Tactical Deployment

[Darquewing]

Quick "hi" as this is my first post. Just love the game, and hope to start contributing. Heck, I'd even like to try implementing this feature below.

And this one may be a bit long-winded so here goes.


The one thing I always wish I could do is decide where to put down my transport craft. I'm not sure this is feasible as it seems the craft is actually a part of the map itself, but I suppose there could be a way. Possibly have a mini "sat-image" of the map shown right before starting the mission. No people/aliens shown though. Then you pick a suitalbe LZ the Firebird. This also leads to a possible idea of having "Sat-Uplinks" or "Stealth Satellites"  research possibilities, giving initial intel and showing on the minimap dots or something for any entities that are around.

Now, to expand on this idea, you could make more advanced deployment techniques available through new research/items/map availability.

Some ideas are:

Air Assault Deployment- Just like the Army. Transport flies over the selected insertion area, and soldiers rappel out. Sounds like they now have no cover to start, but also you don't waste TU's getting out. Another bonus is that troops could land in places the transport could not, such as a building roof-top, etc. Danger is that mission aborts may not be available, or you would have to select where to land the transport, and wait somewhat random number of turns before the transport could be there. If enemy get in the way, it would cancel and you would have to re-issue the abort with a new location or set transport to hold while you clear the LZ. This technique could be dangerous to the transport as it could be damaged by enemy fire during insertion/extraction.

Airborne Deployment- Another Army favorite. This time instead of rappelling at low altitude, troops parachute out at mid-altitude. You select the drop zone on the map, and troops try to land there. No danger to the transport during insertion, though troopers may drift some during landing. Still need a clear area as troops landing on trees/fences/etc may take from a bad landing. Mission aborts are as Air Assault.

Glide Suit/Grav Chute Deployment - Which ever of the two makes more sense to you, but the premise is the same. In this case, it's a mid/high altitude drop like airborne, but now you get to pick where each individual soldier is going to land. Some drift may occur, but not common, and never as much as airborne drops. Mission aborts as per Air Assault.


Since you are playing a commander role, I think initial troop deployment should be an important part of any mission. Should you deploy well, things go better. Deploy poorly and you may be up a creek. But at least the player can only blame themselves.


Any thought/comments?

[Thyranim]

the ideas of air-dropping sound great
signed by me

on this way it would also perhaps be possible to get reinforcements during a long battle (on a huge map with a lot of aliens)

so you can say "get me the next 6 soldiers"
and a few rounds later you get the option to say where to drop, or where to land the transport


additional idea for thos kind of bigger maps:
same option for aliens
after some rounds you receive a message by radar-specialists, that a further ufo is approaching in 7 rounds (or something else)

for this a new ufo-type: troop transport

[Hertzila]

I'm not too keen on the idea of reinforcements (and I don't know if it's feasible technically) but the basic idea of different insertion mechanisms than just the basic landing is good. And IIRC there has been talk about a jetpack fitted "Jumpsuit" as a late-game armor. This could fit the glidesuit idea spot on, though it could mean that you only drop a couple of soldiers down and land the other guys in the basic way.

[Gunner]

maybe to parachute in you have to equip your troops with a parachute that fills most of your backpack meaning that if you choose to drop into the mission you can carry less equipment. this would somewhat offset the advantages of not having a clustered insertion point, troops not equipped with a shoot would be inserted at the maps LZ as usual?

[Darquewing]

I was thinking deployments possibly as tactical research options as even present-day airborne soldiers carry their backpack in thier front (dropped below by a tether before landing) and usually carry more equipment as they don't get support very often.

As for reinforcements, that would be neat, but I think it would be hard to pull off, as you need a second dropship already on its way and very close to make the battle. Even for aliens.

Other possibilities are "tunnel-rats" for below ground insertions, and water-bourne deployment (SCUBA). Both of these would depend on if the map hasfeatues alllowing this. (like the mines or the canal maps.)

Also, I love Sluggy Freelance. Been reading it for 4 years now.

[Gunner]

I was thinking deployments possibly as tactical research options as even present-day airborne soldiers carry their backpack in thier front (dropped below by a tether before landing) and usually carry more equipment as they don't get support very often.

As for reinforcements, that would be neat, but I think it would be hard to pull off, as you need a second dropship already on its way and very close to make the battle. Even for aliens.

Other possibilities are "tunnel-rats" for below ground insertions, and water-bourne deployment (SCUBA). Both of these would depend on if the map hasfeatues alllowing this. (like the mines or the canal maps.)

Also, I love Sluggy Freelance. Been reading it for 4 years now.

true they can but the ability to claim all the high ground more than offsets the loss of mutual support add in the loss of 1/3 of your equipment capacity, and should balance it up a little more

[Hertzila]

I don't think we will see SCUBA entry at any point. Water maps are already scarce (I do hope I'm wrong though). Same thing for the "tunnel-rats". Besides, would it be rational to fly there with the dropship and then drop and start making a tunnel at the last minute?
Also the loss of equipment sounds like a rather bad balancing act. Since if you can't take much stuff with you, what's the point of going there in the first place if you just end up hiking back to dropship for more supplies?

[Gunner]

Also the loss of equipment sounds like a rather bad balancing act. Since if you can't take much stuff with you, what's the point of going there in the first place if you just end up hiking back to dropship for more supplies?

well sniper ammo is small 1x1 so if the chute was 3X4 then you could still carry 4 mags on the belt 6 on the holster and 6 in the remaining back pack space so thats quite a few, where as a flamer (2X1) is would be 3 realoads 1 in the belt 2 in the holster and a MG is reload is 2x2 so only 1 reload. so you can't just mine every roof top with heavy weapons that can wipe out the aliens but a few strategic placed snipers. or you can put your MG on the roof and hope he can hold out until someone can get to him from the dropship with more reloads.

there is a certain convoy mission that has you sitting in a valley with the aliens on all the high ground and taking ruthless advantage. now if you could drop onto that high ground a full and fully armed squad that would give you a massive advantage. but if you are limited to a couple of snipers or heavt weapon but the need to deploy them close enough to give them support. so you still have the advantage but with enough of a down side that you have to using it carfully or it blows up in your face

or downed UFO aliens are all inside you drop your fully armed troops out side the doors force entry and complete the mission in a few turns, where as with limited capacity you drop some troops outside the doors but they don't have sufficient ammo to take the entire ship but can suppress the aliens until either the rest of the troops with a heavier load out can get to them and offer support or they run out of ammo and have to retreat to safety hoping they don't get overwhelmed

but if you then had to balance a reduced carry capacity then you still have an advantage you just have to put some though into how you use it.

i'm not saying it is perfect way to do it, but being able to position your troops is just to big an advantage with out something fairly dramatic to balance it out. and the loss of carry capacity in the best way i can think of doing it

[Gunner]

make that 2 reloads for the MG you could have MG in one hand reload in the other, on landing you dump the chute and free up your hand by putting it in your now mostly empty pack

[Darquewing]

I'm still not on the same page with using equippable parachutes.

For one, I don't think having some people drop in and others use offload normally is a good idea. That DOES give needless advantage and sort of breaks the feel of it.

As for selection of an air-bourne drop zone, you would really be selecting an area roughly one-quarter the size of the map. After that, random placement, and random facing go into effect. Parachutes (especially army parachutes) are not the wonderful para-sails that civi's use. They are round, give little control, but can take the massive weight a soldier carries.

Now the glide-suit advanced option would give you more control, but at this point, the enemies should be high-end where you need every advantage you can get. As for balancing the gameplay, remember that there is no longer a dropship around for cover or carrying extra equipment if you need it. Also any delpoyment beyond standard may limit or negate your mission abort options.

As for SCUBA type insertions, I just meant being able to start with troops right next to a water feature on the map. Not really in the water.

Tunnel-rats doesn't mean digging per se, but more along the lines of landing close and finding connecting sewers/mines/etc that would connect in to the existing maps lower levels. Or are close enough that a bit of high-explosives would get them through.

For either of these last two deployment types, think of the movie "The Rock" and how the SEAL team went in. These are options that are done for stealth and suprise. The air deployments are sort of the "shock-and-awe" of deployments, and though nifty, are not always the best way to go into a hostile engagement.

[geever]

ah, another pointless topic...

-geever

[Gunner]

As for SCUBA type insertions, I just meant being able to start with troops right next to a water feature on the map. Not really in the water.

Tunnel-rats doesn't mean digging per se, but more along the lines of landing close and finding connecting sewers/mines/etc that would connect in to the existing maps lower levels. Or are close enough that a bit of high-explosives would get them through.

For either of these last two deployment types, think of the movie "The Rock" and how the SEAL team went in. These are options that are done for stealth and suprise. The air deployments are sort of the "shock-and-awe" of deployments, and though nifty, are not always the best way to go into a hostile engagement.

so you are talking about multiple Insertion Points on the map and then on a briefing screen choosing which you want to use?

you you have a IP in the middle of the map, on on the edge and on the river or at a manhole cover or other covert means

reminds me of the SWAT, FPS.

probably wont happen as much to different to how the game was designed, and even if they did code it it would still need every map to be remade in order to use it

[Darquewing]

so you are talking about multiple Insertion Points on the map and then on a briefing screen choosing which you want to use?

you you have a IP in the middle of the map, on on the edge and on the river or at a manhole cover or other covert means

reminds me of the SWAT, FPS.

probably wont happen as much to different to how the game was designed, and even if they did code it it would still need every map to be remade in order to use it

Something like this. If it would take that much effort, then it may not be worth it, depending on if the time taken is more in building the maps or actually setting all the new spawn points. Or is there a way to set start locations for models when the map loads?

[Destructavator]

ah, another pointless topic...

-geever

I think this spells it out right here - Sorry guys, but I've been in this forum long enough to see many people post all kinds of almost random new ideas that they think would be great in their vision of what they think the game should be like.  Even worse, many of these people who do this don't have the time to commit to coding it themselves, or, what's really bad, they aren't even programmers to begin with.

Sorry to let people down, but that's really the way it is - We already have a design team, the top project devs, and if they were to accept every new idea of this type that came along the game would become one chaotic mess, attempting to please everyone.

If you want to suggest something and have any chance of getting it in an official release (remember, there is a place for mods), I'd personally (I'm not talking for all the team here, just my own guess at what might work) suggest:

- Don't suggest a radical or extreme change in gameplay, but,

- Pick an issue already on the TODO and try an idea for how to implement something already desired from that list ("I see the development team wants a new way for feature 'x' to work, perhaps it could be done like this...").

- Offer to do at least some of, if not most or all of the coding/modeling/whatever work yourself, unless you have other volunteers willing to join you and you can organize it together.

- If you don't like the way the game design is going, then go for your own mod or something if you really want it, the game is after all open-source.

[odie]

Hi Gunner and Darquewing + any others who might be watching this,

I am sorry but to say that geever and Destructavator are both right.

Nothing about the idea being wrong or impractical. But this is bringing the game way out of its initial design.

Possibly, u have not seen enuf of this project to comment..... so, this is not meant to kill your enthusiasm nor your interests ok?

Maybe i can gear u folks towards an area to look at?

1) 2.3 TODO List (of what we are aiming to complete for this nx built).

2) You might want to look at the Proposals page too.

3) To see what have been proposed but rejected specifically, see the Trash Can. U might want to check out also Submarine Missions

4) And if that TODO is not enuf to understand whats going on, this definately will : Contribution Page

After u have exhausted or briefly touched on those, i am sure u will understand this project a whole lot more. Trust me, i have been around this forum for less than a year (though i have been with the game since UFOAI 2), but those pages plus fanatic-like browsing of the forums helps me alot. Lol. U might wanna do the same?