Hungry

@doobie said:

but we still have loads of game like that as well now.

Yeah, I am just more tired of seeing the progression system seen in most modern shooters nowadays. Just like how I am getting sick of seeing voxel-based creativity sandboxes, and I didn't even like Minecraft in the first place.

@Bell_End said:

@Hungry said:

@Bell_End said:

@Sooty said:

@Bell_End said:

@Sooty said:

How about not every game having a progression system.

but not every game has a progression system now.

Almost anything with online does.

what's wrong with having some kind of progression anyway.

Honestly the problem is for me not that everything has a progression system, but everything uses the same progression system. Get XP for doing stuff, unlock extra options for currently existing abilities or traits and then unlock new, unique traits. Which is fine as a progression system, but not what I want to see in every single game ever. Even back in the day games had a progression system, just it usually wasn't as systematic and revealed to the player as light RPG leveling mechanics. It is especially getting tiresome with shooters. Classes. EXP. Perks. Zzzz. Again, it isn't bad, just that it is getting annoying that it is so common.

so how was it done differently back in the day. refresh my memory

Well to go to some iconic roots. Metroid had a progression system that was directly tied to the overall progression of the main course of the game. Megaman's progression, while it had an optimal path, allowed you to get powers in specific orders but was only obtained at the end of a level (or in Megaman X's case you could get some through secret areas). Most older FPS had a progression in weapons in their single player where you got new and more interesting weaponry as you went along. The original Legend of Zelda had all of its upgrades tied to a mixture of exploration and main quest completion similar to Metroid, but it wasn't as core to the gameplay as Metroid. I could keep going on dozens of more games, but introducing new abilities, mechanics, or tools has been a staple of games for a long time.

@Bell_End said:

@Sooty said:

@Bell_End said:

@Sooty said:

How about not every game having a progression system.

but not every game has a progression system now.

Almost anything with online does.

what's wrong with having some kind of progression anyway.

Honestly the problem is for me not that everything has a progression system, but everything uses the same progression system. Get XP for doing stuff, unlock extra options for currently existing abilities or traits and then unlock new, unique traits. Which is fine as a progression system, but not what I want to see in every single game ever. Even back in the day games had a progression system, just it usually wasn't as systematic and revealed to the player as light RPG leveling mechanics. It is especially getting tiresome with shooters. Classes. EXP. Perks. Zzzz. Again, it isn't bad, just that it is getting annoying that it is so common.

@UltorOscariot said:

What are people's opinions in terms of where early research should be directed? I appreciate that this is wildly based on the player's personal tactics, but having not played the originals, I feel a bit overwhelmed by the array of options. And is it really worthwhile to capture aliens alive once you've interrogated one of a given species already?

Really early on in the game you should complete the main objective research as completing the first couple of main objectives gets you bonus research on some early upgrades. Otherwise, you should focus on getting at least level one armor and laser weapons for your crew. Afterwards, getting Laser/Plasma cannons for your Interceptors is good, but you only really need to do that once the UFOs start to get larger, and then again for completely new aircraft types. Once you get everyone kitted out with level 1 armor and laser weapons the game actually feels like the old X-COM in terms of play and average difficulty (at least on Classic).

As for some general advice, especially for the metagame elements, I would say don't sweat it if a couple of nations withdraw from the X-COM project. I don't know if the panic rates change from Normal to Classic, but eventually you are going to have to give some people up. One thing I wish I had the foresight to do was instead of dropping satellites instantly, was to wait and see who was about to blow their top and pull out and then drop it.

Oh man that sounded dirty.

Also, I find that building additional workshops and laboratories isn't really a neccessity. I am researching at a decent rate, have good funding, and can manufacture pretty much anything I want. On the other hand, that means most of the time I have to pass up getting extra money or high-quality soldiers during Terror mission choices because I need to keep getting scientists and engineers.

I also want to note that you should probably take all the advice with a grain of salt. I am playing on Ironman and I am just expecting to get to the end of the game (I'm maybe 6-8 hours in now? I don't really keep track of time) and everything blow up in my face.

The thing I miss about old games is were it taught you entirely in the level design and not into hand-holding, mind-numbing tutorials that insulted your intelligence. I guess that is one of the reasons why games like Mega Man, Castlevania, and the Souls games are so great.

EDIT: I forgot to mention probably the best modern example of this. Portal.

I think people have been misunderstanding my original gripe when I created this thread, which in the OP I made it sound worse than it was. I felt like at the beginning of the game those ridiculous swings in luck were not only happening too often, but their detriments were too severe. Now that I have progressed as far as I have sometimes those sorts of catastrophies DO happen. I lost a Rookie and a Support became mortally wounded because of a panicked Heavy (thanks to a triple proc Intimidate) firing at a car and subsequently panicking both of those other two characters. I am fine wth these sorts of things happening. I just felt like in the beginning of the game that it was happening like every other mission. Now that I have gotten a better grasp on the game it is a somewhat rare event and the high percentage misses don't cost lives, so it is okay. My problem was when if you were in sight range of the enemy they would kill you instantly if you could not kill them which relied almost entirely on dice rolls thanks to their free movement upon discovery.

Either way, I think the game is fine now that I understand the game more. It is a good game and people should play it, but unlucky people like me should probably be ready to get stressed in the first couple of hours if they play Classic Ironman.

Hey guys, I thought I would just pop in and give an update. I managed to squeeze in five hours of play today on a new save (still Classic Ironman, because I hate myself) and made some significant progress, and I have to say that things have gotten better and here is how I see why that is for anyone who is curious or having the same problems I have:

a) Squad promotions are way more important than they were in the original X-COM. Your statistics seem to be raised more significantly in the new XCOM and it is easier to gain ranks. Having a handful of Sergeants seems to make everything a little more balanced out numbers-wise because you don't have all the amazing tech to slap onto a half dozen rookies.

b) Managing who you send out on missions. In the original X-COM wounded soldiers recovered fairly quickly so you could usually keep a consistent crew going. While this is true in the new one as well when you have an important squad member wounded for 18 days it is important to know who to risk sending out on missions, even if the risk is only them being wounded. Easy missions like assaulting light scout UFOs are fine with maybe one higher-level squad mate and a group of Rookies or Squaddies, while saving your main crew for Terror missions and the like.

c) Suppression is king. Suppression is king. Suppression. Is. King. This goes hand-in-hand with managing who you take with you and leveling up soldiers early.

c) Tech. Focusing on getting the level 1 armor and laser weapons has made it so that I have only lost maybe 2 soldiers who were not throwaway Rookies through this entire new playthrough.

Some things to learn from:

a) Base-building: Trying to set up a huge array of satellites early seems to be a fool's errand. By the time you have enough money and engineers to support a large number of them a decent chunk of the council will have pulled out already (Classic is pretty harsh on the panic levels) unless you can somehow get either really lucky with the mission draws. Instead, getting the Officer training is incredibly important since it can upgrade your squad size to six and reduce wound healing time for fairly cheap by what you would expect.

b) Main objectives: Because I was trying to get the new tech so early I held off on doing any of the main objectives (I think it was like May before I even tried to capture an alien). Well apparently the story missions can easily lead you to getting some of that important tech research either for free or discounted, I couldn't tell because I had already researched the stuff it was giving me credit for.

I hate to sound like a broken record, but thanks again everyone for your help and responses. After a bit of a rough start and taking some time to figure this out, my initial thoughts on this game have proven to be true; it manages to make itself different from the original X-COM in mechanics but manages to still capture what made the original so great.

@bushpusherr said:

@Hungry said:

Either I am missing something, or I am the king of bad luck. I've missed several 80+% shots and been hit from max fog distance and instantly killed behind full cover several times, and I am only 3 hours in. Sure they do have Plasma weapons so their accuracy (if this is like the old X-COM) should be pretty good, but if I can't sit max range and hit and they can sit max range and hit, then what do I do? I just don't really see the strategic options because there are not a lot you can do.

Yeah in the early game your soldiers are pretty fragile because of their low health, I heavily utilized snipers so I could sit back more. Also, I usually find myself using Hunker Down instead of Overwatch in a lot of situations where high damage is a bigger risk.

Do you know if Snipers have some optimal minimum/maximum range? I am pretty sure they get less accurate when aliens are right in their face, but I have been like a full Sprint move away from an enemy in half-cover and had a 45% chance to hit wit ha SCOPE equipped on my sniper. So far because of the movement restrictions and that low chance to hit and the low damage until I get laser snipers I have found snipers to be pretty ineffectual.@gladspooky said:

@Hungry said:

@gladspooky said:

Maybe you should've started on normal instead of going straight to the man's difficulty.

I am not crying about it being too hard, I am crying (kind of, rereading the OP I feel like I come on that way but I don't mean to) that it seems like in the early game your strategy barely matters. Trust me, I love challenging games, but what I don't like is random chance mostly deciding what is going on. So either I am missing something huge about how you are supposed to play this game, or this is just how the early game plays out.

Yeah, but it sounds like you want to play on normal. You hit, but there's some randomness. I lose like one guy a mission. Also, ignore the percentages. In every game where they show you the percentages, it never feels right. It always feels like you've got like a 40% chance, even if it says 99%.

The thing is, difficulty shouldn't jack up the random chance, it should jack up the difficulty. The original X-COM was pretty hard and had random chance, but I never really felt like I got fucked over by random chance in that game nearly as much as I do in this one.

Again, thanks everyone for the responses.

@gladspooky said:

Maybe you should've started on normal instead of going straight to the man's difficulty.

I am not crying about it being too hard, I am crying (kind of, rereading the OP I feel like I come on that way but I don't mean to) that it seems like in the early game your strategy barely matters. Trust me, I love challenging games, but what I don't like is random chance mostly deciding what is going on. So either I am missing something huge about how you are supposed to play this game, or this is just how the early game plays out.

@bushpusherr said:

Dice rolls don't negate strategy, they negate certainty.

85% is not 100%. The game would be broken if you never missed an 85% shot. And as for cover, the angle at which you are being shot at is important, as well as elevation. I've had a few spots of bad luck, sure, but overall the game has been completely fair. I'm about 15 hours in and I've only lost about 2-3 guys. That's not "preparing for bullshit", it's just playing the odds.

Either I am missing something, or I am the king of bad luck. I've missed several 80+% shots and been hit from max fog distance and instantly killed behind full cover several times, and I am only 3 hours in. Sure they do have Plasma weapons so their accuracy (if this is like the old X-COM) should be pretty good, but if I can't sit max range and hit and they can sit max range and hit, then what do I do? I just don't really see the strategic options because there are not a lot you can do.

@rebgav said:

If you're within the effective range of the enemy then you aren't safe, regardless of factors like cover or abilities. Ideally, you want to draw the enemy to you so that they have to move into range before they can attack - all of your guys on Overwatch then get a crack at the enemy before they get to fire on you... The random variables create a level of unpredictability in every encounter, you counter that by trying to make good decisions which set your strike team up for success and mitigate as much of the risk as possible. That isn't a design flaw, that is the essence of the game.

So if you put troops on Overwatch do they get to take potshots at the enemy when they get their free movement upon discovery? That might help a lot, but almost all of my Overwatch shots miss anyway. Also, I agree with strategy mitigating random chance, but I just find it really hard with the limited options you have (at least in the early game) to mitigate it enough to feel like that my strategy actually does any good job with that.

@Tennmuerti said:

At the start of the campaign? - Yes. Absolutely. The randomness can screw you big time. Low HP pools, limited abilities, panicky soldiers.

As you progress further? - No. Better armor and dozens of soldier abilities can provide you with a sufficient buffer to deal with random fuckups, as well as tools to avoid said fuck ups in the first place. Not to say that the game gets easier, just more manageable and controllable, provided you play your cards right.

At 3 hours you are still in the very very early stages of the game.

Also don't put your entire squad behind the same cover, that's bad tactics. While we are at it, low cover should be considered a baseline state, not actual good protection.

As to what you're supposed to do when killed when in full cover and hukered down? Analyse why were you killed in a single turn, weak soldier with low HP? was it a flank? type of enemy? weapon used against you? could you have instead suppressed the enemy? or flushed him out of cover, or destroyed enemy cover? Rookies and low ranked dudes can get one shot if they are only wearing basic armor, regardless, so don't sweat it, new recruits are cheap.

It seems like you've hit the nail on the head, it is because of how early I am in the game. The old X-COM you could pretty much move out of early-game technology if you knew the tech tree and could mitigate any of these same problems I am having. Now, I think that is pretty bad design so I am pretty happy that it is not in this new game, so I will just have to tow this shitty line until my gear gets better.

Also, my troops aren't all behind one piece of cover, I just try and keep behind full cover as much as possible. It is just annoying when I am moving cautiously and then I discover a group of Mutons or whatever, they get to move behind cover for free(another infuriating thing about this game) and then when their turn starts they kill two dudes because they got lucky.

I forgot to mention as well that I am playing on Classic Ironman. I thought about doing Impossible but I didn't know how much different this would be from the old X-COM to warrant that.

@haggis said:

@Ping5000 said:

I think it's the fairness of it that let's me not see this as a problem, since it applies to the aliens, too.

Yeah, I've had a few sniper shots go through cover in my favor, so it balances out (at least, so far). There's basically no way to completely protect yourself, which seems like a sensible design approach for the game. You try to minimize the chance of being hit, but you can never eliminate it. That keeps you on your toes, and forces you to assess the risk/reward of your positions. Honestly, it's usually safer in the long run to take some risk in order to get a better shot angle than it is to keep your soldiers hunkered down all the time. Of course, I'm only a few hours in so that advice should be taken with a grain of salt.

I can kind of understand this sentiment, but the thing is I really don't want random chance ruling over the outcome of the game like that. From what most people are saying the random chance seems to mostly be due to how early I am in the game and I just don't have the gear yet to mitigate it (just like in the old X-COM, except in that one you could rush the tech really early). I like games where both sides are on equal footing when it comes to mechanics and capabilities, but I think how much things can swing with random chance is not good design. If I made a huge mistake and my dudes deserve to get killed and I get lucky by killing two dudes with two 20% chance to hit critical shots, that is not good to me. Sure it is advantageous to me, but I did not deserve to have that happen. If it is of any help to understand my thoughts on turn-based strategy games, I think Frozen Synapse is one of the most brilliant strategy games ever made.

Anyways, thanks a lot everyone for your responses. I will keep at it for a bit more and see how things turn out.