To fix your quotes put the [/quote] on its own line. And yes covering the body is a defense bonus, but only if the enemy’s accuracy is low enough for it to matter, as opposed to the FiraXCOM version where there’s a literal defense stat.
2 Likes
I obviously can’t talk for everybody, but I seldom take 20% shots. I normally plan the entire turn before taking a single move, which means I have ample opportunity to take better actions than a20% shot. It can always happen in desperate cases, but then it means I’d have started my turn in such a shitty position that a 20% shot would be the best move out of all available possibilities. Not impossible, but quite rare.
Then there is the opposite scenario, where there’s only one target left; it’s almost dead and I have guaranteed damage on it via a skill or consumable. In that case, I may take any shot at it, no matter how bad, with my spare soldiers, knowing that if everything misses, I still have a guaranteed kill somehow, but a lousy shot somehow connects, I just saved a charge/long cooldown.
Somebody mentioned in this thread that PP doesn’t have critical hits and I’m wondering if it’s planned for later. I can see pros and cons for it.
2 Likes
I mentioned it and I don’t see them adding it in later. Right now each bullet does its own damage, so a 6-shot burst from an AR can do up to 18 damage since each shot does 3 damage. Likewise each round from the minigun has something like a 10% chance to shred (-1) armor. Given the low damage value but high rounds fired per burst I just don’t see crit as a very good mechanic here. For most guns it isn’t going to add much damage unless you get a string of crits, but you get too large of a string and the damage could swing too high (which was why damage was changed from 0-200% of listed in UD to 50-150% in TFTD).
Now they might add it in later but I just don’t see it playing well with how the guns are currently designed.
2 Likes
I agree there is enough variance for burst/full auto weapons. Single shot ones are a bit different though. We’ll see.
2 Likes
Cheers, that was annoying the hell out of me. 
What do you need to do in order to nest them?
1 Like
< [quote=“Aknazer, post:128, topic:557, full:true”]
< [quote=“SpiteAndMalice, post:127, topic:557, full:true”]
< Cheers, that was annoying the hell out of me. 
< What do you need to do in order to nest them?
< [/quote]
< Nested
< [/quote]
I’m using the < to break the formatting but basically everything has to be its own line. You can also see that I typed in the post and topic info which is what gives the arrow on the right to go to the quoted post along with the Avatar to the left of the quoted person’s name. All this reminds me of when I had to program a webpage back in seventh grade and everything was its own line. You can also use > for quotes as seen below (though you lose the ability for people to go to the quoted post along with losing the avatar symbol).
Aknazer:
SpiteAndMalice:
Cheers, that was annoying the hell out of me.What do you need to do in order to nest them?
Triple Nest via carrots
Nested
< >Aknazer:
< >>SpiteAndMalice:
< >>Cheers, that was annoying the hell out of me.
< >>
< >>What do you need to do in order to nest them?
< >>>Triple Nest via carrots
< >
< >Nested
Well all of this went longer than I thought and is a bit off topic. I’ll leave it here for others who might have the same question though lets take any future questions along these lines to PM.
EDIT: Apparently this post counts as a reply to itself since it literally quotes itself (from that topic/post info I manually typed in for the quote example). Interesting.
1 Like
So I have read literally this entire thread, and I am now exhausted. Completely and utterly exhausted by what feels like an endless thread with 90% of its content being the same 10 regurgitated points, spat back and forth between a few people with no real progress and very little consensus. So exhausted now, that the original intelligent and detailed post I was inspired to write after reading the first few replies is long gone, replaced now by frustration.
I will say this. I feel that Duskmare has a poor understanding of how statistics, probability, and mathematics as a whole work. I feel that you don’t like XCOM-stylized games, regardless of what you tell yourself, because certain core concepts of the game are irritating to you in a “Ruin my enjoyment of the game” sort of way, rather than just a “Damn, my strategy didn’t work and now I have to play catchup” sort of way.
The omnipresence of danger is an important element of this gaming genre. Your soldiers never being truly safe is essential to XCOM. The potential for even the most well-thought out plans to fail is important. In the moment, when my soldier dies to a freak accident low probability crit, it is frustrating. In the moment, I am upset…
But on a macro level? When I step back and look at the game as a whole? That level of unpredictability, of danger, is what makes this genre truly my favorite kind of game in existence. FXCOM dominated my interests for the last 2 years. I spent a lot of time playing the game, replaying it at higher difficulty levels, downloading mods that made the computer play more intelligently and with more brutality, as well as mods that gave the enemy a wider diversity of enemies, strategies, and choices to wreck me with.
If the game had clear cut strategies where there was always an objectively better move with no drawbacks, I feel this game would become stale in no time. The game would become cookie cutter, with the strategy for any given map becoming quickly and easily apparent with just a few minutes spent scanning about. The ability for freak incidents I didn’t plan for to occur is what keeps me on my toes, challenges me, and forces me to rethink strategies and adapt. The possibility of losing a good soldier even when I thought I was playing perfectly forces me to revisit the planning board. Was I truly playing perfectly? Could I have been more patient? More aggressive? Should I have simply retreated and taken the failed mission to preserve the campaign run as a whole?
For me, this creates true immersion. The enemy is greater than me. I have a small force of competent but not god-tier soldiers who must overcome immense odds through a combination of strategy, luck, and experience. There should be some missions where I come face to face with threats I cannot overcome. There should be some missions where I am forced to deal with unexpected losses. There should be some situations where I thought I had a clear advantage, but poor luck forces me to quickly come up with a new strategy… Even if that strategy is simply an exit strategy.
This is what has made this genre a legend to me. This is what gives it near infinite replayability to me.
If this is not how you feel, that is your right. I don’t expect you to agree. But perhaps the reason you have beef with this game and its RNG system has more to do with the kind of game you actually truly enjoy playing (known vs unknown, predictable vs unpredictable, RNG vs pure skill) than an issue with the game itself.
6 Likes
Maybe there could be a mechanic that would let you spend Will points to shrink and otherwise adjust and modify your target circles, in useful ways?
1 Like
I haven’t read the rest of the thread, so maybe that’s already been suggested. It’s just the first idea that popped into my head, as a possible solution.
1 Like
Pardon the self quoting, but said game is at 1.99€ today on steam, for those who need their fix of tactical turn based games. Not the game of the year but some interesting concepts and a wild west setting with supernatural elements.
1 Like