The 1x2 hangar sie in X1 was less optimal then the origina 2x2 as it does not provide sufficient space for the art of the planes (the need to be bigger over time) AND hangars need to take up a lot of sapce to fucntion as a limiting factor when designing a baseĦ. There need to be various sizes of rooms BUT this should be simple not needing rotation (like in X1): 1x1 and 2x2 layout rooms are perfect just like in the original. E.g: Bases in Asia, could recieve a +10 staff bonus to each living quarter, Or Africa could provide lower consturction costs for buildings, EU lower maintenance for labs etc.ĥ. Base layouts should be different with each region/continent providing various amounts of usable space, bonuses and even shapes to build in. Now the 3 types of staff are signifficantly less in a given base moving from base to soldiers and to pilots so it could be considered to have 3 types of Living Quarters to really spice up the minigame: Base staff LQ: 20, Soldiers LQ: 10, Pilots LQ: 2Ĥ.
Staff can be tied into many aspects of the game: when bombed a base could loose staff, purchase cost can be dependant on region and relationship, Base staff could accumualte exp as a unit etc, etc. The player could now hire hunderds of staff per base and would need to decide not just if they have money for a new hangar but also if they can staff it and have enough energy (which also needs staff) The goal is to both simplify the MGMT of staff, while also introducing interesting decisions and lend a much imposing scale to the organisation. Staff are hired in three ways: Base staff manning all the buildings, soldiers and pilotsĮach staff type should have different upkeep (salary): Base staff the lowest amont and pilots the highest amount There should not be any difference between lab and production staff to do away with the one-time not really a decision micro of hiring theseĮach living quarter provides capacity for +20 Staff Now here I would introduce manpower or staffĮach building needs staff to operate including labs and factories but also hangars, radars, reactors etc.
Other limitations can be energy (produced by reactors), storage room and living quarter. Limitations on buildings: Hangars should only be allowed to be built at the side of the base for planes to be able to leave the base and yes they should be 2x2 and yes: each hangar should only be housing a single plane which should be visible when in the hangar for visual flair and overview of what is where and how many. What the heck: place a devastated base icon on the map or abandoned base marker to make the world more reactive to the campaign events and refect game progressģ. In some cases it should be a valid choice to decomission an existing base containing a bunch of hangars for example as the countries around it have all fallen to ruin and are not actually paying into the budget anymore - this would work excellently at throttling base expansions and serve as a dynamic difficulty (one a base is destroyed by aliens you have more money left over at the end of the month to rebuild). Players should be able to build a practically unlimited number of bases BUT each base should have a high enough maintenance fee to ensure additional bases are only built if they are really worth it and the player is doing well. so that it works naturally and gives a bit of variety to each base, provides instant recognition and collect-em-all feeling besides allowing the player to just look at their base without being instantly bored and/or discussed by the models/bland color choices This is a screen where the player will spend the most time after tactical battles and maybe the Geoscape and is the basis of game progression: it needs to reflect thatĢ. They shouldnt of course contain only these colors but subtly warry on them viaa markings, some of the equiment paint etc. e.g: Hangar blue, Living Quarter Green, Factory brown, Reactor yellow, Defense Buildings red etc. The art needs to be popping, fitting with the era and game UI style AND each type of buildings needs to have its dominant color scheme to instantly set them apart visually. Xenonauts 1 kept the original approach which I liked but highlighted some of its shortcommings so now that X2 decied to improve on the base concept here is my therapeutic list of improvements I have expected from PP and now hope will be found in X2:ġ. Was terribly let down by the base building of Phoenix Point and while I did enjoy some of the innovations that were introduced for XCOM the concept was far too limited
0 kommentar(er)
