ShadowBlade Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 The thing with shield icons is that they've proven to be an inconsistent way to indicate cover state, if that's their actual purpose. Maybe it is, but being cover about the positions of two units relative to each other, it'd be hard to see the system in action on a still picture. I'm not so hot about being so readily able to see enemy health so clearly. I'd either attach that feature to a lower difficulty level, psionic methods or, ideally, vague visual cues such as mechanical units appearing battle-damaged and biologicals wounded. The latter maybe leaving blood trails behind, which you can follow and finish off the sucker. And by the way, being so flimsy (two health blocks), the "ghost" looks more like a Celatid/Silacoid kind of enemy. Or maybe something entirely new! I wouldn't degrade Ethereals to such puny status. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobbes Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 Actually, I think those shields might be some form of Cover System. I like how the troopers are leaning out from behind cover. It's promising, and should radically change tactics we're too used to from the original games. I was trying to correlate the cover system with the images and it doesn't make much sense to me. There are situations where you have full shields on units either out on the open or behind cover. It also just noticed the arrows below the 'health' bars and those would make more sense to be the action points than the shields.I'm wondering if the colour of the shields is also related to a possible setting for units regarding their aggression/reaction mode, blue being cautious, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matri Posted January 17, 2012 Report Share Posted January 17, 2012 Hmm, how about a combination status indicator? Filled icon for full auto reaction, empty icon for Off. The blue for plenty of TUs left to reaction, yellow for minimum reactions, red for insufficient TUs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobbes Posted January 17, 2012 Report Share Posted January 17, 2012 Hmm, how about a combination status indicator? Filled icon for full auto reaction, empty icon for Off. The blue for plenty of TUs left to reaction, yellow for minimum reactions, red for insufficient TUs. That's one possibility but it still leaves the 'arrows' below the health bars to explain. From the pictures the units there are 3 situations: no arrows, 2 arrows pointing right, 1 arrow pointing down. I guess we'll have to wait or keep speculating Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowBlade Posted January 17, 2012 Report Share Posted January 17, 2012 Maybe arrows indicate movement stance. No arrows might mean walking, two arrows pointing right running and one arrow pointing down crouching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobbes Posted January 17, 2012 Report Share Posted January 17, 2012 Maybe arrows indicate movement stance. No arrows might mean walking, two arrows pointing right running and one arrow pointing down crouching. Nice idea So we'd have the small bars for general health, arrows to indicate movement and the shields for cover or combat attitude - now we only need to figure out the items still remaining, like the 'RB' 'LB' present above Sectoids in one pic.Another less intriguing item - the dots above (or below) the game must be rank, 1 dot for Squaddie, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowBlade Posted January 17, 2012 Report Share Posted January 17, 2012 (...)like the 'RB' 'LB' present above Sectoids in one pic.I fear we're at least partly seeing console version screenshots. I'm pretty sure that means R and L buttons, probably to cycle targets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobbes Posted January 17, 2012 Report Share Posted January 17, 2012 I fear we're at least partly seeing console version screenshots. I'm pretty sure that means R and L buttons, probably to cycle targets. So we may as well speculate all we want since we have no idea of what will appear on the PC and console versions? LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorondor Posted January 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 :: Just keep a level head, gal! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobbes Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 :: Just keep a level head, gal! Stick your head out too much and you'll have a plasma haircut! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mouse Nightshirt Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 New GameInformer interview, quite a long one, seems relatively informative. An as the guy points out, the moon has been very lovingly rendered. Are we going there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt. Strike Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 :: Just keep a level head, gal! Distraction, then move quietly, then grenade time. I would do it in those steps. Maybe the distraction is the grenade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silencer_pl Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 The thing with shield icons is that they've proven to be an inconsistent way to indicate cover state, if that's their actual purpose. Maybe it is, but being cover about the positions of two units relative to each other, it'd be hard to see the system in action on a still picture. Company of Heroes or Full Spectrum Warriors Half-shield = light cover - lower chance of being hit from that direction - the car doesn't give you full cover.Full-shield = high-cover - nigh imposible to get hit from this direction - only AoE weapons could do you no good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 New GameInformer interview, quite a long one, seems relatively informative. An as the guy points out, the moon has been very lovingly rendered. Are we going there? It would make a sensible staging area on the way to Mars for XCOM, just as it would make a sensible staging area for the aliens in the early part of the game when they're in control. I'd love to clear out both the moon and Mars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobbes Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 New GameInformer interview, quite a long one, seems relatively informative. Not much to add to what has been already released, with the exception of the Geoscape elements and funding. I'm getting more and more curious about the new move-action system. I've been playing the original game trying to picture it during combat and that system seems intuitive and faster - on the original game you end up doing move/shoot, or move/wait to react or move/move or shoot/shoot. There are those occasions where you have to carefully spend the TUs (checking all rooms, etc) which I guess are gone or maybe got included in some of the actions, but most of the battles are done using a 2 steps system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bomb Bloke Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 I just can't bring myself to watch the interviews. I see tags such as "eighteen minutes long" and wish for a transcript. Personally I tend to do multiple short movements a turn - eg, see what's around a corner before I decide to either keep exploring, fall back to cover or stand and fight (... or have a completely different unit do something before deciding what the original unit should do - sniping, or shoot through a wall and attack through the gap, maybe lob a grenade, etc). Here my only option after going around a corner and seeing what's there seems to be "stand and fight"... at least until next turn. This problem is somewhat less noticeable if you can't move far each turn anyway, so I suspect that's how they'll deal with it. Either that or scouts will get a "move/move" perk or something. I've played move/shoot systems in the FFT games and find them great fun, but at the end of the day find the TU system superiour. It's only as complex as you make it, but it allows for complexity (and hence freedom of choice) when you want it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowBlade Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 This problem is somewhat less noticeable if you can't move far each turn anyway, so I suspect that's how they'll deal with it. Either that or scouts will get a "move/move" perk or something.I wouldn't be surprised if the length of each move action varied from soldier to soldier, depending on one or more personal stats. And move-move and move-action are the default options for standard troopers, so if you wish you could cover twice as much ground as long as you abstained from doing anything other (presumably major) action. I think I read somewhere there's a perk that allows an action-action alternative as well, but I've no confirmation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobbes Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 I just can't bring myself to watch the interviews. I see tags such as "eighteen minutes long" and wish for a transcript. He talks of the whole general process then answers questions about Geoscape and Battlescape. On Geoscape X-COM will have to expand its own satellite cover throughout Earth and there's actually a chamber at the base for the Funding Council. Besides giving the monies, the countries can request technology, offer deals and ask for X-COM help with disturbing alien activity. Remains to be seen where the interceptors will be positioned or if you even have to build bases for them. Plot like, the same whole story, it's current day and aliens are doing nasty things, your job is to investigate and stop them. He made a big reference to proving the players with elements for them to create their own part of the story (soldiers, conducting research, etc.). The initial base can also be expanded. Regarding tactical nothing new, other than he mentioned that you'll control 4 or 5 soldiers, which is interesting because of the initial forum reaction to players only controlling 4 soldiers at start. Maybe you'll be able to bring more, after all. Personally I tend to do multiple short movements a turn - eg, see what's around a corner before I decide to either keep exploring, fall back to cover or stand and fight (... or have a completely different unit do something before deciding what the original unit should do - sniping, or shoot through a wall and attack through the gap, maybe lob a grenade, etc). Here my only option after going around a corner and seeing what's there seems to be "stand and fight"... at least until next turn. This problem is somewhat less noticeable if you can't move far each turn anyway, so I suspect that's how they'll deal with it. Either that or scouts will get a "move/move" perk or something. I've played move/shoot systems in the FFT games and find them great fun, but at the end of the day find the TU system superiour. It's only as complex as you make it, but it allows for complexity (and hence freedom of choice) when you want it. I agree also with turn based giving freedom and complexity but to be honest I prefer Apocalypse's RT system the best of all the 3 created by the Gallops (turn based, RT and the Laser Squad Nemesis different RT). I was kinda hoping that they would go that path and have both TB and RT available. I never tried this new system though and that's why I am curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Voyager Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 I just can't bring myself to watch the interviews. I see tags such as "eighteen minutes long" and wish for a transcript. It took me three hours at work to go through it! There were constant phones and somebody wanting something from me right away... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bomb Bloke Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 He talks of the whole general process then answers questions about Geoscape and Battlescape. ...Thanks! Regarding tactical nothing new, other than he mentioned that you'll control 4 or 5 soldiers, which is interesting because of the initial forum reaction to players only controlling 4 soldiers at start. Maybe you'll be able to bring more, after all.Could swear I read somewhere that this number would go up as the game went on. Though four is ridiculously low even as a starting point. It's probably to "limit turn times" and "speed up battles", which is a nice way of saying "it's another thing they're dumbing down". I agree also with turn based giving freedom and complexity but to be honest I prefer Apocalypse's RT system the best of all the 3 created by the Gallops (turn based, RT and the Laser Squad Nemesis different RT). I was kinda hoping that they would go that path and have both TB and RT available. I never tried this new system though and that's why I am curious.Yep, having the choice of RT in addition to TB was awesome, and (like most people) I stuck with RT in that game, but a lot of the outcry over the XCOM FPS was along the lines of "we want a TB game!"... I'm thinking the result'll likely be TB-only. It took me three hours at work to go through it! There were constant phones and somebody wanting something from me right away...For me it's just impatience. If I watch a video and see nothing of substance happen, or some guy drawling along at about half the speed I can type/read aloud, I start to get antsy. Or something like that. I've taken to going to video hosting sites and just reading the user comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 To be fair he does say a lot in the 18 minutes, but you've got connection speeds to contend with if I recall correctly, so I can see why you wouldn't want to sit through that. To be honest, much as I've loved watching these videos, not one of them ha played through to the end smoothly for me without crapping out at some point. I'm not moaning, because they're generally good and informative, I just wish they could upgrade their server or get more bandwidth or something at GameInformer because it always seems to stop at a really interesting bit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobbes Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 To be fair he does say a lot in the 18 minutes True, but nearly all of it has been already revealed or he's just chewing on old topics, like talking about working with Sid Meier and so on. Someone already mentioned that the magazine is merely squeezing the most out of the material they got and I agree. It gets boring hearing the same things over and over Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mouse Nightshirt Posted January 27, 2012 Report Share Posted January 27, 2012 https://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/arc...bat-part-1.aspx Walkthrough through a tactical mission. *drool* And Pete - can't say I've had that problem myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowBlade Posted February 27, 2012 Report Share Posted February 27, 2012 Found the following super high-res (5120x2880!) tactical combat screenshots on another forum. Not sure where they came from other than that. Obviously, since they're huge I'm posting them as links. Image 1Image 2Image 3 They don't seem to show anything particularly new other than environments, but they're still good! Enjoy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted February 27, 2012 Report Share Posted February 27, 2012 And Pete - can't say I've had that problem myself. Oh well, must have just been getting bombarded when I was viewing them then. They do seem fine now Shadowblade - these were mentioned in another topic recently, but others may not have seen them if you didn't, and I definitely agree they are nice! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now