Please rethink this!

RookieAutopsy
Posts: 80
Joined: Sat May 13, 2017 9:35 am

Re: Please rethink this!

Post by RookieAutopsy »

A funny thing from S2E62 of XWynns campaign: 'Fire grenades are OP as they will take this (single enemy) out of the game (once for 2 turns). I wish I had Combatives on Gee so I could continue to lock down (all) Mutons (and Archons indefinitely and turn Berserkers into harmless fluffy kittens).'

However, Combatives would be even harder to balance without making it completely useless.
Psieye
Posts: 829
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 12:27 am

Re: Please rethink this!

Post by Psieye »

stefan3iii wrote: The poison buff still looks very weak to me. In XCOM, most enemies die in 1 turn, and some enemies die in 2 turns. If something is alive for 3 turns then shit has hit the fan and you're probably taking damage on your soldiers. So the damage output of a poison grenade is pretty awful, because usually it'll have 1 or 2 turns to do damage. As a CC effect it is much worse than a flashbang, there are many enemies immune to poison (Vipers, Chrysallids, Robots), and many enemies that simply cannot be allowed to use special abilities (m2 grenadiers, rocketeers). On top of that, there is a chance it wears off immediately on the the next turn, and the previously poisoned berserker runs in and murders your dudes. The idea of a hybrid cc/damage grenade isn't crazy, but it needs to do one or both better, and adding +1 damage isn't nearly enough.
Some ideas, obviously not all at once:
1) Poison disables melee attacks, and chrysallids are vulenerable to poison. I don't know why this makes story sense, but poison grenades would now have a niche as an anti chrysallid/berskerer utility.
2) You can't shoot at all from inside a gas cloud. Would basically make poison gas a sort of cover denier, would open up interesting tactical play, ex poisoning all cover that can be used to flank your soldiers. Might be a lot of work to implement.
3) Significantly increase damage, something like 5-7 on hit. Yes, they should do more damage than frag grenades, frags work on everything, shred armor, and destroy cover.
4) Make poison last a minimum of 1 alien turn, so you can at least rely on it as CC.
The simplest way to implement something approaching this is to slap -6 mobility to poison status. Poison is somewhat tricky to balance as your dudes take snek spit a lot before you ever get your first poison grenade. Do grenadier perks still buff grenade DoTs?
WanWhiteWolf wrote:What people are argue and complaining is that this nerf will simply remove the item from the game.
What they mean is "the CC grenade" will be removed from the game. "The single-target kill grenade of midgame" is still around if you go tandem warheads. Now, you don't believe this kill grenade to be worthwhile. That's fair, it's your playstyle and many share it.
My three 8-man GOp squad Commander campaigns:
1st
2nd
3rd
stefan3iii
Posts: 319
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2017 3:49 am

Re: Please rethink this!

Post by stefan3iii »

RookieAutopsy wrote:A funny thing from S2E62 of XWynns campaign: 'Fire grenades are OP as they will take this (single enemy) out of the game (once for 2 turns). I wish I had Combatives on Gee so I could continue to lock down (all) Mutons (and Archons indefinitely and turn Berserkers into harmless fluffy kittens).'

However, Combatives would be even harder to balance without making it completely useless.

Combatives should be nerfed too. Just need to adjust muton AI so they only melee the adjacent target like 85% of the time. Would still be an effective perk, but carries major risk, so wouldn't be the first option every time.
Saph7
Long War 2 Crew
Posts: 167
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 4:00 pm

Re: Please rethink this!

Post by Saph7 »

WanWhiteWolf wrote:I don't think anyone argues that incendiary is the most powerful grenade. What people are argue and complaining is that this nerf will simply remove the item from the game.
I'm playing with the nerfed version of incendiaries in my current campaign right now. They're fine.

Point of interest: none of the grenade launcher soldiers I have on my roster right now have Boosted Cores or Biggest Booms (since I'm trying out a different class to replace the Grenadier). So Incendiaries do no more damage than they would if used by a Rookie. Even with all that, I'm STILL using them. That should tell you something.
RookieAutopsy
Posts: 80
Joined: Sat May 13, 2017 9:35 am

Re: Please rethink this!

Post by RookieAutopsy »

In the hands of a normal soldier, hitting only a single target, the Incendiary would have 25% chance to not burn. In the hands of a Grenadier, hitting two targets (which is very frequently possible), there is only a 6.25% chance neither will be lit, before you even consider them running from a burning tile. You're still pretty much guaranteed to take one out while they wont be quite as potent on regular troops.

Combatives perhaps would be better if the enemy 'learned' and didn't melee the same soldier more than once (per enemy). Its still a good counter as it could be relied upon (bear in mind you have to flank yourself to make it work, much, much more dangerous than a failed Incendiary) but won't break the AI. You can lock down the Muton for one turn after which they will just shoot you. Or the Berserker/Archon then goes and attacks someone else.
wobuffet
Posts: 92
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:09 am

Re: Please rethink this!

Post by wobuffet »

RookieAutopsy wrote:A funny thing from S2E62 of XWynns campaign: 'Fire grenades are OP as they will take this (single enemy) out of the game (once for 2 turns). I wish I had Combatives on Gee so I could continue to lock down (all) Mutons (and Archons indefinitely and turn Berserkers into harmless fluffy kittens).'

However, Combatives would be even harder to balance without making it completely useless.
Combatives can shut one unit down (if it's a melee unit), but only if you place a unit right next to it indefinitely, potentially wide open to damage from any other active enemies. So I don't think it's nearly as much of a balance problem as Incendiaries.
Psieye
Posts: 829
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 12:27 am

Re: Please rethink this!

Post by Psieye »

Saph7 wrote:I'm trying out a different class to replace the Grenadier
This is the most interesting post in this thread. For 1.5 if it proves successful? Or 1.6+?
My three 8-man GOp squad Commander campaigns:
1st
2nd
3rd
Saph7
Long War 2 Crew
Posts: 167
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 4:00 pm

Re: Please rethink this!

Post by Saph7 »

Psieye wrote:This is the most interesting post in this thread. For 1.5 if it proves successful? Or 1.6+?
Nothing that dramatic I'm afraid! I'm playing with the LW2 Shadow Ops mod to vary things up a bit.
Psieye
Posts: 829
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 12:27 am

Re: Please rethink this!

Post by Psieye »

Thank you for the quick clarification.
My three 8-man GOp squad Commander campaigns:
1st
2nd
3rd
joebill
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 10:38 am

Re: Please rethink this!

Post by joebill »

Why not tie it to armor? If every point of armor dropped the chance from 100 by 5% (10%?), it'd be easy to know who is fireproof, and you'd be rewarded for combining it with shredding weapons.
Exquisitor
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed May 10, 2017 4:50 pm

Re: Please rethink this!

Post by Exquisitor »

joebill wrote:Why not tie it to armor? If every point of armor dropped the chance from 100 by 5% (10%?), it'd be easy to know who is fireproof, and you'd be rewarded for combining it with shredding weapons.
This is a great idea. It also gives more weight to shredder ammor.
wobuffet
Posts: 92
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:09 am

Re: Please rethink this!

Post by wobuffet »

joebill wrote:Why not tie it to armor? If every point of armor dropped the chance from 100 by 5% (10%?), it'd be easy to know who is fireproof..
Elegant!
Thrombozyt
Posts: 76
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 10:37 am

Re: Please rethink this!

Post by Thrombozyt »

wobuffet wrote:
RookieAutopsy wrote:A funny thing from S2E62 of XWynns campaign: 'Fire grenades are OP as they will take this (single enemy) out of the game (once for 2 turns). I wish I had Combatives on Gee so I could continue to lock down (all) Mutons (and Archons indefinitely and turn Berserkers into harmless fluffy kittens).'

However, Combatives would be even harder to balance without making it completely useless.
Combatives can shut one unit down (if it's a melee unit), but only if you place a unit right next to it indefinitely, potentially wide open to damage from any other active enemies. So I don't think it's nearly as much of a balance problem as Incendiaries.
It's a much, much bigger problem because the soldier can act fully while locking down the muton/archon/berserker. Especially with Shinobis you can easily achieve a position where you can be adjacent to a Muton (often firing out of a window) and not be shot by something else. With gunners it's even more hilarious, as you can move next to Muton and suppress other aliens so they can't move into a flanking position.

Facing a Muton in melee combat should be - thematically - a last resort option. Currently it's a standard move and you order your gunner/shinobi to shoot at other things than the big Muton next to you, because he is of no concern anymore once you are next to him.

I'm completely fine with grenades being a 100% control panic button. Just make you pay for it by making it a consumable. Each time you use a fire grenade, 5 supplies and an officer corpse are gone.
wobuffet
Posts: 92
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:09 am

Re: Please rethink this!

Post by wobuffet »

Thrombozyt wrote:It's a much, much bigger problem because the soldier can act fully while locking down the muton/archon/berserker.
Gotcha. Good point!

I guess the question is whether to change the AI melee behavior or to nerf Combatives (e.g., making it an active ability).
Thrombozyt
Posts: 76
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 10:37 am

Re: Please rethink this!

Post by Thrombozyt »

wobuffet wrote:
Thrombozyt wrote:It's a much, much bigger problem because the soldier can act fully while locking down the muton/archon/berserker.
Gotcha. Good point!

I guess the question is whether to change the AI melee behavior or to nerf Combatives (e.g., making it an active ability).
For Combatives are % success chance could actually work. Rework the Counter Attack mechanic that you need to succeed your attack roll to parry and allow for counter attacks (but not Blade Storm) to be countered. That means that the attacker (the guy actually expending the action) has a higher chance to come out on top and the higher the skill of your soldier the more likely he is to win a fight.
wobuffet
Posts: 92
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:09 am

Re: Please rethink this!

Post by wobuffet »

@Thrombozyt
How about all melee counterattacks (Mutons' or Combatives) work like this:
(1) simple proportional Will comparison battle to see who gets to try to attack (e.g., a 80 Will unit has 2/3 chance to win against a 40 Will unit), and then
(2) the winner attempts an attack with (melee Aim)% chance of a success?

Makes both Will and Aim matter, is simple/understandable, and also opens up more player options (e.g., lower the Muton's will before running up with a Combatives unit, or just Flashbang and Suppress it from a distance?).
Thrombozyt
Posts: 76
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 10:37 am

Re: Please rethink this!

Post by Thrombozyt »

Why bring will into this? It's not like you can influence will aside from red fog which will also influence offense. Try Insanity on a trooper to see the success rate, then flashbang and see that the trooper has the exact same chances. On the flip side the flashbang disables combatives anyhow.

Making it based on offense allows you to improve it by picking the right skills (blade master will be better at countering than a regular and even cutthroat has a minimal influence as it might negate graze into miss rolls). Plus it's a tense thing to see a Muton and a XCOM soldier duke it out in a series of attacks and counters.
Post Reply