Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[10ebbor10]

Sure.

[Failbird105]

Yeah I'd be up for doing that in that case.

[Kashyyk]

That sounds good to me.

How would people feel about either another shot at Mutons, or some sort of Terror mission as a revision?

[piratejoe]

Me!...say, didn't I have a military base terror mission I made a while ago? Actually, just checked, no I didn't....huh. I did make a air terror mission though.

[Kashyyk]

I had a thought on how to "solve" the schrodinger's revision.

Currently we're sometimes one revision behind, so if we get given one revision before the mission phase, and then apply all subsequent revisions to future missions only, we'll be back on an even keel.

This way we'll effectively be revising then designing before each mission, whereas xcom will be designing then revising.

[NUKE9.13]

But the whole point of our revisions happening after we launch missions is so that the turn goes like this:

Ethereals: Design -> Launch Missions -> Revise -> Battle
XCOM: Design -> Revise -> Respond to Missions -> Battle

XCOM can't respond to our missions before they are launched, hence there needs to be one phase before we launch missions and two before they respond.

[Kashyyk]

I understand that, but because of this we're potentially one revision behind XCom each battle (if the results of the revision cannot be retconned).

If we get a one-off revision at some point (say at the same time as the standard revision), we'll then have had the same net total of Design/Revision actions before launching missions as XCom has had before responding. We then don't need to bother with retconning anything, nor altering our revision proposals to ensure we don't get bitten by it.

[sprinkled chariot]

Actually, there are things we can spend the captive on, now that I think about it. If Recruit Collaborators was not already nigh-perfect (it rolled a 7), we could use EXALT's experience with running underground movements to improve it. When we design an outpost-establishing mission, EXALT knowledge could help us ensure they can remain undetected. Would these be valid uses of the captive, ebbor?

As for our plan this turn- assuming we roll well enough on the decoys, I'm guessing they would cost 0.5VP (if they cost 1VP, they would obviously be useless). In that case, we could do a thing where we launch 4 real (small scout) missions, and 4 decoy missions, with all 8 masquerading as Medium Scouts. Obviously XCOM will realise that something is up, but what can they do?
I suggest we avoid Europe, and send two missions to each other continent- one real, one fake. I think we have enough UP/DNA right now, so it would be a good time to do some recruiting. We can afford to send one unit of Skincrawlers on each real mission (8-3=5UP), each equipped with Plasma Rifles (spending our month end point on EP), and two with backup Sectoids (2-1=1UP)

Thoughts?

 no lone  small scout missions plox, just one loss of small scout and they have this flying rapetrain with 15 missiles . We had enough fuck ups with unsupported  small scouts.

[NUKE9.13]

Where are you getting 15 missiles from? Anyway, the Talon's not that bad. A medium fighter with two missiles managed to hold off two of them for a while, and there's no way in hell those things cost less than 2VP. So, yeah, they're bad, but not the end of the world.

Still, you may have a point that losing too many missions could be bad. We could remove the Plasma Rifles from one of the missions, and give them all Elder's Scorn. That way, no intact ships fall into enemy hands- and the downside of the slightest damage being enough to end them isn't so bad, since a single scout would probably go down no matter what.

[10ebbor10]

The Talon is actually quite bad. It has 18 missiles, 2 railguns, and the only reason that 2/3 of your ships escaped without loot losses is a mechanical fluke of the system (specifically one of the rules intended to ensure that you can't just monofocus air to win everything).

[TopHat]

@Ebbor: Quick question - under contact mission success it says we gain 1 EP as a reward. Is this in addition to the Exalt token listed under loot at the end of the mission (giving us 1 EP, 1 EXALT, and 1 Month End token total for this turn)?

Regarding the Talon: It almost certainly costs 2 VP and at present two of our missiles (1 EP) could probably destroy one or at least prevent it from posing a significant threat. They'll probably develop an anti-missile-missile pod or something as quickly as possible, but it's too expensive to send after single small scouts.
Regarding the decoy drones: They're a good idea but my one worry is that they may have already developed a way of getting past that function of the ECM, or be able to do so with little difficulty - in which case it will probably be effective for a single turn at best (though that one turn might be worth it). Something providing a permanent benefit such as improved armour technology (first for craft and later infantry), lesser mutons (I think they'll still be too difficult to fix in a revision) or a new mission (e.g. the one shortly to be edited in below) might be better.
EXALT Captive: I recall the EXALT operatives we encountered in Japan were immune to the effects of our mind merge. Looking into how that was achieved (a revision?) could be a good use for it. That or psionic training for humans, given our plans to expand the infiltration and Tamsim's niece being a potential asset.
Regarding this turn's mission plan: If we go for decoys the one outlined by NUKE (with Elder's Scorn) sounds good. Otherwise I have a half-formed idea to chuck on the table.

Spoiler: Assault Mission (click to show/hide)

 

There are certain facilities which provide invaluable support to the Earthlings' resistance - such as military headquarters, centres of government, research facilities and - last but not least - the bases of X-Com and EXALT. Their destruction will render our subjugation of this planet far easier.

This mission consists of two parts. Firstly, infiltrators and any appropriate collaborators work to choose and locate suitable targets as well as gain any information about them which might help the assault.
Secondly, combat troops will make a landing nearby. They are to storm the facility with fire support from our UFOs, dealing with any local security swiftly before causing as much damage to the facility as possible; where appropriate high-ranking and non-combatant personnel, a long with any items of research or intelligence interest, are to be captured. If X-Com show up before the destruction is complete they are to be driven off if possible, or otherwise held off long enough for our forces to escape.

[Shadowclaw777]

The Talon is actually quite bad. It has 18 missiles, 2 railguns, and the only reason that 2/3 of your ships escaped without loot losses is a mechanical fluke of the system (specifically one of the rules intended to ensure that you can't just monofocus air to win everything).

Well first, the rule system seems very much in flux. Because only now we are hearing of this system that focusing solely on monoair means that the Aliens are going to be punished, and it really seems like this was a last-ditch change as we never heard of this feedback until now. There should at least be some heads up before we hear of rule changes so that we can prepare for them.

Also a ship with 18 missiles feels a little bit on the absurd to me, even for advanced aircraft that Xcom can deploy. Being a extensive Xenonaut and avionics nerd myself, and when we compare a normal post-information era jet fighter such as the F-22 Raptor which can hold 6 missiles, and commonly two for previous cold war fighters. That amount of reserves missile must come at agility penalty, especially due to its increased armor compared to the previous crafts. Which I feel it doesn’t, which is trying to compensate with the “it utilizes Alien tech” tokens and so it got to be extremely effective in the efficacy department. I mean 18 missile hardpoints would mean that the aircraft has really extended wings and just have the appearance of a bulky and obtuse shape in its design, case in point. I just guess they got a 8 on their design and used three tokens

Conclusively I have a better idea than decoy drones. Things like decoy drones attack the fundamentals of the game, and like the Elder’s Scorn their going to be some sort of penalty in their deployment, that I can’t fathom actually going for it, because they attack a fundamental of the game, which means that it’s going to have sort of penalty because it isn’t a straight upgrade. Xcom also has two bases, one in Aegean Sea and one elsewhere. Why don’t we have two bases? We should probably develop some underwater base or UFO vehicle construction base out in the Asteroid belts and get more points. Mainly in the vehicle area

I mean in all reality, it just seems Xcom always has a advantage over us and it seems in most combat engagements that they have a decisive lead over us, why isn’t Exalt making any attacks against Xcom and just us, I understand we have the technology they desire but also exalt at least in base game hated Xcom for trying to defeat the aliens or something, so they did technology stealing, sublime propaganda, and even credit stealing?, and just because we have access to better starting technology and get
to direct our deployment of units, it really seems it doesn’t compensate for this. Just my thoughts.

Edit: Also the creation of a new base which will provide us with new points, can’t be countered and helps with the long-term. The decoy drones can be countered. But indeed the bases are created with a difficulty penalty in mind with this, but we should still go for this

[TopHat]

In fairness I do remember Ebbor saying at one point that neither ground nor air could be ignored, using as an example the UFO which was shot down and later repaired due to a lack of ground response. And the effects of this system have swung both ways now.

EDIT - We also have no idea how many bases X-Com have (they could easily have just the one) or what their interactions with EXALT have been like.

EDIT 2 - Expanding our current base may be a better option in the short term given the large initial investment of setting up new ones.

[10ebbor10]

@Ebbor: Quick question - under contact mission success it says we gain 1 EP as a reward. Is this in addition to the Exalt token listed under loot at the end of the mission (giving us 1 EP, 1 EXALT, and 1 Month End token total for this turn)?

In addition.

Well first, the rule system seems very much in flux. Because only now we are hearing of this system that focusing solely on monoair means that the Aliens are going to be punished, and it really seems like this was a last-ditch change as we never heard of this feedback until now. There should at least be some heads up before we hear of rule changes so that we can prepare for them.

The lack of reading comprehension here is spectacular. I have no idea how you went from "a known flaw in the rules prevented XCOM from wiping your attack" to "GM malicously changes rule to punish you for focusing on the air".

In fairness I do remember Ebbor saying at one point that neither ground nor air could be ignored, using as an example the UFO which was shot down and later repaired due to a lack of ground response. And the effects of this system have swung both ways now.

It's part of the same mechanic.

But really, I found the fluff of "your UFO's got shot down, then repaired because the enemy ground forces are all dead" to be too silly, so I fluffed it up differently.

[Shadowclaw777]

Okay heesh, I made some aggressive sounding comments, and they were of the unsavory kind, I’ll admit that. But in truth be told, some areas we were very much in confusion for our side. In essence it feels that Xcom gets way more tokens from destroyed and captured UFOs, since they always have aerial superiority over us, and it seems we get absolutely demolished whenever we perform the “three” UFOs into three distant countries, than solo-focusing in a single country. But feel isn’t actual to what the stats say, so I guess I just got overly-tilted by their new interceptor

Anyways here’s a report of both side’s successes

Report on Combat Success on Our Side

Spoiler: All Combats Report (click to show/hide)

T1:
Mission 1: Intercepted, UFO Repairs Itself
Mission 2: UFO Destroyed; Xcom (Presumably) Gets Tokens WRONG, it was blown from orbit
Mission 3: Operation Successful
Ethereals Get Tokens

T2:
Mission 1: UFO Crashed, Xcom (Presumably) Gets Tokens
Mission 2: Operation Successful, No Counterattack from Xcom. Ethereal’s Get Tokens

T3:
Mission 1: Pyrrhic Victory, Ethereal’s Get Tokens

T4:
Mission 4: Close Defeat, Xcom (Presumably) Gets Tokens

T5:
Mission 1: Pyrrhic Victory, Ethereal Gets Token
Mission 2: Defeat, Xcom (Presumably) Gets Tokens
Mission 3: Defeat, Xcom (Presumably) Gets Tokens
Mission 4: Exalt Captures UFO
Mission 5: Defeat, Xcom (Presumably) Gets Tokens

T6:
Mission 1: Partial Success, Ethereal (Presumably) Gets Tokens

T7
Mission 1: Success? But Routed, Ethereals Get Tokens

Times Ethereals Gotten Tokens 6x
Times (Presumably) Xcom Gotten Tokens x6

Okay after a fine statistics check apparently it seems very much contested between each other, fine I’ll give props to the GM for making a really 50/50 battle here, it really seems like no side has the advantage here.