Print

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

[Happerry]

Allright, so you arent also looking at XCOM 2 then, where lasers dont exist.

...Er, besides the part of my post where I outright said that magnetic weapons have also been tier 2 weapons in both generations of games? You know, in Terror from the Deep and also XCOM 2? What part of that is not looking at XCOM 2?

Out of curiosity, where have I said that Lasers arent viable weapons? That they are crap at range in atmosphere, yes. That you cant use them as weapons at all, no. My main objection to lasers are effective range(making them less useful for aircraft, which should probally be our first focus for getting upgunned, and shown to be something to consider by the effect of enemy plasma weaponry with atmospheric effects(i.e. subpar)) and the fact that by their nature they are a one-trick pony, unless you have fun and make electrolasers.

Well, besides the part where you just said they're crap in atmosphere again? You've never said they're useless or unusable, that's 100% true. But you're still treating them like they're inherently worse then magnetic guns when they're both the same tier of weapon in both generations of games. These aren't 'real world' lasers any more then any railguns or coilguns or gauss guns we'd be making are real work magnetic weapons, and going 'oh the atmosphere will keep lasers from being effective at range' is just as accurate, or should I say inaccurate, as claims that we can't make handheld magnetic guns because of the lack of infantry carriable power sources and that the rails would wear out in just a shot or two. In setting, they're just as viable an option.

Since it got muddled, let me be frank. I dont think you are of the view that electromagnetically propelled projectiles(be they slugs, plasma, or horseshit) are useless. I do think you are overvaluing lasers compared to the potential utility of electromagnetically propelled projectiles, and total possible power of the relative systems. I am also under the impression, perhaps incorrectly, that you place overmuch faith in what works based on the games, hence my comments pointing out that by current examples, the games are mostly simply background to this. I am also of the view that your "we did X last time so lets not now" is daft, since this is the third XCOM arms race. Granted, the first one was Forenia meets X:COM, but still.

My 'faith on what works' is based on the games, because this is a game that is based on the games. Yes the games are background, but that's like saying that world war 2 is just background for a world war 2 arms race and people shouldn't place too much faith in what worked in world war 2 because of that. It's an utterly useless statement. I mean, we literally got told, right from the start, that "You can design pretty a lot of things, provided they're thematically consistent with the XCOM universe. Magic is right out, for example. Psionics, on the other hand, are a respected scientific field of inquiry."

That's directly copy pasted from the core thread.

You're treating this like this is a 'Real World + Next Gen Sci-Fi' arms race, not an XCOM arms race, or at least that's what it feels like when I read your posts. And it's not one of those. Yes, I'm treating 'what works in xcom' as a guide, just like I'd treat 'what works in star wars' as a guide for a star wars arms race.

And both generations of XCOM games, the new generation and the old generation, have placed both Lasers and Magnetic weapons in the same 'tier 2' zone of effectiveness. Now, whether we should do Lasers or Magnetics is a matter of personal opinion. You like railguns for your own reasons, and that's fine, and I want to do lasers for my own reasons, which is also fine. My point is not that wanting one is un-fine, because that's not true, but that both are an equally valid and equally effective choice, as of course the dice gods allow it because rolling a 1 for anything is going to screw it over.

Anyways, votes.

On an entirely separate subject, shouldn't we be spending an alloy token on the armor if we're going to make armor?

[Aseaheru]

 Working back to front, then...
 Well, since it(The armor) isint using alloy in the design its not using our alloy, mostly because I wasent aware we had alloy, else it might be using it in the design.

 If I was treating this game as a "next gen plus" then I would be suggesting telescoped ammunition or possibly gassious propellant designs, not a line of tech leading to handheld coilguns. Yes, I am aware that Xcom stuff exists. We have sectoids, plasma to contend with(which the armor is intended to handle with its carbon-based aerogel, for example), and all that happy horseshit. Just because there was a coilgun design knocking about during WW2, for example, doesent mean that then I would suggest it as a man-portable system in a WW2 arms race. Yes, lasers and magnetically propelled kinetic kill weapons are the same tier in many XCOM games. They still have their own pluses and minuses.
 Also, I really, really hope you arent lumping plasma in with the rest of the electromagnetic acceleration weaponry, since thats what flavor of plasma weaponry XCOM uses. AKA, please be specific, because every time I see you talk about magnetic weapons to only include kinetic kill projectile rail/coil weapons I start itching, and that does not help with the semi-rational debate we seem to be locked in for some strange reason.

 Lasers in XCOM are stated to be comparatively short range. Just look at the laser based interceptor weapon for proof of that. For ground combat in XCOM, that aint an issue. Here, where extended ranges are not only possible, but probable if we do things right, its much more of a concern. And for utility, they are flat out worse than any form of electromagnetic weapons. You cant lob explosives effectively with a laser short of pulling a laser-energized-rocket system outta spaces.

 As for why I state you arent looking at Xcom 2, because you arent mentioning the fact that lasers dont exist there. Perhaps because of the increased focus on potential ammunition choices, since if they where to have those and lasers you would get screaming about why lasers work with, for example, shredder ammo.

On non-exausting psudo-debate frontage, the naming of our equipment section "starting tech" continues to confuse me. Also, the alien alloy is now stated to be used in the designs, since I have been informed we have some.

 

[Chiefwaffles]

X-COM UFO Defense, lasers were the T2 weapon. In fact, an insanely useful weapon. Disregarding the bit where heavy laser weapons manufacturing was extremely profitable, laser weapons in UFO Defense required no ammo making them still viable even after you get plasma stuff. And enemies like the very dangerous Sectopod are vulnerable specifically to lasers.
In XCOM:EU, lasers are the T2 weapon. They're also a viable interceptor weapon as well. Granted, the Interceptor laser cannon explicitly has a short range drawback, but even with that drawback in 100% consideration when the laser cannon is mounted on a simple Interceptor with no upgrades, it easily outperforms past weapons.
In XCOM2, magnetic weapons are the T2 gun.

So based on XCOM games, generally laser weapons are pretty much the same as railguns and the like. Of course, their exact advantages and niches and whatnot will be varied. After all, what's the point of a forum game if the GM can't get creative/use fiat. But based on all the available information, using lasers won't handicap us in any field.

Regardless. I thought about it, and we don't really need better weapons. Air scales can be tipped with a revision, and we're already overkilling on ground. Though a revision or something along those lines to help

Design: "Gladiator" Superheavy Mechanized Augmented Cyborg
Alloy token; UFO Power Core token; Doctrine token; Meld token
MELD is quite fun to play around with. Cybernetic nanomachines that connect pretty much anything no matter how much they (used to) hate each other. Amazing! And they just gave it to us!

As it turns out, one surprisingly easy use of it is cybernetics. Both for I/O and for implants that don't insult the body's parents and get rejected. So we took the step that any group presented with easy cybernetics would naturally take: large robotic exoskeletal combat suits. SMACs for short. Sure, our operatives maaay have to get every limb amputated for cybernetic versions but hey, progress.

The Gladiator SMAC is a fairly large... "suit of armor". Powered using technology derived from the alien UFO power cores, it's capable of tremendous feats. While the bulk of it is made out of (still very strong) conventional metals, we've employed an alien alloy internal skeleton, and armor plating. Extremely durable, yet not extremely heavy; and the Alloy skeleton cuts down on requirements for other conventional metals. It may be a big target but have fun knocking it down. SMAC Operatives remove their bionic limbs and situate themselves into the suit, where they gain control of the mechanized limbs and all its fancy features. And no, their head is not sticking out. It is fully inside the armor. We don't know why people were suggesting that.
TACTICAL is, of course, integrated into the whole SMAC. And for bonus points since the limbs are mechanical, TACTICAL gets to take on a more active role in aim assist. From slightly adjusting aim to aim assist to autonomous shooting. The operator chooses what level when.
A mode also exists to show only TACTICAL data along with some basic wireframes for obstacles/cover, rather than a full visual feed. In case the pancake aliens' cognitohazards can propagate through visual feeds.

Its weapon is pretty much the same overkill 20mm cannon used by the Guardian. Well, no, its main weapon. The other arm hosts an extending alien alloy blade to shiv engage in melee combat with enemy combatants. The extremely strong blade, skeleton, and power behind the skeleton, should lead to devastating damage. Against the judgement of saner minds, our soldiers will be excited to know this blade can be launched outwards at blistering speeds. And, if intact after impact, retrieved.

SMAC Pilots can hop out in the field. While their bionics aren't immensely strong and don't give them superhuman abilities or anything, they can be folded to enter the SMAC and unfolded to leave it. Allowing for engagement in tighter spaces. An unpiloted SMAC continues to operate within the TACTICAL network as a stationary weapons platform, able of turning itself and aiming/firing its weapon, but not of proper locomotion. Meaning that even when a SMAC is disembarked from, it continues to be a menacing asset.

Gladiators also are prepared for stowing of (on their exterior) mission-relevant items for immediate use in the field. From medical supplies, to pretty much anything an engineer would want (no more lugging around guardian turrets and drones and more!) and, well, anything. Deployable items can be ejected from wherever they're held to be deployed without requirement for manual deployment. For instance, a stowed Guardian turret could be ejected off the back of a SMAC and deploy on the ground behind it.

Importantly, SMAC operators are trained specifically for this. Regular combat is of course included (and it's not completely exclusive to SMAC combat) for disembarking, but we aren't just throwing existing soldiers into these exosuits. They'll be properly trained to exploit their suit to the fullest of its potential. Also trained not to brag about it to the rookies. (This part skipped if no Doctrinal token)


Overall. A Gladiator SMAC is equipped with a 20mm autocannon and a retractable alien alloy blade, each one a vaguely human-like arm. TACTICAL integration allows for autonomous firing and/or aim assist, and operators can disembark to fight on foot (using foldable bionics) while the Gladiator stays in place using its cannon. Lots of potential for storage, including easy ejecting for deployable items to cancel out manual requirements. UFO Power Core-based tech gives it enough power for immense strength and can launch the alloy blade forward at extreme speeds (to be retrieved if intact). Alien alloys have been integrated as exterior armor plating and as a skeleton for maximum strength (and skeleton should mean less conventional metals needed to maintain integrity). Soldiers are properly trained for it all, and MELD is of course used to allow humans to pilot these suits in the first place. No part of an operator's body is exposed to the outside, and the suit's visual+TACTICAL feed can be replaced with a basic wireframe/TACTICAL info feed in case of cognitohazards. Lots o' TACTICAL sensors and whatnot.

A devastating and, importantly, versatile weapon.

DESIGNS
Project Nail(Coilgun) | () :
TACTIC-AL-LY 'Blind Man'(Armor) | (2): 0cra, AseaHeru
"Gladiator" SMAC (1): Chiefwaffles

BLACK MARKET VOTING(CHOOSE TWO OPTIONS)
Veteran Personnel | (1) : AseaHeru
Elerium | (2) : AseaHeru, Chiefwaffles
Advanced Weaponry | () :
Doctrinal Support | (1) : Chiefwaffles

Doctrinal support isn't essential but is preferred since it's a new unit/squad type. Alien Power Core token can be switched out for the Elerium token from the black market if needed; I figured the power core made more since as while very good at power generation, it's not huge and the token is used to make technology based off of it -- not just copying it and putting it into the schematics.

The SMAC should push our infantry advantage; better than that, it pushes it in a different way so the aliens will have a headache dealing with it all. Also gives us some useful experience in general power/alloy engineering areas.

[Happerry]

Working back to front, then...
 Well, since it(The armor) isint using alloy in the design its not using our alloy, mostly because I wasent aware we had alloy, else it might be using it in the design.

On non-exausting psudo-debate frontage, the naming of our equipment section "starting tech" continues to confuse me. Also, the alien alloy is now stated to be used in the designs, since I have been informed we have some.

I'm roughly 100% sure that you can't just say you're using a token in the design write up alone without also voting to use that token. 10ebbor10 we're supposed to put any tokens we're using this turn into the vote box so people can vote on if they're used or not, right?

If I was treating this game as a "next gen plus" then I would be suggesting telescoped ammunition or possibly gassious propellant designs, not a line of tech leading to handheld coilguns. Yes, I am aware that Xcom stuff exists. We have sectoids, plasma to contend with(which the armor is intended to handle with its carbon-based aerogel, for example), and all that happy horseshit. Just because there was a coilgun design knocking about during WW2, for example, doesent mean that then I would suggest it as a man-portable system in a WW2 arms race. Yes, lasers and magnetically propelled kinetic kill weapons are the same tier in many XCOM games. They still have their own pluses and minuses.

Then please don't try claiming that considering what works in XCOM is pointless in an XCOM based game.
 

Also, I really, really hope you arent lumping plasma in with the rest of the electromagnetic acceleration weaponry, since thats what flavor of plasma weaponry XCOM uses. AKA, please be specific, because every time I see you talk about magnetic weapons to only include kinetic kill projectile rail/coil weapons I start itching, and that does not help with the semi-rational debate we seem to be locked in for some strange reason.

Blame XCOM 2. They started calling it Mag-'Weapon' first while still having Plasma guns be a separate tier.

Lasers in XCOM are stated to be comparatively short range. Just look at the laser based interceptor weapon for proof of that. For ground combat in XCOM, that aint an issue. Here, where extended ranges are not only possible, but probable if we do things right, its much more of a concern. And for utility, they are flat out worse than any form of electromagnetic weapons. You cant lob explosives effectively with a laser short of pulling a laser-energized-rocket system outta spaces.

If we can look at comparative ranges and therefor bring game stats into things, then I feel like I need to point out that Laser Cannons are twice the range of normal cannons (10 km verses 21 km), and the only weapon that outranges human missiles are the alien missiles, because as scaled up Blaster Bombs that is what Fusion Balls are, and even so Fusion balls only have a 5 KM range advantage over the Avalanche. (Also, if we're bringing up game stats, I feel I need to point out that Plasma Cannons, which you said are also bad for long ranged combat, are super good long ranged weapons with a range of 52 km verses the Avalanche's 60 km and the 65 km range of the Fusion ball)

Incidentally, please provide evidence that lasers were ever claimed to be 'comparatively short range' in general, as far as I'm aware no statement to that effect have ever been made. The only laser weapon that says it is short ranged is the NewCom 1's Interceptor Laser, which is one weapon out of many many others which you seem to be ignoring. The relevant description of the OldCom Laser Rifle, from the Ufopedia, is "Good accuracy, long range, no ammo needed, burst fire; this gun has it all", which does not suggest your generalizing statements are based on fact, while the NewCom version of the Laser Rifle upgrades from 2-4 damage to 4-6 damage, while also upgrading from short range to medium range, also providing evidence against your beliefs.

You are also back to making the false claim that lasers are, to copy paste your own words 'flat out worse than any form of electromagnetic weapons'. Which also contradicts your own admission in the very same post that they're both the same tier of weapon.

As for why I state you arent looking at Xcom 2, because you arent mentioning the fact that lasers dont exist there. Perhaps because of the increased focus on potential ammunition choices, since if they where to have those and lasers you would get screaming about why lasers work with, for example, shredder ammo.

This is the kind of statement that makes me wonder if you are actually bothering to read my posts, given I directly mentioned XCOM 2's Gauss weapons from my very second post in this discussion, where I outright said that the 'magnetic' tier has been tier 2 in both generations of games. I am unsure how you managed to take 'right out saying they exist' as 'ignoring the entire game exists'.

Design: "Gladiator" Superheavy Mechanized Augmented Cyborg
Alloy token; UFO Power Core token; Doctrine token; Meld token

I like this design, but I still want 10Ebbor10's input on if we can just assign tokens like this or need to vote them in. I'll probably be voting for this though, we don't really have the equipment points to afford a new kind of armor anyway and as a troop type this should be an 'either' thing compared to normal infantry not an 'and' thing.

[Aseaheru]

Spoiler: The Ongoing Shitshow with AseaHeru and Happerry, spoilered for everyone elses sanity. (click to show/hide)

 First off, I do apologize for only just remembering the alloy cannon, I blame heat, being tired, and being generally irked. Perhaps its an artifact of the english language in text or my writing style specifically, but prior to this post I have not put really any measure of emotion into rebuttals past light pleasure at having what appeared at first to be a nice debate, and I know that I almost always come off as an antagonistic asshat._{I should probably put a warning to that effect in my signature...}

Then please don't try claiming that considering what works in XCOM is pointless in an XCOM based game.

I am not. You saying I am is the main reason why I am continuing this more or less pointless argument. Yes, it is an argument by this point, not a debate. Thank you for dragging it down to this level.
 

Blame XCOM 2. They started calling it Mag-'Weapon' first while still having Plasma guns be a separate tier.

And they refer specifically to electromagnetic kinetic kill weapons by that name. Not plasma weapons, which in XCOM are also electromagnetic-based weapons, and are, infact, sodding railguns. It turns out that I was fibbing above, THIS, right here, is what is getting my goat. Yes, I am a pedantic little shit, but for the sanity of the the other pedantic individuals here please be more specific. Also, the tier thing isint quite accurate, as noted by the Alloy Cannon again.

If we can look at comparative ranges and therefor bring game stats into things, then I feel like I need to point out that Laser Cannons are twice the range of normal cannons (10 km verses 21 km), and the only weapon that outranges human missiles are the alien missiles, because as scaled up Blaster Bombs that is what Fusion Balls are, and even so Fusion balls only have a 5 KM range advantage over the Avalanche. (Also, if we're bringing up game stats, I feel I need to point out that Plasma Cannons, which you said are also bad for long ranged combat, are super good long ranged weapons with a range of 52 km verses the Avalanche's 60 km and the 65 km range of the Fusion ball)

And the range of standard, gunpowder autocannon is relevant how? And yes, Plasma has fairly long range in air combat. It has also been shown to bring into account weather, i.e. clouds. With no kinetic-kill electromagnetically propelled aerial weapon system out there to compare it to, this is mostly an exercise in futility by both sides.

Incidentally, please provide evidence that lasers were ever claimed to be 'comparatively short range' in general, as far as I'm aware no statement to that effect have ever been made. The only laser weapon that says it is short ranged is the NewCom 1's Interceptor Laser, which is one weapon out of many many others which you seem to be ignoring. The relevant description of the OldCom Laser Rifle, from the Ufopedia, is "Good accuracy, long range, no ammo needed, burst fire; this gun has it all", which does not suggest your generalizing statements are based on fact, while the NewCom version of the Laser Rifle upgrades from 2-4 damage to 4-6 damage, while also upgrading from short range to medium range, also providing evidence against your beliefs.

We have been speaking primarily about lasers vs non-plasma railguns in aircraft, correct? Most of my statements about lasers having reduced range are primarily due to one factor: crap in the air. Something we know is modeled in this game(from the interceptor combat) and is most decidedly not in any of the X:COM, XCOM, or associated titles. Given that anyone on the other team could decide to wander over to wikipedia on lasers should we decide to use them as infantry arms and see that a smoke grenade would render them all but useless except as poorly designed clubs or at point blank range. So, are my statements based on fact? Yes. Are they based on fact in this game? Yes. Are they based on fact from prior games? No. Yes, we should look to prior games to inspiration, flavor and background, but we also need to look at the empirical evidence we have been given already in the limited lifespan of this game.

You are also back to making the false claim that lasers are, to copy paste your own words 'flat out worse than any form of electromagnetic weapons'. Which also contradicts your own admission in the very same post that they're both the same tier of weapon.

Kinetic-kill rounds can have variable payloads aswell as variable velocity when employed by electromagnetic systems. Lasers, can not. That is the primary reason for being worse, unless we want to get into esoteric and unnecessary stuff like backscatter being prone to make users go blind eventually, which is not only irrelevant but besides the point. With a coil gun or a rail gun, we can do anything from fire grenades to fire drones to fire sabots, beanbags, tazer shells, or whatever else you can think of. Which should be beside the point, since this started from a discussion on what to stick into aircraft, but ahwell.

This is the kind of statement that makes me wonder if you are actually bothering to read my posts, given I directly mentioned XCOM 2's Gauss weapons from my very second post in this discussion, where I outright said that the 'magnetic' tier has been tier 2 in both generations of games. I am unsure how you managed to take 'right out saying they exist' as 'ignoring the entire game exists'.

Yes, you mentioned the fuckers. I have indeed read this, not reading it raising questions of how I can respond to you to begin with. You have, however, yet to mention a situation where lasers and kinetic-kill electromagnetic weaponry coexist, unless yer overlooking the alloy cannon from XCOM:EU? Which, granted, is a shotgun with crap range, but is an example of the two existing in the same game. If you read my response on my treating the game as "nextgen+" situations, which you must have, I agreed that indeed, both lasers and non-plasma railguns are tier two weapons in their own games.


Oh, hey, I missed an interesting design to... This. Whatever the hell it is now. A debate? A discussion? A pair of people ranting past eachother? I rather wish we had a discord for this game so we could have it there instead of inflicting it on others.
 Actually, theres a point, shall we take this over to Discord? Fair warning, I wont be able to respond for about seventeen hours from now, but its better than continuing it here.

 I would like to apologize for my part in subjecting everyone else here to, well, you know.

 Glloyd, I would likewise like to learn if we are to vote on use of material or credits on designs. It seems like excessive amounts of options when one uses more than one piece, but that might just be me.

 On the Gladiator, Chiefwaffles, I would like to suggest firstly sticking it in a quote box, or a spoiler, or between two lines to help people skip right to it. Also, Im kinda squeamish of going the full "torso in a can" route right off the bat. Yes, I know, its silly. On a more practical note, I would prefer to get some armor experience under our collective belts prior to going for a full mech. Mek. Whatever its called. Perhaps if we go with the Blind Man and it works well we might get some work done with a powered version as a revision? I dunno, leaping right for it seems like overreach to me. Other than that, looks grand.

[Chiefwaffles]

Not a big fan of the blind man, and making power armor out of unpowered armor in a revision seems like a stretch.

The thing about the SMAC is that not only it makes full use of tokens, but it actually makes sense from an XCOM perspective. In XCOM2012, you can research MECs as soon as you officially discover Meld. This isn't a carbon copy of the first MEC in XCOM (and it shouldn’t be) but again takes full advantage of tokens. Alien alloy token to give it armor and the skeleton. Power core token to, well, power it. Doctrine token to handle the training. Meld token to make it all possible.
Then we have all our tech experience we’ve already gotten so far. TACTICAL helps a lot, and we have our other tech designs to go along with the tokens.

Hell this is basically the whole point of Meld. Making this kind of thing very possible.

[10ebbor10]

I like this design, but I still want 10Ebbor10's input on if we can just assign tokens like this or need to vote them in. I'll probably be voting for this though, we don't really have the equipment points to afford a new kind of armor anyway and as a troop type this should be an 'either' thing compared to normal infantry not an 'and' thing.

I'm not sure what you're confused about?

[Madman198237]

I don't much like amputating limbs like that. I imagine that we could probably manage to make something almost functionally equivalent out of a Guardian turret and a set of wheels, frankly. A little more computing experience and it'd basically serve as a heavily-armed rolling platform capable of providing direct heavy fire support in a fairly compact platform.

Anyway, if Meld is this powerful, why don't we start differently? Start by inserting titanium into bones, carbon fiber weave into skin and organs, etc.

Regardless of this all, as you all may have noticed we were a little tight on EPs last turn. If we build ANYTHING that requires EPs, we're going to find ourselves trading advantages around and not having enough equipment. So I think the best possible design for now is an EP-producing infrastructure design, since we so desperately need more EPs so we can continue to actually equip soldiers. Even if we did try and patch up the vulnerabilities of our troops, we'd not be capable of equipping them with everything.

[Chiefwaffles]

They're really cool and feasible though.
Cool part is self-explanatory and I guess opinion based. But just to reinforce the "feasible" part, in XCOM:EW you unlock MECs as soon as you recover and research Meld. And that's what our Meld token represents.

Of course while this is very much a heavily-XCOM-themed-AR, it's not going to follow exactly the same path as the XCOM game. But the fact that we got "Meld" is a very telling factor in all this. The SMAC is obviously heavily based on the MEC, but I made sure that it's different enough to be its own thing, even if based on the same core concept. Also if anyone has suggestions/feedback for the Gladiator SMAC, please do let me know.


I'm not sure about doing a full-on infrastructure design right now. I want to push our advantage. Now that the aliens (roughly?) how we're winning, they'll definitely try to address that.
Thouuugh I am curious now: Ebbor, could we know in advance what kind of points a SMAC squad could potentially cost? Like while they'd definitely use UP, would they be more likely to use VP or EP based on the kind of thing they are?

Spoiler: Sidenote for how SMACs could look if made (click to show/hide)

Found this concept art for the MEC while on the xcom wiki for them. And as it turns out, it looks really cool.

EDIT: To expand on my point.
Basically, the SMAC relies on three things:
1.) Meld/XCOM:EW precedent. In XCOM:EW as soon as you research meld you can chop people's off limbs, replace them with bionic equivalents, and stick 'em in the large MEC.
2.) Tokens. We have lots of tokens, that all make sense here. Alloy for the armoring/integrity, power core for the power, doctrinal token for the humans, and Meld token to satisfy thing #1.
3.) Experience. MECs are treated as the "tech option" in Enemy Within. Lucky for us, that's exactly what we've been doing. We have great experience with TACTICAL, and our general knowledge in progressing tech with other designs should help a lot with making this good as well.

[10ebbor10]

Ebbor, could we know in advance what kind of points a SMAC squad could potentially cost? Like while they'd definitely use UP, would they be more likely to use VP or EP based on the kind of thing they are?

UP+EP, likely not to be all that cheap.

[Chiefwaffles]

Hmm. Thanks.


UP is fine unless it turns out to be especially outrageous. EP less fine but a SMAC squad wouldn’t have to worry as much about bringing extra EP-costing stuff.
That and I’d imagine/hope the Engineer bonus applies to SMACs to some degree, given how techy they are.

If someone has a good plan for an infrastructure EP design(/revision) this turn while still providing some decent help to our troops outside of the extra EP by itself (either in the EP action or another action) then I’d probably support it.
But other than that I still think SMACs would be worth it.

[Aseaheru]

 A powered blind man would probably be something akin to a useful version of the powered exoskeletons every military seems to be working on. Bonus points being that we dont have any self-inflicted cripples should we cock it up, it would be cheaper, and it definitely wont have any potential issues with fitting on a skyranger or in enemy UFOs, which is something that worries me slightly about any form of mec/mech/mek/large power armor suit.

[Chiefwaffles]

Sure, fair, but MECs in XCOM fit into UFOs and even disregarding that there’s a reason I included field disembark capabilities. Even if for whatever reason a SMAC can’t go into a ufo (and can’t smash through its hull), the operator can disembark and fight as a normal(ish) squad member while the sentry-mode SMAC keeps watch outside.

[Aseaheru]

 That just screams of costs being ramped up even farther, since we cant even get away with not having asmuch infantry armor and weapons. And, again, theres still the cripple thing.

[Chiefwaffles]

Current infantry armor and weapons are 100% free. And I already addressed the cripple thing. In the design itself and subsequent posts. As in XCOM, they have perfectly fine bionic limbs (just that they had no reason to use them in combat in XCOM).

Obviously a disembarked SMAC Trooper won’t be as good as a fully-geared-out Operator but they should still be effective, and there’s the sentry mode thing to make it ultimately still very useful.