I’m waiting for one or two big patches before Ironman. Too many bugs. But even limiting save/reload, being crazy patient cuts down on casualties considerably.
Savillo
3182
Had another weird bug last night, but I didn’t think to take a screenshot. I launched a satellite and … it went nowhere.
When the confirmation screen came up with no information filled in, I should have hit cancel. I confirmed because I just assumed that it was a display error or something and that my satellite would indeed be launching over France. Lo and behold, I launch it and there’s no satellite over France.
I now have more satellites in the air than I have countries left in the game. This happened after my first country dropped from the Council (Canada).
Speaking of countries dropping out, I had one leave in the middle of the month when I performed especially poorly on a terror mission that I had to abandon (two terrible ratings).
It was that army tank map, and my team just got slaughtered by multiple teams of Mutons and Berserkers (three in total) plus some Heavy Floaters. I never got any soldiers past the second row of tanks. As Naterstein wrote above, all my flanking attempts just activated more groups of aliens (and I swear that one three-alien Muton/Berserker team mysteriously teleported in front of my flanking squad).
But right after this mission, Nigeria left immediately. I didn’t know that was possible. This is on classic, ironman.
MikeJ
3183
IIRC, being out of cover or flanked causes a significant boost in crit chance, so I think in that sense there is a form of indirect damage mitigation due to cover.
If you get the AOE suppression upgrade, they aren’t even necessarily single person infinite long range frag grenades.
Grifman
3185
I think that’s a bit unfair. There’s maybe a difference in design philosophy but there’s no evidence that any significant corners were cut in developing the game.
Alien reaction move, not being able to target cover, unbalanced abilities, reliance on teleporting enemies, bugs, inability for the game to handle multiple height levels, piss poor LoS
I think I would rather there be some damage mitigation by cover than a boost for without. Flanking is nice an all, but you wont be able to do much of it less you know you are fighting the last group or no other groups will aggro by doing so.
I had an early mission last night in the trainyard where I found a group and my 5 man team (4 vets: sniper, support, assault and 1 rook) engage them and pretty much was ready to smoke them. I manage to flank with a support and an assault, but 2nd turn 3 more groups suddenly move into frame and activate. So now its 12 v 5. I do my best to withdrawal my troops by using bounding overwatch. Lost 2 in the end (mostly due to a break in lucky AI rolls) and it was fun but only because the mission was a success overall.
Aside from missing some dynamic combat action, I really think the power gap between rookie/squaddie and officers is just too great.
Another nitpick is the rank names themselves. Highest should be Captain in my opinion with more NCO ranks to fill in the gaps like more SGT based ranks.
Maybe that was their design philosophy!
:P
Actually, they were talking of real cut corners, not if the game have bugs or not, of if some abilities are unbalanced (it’s subjective, it could be fixed on patches).
Like… the maps. Number of maps, and their size. Cut corner there? Or it was part of their design?
rezaf
3189
Wasn’t it in the TMA podcast where Jake seemed really proud how much time they invested in playtesting their limited pool of maps? I think I heard or read him talk about it somewhere.
But in terms what’s actually there, I’m not sure it’s really one bit better than if they had just done building-blocks like in the original X-Com. A few maps have semi-interesting parts, like a chokepoint of sorts or a hill you can flank, but these could just as well have been larger building blocks.
Arranging stuff differently would be WAY easier this way.
Hopefully the modding community will make some progress in modifying the maps or (unrealistic, I know) there’ll be some kind of official editor from Firaxis.
rezaf
I think the best part about the problems XCOM has (buggy camera controls, number of unique maps, stuff like that) is they are all fixable with patches and DLC. The things I worry about the most with a strategy game I really hope to enjoy for years to come (such as how does it play? How is the AI? Stuff like that) that tend to never get fixed even with patches and expansions, are NOT really a problem here. So even if one isn’t fully able to enjoy it now, they should be able to at some point, in theory.
Here is to hoping Firaxis can get some of the bigger bugs (SHIV bug in particular, but that final mission needs a little work, too) fixed soon.
In the meanwhile, I’m finding Normal Ironman to be just a perfect blend of challenge but not overwhelming frustration - if a goofy camera glitch moves my mouse cursor in the WORST POSSIBLE place to move my guy right before I click, it’s not certain to be the end of the game like on Classic, for example.
I don’t know if I would count on them to be able to easily fix all of the issues with different height levels. Things like enemies flying through/in ceilings, shooting through ceilings/floors.
They might be able to fix the selection/view problems in large ufo’s though.
These problems are also probably why you almost never have multi level buildings in maps.
davidf
3192
Hmmm ran into a interesting bug. Started a new game on normal and was enjoying that the enemeies stayed in their own groups until activated. Then as I hit the alien base segment the AI changed, its now calling in reinforcements from across the map and seeing the enemy move in groups including hidden enemies, like on classic.
Actually, I wanted something between classic and normal, so as bugs go this is a nice one. :) Got a little tense with 9 mutons and 3 thin men, but got the whole team cleared the area and survived by their teeth.
I’d give you the last three, but your early ones all clearly fall in the realm of design decisions. Ones that you obviously don’t agree with, but they’re not clear signs of cutting corners.
Teleporting enemies is the design choice that probably leans closest to cutting corners: they could have enemies come in from the edge of the map, at least.
So, simultaneous missions with different rewards.
Is there some agreed order of priority? Let’s say mission A gives you money, mission B gives you engineers and mission C gives you scientists. Supposing it’s all well balanced, what’s preferable?
Reemul
3195
If it’s well balanced any should be fine, the reality is if you need engineers early on then get them. i’m finding I have enough engineers and scientists but need more cash
Reldan
3196
I think the root of the issue is that with only 4-6 troops the design would be unfair if aliens could kill you sight unseen. The solution was to remove aliens being able to attack until at least the turn after you first spot them. This is true even if the aliens stumble across you on their own on their turn - they don’t get to launch an attack, they can merely take a free move action.
The result is that the best strategy is to peel the aliens off slowly and murder them before they get a chance to ever shoot. This would be resolved if the aliens did get first strike capabilities and were generally more active, but the design would need to allow for a lot more troops. To me this is the fundamental difference between the combat in XCOM and X-Com - moreso than the cover system, skill system, or action/TU differences.
Engineers. I always go for engineers.
Savillo
3198
It really depends. Often times I’ll go for cash because I need to manufacture something or start construction on new facilities, and early on, low cash is your biggest limiting factor.
Engineers are a higher priority than scientists for me, though, because I want to get satellite uplinks built as soon as possible. I don’t want to slow down my satellite production.
I think the order of your research isn’t too critical – I haven’t looked at tech progression too much, but I’m frequently in a position with nothing to research after four or five in-game months – but I do prioritize armors over anything else even if that means starting a 28-day project for carapace armor early on.
Yeah, I’d say engineers or money – scientists don’t seem to be a problem, at least on Normal – I get enough without building a single laboratory to research fast enough to keep up with the aliens. On Classic, maybe this is different.
That being said, I usually have to decide based on who is most in danger of leaving the council…
hepcat
3200
Gah, I finally had to bail on my initial Classic run through. I discovered that I had screwed up my earlier production and research paths so badly that by the time I started facing the more difficult enemies, I was essentially sending my guys into battle with paper mache hat and sling shots.
I tried starting up another Classic game last night and immediately got my butt handed to me. I wonder if the last patch didn’t increase the difficulty somewhat? Or perhaps I’m just a wuss with not tactical skills after all and my initial run was a fluke.
…my money’s on the latter.
Now I’m thinking about doing a Normal run, but my pride keeps telling me to retry Classic yet again. I’m so torn…
