Covering Fire as a lvl 1 Offensive AWC perk

[Mavoc]

Covering Fire: Overwatch shots can now be triggered by any enemy action, not just movement.

I personally hate this perk, and while I understand that it has some uses, it is the only perk that can make your soldier worse in certain circumstances. If my soldier didn't have a good shot and I overwatched him, then I don't want him wasting the overwatch on a shot that he has little to no chance of making. Personally I would prefer if this perk also caused the shot to ignore any cover bonus the shooter has, though that might be a bit too strong.

Anyways, the issue lies in the AWC that requires you to get Offensive lvl 1 before you get level 2 and then 3. If Covering Fire is the lvl 1 perk, then I have to decide if the lvl 2 and/or 3 perks are worth having to take a perk which might weaken my build.

Possible Solutions:
remove Covering Fire from AWC --I commented out the entry for my game as a quick fix
move Covering Fire to a lvl 3 perk, so it doesn't block anything
change Covering Fire so that it is better, or atleast not be a negative.

• Make the Covering Fire shot ignore cover defense. This way the shot will have the same chance as if the unit moved.

[Wardy2005]

Not sure why covering fire does not ignore cover bonus. It always should have as you are shooting at someone coming out of cover to fire at you. Makes it a good perk and makes sense. Should've been this way since eu...

[NoDebate]

Not sure why covering fire does not ignore cover bonus. It always should have as you are shooting at someone coming out of cover to fire at you. Makes it a good perk and makes sense. Should've been this way since eu...

That certainly would boost the utility of Covering Fire, might even encourage an OW build here and there.

[UraniumOverdose]

Any overwatch based soldier should have a PCS chip that requires a 50% chance or better before they fire. Building an overwatch soldier without one of those chips is just asking for sadness.

[Mavoc]

Any overwatch based soldier should have a PCS chip that requires a 50% chance or better before they fire. Building an overwatch soldier without one of those chips is just asking for sadness.

Fair, but what if it isn't an overwatch build? Like a Pistol wielding Sharpshooter that took Covering Fire on the AWC so it could get Resilience and Untouchable. Now he is forced to use Covering Fire on both his pistol and sniper overwatch shots on the random times he gets placed on overwatch.

[UraniumOverdose]

Any overwatch based soldier should have a PCS chip that requires a 50% chance or better before they fire. Building an overwatch soldier without one of those chips is just asking for sadness.

Fair, but what if it isn't an overwatch build? Like a Pistol wielding Sharpshooter that took Covering Fire on the AWC so it could get Resilience and Untouchable. Now he is forced to use Covering Fire on both his pistol and sniper overwatch shots on the random times he gets placed on overwatch.

Well that is part of the randomness of the AWC (biggest booms on a sharpshooter anyone?). Usually of the tier 1 skills aren't good, I focus on other soldiers. You should always have another guy to stick in there.

As far as your suggestion to improve covering fire, consider that improving the perk will help ADVENT way more than the player. As the player might have one or two guys who use that ability, but a ton of ADVENT use it.

[moroniccinamun]

Who used the "only take overwatch shots on %" PCS? If you are doing an OW, you should be using something like situational awareness of hyper-reactive pupils or something.

[bingo12345]

Normal overwatch should be a option when you learn Covering fire. that was problem from LW1.

[LordYanaek]

Well that is part of the randomness of the AWC (biggest booms on a sharpshooter anyone?). Usually of the tier 1 skills aren't good, I focus on other soldiers. You should always have another guy to stick in there.

But there is a big difference between taking a useless perk (yes, i mean biggest booms on a sharpshooter) and an actually harmful one like covering fire.

To anyone, the list of available AWC perks is inside XComLW_AWCPack.ini
I didn't test it, but commenting the perks you don't want (Covering Fire and possibly the free grenades since they reduce your mobility) should prevent future promoted soldiers from having them show on their AWC trees.

[Goumindong]

Who used the "only take overwatch shots on %" PCS? If you are doing an OW, you should be using something like situational awareness of hyper-reactive pupils or something.

I do. All the time. They're only 5 supplies, benefit a lot of units, and for a good portion of the game your units won't have a other PCS installed anyway.

[Arcalane]

Any overwatch based soldier should have a PCS chip that requires a 50% chance or better before they fire. Building an overwatch soldier without one of those chips is just asking for sadness.

Missing the point. OP's concern is that if you get Covering Fire as your level one perk, you must train it - even if you don't want that effect - in order to get access to the higher-level perks.

Either they have to make do with a perk that is not desirable for that build, or they have to take a double punishment and blow that PCS slot (which they might want to use on Conditioning, or Mobility, or whatever else) instead.

[Mavoc]

Normal overwatch should be a option when you learn Covering fire. that was problem from LW1.

That becomes problematic with Ever Vigilant. Which one gets auto enabled? Also it would just be confusing to have 2 different overwatches that each have their own benefit. Much better if the upgrade was a complete upgrade without downsides.

But there is a big difference between taking a useless perk (yes, i mean biggest booms on a sharpshooter) and an actually harmful one like covering fire.

Exactly, I will gladly take a Biggest Booms on a sharpshooter to get at Shredder.

possibly the free grenades since they reduce your mobility

Wait, what? Are you sure about this? Those are my first picks as I never considered the possibility of them affecting mobility as they are not an equipment with a weight, they are a free ability. If you are correct, then I have an issue with the word 'free' in their description.

[Arcalane]

possibly the free grenades since they reduce your mobility

Wait, what? Are you sure about this? Those are my first picks as I never considered the possibility of them affecting mobility as they are not an equipment with a weight, they are a free ability. If you are correct, then I have an issue with the word 'free' in their description.

It's true, but JL confirmed it's a bug and it'll be fixed in 1.2.

[Goumindong]

Any overwatch based soldier should have a PCS chip that requires a 50% chance or better before they fire. Building an overwatch soldier without one of those chips is just asking for sadness.

Missing the point. OP's concern is that if you get Covering Fire as your level one perk, you must train it - even if you don't want that effect - in order to get access to the higher-level perks.

Either they have to make do with a perk that is not desirable for that build, or they have to take a double punishment and blow that PCS slot (which they might want to use on Conditioning, or Mobility, or whatever else) instead.

I suppose the simple solution is to just not train it?

It takes what 1 month+ to train all the offensive and defensive perks on a soldier; let alone the pistol perks? You're not going to run out of units to train if one guy role abilities you don't want.

[Arcalane]

Any overwatch based soldier should have a PCS chip that requires a 50% chance or better before they fire. Building an overwatch soldier without one of those chips is just asking for sadness.

Missing the point. OP's concern is that if you get Covering Fire as your level one perk, you must train it - even if you don't want that effect - in order to get access to the higher-level perks.

Either they have to make do with a perk that is not desirable for that build, or they have to take a double punishment and blow that PCS slot (which they might want to use on Conditioning, or Mobility, or whatever else) instead.

I suppose the simple solution is to just not train it?

This is an equally shitty solution. The soldier could have really good perks waiting for them later.

[Goumindong]

Missing the point. OP's concern is that if you get Covering Fire as your level one perk, you must train it - even if you don't want that effect - in order to get access to the higher-level perks.

Either they have to make do with a perk that is not desirable for that build, or they have to take a double punishment and blow that PCS slot (which they might want to use on Conditioning, or Mobility, or whatever else) instead.

I suppose the simple solution is to just not train it?

This is an equally shitty solution. The soldier could have really good perks waiting for them later.

They could also have shit perks. Not like you know.

You're forced to prioritize the AWC anyway. I don't see a problem with situationally useful or even potentially damaging perks. And we'll, how many times do you OW with non-OW spec units? The only unit you might consider it with would be the sharpshooter, but they're not going to be OWing in vision of an enemy they can shoot.

And you can always give them a PCS for 5 supplies.

[Randal Miser]

While I disagree and think Covering Fire is a very very strong perk to take because of how often you end up hitting overwatch shots and shots against enemies in full cover as your soldiers rank up and get insane aim bonuses, AWC perks are in kind of a weird spot in general.

Oftentimes you just get these, utterly useless choices for classes that have no use for them, you get stuff like Biggest Booms for sharpshooters which is just hot garbage imo, and makes the time investment needed to "maybe" get the option for a better perk after hardly worth it.

Would be neato if we could at least see the full tree accessible by the soldier you are training so you can decide if its at all even worth putting them in the tube and waste your time or not.

[Devon_v]

As someone who has always despised Covering Fire, I also agree that it sucks to see it in the AWC because there's no damn way to turn it off once you have it.

Even for Rangers it should be a mode, not a replacement, as it is of only situational use, and potentially harmful. There are plenty of good PCSs that actually do something instead of putting a bandaid on a bad perk.

[nightwyrm]

I confess I changed the ini to make AWC perk trees visible. There are some soldiers I would never have trained in the AWC if not for it. Biggest Boom on a Shinobi? But Center Mass and Lethal was behind it....

[Mavoc]

Would be neato if we could at least see the full tree accessible by the soldier you are training so you can decide if its at all even worth putting them in the tube and waste your time or not.

It is a simple ini edit to see them which I have done, which is why I created this thread.

[Tuhalu]

Rather than making Covering Fire completely ignore cover (which would probably be OP), how about making it halve the effects of Cover? So light cover would only be worth 15 instead of 30 and heavy cover 23 instead of 45. This would at least make Covering Fire viable for a greater range of accuracy (rather than just those with absurd accuracy levels).

[Thrair]

Personally, I'm much more in favour of making the Overwatch chips into a Weapon Mod instead of a PCS, perhaps raising the cost a bit in the process.

While making these chips a weapon mod instead of a PCS would make Overwatch a bit stronger, I have little problem with Overwatch being VERY strong within it's niche, given that niche is not as ubiquitous as it was in XCOM 1. On some missions, yes it's amazing. But Long War 2 has several key factors that prevent Overwatch from being as potentially game breaking as it was in XCOM 1.

-First of all, the AI can act on scamper now, which makes Overwatch walls still have an element of risk (as opposed to XCOM 1, where it was BAR NONE the best way to activate a pod).
-Secondly, mission timers and reinforcement waves provide a limitation on Overwatch builds and tactics. It's strong, but not always the best choice, as it was in XCOM 1. Just like Stealth build Shinobi may excel at sneak-hacks and related missions, but are poorly suited to retaliation sites.
-Thirdly, iirc JL and the Long War team modified the code so certain units tend to move first, such as zombies (cannon fodder) and Lightning Reflexes equipped units. This gives the AI more reliable tools to breach Overwatch walls than in XCOM 1. Especially since these Overwatch chips explicitly STILL FIRE against Lighting Reflexes units.

Put simply, XCOM2's greater moddibility and tactical-changes compared to XCOM1 has given the Pavonis team far more tools to properly balance Overwatch. It's not the game-balance migraine it used to be.



Finally, I have another reason to want a weapon mod instead of PCS for this.... One I find a bigger pet peeve than poor AWC procs:
Shotguns.

As it stands, the game's lack of a reaction fire range stat makes Overwatch with Shotguns a complete farce. Soldiers will fire their shots at units across the map that they have almost no hope of ever hitting. All it does is waste ammo. And to correct this requires assigning a PCS slot to the soldier. SMGs face the same problem, though to a far lesser degree. Dedicating a soldier's sole PCS slot to this feels rather punishing, while there are three weapon mod slots that can be used.

[LordYanaek]

They could also have shit perks. Not like you know.

For your information
File XComLW_AWCPack.ini

Code: Select all

ALWAYSSHOW=true	;display all future abilities instead of displaying "locked" 

In case you don't like the AWC lottery to get the useful later perks.

[Antifringe]

possibly the free grenades since they reduce your mobility) .

Flashbanger and Smoker do not reduce your mobility at all. I just tested this. I have two soldiers with equal nameplate mobility, but one of them has Smoker and Flashbanger from the AWC. They have exactly the same mobilities in the armory, and when tested directly against each other on the field, they can both travel the same number of tiles per turn. I even stripped them of all gear to avoid any confounding variables.

[LordYanaek]

And yet, someone else tested exactly the opposite. The armory don't show a difference, it's only on the tactical map that the items are added so you won't see the effect in the armory.

When you tested it on the field, how much mobility did you have with both soldiers. I'm not talking about number of tiles but the real mobility number (you possibly can't see it without a mod like additional icons) because number of tiles is a fraction of the mobility number and rounding errors could cause both soldiers to cover the same distance with actually a different mobility value.

Anyway, this is from the 1.2 patch notes so i think it settles the point.

- X2Effect_TemporaryItem will now ignore "SmallItemWeight" ability. Things that give free items should no longer cause mobility penalties (e.g. Flashbanger, Smoker perks).