Linking classes with attributes

Most of those who finished the game should have had the “Termintaor Builds” but also “MAX Everything Builds”. Both lead to boredom from mid-game to the end. The mere fact that some here set self-adhering “rules” so as not to get to this point shows that something has to be done.

So that you don’t get me wrong: Alpha strike and OP skills must of course be banned / balanced independently of this thread so that any suggestions bear fruit at all. Often, however, everything is somehow related …


  • All classes can have their attributes max. This gives IMO the impression that all soldiers have exactly the same bodies. The only difference is just that they get different skills / spells.
  • sniper can have exactly the same speed as a berserk.
  • The fragile (looking) infiltrator can have the same strength (HP and load capacity) as the heavy.
  • Due to the alignment of the attributes, the “roles” of the soldiers also align, particularly in mobility, which “also” leads to the OP combos.

Proposed solutions:

  • Each class has advantages and disadvantages for attributes (this would be displayed directly when selecting the class / second class)
  • My suggestion would be to assign attribute points in +/- so that they balance out again to 0. It could look like this …
  • Sniper (strength = -2; will = +3; speed = -1)
  • Heavy (strength = +5; Will = -2; Speed ​​= -3)
  • Assault (strength = 0; will = 0; speed = 0)
  • Infiltator (strength = -5; will = 0; speed = +5)
  • Berserker (Strength = +2; Will = -5; Speed ​​= +3)
  • Priest (strength = -3; will = +5; speed = -2)
  • Engineer (Strength = +2; Will = +3; Speed ​​= -5)

For example, you could let the class-related attributes affect the max to “reacheble” attribute level.
A berserk / heavy would then have “MAX” attribute level +7 STR, -7 WILL, 0 SPEED. This would make a build play slightly different (super tanky, but little use of the spells)

In addition, it would be cool when recruiting a slightly random distribution of attributes and the maximum attribute points to be achieved.

What is the idea behind it?

  • With an Assault / Berserker I would actually like to be able to run significantly further without skills than with a Heavy / Ingenier.
  • The soldiers’ bodies differ slightly and no longer appear to be “cloned”, which means more variation.
  • A right to be for one class soldiers (but MAX Everything has to be banished or at least extremely difficult)


This suggestion is still very “raw”, so I would appreciate your opinion and discussion.

1 Like

I think your idea goes in good direction. BUT. :smiley:

In my balancing ideas I have:
Soldiers (any class) start with random attributes which can vary up to +/- 2 points. So it may look really different between soldiers. For example let say that 16 is average starting value (my balance ideas has this value lower, but I don’t want to shock players that there are so huge nerfs):

attribute 1st soldier 2nd 3rd 4th
Str 14 16 15 18
Will 14 18 14 18
Spd 14 14 17 18

This would lead to discrepancy that the best soldiers have 12 points more than the worst. That would lead probably to some players omit those soldiers with lower stats (all attributes should be seen in recruitment screen). But who said that life is just and even? :smiley: Btw. There will be a list of available soldiers generated with start of each new campaign, and those soldiers would be assigned to each haven. So reloading a save game before recruit was available won’t bring the player different (better in mind) soldier.

Then some of the classes add to one or two attributes by 3 points (when I’m thinking of it then maybe it could be varied so UP TO 3 points), but they don’t give negative values to attributes. For example Assault Training gives +3 speed so above table for assault would look like this:

attribute 1st soldier 2nd 3rd 4th
Str 14 16 15 18
Will 14 18 14 18
Spd 17 17 20 21

And there would be hard cap of each attribute. So when you have maxed one of the attributes and you select second class which gives +3 to that attribute or you select some perk which normally grant such bonus, it won’t go up. Reason behind it is because people can’t be stronger or faster than some point.

You would ask then, what will be difference then if every soldier has the same maximum? Yes they have the same maximum, but in my balancing ideas reaching max would be really hard to achieve and would mean abandoning skills and probably second class. :slight_smile: So soldiers won’t usually have max all attributes. Maybe one of them will be achievable.

Oh, worth mentioning about my balancing ideas is that armors mostly would give only negative rather than positive values to attributes. So positive value from class could counter those negative values. Wait. I have written on the other tab that armor modifiers work after caps are reached. So class speed bonus won’t benefit soldier in heavy armor. My bad. Good news is that if armor gives a bonus (rare case) then you can go above hard cap of attribute.


That is one problem, and the other problem is that you can’t get new recruits up to speed fast enough. The previous system wasn’t perfect, but I think it dealt with this better (though there is no denying that the Training Facilities were too good).

So, yes, I think the character progression needs to be adjusted.

One suggestion (made by @MadSkunky and me) is to link number of SPs gained per mission to combat experience (ie number of missions), so that at first the recruits gain a lot of SPs (maybe 15 SPs for the first 10 missions), and then less and less (so that after a number of missions they get only a couple of SPs). Perhaps also number of SPs gained from leveling up could be 30 SPs instead of 20 SPs. That way combat experience would still be more efficient than training, but replacing veteran troops would be easier.

As to linking the classes to attributes… I just don’t see classes that way. Take the example of infiltrators. They can be squishy with the infiltrator armor, but they have skills that don’t require wearing it. You don’t have to use infiltrarors for infiltrating… For example, the next builds I want to experiment with is infiltrarors relaying on Vanish.

I mean, the whole point of the sandbox character system is that you can come up with unexpected combinations - the classes don’t dictate the roles.

This sounds like a good optional setting. (and it was in Firaxis XCom’s Second Wave, “not born equal”, IIRC)

Ultimately, I think that it is the way to go, particularly for bonuses to accuracy and speed.

1 Like

I think, better make one time -10 from max of every attributes and give to every class bonuses +10 in summary. It makes difference more clear.

Random base stat good if you have many different soldier in hire pool. But in PP new soldiers finding very hard and cost too much. Don’t think it make game more fun. And in the end all of them will have same max attributes, so it don’t change anything.

Getting a degressive curve for SP is a must have.

I do not agree with that.
If everything goes as we all hope, we no longer need to replace ultra superheroes, which means that the replacement is no longer so important. Combat experienced soldiers must be clearly different from the soldiers who “practice” in a simulator.

I have no problem with that either. I also try not to distribute the roles firmly, but to give a slight preference so that the attributes of the soldiers do not fill up like clones.

Many RPGs have the approach of either max power for class development or mid power for hybrid classes. In PP it is the case that you have a HUGE disadvantage if you only stay in one class. I’m a PP fan, but Gears Tactics chose the approach I just described, and it doesn’t have to be bad what the competition does. :wink:

How would the solution be? Just "you should just choose two classes, otherwise it’s your own fault?"

Apart from that, I think that new titles like GT or the new little XCOM make turn-based tactics more popular, and thus PP too.

As I said: if it worked for others why not install it too? It would be extremely surprising if the big XCOM 3 came out without free aiming. Free aiming has clearly set a new standard.

I like both the suggestions given by @walan and @Yokes,

the only point I see in walans suggestion is that the SP valeu of 5 points of will is higher then the skill point valeu of 5 points of strength or speed, as the costs of the will stats rise by 1 for every 1, rather then 1 for 2 for all the other stats. does this make a significant difference in the long run…I honestly don’t think it does.

it also lacks a critical part of the suggestion, like what system exactly would make reaching max stats difficult?

Yokes suggestion for attribute caps is a solid idea, but it would have to be made uniform across all the therms used in the game as to prevent confusion about where the cap is, and what is affected and not affected by it.

personally I would not allow players to see the exact stat array of a new hire, keeping the suggestion in mind but also the devs suggestion that future recruitment might be simplified. (possibility of new recruits through training center perhaps, I’m guessing here) and the fact that there are many havens to get recruits, but the player generally only gets about 20-30 soldiers throughout the campaighn, starters accounted for in that number. considering this, cherry picking would definitely be possible.

That is one of the downsides of the new SP system where you can skill up with no end. The old system was capped at 300 SP and the 50 SP for dual classing was expensive and alone for this at least a not that small disadvantage (50SP = around 3-5 increase for strength or speed, 1-3 for willpoints).

Maybe they should bring the max SP cap back and/or the dual classing more expensive?

1 Like

My proposal is still very raw. You could not only adjust the attributes of the classes at the beginning, but also (maybe only) refer to maximum “reacheble” attributes.
For example: A berserk / heavy would then have “MAX” attribute level +7 STR, -7 WILL, 0 SPEED. This would make a build play significantly different (super tanky, but little use of the spells)

Of course, the extreme mobility and accuracy must be adjusted beforehand :wink:

I didn’t say that soldiers should be hard to find and expensive. :slight_smile:

That is why I wrote this (there is change):

but in my balancing ideas reaching max would be really hard to achieve and would mean abandoning skills and probably second class.

That is true, the disadvantage of dual classing was the cost, no only the 50SPs, but also the SPs you have to spend on skills from both classes to make a viable dualclass build.

I often stay in one class for very long time because I prefer higher stats to more skills - and I used to do it more often before the new system.

Regardless of how the good balance is achieved, being able to replace veterans is a good thing.

My attitude with the previous system was “I don’t care that much if I lose a veteran, because I can replace him/her somebody different. Every loss is an opportunity to try out something new”

Now I have mixed squads of veterans/trained rookies, which is not bad, except it takes too long to bring the trained rookies up to speed, so losing them is also a headache.

Let me put it this way: getting 300 SPs through the TFs was too much, but getting 120 is too little, IMO.

Totally agree. It looks like another case of a “quick fix” without thinking through the balance of the fix. However, it does look as if they are planning on addressing this and other concerns with squad building. Hopefully, we will have a taste of a balanced pudding soon.