Is this meant to be like this?

The one thing I will mention about leveling up that annoys me…

I can go on 25 missions, and a character will level up more slowly than if I sit the squad member in my phoenix base that has three training facilities. A level 1 literally levels up to a level 7 in about 2-3 days max. Whereas getting through 25 matches with a squad member takes about a week, when you count healing time.

That’s pretty silly. Once I realized this, losing a squad member became a non-issue unless I was critically low on resources. With that in mind, I just backlogged some extra soldiers at the base for a rainy day.

Training and soldier progression is getting a rework in the free patch alongside DLC 1. Soldiers will receive fewer SP from levelling (20 down from 50), but will receive 10 SP for every successful mission. This will make levelling soldiers with training facility less efficient than through battle experience.

Soldiers will continue to receive SP even at max level making maxing out a souldier possible (it will still take a lot of missions to do so).


Math isn’t your strong point isn’t it? :stuck_out_tongue: It’s close to 10 days with 5 training centers and not the research increasing it. I suppose you took 850 / 10 / 24.

I’ll have to setup strategy with minimal roster, moreover SP will be plenty with grinding, scarce for players disliking gringing. And first will request many nerfs for their ultra boosted soldiers, that will be crap nerfs for those who don’t like grinding.

Moreover teams of 6 and worse teams of 5 and vehicle will be weak non efficient choices.

EDIT: For having the same number of soldier SP it will require 18 combats. Mmm I’m not good enough in math or too lazy to search a little, but the number of combats to have 24 soldiers level 7 and same number of SP will not be 54 combats, no way a full team level 1 - 4 will do it. It means that it will be more but I won’t bother attempt estimate it.

Also spread more evenly the number of combats of each team won’t be possible, too many travels and teams changing, it means some will be quite more powerful, and some weaker than current level 7 soldiers.

That said, it targets some aspects, but I’m skeptikal on the number of combats.

Math isn’t your strong point isn’t it? :stuck_out_tongue: It’s close to 10 days with 5 training centers and not the research increasing it. I suppose you took 850 / 10 / 24.

You are really toxic. You should post less. You just try to drum up insults/anger/flame wars from other posters. I won’t bite or play this game with you. Yes I should probably have said “seems to” instead of “literally”, but there is a difference between saying, “let me correct you”, and “you are uneducated or stupid because you are incorrect”.

No, I didn’t sit down and do calculations. I came up with a number that simply felt approximate off the top of my head. You might even call it a hyperbolic comment. I didn’t suggest my numbers were scientific or mathematically verified.


Common I added a smiley, to appease you I did the same error, roughly evaluate from number under eyes 850. You don’t need be that susceptible. You would worth I list the name you tagged me, last one is toxic. :slight_smile:

It’s called an opportunity cost, when there are competing options to chose between and one provides lower gains than the other.

In this case, having a squad with some level 7 soldiers which “eat up” XP which could have potentially gone to the lower-level soldiers (and is exacerbated by those level 7 soldiers also generally outperforming the lower-level ones and thus getting a bigger share of the XP). This is a net loss compared to just leaving the lower-level soldiers home to level up in training facilities, or leaving the level 7 soldiers home until you can fill out an entire squad with them so they don’t “eat” XP which could have gone to a lower-level soldier in the squad: in either case, you lower-level soldiers aren’t having their XP share lost to the level 7s which can’t actually use/gain the XP allocated to them, so your soldiers in total have a much higher net XP gain.

Ergo, you’re essentially being punished for leaving level 7 soldiers in a squad with lower-level soldiers in the field rather than replacing that level 7 soldier with another lower-level one who would benefit from the XP which would otherwise be eaten/lost to the level 7.

EDIT: It also sounds like the XP distribution behaviour isn’t being changed, only earning SP. So this (having to split level 7 soldiers out into their own squads or leave them at a base, or leave low-level soldiers in-base with training facilities to level up to max before taking them on missions) will still be a problem.

You think only in terms of XP gain. But when you take level 7 soldier to the mission you take super-hero to help you overcome enemies. That makes the fight easier and let your low level soldiers live to level up and have opportunity to gain at least some spare XP. I think that XP cap is not bad design.

1 Like

Which is actually kind of my point. You don’t need that superhero in most cases since obviously your squad survived pretty well up to the point where that soldier hit level 7. Your remaining level 1-6 soldiers on the squad would be able to get up to level 7 quicker themselves if that first level 7 soldier didn’t suddenly start taking a large chunk of the XP and doing nothing with it.

It’s better in the long run to get the rest of the squad up to level 7, so you have more max-level soldiers, than to have them take measurably longer every time another one hits level 7 but have the squad’s survivability/effectiveness marginally increased. By the time most of a squad is level 7, the last few soldiers who haven’t hit max level are getting almost no XP unless you explicitly don’t use the other max-level soldiers on the squad anyway. Also bad luck can happen any mission, so having a level 7 soldier doesn’t necessarily increase the survivability of the other lower-level soldiers on the squad.

bad luck is very situational. :slight_smile: With lvl 7 you mitigate that bad luck most of the time. :wink:

Having a very situational “saviour” situation with a level 7 when I could have instead leveled my other soldiers up to 7 themselves much faster doesn’t really seem worth it :stuck_out_tongue:

Maybe it’s just the way I look at it, but it doesn’t seem worth it to keep one in the squad and prevent the rest of my soldiers from also getting to level 7 as fast as possible. If that level 7 gets unlucky and bites it, you’re left with a squad that has no max-level soldiers any more because their XP was all getting wasted on the level 7 doing all the heavy lifting. When instead, if you rotate the level 7 out your other soldiers will still be able to gain XP no matter who does the heavy lifting and you’ll quickly have even more max-level soldiers.

…Who you then leave to chill back at base smoking mushrooms and playing Fortnite all day. Thus completing the eldritch cycle that is the true Lovecraftian horror of Phoenix Point.

For a while, until you have a few and can put together a full (or almost-full) squad of max-level soldiers (who aren’t stealing XP from lower-level soldiers in the same squad) and send them back out in the field as The A Team

I say again, not receiving a reward is not the same as being punished. This is by definiton. It may feel that way, but that does not make it so.

I find it difficult - and pretty much unnecessary - to remove level 7 soldiers “stealing” experience. Assume that it wouldn’t be so; all experience goes to lower level soldiers who still can use some XP. What stops one from taking a rookie to a mission with half a dozen level 7 veterans, hide him in some remote corner of the map and have him promoted to level 3 (250 XP) or 4 (500 XP) from the mission? All he did was to listen to a distant gunfight.