’s also 260% or more 250% and no aiming penalty for heavy weapon and again a quite rare soldier.
Id’ say ok to stop a weird percentage multiplication. If percentages multiply currently it can go to 130 then 169, then 338. Percentage should not multiply, in most games it never work like that.
But rush cap at 200% looks a bit weird, and need be looked at closer.
EDIT: For Bloodlust, until it’s not fixed to avoid abuse and to force it real damages from recent enemy fire, it is just exploit and doesn’t worth consideration.
I don’t think it would work. For example, take 22 as the speed cap. So 1 AP move = 5 tiles, Dash move 15 tiles.
Now apply fenzy = 33. Now 1 AP move is 8 tiles, one dash = 24 tiles.
Is 24 tiles too much for 1 AP? Maybe yes, maybe not. But to be able to move 96 tiles (4 dashes) in one turn is insane any way you look at.
What I propose is X speed *1.5 = maximum tiles that can be traveled in a turn (not sure if to exclude jetpack or not). So a soldier with 25 speed can travel 37 tiles per turn max. Let’s say he is frenzied and dashes. OK, he can move 37 *0.75 = 27 tiles for 1 AP. But then no matter what he can only move 10 more tiles that turn.
I don’t think it is elegant and easy way to put it in the methods supporting skills, but at least it creates some reasonable restrictions in the game’s world.
It is an issue, but I think it can be shown easily enough as a redline when a soldier is selected. So now there is a blue outline to show that you can shoot after the move, and it would be a matter of adding a red one to show how far you can move during the turn.
I think that as in many other cases in PP it’s not that the devs don’t have an issue with very very long runs, it’s just that the result of combining so many different skills couldn’t have been reasonably foreseen, didn’t come up during testing, or in the feedback during the BBs, or rather that it came up in a different manner (there were many complaints about dash, but perhaps not so many about the effects on speed and mobility of the different buffs).
By the way, what I’m suggesting is really something like a very streamlined version of the Energy/Stamina stat that was in the original XComs and JAs (the Stamina stat in PP serving an entirely different purpose).
I lost the track, what is the point of very long run? Beside lairs I don’t see anything OP in doing that, eventually the realism aspect can be argued but it’s only one aspect of gameplay.
EDIT:
I don’t see any JA stamina in your 1.5 suggestion and max square limit.
EDIT2:
I think the JA move/fire/injury/stamina/health system has a lot of value and worth some cloning but it has serious negative aspects that will not fit a more modern game. And I wonder if it is really fixable.
I’m not a sticker for realism, I don’t mind the soldiers in PP running really fast. I do mind unexplained challenges to physics, because this kind of mobility is close to (if not) teleportation. It’s not just unrealistic, it’s not even remotely plausible. It’s a whole different level from “a soldier in real life couldn’t do this” it’s more like “you need a particle accelerator, or witchcraft for this to happen”. So if the devs actually want this kind of mobility, there has to be some lore to explain it.
As to gameplay,
it beaks any missions that require getting somewhere and not killing all enemies, not only lairs (for example, getting somewhere and getting out, as many story missions do, as well as research theft)
for combat, it makes distances irrelevant. That means any weapon balancing that relies on lower accuracy at longer range goes out the window. Even if for some reason you can’t kill all enemies after running next to them (e.g. if you are having problems chaining Rapid Clearance), you can just dash back.
EDIT:
I agree.
I meant that it is intended to serve a similar purpose in a very streamlined manner.
Perhaps a lore justification is required, not for me, or Sirens already need one with Frenzy and agile version.
Research theft is totally broken in many ways and stealth is much more the problem. I’d say it’s a point of possible problem. I think design should be able to manage extreme speed, but not stealth.
Story/special missions most often require kill all enemies, problem solved. I don’t even remind one where pick something didn’t require also to clean the area.
For combats distances, not it doesn’t make it irrelevant, rush to enemies is no way a simple decison, position closer or further from enemies is a very relevant decision that isn’t just about a better aiming. And for huge run shoot and huge run back, it’s no way a major tactic, and it’s only helping shorter range that are already a lot handicapped compared to longer range.
So ok steal missions need find a good design, stealth need be incorporated to their design or changed for their design, and eventually huge distance run will be a problem to find a satisfying design. For now it’s a minor problem for those missions.
I don’t mean some lore explaining frenzy, I mean some lore explaining the effects of something like frenzy + dash, or even dash with top speed and very light armor.
My point is that if the player can almost arbitrarily set the distance at which to place the soldier, whether to attack or to take cover, to position or to run away, be at long range, mid range or short range, it makes distance irrelevant for the player.
So I can agree that positioning is more than about accuracy, but this only highlights the problem, which is that currently some builds allow the player to almost arbitrarily and repeatedly choose the position for the price of 1Ap and 4Wp.
This is game breaking in itself, but even more so when combined with skills. I would suggest that you see if for yourself, making a build with top speed, Anu armor that gives +5 speed and cast frenzy on it (movement on dash: 45 tiles). And this is not even the optimal build, because I’m not considering stimpacks or blood lust.
If you don’t see a problem, I think we will have to disagree on this one.
Yes we disagree on this point, for me it’s positioning that matter and high speed doesn’t break it. Yes the high speed means more positioning choices unlike slower speed, I’m fine with the extra choice.
I can agree with that - with high speed giving more positioning choices. I wouldn’t put any caps on speed (that is, how much a soldier can move with a single AP), but rather on mobility (how much a soldier can move in the whole turn), because what I think doesn’t work is allowing the player to almost arbitrarily and repeatedly choose the position.
As I was reading your post I was playing an ambush mission and I had to laugh: my guy in Anu armor with top speed without frenzy could literally choose where to be anywhere on the map (except the corners and borders) at the price of 1 AP and 4 WP. He killed 5 crabs at point blank, run out of ammo for the HMG and got away to safety at the other end of the map. He does this reliably in almost every single map.
There’s a scouting, how do you know where rush at high speed, probably because it’s ambush, anyway let face it only Haven defense are well done missions, plus a part of special mission. You can’t do that in defense missions.
I don’t get why maps became so tiny, the ambushes, but also high scaling maps become more and more tiny. This is a big negative of the game.
With maps a bit larger but not big, rush in unknown would be suicide.
EDIT:
But again I would cap speed, and remove Frenzy, I would be fine with that, but don’t consider it a big deal, maps need be a bit bigger, those tiny maps are ridiculous.
Mmm this would be done with Rally, very high speed and Rapid Clearance.
You can move only twice, so kill 5 without moving is never, or you use the RC+AR combo that is clearly wrong without limit.
Or with very high speed ok perhaps, I should try, but then a Rally is needed to retreat.
It’s still a problem, where very high speed is involved by giving too much mobility in one move. I agree on that, but more simple nerf, cap speed, show it through a char sheet, remove Frenzy.
Ok let say very high speed (I never used, sigh) is a serious problem because of RC (that in my opinion shouldn’t be removed only limited to 5, and overall design need make it harder, aiming penalty, decreasing damages until end of turn).
Cap on speed or number of move is complex, keep it simple, for example: Attribute speed max should be 20, that’s more simple. Anu armors give around +5. Bloodlust is a crap skill and probably impossible to make it work properly without ridiculous abuse or pointless risks.
This let the question to remove or not Frenzy.
EDT: But still, the game should give up entirely on tiny maps, including for ambushes.
And about missions types, it’s not just a problem of tiny size, when doing a recap only Haven defense against alien, some special missions, Nest because there’s very few, have a proper design when not on tiny map.
I don’t see anything else to rescue without tuning and deep changes. Lairs, Citadels, Haven defenses against Anu/Syn/NJ, Stealing missions, Rescue missions, Scavenging, Base defense, Ambush that need a larger map. All need a serious tuning or rework.
OK, I was writing to explain, but you got it. Yes, it’s 25 speed and RC (he is an assault sniper with heavy weapons perk). No rally necessary - after the last kill he has 2 APs to get away.
Note that the build I’m describing is limited to 5 kills per turn, because he runs out of ammo for the HMG after that and I didn’t give him ready for action.
5 kills is a lot, because he is just one guy out of 6, and these 5 kills he can do all on his own without any assistance. Despite reports on the forum of “30 arthrons and tritons”, I’m very close the final mission and I’m yet to see a map with more than 20 enemies. So he takes care by himself of 1/4 of all the enemies in the first turn.
The problem with reducing damage, or an accuracy penalty to implement some kind of diminishing returns is that then we get to the problem of buff-stacking that can more than compensate for these penalties.
Having said that, I would definitely take 5 kills max and penalties to accuracy and damage as a starting point for further balance testing, provided that mobility is also nerfed.
I would stick to aiming penalty from RC start but not increasing, and damages penalty increasing per kill until end of turn, it should nerf properly the difficulty of even 4 kills, and wouldn’t remove a long preparation and a clean of 8 damaged enemies.
And ok very high speed is a problem with RC not because of pure run distance but because of mobility on a long distance.
For buff stacking aiming, it would mean give up buff stacking on speed making it harder. The game need tune better the various trade off. Currently most players ignore armor, this is breaking trade off between armor and aiming, or even armor and speed. The trade off speed for aiming or the reverse need work properly.
EDIT:
For buff stacking on damages, as I already quoted it should never multiply. And if there’s a more general problem it’s from Vanish, I quoted it since some time Vanish is a problem for many points, but don’t see clear nerf not making it pointless with closer ranges.