3
« on: September 14, 2013, 06:53:15 pm »
This isn't my first time playing UFO:AI, but last time I gave up because of the campaign pacing in previous versions. However this time I'm enjoying it a lot more, and decided to write up some very quick comments on the game and post some general feedback. I hope this is helpful in some way! I made a couple of "suggestions" in the course of this post, but these are mostly very minor and I'm aware they have probably been suggested before - in which case I'm just voicing my support for them.
The version of the game I played was from 8th September.
Geoscape:
- I really like what I've seen so far of the new tech tree. In particular the links between actual research projects, disassmbley and combat missions (e.g., shoot down UFO, research UFO theory, dissassemble, research parts, produce parts) seem to work well. There does seem to be an awful lot of things to research, but I consider that a good thing!
- I experienced some odd behavious of UFOs: a couple of fighters that totally ignored my aircraft, and a harvester that seemed more interested in going after my interceptors than in the humans on the ground! Could this be a bug?
- The limit on the number of installations that can be built can be very annoying at times. It restricts the range of available playstyles, penalising players who prefer fewer, better-developed bases and favouring those who build lots of bases. Further it breaks immersion, since it beggars belief that a high-tech command centre cannot deal with more than three basic radar stations!
I don't see why the limit is necessary, especially for radar towers and UFO hangars. I suggest that the limit should apply to SAM sites only, so that the player has more freedom but still cannot build SAM sites en masse and shoot down arbitrarily strong UFOs.
- The range of the Radar Tower seems very small, especially the detection/inner radius (the tracking radius, on the other hand, is large enough to be very useful). Is it intended that the player build extra bases as glorified radar stations? This feels unsatisfying to me, so I suggest that the detection radius be increased by 25% or so with the tracking radius remaining the same.
- The UFOs maintain targets forever and only shoot at their target, so can always be shot down with 2 interceptors if they decide to get aggressive. The interceptors close in until the UFO targets one, and whichever was targetted flies directly away. The other moves in and shoots down the UFO, which will not fire back.
- There seems to be little strategy involved in research once the player has worked out what the most immediately useful projects are (e.g., plasma rifles are very important early on, but live alien research is not). Since the player can always focus all of his scientists on a project and complete it very quickly, there is little incentive to pursue a `balanced' approach to keep options open. However much a player neglects a certain area early on, he will always be able to catch up quickly once it becomes relevant (so once the player has 70 scientists and wants to start on the way to psionics, he can complete the live alien research in a few hours).
FreeOrion added another layer to the research system by limiting the number of scientists (which FreeOrion calls RP) that can work on a particular project at a given time. This means that if a player neglects live alien research for a long time, then it will cost him a minimum amount of time (e.g., 5 days) to complete it. In my opinion this works very well and encourages players to research multiple topics at once, which greatly improves immersion (in real life, universities tend to have multiple projects going simultaneously). I also introduces a choice between pouring everything into immediately useful projects (better now) and spreading out a bit to avoid bottlenecks (better later). So I would suggest having a look at implementing this kind of system.
Battlescape:
- I really like the new wounds system! First Aid Kits are now vital because without them your soldiers will die of their wounds, rather than because they make your entire team invincible to anything but a one-hit kill.
- I also really like the way reaction fire works. There is a real tactical choice in whether to use a low-TU mode an guarantee at least some damage, or a high-TU mode and hope the AI is silly enough to spend many TUs in your line of sight.
There is also a similar choice when dealing with enemy reaction fire. Overall, it's really really cool.
- Weather effects (specifically snow) produced a dramatic drop in performance for me. Similarly, triggers (specically that map where there's a door you can open by standing near it) produced a dramatic but temporary drop in performance. On the other hand, my computer was able to handle the rest of the game with little trouble so far.
AI:
- The AI does not react at all to smoke grenade clouds. As a result, soldiers can stand in a smoke cloud on completely open ground and be almost completely safe, unless the AI walks a unit right next to them.
- The AI units do not support each other, at all. For example, one unit frequently wanders around near the edge of the map, away from the player's units, while the rest of the AI team is engaged in combat. As well as making battles easier (since only a reduced force is present), this can also make them more irritating as one has to hunt down stragglers after the main battle is over.
- The AI does not utilise cover, frequently standing around on open ground waiting to be shot. I suggest they should at least prefer to stand near a wall (maybe even a wall which blocks them from the enemy, but any wall would be a start!).
- The AI is very vulnerable to reaction fire, because instead of firing as soon as it sees your unit (which might be 10 spaces away or so), it tends to close in for a better hit chance. Of course this gives your units a better hit chance too, as well as giving you more time to get your shot off first!
Show Posts