Magical equipment teleportation

@Sklerotikkk I was a bit economic with words and did not make myself very clear indeed. @VOLAND got the direction I was going for. There are of course a lot of ways to implement it differently, and it’s why I said I like the teleportation in the current iteration of the game. I want mechanics that make sense like you, but I don’t want pure chores that detract from the fun. Ideally, we should try to find good and fun mechanics, but also balanced with the rest of the game, and this last part is not always obvious.

One point that @VOLAND has brought in our past arguments is that devs have so much in their hands that our suggestions are best heard when they are simple to implement. So, when talking about game problems, I’m already in the mindset of finding first easy solutions so we get some advancement, rather than ask for what’s currently impossible and get nothing. I’m not saying that what you suggested is impossible at all, just giving a bit of context.

Your suggestions all have some kind of balance work that would come with them. The one that seems easiest to implement and balance in my opinion is just giving aircraft storage space. Even this one comes with its challenges besides the implementation:

  • As mentioned, there’s a problem with game pacing that must also be solved, else your aircraft would need to be able to carry a lot of stuff and then there would come the question “why can I fit tons of equipment but only 6 soldiers?”.
  • The aircraft is not shown in missions so you wouldn’t be able to get equipment after entering the mission. I would really like if it was like in the original x-com, but I guess there must be a (performance?) reason for not having it.
  • Currently, if you do not abuse broken game mechanics or is not a very experienced player, resources are hard to come by even in easier difficulties, and also really prone to RNG. Having equipment locked in a distant place would lead to a need for even more resources, so the resource availability or item costs would also have to be tuned. Also, aircraft may be destroyed, and then you would lose all that equipment. Right now, that would be a MAJOR hit to a campaign, possibly ending it. One option here is to turn the destroyed aircraft into a scavenge mission.

These are just a few points and I had one more in my head but I forgot it while typing :roll_eyes:. Of course it’s the devs work to find out how to balance stuff and you can just throw ideas at them, but what I tried here was to show that my response was not dismissive of yours and also to help building a strong case that may get real attention from the devs.

Maybe we could use the evacuation area instead of the aircraft.

If it was an inventory screen on the evac area, ok (it should not show on the ground as it would be confusing if the items would be left behind or not)… but what about missions that have more than one evac zone? All of them would have this inventory available? Is the aircraft hopping around to enable this? It seems strange just like the current mechanic.

I like the idea of aircraft (and vehicles for that matter) having their own storage space, but it could be a total micromanagement nightmare if it’s implemented badly. Picking out individual ammo packs on Scavenging Missions and deciding which ones to bring home is already a bit tedious. Imagine doing that 10x over every time your aircraft left base!

On top of that, as the game progresses you accumulate LOTS of aircraft and LOTS of bases. 5 aircraft and 15 bases isn’t unusual by the endgame. If the UI isn’t VERY good, managing 20 different inventories would be horrendous.

“Okay, where did I put my fifth Gungnir? Not in that aircraft . . . not in that aircraft . . . not in that base . . . not in that base . . . not in that base . . .”

(3 minutes later)

“. . . okay, there it is! Okay, now where did I put that spare Destiny? Not in that base, not in that base . . .”


I agree :smile:

It was really funny😆 How do you like this: We buy small cargo planes and they transport our things automatically. At the same time, they are displayed on the geoscape and we receive a message something like “Delivery in 2 hours 30 minutes”. Moving is possible only from those bases where warehouses are built. Thus, I believe that it is simply necessary to make smarter and better use of the current warehouse system. An additional strategic choice emerges: Should we build? Where to build? How much to build? The only micromanagement is the distribution of these aircraft among our bases.

Vehicles already have their own storage space. When a soldier is in a vehicle he can drop anything there (drop didn’t cost an action but take something cost 1 AP unless it as an Assault with Ready For Action). That’s how I do scavenging sites, drive by with a vehicle, one soldier hops out and grabs all of the crate and then back into the vehicle where he drops all what he has found. At the end of these missions my ‘vehicle storage’ is full of all the nice things I found.

Oh, forget to mention that the vehicle storage has no maximum capacity, at least I never reach it. It gets automatically a scroll bar when the two lines of inventory squares are full and a third line is added.

Well, I meant more that one of the features I’d really love to see in the game is to let vehicles go travelling out on their own to explore for scavenging sites . . . put a Canny ticket up, but no idea whether they’ll do it.

OK, that is a completely different case.
But anyway, vehicle storage is already in the game. Even if it is actually only usable in tactical missions and not on the strategical layer, the base is there.

1 Like

they would be utterly slow on geosphere… plane flies 500-600km/h, but vehicle will do 100km/h at best (a lot less because it cannot go straight, but has to use roads which are not present on geosphere)… so simple drive to nearest POI would take at least 10x longer than fly there…

Yeah, but the idea isn’t to go 2,000 miles away, it’s to explore the local area.

It doesn’t make sense that the entire world’s been devastated but there are only 50 or so points of interest on the entire globe. By mid February you’ve cleared every question mark on the map. Are there really NO other places in the entire world with resources to scavenge? Doesn’t seem to make much sense . . .

Anyway, this is a bit off topic, so I’ll stop.

i’d say that would be a great idea for follow-up game, if they went for more detailed but smaller scale campaign map… (which i think would be better than current globe)

You are looking from realistic Googles. With your logic, you can find tons of things even from a little city. But this is a game that about 10 people saving the earth from a global mutation virus in 2 month from zero.

So we need to think game wise more then realism.

1 Like

Hmm, it’s almost like the same discussion happened 10 month ago:

There was a simple solution to this, instead of manufacturing magazines, manufacture ammo piles. Magazines would be carried only in soldier’s inventory, bases and ships would store just ammo stockpiles.
The other thing is loadout templates, which are featured in numerous games. At the end this is all irrelevant, all these issues where discussed for the last year and half and not addressed.

1 Like

Creating a feedback ticket at official tool could help, if voted and considered by team. I also like more strategic options in options, not to disturb modern visual styled players :slight_smile:

Like I would like to see no combat anims, faster and jerky climbing, no animations … in options.

Yes, just adding a new restriction to existing balance wouldn’t work.

I would welcome having to have a ship dedicated to shifting things around and trading (honestly I try to do have one anyway). I wouldn’t be opposed to having a new type of transport ship - with no space for personnel or perhaps just one or two for recruits, cheaper but dedicated to item management and trading.