Print

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

[SOLDIER First]

But it's realistic. There's no way you wouldn't be able to hit a guy easier from 160 degrees vs. 10 degrees.

[scriver]

I like Aiming Angles. What's wrong with Aiming Angles?

Perhaps a "best of both worlds" in this sense was, again, Silent Storm. It had no cover system, but taking cover behind something did alter the accuracy numbers, because the game approximates the visibility of the target from the shooter's point of view, and the chance that the shot will penetrate the cover and still hit the target, and displays the result of that approximation as the accuracy number.

Or Jagged Alliance 2. No cover system there either, but you sure as hell wanted your mercs crouching or lying down on the ground behind a stone or a tree or a wall rather than standing around in the open like a fool. And your % to hit chance was in turn changed accordingly when it was your turn to shoot at them enemies.

[scrdest]

Exalt HQ is a bit underwhelming in terms of difficulty, but it's pretty fun because of how destroyable their base is. Even if I don't try, their base ends up in ruins before I end the mission, with flaming walls and debris everywhere.

EXALT never really was a serious threat in vanilla - by design. They aren't soldiers - they are terrorists, they know which end of rifle to point at the enemies and are trained in tactics, but they are not a fighting force to match the creme de la creme of XCOM.

That's a really goddamn fun mission, too. The way I did it was split my squad, send two guys with Mimetic Skin and Low Profile (Roulette'd; one of them was... and Assault, I think, the other was a Sniper) to the skylights, one gal alongside the edge of the roof on the left and the rest through the door.

Once the main team breached the door and started shooting, the skylighters decloaked and gave a flanky surprise to the rest, and one sneaky EXALT tried to flank the door team only to get a face-full of Overwatch from the girl on the side of the roof - and that was on the first playthrough of the map.

[Shadowlord]

My solution was to send everyone up to the roof to shoot through the skylights, because of that high ground bonus.

[BurnedToast]

Perhaps a "best of both worlds" in this sense was, again, Silent Storm. It had no cover system, but taking cover behind something did alter the accuracy numbers, because the game approximates the visibility of the target from the shooter's point of view, and the chance that the shot will penetrate the cover and still hit the target, and displays the result of that approximation as the accuracy number.

Silent storm had such an amazing game engine. Graphics aside, it's easily better than anything that's been produced since. I just wish the core game had been better. Despite the excellent engine I never actually finished it because I just got bored.

I really wish someone would take the engine, slap a fresh coat of paint on it, and build a fun game around it. I guess it's too old at this point to realistically expect that but it's nice to dream about.

I like Aiming Angles. What's wrong with Aiming Angles?

It helps the aliens a lot more than it helps you. I guess that's not always a bad thing, but it makes the early game (which is already the hardest part) even harder without improving the difficulty of the mid/late game (since at that point you can usually kill all the aliens before they get a chance to shoot anyway).

[Flying Dice]

I like Aiming Angles. What's wrong with Aiming Angles?

It's a half-assed attempt at situational to-hit percentages which ignores actual cover and concealment in favor of different numbers. The main issue is that it gives the AI a much larger increase than your troopers, making even Sectoids capable of shooting your people out of full cover at relatively bad angles. Basically, for AA to be good, you'd have to have a mix with a semi-oldCom-style "cover" system where the CTH was modified directly by what percentage of the target is visible, married to another set of numbers based on the total profile of the target from that angle relative to some arbitrary standard -- call it human-sized for no bonus or malus to to-hit, with percentage visible and size relative to a human affecting the to-hit chance.

But instead it's applied to the modified-vanilla cover system of nuCOM, where there is only full cover, half cover, and no cover/flanked. It sharply reduces or outright nullifies the effects of taking cover in a game which is heavily oriented around making smart use of cover, and like most similar SW options it benefits the aliens more than the player. I've heard a comparison that suggested that AA alone was enough to make a Classic campaign feel more like Impossible, and I'd not say that that's wrong.

[Jacob/Lee]

Aiming Angles is that option you use when you feel you aren't torturing yourself enough. Red Fog is a good #2 for that as well.

[puke]

I like both of those, they make for a better simulation.   I think they help more than hurt, since the AI does not know how to take advantage of the angles or how to spread around injuries.

[umiman]

I never thought Aiming Angels made the game more difficult and I always play with it on too. But then again I also always play with the one that makes every flank a crit so it's hard to notice if it makes the AI stronger due to the fact that they're probably going to crit me anyway in that situation.

[BFEL]

I like both of those, they make for a better simulation.   I think they help more than hurt, since the AI does not know how to take advantage of the angles or how to spread around injuries.

Correction: The AI doesn't CARE about spreading around injuries because they have reserves. Doesn't matter that that muton elite got flanked and murdered when there's twelve more right behind it and infinity back on the mothership.
Meanwhile if XCOM loses a trooper that trooper is gone and it will take months to get another one even close to them.

Anyone else think XCOM has this a bit backwards? I mean XCOM as the controller of the planet has a population of 7 billion or so, while the Aliens simply couldn't have brought that many with them due to the fact they are arriving in ships and not parking their own planet next door.

[scriver]

I play with both Aiming Angles, Red Fog, and that one with criticals-when-flanked. I think they all help me more than hurt me, too.

I like both of those, they make for a better simulation.   I think they help more than hurt, since the AI does not know how to take advantage of the angles or how to spread around injuries.

Correction: The AI doesn't CARE about spreading around injuries because they have reserves. Doesn't matter that that muton elite got flanked and murdered when there's twelve more right behind it and infinity back on the mothership.
Meanwhile if XCOM loses a trooper that trooper is gone and it will take months to get another one even close to them.

The state of the AI has nothing to do with any of that.

[Urist Imiknorris]

The aliens do care about their survival in a basic sense - preferring full cover, not rushing you for close-range bonuses (unless they're melee or fliers), etc. They just don't understand the second wave options. Except for Itchy Trigger Tentacle, they understand that one just fine.

[BFEL]

The aliens do care about their survival in a basic sense - preferring full cover, not rushing you for close-range bonuses (unless they're melee or fliers), etc.

I have seen SO many aliens suicide flank rush my troops its not even funny.

The state of the AI has nothing to do with any of that.

Its the opposite actually, the "we have reserves" mentality practically wrote the AI in my experience.

[Flying Dice]

I play with both Aiming Angles, Red Fog, and that one with criticals-when-flanked. I think they all help me more than hurt me, too.

People kept insisting the same thing about Damage Roulette and Not Created Equal/now not taking Strict Screening until the math and research was done that definitively proved that they're fairly detrimental to your performance over the course of a campaign. Red Fog in particular doesn't really become noticeable until fairly late in a campaign, when you're running through the real slogging missions and are forced to continually take on waves of fresh enemies with injured soldiers. It's not necessarily unrealistic, but I'd posit that if you're looking for realism X-Com might not be the right choice.

That said, Absolutely Critical is a good example of a SW option that is both broadly beneficial for good players and fairly balanced. On the face of things it affects both you and the AI equally, but if you're careful you can turn it into a very strong tool on the Battlescape. Naturally, it means you lose more people if you play sloppily, but if you play well then it means you don't have those situations where you attempt a flank and then roll non-crit damage and your dude gets killed the next turn by a crit through full cover. It also makes it easier to train up PFCs.

By the same token, though, AC serves to magnify the bullshit of AA. But to each their own, I suppose. I'd rather play on Impossible without the shitty SW options than on Normal with them, because the former leans more towards punishing me for my mistakes in game and less towards punishing me for my mistakes when selecting SW options.

[BFEL]

I'd rather play on Impossible without the shitty SW options than on Normal with them, because the former leans more towards punishing me for my mistakes in game and less towards punishing me for my mistakes when selecting SW options.

PUNISH ME CORRECTLY MISTRESS XCOM!