What's the point of the LoA resource sites?

[Rainer]

@drages

It’s another discussion but I find very odd that melee hits need 2 TP and there is no skill to let you run from danger if the enemy is not dead or got support.

I’d argue that the skill is Dash. Just a basic assault with some speed and nothing else can Dash up to a target, attack it, and Dash into relative safety. Not as insane as it used to be… but there’s a variety of options. Vanish is another skill. If you’re not completely exposed, Deploy a Decoy that is. If you’re using BnT DLC, the Juggernaut Torso offers the shield. Someone else can onslaught you… Rapid Clearance… Frenzy, etc. Then there’s the Anu skill and BnT Synedrion Torso that reduces melee to 1 AP to make all of the above even easier and more powerful.

@drages

I respect Ironman-Legendary players with their skills and patience but yes this game is a save-load one.

In regards to squad wipes, I’d say they are a rare issue, and are almost always a result of having too few bodies on the field. I’ve suffered only one I can remember recently, and I reloaded, all because the Hatching Sentinel triggered behind a wall and I had no idea. I only had 3 troops and 3 mindfraggers hatched, ran around the corner and mind controlled everyone… I thought that was a bit unreasonable so I just reloaded… but looking back, I think if it wasn’t the very beginning of the game and we had rosters of 30+ soldiers instead of a struggling 4 to begin with, I wouldn’t have cared so much and just laughed at the outcome of that mission instead.

@kingius

You can’t, for instance, ‘hide behind a heavy’ and vehicles are durable but do have to be evacuated sometimes because they can get overwhelmed quickly by multiple foes.

You can’t? I do that all the time… well, whenever that time permits it as an ideal solution anyway… which is rarely… but still!

Heavies actually don’t seem to draw that much fire unless they’re the only valid target, and even then enemies seem to prefer firing at the vehicle because of how much of an easier target it is… a tank being a tank! The only thing that really hurts a heavy for most of the game are other heavies, explosions, and sniper rifles… sniper rifle, the rock to a heavy’s paper. Sniper rifles aren’t always present though, and if they are, play accordingly… otherwise if you have an injured unit or something stuck in a bad position, but a nearby heavy… yeah, I’ve ran him in front of my other guy a few times and yea he took the hits like a champ and potentially saved their lives (especially against a shotgun). So I know it works, but that was only against one aggressor who I also knew wouldn’t be able to do much else except potentially kill that unit I didn’t want to die. I actually did this once to protect someone who might die from sniper fire, standing him in front of the crouched sniper because the sniper only had 108hp or something and this guy had 200hp. He lost his head, but he didn’t die!

I use vehicles that way about half the time as well, otherwise they’re mostly for hit and runs (dropping someone out the back, using 2ap for attacking, and loading back in before driving away. with 3-4 soldiers) Really enjoy using a vehicle as a blockade to close an entrance/exit to give my soldiers time to move to a different location without worrying about pursuit (nests come to mind as a perfect example)

The armor will not protect people from multiple attacks though. Your best bet is to always position yourself in a way to prevent an enemy from firing on you at all.

---

My position on Squad Wipes are that they aren’t inherently an issue, and are mostly the result of poor choices, unclear mechanics, balance issues or any combination of the above. That being said, most of the balance issues seem to have been finer tuned (the artillery chiron nerf for example).

Does our soldier armor need to be buffed to compensate for any of this? I’ll argue that no I don’t think so, and that if it were changed, then the rest of the game would also need a complete rework as far as balance goes and we could easily find ourselves in a worse place than we perceive ourselves in now. While more variations and technical aspects to armor would certainly be appreciated and interesting, I’m not confident that it would necessarily add much (lets say “as much”, relative to other improvements/changes that could be made with the same time by the same team) to the game nor solve any perceived balance issues.

As long as we have a means of stripping enemy armor, killing the enemies on the same turn, and providing a lot of distractions for the enemies on their turn (there’s a lot of ways to do this), then we shouldn’t ever really find ourselves in a position where everyone’s dying unless it’s on one harder of hard missions in the game and you’re coming in under-prepared/under-equipped or just had really really really bad luck.

---

As I play the game on Legend, I find squad wipes in the early game to be only possible on the New Jericho or Anu starter missions if one were to make unfortunate errors and hadn’t yet mastered these missions. Honestly don’t know what happens if you try to continue after losing literally everyone…

I play with a strategy in mind throughout the entire game that focuses on growing my power exponentially in every direction. This means I try not to waste resources on anything that isn’t immediately useful. I focus on fielding as many teams as possible, and giving them all Scarabs to make missions easier for them. They all spread out, exploring, raiding, scavenging, defending, destroying and only converge for tough story missions, lairs, citadels. Losses within the first month are almost never had, only 2 or 3 this last time but by the end of this first month I’m at 4-5 aircraft, about 15 outfitted soldiers and 10 or so additional recruits in training. By this point, the “weeds” begin to show (the soldiers who aren’t entirely useful, and I deem expendable) but I’ve also grown to a state where I can begin throwing out new teams in just a few days, all doing their own separate missions (raids mostly now) and still gathering resources.

By the time I get to those harder missions in the game, I’ll have a lot of soldiers with a lot of SP and any soldiers who are lost can be easily replaced because I’ve already been preparing for that. I plan for this. A squad wipe at this point would suck, but it wouldn’t be the end of the game… it couldn’t be… The only complaint I have in this regard is… PREPARING FOR THIS TAKES FOREVER! HOLY MAN… the amount of missions I’m doing. New Xcom you’re doing a mission once every few days… Phoenix point I’m doing multiple missions an hour. I’m glad the haven defenses were scaled back, because it really opens up my ability to field more outfitted teams easier (more teams doing more raids = more resources than wasting all that stamina defending havens and taking out nests)… but due to the way resource gathering works, I’m still stuck doing many missions per hour and these ones are kinda worse. So I’m just saying there’s a strategy that compensates for squad wipes or soldier losses… but it in itself is also kind of problematic… but that my stance remains firm that I think soldier losses need to be a meaningful part of this game and need to happen, just not result in a lot of sunk time and costs.

(+) Something needs to be done about overall mission frequency and methods of resource income, and the relation between the two

[sectoid_br]

Nice points @Rainer, you describe a REALLY different, much better picture than what I can accomplish in the first month, even though I do think I’m playing fairly well myself.

The main difference is raiding. I do not do raids, research steal, sabotages, aircraft steals, etc. If you try playing like me, you’ll find a MUCH harder game, with MUCH less resources. It’s fine to play either way, but I don’t like doing those types of missions both because of role play and because I know the same that happens to you will happen to me: these mechanics are currently exploitable and thus you find yourself doing them over and over as to have this very powerful, worry-less, army. This in turn may make the game tedious and as I don’t have much time to play, this would make me drop the game entirely.

That said, regarding more recent patches, I’ve never had a squad-wipe situation on veteran. I do usually field 8 soldiers and no vehicles. It was certainly possible in earlier patches to be wiped out, and I found that the most difficult mission for me potentially was the 2nd NJ one (never did the 3rd). Once I had this mission with like, 3-4 sirens and 2-3 exploding chirons, plus hidden sniper tritons far away, plus HA arthrons all around… it simply wasn’t winnable even though I had some lvl7 soldiers already. This doesn’t happen anymore, so it’s ok now.

At the beginning I go for what makes me optimally more powerful in the game, faster. First needed things are 3 more aircraft (one manticore and 2 SYN ones), 16 soldiers total and enough bases with radars to move around the world, which is what I reach usually at the end of january or early february, but hugely depends on the RNG for faction diplomacy. Only after that I spend resources on other things like weapons, armor, etc, the only exception is the melee capture thingy. I find this optimal because in january you usually can make do with the equipment you have as the enemies are weaker.

There may be better options of course, but this is what I found as optimal atm with my playstyle. Missions have been relatively easy but I’ve not tried the LoA ones yet as everyone talks about their difficulty and I’m still mid-february and in a bad campaign regarding faction diplomacy.

[snovikov]

I don’t think that we play to win as soon as possible or as efficiently as possible. Why not play an extra month of game time to complete the LoA stuff?

[Saph]

Well, personally, the reason I don’t want to do that is because I’m not really enjoying the LotA stuff.

[Rainer]

@sectoid_br

these mechanics are currently exploitable and thus you find yourself doing them over and over as to have this very powerful, worry-less, army. This in turn may make the game tedious and as I don’t have much time to play, this would make me drop the game entirely.

You’re right about this. It’s one of my main gripes with this game. I both enjoy it (mostly because of my ability to overcome) and despise it (too much grinding of the same type of mission that has no tactical engagement involved).

I had it in my head who Phoenix Point and all the factions were supposed to be. Allegiances with some causing distrust with others, difficult choices needing to be made, forcing you early on to side with a faction follow their goals, or keep it cool and remain neutral. Dramatic events that shift the politics halfway through the game opening the table to brokering world peace and unification against the Pandoravirus, or a lack of leadership leading to a collapse of trust and diverging interests causing humanity to struggle and fight with one another for survival. Your choices matter!

… but it is what it is… the diplomacy of the game is a very basic meter that means nothing other than free research, access to exclusive research, and a bulk reward of resources with no restrictions or meaningful tie-ins to the story whatsoever except for supposedly a minor difference in the end along with non-existent morality… so I too pretend, and play like how I imagine it should be anyway… just wishing it was a bit different so I didn’t have to do a billion missions to compensate for any of my failings (though no longer particularly bothered by the fact that it’s raiding).

I tried the “friends with everyone approach” in my first few playthroughs of the game and I quickly noticed how many resources I could’ve been gaining and how much of an edge I could’ve given myself had I just raided more as well as how unnecessary it was to unlock EVERY tech, that having just two faction’s techs was sufficient enough. Since then, I started imagining ways to make raiding make sense story-wise, because playing the game without it really started to not.

@sectoid_br

…which is what I reach usually at the end of january or early february, but hugely depends on the RNG for faction diplomacy. Only after that I spend resources on other things like weapons, armor, etc, the only exception is the melee capture thingy. I find this optimal because in january you usually can make do with the equipment you have as the enemies are weaker.

Ha! That’s awesome. That’s actually how I did it too at first, because I too didn’t want to just raid other people’s resources without reason. Even in previous patches with the heavy Arthrons flooding the screen, multiple exploding Chirons, etc., I’d have three teams (even then I still relied heavily on Scarabs so each team had one) but only one of the teams had any armor, the others remained naked because I just couldn’t afford it while trying to keep up with fabs, labs, teams and bases, which is what eventually tempted me into raiding to begin with. The strategy though was totally doable, I know, and added its own interesting flair for the time and even sparked the thought of “What if naked soldiers didn’t mean 0 armor but instead something like 10 armor?” simply because how many weeks I’d be using naked soldiers against heavy armor and things that could instantly kill them.

But now, in that same time frame, I have 3-4x as many fully outfitted and trained soldiers and I begin reconsidering whether I even need a 5th, 6th, and 7th team and more bases? Nothing is stopping me from ruling the world by this point other than my own laziness. The game’s kind of always been this way, and it’s always what ends up making me ironically stop playing the game halfway through because the knowledge that I have 10000 raiding(and previously Haven defense) missions ahead of me to further my goals becomes a “Ahh… maybe I’ll just play this other game instead right now.” almost every time I sit at the computer. So I don’t know why I’m recommending this as a strategy… maybe I’m not.

I guess I’ll say that a lot of the game’s issues in difficulty can be resolved through currently existing mechanics, but the currently existing solution is a bit of a tedious one that also breaks the immersion for some and grossly changes the pace of the game in a broken and imbalanced manner similar to those terminator builds. I’d like to see this changed(improved), yes, and currently I use it in my own restricted way because I now enjoy my personal implementation of raiding into the story (only raid when base is not on high alert, just raid places every few days instead of exploiting, go to AT WAR with Anu if you ally with NJ, opposite for Anu, don’t drop below -49% if siding with Synedrion… stuff like that). I’m not sure I like the “farming” experience of this game’s resources compared to original xcom’s monthly income and believe that the original system actually prevented this issue. We’d make choices within strict and set limits… whereas now we’re either limiting ourselves and income is unpredictable, or not and income is infinite without self-restriction.

Only easy sounding solution I can think of is changing raiding so that it is unlocked through an alliance and not a method of farming resources early on in the game, and long cooldowns on the ability to raid a haven… and that being allies with a faction rewards an income from the faction that is based on your success of the weekly missions/haven defenses given by the faction (similar to old xcom and protecting countries and being provided with funds), weighted with their resource specializations. Early game, regardless of morality, I see this as resulting in no steady income nor raiding and no longer would I be spending 2 weeks raiding a faction to earn quick rep and create an ally while also earning a lot of resources to kickstart a snowball. But once you get into an alliance (usually around week 2-3), you’re both earning an income with that ally and able to raid the other factions. If you ally with everyone, you can’t raid, but earn a steady supply of materials/tech/food from all factions to offset that and are given enough faction missions instead to maintain that supply (relatively easy missions with easy primary objectives and harder side objectives that give immediate rewards to mimic the ease or difficulty of a quick raid vs. a full raid).

So simply put (but not exactly):

• peaceful = mostly quests, few to no raids, steady income
• dastardly = mostly raids, low to no income, few to no quests

Overall = less missions total, but relatively similar supply of resources as if you were constantly raiding like now, and a choice in how to approach generating an income. Less raid targets overall means less ability to farm resources meaning less grinding and less back-to-back of the same type of mission, regardless of play style.

Something like that, to keep a balance between play styles and bringing the peaceful resource flow more in line with the warmongerer flow while also making resources more of a predictable income and less of a farming experience. What do you think?

@sectoid_br

I’ve not tried the LoA ones yet as everyone talks about their difficulty and I’m still mid-february and in a bad campaign regarding faction diplomacy.

I think a lot of those complaints came before the nerf. I’d tried two the other day and they didn’t seem that difficult. I’d say if you bring at least 5 members, a vehicle, sniper, grenade launcher/acid, and some pdw’s/turrets/pistols, you’ll be fine. Just need to wear out that orichalcum armor (-90% dmg taken per attack, 3 stacks), 3 AP of pdw/pistol shots wear it out. Shred the armor so you can damage it with other attacks. Hide behind cover, and take your time either blowing apart their shields and killing them from the front, or shooting through the holes with snipers… the vehicle is useful for protecting a soldier in an emergency. Don’t expect “cover” to do anything, always hide from those sniper-lasers, but that being said they do have bad aim so you can easily get lucky. Flanking just results in activating more enemies, so it’s best to just hold a secured position.

[sectoid_br]

@Rainer

I started imagining ways to make raiding make sense story-wise, because playing the game without it really started to not

Why do you say so?

@Rainer

but only one of the teams had any armor, the others remained naked because I just couldn’t afford it while trying to keep up with fabs, labs, teams and bases, which is what eventually tempted me into raiding to begin with.

I guess this is intentional, designed to be like this. I think the game is made to be hard if you want to ally with everyone, and tempts you to wage war on at least one of the factions, if you want to be stronger… a bit like the dark side?
However, your experience shows that the mechanics for that need tweaking, both because they can be exploited (others have mentioned here and on canny some ideas for this) and because it makes the game a chore. In my opinion, attacking a faction should have way worse consequences and probably way better rewards, so that you don’t have to repeat it again and again if you choose to do it. The player would also learn that attacking later would be best than attacking earlier - this way you would get more tech, resources and/or vehicles - but how much would/could you hold in a much harder game? Maybe it would be better to persevere in an alliance? That’s what I imagine as being more fun - having more hard choices.

I’m pretty sure that Snapshot is not only aware but may also have multiple solutions for these problems - what they seem to be lacking is resources/time. That’s what I perceive from the community counsel member’s comments… I guess we just have to wait.

@Rainer

currently I use it in my own restricted way because I now enjoy my personal implementation of raiding into the story (only raid when base is not on high alert, just raid places every few days instead of exploiting, go to AT WAR with Anu if you ally with NJ, opposite for Anu, don’t drop below -49% if siding with Synedrion… stuff like that

That’s probably good feedback because when you develop something, you tend to find everything easy and obvious and to assume others will do the same as you do, and often that’s not the case. Every time we spell here how we play, may give great hints to the team as how they should transform the game to be great for us, the players. A great example is the recent comment from @VOLAND where he said that the dev’s idea was that squad wipes shouldn’t happen because of the evac mechanic - not only other problems were mentioned that prevent it being a valid option for normal players, but most players don’t even consider it. I’ve never evac’d from a mission due to losing myself… either I won and sucked up the losses, or I reloaded

@Rainer

We’d make choices within strict and set limits… whereas now we’re either limiting ourselves and income is unpredictable, or not and income is infinite without self-restriction.

I agree. I don’t know if the current mechanic can be tuned to really work, we’ll see.

@Rainer

What do you think?

I think it’s a pretty good idea, and similar to others seen here and on canny. What I like about yours is the balance between peaceful/dastardly, enabling both styles of play, and on ‘peaceful’ giving PX the role of world ambassador of sorts. Of course factions would still hate and go to war with each other, but you should’ve conversation options that enables you to stand your ground, not take sides. This would lead them to give you less resources, but you would get them from 2 or 3 factions. However if you play ‘dastardly’ and choose to side with only 1 or 2, doing raids for them on other factions, you should get more rewards from them, as well as quickly having a war with the attacked faction. So the main tweak I would make to the idea is:

• peaceful = mostly quests, few to no raids, low/medium steady income from any ally
• dastardly = mostly raids, medium/high steady income from your allies plus high rewards from raids, war from your enemies, also quests to get greater rewards now and then, like destroying all training centers from the enemy, removing them from a continent and such up to even extinguishing the enemy faction.
• public enemy n.1 = mostly raids with high rewards, no income, few to no quests, war with every faction

The beauty is that you need only one system for any play style.

One problem is that this would call for a new ‘peaceful’ ending.

@Rainer

and some pdw’s/turrets/pistols

I couldn’t ally with NJ yet, no way to make turrets or mounted weapons . I’ll be trying these missions as soon as I can do that, I just had a base defense that revealed 2 citadels, that’ll boost the rep nicely.

[VOLAND]

@kingius

if a mission occurs early in the campaign (or earlyish) the player will assume, even if the game tells them it will be difficult, that it can still be done. There’s a trust between the player and the devs, I suppose.

Yes, that is a problem. How do you think it should be handled? I mean, right now there is a panel warning that the ancient site missions will be difficult, but that’s clearly not enough. Would it work better as a deterrent if the language was stronger?

Or is the only way to gate it until such time as it can be estimated that the player will be ready? And when would that be?

[JonnyDoH]

Agree with all the points I liked, and in addition I’d like to add: If Orichaleum is such a great, light material to work with, and nigh invulnerable to damage, then why the heck aren’t we making -armor- with it? Why isn’t there a blueprint for a chest piece for heavies, so they can charge in and do melee? I mean, if there are two new melee weapons, wouldn’t there be an equal importance to armor up those types of fighters?

I understand that game balance is important here, but maybe make it so it’s just extra light so rookie soldiers might be able to wear them without having to invest in strength so much?

Or maybe have crystal imbued armor that does a small amount of damage to units in a radius around it-- not something you would want on anyone rescuing civilians, but might come in handy when you’re rushing in to melee a Chiron?

I don’t know. I feel like there are some opportunities wasted in the tech here.

[Rainer]

@sectoid_br

@Rainer

I started imagining ways to make raiding make sense story-wise, because playing the game without it really started to not

Why do you say so?

Just because it began to seem wrong having multiple teams fielded who had no equipment. Cheesing missions. It was fun for a little bit, but I began to want to see more action. So doing some thing to earn the materials/tech to outfit these soldiers instead ended up with the only answer being “Raid?”

Over time I found it more fun to play the game with equipped soldiers, than with naked soldiers. All teams can respond to anything, instead of me having to drag my “a team” halfway across the globe to do the next story mission. It both added tedium in one way while removing it in another. Now I’m fond of having at least 3 equipped teams by the end of the first month and anything less than that seems wrong.

@sectoid_br

tempts you to wage war on at least one of the factions, if you want to be stronger… a bit like the dark side?

Haha yea maybe! Never looked at it that way before… I’d say that’d be brilliant if it weren’t for the fact that all the factions dehumanized themselves for me by illogically complimenting within hours after their mortal enemy gave me a mission to wipe out one of their havens, appreciating our alliance, and then attacking me, lol. These bits and bytes deserve to get raided.

@sectoid_br

So the main tweak

peaceful = mostly quests, few to no raids, low/medium steady income from any ally
dastardly = mostly raids, medium/high steady income from your allies plus high rewards from raids, war from your enemies, also quests to get greater rewards now and then, like destroying all training centers from the enemy, removing them from a continent and such up to even extinguishing the enemy faction.
public enemy n.1 = mostly raids with high rewards, no income, few to no quests, war with every faction

That’s funny… because my list was originally longer like that with about a dozen different endings and play styles, but I shortened it just for simplicity to 3 like you listed, and then shortened it to 2 because I realized “At War” with everyone would mean “no recruits” and would require additional game changes.

[Rainer]

@VOLAND

Or is the only way to gate it until such time as it can be estimated that the player will be ready? And when would that be?

The warning isn’t clear when it’s just text. So many text warnings say “Extreme” and the mission turns out to be relatively easy compared to what we were expecting, so it’s that threat severity warning (for me at least) goes 100% ignored, because I find it unreliable and misleading.

My favorite solution to convey information to players in video games is through demonstration. Imagine a mission where you find the ancients for the first time fighting another enemy. Perhaps one hoplite vs. some raiders. You can see what the Hoplite can do to a human target before they ever target you. You still have a mission requiring you to kill raiders after they manage to take it down, but you get a glimpse of what you’re going to be up against before actually finding yourself overwhelmed by something new. If there were scripted in-mission events that could happen, I’d suggest starting the mission on the enemies turn so that it begins with the hoplite attacking them so that you’re guaranteed to see what it is capable of.

[MadSkunky]

This is a nice idea
It could maybe a mission right after the first LotA mission (the rescue of the doctor from NJ), something like getting data to start the initial research, but the place was occupied by raiders or even some NJ soldiers fighting some Hoplits. Probably even a wounded Cyclops?

[sectoid_br]

@Rainer

Now I’m fond of having at least 3 equipped teams by the end of the first month and anything less than that seems wrong.

This to me seems really rushed. Some time ago I created a ticket on canny to slow down the game’s advance. To me having a new equipped team in about 1-2 game months time would be nicer, more slowly paced, leaving you time to think about what you want to do. Ideally I wanted to have the original x-com experience that you could just fly off to explore anywhere and happen to find the enemies doing their stuff on their own, not necessarily against you the player. Maybe like finding a pandoran expedition before they reach a haven to attack it, and being able to destroy them before that. I hope this gets into festering skies.

@Rainer

because I realized “At War” with everyone would mean “no recruits” and would require additional game changes.

You would be able to recruit soldiers 2 ways:

1. Before you have negative rep with a faction
2. Directly from your base for food

The only problem is that recruits from the base are time-gated.

[omenomaho]

You have to be able to beat the game in order experience the contents of the DLC. It’s like some addendum for end game.

I don’t like it either.

[VOLAND]

That would be nice, but scripted missions are not a thing in PX… The closest thing we have is the Tutorial, and it’s a total disaster: it teaches all the wrong things, lol.

At some point there was talk of making a “gym” where the player could experiment with different enemies and tactics without any consequences (it’s one of the 10 suggestions from Snapshot on Canny).

I don’t know it this is still on or not, but if it is, how about if once you excavate one of those sites, you got a prompt to meet these automata in the “gym” before going there for real?

[MadSkunky]

@VOLAND

That would be nice, but scripted missions are not a thing in PX… The closest thing we have is the Tutorial, and it’s a total disaster: it teaches all the wrong things, lol.

I think it doesn’t have to be scripted, position the ancients behind or close to the bandits or NJ soldiers should do it. The mission to get the Synedrion bionics with Synderion defenders and Pure works almost this way and I think this is not a bad example how to go.
Map design and positioning, that’s IMO all to get there.

Edit (I should read the whole post before writing ):

@VOLAND

At some point there was talk of making a “gym” where the player could experiment with different enemies and tactics without any consequences (it’s one of the 10 suggestions from Snapshot on Canny).

I don’t know it this is still on or not, but if it is, how about if once you excavate one of those sites, you got a prompt to meet these automata in the “gym” before going there for real?

If this is in the game, then it would be probably the best solution.

[VOLAND]

@MadSkunky

The mission to get the Synedrion bionics with Synderion defenders and Pure works almost this way and I think this is not a bad example how to go.

I have very mixed feelings about that mission because of the very poor AI…

I mean, three, or even four way battles is something that should definitely be a thing in PX, but I feel nausea just imagining what mess the AI would make of things.

[MadSkunky]

@VOLAND

I have very mixed feelings about that mission because of the very poor AI…

I mean, three, or even four way battles is something that should definitely be a thing in PX, but I feel nausea just imagining what mess the AI would make of things.

Yes, the AI is poor, but this mission has only one thing to do: Show the player the strength of the ancient Hoplits and maybe also the Cyclops. For this it only needs to have 3-5 human soldiers against 3-4 Hoplits or 2-3 Hoplits and a wounded Cyclops.
The human soldiers should be so weak so that they definitely will lose this if we not help them. Maybe we can take control of them like in heaven defences. This way we have more firepower and also some toys to feed the Hoplits and/or Cyclops … eeehhh … I mean distract and finally kill them .

Edit, an example for the Story:

Immediately after rescuing the doctor, she told us about an NJ expedition to clear a place with very important information for her research on the ancients. But this expedition is not going well, the soldiers reported that they could not collect the information because “unknown and heavily armed enemies” are protecting them. Tobias West is unwilling to send more of his few soldiers and urged the team to “find a way to get what we want”. So this team is still there, alone with their problems, and this is the chance for PP to “help” them.

Another Edit:
This way the mission can started in a form of stalled confrontation. The NJ soldiers are somewhat wounded but out of range of the ancients and these are also not engaging as long you don’t pass a certain distance to them (no AI issues). Then you can take control of these soldiers and get additionally firepower to take the ancients down.

[sectoid_br]

I like the gym idea as an ongoing tutorial of sorts, but I would like scripted story events much better. PP’s story could be more fleshed out, although I also don’t see that coming.

[kingius]

@VOLAND

Yes, that is a problem. How do you think it should be handled? I mean, right now there is a panel warning that the ancient site missions will be difficult, but that’s clearly not enough. Would it work better as a deterrent if the language was stronger?

I’d suggest moving the content to mid game… and keeping as is. I know some players will complain their new DLC has no effect on the early game, but the content cannot be tackled effectively by a team in the early game anyway. However there is precedent for the approach taken by Snapshot here (in Firaxis Xcom 2) and so Snapshot may feel it’s just fine the way it is. The player learns the hard way not to try taking the ancients on until they field a very experienced and well equipped team, as things stand.

[Rainer]

@Rainer

I merely intend to craft the sniper rifle and crossbow and probably leave it at that for my ONE hero I care about and then leave the ancient sites to the factions. Maybe I’ll do more depending on how cumbersome it is/how much time I have left, and the level of cumbersomeness will determine how many I end up making I think while continuing to progress the game alongside these added goals.

Revisiting this after giving it some more time in game on Legend difficulty. Originally the was posted at around the end of January in game. Now that I’m in the 4th week of February, I have new feedback:

1. I’ve since done about 7 excavation sites (one of each manufacture and one of each gather, +1 extra gas), each of them were relatively the same with the type of site dictating the type of special aura the guardian gives. This aura was negligible as the guardian was always the first enemy to die when the other enemies were present (easiest and most threatening target makes it a simple choice), rendering every mission relatively the same other than the layout of the map.
2. I’ve held on to these sites nearly the entire time (lost 1 when no defenses were present, immediately without warning to pandorans, and have since taken it back). With 10 teams spanning the globe, I can easily keep 6 of them sitting on these sites to defend them now.
3. I built 3 Archaeology labs before I knew what they did. I noticed my resource gain being 3 per tick, and at first I thought this was just the normal amount. After a month of gathering, I have hundreds of resources and my first thought was “Hm… maybe on Legend they should reduce this amount to 1 per tick or something because I can outfit entire teams with the Ancient Weapons”. Ancient weapons don’t require ammo, are relatively cheaper than every other weapon in the game, and are anywhere between something like 20-60% stronger than their counterparts.

Here you can see me making Imhullu Grenade’s just because I’ve ran out of things to manufacture really (even though another manticore was in the works here too) and I didn’t have any (even though I doubt I’ll use them because they don’t seem very good). But about 30+ of those soldiers are fully geared, and almost all are level7 with various amounts of SP distributed in them. About 4 “Super Soldiers”, spread out leading some of the teams. Full on vehicles, 7 bases with 1 of them abandoned in disrepair. All of the world protected other than South America which has been completely lost (and I don’t bother protecting Anu).

Edit 2: Also I left the Bionic Fortress alive (because it sounded like it needed to be for the Pure to continue to exist) after finishing the mission… I’d rather keep them in the game because they’re such an easy opponent and I figure more resources + SP that differ from raiding is welcome, even if rare.

Feedback:
Almost all of this I like other than these LoA weapons and the fact that Raiding is the only real steady and reliable source of income and I need way more resources than Scavenging Sites and defenses can offer, so raiding is necessary. With the amount of raids I do, I manage to still acquire a fair amount of SP even on Legend, so I’m still able to make a few overpowered soldiers and prepare them for the final mission while still having multiple teams defend the globe, and I like this (the 5SP per mission is really good).

Edit: You may be able to see how this creates an odd conflict, of too many easy 1-2 turn missions that result in no gunplay which get tiring (but are fun to do on their own just as well. I just don’t know if I really want to do that many of them… and maybe I don’t need to, but I can, and it makes everything easier and it’s a bit fun to do all of this, so I do. I could even exploit and make it infinitely easier with the only downside being time consumed, but that’s another thing and seems unnecessary.) But on the other hand, despite being a bit tiring, I find these easy missions are able to create the SP pool to forge the fun team of super soldiers for the end game (not that you really need that probably, I still have yet to see) while still being able to lead multiple teams around the globe throughout the game. I’ve suffered 5 casualties, and did 5 or so reloads on errors I made + tested a weak team vs. an Extreme Haven defense and got obliterated. Must have done somewhere around 100 missions in this play through so far, with probably around half or more being raids.

What I don’t like about these LoA weapons are that they’re too powerful and too easy to acquire for how powerful they are. I can sit on a resource site for a few hours and be able to build a Rebuke, a god-tier grenade launcher with infinite ammo. Infinite ammo = less weight required, no reloading, etc = less SP to make powerful. Raiding for materials takes about 1-2 turns, it’s easy, and can be done with lvl1 rookies even late-game against Anu, whereas Tech is a lot more tricky and things can go sideways pretty easily. I find that these new weapons outshine the old ones in too many ways.

• Easier to acquire tech-wise (Actually unlocked and built the Ancient Sniper rifle before the Virophage unlocked, and it’s pretty comparable)
• Inherently more powerful (straight-up much better stats)
• Cheaper to build once the flow is unlocked (tech costs + raids vs. steady free flow of special resources)
• Easier to equip and utilize (less strength needed, “free reloads (there are none)”)

All of this I’d consider fine if I had only 1 of each (Maybe if there were an extra-special and rare resource, only a few exist. A keystone for building the weapon). But with the ability to produce as many as I want I find that it just takes more away from the game then it’s adding, in my opinion. Once again I find myself restricting the usage of these weapons, but otherwise finding much of the content still a pleasant addition.

I have not found the sites to be attacked too frequently (once in a month, which translates to about 1/30 missions or more for me. I’ve had Phoenix bases attacked more frequently), nor for them to be too difficult (though a bit on the boring-side as far as AI behavior goes). The rest of my feedback stands.