UFO: Enemy Unknown, remake by Firaxis
- Thread starter Rub'Rum
- Start date
- Status
I don't know if they've patched it yet, but on release (and for at least several months after release) there was a moderately-uncommon flanking bug (I'd generally see it every three or four missions) that might cause someone to register as still in cover despite actually being flanked. It was probably the #2 most-griped bug in the game (#1 was the teleporting aliens who might appear in the middle of your squad).
Pikkis
Prince
Does anyone know how exactly does Ethereals' shot-reflect ability work?
In an earlier game (Normal) I used a psionic sniper for taking the Uber Ethereal down, because other soldiers seemed to have their shots reflected. This time (Classic), however, every shot (a non-psionic Heavy with a Blaster Launcher, a non-psionic Assault with an Alloy Cannon, a non-psionic Heavy suppressing with a Heavy Plasma and a psionic Heavy suppressing with a Heavy Plasma) hit. Each of the shots were 100%, but I thought that shouldn't be a problem for the Uber Ethereal.
Possible explanations I could come up with:
* it was lucky to have each shot hit
* there are limitations for the ability (like point-blank shots)
* having a Blaster Launcher hit did something to the ability
* all my soldiers had high-enough will
In an earlier game (Normal) I used a psionic sniper for taking the Uber Ethereal down, because other soldiers seemed to have their shots reflected. This time (Classic), however, every shot (a non-psionic Heavy with a Blaster Launcher, a non-psionic Assault with an Alloy Cannon, a non-psionic Heavy suppressing with a Heavy Plasma and a psionic Heavy suppressing with a Heavy Plasma) hit. Each of the shots were 100%, but I thought that shouldn't be a problem for the Uber Ethereal.
Possible explanations I could come up with:
* it was lucky to have each shot hit
* there are limitations for the ability (like point-blank shots)
* having a Blaster Launcher hit did something to the ability
* all my soldiers had high-enough will
Gzz
Warlord
Th Blaster launch cannot be deflected, so...
Anyway, for what I found point-blank shots are likely to begin reflected
I have seen every possible rumor, theory, or wild guess about what might impact Ethereal reflection chance - people saying point-blank can't be reflected, saying it's more likely; people saying plasma can or cannot (or is more or less likely), saying the first action in a turn can't be reflected, or the second action is always reflected, or things along those lines.
The consensus explanation seems to be that it's... just... random. Sometimes you get lucky, sometimes you don't.
Explosives (grenades, rockets, blaster launcher) cannot be reflected by the way; that is confirmed for sure.
The consensus explanation seems to be that it's... just... random. Sometimes you get lucky, sometimes you don't.
Explosives (grenades, rockets, blaster launcher) cannot be reflected by the way; that is confirmed for sure.
Pikkis
Prince
Nice. I, for one, would welcome a clarification about this from Firaxis at some point. Not that it's a major issue (maybe not an issue at all), but rather goes to the "would be nice to know" category.
Random in most cases, yes. The underlying probabilities and factors would be beneficial to know, still. Maybe too beneficial since Firaxis hasn't talked about them?
I think I knew that; at the very least I was very confident about it. I was more interested in the possibility of Blaster Launcher weakening the Uber Ethereal's shield/whatever here.
I just cant stop watching this. I think this is one of the best epic fails in video gaming:
http://youtu.be/kj-jQ9Kpimc
http://youtu.be/kj-jQ9Kpimc
SJSerio
Centurion
That was just terrible... I understood what to do my first bomb mission. It is rather simple. I can't believe this guy!
What makes it funnier is that its on ironman and apparently he had already played a bomb disposal mission in his last play through. Also, someone had told him what to do in earlier comments. I just love the bit at the end when everyone dies and you hear his anguish knowing that he cannot reload. Its a beautiful moment
wow, i didnt get that it was Ironman. that was awesome. i also figured it out on my first bomb mission. lol, it even said something like LP episode 32 or something.
Id be lying if i had not done stupider things in video games (actually, i have done stupid things, but perhaps not THAT stupid). Whats slightly rare though is that some people will actually post videos of it on youtube. Quite often you will just get glorious runs that end in success. I think fails are more interesting. And this guy has 2 before he wins classic, and then he tries and fails on impossible. Makes for interesting viewing anyways.
Omega124
Challenging Fate
In the response to above about ethereal reflecting, I think that not only can't explosives be deflected, but also tier 1 weapons can't either (Original Pistol, Assault Rifle, Sniper Rifle, Shotgun, LMG). In my last play through, I had the unfortunate situation where I had to capture an ethereal, and only had regular pistols to whittle down his health (I had plasma otherwise, but like I said, wanted to capture him). The pistols were never deflected once.
i at least appreciate his willingness to not show only the successes. i can give him props for that.
Indeed. Although it can be self gratifying to display our triumphs, it is our defeats that are more instructive.
Pikkis
Prince
That almost sounds like it could be a Civ tech quote for something like Military Science.
I agree; not everyone has the guts to post failure videos.
What impressions of Impossible do people here have? I've found it terribly hard compared to Classic, and haven't gone past the first month yet with Ironman.
That almost sounds like it could be a Civ tech quote for something like Military Science.
I agree; not everyone has the guts to post failure videos.
What impressions of Impossible do people here have? I've found it terribly hard compared to Classic, and haven't gone past the first month yet with Ironman.
Impossible is much, much harder than Classic - I know a lot of people on the official forums were wishing there were something in between to ease the transition.
Playing on Classic simply does not teach you the habits and tactics you need to succeed on Impossible, which dumps you back mostly on trial-and-lots-of-error when you step up to Impossible. But it is definitely doable; I think the best way to adjust is simply playing the first mission over a couple dozen times until you start to get used to it.
Once you are used to it, I view it as the appropriate difficulty for an experienced strategy gamer who is familiar with XCOM; you'll almost never get away with making a mistake without the game punishing you for it. It calls for detailed planning, unconventional thinking, and absolute paranoia. It also requires extreme familiarity with the maps, so it's not a difficulty for someone new to the game unless they don't mind losing a lot. Personally, I also think it has the best "atmosphere" for playing in - nothing as good for your adrenaline as knowing that at any moment half your squad could die.
Unfortunately, its difficulty tapers off a lot as you get later in the game - by the second month it's hard, but moderately forgiving; by the fourth month, it's barely more difficult than Classic.
Some people insist that Impossible requires luck. This is true - if all you get is bad luck, you will not beat Impossible. That said, there are players on the official forums who win 4/5 I/I attempts or more. I feel pretty confident saying that the dominant factor is skill (if anything, I feel like skill is more dominant - you might win despite a lack of skill on lower difficulties if you get lucky, but if you aren't a good player you'll never beat Impossible).
While adjusting to it, I'd give these rough rules of thumb: until you're feeling quite confident with Imp, just skip Bomb Disposal missions and accept the higher panic + lower experience/income. Thin Men should be hit with rockets or double-grenades on sight. Four of your soldiers firing on one half-cover Sectoid, with all four of your guys in full cover, is about the worst odds you should be willing to accept (and ideally, you've got at least one guy flanking or something). Half cover is almost as bad as no cover at all, and simply should not be used. You don't always have to approach a map head-on; sometimes it's better to hug the edge of the map while you circle to a more favorable area.
I agree with Coanda. Impossible is pretty rock solid. Its a bit too difficult for me. I dont like the way at the beginning you have to rely almost exclusively on luck. I dont think it would be as bad if your soldiers didnt panic so frequently. Because you have to be ultra conservative, its fairly common for your team to panic and shoot each other.
Personally I wouldnt play on impossible. Classic ironman is challenge enough and you can ramp up the difficulty with the second wave options by choosing things like "diminishing returns". I think you have to be a massochist to enjoy playing impossible. That said there are some interesting lets plays on youtube played on impossible. Zenalf manages to win the game without losing any countries what so ever by careful base planning (he manages to build a satelite uplink and 4 satelites in the first month, which i didnt even think was possible).
Personally I wouldnt play on impossible. Classic ironman is challenge enough and you can ramp up the difficulty with the second wave options by choosing things like "diminishing returns". I think you have to be a massochist to enjoy playing impossible. That said there are some interesting lets plays on youtube played on impossible. Zenalf manages to win the game without losing any countries what so ever by careful base planning (he manages to build a satelite uplink and 4 satelites in the first month, which i didnt even think was possible).
Absolutely. Panic was just... not well balanced for Impossible. It's become a bit of a "rocks fall, everyone dies" thing - it is where almost all of the ~10% of unwinnable I/I games come from. Friendly fire needs to do less damage, and it should not be capable of triggering chain panic (where soldier A panics, shoots B, causing C and D to panic as well).
A 4- or 5-sat opening I think is fairly standard with Impossible players, although not truly necessary. It does rely on a bit of luck (you need the mission timings to be early enough in the month that you get income from them in time to make the satellites and uplink), but it's a solid strategy for all that. If you pull it off, it makes the rest of the game far easier - you can afford to lose a few missions without losing the game.
Yes I agree. I think panic needs a nerf. I would make it so that its impossible to critical hit when in panic. There is nothing more annoying than when your assault panics next to your sniper and blows his face off with the shotgun.
missing on a 95% chance to hit is more annoying, imo.
- Status
Similar threads
