Ahh, ok, I missed that and with this my example would be very rare.
But another one:
Sitting with one assault save behind a wall (out of LOS, 1 tile away to don’t get hit by enemy) for peek-a-boo. In this case i could step out, do 2 shots and step back to a safe place.
Then you have to “shift” an ability to a target. I don’t know if that will work, but maybe. So why not, sounds not to bad.
And I only answer, that your solution with giving partial, like 0.9 AP to the target would not achieve this goal?
Of course, something like Dash/Vanish points will do it. So this way it would be an alternative and of course way more restrictive than any other solution we discuss before here
It seems to me that this can be implemented organically without a lot of effort with new features. So from profit per effort perspective a very nice solution!
TBH, I think this and the 0 AP generation approaches miss the mark a bit, in that AP refunds, though game breaking in excess, are fun and choice enhancing in moderation. It can be a very good, satisfying and deserving play to use Rally to squeeze out that one shot your need to get out of a jam.
Last night I was playing a Lair mission, and after bragging about how not-so-difficult those missions were, I got a tough one. It all really came down to the wire. I had to count every WP, both of the enemies and of my soldiers. I only managed to get my assault/serker to the Spawnery with a Synedrion AR. His melee/sniper teammate got stuck on the body of a Terror Sentinel, and couldn’t move [bug reported via F12 ], the heavy with the Deceptor had one arm and one leg broken, and no ammo for the Fury. The three other guys were holding the flank close to the starting position, but the Pandas were already closing in on the Spawnery through a different route.
And then this Arthron opened up with his MG at my serker at close range - not enough to kill him, but enough to give him a significant damage buff through blood lust to finish off the Spawnery.
It was epic, and throughout the mission though I didn’t break my rule of no skill spamming, I used skills profusely, and I fancy rather imaginatively…
But of course some may call it meta, magic, or otherwise deride it’s lack of plausibility in reality as if it was a bad thing
What I’m trying to say is that skills do add depth to the game, and Rally the Troops in particular. There is an interesting tradeoff when you have to choose whether to lose 2 APs with that particular soldier to gain 5 or more APs spread among the team. Of course this tradeoff disappears then you can then recoup those 2 APs with 2 more rallies…
That’s why I’m always stranded between arguing for one nerf or another, and against taking it too far…
As long as the developers for “unreality”, we have no opportunity to try the game from this side. And this will repel all adherents of XCom / UFO2020.
True Magic / Genius is on the verge of “Believe & Unbelieve.”
Which is why I’m looking for a solution that doesn’t nerf Rally right into the ground.
Going slightly off-topic here: once, many moons back in BB3, 4 or 5, I remember suggesting that the best way to limit the kind of skill spamming I could see on the horizon would be to double the cost of using a skill each time you used it on the same turn - so Rally would have cost 2/4/8 WP if you used it 3 times in a turn (as would Rapid Fire).
At the time, this was shouted down because people thought it would limit skills too much. Now, I’m not so sure. Exploits of multiple skill combos is SO over-powerful that the likes of you and I put a self-imposed limit of 1-per-turn on all/most skills. But perhaps a better way would be to make the re-use of any skill in the same turn prohibitively expensive - that way you can still use them to get out of jail free if you need to (or at least get out of jail at an extortionate cost in WP )
On the one hand it’s better than a one per turn hard limit, as it is more flexible, on the other it doesn’t close the OP holes as effectively…
In the case of Rally I think the maths are clear in that allowing more than 2 rallies per turn allows to fully recoup the APs expended by the casters, so that the only factor in the decision becomes the WP cost (which is negligible when compared to the return and easily covered by it). The real challenge then is a puzzle of figuring out the correct actions order. (So all the team has to spend at least one AP before Tom casts Rally, then again before Bob casts Rally, and then again before Alice casts Rally: with optimal action order Tom, Bob and Alice will have each 4APs to spend on other actions in addition to casting Rally).
Which is in part what my original suggestion was about. On paper it looks pretty straightforward: a squad of 8 with 4 Officers gives back 7 + 6 + 5 + 4 - 8 = 14 APs. But in practice it hardly ever works like that - cos no plan ever survives first contact with the enemy.
In practice, my experience of an 8-man squad with 4 officers is that you can usually grant 2 Squaddies an extra turn if you are enforcing a 1 Skill/turn limit - I’m not saying that’s mathematically correct, I’m saying that’s usually what in-game circumstances allow, while the rest of your Squad is trying not to get its head blown off by everything that’s around them.
2 Squaddies/turn gives you just the edge you need to survive and progress without completely spamming the system. But that’s just my own personal experience - I’m sure better players than me could game the system more efficiently.
a bit offtopic since I’m going to completely omit rally, but it ties into the part about generating officers.
how about we allow officers to do the training in the training centers, and have the lvl cap and exp gain depending on the level of the officer?
-every officer could run a training center, but only 1 center per officer. This would prevent training center spam.
-officer can train troops up to his own level and the training should be faster if the officer has a higher level. (keeping time to train to officer level about 7-10 in-game days, as to keep it fast enough to matter in the game) this is mostly to prevent a lvl 2 trooper to be used to man the center and train lvl 7 troops, but also ensures that at no time any training center trooper outclasses your alpha squad. (the training officer will probably be the most disposable member from the alpha squad, possibly rotated out when another member reaches a higher level)
-this would allow the training center changes to be mostly reverted, preventing the SP flood in the alpha squad and also avoids the relatively weak higher level troops with the current 20SP per level/10SP per mission split.
possible complications:
-its the only non combat function we would currently have for a trooper. as such they should still have the capability to go out on missions. but there is nothing special about being an officer just because you are a higher level. there has to be a cost and a benefit to make it a worthwhile distinction, otherwise it would be better called: “veteran trainer”
-the only manned station, the game currently has no workstations. every soldier in the base is just being trained (even when on the craft) this means a system would have to be implemented where you assign a trainer. this is needed because if its just “train to the level of the highest trooper currently at base” a resting stop from alpha squad will suddenly add 6-8 lvl 7 trainers if excess TC have been build, and this is not the intention of the suggestion.
How we assign someone as officer? It works every time we put someone in that manned station?
Is this distinction permanent or he can loose that function?
How many officers we can have per base and per globe?
Why training is faster when officer is higher level? I would prefer linear time of training no matter how experienced officer is. But he can still limit level to which trainees can train.
Guys, I admire effort and thought you put into this process, though I’m afraid it’s going to waste. You cant really get into designing things without thinking about the cost.
In order to fix just one little ability, designing such elaborative solutions, that will cost dozens of mandays to implement, is not advisable. The “value added” /“cost” ratio here is abysmal.
Especially when there are many solutions, with much better value/cost ratio. For example:
“Turn Rally the troops into status buff (just like Frenzy for example) that lasts 1 turn. Status effect does not stack (just like Frenzy), so no matter how many times it’s cast, on a given turn soldier will be affected just once” - My guess is this would cost like 1-2 mandays to implement.
I agree that this has to be the objective, but I’m not sure if what you propose is the way to go.
Why not just raise the SP gain per level to 30, and gain from mission to 5, or a system of diminishing returns - so first missions give many SPs, until eventually they give very few, so that essentially there is a soft cap?
Yeah, that’s my preferred “easy” solution for Rally. But it would actually take quite a long time to implement, because it would be a huge change for many players.
Why then?
The game is still far from being “polished”.
If such changes are easy, Snapshot should dare to.
If you now assume that all skills “must” remain the same, Snapshot takes all the freedom to reconsider its initial decisions.
Edit:And that would not be good for the players in the long run, nor for Snapshot
That was my preferred solution at first, but then I realised that a) it doesn’t seem to fit with the ethos of the devs and b) it makes the game far too difficult for all but the most proficient players.
Rally is - or should be - a ‘get out of jail free’ card for players who find themselves overwhelmed by what’s coming at them. As such it needs limitations, so that it doesn’t turn into Terminator Spam (which it is now) - but 1 Rally per Squad per turn doesn’t give enough reward to help you ‘get out of jail free’.
One simple way of solving that is make it a once per squad-turn action, and increase its AP gift to 2 -essentially enabling a Heavy or Sniper to Dash & perform their key combat function once per turn.
Another would be to make it much more expensive, so that the cost/benefit ratio went down.
My Officer solution was intended to do 2 things:
Introduce Officers into the mix, as this is something many of us miss from other such tbs games.
Set a hard limit on the number of Rallies available, by setting a hard limit on the number of Officers you can have. For me, 5 Officers on Legend up to 8 Officers on Easy feels about right - lets those who want an easy time use Rally the way it is now, but puts a limit on the number of Rallies you can get on the higher levels.
So for me it’s already a super skill (1 Rally per Squad per turn).
2AP + a little WP -> 7AP (on other 7 soldiers). We don’t have to downplay that, it’s already a massive AP regeneration. That is why all unbalanced problems arise.
Edit: If we want to help beginners, the early game has to be easier. These players do not experience the midgame at all. Either they give up beforehand or have huge losses and therefore no super soldiers.
The superskills (pretty much all level 7 and Rally the Troops) only mean that the already good players, who had no losses until mid-game, can now walk blindfolded through the rest of the game.
I try to understand this conclusion. Changing a few parameters is like an hour of work in not less than that. Huge change for many players means long time to implement? How? Why? What? It may be huge change, but we got DLC with new augmentations replacing standard armors. Was it a problem to any of the players? I don’t think so. Except devs should implement it in the way where you receive not augmented soldiers in recruitment (or just like now you have the information about augmentations).
I think that PratBitt suggestion is good. Let the players adapt. They won’t abandon game because one of the skills was changed.
Because it was adding something new, not changing something currently existing. It will be a different story if now they replace the melee bionic torso with something else.
Well, that reasoning works both ways, unfortunately .
Ok, let me put it another way: will changing Rally change anything much? Not really. However, tackle both Rally and Rapid Clearance in the same pass, now that’s something.
1.my original plan for that training would be: popup telling the player about the existence and option of training officers, and then having it be a mere button with a cost and time investment attached. but more stuff has to be attached to the promotion to be worth it, that is the first complication. if its just training merely slotting a trooper in the manned station should be enough, but in that case a promotion to an officer would be moot.
2. permanent.
3. you can go “all chiefs no indians” if you want to in my current suggestion. note that is has nothing to do with @MichaelIgnotus rally suggestion. it has to do with the XP flood of the alpha team, and the fact that you can train troops to a higher level faster then actually get them through fighting by stacking training centers.
4. this is a matter of preference really, I prefer the time needed for training from rookie to the cap to be roughly the same all the time, and higher levels require more XP, so the TC manned by a high level trainer should have a higher XP/day rate.
@PradBitt: that, is actually a very good idea…its even easier then applying turn limits.
)
Changing a few parameters is like an hour of work in not less than that. Huge change for many players means long time to implement? How? Why? What? It may be huge change, but we got DLC with new augmentations replacing standard armors. Was it a problem to any of the players? I don’t think so. Except devs should implement it in the way where you receive not augmented soldiers in recruitment (or just like now you have the information about augmentations).
Let the players adapt. They won’t abandon game because one of the skills was changed.