Rank VS Class VS Basic

I’m hoping PP uses a three sectioned approach to soldier development.

Section 1 - Basic
These are the skills every soldier has and develop over time and missions. These are completely random upon soldier creation like the original XCOM. If you get a soldier with a high AIM skill, you might put him on the SNIPER path… a high STRENGTH skill, he’s going to be a TANK… etc.

Section 2 - Class
Once a soldier passes the Rookie stage and gets into a CLASS, this section will open up the tree to increasing abilities and enhancing growth. Mission complete… successful mission = more experience than a failed mission… use that XP to enhance existed skills OR invest in a new higher level skill. Do you add 1 point to your STEADY HAND ability for your SNIPER or do you open up a new path that increases your EAGLE EYE long-range sight?

Section 3 - Rank
Sorry all… not everyone is going to be a General. Never, Ever, Forever, Whenever, Did a 4-Star General climb up a tree and sit motionless for 3 hours to take a kill shot on a target… or carry a 100 pound rocket launcher up a hill to blast the outer wall of a landed UFO…

Ranked soldiers do not equal a better CLASS soldier, they provide leadership, guidance, and team bonuses.

I want to see my soldiers grow and develop… I want to see my best soldiers increase in skills and get bad-assier… I want an option to promote my soldiers up the ranks and feel accomplishment as they enhance the rest of my squad.


For ranks I like what they did in the LW leader pack for xcom2, you select wich soldiers are going to be officers and they gain buff perks as they rank up, but you only are allowed to have an officer per mission.

I think is fine having only one leader per mission but the thing I didn’t like is that two officers can’t be selected for a mission, I would like the option to select more than one officer per but allow only one of them use his buffs for the mission as the leader of the squad.

1 Like

That’s what they did for the Long War mod in XCOM: Enemy Within, yeah – you could take multiple officers, but only the highest-ranking officer got to confer his buffs to allies. You couldn’t take two officers with different buffs and apply them all to the squad.


First off, Bump! …and now on to my reasoning to bumping. Militarizing this into something tactile for the consumer larping it out if you will.

TL;DR function behind op’s theory

The military evaluates it’s servicemembers for placement in the right most(army/Marines) or rating (coast guard/Navy) Theres your basic stats going into class.

Making rank happens when proficiency is proven either in the field on the spot or over time as a person’s subject matter expertise increases. There’s your class into ranking.

Sometimes if an enlisted member has superior performance (or is just really good at making themselves look good) they are selected and then commissioned as a restricted line officer (General leadership.) Othertimes someone becomes such a specialist in their “class” they become Warrant Officers. There’s your rank into senior leadership/field commander positions.

1 Like

While I can see the point of only allowing one “commander” rank on a mission, I think a large part of your premise is flawed. 1) These are non-standard rank structures used by an irregular paramilitary force. 2) History is full of examples of generals leading from the battlefield, even sometimes in the thick of things.
That being said, I think it’d be great to be able to promote soldiers in an officer form of their class, with limits on how they can be deployed, while allowing others to further level up through their main class. It may become a little obtuse though, and just be too unwieldy to use.

1 Like

Yep, that was one of the things that was clearly ridiculous in the Firaxis take. Overall, agree with you. But i don’t know. Maybe these guys have even better ideas i know nothing about. Still, i like this kind of approach.


Not bad balancer, really. Too bad you are not in dev team and we are clearly told “things are kind of nailed”

1 Like