Several Skyrangers or just one?

[huskeonkel]

Hi all,

I've been wondering about something. I haven't seen any report on how many Skyrangers we have access to. I know we only have one base with soldiers, but do we also only have one Skyranger?

One thing I really liked about the original was the option of having more than one team of soldiers out on missions at a time. Later in the original game, there were quite a few spaceships buzzing around, requiring a team to check out a landed UFO, another a shot down UFO and yet another going around the world for a Terror Site.

One team was not enough for all that action, so I hope we get several strike teams as well in this game. Anyone know?

[katscan]

You do not get several strike teams.

One skyranger, one active/deployed team at any given time.

That means you cannot have one team enroute to one location while another one is fighting or two different teams flying to two different locations at the same time. You have to deploy, fly to, and return from one engagement before you can go on another.

This effectively means you will have to choose which missions to go on as there can be several 'active' missions at one time and you will NOT be able to do them all.

This does raise the issue of if 'rearming'/'refueling' are included in this game since you will only have one active Skyranger/team, as they were prolonged in the other game and limited your capabilities.

[Jeep-Eep]

No insult intended, but sauce please.

[katscan]

None taken. Source = Jake Solomon.
Its in one of his interviews. And he is very clear about it. They want you to have to choose between active missions, knowing that you cannot do more than one. Therefore, you have to choose (for example) which country to piss off and which one to help out.

A more interesting question is, with the lack of extra skyrangers, crew/soldiers bays, will Skyranger upgrades be included? Why and what kind? Perhaps one that increases its range and speed I suppose. Ok, I just answered my own question.

[Jeep-Eep]

Again, no offence, but link please.

[katscan]

Maybe someone else can find it ?? I don't have time to rewatch 20 interviews for the link but its there.

[Steelsky]

I don't have a link either but I'm pretty sure it was in one of the Pax interviews or possibly one of the exclusives in the same series as the Sid Talks XCom.

/Yks

[Oathbreaker]

I'm hoping they'll still allow us to go from mission to mission without hitting home base in between.

Nice little added pressure if you like that kind of thing.

[rharris]

I think this comes down to the pace of the game to see if this will/could pose a problem.
If the pace of the game will be at 100 miles an hour as the original ramped up to, where you had three 'crash sites' and couldn't remember which one was the largest... this could get frustrating, however....

If the research is the same and we can go to Lightings, or Ultimate craft, then this really should be put down the list of priorities.

[heniv]

From what I have read so far it looks like you will be forced to choose what mission to respond to, this would imply that you can only have one active mission at a time (I can't remember what interview it was either they said only one Skyranger). My guess is that this will come as multiple attacks at once, forcing you to prioritize what mission you think is more important and once completed you failed at the ones not chosen.

I don't know how this will work with the interceptions of UFOs since you have multiple Interceptors and interceptor-bases.

[DazzD]

I think it was in the first bunch of exclusive interviews at the start. I remember Jake saying that you would have to pick which missions you done and which ones you missed. I don't remember him specifically saying only one sky ranger but it was a while ago I do remember he was very specific about only hitting up one mission at a time.

@ Oathbreaker, I hope you are right about mission hopping too. Especially if we have missions on the other side of the earth... If we must come back to base after every single mission the single base factor will get really old really quick. The places on the other side of the earth will get seriously neglected.

I liked the XCOM Apoc way, send ships where ever, when ever you like. hitting an alien strike team in a building, no problems, send 2 landers, one squad in each! If you shot down 3 UFOs, you could send out 3 teams in 3 ships. Every time you finished one mission your next ship would land at the next site and away you go again.

[rharris]

I wouldnt mind one base, but you surley caan have only one Sky Ranger if you only have a squad of 6. someting I really wish they would reconsider. I really want to have the options. I would like four Hanger(s) and fill them how I want.

Escpeically later in the game when we have Lighing ans Ultimate Craft (do we have a feed confirming this??)

[DazzD]

I wouldnt mind one base, but you surley caan have only one Sky Ranger if you only have a squad of 6. someting I really wish they would reconsider. I really want to have the options. I would like four Hanger(s) and fill them how I want.

Escpeically later in the game when we have Lighing ans Ultimate Craft (do we have a feed confirming this??)

It has been confirmed that you can only have 6 soldiers in a squad but that doesn't have much affect on how many sky rangers you can have. What I meant was, I would like to have as many sky rangers as I could afford and several squads of soldiers. If I have shot down 3 UFOs and I have 3 squads loaded into 3 sky rangers, I would like to send them all out at once. One to each site. Then we could just play the mission as each sky ranger hit each site. This is how it worked in xcom Apoc.

If we we only have one base and one sky ranger, we will be forever waiting for the sky ranger to return to the base. A mission on the other side of the world might rule out several that are close to base. I think it is one or the other... If we are only allowed one base we need more sky rangers, or if we are allowed several bases then it can be one sky ranger per base. Having only one of each really restricts game play.

[rharris]

I think it is one or the other... If we are only allowed one base we need more sky rangers, or if we are allowed several bases then it can be one sky ranger per base. Having only one of each really restricts game play.

I agree. I just dont want my options cut down. I'm not happy with them cutting down my squad to six either... but i know that is another thread

[katscan]

It has been confirmed that you can only have 6 soldiers in a squad but that doesn't have much affect on how many sky rangers you can have. What I meant was, I would like to have as many sky rangers as I could afford and several squads of soldiers. If I have shot down 3 UFOs and I have 3 squads loaded into 3 sky rangers, I would like to send them all out at once. One to each site. Then we could just play the mission as each sky ranger hit each site. This is how it worked in xcom Apoc.

If we we only have one base and one sky ranger, we will be forever waiting for the sky ranger to return to the base. A mission on the other side of the world might rule out several that are close to base. I think it is one or the other... If we are only allowed one base we need more sky rangers, or if we are allowed several bases then it can be one sky ranger per base. Having only one of each really restricts game play.

You cannot. One skyranger, one active team.

The problem with waiting for a skyranger to return can be solved in two ways: One is, we dont know how fast the new game pace on the world map is. Two- you can speed up time. They are restricting gameplay in order to force you to make difficult (impossible) decisions. You cannot be everywhere at once.

At base, you can have as many teams as you want (limited by living quarters) and have your teams ready to load up.

[Oathbreaker]

You cannot. One skyranger, one active team.

The problem with waiting for a skyranger to return can be solved in two ways: One is, we dont know how fast the new game pace on the world map is. Two- you can speed up time. They are restricting gameplay in order to force you to make difficult (impossible) decisions. You cannot be everywhere at once.

At base, you can have as many teams as you want (limited by living quarters) and have your teams ready to load up.

Well that's a bit of a downer. So we have this awesome story. We have these awesome toys and cool technology and whizz bang stuff and really really REALLY fast super-long range troop transporters who can respond to an emergency on the other side of the planet - and even more crazy fast interceptors with just as much range.

But we can't for the life of us build more than ONE of these super fast super far-going troop transports. Ummm, okay. I'm gonna have to throw the bull**** flag on this one and file it under another little thing to decrease my reasonable suspension of disbelief. I'm not looking for realism, I'm looking for a halfway believable internally consistent story here. Forcing stuff like this just for some sort of gameplay purposes just smacks of linear, FPS-style story progression, and not the sandbox-ish take of the original.

[Chaos Marine]

If you can mod it into being more akin to the originally, all of these negative things, I can and will ignore them and buy the game.

[Wrench]

I think that a squad of 6 will work... Hopefully with the mechanised additions which you build not requiring one of the slots.
But i do agree that multiple squads would be good.. Not dozens.. just 2 or 3 would be fine.
You can different loadouts of squads for different mission types.. City rescue: light weight, fast on foot... Crashed UFO (basically search and destroy): Heavy weapons load out... you get the idea...
+ this would mean that you could hit multiple missions close and far from home. They could do this whilst still restricting you from doing every mission.. it just means you'd be slightly more flexible.

[katscan]

Hehe Yea, just more decisions made for gameplay sake instead of for realism.

Personally, I don't understand how you can accept that no one except for one particular class can figure out how to pull a pin on a smoke grenade yet can't accept that the base has not enough room for 2 skyrangers Or that shotguns are so complicated that you have to be specialized to understand how to pull a trigger

[Inkidu]

Hehe Yea, just more decisions made for gameplay sake instead of for realism.

Personally, I don't understand how you can accept that no one except for one particular class can figure out how to pull a pin on a smoke grenade yet can't accept that the base has not enough room for 2 skyrangers Or that shotguns are so complicated that you have to be specialized to understand how to pull a trigger

Are you sure no one else can use smoke grenades or is it just that support guys are better at using them/get more abilities with them? Like medkits.

Ultimately I think it doesn't really matter.

[katscan]

From what I read, the smoke grenades are class locked. What extra ability would you enable them to have? I suppose stun gas or something...

[Inkidu]

Well, I always had my "support" people as the only guys who ever used smokes or flares so it doesn't really matter to me. Still, if it's dedicated to their class only what's the point. That's still two smokes a support soldier. I've never popped off more than three at at time so I think I can manage.

Oh, and check the sticky list. Smokes can be upgraded with performance enhancing chemicals. ;D

[Nosmirc]

Honestly...I only ever used one in the original. It was a big pain in the rear to keep multiple craft supplied and manned, especially if they were stationed at different bases.

[Chaos Marine]

It was? I had about six teams operating with two interceptors in support of an Avenger per base.

[Nosmirc]

Obvz, I was speaking for myself there. By the time you're making additional bases, the tougher aliens are showing up, and your main base will be constantly having to keep the new bases supplied with rare materials needed to remain competitive. It was a logistical layer of the game that really didn't do much for me.

Additional bases fullfilled two roles for me: Radar coverage, and housing interceptors, and if I was feeling generous, a token defense squad.

[Chaos Marine]

I actually quite liked having to balance the economics of each base I as expanded. As for weapons, all of my dudes carried heavy plasma cannons and I always kept forty heavy plasma cannons and the same number of ammo which I was able to distribute easily. I then sent half of my ten man team, to the second base and began to train up new rookies for each.

[DazzD]

I don't mind loosing the multiple bases but only having one skyranger kinda sux. The originals I always had my main squad ready to roll in a ranger, but then also 2 back up rangers with 2 back up squads waiting at base. I wouldn’t mind if they just made the replacement rangers so expensive that it wasn't practical... but I would like the option to get a second.

Sarge "We are XCOM, the world’s elite with the whole world behind us! We have the best weapons and aircraft, we are the only force stopping the alien invasion. We are the only ones that can...."

XCOM Commander "Errm Sarge, the skyranger just got shot down. Jump in the other one and roll out"

Sarge “Well... I have been meaning to chat to you about that...”

XCOM Commander "So we are going into the most dangerous places on earth to fight against an alien race that is 1000 times more advanced than us.... AND NO ONE THOUGHT TO BUILD A SECOND RANGER?!!? ARE YOU ALL %@#&ING RETARDED?!?!"

Sarge "Well... we’re screwed. Anyone for a beer?"

[rharris]

Sarge "We are XCOM, the world’s elite with the whole world behind us! We have the best weapons and aircraft, we are the only force stopping the alien invasion. We are the only ones that can...."

XCOM Commander "Errm Sarge, the skyranger just got shot down. Jump in the other one and roll out"

Sarge “Well... I have been meaning to chat to you about that...”

XCOM Commander "So we are going into the most dangerous places on earth to fight against an alien race that is 1000 times more advanced than us.... AND NO ONE THOUGHT TO BUILD A SECOND RANGER?!!? ARE YOU ALL %@#&ING RETARDED?!?!"

Sarge "Well... we’re screwed. Anyone for a beer?"

haha! great shout... This needs to be addressed, its like making just enough clips for the rifles in the old game.. Well done....

I dont know about anyone else, but the more we talk about it and the changes, the more apparent it becomes that it is focused on how Firaxis like/want to play the game. I think if you add it all up, there are a few (some big) options being taken out of the game.

I love(d) this game for the Options I had and hoping, with the advancements Firaxis could work with, there would be more options, not less maybe the play the game more politically, I like the inclusion of extraction missions (i'd use 6 men then). If I want two squads (Alpha and Bravo, thats what I'd call them) I should have them, with my two Skyrangers packed with 12 men each... I want to equip ALL my men with Heavy plasmas and Bulldoze my way through towns and Forests... Leaving a smoldering mess behind me! wooohaa!

I WANT THOSE OPTIONS, please can I have them? I know this is not to everyones taste... but I'm not the only one that wants this, surley?!

[DazzD]

haha! great shout... This needs to be addressed, its like making just enough clips for the rifles in the old game.. Well done....

I dont know about anyone else, but the more we talk about it and the changes, the more apparent it becomes that it is focused on how Firaxis like/want to play the game. I think if you add it all up, there are a few (some big) options being taken out of the game.

I love(d) this game for the Options I had and hoping, with the advancements Firaxis could work with, there would be more options, not less maybe the play the game more politically, I like the inclusion of extraction missions (i'd use 6 men then). If I want two squads (Alpha and Bravo, thats what I'd call them) I should have them, with my two Skyrangers packed with 12 men each... I want to equip ALL my men with Heavy plasmas and Bulldoze my way through towns and Forests... Leaving a smoldering mess behind me! wooohaa!

I WANT THOSE OPTIONS, please can I have them? I know this is not to everyones taste... but I'm not the only one that wants this, surley?!

I am with you on that. It all comes down to options. The more options we have, the happier everyone will be. Everyone can pick the path how they enjoy playing the game. I think that’s one of the main things that made the originals so good. There was so much choice given to the player, that everyone could find a way to play that they enjoyed.

It does sound more and more like this game will be a compromise, but it is still the closest thing to the original we have seen in 15 years, so I will give it a chance. It sounds like they are passionate about the game and are trying to make it good. I guess the more of us that buy it, the more chance we have of seeing what we want in the sequel!

[Inkidu]

I am with you on that. It all comes down to options. The more options we have, the happier everyone will be. Everyone can pick the path how they enjoy playing the game. I think that’s one of the main things that made the originals so good. There was so much choice given to the player, that everyone could find a way to play that they enjoyed.

It does sound more and more like this game will be a compromise, but it is still the closest thing to the original we have seen in 15 years, so I will give it a chance. It sounds like they are passionate about the game and are trying to make it good. I guess the more of us that buy it, the more chance we have of seeing what we want in the sequel!

That's actually an erroneous statement. People want the illusion of choice, if you have too many options some people are very unhappy because it feels like the game lacks structure and direction. Games are defined by parameters.

[Inkidu]

Somehow I don't think I'm going to be having a problem with this. If Faraxis ups the strategic layer like they say they're going to, I don't think I'll have a problem picking one mission over the next.

Also, how many people here have ever lost a skyranger to anything but dusting off with no one aboard. I mean, it's pretty dumb to send a craft with no weapons against an armed UFO.

[Oathbreaker]

Somehow I don't think I'm going to be having a problem with this. If Faraxis ups the strategic layer like they say they're going to, I don't think I'll have a problem picking one mission over the next.

Also, how many people here have ever lost a skyranger to anything but dusting off with no one aboard. I mean, it's pretty dumb to send a craft with no weapons against an armed UFO.

Could you point out the interview or source of the whole "strategic layer" re-design thing? I must have missed that part.

Cheers.

[Inkidu]

Could you point out the interview or source of the whole "strategic layer" re-design thing? I must have missed that part.

Cheers.

Uh, several places. They're adding more mission types, the funding council offers missions. That's what I'm saying. More variety with more specific rewards. Not just go to a ship, get a bunch of stuff, sell it. More than just crashes, landings, terror, and base raid/defense.

[katscan]

Yea, I think they are again making us focus/become attached to, a single small core group of soldiers. In addition to streamlining the strategic layer to things that most people did (eliminate all bases except for one because most people only really focused on one base, hence only one skyranger, hence only one active team)

[DazzD]

Well fair enough... but even the illusion of choice is disappearing with each interview (I know what you are saying tho)

Don't get me wrong, I am still very much looking forwards to the game and unless there is a total game breaker I will be buying it. But it's those extra choices that the originals had that made me enjoy them. I think that everyone was able to find a slightly different way to play the game that made them happy. The outcome was the same, but the choices in game allowed for a different experience player to player. Games are defined by parameters... its just how much scope is between those parameters.

[Inkidu]

Well fair enough... but even the illusion of choice is disappearing with each interview (I know what you are saying tho)

Don't get me wrong, I am still very much looking forwards to the game and unless there is a total game breaker I will be buying it. But it's those extra choices that the originals had that made me enjoy them. I think that everyone was able to find a slightly different way to play the game that made them happy. The outcome was the same, but the choices in game allowed for a different experience player to player. Games are defined by parameters... its just how much scope is between those parameters.

Yeah, but you've got to be careful. We're often too close to this thing. The more we know, the more there's less surprise. Surprise has a lot to do with what we perceive to be freedom of choice. Think about it, when you have your whole research tree splayed out before you it either seems like there's note enough choice or way too many. It's that balance that they've got to strike.

[DazzD]

Yeah, but you've got to be careful. We're often too close to this thing. The more we know, the more there's less surprise. Surprise has a lot to do with what we perceive to be freedom of choice. Think about it, when you have your whole research tree splayed out before you it either seems like there's note enough choice or way too many. It's that balance that they've got to strike.

Good call. I guess they only know if they have it right once it hits the public. Just because I want more doesn't mean everyone does... I am just a hard bugger to please

[rharris]

Yeah, but you've got to be careful. We're often too close to this thing. The more we know, the more there's less surprise. Surprise has a lot to do with what we perceive to be freedom of choice. Think about it, when you have your whole research tree splayed out before you it either seems like there's note enough choice or way too many. It's that balance that they've got to strike.

I'm with DazzD, I think I'd rather have too many options than not enough, I know its not to anyones taste.
I like the fact then when you are reseaching things, you don't know whats coming next, I wouldnt like a "tree" already preset, i like not knowing, like the original... and I know that you didnt mean litirally Inkidu... I have played games where it is, like Dragon Age, but I wouldnt want to see it in this.

[DP1982SK]

This is interesting.... I do not like the idea of one skyranger only... I wonder... how will the aircrafts progress then?

Will we be upgrading the current skyranger? When a new ship will be manufactured, we auto-sell the current one?

I sure as hell don't want to be stuck with no drop ship at all for almost a month of production

[DazzD]

Another good point. I would assume that there is one of 3 things...
1. Either no upgrading the skyranger
2. You upgrade the ONLY one you have and just add new things to it.
3. Or you can design new craft (my preference) but the old one magically disappears of the face of the earth?!

All 3 have massive floors in them... that could be fixed by having extra skyrangers