Print

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

[Dohon]

Part three of the RPS interview is up here.

[Microcline]

Part three of the RPS interview is up here.

I can honestly say that I'm looking forward to this game now.  He gave a good explanation of how removing time units wasn't a case of blatant dumbing down, but rather shelving it to make room for new mechanics (similar to what Egoraptor said about the sub-weapons in his video on SCIV).  The only change that hasn't been explained is the decreased squad size.  I always felt that eight was the optimum number, going down to six for small UFOs and up to ten for things like battleships, bases, and terror missions.

The inclusion of ironman mode makes me think that they understand the original and know what they're doing though.

Edit: listening to the podcast

[Aklyon]

The decreased squad size was explained in the podcast.

[Domenique]

The decreased squad size was explained in the podcast.

If I understood it well, they're keeping it to make tactics more interesting? I think I listened to it not carefully enough  .

[Mephansteras]

Yeah, they discovered that having a smaller squad size made the player's choices more meaningful and interesting. Too many people apparently reduced the tactical level since you had too many decisions to make and in many cases you ended up with soldiers doing nothing.

So they opted for fewer, more interesting, decisions over many less interesting decisions.

I guess that makes sense. I still liked that large squad sizes, especially for terror missions and base assaults. But at least it seems like they have really good reasons for what they're doing, so I'm a lot less worried about it now.

Good podcast, overall. I'm getting a good feeling about this game.

[Virtz]

They actually mentioned something along the lines of wanting more of an exchange between the sides? Like that because of the stupid class abilities, with enough people, you could overpower the visible enemy forces in one turn?... Or something? But basically it sounded like they lowered squad size because of the class abilities and kept insisting that the classes add depth and tactics.

The douchebag interviewer then said some stupid shit about a jetpack shoryuken to anyone complaining about squad size. Good podcast.

[Domenique]

So they opted for fewer, more interesting, decisions over many less interesting decisions.

I can't believe I'm buying this.

[Delta Foxtrot]

The game is really starting to sound good. Customizable operatives sound cool. Turning X-COM into Rainbow Six operatives is going to be fun.

[Aqizzar]

This was not some sort of thing where we said ‘Oh, time units are too tough, this’ll make it easier to play’ because everybody intellectually understands time units once you explain it to them, it’s easy to intellectually understand. The problem was that it just didn’t map to the experience well. With all these new abilities and things, it just created this barrier between ‘I know what I want to do and I know how I’m going to do it’ and instead it became this sort of thing where you were like ‘I’m not quite sure what I can do, and so I’m just going to let it sort of play out’.

"Put that in your pipe and smoke it."  I had my doubts, until he described how the people would play the original prototype - treating each soldier as their own independent unit, acting with no real regard to what the whole squad is doing, because you never know what's going to happen when moving any one guy around.  And this is exactly how I always played, and it really brings out the inherent lack of logic in turn-based strategy games.

The height of tactics was to march your whole squad forward a turn, then have one guy walk around spotting while the rest of the squad blasts at targets outside their vision range.  The more you think about Time Units in relation to realism, the ridiculous it gets, and they think they came up with a system that makes it look and feel like a squad of soldiers is actually acting like a squad of soldiers.  Can't tell if it's true, but I can see where he's coming from.

[Cthulhu]

Yeah, he was basically describing how I played there, so I'm 100% on board (Where before I was only 90%) the no time units train.

[Mephansteras]

Yeah, he was basically describing how I played there, so I'm 100% on board (Where before I was only 90%) the no time units train.

I usually had a decent idea of what people could do, and I'm pretty good about setting up actual tactics using my soldiers. But I can see where he's coming from. Hopefully the new game is as fun to play as they make it out.

[Criptfeind]

I'm glad they are being consistent in their idea of tactics and how to add them to the game.

[Aqizzar]

Yeah, he was basically describing how I played there, so I'm 100% on board (Where before I was only 90%) the no time units train.

I usually had a decent idea of what people could do, and I'm pretty good about setting up actual tactics using my soldiers. But I can see where he's coming from. Hopefully the new game is as fun to play as they make it out.

He cinched it when he pointed out the classic X-COM moment when you have some guy stuck in a bad position, one TU short for ducking or moving, or burns it turning to face a target and can't shoot, and so forth.  It's a venerable dynamic sure, but I won't miss it.

And I like how their prediction for the moment Firaxis announces Civ 4 scale modding support, there's going to be a legion of people cranking out the "True" X-COM game they were supposed to be making.  This guy really does know his audience.

[Microcline]

Yeah, he was basically describing how I played there, so I'm 100% on board (Where before I was only 90%) the no time units train.

I usually had a decent idea of what people could do, and I'm pretty good about setting up actual tactics using my soldiers. But I can see where he's coming from. Hopefully the new game is as fun to play as they make it out.

He cinched it when he pointed out the classic X-COM moment when you have some guy stuck in a bad position, one TU short for ducking or moving, or burns it turning to face a target and can't shoot, and so forth.  It's a venerable dynamic sure, but I won't miss it.

I interpreted it as a new emphasis on multi-turn planing.  In the original, the best defense is a good offense so your goal would be to coordinate a one turn action that would neutralize all hostiles, and failing to do so would leave you vulnerable.  Surprising an enemy and taking them down in a single turn always made me feel like I was running a badass SWAT team, but the TU system does become difficult for spans of time beyond a single action phase.  Firaxis' system seems to emphasize plans that occur over multiple turns by new mechanics that allow a unit to survive an enemy action phase (with things like bunker down), and the TU system was replaced with the move/act system because it fits these shorter turns better and is more suited to long-term plans.

They actually mentioned something along the lines of wanting more of an exchange between the sides? Like that because of the stupid class abilities, with enough people, you could overpower the visible enemy forces in one turn?... Or something? But basically it sounded like they lowered squad size because of the class abilities and kept insisting that the classes add depth and tactics.

The reason given is that having too many soldiers would often lead to a ridiculous amount of micromanagement.  He's right that a lot of players would just leave units in the avenger towards the end.  I still think 6-8-10 is the optimum for the original X-COM, but I could see 4-6-8 working in the new game.  What troubles me is that he brought up the problem of the effects of lethality that were discussed earlier in the thread but didn't seem to suggest a solution.  They're probably still sorting out what the endgame number should be, and I'm hoping that the number is raised to six by the time the missions escalate above flying saucers in cornfields.

The class system still seems like a load of bollocks, especially the notion that units need a support tree perk to throw smoke grenades.  The versatility of the original units meant that you were always given a choice of actions (i.e. do you use a smoke grenade or make a run for it?), whereas while the new system might not be as bad as using a Final Fantasy class system it still seems like it would severely limit the choices that the player makes in the battlescape.

That said, it still looks pretty good right now.

[Farce]

Wait, did they really say "no smoke nades if you don't have the skill"?

That's kinda terrible...