Curious what people do. I might try the ‘one team’ on my next (Cthulhu) campaign.
Just craft enough equipment for one team and rotate it through the various teams you have. Instead of building for the other teams, use the resources for base facilities. (In XCom you did this because everyone kept returning to the same base. You could view PP the same way.)
Equip each team because it’s a pain switching stuff on and off; makes no sense that a piece of equipment in S. America could suddenly end up with someone in Europe.
If I can’t equip second team well enough I bring something from first team. But as soon as I have resources I manufacture stuff for second team. It is mostly because second team have different classes than the first one.
I hate that the game lets you do this. So annoying that the optimum way of equipping your soldiers breaks any logic and requires tedious micromanagement.
It would be cool to change our equipment on bases only. Realistic logistic gives more deeper strategic layer, interesting and hard choice. On emergency shuttles that runs automatically. Timer at least
In addition, it already works with vehicles and soldiers
Now someone will definitely come and say: Then don’t use it! Make your own enforcing rules . The problem is always: In a tactic / strategy game, the player usually wants to play as efficiently as possible, but what the rules of the game apply to and not their own. (As in a card game, you want to beat your opponent with the permitted rules of the game). The game allows this type of equipment so players can take advantage of it with countless micromanagement clicks. For myself, it would be an improvement if the soldiers were only equipped in the bases (or exchange at waypoints - see @mcarver2000).
Fits the world setting of PP.
A comfort feature for my style of play (probably not for everyone)
This is one of the basic problems with the criticism of Phoenix Point. “I want the game to only play the way I like.” “Remove Rapid Clearance because it breaks the game.”
Except there are a great many players out there who like the options. There are a great many players out there who like Rapid Clearance or Rage Burst just as it is.
You are free to arm your squads from each base if you like. If you prefer to play X-Com style and just have one set of equipment (say for 8-10), then go for it. One of the truly great design features of this game is all the choice in it. Play only as Anu? Sure, why not? It’s possible to complete the game that way. Just race through the story events and complete the game? Sure, why not? Get your guys to level 7 and use that Rage Burst every possible time with invisible snipers? Sure, why not? Hate that idea? Then play your way.
There is so much variety in this game it is startling, really. And JG et al keep adding more. Don’t take away my choices; give me more of them.
The comparison to XCOM (I assume you mean nuXCOM) isn’t relevant. You can only have one squad in play at any one time so having one pool of equipment is fine. In PP you can just teleport your single pool of equipment around the map to different squads.
These games aren’t sandboxes - there should be a set standard at each difficulty and the game shouldn’t encourage illogical activity as the META.
Absolutely nothing against many alternatives! I like that about PP as long as they don’t overshoot the target.
Many different philosophies can be represented here:
You can give the player powers that e.g. go from level 1 to 10, where 10 are full equipment TBs. The player can then decide which power he wants. I personally don’t like this idea, even if some will. It is hard for me to find a challenge in the game when there are “Genie out of the bottle” everywhere, which I should now ignore from my game principle. I mean, if the philosophy “I give you all the power that destroys everything, but you decide whether you want it” works, why don’t other big, successful strategy games do that? They try to elicit tough decisions from the player, to weigh alternatives where none is the “dominant” one. Don’t get me wrong PP is great when it comes to alternatives and flexibility, only that PP could use some fine-tuning, so that the “Genie” doesn’t make the other alternatives absolute.
It is a controversial issue. but I don’t want to argue about it. It’s just a matter of opinion and everyone has their right to express their opinion. I see (or want to see) PP as a deep-seated TBS, where tough decisions have to be weighed up with consequences and there is no “dominant” way. And my hope is that this is also the goal of the Devs, which is still in progress.
Micromanagement ? Imagine local storages and local production, having to take care of the logistics for every single grenade produced. Tiamat takes like 5 weeks to get from A to B - “the pure ? Oh man forget to bring piercing/acid/emp/whathaveyou … I guess I head back and grap that real quick”.
Think about that for more than a minute please in the context of how the game is set up currently. Really try to imagine localized store and production across 3-4 ships and 8 bases. Helios is already king, this would kill every other ship for good and the motivation to play this game as it would 99% be logistics and 1% actual strategy and tactics.
But today the problem is we have 1% logistic and illogical ridiculous teleport…
I would use one aircraft only for logistic. Not a big problem for me, but it makes SENSE
I wish that logistics played some role in the game and that equipping weapons across the globe would not be possible, but @omenomaho has a point, with the way exploration works right now.
Perhaps with the upcoming changes to exploration some opportunities may appear for a better inventory management?
Which is why I keep banging on about Second Wave Options.
The problem with the ‘just ignore it’ argument is that the ability to break it is embedded into the game, and as Walan has pointed out, part of the joy of these games is figuring out how to exploit the system to the max to achieve your goals. When you have to deliberately and actively stop doing that, the game eventually ceases to be an interesting challenge.
To resurrect the tired old Chess analogy, you are essentially saying: “We’ve made it so that the Queen can jump over everything and checkmate the King in one turn - but you don’t have to use that rule if you don’t want to.” Which basically makes a mockery of the game.
You want to do that, pick ‘Unlimited Skill Use’ in the SWO Menu and knock yerself out.
But equally, give those who want a proper tactical challenge the option not to have to wilfully ignore the most optimal builds in the system just so that they don’t break the game.
I don’t want to. But right now, your preferences are being imposed upon me.
Yea, exactly. It’s just not compatible with this exploration style - that’s the wording I was missing there I suppose you could add some sort of logistics gameplay, but it has to be really well thought out. It certainly would not work with the ships we currently have available. For starters, they are way too slow.
On the topic:
I try to build all the equipment, but there certainly is quite some resource shortage in legend difficulty. I do juggle when needed.
I suppose it all boils down to how one approaches this and other games. I’m not of the nature to find the exploits and my play style doesn’t use the so called game breakers. I think I have used Rapid Clearance once in my many, many campaigns. Then it was just a test to see how it works. I rarely use dash. I use Rage Burst (MichaelIgnotus, I know this is big no-no in your book), with sniper rifles. Especially early in the campaign when one doesn’t have the really strong weapons on hand, and of course when one’s squad is in a jam. Since I’m not of the “let’s huddle and cuddle” player that likes to charge in up close and personal. I’m the long distant lover, that likes to send artillery and sniper love letters.
Now, for players that are just the opposite to me, I can see why certain combos and skills are a game breaker. If the devs can come close to balancing out the highs and lows, then we can evaluate whether PP really needs a Second Wave Option. Not that I wouldn’t love to see one added.
. The problem is always: In a tactic / strategy game, the player usually wants to play as efficiently as possible, but what the rules of the game apply to and not their own. (As in a card game, you want to beat your opponent with the permitted rules of the game). The game allows this type of equipment so players can take advantage of it with countless micromanagement clicks. For myself, it would be an improvement if the soldiers were only equipped in the bases (or exchange at waypoints - see 
(probably not for everyone)
I suppose you could add some sort of logistics gameplay, but it has to be really well thought out. It certainly would not work with the ships we currently have available. For starters, they are way too slow.