Multiple ammo types?

[Bandobras]

I wonder if we would like to have, say explosive rockets and incendiary rockets for the RPG? Or three grenades fired at once from the Grenade Launcher (I cannot script it right now, because Grenade Launcher seems to be hard-coded, e.g., range is fixed --- will the engine be extended?). Or standard projectiles and armor-piercing projectiles for the Bolter Rifle (already proposed, but not implemented). I think this could be fun for the following weapons:

Rocket Launcher (explosive and incendiary)
Sniper Rifle (some special ammo, less accuracy, bigger damage)
Grenade Launcher (single grenade or triple smaller grenades with smaller range)
Bolter Rifle (standard projectiles and armor-piercing projectiles)
Tachyon Missile Launcher (one big beam upon hit or many small beams in a big splash radius, or perhaps one or three warheads as for the Grenade Launcher)

Of course you will come with better ideas... Is it implementable or even implemented already (just define second ammo type)? Will this clutter inventories? Too much complexity? Are the two fire modes enough (perhaps implement incendiary rockets just as the second fire mode of the Rocket Launcher --- the missile is reconfigured for burning explosion rather than maximum damage explosion).

[BTAxis]

I'm all for different rockets and grenades for use in launchers, but I have to say I don't like the alternative ammo for normal fire-arms. That stuff never works for me. They did that in UFO After*, and I always ended up using the same ammo for everything because I just couldn't be buggered to remember who had which ammo and what aliens it was effective against. It was much, much easier to just shoot until the enemy died.

Besides, we'd have to introduce new damage types, which would add to bloat. We can design missile and grenade types around the types we have now, but all bullets should just be projectile.

[Bandobras]

Absolutely. No new damage types and no juggling ammo on the basic of alien resistances and succeptibilities. This sucks.

Anybody else?

[Bandobras]

A fresh idea --- instead of Tachyon Missile Launcher I could design Rocket with Tachyon-Beam Warhead for the Rocket Laucher. I've already designed preliminary stats for the Tachyon Missile Launcher but it is very similar to the Rocket Laucher, so there is no real reason to duplicate this weapon.

Unless you have ideas how to make the Tachyon Missile Launcher different and interesting. I have also changed the Plasma Blaster to be more like Grenade Launcher, but the plasma balls explode on hit, not after bouncing, so this possibility is taken. Anything else?

P.S. I've added preliminary incendiary and tachyon rockets to RPG in a next weapon tweaking patch to be submitted in a day or two. We'll see...

[BTAxis]

Well, the Tachyon missile launcher does Tachyon damage, right? It should also be more powerful overall. I think that should be enough. It's not really necessary to make every weapon unique; in fact, stronger versions of the same weapon is what you naturally get when armor becomes better. After all, it's really not like the endgame should be fought with the same weapons you get in the beginning, is it.

[Bandobras]

Well, the Tachyon missile launcher does Tachyon damage, right? It should also be more powerful overall. I think that should be enough.

Well, if so, I think, tachyon rocket for the RPG should be enough. The tricky part is that aliens will not have any long range explosive weapon, neither tachyon nor plasma (after I make some more changes to the Plasma Blaster). This is quite nice in that they will not be able to kill 4 of your soldiers at once from the other end of the map. Then, after you leave your dropship you have to disperse, or they kill the 4 soldiers at once with grenades, Plasma Blaster (similar range) or Tachyon Rifle (similar range, explosive secondary fire mode).

It's not really necessary to make every weapon unique; in fact, stronger versions of the same weapon is what you naturally get when armor becomes better.

Yeah, I agree. I just try to make sure we know what we do, so that we don't end up with an uberweapon, nor with 7 weapons per soldier. I think we should be very conscious which weapons become obsolete and which do not and why. Ideally, generic and bland weapons should get obsoleted by interesting weapons of a similar kind and no weapon should obsolete a very different tactically weapon (e.g. by sheer damage and range, see also the Obsoletable Weapons page of the wiki).

After all, it's really not like the endgame should be fought with the same weapons you get in the beginning, is it.

Why not. I would love that the endgame  could be fought with very different but well balanced sets of weapons, depending on a playstyle. Such sets would mix advanced and traditional weapon, matching their realtive advantages and disadvantages.

[BTAxis]

Well, the thing is, if you can still use the old weapons from the beginning of the game effectively in the endgame, what's the point of researching weapons? The gameplay in terms of research should be that the player has to make decisions. Should he research a new (better) weapon? Or should he focus on facilities? Or support equipment? Or alien life-forms? If weapons don't become obsolete, then researching weapons neaturally gets put on the back burner, since you don't need it that much. So yeah, I feel the starting weapons should be so ineffective that you don't want to use them by the end of the game.

That said, I fully agree that there shouldn't be one or two superweapons you can just give to anyone. That's what the weapon tiers in the original design docs were for. They provided a framework for having a balanced set of weapons, while still making old weapons obsolete.

Putting a tachyon missile in the old missile launcher works, but why not make a whole new launcher? It makes the player feel like he's upgrading his equipment (an important aspect of gameplay, one that I enjoyed the most in the old games), and you can easily explain it away by saying the new missile design cannot possibly be adapted to fit the old launcher.

[Bandobras]

Well, the thing is, if you can still use the old weapons from the beginning of the game effectively in the endgame, what's the point of researching weapons?

For fun. Seriously though, you have a point and that's one more thing to be wary of. I think the set of old weapons has its weaknesses and so you research to overcome them. You do not have to exchange all your weapons, only research as many to make a balanced subset, with all tactical needs covered. This also makes research nonlinear (at least in the early game).

I will give an imaginary and simplified example. (In reality there is still too few weapons to be researched and too many already available from the start, so the set of old weapons is relatively strong. I'm thinking if e.g. the Bolter Rifle or Grenade Launcher shoudn't be researched (for you computer-guided version it would make sense). Or perhaps there should be more alien weapons and more old weapons should be obsoleted. Anyway, only gameplay practice will show what the real weaknesses of various sets are.)

Suppose you just start encoutering dense village maps and the two main weaknesses of the set of old weapons is the lack of a powerful sidearm (say, SMG is crap, because it's two-handed and uses the whole clip, leaving the soldier helpless; 9mm Pistol is crap obviously) and powerful weapon that shoots above obstacles (Frag Grenade is too weak per points taken to throw and has too little splash damage range). You can now research Plasma Grenade, equip every soldier with Assault Rifle,  9mm Pistol and Plasma Grenades and hunt aliens with grenades from behind obstacles and finish them with Assault Rifle at close range. Or you can research Plasma Pistol, equip two of your soldiers with Grenade Launchers (fast shooting, more ammo) and Plasma Pistols for reliable protection, the rest with Assault Rifles, Plasma Pistols and standard grenades and here you go. Both sets are now balanced, without upgrading all your weapons to the next (plasma) tier.

Remember I make this up, just for illustration. Moreover the example is simplistic, because both Frag Grenade and 9mm Pistol are indeed strictly worse than their alien counterparts. I think it is possible to research an advanced weapon that is not strictly better than any of your currently used weapons (any of them has at least a single important advantage over the weapon to be researched), but still has a unique advantage or a unique combination of advantages that are just fit to improve your current set of weapons for the changed battle conditions you start encountaring at the moment. Depending on circumstances, it could be Laser Rifle, which is weak but combines sniping and assault functionality, or Heavy Laser, which can fire with full strenght only once in two turns, but is devastating at long range, or Plasma Blade, which is lethal if you sneak on an alien from behind (none or unlikely reaction fire, I suppose?).

The gameplay in terms of research should be that the player has to make decisions. Should he research a new (better) weapon?

And better yet: which one? If you just have several tiers, the answer is too simple --- then most powerful of the next tier.

If weapons don't become obsolete, then researching weapons neaturally gets put on the back burner, since you don't need it that much.

I hope this will not be a problem due to the changing battlefiled conditions (new aliens, new maps, etc.) that will require many researched weapons, so that configuring new, appropriate to the situation, weapon sets is possible.

So yeah, I feel the starting weapons should be so ineffective that you don't want to use them by the end of the game.

Objection noted. Anyway, for now there is not enough weapons that need research to do this sensibly. I hope you will change your mind after playing with the current setup (and after lots of balancing to the setup). But, tiers or no tiers, I only insist that we keep track of what we do, to prevent absurds and allow many winning weapon sets (even if there is an obvious one for dummies).

The winning weapon sets may not only depend on playstyle, but also on nonlinearity of plot --- e.g. do you now fight only aliens, or also humans, or mixed forces? or have you raided alien tachyon factory earlier in the game than the alien plasma factory? or have you dumbed them down by shooting down their satelites linking them with mothership, or have you hacked the satellites and you spy on their messages, but do not break their communication? (Wow, even quarelling with you spurs my lazy creativity --- thank you.)

That said, I fully agree that there shouldn't be one or two superweapons you can just give to anyone. That's what the weapon tiers in the original design docs were for.

Pardon? Tiers do not prevent uberweapons. They are an entirely orthogonal concept. What you get is only that you know where to hunt the superweapon --- it will surely belong to the highest tier. In fact, tiers all too easy result in an uberset of weapons, which is not that boring, but still...

They provided a framework for having a balanced set of weapons, while still making old weapons obsolete.

I guess what you mean --- each of the tier should be a fully functional set --- easy on the newbies. But I don't find it in the docs. There is just not enough alien weapons and too much old human weapons... I agree, I've made it even worse by removing four weapons (see Trash Can on the wiki), but I'd swear I'm faithful to the intention of the original authors taken by the aliens, which is "mix and match" (sometimes if you switch on your radio and turn the knob you can almost hear "mix and matchshshsss, mix and matchshshshsh" --- they broadcast using a stolen alien device).

Putting a tachyon missile in the old missile launcher works, but why not make a whole new launcher? It makes the player feel like he's upgrading his equipment (an important aspect of gameplay, one that I enjoyed the most in the old games)

This is lots of fun, indeed, but not so much fun if you only upgrade your green RPG for a bluish one. I think what is most fun is a real acomplishment, like exchanging your explosive rocket for a tachyon one. As much as I like any new shiny, when I have too many, too weak upgrades, I loose interest. OTOH, I may get really attached to those lovely green RPG, especially that they are so powerful weapons in the early game and I will then be really relieved I do not have to ditch them, nor to use them only in support role with incendiary rockets,  thanks to the tachon rocket upgrade. That said, sure I am ready to make a separate heavy Tachyon weapon (not quite RPG), if anyone is really passionate about it. E.g. for aliens use or if the GUI guys insist they are not going to open inventory screen when somebody with an RPG and an assortment of rockets clicks "reload weapon".

[Bandobras]

After this fruitful discussion I hacked UFO:AI techtree so that more weapons need research and so that we have five tiers --- initial (twice the size of others), human advanced weapons, laser weapons, plasma weapons, tachyon weapons. No tier is self-sufficient, nor strictly more powerful than others, which is fine by me.

Please comment on the wiki discussion page.

[BTAxis]

And better yet: which one? If you just have several tiers, the answer is too simple --- then most powerful of the next tier.

The idea was that there wasn't any "most powerful" weapon in any tier. It's just that each of the weapons in each tier is stronger than it's counterpart in lower tiers. So the choice really shouldn't be that obvious.

Objection noted. Anyway, for now there is not enough weapons that need research to do this sensibly. I hope you will change your mind after playing with the current setup (and after lots of balancing to the setup). But, tiers or no tiers, I only insist that we keep track of what we do, to prevent absurds and allow many winning weapon sets (even if there is an obvious one for dummies).

Beware, though, too many weapons make for either extremely hard balancing, or for weapons that end up being useless (heavy explosive in X-COM, anyone?). That's why I didn't write up too many weapons in the original design docs, because I felt every weapon should be worth using, and every weapon should be notably different from the others in its tier. So only one assault rifle, one sniper rifle, one mine, etc. The question of different ammo types for grenade/rocket launchers is a different matter, though.

Pardon? Tiers do not prevent uberweapons. They are an entirely orthogonal concept. What you get is only that you know where to hunt the superweapon --- it will surely belong to the highest tier. In fact, tiers all too easy result in an uberset of weapons, which is not that boring, but still...

You're completely right, but of course I intended for each tier to be a balanced set. SO you'd always end up using the highest tier, true, but you'd still use a variety of weapons from that tier. And in my opinion, that's how it's supposed to be. Just like how regular and laser weapons got totally replaced by plasma in the original X-COM game. You can find it boring all you want, but that's the example from the game that has to this day been unsurpassed.

And another thing. Don't forget that soldiers have skills. It's not a simple matter of researching a new weapon, and reshuffling your weapon set to create a new style of finishing a mission. Your soldiers are supposed to evolve into experts in one (or possibly one and a half) weapon. So a sniper who doesn't get to use a stronger sniper rifle at times will degrade into a useless soldier once the aliens start getting better armor. You could desperately try to work around it with weaknesses, but I think we agreed earlier that we don't like weaknesses.

So the conlusion of the above is, I think you should keep it simple, as in the original idea. Have a balanced set of weapons, each weapon having a use and a reason for being in battle. Then as the game progresses, increase the power of those weapons, making the old ones obsolete. That's the only real way I think it can work. Too small changes (like you give in your examples) will probably be lost on the player. Too much micromanagement. It's easier for the player to just know which weapon is best for any given role, instead of having to dig into the little details of how many TUs a weapon uses and how far it can shoot. Don't get me wrong, those parameters are important, but the casual player should always be able to pick the obviously superior weapon for the role he intends.

This is lots of fun, indeed, but not so much fun if you only upgrade your green RPG for a bluish one. <snip>

Obviously, the bluish one fires stronger missiles (and none of the old types - you'd have to research them again to get stronger versions of those). I personally wouldn't get attached to the old launcher; in fact I'd be happy to see it go. Seeing my soldiers walking around with the same stuff at the end of the game as at the start would make me feel like I hadn't progressed any, and all the work I did was trivial. It's just my experience, you understand. I want to get the feeling I use stronger equipment. Keeping the old stuff around conflicts with that.

[Bandobras]

The idea was that there wasn't any "most powerful" weapon in any tier. It's just that each of the weapons in each tier is stronger than it's counterpart in lower tiers. So the choice really shouldn't be that obvious.

You are right, it's not that trivial, but still less interesting than when you mix and match, especially if tiers are small (as they are currently).

Beware, though, too many weapons make for either extremely hard balancing, or for weapons that end up being useless (heavy explosive in X-COM, anyone?).

Very true. But if you have few weapons and additionally divide them into tiers, you really restrict player choices... Could we instead have an obvious newbie friendly weapon progression path based on tiers, but still keep mix and match sensible due to higher tiers not that overwhelmingly better in each respect? It would be nice if higher tiers were only generally better than lower ones (but some particular weapons could be uncomparable or just have no counterparts) and only approximately complete, just enough for newbies to play comfortably on easy difficulty without mix and match, or even with a naive choice of one of the weapons for reason of sentiment or cool particle effects --- perhaps we could compromise that way?

That's why I didn't write up too many weapons in the original design docs,

Ooops :oops:, so you are one of those ancient fathers of UFO:AI that I allegedly feel like receiving inspiration from through the stolen alien communication device... If so, I'll try even harder to understand and take into account your ideas. And feel free to veto anytime you want.

because I felt every weapon should be worth using, and every weapon should be notably different from the others in its tier.

Ok, so at least we agree on this notion, even if I think it should extend to most weapons (except those 10 obsoletable, of course), while you think it should apply only inside any given tier (with some exceptions, I suppose?). Could you now tell me if the tiers you enovision right now are 3 (initial, human, alien) or 5 (initial, human advanced, laser, plasma, tachyon)? As you understand this is very crucial distinction... This is also somewhat related to the alien behaviour. I guess aliens will start with plasma weapons, then add tachyon ones, but will they ever mix? Or just switch to tachyon and stay there (with the possible exception of weak alien types on small ufo ships, etc.)? I think the approximately best tier composed of tachyon weapons, filled plasma weapons whenever they have no tachyon counterparts (Plasma Blaster (Grenade Launcher-like effect), Plasma Grenade, Plasma Mine, Plasma Blade, perhaps Plasma Pistol) is sensible, especially if aliens use it as well. Even graphically it should be less monotone.

So only one assault rifle, one sniper rifle, one mine, etc.

I'm with you; also, one proximity mine, one grenade, one melee blade, one mainly throwing blade, one RPG, and perhaps some others. Based on on your earlier posts I've already considered extending the set of obsoletable weapons (mainly the initial ones --- you did not research them so you are more inclined to let them go).

But, e.g. all pistols are very interesting, except the initial obsoletable one. Plasma is great at close distance, laser is long distance, tachyon can obsolete the laser pistol and has better damage type (less armor resistance) or can be again incomparable (it has lower range than laser). How do you want to make only one best pistol? Isn't the current setup more interesting? Should we change the name of the Plasma Pistol (Plasma SMG? Plasma Shotgun? Plasmathrower? Plasma Spray?) not to confuse the newbies that Tachyon Pistol is comparable to it?

Also, some weapons are so unique (and cool, at least after some more balancing, e.g. Bolter Rifle, Grenade Laucher) or so multi-purpose (Laser Rifle, Tachyon Rifle) they cannot be just directly compared with others. E.g. Laser Rifle may be worse sniper weapon than Sniper Rifle and worse assault than Plasma Rifle, but it's the only one combining the two. I think it's good (and it's already in the original design docs --- I got most of my appreciation for non-linear weapon design from there).

[...] in the original X-COM game. You can find it boring all you want, but that's the example from the game that has to this day been unsurpassed.

And we really don't have to repeat it's shortcomings (especially those repaired in xcomutil) to surpass it's success (commercially it wasn't that great, BTW, not dumb enough, I suppose).

And another thing. Don't forget that soldiers have skills.

Sure and this makes even strictly tiered design more interesting and sure tiers help controlling that your soldiers use a set of weapon that excercises all their skills. But I think there is no danger as long as skills and weapon purposes match, even if we allow the purposes to be covered by weapons outside of our current tier.  Say, I use Laser Rifle instead of Tachyon Sniper Rifle in late-game, for whatever reason. But the sniping purpose of Laser Rifle is governed by the sniping skill, so the skill will be exercised allright. However, some exceptions are nice, to allow player to go against skills once or twice in the game. Say, he doesn't have anybody with good  sniper skill in his team at base Delta and the aliens in this area have very hard armor. He can then use Bolter Rifle (heavy skill and bigger damage) and he knows what he is doing (the description of Bolter Rifle does not erroneously suggest that sniper skill is used or exercised).

It's not a simple matter of researching a new weapon, and reshuffling your weapon set to create a new style of finishing a mission. Your soldiers are supposed to evolve into experts in one (or possibly one and a half) weapon. So a sniper who doesn't get to use a stronger sniper rifle at times will degrade into a useless soldier once the aliens start getting better armor. You could desperately try to work around it with weaknesses, but I think we agreed earlier that we don't like weaknesses.

Agreed. Newbies better stick to tiers.

So the conlusion of the above is, I think you should keep it simple, as in the original idea.

The original idea was surely not as simplistic as you put it here. I guess I would not even touch the weapon scripts if they were so bland. What really caught me were all those little splendidly thought-off non-linear details (don't tell that was just 1000 monkeys typing weapon scripts at random ).

Have a balanced set of weapons, each weapon having a use and a reason for being in battle.

Sure.

Then as the game progresses, increase the power of those weapons, making the old ones obsolete.

Totally obsolete, under all circumstances, with all play styles and mixed with all possible sets of other weapons? Make totally obsolete even the nice laser weapons we researched with so much effort and were so proud of?

That's the only real way I think it can work. Too small changes (like you give in your examples) will probably be lost on the player.

So what's the problem. Let him be indifferent to those details and just go by tiers (they are already noticable in names, descriptions, technology dependencies, general damage figures, hard to miss and be totally confused what to research next). Then, when the player wins on easy and standard and cannot cope with hard, let his discover the replay value and an array of tactical possibilities hidden in the little weapon stat details.

Too much micromanagement. It's easier for the player to just know which weapon is best for any given role, instead of having to dig into the little details of how many TUs a weapon uses and how far it can shoot. Don't get me wrong, those parameters are important, but the casual player should always be able to pick the obviously superior weapon for the role he intends.

I agree, though I would relax it to "casual player should always be able to pick the obviously superior weapon tier" plus "casual player should always be able to pick a weapon that is only slightly worse for the role he intends than the truly superiour weapon in this situation". I will try to make sure all this is newbie friendly. The only danger I cannot prevent is that a clueless newbie will not restrict himself to the obvious and will suspiciously starts digging in the weapon stats and gets confused. But after some more digging he should be able to rest assured that his "tachyon plus a bit of plasma" weapon set is generally better than initial+laser, even if some individual figures (e.g. some ranges) are slightly better in the latter, and even if a particular mix and match would be somewhat better, given skillful tactical use, in his current situation.

I personally wouldn't get attached to the old launcher; in fact I'd be happy to see it go. Seeing my soldiers walking around with the same stuff at the end of the game as at the start would make me feel like I hadn't progressed any, and all the work I did was trivial.

Even if you fire some really nice shiny new azure super-rockets with it? I fear your bordering the "passionate" stance I promised to aswer by designing Heavy Tachyon and scratching Tachyon-Beam Rockets (and probably the whole idea of multiple amunition with it)...

It's just my experience, you understand. I want to get the feeling I use stronger equipment. Keeping the old stuff around conflicts with that.

Could RPG be an exception (well, and the cool Flamethrower too, for some rare tactics)? All the other primary and secondary weapons that do not need research would be obsoletable. Would that be enough?

P.S. Don't you feel any kind of pride, when you kill alien bosses with your home-made RPG fitted with tachyon rockets or Grenade Laucher fitted with plasma grenades? They forced you to catch up technologicaly, but they did not manage to change your ways. You are still human, not alien. You fry their asses with trusty old Flamethrower and deal the final blow to the alien commander with your old obsolete grandfather-made shotgun (even if you have Plasma Pistol in your holster and Tachyon Sniper Rile across your back). Let them feel what the laughable human technology tastes like...

P.P.S. I sketched a proposal of the top tier weapon set at
  http://ufo.myexp.de/wiki/index.php/Equipment/Obsoletable_equipment

[BTAxis]

Very true. But if you have few weapons and additionally divide them into tiers, you really restrict player choices... Could we instead have an obvious newbie friendly weapon progression path based on tiers, but still keep mix and match sensible due to higher tiers not that overwhelmingly better in each respect? It would be nice if higher tiers were only generally better than lower ones (but some particular weapons could be uncomparable or just have no counterparts) and only approximately complete, just enough for newbies to play comfortably on easy difficulty without mix and match, or even with a naive choice of one of the weapons for reason of sentiment or cool particle effects --- perhaps we could compromise that way?

Yes, I think so. In fact, the original selection had that to a very limited degree (only laser tier had a shooting proximity mine as opposed to an exploding one, for example), but I do suppose this could be worked out better.

Ooops :oops:, so you are one of those ancient fathers of UFO:AI that I allegedly feel like receiving inspiration from through the stolen alien communication device... If so, I'll try even harder to understand and take into account your ideas. And feel free to veto anytime you want.

Ha, no. I wrote it up before you showed up, but I didn't work on this game before it went "open". I was around before that time, but I couldn't really contribute because of the secretive nature of the developers.

Ok, so at least we agree on this notion, even if I think it should extend to most weapons (except those 10 obsoletable, of course), while you think it should apply only inside any given tier (with some exceptions, I suppose?).

It is my firm belief that you can only have so many weapons (say, 10 or so) at any one time that are different enough to use at the same time. Any more, and you'll end up with more of the same, like UFO Aftermath with all its different (samey) assault rifles. A small difference in TUs, rang and accuracy simply doesn't cut the cake, for reasons I have explained earlier.

But, as stated above, I do believe it is possible to keep at least some unique weapons from older tiers around as irreplacable. Perhaps things like mines, with different damage types and operations. Or perhaps the laser sniper rifle has insane accuracy, making it the best ranged weapon (but not the most powerful one). Or maybe one weapon has a unique and powerful secondary fire mode that none of its couterparts have (a tazer on a pistol so you can use it to capture aliens alive? You name it). A BIG difference like that would make me stop and reconsider, rather than just picking the weapon from the highest tier. It's just that you can't really do this a lot, so it's just a handful of weapons you'd retain.

Could you now tell me if the tiers you enovision right now are 3 (initial, human, alien) or 5 (initial, human advanced, laser, plasma, tachyon)? As you understand this is very crucial distinction... This is also somewhat related to the alien behaviour. I guess aliens will start with plasma weapons, then add tachyon ones, but will they ever mix? Or just switch to tachyon and stay there (with the possible exception of weak alien types on small ufo ships, etc.)? I think the approximately best tier composed of tachyon weapons, filled plasma weapons whenever they have no tachyon counterparts (Plasma Blaster (Grenade Launcher-like effect), Plasma Grenade, Plasma Mine, Plasma Blade, perhaps Plasma Pistol) is sensible, especially if aliens use it as well. Even graphically it should be less monotone.

Yes, I think so too. There is also the factor of what aliens you're tackling. I think especially aliens from smaller UFOs should keep on carrying the plasma weapons, firstly because they're supposed to be the vanguard, and are thus not as heavily armed, and also because that would allow a player to send new recruits into battles with slightly less dangerous aliens.

But, e.g. all pistols are very interesting, except the initial obsoletable one. Plasma is great at close distance, laser is long distance, tachyon can obsolete the laser pistol and has better damage type (less armor resistance) or can be again incomparable (it has lower range than laser). How do you want to make only one best pistol? Isn't the current setup more interesting? Should we change the name of the Plasma Pistol (Plasma SMG? Plasma Shotgun? Plasmathrower? Plasma Spray?) not to confuse the newbies that Tachyon Pistol is comparable to it?

See, that's what I mean. You could make them all different, but I'd end up getting the one with the highest damage, always, if the changes were on that scale. Besides, do you really want to keep that many alternatives around? Including all their ammo clips? Think of the clutter it would give on the equipment list. No, I think we're better off with one best pistol.

Totally obsolete, under all circumstances, with all play styles and mixed with all possible sets of other weapons? Make totally obsolete even the nice laser weapons we researched with so much effort and were so proud of?

Well, in basic outline, yes. That's one of the aspects of the game: you progress through the tech tree, upgrading, improving, replacing the weapons you use at a steady rate. That keeps things interesting. It makes you feel like you're developing, rather than just leveling up your soldiers. It's common practice. I refer to all the RPGs out there that have the players get new weapons and armor from time to time. I refer to all the RTSes that have you use more advanced weaponry and upgrades for old equipent as the campaign progresses.

But, again, exceptions. If a weapon from a lower tier just has no counterpart (shooting mines) or is just the best in its field already (laser sniper rifle with max accuracy), then you would keep it around.

So what's the problem. Let him be indifferent to those details and just go by tiers (they are already noticable in names, descriptions, technology dependencies, general damage figures, hard to miss and be totally confused what to research next). Then, when the player wins on easy and standard and cannot cope with hard, let his discover the replay value and an array of tactical possibilities hidden in the little weapon stat details.

Yes, you may be right. But then again, maybe not. I think a lot of players wouldn't bother. The little weapon stat details really don't have a great impact, you see. If the chance of hitting an alien is 38% as opposed to 35%, nobody's going to notice the difference on the field. Damage from 112 to 120? It'll probably still take three hits to kill an alien. TUs from 18 per shot to 16? Okay, you can walk one square farther than normal before shooting. It's just not worth it.

Even if you fire some really nice shiny new azure super-rockets with it? I fear your bordering the "passionate" stance I promised to aswer by designing Heavy Tachyon and scratching Tachyon-Beam Rockets (and probably the whole idea of multiple amunition with it)...

Like I said, it works with just putting a new missile in the old launcher. It doesn't make any difference in terms of game effect. The difference is purely cosmetic; do I see my soldier walking around with the old launcher I know and, arguably, love? Or is it a shiny new sci-fi-looking model? That's all, really. I prefer the latter, you prefer the former.

Could RPG be an exception (well, and the cool Flamethrower too, for some rare tactics)? All the other primary and secondary weapons that do not need research would be obsoletable. Would that be enough?

I have an idea here. What if you pulled an X-COM 1 and introduced one new launcher in the course of the game, one that would allow you to fire missiles along corners, like the ultimate cheese weapon from X-COM? The advantage of this weapon is obvious, and the drawback could be that you have to expend much of the grenade's volume to guidance and propulsion at the expense of destructive power. This way you would still want to use the old model for better damage, and the new model for its tactical advantage. Thoughts?

P.S. Don't you feel any kind of pride, when you kill alien bosses with your home-made RPG fitted with tachyon rockets or Grenade Laucher fitted with plasma grenades? ...

Well, no. No I wouldn't. I'd more enjoy seeing new equipment on my soldiers every once in a while, giving me the sense of having gained new powers and finally being able to start giving some back. I stress again, this has more to do with cosmetics than with the actual effect ingame.
Firing the plasma grenade with a human launcher doesn't make it human equipment, anyway.

[Bandobras]

Well, I guess, we have compromised. Could you monitor the wiki from time to time and help guiding my understanding of the compromise so that its acceptable for you? As I see it, currently there are too few weapons to have more than three distinct tiers (human, laser + human + a bit o plasma, all alien), but we agreed numerous weapons cause problems and have to be introduced slowly.

I have an idea here. What if you pulled an X-COM 1 and introduced one new launcher in the course of the game, one that would allow you to fire missiles along corners, like the ultimate cheese weapon from X-COM? The advantage of this weapon is obvious, and the drawback could be that you have to expend much of the grenade's volume to guidance and propulsion at the expense of destructive power. This way you would still want to use the old model for better damage, and the new model for its tactical advantage. Thoughts?

Cool. Incidentally we have a bit of a description for this one (the original descritpion of RPG was erroneously as a guided missile). Name? Stats I can devise, but engine implementation will be needed... Only high-explosive rockets or allow upgrade with alien tech? Or make it an alien tech from the beginning (plasma or tachon?). Brrrr, aliens using that a lot would be awful, even if short range, most of you hiding tactics would be rendered useless. No wonder that weapon is excluded from multiplayer UFO2000. But perhaps with very short range it would just make very close combat more dynamic, more charges, more melee, more damage dealt and received instead of peeking out of doors and corners, sniping and hiding again...