UFO: Enemy Unknown, remake by Firaxis

[Lib.Spi't]

I think I have nearly finished my First game on normal.

I generally enjoyed myself, although I think right now I would not recommend buying it at the full price, it is a good game, but not a great £30 game.

I admit, some of these things are personal, I just felt like it didn't quite have enough content for my liking, after playing the Altar UFO Triliogy, I would have really liked to see an XCOM game that had a lot more stuff in it. There is some really fun stuff like the:

Spoiler :

Grapple Hook

Which made me go COOL! But a lot of other stuff left me a little flat and going... is that it..

The Terror missions are GREAT and worthy of the name with the fire and the screaming and the life and death choices, the first one of those I really found intense, far more so than the original Xcom terror missions. (of course a lot of that is modern graphics and sound)

I think overall I would say as a game it is an 8/10, as an xcom game I would say 6 or 7.

I think I need to try and play the classic difficulty to see if it hurts a lot more.

I also wasn't a fan of the minibudget, it is only a small thing, but getting like 200 cash didn't make me feel like I was the head of a globally funded secret Facility. Mostly it is these sorts of niggles on and off that got me. Things that just made me sort of feel...why did they decide to do it like that?

Also the troop pathfinding is hilarious, it can be annoying, especially as you you can only do the 1 2 move. My favourite 2 were when one of my guys smashed through 2 windows instead of just walking round the outside of the building (clearly he was a stealth master) and the other was one that smashed through a window on their left instead of walking through the open door on their right. (They clearly have an action hero complex!)

The graphics glitches are funny too, when a guy shoots behind himself to kill an alien in front, or smashes a window and then shoots in another direction!

Also the weird line of sight issues, like shooting through walls and the like without leaving a mark.

Sometimes from the graphics you couldn't tell when you were hitting or missing until it told you. Again a small thing, but it is the kind of polish I want in a £30 buy

Snipers are just Hardcore! If they were healthy I always had 2 of them because of the untold mega death they can unleash, especially with their high end skills DEVASTATING a couple times a got 4 or five kills in a single turn! also they have the only option I have found for dealing with long term mind control in your uinits, as their is no way to knock them out (which I also miss)

As to the Dumbed down argument I would say it is at the very least incredibly streamlined! One thing I liked and hated (liked because it made it easy, hated because...it made it easy!) is the

Spoiler :

Firestorms not needing Elerium Fuel and no better transports

As this was one of the major decisions to be made on what to use that precious resource on..

Again it is the things like this, the reductions over old xcom, or the lack of expansion from the old xcom..it just left me wanting more and not in the good way. I mean things like the ammo is not such a big deal for me, although the different types of ammo were fun, and the ammo indicator is a bit nondescript in that at times I would look an it would not be empty but I couldn't shoot until I reloaded, it was a bit like 'if it's empty then make it empty!!'

There are some genuinely scary bad guys when they put their best foot forward that can devastate you!!

I think overall I would have felt much better about it at the £10-20 range for what I got.

 

[Lanstro]

I've restarted a few times on classic to optimise strategy. My tips for anyone trying classic for the first time (possible spoilers):

• You get a continent's starting location bonus if you (a) start on that continent or (b) cover all the countries in it with satellites. Therefore, don't start in South America, because it's only got 2 countries so it's really easy to cover. Other 4 all seem ok.
• You start with 2 interceptors but only 1 satellite. You'll want to build that second satellite asap, and launch it in the richest country outside of your contient – ie the US or Russia. Get the interceptor to go there also.
• Satellites are crucial for 2 main reasons: income and an instant 2 panic reduction upon launch. 2 sub-reasons also: countries often request a satellite over them, which when completed is quite profitable. And of course they help with interceptions (when you get to the mid-late game and have more than 2 interceptors)
• After the first satellite, there's minimal reason to launch satellites the second you can – you're better off waiting until just before a council meeting to see where best to deploy them. The income from a satellite applies as long as you launch it before a council meeting, and the only time that countries leave the XCOM program is at council meetings. So just hold on to the satellites until just before the meeting and launch them over the countries that are at max panic (and if there aren't any, put them over the highest income countries or countries for which you can finish the continent bonus)
• if you get 2 more satellite links up asap, then the rest of the game will go a lot smoother. As others have said, build your base vertically – build your first power station above the closest steam. Build your first satellite link below your existing one. Find a fairly empty area for your first workshop. Put all your stand-alone buildings in a corner together (officer school, alien containment, foundry, etc)
• the fastest way to get your first uplink is to choose an engineer reward and a money reward as your first 2 kidnap missions. Build your first power station asap, then a workshop for more engineers, then a lift so you can access the square below the satellite link, and start building 3 satellites (remember that satellites take 20 days to build but satellite links only 14). You'll probably need another power station by now (depending on how well you're going with the other goals below). By the time you've excavated that space, you should have enough engineers to build the satellite uplink, and the satellites and the uplink should finish around the same time.
• the other 2 priorities are (a) to get your fifth squad member, which makes fights a lot easier and lets you level people up faster and (b) to start capturing aliens, which when researched gives you research bonuses
• getting the squad member is just a matter of getting a level 3 soldier, so keep sending your starting guys into battle and keep them alive. The officer school + squad upgrade costs a bit of power/money, so that's why you need to do a money mission in your first 2
• to start capturing aliens asap, research alien physiology, then arc throwers, and build your alien containment/arc throwers asap. Don't bother researching beam weapons or armours until you get the appropriate research credit for capturing the corresponding aliens.
• don't get sucked into buying too much of the early equipment from the workshop, they obsolete pretty fast and cost money/materials that you won't be getting back. You only really need 1 medpack and 1 arc thrower, and maybe one of the +2 hp vests for your assault guy. The first +4 hp body armour is also not great, as you get the +3 hp/grapple/+movement armour shortly after. Laser weapons on the other hand are great – you'll struggle without them against midlevel stuff like Mutons, and won't have the momentum to jump straight to plasma weapons.
• after the initial income-building, the rest is just a matter of keeping panic under countrol and not splurging too much on equipment/officer school upgrades you don't absolutely need at the time.

 

[Liegence]

Ok - I finally got over my frustration with not having access to the Elite Soldier DLC. Long story, didn't know about game till after it was released and bought off steam b/c I thought it looked cool but can't access Elite Soldier DLC now b/c I didn't pre-order or get the collector's edition box from the game store. Suffice to say, after playing it now if I knew what I knew before I bought the steam version I would have probably bought the collectors edition. I will probably pick up the Elite Soldier DLC along with any other significant expansion if released. This game is seriously cool. I've never played an X-Com game, which makes the experience much more refreshing, so you won't get any complaining about what they got wrong in this version yadda yadda yadda

Perhaps the best thing about this game is the expectation of where Expansions and Modding is going to take it. From what I understand, the old X-Com games existed before what I like to think of the "Counterstrike" era of gaming, where serious modding communities can take games to places the developers never dreamed. I know Firaxis is serious about installing mod capabilities in their games, and the realm where the community can take this game is as limitless as I expect. I see great things in store for this franchise in the modern era of gaming - long live turn based strategy games

Anyway - I love the game and I think there's a load of amazing things to be seen in future developments, so we'll settle on that for the positives. I can say more, trust me. On the flip side, the current game doesn't seem to have enough out of the box to warrant a great deal of replay. Unless you're determined to grind attempt after failed attempt at chipping away on Impossible/Ironman, you're probably going to put this down after a CI victory. And the unfortunate thing about the development of this game is that the overall strategy seems to have an apparent optimal path to victory. Once you know what everything does when researched, how much of material x you need for best gear/victory conditions, what can be skipped and what's priority, the game loses a bit of its awe. It's not like Civ where you are given full information and have to adopt your strategy - in XCom you get no information and have to develop a strategy as the info comes in and that strategy going forward in future games will only need to be tweaked for minor opportunities or delays. Even unit builds have obvious paths to greater glory, and some perk choices are so unbalanced they're basically made for you (I'm looking at you, squad sight, b/c I love you). So once strategy is down, what's left is on the field tactics.

Tactics in this game, much like the overall strategy, comes down to following a series of protocols to ensure optimal survival. With unit builds in the bag, it's all about taking 'er easy, setting up the death zone, hooking the enemies and then letting the die fall where they may. This random element is what keeps Ironman mode so fresh - how do you come back from absolute mission failure? It adds a nice air of intrigue to the game that I can appreciate - you can fail and march on, but will you win - how much loss can you afford and still pull it off? The unfortunate thing is, to maximize your chances you really have to take it slow - which is fun at first, because it's creepy, but after repeating the same maps over and over again it gets tiresome to move everyone once to see if you aggro, then hunker down or overwatch just to do it again... pacing gets really.. slow. Unfortunate with such a low number of diverse missions and so few maps. That being said, everything else that happens on the field is just another day in the field, and currently that's a problem.

Canned maps with only a slight variance for patrols is a problem to replay-ability. So is the long stint of repeatable mission types that you have to endure. Don't want to add spoilers, but with the exception of a few special ops and two other unique raids you just do the same thing over and over again while the Comp creeps up its own tech ladder and you steer through objectives to victory. Sometimes you're overwhelmed, other times it's on parity, sometimes it's just an alien stomp (on normal, it's basically always an alien stomp after about 5 mishes or so). So until we see a concerted mod effort or a solid expansion pack, I think the games tenure ends ultimately either with your conceding loss in Classic/Ironman or victory in such a setting. Anything after that is surely just abuse, be it save exploitation to be Impossible, or pure masochism in the face of the II setting.

I digress - fun game, I thought it was worth picking up. Definitely - by all means that move heaven and earth - DO NOT SPOIL THIS GAME FOR YOURSELF by reading spoilers or researching optimal tips. Go through the motions yourself - that's where this game really shines.

 

[VoidTrooper2014]

Yes, you can argue that the content is a bit slim. It's a bit the curse of our modern times: Instead of investing 10 hours into a book, many people rather spend 120 minutes watching the movie.

I am currently in my second playthrough (Classic now) and it's still exciting. Trying to optimize my base, getting the important stuff early (my personal opinion: Satellites, satellites, satellites, armor and laser weapons. Foundry can wait.)

Now I am looking forward to DLC to expand the game.

 

[sherbz]

Yes, you can argue that the content is a bit slim. It's a bit the curse of our modern times: Instead of investing 10 hours into a book, many people rather spend 120 minutes watching the movie.

I am currently in my second playthrough (Classic now) and it's still exciting. Trying to optimize my base, getting the important stuff early (my personal opinion: Satellites, satellites, satellites, armor and laser weapons. Foundry can wait.)

Now I am looking forward to DLC to expand the game.

Im curious about what they envisage as releasing for DLC. I would like to see base invasions personally. I think they could also do water missions.

 

[PhilBowles]

Ok - I finally got over my frustration with not having access to the Elite Soldier DLC. Long story, didn't know about game till after it was released and bought off steam b/c I thought it looked cool but can't access Elite Soldier DLC now b/c I didn't pre-order or get the collector's edition box from the game store. Suffice to say, after playing it now if I knew what I knew before I bought the steam version I would have probably bought the collectors edition. I will probably pick up the Elite Soldier DLC along with any other significant expansion if released. This game is seriously cool. I've never played an X-Com game, which makes the experience much more refreshing, so you won't get any complaining about what they got wrong in this version yadda yadda yadda

To be honest, while it's a very worthy X-COM game (I'd definitely argue better than Apocalypse, which was fun but had some downright silly aliens and ideas, a much reduce strategic element, and somewhat lower difficulty level compared with UFO), I think if this game had been marketed as an all-new brand it might well become a modern classic. Adding XCOM to the title invites comparison with a game so well-regarded, and so good, that people are comparing this version with it and sometimes unfavourably. Consider that Civ V complaints revolve around comparing it to Civ IV, a game 5 years older; few people without rose-tinted glasses would consider Civ V less detailed or complex than Civ I, yet XCOM is being held up against a game that's almost exactly 20 years old and in some ways coming up short. This is not just nostalgia - unlike Civ I, UFO is now readily-available and playable on modern computers for comparison - and it is certainly not because XCOM is a bad game by any means.

Anyway - I love the game and I think there's a load of amazing things to be seen in future developments, so we'll settle on that for the positives. I can say more, trust me. On the flip side, the current game doesn't seem to have enough out of the box to warrant a great deal of replay. Unless you're determined to grind attempt after failed attempt at chipping away on Impossible/Ironman, you're probably going to put this down after a CI victory.

I don't know, I've yet to finish the campaign the first time through but have already been tempted to replay early stages several times on Classic. This isn't like a Starcraft, say, campaign, where all the missions are pre-scripted. I think there's an inherent difficulty in modern gaming in trying to sell a game based on a single-player campaign, but I don't think the replay value hinges on the strategic elements; as I noted in another thread, X-COM games do not have a history of being strategically complex. What the older games offer is breadth, not depth - the scope is much wider and, more importantly perhaps, feels much wider.

The Geoscape in the new one is not the main view; you get characterless mission briefings with only the change in the name of the country/city to identify where you are, which really doesn't have the feel of a world in peril you get from watching your yellow pixel slowly moving over the surface of the Earth towards its target (yes, you do see a brief animation of the Skyranger moving to the relevant part of the world, but blink and you'll miss it). The lack of maps specific to geographical regions is also a weakness in this regard, and while I love the XCOM UFO maps, I'd rather the game inserted a UFO into one of a variety of base map types as it did in the original, rather than having a UFO land/crash in temperate woodland whether it's shot down in Japan, Nigeria, Egypt, or over the sea.

In my experience so far, the way tactical missions play is much more varied than in the original games, though, and that will likely keep me playing.

And the unfortunate thing about the development of this game is that the overall strategy seems to have an apparent optimal path to victory. Once you know what everything does when researched, how much of material x you need for best gear/victory conditions, what can be skipped and what's priority, the game loses a bit of its awe. It's not like Civ where you are given full information and have to adopt your strategy - in XCom you get no information and have to develop a strategy as the info comes in and that strategy going forward in future games will only need to be tweaked for minor opportunities or delays.

All generally true, and all necessarily true of linear campaigns generally. Compare this game not with Civ but with games that are closer modern counterparts, such as the original Dawn of War II campaign, or as I mentioned before RTS campaigns like Starcraft, and XCOM looks much more open in the way you play it. You need certain amounts of each resource, sure, but the amount you actually have coming in is going to depend on mission performance, how damaged the UFOs you run into are and so forth. In this run-through, for instance, I had to delay production of the Firestorm due to a shortage of UFO flight computers. Now I know that it requires two, I will indeed be more careful with that resource in future, but that in turn will limit what other priority items I could be building. And the earlier you get the Firestorm, the more UFOs you'll be bringing down etc.

Whether you succeed in capturing a live alien early, and of which type, will determine the research credits you have available. Early in the game when money is an issue, replacing squad losses may delay progress on other projects.

It's still limited in variety, I'll grant, and I'd prefer that some of the major game features - specifically psionics - weren't written into the story at a specific point, but that instead you could potentially encounter Sectoid Commanders earlier (or later) in the game, and possibly that as in the original you would need a live one to develop psionics. In the original, you could potentially (though it was unlikely) get psionics in the first month or two, if you attacked a Large or Very Large spaceship on the ground (you can't shoot them down at that stage), or you might get psionics much later than average if you have difficulty capturing a live alien of the right type.

Even unit builds have obvious paths to greater glory

I'd say 'especially' rather than 'even'. It was my key issue with the class system when it was announced that it promoted build orders. I think this could be mitigated by allowing unit stats to vary, however, while keeping the class system - different options may be preferable if your character rolls Aim 60 than if he rolls Aim 40, say (it would make the critical difference between training your support guy for fire support rather than medical upgrades or vice versa, determine whether defensive or offensive upgrades are best for your assault soldiers, or whether your sniper really needs the aim bonus from high elevation more than Executioner, for starters), or characters with low Will would benefit more from certain upgrades than stronger-willed ones.

and some perk choices are so unbalanced they're basically made for you (I'm looking at you, squad sight, b/c I love you).

And the assault upgrade that lets you reaction shoot for free within 4 tiles, and Double Tap (let's see, do I want to get two shots every turn I don't move, or two shots only in specific circumstances?), and Psi-Panic, and...

Tactics in this game, much like the overall strategy, comes down to following a series of protocols to ensure optimal survival. With unit builds in the bag, it's all about taking 'er easy, setting up the death zone, hooking the enemies and then letting the die fall where they may. This random element is what keeps Ironman mode so fresh - how do you come back from absolute mission failure? It adds a nice air of intrigue to the game that I can appreciate - you can fail and march on, but will you win - how much loss can you afford and still pull it off? The unfortunate thing is, to maximize your chances you really have to take it slow - which is fun at first, because it's creepy, but after repeating the same maps over and over again it gets tiresome to move everyone once to see if you aggro, then hunker down or overwatch just to do it again... pacing gets really.. slow.

Hmm, I tend not to play that way, and I find that this approach is limited by where the aliens show up, their identity, and the availability of cover (which is going to vary on identical maps between playthroughs as a result of battle damage). I find overwatch a mixed blessing - if you have enemies in sight it's rarely preferable to shooting directly due to the lower accuracy and inability to score critical hits. And the AI is smart enough generally to 'force' overwatch - if I set up overwatch to hit a Chrysalid or Cyberdisc, the AI will move that Heavy Floater or Drone into sight first, everyone will fire, and the Chrysalid has a free run. This also limits the effectiveness of setting up a 'kill zone' with multiple units on overwatch exposed to the same target. So I find I need to be somewhat focused in how and when I use it, unless I'm in a situation where I have no other actions to perform. If I just set overwatch in case, when I could be finding better cover or exploring more of the map, it's often a waste.

I haven't tried the multiplayer mode yet, but that adds an additional element to the game's replayability as well.

 

[ColdFever]

I prepared a more serious XCOM Wallpaper, so that you can enjoy XCOM in your office as well. Preview:

THANK YOU FIRAXIS AND 2K, I LOVE THIS GAME.

 

[PhilBowles]

Im curious about what they envisage as releasing for DLC. I would like to see base invasions personally. I think they could also do water missions.

As for water missions, expect Terror from the Deep as a 'standalone expansion'. Yes, I wonder what the DLC options will be, and hope they don't just focus on multiplayer. New classes and aliens would be my first guess.

 

[sherbz]

Yes, I would expect a terror from the deep kind of expansion. I would have a few concerns as to how well the unreal engine would actually handle that though. I also think if they were to do that then they ought to address the rather silly notion that you used to be able to throw grenades underwater, which I never really quite worked out. I would also like to see more map varieties according to location. I think the terror missions are quite varied and represent a decent mix (excepting the fact that they are obviously all set in a western style city). It would be nice if they added a bit of regional flavour.

I would also like to see terror missions integrate more in to the game world too. Along with base defences and invasions. That would be cool.

 

[PhilBowles]

Yes, I would expect a terror from the deep kind of expansion. I would have a few concerns as to how well the unreal engine would actually handle that though. I also think if they were to do that then they ought to address the rather silly notion that you used to be able to throw grenades underwater, which I never really quite worked out.

That should be an easy fix with the new system - since you only have one grenade each, just rename it a portable depth charge launcher or something equivalent.

I would also like to see more map varieties according to location. I think the terror missions are quite varied and represent a decent mix (excepting the fact that they are obviously all set in a western style city). It would be nice if they added a bit of regional flavour.

I had an abduction mission in Japan where I'd swear the metro map on one of the billboards was the DC one. Given how few countries are represented as areas where the aliens can invade, they should be able to have a set of maps representing regional towns, as well as landscapes appropriate for that area (tropical forest and savannah in Nigeria, desert and floodplains in Egypt, farmland in Europe etc.) Maps are commonly added as DLC to various games, since they're a key draw for multiplayer, can be used in single player, and aren't generally expensive to produce.

As it stands I don't see the same map turning up too often - there are purportedly around 80, and this is a much smaller game in terms of how many missions you'll complete in an average campaign than UFO (where you could easily play more than 100 missions). For me the key thing is the UFO maps, since while UFO type and tree placement differ, they are all woodland maps outside the confines of the UFO itself. I think they're very good maps, except for the camera/interface problems with multilevel UFOs, but they aren't very varied graphically.

Also, I'm bothered by the sometimes seemingly arbitrary nature of cover, which is dictated more by map needs than by the structure of the cover itself. Being behind a tree is hard cover, fine - but being next to one is? Sometimes the identical points of two different cars will differ in the cover they provide, and so on. A trash bag counts as cover, but some other structural elements don't provide cover at all. So you often have to rely on checking every possible placement and the shield icons that show up rather than necessarily being able to infer from logic and past experience what type of cover your soldier will benefit from for any given mission.

I would also like to see terror missions integrate more in to the game world too. Along with base defences and invasions. That would be cool.

I suspect that any major changes to the structure of the existing campaign won't be feasible as DLC. In the original setting, though, there were 20 years between the 'First Alien War' and the events of Terror from the Deep, so there's scope to add a new campaign set between these periods as DLC (as for instance Shogun Total War did with Rise of the Samurai, or its predecessor Napoleon with the Peninsular War campaign).

I do expect to see new aliens - three were withheld from this game, and although their flavour suggests that Thin Men are basically Snakemen genetically modified to appear human, that explanation provides scope for re-adding unmodified Snakemen to the game (perhaps as the elite equivalent of Thin Men, something that's currently missing). Flying kidneys are a silly idea, but an alien that clones itself might be interesting and they've departed far from the graphical style of UFO for most aliens, so there's room to bring the Celatid back. The Silacoid didn't really do anything distinctive, but it's out there anyway.

EDIT: An elite Chryssalid is also needed. These are genuinely scary early in the game, moreso than they were in UFO I'd say, but it's a little sad that by the late game they don't have the strength to kill your troops in one attack (and die before they get a second), and can be taken out with one shot from any plasma weapon (or a critical from the heavier laser weapons).

 

[PhilBowles]

Finished the game on Normal - the twin Sectopods in the final mission were an unpleasant surprise, and I ended up with only The Volunteer surviving that mission, and that on the second run-through having lost him to a lucky Muton the first time round. Fortunately he was also a sniper colonel - with Double Tap I took out the Ethereal the turn I spotted it, using a pet Muton Elite as a forward scout. I don't think I'm a fan of the story ending; ending the story with a way to set up a sequel is fine, but making setting up a sequel the entire story conclusion is unsatisfying, especially as such revelations as there were were nothing that hadn't been heavy-handedly foreshadowed well in advance. And for nostalgia's sake I'm sad not to have had a Mars mission.

I'm disappointed in a couple of things that were missing - I never ended up tackling a Very Large spaceship, so maybe they're available that way, but the blaster launcher was an iconic part of UFO and I was sad not to see it return in this incarnation.

Also, Ethereals - what made them scary in the past was that you had entire ships full of psychic aliens. One Ethereal worries me less than a ship with three Sectoid Commanders, despite its overpowered psychic attack and ability to deflect close-range shots (which came as an unpleasant surprise which cost me an assault soldier). Not encountering ships with more than one Ethereal crewmember was anticlimactic after waiting for them to make an appearance for so long.

Starting again on Classic Ironman was much more difficult - I've already restarted the game once (having lost my first squad in the UFO mission the first time, and then failed the subsequent VIP mission). On the second run, and three died on the second mission after a flawless first. Incidentally, I haven't seen the patterns I thought I'd noticed in how classes are assigned based on battlefield performance; possibly the previous ones were coincidences, but I still suspect there's some rule to it.

 

[sirtommygunn]

I'm disappointed in a couple of things that were missing - I never ended up tackling a Very Large spaceship, so maybe they're available that way,

Aren't the battleships considered very large ships? I know I just took one down in my game. I'm kind of surprised how easy it went down actually; the intercept screen made it look like a floating skyscraper, and it just took 4 shots from my firestorm to take it down.

 

[Unconquered Sun]

I think the jury is still out on the difficulty of this game. While the old XCOM's Superhuman difficulty was significant, it was Terror from the Deep that was really difficult on Superhuman (I still remember my first Lobsterman encounter).

So, back to today's XCOM: I'm closing in on finishing my Classic Ironman game. Barring extraordinarily bad luck, I ought to be successful. I have started two games on Impossible just to scout the best way to start on it, and it's considerably harder than Classic. You might think that Sectoids having the same health as your soldiers is bad, but in reality the second month comes with snakemen and floaters at 6 health, and getting lasers by that time is difficult as they require not only the tech, but 12 engineers for the rifles.

The abductions will cause very high panic no matter what you do, satellites begin at 100$ making launching more than one in the first month unlikely, as the uplink is 150 and requires 10 engineers, which means one 4 engi mission + 1 workshop very early in the month, or two 4 engi missions by mid month, and hoping for two such missions on Ironman is not the best plan (even assuming they are not very difficult or badly located for panic control).

Bottomline is, you're going to lose members in the first month, and then a very hard second month starts. One satellite will be shot down. The aliens will be very hard with floaters/snakemen at 6 health; plus you get the chryssalid mission at some point, probably at 10 health. If you bleed more members, the XCOM project will be very close to termination. So there you have it.

Overall, I wouldn't be surprised Ironman Impossible to be more difficult than old XCOM Superhuman.

 

[sherbz]

I think the game is tough, and particularly unforgiving if something goes wrong (and you're playing on iron man). It certainly gets a lot easier once you understand how all the mechanics work and what happens when you research technology "X". I dont think i will ever play this on impossible. I think classic ironman is about as crazy as ill get .

 

[PhilBowles]

Aren't the battleships considered very large ships? I know I just took one down in my game. I'm kind of surprised how easy it went down actually; the intercept screen made it look like a floating skyscraper, and it just took 4 shots from my firestorm to take it down.

The UFO screen will tell you the size as well as class of ship - yes, Battleships are Very Large. I didn't take any down because I was lax about upgrading interceptor weapons, and the Firestorm comes too late in the game to really be useful for anything except the story mission vs the Overseer - in my game mine was still under repair for all subsequent UFO encounters until the final mission.

I'm just wondering if, as in the original, there are techs you only have access to if you take out certain ship classes. Blaster launchers used to be only found in bases and very large ships, and they aren't in the alien base mission in this game. It would surprise me for them to be altogether neglected, since in the original they were important and spawned several techs - Fusion Defences, Fusion Ball Launchers and Hovertank/Fusion.

I think the game is tough, and particularly unforgiving if something goes wrong (and you're playing on iron man). It certainly gets a lot easier once you understand how all the mechanics work and what happens when you research technology "X". I dont think i will ever play this on impossible. I think classic ironman is about as crazy as ill get .

So far I'm liking the way they've scaled the levels so that you have to use increasingly sophisticated tactics to succeed, and abilities that aren't amazing on Normal really come into their own. Cover bonuses really force you to use flanking to score hits and kills on Classic, while it wasn't too noticeable on Normal. Headshot really comes into its own. The fact that someone is going to panic if anyone goes down (and may do if they get wounded) will likely make Combat Stims and Psi-Inspiration more valuable (not close to that game stage yet). Had an unpleasant surprise with a panicked soldier who, rather than shooting her tormenter, shot and killed a squadmate (causing further panic in the team). Not welcome in that mission, but I have to admit I had strangely mourned the loss of friendly fire for anything other than explosives in this game...

 

[SJSerio]

So, I have been playing XCOM as much as I can since it was released. I am pretty satisfied with it. I had some skepticism and gripes going in, but overall, it looked good and has pretty much lived up to my expectations. That all said, I find a couple things (small as they might be) that I wish and hope that they may improve.

First, when managing your soldiers, I think it would have been better if they allowed you to assign squads. What I mean is you have several squads (most ideally would be 4, I think... Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, Delta). You would assign your soldiers to a particular squad, with freedom to move them around, etc, and any extra soldiers would be your "reserves".

I am also a bit of a stat lover and would like to see something like a "Service Record" that breaks down the soldiers history. That would include number of each type of alien that the soldier has killed, captured, etc. Plus special accolades for certain accomplishments/tasks. For example "Last Man (woman) Standing" for being the last remaining soldier who successfully completed a mission. There could be many others. Also stats each ones individual civilian saves. I could go on.

Another thing I would like to see is a more robust way to select soldiers, etc for multiplayer. You should be able to set up a pool of soldiers that you can select from. I would like to be able to fully customise them (at least the soldiers) just as in the main game, and put them aside so that I can grab whoever I want for the matches I am playing. Plus, it makes it easier to adjust to the limited points as opposed to spending 10 to 15 minutes trying to shrink everything down to fit.

 

[PhilBowles]

So, I have been playing XCOM as much as I can since it was released. I am pretty satisfied with it. I had some skepticism and gripes going in, but overall, it looked good and has pretty much lived up to my expectations. That all said, I find a couple things (small as they might be) that I wish and hope that they may improve.

First, when managing your soldiers, I think it would have been better if they allowed you to assign squads. What I mean is you have several squads (most ideally would be 4, I think... Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, Delta). You would assign your soldiers to a particular squad, with freedom to move them around, etc, and any extra soldiers would be your "reserves".

Given the equipment assignment system, I'm not sure this would be a timesaver unless you have four times as many weapons etc. as you would normally build/secure. My favoured fix would be simply not to have the computer automatically assign new soldiers to replace combat losses or wounded soldiers - just leave those slots empty and for the player to fill (or not if you want a smaller squad for any reason).

I am also a bit of a stat lover and would like to see something like a "Service Record" that breaks down the soldiers history. That would include number of each type of alien that the soldier has killed, captured, etc. Plus special accolades for certain accomplishments/tasks. For example "Last Man (woman) Standing" for being the last remaining soldier who successfully completed a mission. There could be many others. Also stats each ones individual civilian saves. I could go on.

Yes, I've thought the same thing.

 

[sherbz]

Spoiler :

So, I have been playing XCOM as much as I can since it was released. I am pretty satisfied with it. I had some skepticism and gripes going in, but overall, it looked good and has pretty much lived up to my expectations. That all said, I find a couple things (small as they might be) that I wish and hope that they may improve.

First, when managing your soldiers, I think it would have been better if they allowed you to assign squads. What I mean is you have several squads (most ideally would be 4, I think... Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, Delta). You would assign your soldiers to a particular squad, with freedom to move them around, etc, and any extra soldiers would be your "reserves".

I am also a bit of a stat lover and would like to see something like a "Service Record" that breaks down the soldiers history. That would include number of each type of alien that the soldier has killed, captured, etc. Plus special accolades for certain accomplishments/tasks. For example "Last Man (woman) Standing" for being the last remaining soldier who successfully completed a mission. There could be many others. Also stats each ones individual civilian saves. I could go on.

Another thing I would like to see is a more robust way to select soldiers, etc for multiplayer. You should be able to set up a pool of soldiers that you can select from. I would like to be able to fully customise them (at least the soldiers) just as in the main game, and put them aside so that I can grab whoever I want for the matches I am playing. Plus, it makes it easier to adjust to the limited points as opposed to spending 10 to 15 minutes trying to shrink everything down to fit.

I like your idea about achievements for last man standing etc. Im surprised that was not included as a steam achievement, in all honesty.

As for squads, this idea is ok, but i would prefer it if, when you deslected a soldier from your squad (or they're wounded), all of their equipment is automatically unequipped. Its a pain having to unequip and re equip all the time, which is only way to do things because you need to rotate your soldiers what with injuries and stuff. i have not played multiplayer. Are there lots of people who play on steam?

 

[PhilBowles]

Spoiler :

I like your idea about achievements for last man standing etc. Im surprised that was not included as a steam achievement, in all honesty.

As for squads, this idea is ok, but i would prefer it if, when you deslected a soldier from your squad (or they're wounded), all of their equipment is automatically unequipped. Its a pain having to unequip and re equip all the time, which is only way to do things because you need to rotate your soldiers what with injuries and stuff. i have not played multiplayer. Are there lots of people who play on steam?

Their kit is automatically available for missions if they're wounded. If you look at them in the Barracks they still have it (if it hasn't been reassigned), but if you just go to the 'Send Skyranger' screen and outfit your squad from there, the only kit that won't be available is that for soldiers on active duty or those in psi-training.

This is a fun review I hadn't seen, and I think its final summary is almost spot on (although I'm not convinced they got the campaign atmosphere right):

http://www.quartertothree.com/fp/20...y-unknown-review-that-took-18-years-to-write/

 

[SJSerio]

Given the equipment assignment system, I'm not sure this would be a timesaver unless you have four times as many weapons etc. as you would normally build/secure. My favoured fix would be simply not to have the computer automatically assign new soldiers to replace combat losses or wounded soldiers - just leave those slots empty and for the player to fill (or not if you want a smaller squad for any reason).

My reasoning for this is to more streamline pre-deployment selection. You can still manage them in regular base mode (assign, reassign, etc.). But all you would have to do is select which "squad" you want to send on a given mission. Individually, you can setup certain squads to handle certain missions, or just rotate your squads. When there are holes due to injury, death, etc, if you have not filled in the whole of the squad before a mission comes up, the wholes will remain for you to select from the reserves. Maybe there could be an option for the game to automatically fill the holes.

Spoiler :

I like your idea about achievements for last man standing etc. Im surprised that was not included as a steam achievement, in all honesty.

As for squads, this idea is ok, but i would prefer it if, when you deslected a soldier from your squad (or they're wounded), all of their equipment is automatically unequipped. Its a pain having to unequip and re equip all the time, which is only way to do things because you need to rotate your soldiers what with injuries and stuff. i have not played multiplayer. Are there lots of people who play on steam?

To be honest, I wasn't really referring to achievements. I was more referring to in-game accolades for each individual soldier. Maybe Medals may be a more preferable term . Things each soldier earns through-out the game. Like when a soldier is injured, they get a Purple Heart (Green Heart?), etc. Just something to add more depth to the soldiers.

As for multiplayer, I have the game on XBOX, so I am on XBOX live. More than 1,000 players on there at least.