Victory Conditions

[Captain Bipto]

I had a thought while reading threads and I am not sure if this has been brought up before...

I think having victory conditions (in addition to cacking alien scum on the map) has potential. Maybe include it as an iron man or difficulty option. The reason for optional status is that these victory conditions could make the game much harder.

For example, having a victory condition where you have to "control" a UFO's cockpit before the end of the encounter would allow you to research the navigation unit. In the real world, things such as jets have self destruct systems in an attempt to keep valuable tech out of enemy hands. So not only do you actually have to enter that UFO (creepy) but the hard work done by the devs on the models gets to be appreciated.

Having victory conditions would probably be better implemented in multiplayer games.

I can't think of any others right now.

[GopherLemming]

It has been mentioned before:
http://ufoai.ninex.info/wiki/index.php/Storyline_Missions - Will be implemented in the future
http://ufoai.ninex.info/wiki/index.php/Proposals/Ironman - Not sure about this
http://ufoai.ninex.info/wiki/index.php/Gameplay_Proposals/Mission_Briefings - Think it's going to happen eventually

[Captain Bipto]

Yes the briefing's page is what got me thinking about victory conditions. You'd list possible objectives to accomplish in addition to wrecking alien scum.

[Volatar]

Yes, victory conditions sounds like a very good idea to impliment.

As an example, for a mission where say, a UFO lands on the top of the white house. Something like this:

PRIMARY OBJECTIVES
-Protect the President
-Safely escort bomb squad team into the Oval Office
-Protect bomb squad team from alien retaliation until nuke is disarmed
-Kill/incapacitate all aliens


SECONDARY OBJECTIVES
-Prevent the UFO from taking off
-Capture the UFO before its dead man's switch activates

[BTAxis]

Except none of those examples make any sense in the context of this game, and even disregarding that for the sake of the argument, I don't want missions to have multiple objectives like that. This is X-COM, not Jagged Alliance.

[Volatar]

My example was just an example, context is not necessary in an example.

I have not heard of Jagged Alliance before, can you go into detail on how multiple objectives are bad? (You have a point in that multiple objectives breaks away from the X-Com mold, but is every deviation from the formula bad? Or is it possible to improve upon X-Com? )

[BTAxis]

Jagged Alliance is all about a complex combat model, complex missions and complex character management. Our game is not. It's about building multiple squads that do many missions. These missions should be relatively simple, both in terms of the objectives and the combat rules, to keep the game playable. Bottom line, while it's certainly acceptable to have a win condition other than killing all the aliens, there should never be more than one in any given mission. Furthermore, such additional win conditions should be used sparingly, to avoid breaking away from the main game premise.

[Volatar]

Thank you. I see your point and agree.

It could however, be a good change to incorporate just a couple complex missions into the storyline. Not necessary however.

[BTAxis]

There are indeed plans for special missions with special victory conditions.

[Volatar]

*rubs hands together in excitment* 

You have me happy/giddy now.

[Captain Bipto]

Egggggcelllent.

Any hints?

[BTAxis]

Well, there's your alien base missions, which will involve neutralizing a special piece of machinery. We're also planning an offworld mission, which will likely be about reaching a particular spot on the map. Then base defence missions will not only be about killing all the baddies, you also have to prevent said baddies from destroying vital equipment in your base.

[odie]

Well, there's your alien base missions, which will involve neutralizing a special piece of machinery. We're also planning an offworld mission, which will likely be about reaching a particular spot on the map. Then base defence missions will not only be about killing all the baddies, you also have to prevent said baddies from destroying vital equipment in your base.

Managed to finally follow up on some of these earlier discussions..... ooooo, this sure sound exciting!

*rubs paws gleefully too....*

Our game is not. It's about building multiple squads that do many missions.

Hi BTAxis,

On this point, i was wondering if u play with multiple squads?? (of 8s). Cos, i usually stick with my 'Usual 8s' with maybe 2-4 to spare (in view of bigger dropships in future?)

Also on same point, why do we keep even > 8 soldiers (other than replacement's sake)? I know in UFO (Xcom series), u need to have a certain number of soldiers before a certain soldier gets promoted (as in the soldier's promotion depended on nos of kills, missions + total of soldiers currently). I saw our specs (as in medals.ufo) and it does not seemed to be so.

If i did not interpret the codes wrongly, it seemed to point to promotion criteria: (Currently not balanced, so others looking at this just refrain from judging on these criterias)
[Lets take Warrant for example]

Code: [Select]

rank warrant
{
name "_Warrant Officer"
shortname "_WO"
image "ranks/rank_05"
mind 65
killed_enemies 18
killed_others 7
type EMPL_SOLDIER
factor 0.5
}

1) Requires min 65 mind.
2) Requires 18 kills of aliens.
3) No more than 7 other kills (civis and maybe fellow mates)
4) Must be a soldier of course
5) With an unexplained 'factor' criteria of 0.5

I trust we are not adding more conditions in near future?