Sirens should be immune to Neural Disruption

That is a cheap way to destroy their main weapon…. The Mind Control ability!

Sirens are leaders in battlefield, should be capable of resist psychic attacks. And Pandoras need to be stronger in late game. In my opinion, player should have no defences against Mind Control besides destroy Sirens head.

Sirens should be immune to Neural Disruption | Voters | Phoenix Point


So I disagree with you, there should be more than one defence against something that players can discover, rather than blowing the head all the time. It’s a sandbox game so different tactics should work rather than the same one all the time.


Turning the more powerfull enemies and their abbilities harmelss destroy game imo. We need fight, no slaugther

I never said slaughter I just pointed out that different tactics should be of use rather than just one. A fight can be hard or easy but must be fair according to the game/world system. It is one of the hardest things to do to create a balanced fair game system that covers all players abilities.


I disagree that Sirens should be made immune to the Neural Disruption ability. Even when their psychic powers are nullified, Sirens are still tough, fast and dangerous enemies that can still attack effectively using their Slasher/Injector Arms or Acid Torsos. The Neural Disruption ability of the Disruptor Head seems like it was specifically meant to provide players with a hard counter option against enemy psychic powers. It’s more reasonable than having to outfit whole teams with Clarity Heads/Ignore Pain to protect against Mind Control, or having to kill/head cripple every psychic enemy before they get close to your team.

But I do think that there is a case to be made that Neural Disruption should be rebalanced due to it nullifying enemy psychic powers a bit too effectively and easily. Maybe it could be changed so that every time an enemy is Neural Disrupted, that enemy only has their Will Points reduced or has their Will Point cost to use abilities increased, for example.

If Neural Disruption in its current form is overpowered, what suggestions might you have for rebalancing it?


It must be rebalanced, maybe a short range to make effect also, and some turns to recover and be used again.

These are better solutions. Generally, I dislike siren can mindcontrol more then one unit at the time, coupled with nice movement - makes it sometimes overpowered enemy when they have where to hide. I believe 1 unit mind controlling 1 unit is just by all means :slight_smile:


I’m here more on the side with Lobo. Overall I don’t like Neural Disruption. Such powerful skill working on any range and disabling most of enemy abilities is just bad in my book. Sirens are commanding units. They should not fall prone to simple mind trick (or tech trick) of a human, at least not easily.

If Siren should be immune or just heavily resistant to such attack is main question. Maybe complete immunity should not be granted to Siren… but surely it should be for Scylla, no matter the circumstances.

For Siren? Maybe I would introduce mechanic, that if target has more Willpower (so maximum allowed WP) than caster of Disruption, then Neural Disruption works in one of below ways:

  • casting it costs double WP to the caster
  • there is check made, if current WP level of target is higher than current WP level of caster then target is immune. Otherwise can be disrupted. Sirens would be immune most of the time, until taking control over something.

The Neural Disruption isent a psychic attack… So your defence ‘they are leader and should be able to resist psychic attacks’ doesent work.

The player having options and abilities is fine. If you want the Sirens in your game to be immume to it, mod it? Dont force everyone elses Sirens to be super duper insanely powerfull because you dont see a challenge in them.

They aren’t super duper insanely powerfull. Maybe with exception of Armis subspecies.

Thats not my point though now is it?

If you want your sirens to be more of a challenge get a mod for it or something. Why make everyone elses game more challenging because you find them ‘meh’, whats the point behind that?

Because there are other ways to deal with them, not only Neural Distruption. So it is very subjective to ‘make everyone elses game more challenging’. We talk here about taking away option that makes game trivial. It is almost like playing with cheats mode on.

1 Like

Sorry for another reply. There is general consensus that game is too diffucult on Rookie level, and too easy on Legend level.

I don’t see how it can be too difficult - maybe it explains too little in terms of game mechanics, maybe some things are not intuitive… Hard to say for me. But yes there are players who complain and struggle with the game.

But when player gets some experience and already knows skill and class combinations, then this game can’t be too difficult. There are so many options to overpower the enemy side that it really is hard to explain how someone can find game difficult. Highest difficulty setting just pushes time constraints so player needs to act quickly, but still there are the same combinations which work on all difficulty options and game can be cakewalk.

I suppose that authors of such requests should just add a notice: "provide us with difficulty (second wave) option to have/enable/disable… ". So everyone in the party will be happy.

Different people have different levels of skill. Whats challenging to some is easy for others. The devs also have to take this into consideration.

Fact that a player has plenty of options just means that theres alot of tactical options for the player to choose from. You add nothing to the game and only take away if you reduce that number of tactical options.

Think the game is to easy, even on the highest tactical option? Well guess the game is just to easy for you or something. Some players then install mods for more challenge or look for other games for that challenge. Ive never heard of people asking for the devs to take away options to get more challenge though, that just seems weird to me.

Second wave options though I always apllaud. Those are overall generally always a good idea. XCOM enemy unkown did this very nicely and XCOM 2 had some as well (though dident do it as good as enemy unknown in my opinion) that greatly exemplify this. Want all your rookies to have random stats? Well you can! Want flanking to a gradual thing rather then a yes or no thing? You can! Want your resources to expire? You can get that! So much options. Can make life as challenging for yourself as you want, alongside the difficulty option.

Those changes arent intrussive though and dont alter the game for everyone who play it, just the ones that want that option specificly. Would add options to the player rather then take away and add to the replay value of the game.

Add this as an second wave option and im all game, just dont alter it for everyone.

Imo, is not the players that should mod the game to have a challenge but the developers who have to create a challenging game in hardest difficulty to expert players have fun also.
This game is to easy in legend difficulty and is plenty of overpowers. Only doing severe self restrictions in gameplay it presents a challenge for a good player and this is no fun at all.
Legendary difficulty should mean a challenge and a hard game, not like it is now.

1 Like

I get what you mean, but my point is more that without a thing like second wave you are essentially asking them to make the game harder. The playerbase will have varying degrees of skill levels and the devs will want to have the game be fun for the majority of players.

In Steam you can vieuw achievements and see the global % of people who have those achievements. Lets take Scylla Thriller as an example. Only 7.8% of players has that one. Only 4.6% of players has the ‘Standard Victory’ achievement for completing the game on any difficulty.

I dont think the majority of players find the game to easy. I think games like this the minority will actually finish the game hence why raising the difficulty would be unwise for the devs.

Maybe the majority is bored after mid-game or in late game? I personally played 150h with 3-4 playthrough. And finished it only once. And the game is opposite from difficult for me :wink:


Could be. Its defenitly a long haul, lol

Absolutely. I have been playing PP since BB1. I really like this game, but I deliberately did not complete the game, as it is very easy at the level of a legend after the middle of the game. I’m looking forward to a fair balance, a hard challenge, and more content for a full playthrough.
Upd. And yes, I still avoid spoilers :slight_smile:


I wouldn’t take that as an indication that the game’s difficult… if people aren’t beating it and swarming to the forums about it being too difficult, 5 big “Wtf” posts every day… then it’s probably that most people just didn’t really like the game or care to play it beyond a certain point.

I’d played a campaign about 30 times or so, and never truthfully really “beaten” it (nor really care to). Near the halfway mark things just got too boring, and I’d restart for a different experience where it was still fun, again and again. About 6 times I’d actually gotten to the end. Only once did I ever actually bother to try the final mission, and I honestly didn’t expect it to be as hard as it was, considering how pathetic the rest of the game was in comparison… all my self-enforced handicaps bit me in the ass there, as most of my units had nothing to do. But those handicaps were the only things making the rest of the game any bit enjoyable, for me.

What wonky balance and flow this game has. I’m a bit eager to read the reviews of Festering Skies… I’m doubting it’ll improve things much, but maybe a little. Maybe they’ll figure out what’s wrong with this “halfway dread” problem and fix that too. Maybe I’ll give it a real shot again. We’ll see.