We have to talk about the Scylla in the room

-Sniper Rifles allow us to shoot from a safe distance the most troublesome enemies, and are one of the most effective weapon to take out body parts, armored or not.

-Grenades (explosive ones at least) are always effective, I have yet to see an enemy we can’t take out with them so they are always useful. Not true for all weapons in the game.

-Heavies are the worst early game, they are hard to level up as they deal the least damage compared to other classes (because they miss so much, attack slowly etc). Yes they do have a few useful perks as they level up but they are the most gimped class overall. They are far from the “king of the battlefield” unless using their big gun as a club count as being an effective combatant. Compared to their equivalent in FiraXcom, our heavies are pretty bad at their job.

-Might be true that some have limited ammo, but have you ever seen an Arthron or a Triton have to reload or stop shooting when they still have their weapons working?

1 Like

I have not, but TBH I have never seen them live long enough to have a chance to run out of ammo. Having said that, you can see how much ammo they have left when you mind control them.

Regarding sniper rifles, grenades, heavies, these are all good arguments, and I was there too, I even started a thread on how to nerf SRs… And complained about ARs being useless and couldn’t for the life of me see any reason for having a pure heavy.

But not now :wink:. That’s my whole point - there is a lot more than meets the eye. For example, if you are thinking in terms of maximizing damage output at long range, sniper rifles make sense (though less than cannons with accuracy buffs, because they shred armor), but why focus on dealing with far away enemies when you can do way more damage at medium and CQC with ARs, shotguns, HMG, cannons, melee?

Also, if you limit yourself to only one use of each skill per soldier per turn, you can only use quickaim once, which means that normally SRs are restricted to one shot per turn…

Maybe it doesn’t change much, but except melee they have limit of attacks. :slight_smile: Arthrons are too powerful so usually they must die before they will run out of ammo. Tritons with sniper rifles too. But I had few Tritons who had empty handguns after some time. Same with Chirons.

I’m aware of the pro and cons of most of the weapons in the game, i do use most of them (at least the ones I seen so far). What I mean for the SR is I feel forced to have at least one guy with an SR whenever I deploy a squad because there is no better weapon to deal with enemies I can’t safely get close to (or I need dead ASAP). All my soldiers carry grenades because again it’s a fairly effective weapon everyone can use even with a crippled arm. By no mean I’m saying i can’t fight without those, but when I do I have a much harder time finishing a mission without losses or badly injured soldiers.

1 Like

The trajectory ‘is’ the hit chance. - Bullets when fired take a straight route between the point from where they are fired to whatever object they strike, there’s no wind, no effects of gravity, no recoil, no flaws in individual bullets, they don’t deviate from their path if they pass through a soft target; if the game simulates anything it’s a laser, not a projectile. It’s also not a moving target, idle animations aside every shot that is taken is at a stationary target.

Moreover the bullet isn’t only fired when the player takes a shot, the game is constantly rolling dice to simulate the ‘to hit’ chance of a shot at any given time, we know that this is how the player is able to see expected damage. At the point where the player chooses to take that shot, the simulated dice roll becomes the actual roll, the bullet traces its straight path and then actual damage is calculated for anything which that bullet it hits.

Rather than the player working with calculated percentages, and the player then judging whether that shot is worth taking, the player is instead asked a visual question, but it’s still has its basis in maths, only now it’s ‘what percentage of this circle is filled?’

Only if there is nothing between the shooter and the target character. And the game doesn’t actually care what the target is - it can be a character or an object (glass, wall, explosive barrel, etc.), so it only makes sense to speak of to hit chances in the very specific context of targeting characters. And in the game you often shoot at enemies behind walls, glass or other obstacles, or enemies you can’t even see yet, i.e. you are not actually targeting any characters as far as the game is concerned.

It’s not rolling any dice yet. It says “your aiming reticle is covering body parts of the target covered in x, x+10, x+30 armor, and your weapon does y damage, thus the possible damage is between y - x and y - x - 30”. And if 100% of the target is covered by the reticle and y - x - 30 > HPs of the target it shows the skull and crossbones. No dice are rolled just yet. It’s the difference between rolling a dice and saying if you roll a 6 this is what’s going to happen. That’s why only if you see the flashing skull and crossbones you know for sure that the target will be killed.

The thing is, it’s the only practical way to ask the question. Because the bullet (and with burst weapons, each bullet) has equal chances of landing anywhere within the circle, the only way to put this in a % would be for each position of the reticle to say (based on its coverage) you have % to hit head, % to hit arm, % to hit torso, etc. % to miss the target.

You can’t just have the question/answer “what are my chances of hitting the target in the head? 75%? OK, I take that shot”, because you can have the same chance of 75% to hit the head in many different positions of the reticle, and depending on each position the chances to hit other body parts of the target, or missing it also change.

Actually, it is. The game runs a Monte Carlo simulation on the current shot and the projected damage is an average of the results.


:sweat_smile: I stand corrected then @SpiteAndMalice

1 Like

TBH, the game doesn’t stack itself against you if you honour the DDA - and by that I don’t mean the snide ‘sacrifice a victim to the gods of the DDA’ caricature that some people portray. Rather, I mean, simply play the game as it comes. Take your losses when they come. Fall back and abandon missions that are too difficult. Only Save & Restart very occasionally, when you take a crippling blow - or lose a beloved character you don’t want to lose.

If you do that, the game very accurately balances itself to your personal ability - or at least that’s what it does for me.

But if you S&R too often, or simply ace the mission because you are exploiting the OP skills, then the DDA will come back at you with a vengeance … aaand you’re in that feedback loop again.

I’m not saying the Pandas shouldn’t be nerfed - I keep on saying that they should, and people keep ignoring the fact that I say that. But you only get that feedback loop if it thinks you’re playing like a superhero.

1 Like

On the one hand you are saying that the game is balanced. Yet on the other, it’s not (if one “cheats”). So we want to make the game work to prevent cheaters. I for one don’t care if someone else out there “cheats” their way in a solo game that they bought. They are only cheating themselves out of a more interesting game play. That’s free will, the game isn’t making them play this way, they are opting to play it that way.

1 Like

No, I’m saying that the way I play it - with 1 Skill/turn limits & no S&Rs - doesn’t trigger the DDA.

However, I am well aware that this is not the usual way the game is played , and it (used to) hideously unbalance Panda strength and depployment (though I’m reading reports that it is much better now).

How many times do I have to say I DON’T CARE how other people play this game before it sinks in?

However, I DO care that the devs haven’t taken into account the way that many people play this game - and that is spoiling it for those players. So I shall continue to call for easy to be easy and everything else I keep saying about limiting Panda numbers to even out the balance and reduce the need for OP skill combos.

I guess my question is, would your changes necessarily keep it the same game? Obviously it was designed to allow combinations that gain more power as one progresses, just as the enemy does.

Because you also say this:

On the one hand you say you don’t care how others play the game, but on the other, you say they are not playing it correctly. And you know how all the other owners are playing this game, how? Are you privy to the stats that Snapshot gathers? The majority of the players aren’t necessarily participating in this and other forums. Nor are they posting their game play on YouTube or Twitch.

Ok, I don’t have time for this - especially not right at this minute.

But, put simply, read almost any thread I have been a part of since BB1, and I have consistently said that:

a) Squad stills are OP.
b) The game is reportedly not easy on Easy Difficulty, and it should be.
c) This is because the DDA doesn’t take into account the way that most people say they play this game - it’s not difficult to say ‘people play differently than I do’, when they tell me in virtually every post I read that they like to save & restart, don’t like losing people, feel that they have to use OP skill combos to survive.
d) the DDA should be changed to take into account the fact that most people S&R.
e) Panda numbers should be nerfed across the board. Specifically: Easy max. 1 Siren + 1 Chiron; Vert 2&2; Heroic 3&2; Legendary 5&2 - with acid & bombard Chirons limited only to the harder difficulties.

You keep trying to deliberately misrepresent me, and deliberately take my comments out of context, and I have had enough of it. Like Voland and that other guy you pissed off (was it Walan or Conductiv, I can’t remember), I am not going to bother engaging with you any more, because I simply find I keep repeating myself against the same old false accusations.

Now I have to go and work. Goodbye.


I don’t skillspam, this means any skill can be used once per turn per soldier, with exception of rally…that one can only be used once by the squad as a whole. the exception also applies on skills gained from equipment or mutations (examples: paralyzing tentacle, stomp, electric kick, technician heal) as they can be used as often as needed. and passives (ready for action). have to say…makes the game a lot more fun.

naturally I save and load but only to exit and enter the game, never to undo a decision…effectively ironman with the option to have backup save if for one reason or another the primary save fails.

I play the game vanilla, without any DLC (for now at least no DLC) or mod

can’t say I have had a lot of beef with the DDA lately, now my troops do take the occasional nick to the HP bar but I havn’t had deaths in the last 2 runs untill very late in the game, and that wasn’t because of the army of crabs experience that I had just after release…yeah C team got wiped at a certain point but I was already researching the endgame tech for “masters tools” by then. and well C team with the current training system…lets just say their stats had some catching up to do…

1 Like

Same here, except I play with the DLC.

And it’s true that playing like this is a lot more fun… at least after you gain enough familiarity with the game. For me it was around 70-80 hours mark.

The effects of the DDA have been considerably nerfed in Leviathan, I think. I lost very few soldiers and completed many missions without any injuries. As I was at the war with NJ, but wanted some of the their tech I did around a dozen steal research missions of “extreme” difficulty in one turn (yep, they can be done using dash only once…). That should have made the DDA go bonkers, but I did not appreciate any increase in the difficulty after that.

Fine, you are free to disagree with me. As I am free to disagree with you. And I know, in your heart and mind you are only trying to make this the greatest game ever. I’m not trying to not make that happen. I don’t have any malice towards you. I only point out what I see as holes in some of your arguments. If that’s a crime, then I guess I’m guilty. Continue your campaign, I’m all for it. Just expect for me to counter something if I see fit. That’s what this community is for. Not so only certain voices are the only ones heard. Sometimes, the emperor is not wearing new clothes.

Ok, now that I have the time to engage with this, rather than being hassled on both sides, I will address this one point, as it pretty perfectly illustrates what annoys me so much.

What I actually said in the whole series of posts that you quoted out of context is: I don’t care how people play this game, but I am aware that the way people say they play the game is unbalancing the DDA. This needs to be fixed, because it is spoiling those players’ fun.

You misrepresented that as: ‘You’re saying other people aren’t playing this game correctly. Who are you to be saying what is and isn’t correct - and how can you have a crystal ball that knows the way that everybody plays?’

No, I didn’t say they’re not playing it correctly, I said that what they report on these forums seems to be fritzing the DDA; but if you play it a different way, the DDA doesn’t fritz.

I also went on to say (which you so conveniently ignored):

…which is one good reason why I got so annoyed when (surprise surprise), you ignored that.

As I have said before and shall say again and again and again until the devs do something about it, this game - as it currently stands - is broken. And it’s broken because:
a) the DDA doesn’t pay attention to the way most people report they play these games (using S&R).
b) Squad skills are so stupidly OP that if you don’t limit yourself, you can end most missions in a couple of turns.
c) the Pandas are so stupidly OP that they will come back at you with a vengeance if you don’t do that - just read the current acid debate that’s going on, it’s ridiculous what acid is doing to people nowadays.

BUT: read the posts of myself, @conductiv and @VOLAND above: we have found a way of limiting the DDA and releasing the absolutely excellent tactical game that is just begging to break out from its straitjacket of overbalanced feedback loops. And it’s so simple it hurts!

Nerf everything.

Set Cooldowns and limits on squad skills, so that we can’t ace a Lair or Citadel in 1 turn by spamming Rally or Rapid Clearance or Rage Burst and offing the Maguffin before the Pandas even get a chance to move.

Limit the number of Big Nasties that appear per mission, and completely disable the DDA on Easy Difficulty - oh, and while you’re at it, force the Siren to have LoS on any Squaddie she MCs.

Tone down acid, for the love of Bradford!

Do that, and as long as players respect the DDA, it won’t ramp up the Difficulty Spike, and the game’s a real blast.

BUT - and I’ve lost count of the number of times I and Voland and others have said this as well - we recognise and respect that fact that other players like the OP Skill combos &/or don’t want the game to be as challenging as we like it to be: so we are constantly calling for the devs to introduce a set of Difficulty Modes (or option menus) that allow players to choose to play this game the way they want to.

I’m not saying that ‘people aren’t playing this game correctly’. I AM saying that - as things currently stand - they are playing it differently to the way I play it, and that’s what’s triggering most of the problems they keep complaining about.

Bottom line: when you call for OP Skill combos to remain untouched because ‘that’s the only way we can survive against the Difficulty Spike’, you are calling for the Difficulty Spike to go up; because the one directly feeds off the other in a vicious feedback loop. If you nerf the one, you technically should immediately nerf the other, because without squads acing missions left, right and centre, the DDA won’t go through the roof.

Won’t solve the S&R problem, but if you accuse me of saying that’s the players’ fault, I shall SCREAM!


No, what he said is the game, the way it is coded, ramp up the difficulty the more successful you are at it (most likely to keep the game challenging as you get better at it). However the current balance of the game allow us the player to steamroll opposition so the game see this as the current game not being challenging enough. Thus it spawn more powerful enemies the next engagement, and so on.

1 Like

What the hell is wrong with you? It was fun now it is impossible. That asshole kills one soldier per turn, shitting more monsters and using abillities during my play. I just want to have some fun. I am playng this crap on rookie and I can’t beat that fucking thing with lvl 7 characters. This game is making me really sad, and I am a guy who enjoys a good challenge.

Scylla is good challenge… but kinda boring once you know how to handle it… just bring soldiers with virus ability… preferably heavy and assaults… so they can stack a lot of virus on her… Aim for spawning abdomen, its least armored (30) therefore easiest to disable (and she is HUUUGE, its not like you have to do it up close and personally…)… few bursts with deceptors and ARs with virus, and it will panic indefinitelly… and you can do whatever you want with it… I usually bring Hera pistols, and once its panicking, i just shoot the abdomen until its paralyzed… I always capture first Scylla… its easiest one, without any special abilities…