Do you thinks this is fair?

Yes its another layer, a part of the game, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t have to make sense.
Rather than finding ways to exploit RF in enemy’s wouldn’t you prefer to have RF that makes sense and is explainable? And of course fair.

I don’t know. At the moment it feels to be a mechanic for mechanics sake. Something to add to the tactics but not thought out properly. A place holder.

To each their own, myself I see too many unrealistic mechanism in such combat games to bother much on some more. And pure gameplay point of view is top priority for me. Moreover I don’t even see the realism problem, it’s just reaction fire, and quick enough so the attacker doesn’t have the time go back in full cover, and not suppression fire so it’s not an enemy attack on anything, and not a cover fire so not a covering of all the field and all enemies attacks.

I’ll quote an example showing how many players are blind on realism aspects. I have seen long arguing on spike attack hitting two enemies in a line was more realistic, as if go through an enemy makes any sense. Or that a circular AOE sword attack was making any sense out of games and movies, nope.

Doesn’t make sense to have AP left over because RF is conditional upon the enemy firing within the designated parameters. How many APs would you be willing to spend for a shot like that? I would say less than 1. Overwatch is higher worth because it can be controlled and because potentially it can trigger before the enemy shoots and even prevent it from happening.

I think it does make sense to have free fatal shot on the opponent’s turn. It makes sense in terms of gameplay mechanics - as it doesn’t happen during the player’s turn it doesn’t lend itself to (at least) obvious abuse. It also makes sense in terms of “realism”, because shooting at someone can result in getting shot back. Also, coming back to my earlier point, shooting from behind cover is not safe, because the shooter has to expose himself to take the shot. RF “simulates” that.

And you don’t think it should come at some expense, rather than free?

AP left used is a Jagged Alliance influence, it can work only with large pool of AP, makes few sense in PP system.

Not really, no. But if you want to think in terms of cost consider that it requires choosing a certain class and equipping a certain kind of weapon, so there is certainly opportunity cost.

All righty then. Thanks for your views and input, it has given me food for thought.

I’m a fan of the “return fire within overwatch cone” school of thought. Though i’d also suggest it applies like before, any crabs or player assaults cover that same cone can use return fire, not just the attacked guy. Would be a bit like the Support class option for covering fire in Xcom 2.

I would like that. At least it puts a handle on the chaos of RF atm.

I’ve just started another game, I’ve discovered on the initial New Jericho mission where you’re fighting a couple of level 1 assault units some of them return fire when they have no icon. They’ve been in clear sight too. I’ve never seen one of my units who doesn’t have return fire do so.

This is telling me it’s probably a logic bug in determining if NPC’s have return fire, possible it isn’t even checking whether an NPC has the ability to return fire, only whether they have a valid weapon and are in range.

Ah funny you mentioned that specific mission. Every time i’ve done it i noticed i was against level 1 assault using a level 3 ability… That can’t be working as intended. Though anymore i just push my snipers to the outsides of the map, then everyone else straight into the room and form a firing line back from the door. It’s turn two before you can get the guys into overwatch, but it usually causes the ai (honestly it seems they know where the overwatch cones are even before getting line of sight on your guys) to move its guys out to the sides of the map, where snipers are conveniently able to deal with them without risking the return fire. Though it is also amusing if a guy blunders right into four point blank overwatches there.

Looks like a cool new skill, suppression fire, even if SF can look weak rather often, it’s also often a very interesting tactical tool, but can’t be passive it’s shoot or suppress.

If I remember correctly in F Xcoms there was no cone for covering fire, though could be mistaken. I do like the idea of return fire as cover fire, as it was before the patch, but I don’t see the need for a cone of fire. One the one hand, it makes sense in overwatch to have it because it’s a way for the player to decide when it should trigger. Because overwatch too close to cover/obstacles is wasted, the player is given a choice as to when it should trigger. There is no need to do that in return fire because the attacker is exposed when making the shot. On the other, it’s hard to make the AI use something like this properly.

I’d much rather have control of it myself. Not common, but i get a laugh every time an arthrons return fire takes out a triton for me… Not so hilarious (at least not until later)when one of my shotgun assaults wings his nearby pal because the AI got some lucky positioning and pulled it off on me. A cone for it and requiring being in overwatch would help since then we simply don’t put our guys within eachothers potential field of fire.

You may be right and there was no cone in xcom for the overwatch/cover fire… been a while since i played those. Seems like there was some similar game i played where you actually had the option to use return fire or not, it’d pause on the enemies turn and let you choose whether to take the shot or not… Can’t recall what game that was though. That might also be a good system, since we’re limited to one return fire per guy (at least from what i’ve been seeing) per turn being able to pass on it when your heavy is down to the last round in a hel cannon to take a higher chance to hit shot the next turn might be the way to go.

RF is just a dumb mechanic because it turns the game into a battle of attrition.

It would be significantly improved if it had a decent counter, for example it only works if you are in the front 90deg arc of the enemy. Or it doesn’t happen until you return to cover.

Also throw in conditions like “not with a shield deployed” would be nice. How can a crab block the front with a deployed shield while turning to shoot its machine gun behind itself? Or maybe if it spins in place like that it has to stay facing that way, so opens up the rear side for a sniper to pick it apart…

1 Like


There are plenty of ways to deal with RF, some of them described in this thread, but there are others:

Not everything need be straight forward or it becomes a series of automatic clicks. Move shoot and don’t bother, nope.

Yeah, agreed.

Still not sure about the cone though. I will keep an open mind!

Okay some of this stuff might work if the dice land facing the sun, but I can’t shake the feeling that RF as it stands, is wrong as a wrong-un. It feels out of place. It happens, and you say ‘what the in blue bells was that’, that’s not how this story unfolds. I must be watching a commercial break.

Are you following me so far?