how does it make sense that monthly funding is increased by 25% in africa. isnt africa the poorest of continents?
how does it make sense that monthly funding is increased by 25% in africa. isnt africa the poorest of continents?
Well... they do have a lot of diamonds, gold, and silver. Maybe it's a super national African funding drive.
NA May also be the biggest cash contributor on the council. Or they are the most balanced and provide a steady amount of money engineers, soldiers, and researchers.
I hope that later interceptions are no longer against solo UFOs - I mean, why should a big ship fly alone? You'd expect them to e relatively vulnerable, big targets, even if they do have great weapons. It would make more sense for them to flu with fighter escorts - a considerable number. Thus needing more interceptors.
I think it was mentioned in an interview somewhere that Africa was funding increase because it was all in. They were putting every cent they have towards xcom being based there. The other countries gave bonuses but must be keeping the $$ to themselves.
It's all too hard to tell until we get our hands on the game. To me the cheap aircraft sounds under powered but in the new game maybe the aircraft play a bigger role. Maybe they are more expensive and we lose more of them. Or it could just be in place to stop everyone that lives there placing the first base on home soil. It forces everyone to try different things with the base placement. (I don't mean any offence by that but every American I know that played the original game, always started right in the middle of the USA! Not one of them ever started in middle Europe or Russia)
First time I played Xcom I remember having read about WW2 and how invaders were unable to carry a campaign in Russia because of the weather and I figured the game would start at the first of the year (winter), I thought of how sparsely populated africa was and how unforgivably hot it was, then I thought of the US and figured it would probably one of the only nations able to defend itself properly via technology instead of weather, so I turned to the area around China to make my first base.... assuming it would need my help the most as it contained a huge amount of people in it's large but dense population, fair weather conditions, and an inability to protect itself (or it's massive amount of the human population it bore).
I lived in southern california, I was eleven years old.
Props for over-thinking it to such an awesome and logical degree at eleven years old.Originally Posted by Hortey
Me, I was maybe 12 or 13... I figured covering a decent number of different countries was a good idea, so I started in the Mediterranean usually.
Yah, the USA were founded by immigrants so a few more (from outer space) shouldn't be an immediate concern. =)
Same here (not north england, but a totally "emotional" choice). I will place my base in a spot near my home so I can see the aircrafts starting and landing when I look aut of the window!
I always used to built my base on top of Baghdad. It allowed you really early to respond to threats in Europe, Asia, and Africa. Close proximity to the most possible cities (terror missions) and the most land mass so downed UFOs could be landed at.
I was always a fan of eastern Europe/western Asia. I've never liked starting in the US and I think it's because when I first started playing over 1/2 of the UFOs I shot down ended up in the drink =/.
I swear by placing my bases in the Alps. That way, I can cover Russia, some of africa, the EU countries and some areas of asia. It's best overall coverage and you get more monies from that group then you'd get from the USA-which consistantly surrenders to the bugs, incidentally. Cheeseburger munching surrender apes.
That's odd, the Brits are always the first to surrender in the majority of my games and that's with full Hyperwave Decoder coverage! I think it's great how varied peoples experiences with XCOM are.I swear by placing my bases in the Alps. That way, I can cover Russia, some of africa, the EU countries and some areas of asia. It's best overall coverage and you get more monies from that group then you'd get from the USA-which consistantly surrenders to the bugs, incidentally. Cheeseburger munching surrender apes.
That presupposes that any of these make sense...
The S.A. bonus is silly (time dilation), and the rest does not track with that part of the world. I expect that the S.A. bonus will either prove useless or the best of all of them (but probably the former). Here is to modding support.
Remember this is still subject to balancing-Also, I suspect that the Africa bonus also effects the still mysterious resources from the funding nations.
Doesn't the US still give you tons of money? I remember in the original that the majority of the funding came from the US.
My thread lives.. It LIVES ! My baby !!!
Is anyone going to try to site a base in Antarctica ?? For a real challenge?? LOL.. I might actually try that some time, probably not in the first playthrough.
Is there an Antarctica bonus? Extra sea lions every month?
I will absolutely be attempting the "Super Human Antarctica Challenge" although in this case I guess it would be the Impossible Antarctica Challenge. I think it would have to be modified slightly for this new version though. Instead of the rules being 1 base in Antarctica and no saves aside from saving the game at the end of a session (no reloads either) it would be like you can only have your main base and no satellite bases, or whatever they are, and you must play on Ironman mode.
Also, I like sea lions
(insert noise of barking sea lion, clapping flippers)Also, I like sea lions
Heh, that challenge sounds interesting ! LOL I actually never tried it in the prior version
It's kind of crazy how hard only having one base can make the game. You have to make frequent use of the UFO activity graphs and your Skyranger for scouting. Even then I don't think anybody has actually finished the challenge with a win.
Exactly my thoughts, if you are losing a bunch or even just one interceptor each time you go after a ufo, building them becomes a real money drain. If you don't lose them then eventually this cap out, the only two abilities taht don't "run out" are the extra funding and the 50% less maintenance.Who is to say how frequently your craft die? What if you burn through them worse than soldiers now?
I think its a bit too early for assumptions as to what is really worth while... I do agree its a boring trait but it may actually be quite useful. We cant confirm this until we know more about the actual air combat though.
Edit
Oh BTW Hi. I have been stalking this forum since the game was announced however I was just too lazy to make an account until now. You should expect to see more of me though as I am as obsessed with this as the rest of you
Post that in this thread. I totally agree with you.
http://forums.2kgames.com/showthread...4-Interception
My guess is that the bonuses are designed to tailor for the following....
Africa: the "vanilla" location. OK at everything.
South America: people who want to beat the game in the fastest geoscape time. Players may challenge themselves to beat the game in under 1 year or something, and having instant interrogations, presumably needed to attack cydonia, saves the most time.
Asia: for players who simply love their troops, and want a strong squad on the ground. Probably helps the most with the ground combat side of the game.
Europe: for those players who like to rule the end game by researching everything and building everything. Less strong early on, very strong late game.
North America: If you shoot down UFOs, You can get away with not visiting crash sites. However, if you let them be, they turn into abductions, bases, and terror missions which cause panic level. Presumably, if you make air superiority a priority, you aren't forced to play as many ground missions. This makes this bonus good for people who prefer the geoscape/base building experience to the ground mission aspect. Since ground missions also take lots of time, this mode may be good for people who want to beat the game in the least RL playtime.
It lives by the will of Cthulu.
He moonlights as a necromancer, you know :P
It could also be good for players who want to field their latest gadget as quickly and widely as possible (lots of workshops, less labs). Lag between developement and getting it out there fighting Aliens always tended to be an issue for me.Europe: for those players who like to rule the end game by researching everything and building everything. Less strong early on, very strong late game.
I know how you feel. I had fully agreed with you, now I'm thinking N. America it might be my first choice.
Ok I'm proud of this, watch my magnificent brain work:
"Yes, Africa is not the richest continent. Therefore manual labour and basic resources are cheaper to purchase. So you spend less on initial start-up costs and monthly expenses, in effect giving you a bonus of 25% more money."
imo, there shouldnt be a bonus at all..
But thats just me.
Or make it so that instead of paying a fixed cost, you pay a variable bribe. If its not enough all your workers leave.
lol, true. Makes me just soooooooo damn proud to be a South African
Also Ironmen don't need bonuses.
I don't know. I can see advantages and disadvantages to all of them at different points in the game and for different reasons. Of course this is based on how I played the original. With XCEU it might just be different. I suppose we shall have to wait and see. Only 104 more days.
As for who pulled their funding in my games -- Australia. 95% of the time they were the first (and often only) one to make a deal with the aliens. I'll admit it was probably my fault since they were just so far out of the way from everything else that they often did get neglected. But they were still the first for me most of the time.
Antarctica: isolated : you need to loose 12 funding nations to lose the game.
Oceania: naval response & salvage: shooting UFOs down over water recovers 25% of their resources.
I actually like the Oceania thing. Not bad, although they would have to balance for the correct % resource bonus.
yes but how much will the USA give you, if you asked really really nicely. Peanuts, africa will probably give you 30% of their population as slave labour if you protect them from the nasty bug men.
Or have i crossed a line.
In the original XCOM, I rarely lost an interceptor, even early on in the game when I was behind in research. It seemed bizarre that I would loose so few interceptors considering the aliens technological lead. So maybe you are right and we can expect bigger losses of aircraft, making this perk a much bigger deal.
Really, the first games interception system was very predictable and kind of weak. I hope they make it more variable so that most of the time there is a chance you will win, and a chance you will lose. This will result (for most players) in losing more ships throughout a game.
On the flip side, they should make building new ships less costly. Easier to destroy and easier to rebuild.
I concur.
http://forums.2kgames.com/showthread...4-Interception
You should put that in the interception post in support for a better interception system.
That was because all us Aussies were down with the Cult of Sirus
I think this time round the interceptions will be very different. If the USA base is dedicated to aircraft then I get the feeling we will be going through them more often. Otherwise this perk is totally pointless.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote