|
Captain Foo posted:well, if I wash out of the pilot ranks, put me on the ground i guess! Also seconding that this is my favorite LP right now. Pffff. I'm not giving up on you, Captain Foo.
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 01:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 21:56 |
|
|
ProfessorBooty posted:Pffff. I'm not giving up on you, Captain Foo.  I'll shoot something down one of these days!
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 04:07
|
|
|
Since slingshot is disabled, are the rewards at the end of gangplank changed and if so, what are the new rewards? Also, is it possible to delay the dlc missions? They're making soldier management extremely difficult. Dreamsicle fucked around with this message at 06:37 on May 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 06:28
|
|
|
Dreamsicle posted:Since slingshot is disabled, are the rewards at the end of gangplank changed and if so, what are the new rewards? Probably better off asking the XCOM thread in games, I'm almost wholly unfamiliar with the DLC, getting free 'hero' soldiers takes my focus away from the soldiers that matter most. I won't be doing gangplank, because that's the last mission in operation slingshot. I don't think you can delay the DLC. It comes when it comes, you can simply choose not to do the DLC missions. e: They're changing the prerequisites for the Annette DLC to occur though. Apparently its been starting way too early.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 07:36
|
|
|
I'm not a robot. More like a biological android really. Kind of surprised my pilot self isn't dead yet.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 10:10
|
|
|
 Youtube Link This map is referred to as 'Slaughterhouse A', and I'm kind of a big fan of this map. The bug Kidneyman was referring to was the 'pod teleportation' bug (I cut the brief discussion to save time), and I think it happens more often in this map because of the general shape and doors that cannot be opened by aliens (If aliens are stuck someplace while inactive, they teleport). You never know when or where they'll teleport, but we all remember the times it happened when we are setting up a breech in the first freezer room.  Congratulations Purerok on making corporal! Purerok needs a nickname!Sadly SgtSteel91 didn't make Corporal. I derped on how much XP he would get from a clean-sweep mission. Perk Talk Suppression v. Steadfast v. Field Surgeon The only new perk here is Field Surgeon - Field Surgeon gives you a 75% chance for an injured solder to be injured for a smaller amount of time (specifically, a 75% chance to eliminate 1 HP of damage, if they only took 1 hp of damage, they don't get injured). More than one soldier with this perk guarantees you'll get a reduction (but does not add to it). Field surgeon is going to be buffed, so its a 100% chance to reduce hp damage by 1, with no benefit if you take multiple medics with the perk on a mission. As it is now, its just not a good enough perk to consider taking (its hard to trust 75% rolls with relatively low benefit). Its rough taking it now because its up against suppression (a perk that greatly increases your chances not to get hurt at all), and steadfast is not a bad idea if you plan on making an officer or psionic medic, as medics have pretty good will to begin with, not to mention the last person you want to panic when poo poo hits the fan is your medic. I'm making Colonel Corazon a badass battlemedic hybrid. Rapid Reaction v. Fire in the Hole v. Snapshot Rapid reaction gives you an extra reaction shot if you hit the first reaction shot, to a maximum of three total. Fire in the hole gives you +10 aim (for rockets only) provided you do not move. Snapshot reduces a rocketeer's rocket-scatter penalty after moving. Snapshot used to be the go-to perk before fire in the hole was introduced. If you have random soldier stats it might not be a bad idea, as you can make super high aim rookies into rocketeers that can move and shoot - or you can take fire in the hole and get even more accurate rockets. Rockets are 100% accurate if aim is high enough (I think around 120 aim), so fire in the hole isn't as good if the sum of your aim is greater than 110 before taking the perk into consideration. In general, for our run, fire in the hole will always be helpful. I used to take rapid reaction rocketeers, but that was when there were a lot more perks that added to rocketeer aim (I found that by dropping fire in the hole and making an overwatch rocketeer I got +10 aim picked up from perks alone). Nowadays its much less appealing, but, then again, I'm not a really huge fan of overwatch builds. Another thing to consider is how rapidly rapid reaction drops off in usefulness (alliteration intended). In the future, high defense flyers and lightning reflexes enemies will do a lot to thwart our overwatch efforts, so grabbing rapid reaction will do good, but it will only really last until November or something. It's May now, but winter is coming. I'm thinking for all my rocketeers I'll be taking Fire in the Hole. One thing to consider is given in the future there's going to be a 'command' ability given to officers, a Rocketeer can shoot two rockets in one round. Taking snapshot can make the second rocket much more accurate than it would be otherwise. That's an extremely niche use though so I stand by not making any snapshot rocketeers. The Future of XCOM We're going to skip advanced lasers, and may potentially never research them for the whole game. This means we're not going to research Pulse Lasers (the "poor man's" plasma weapons), and EMP weapons. This also means we're not going to see laser shotguns, laser sniper rifles, and laser marksman rifles. If someone wants to see my spreadsheet I guess I can show it, but what it boils down to is the air game: This is the expected DPS for each of the tier 1.5 to 2 weapons (on balanced stance) Phoenix Cannon: 74.7 Laser cannon: 116 Phoenix Cannon (after foundry project): 122.7 Laser cannon (after foundry project): 160 So lasers win almost every time in expected damage, but what I decided to look at is how much money you spend for each expected damage, including the opportunity cost of completely skipping advanced lasers, when rolled out to the entire air force, and this is what I found: If you plan on having less than 11 interceptors for the entire game, you should stick to laser cannons without the foundry project. If you plan on having less than 20 interceptors for the entire game, you should stick to the Phoenix Cannon (with the foundry project) If you plan on having more than 21 interceptors, you should use Laser cannons with the foundry project. This does not take into account having a lot of resources (say, if you have the Gangplank DLC turned on). If you're resource and money-rich, you should always do laser cannons every time. So I considered the costs of the phoenix cannon foundry project, as well as plasma weapons for interceptors (I didn't consider the costs of Gauss research, because I'm doing that no matter what), and this is what I found: By skipping everything past advanced lasers I save 85 Weapon Fragments, 90 Alloys, and 280 Elerium - this is assuming I invest in the foundry project that increases intercepter damage a piddly 10 DPS (otherwise it would be 165 WF, 130 Alloys, and 300 elerium). I also save 217 hours of research, and 4 UFO power sources. What we also gain is the ability to start on captures and psionics a lot sooner than if we focus on lasers first, which is turning into a huge priority for me. Our capture game is going to be ridiculously important using this strategy. This also means our air force is going to be working double-duty. Thankfully North America should be safe for a good long while which will keep our costs down. The extra alloys, elerium, weapon fragments, and time will let us have more advanced tiers of weaponry and equipment earlier. I've never played Long War like this, so hopefully this won't explode in our faces. Also, we have three updates next week (in my attempt to combine videos again). Eventually when most soldiers have a nickname I'll be more comfortable having a backlog of videos and I might go to two videos a week again, but as long as we have a new corporal almost every mission I'm going to keep the backlog from getting huge. ProfessorBooty fucked around with this message at 13:11 on May 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 13:09
|
|
|
Question Professor: Why is it that having less interceptors means having the lower quality weapons? I would imagine the quantity/quality argument would appear here. Is it because it is not worth expending the resources required to get those higher quality weapons in a situation where you could just replace an interceptor each time it died? Edit: Also thank you once again for the best LP on the forum.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 13:32
|
|
|
Gridlocked posted:Question Professor: What I did was I figured how much it would cost in resources (money + grey market price for raw materials, such as alien alloys) for each interceptor. For the two weapons with foundry projects, I added the cost of that foundry project spread over how many interceptors there are (so the more interceptors you have, the 'cheaper' the foundry project is per interceptor). I then divided this cost by the DPS of the weapon, giving a 'dollars per DPS', I summarized the overlapping points in the post. Having less interceptors means you're not spreading the foundry project cost around. Also, its never good to lose an interceptor, not only are they expensive, but its very tough getting interceptor experience, which is invaluable.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 13:41
|
|
|
ProfessorBooty posted:What I did was I figured how much it would cost in resources (money + grey market price for raw materials, such as alien alloys) for each interceptor. For the two weapons with foundry projects, I added the cost of that foundry project spread over how many interceptors there are (so the more interceptors you have, the 'cheaper' the foundry project is per interceptor). I then divided this cost by the DPS of the weapon, giving a 'dollars per DPS', I summarized the overlapping points in the post. Having less interceptors means you're not spreading the foundry project cost around. Not to argue with you, it's your LP, but it seems to me having more interceptors is less reason to need the bigger guns because you can throw more interceptors at a target that way.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 13:58
|
|
|
I think it's offical now, Van Doorn doesn't understand scatter rules and neither does he care. MECs? Yes please. I so volunteer to be one of the guys to get my limbs chopped off. Nickname must be Wunderwaffe. It'll be just perfect. (This post is as serious as you want it to be.) Yami Fenrir fucked around with this message at 14:20 on May 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 14:02
|
|
|
Gridlocked posted:Not to argue with you, it's your LP, but it seems to me having more interceptors is less reason to need the bigger guns because you can throw more interceptors at a target that way. That's absolutely right, that's the conflict. Getting phoenix cannons and their upgrades can mean cheaper and more interceptors, but in the future you may be spending more per damage per second than if you went with laser cannons and their upgrades (especially when you consider the monthly maintenance cost for interceptors). Also, going with laser cannons means you can take down UFOs in less time using defensive tactics, meaning you can field a smaller air force, so you ultimately don't need as many interceptors. So there's the 'expected value per damage per second', and the 'most cost-effective air force', which is more abstracted and slightly more difficult to model.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 15:07
|
|
|
Oh no, I finally missed a reasonable shot, no wonder I panicked on a 95% chance to resist! At least I continue my streak of making all the improbable rolls and eating plasma on the chin without getting hurt. I think that might be the third time that I've eaten plasma that didn't break my armor health. As for Purerok, I'm going to be
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 16:15
|
|
|
ProfessorBooty posted:That's absolutely right, that's the conflict. Getting phoenix cannons and their upgrades can mean cheaper and more interceptors, but in the future you may be spending more per damage per second than if you went with laser cannons and their upgrades (especially when you consider the monthly maintenance cost for interceptors). Also, going with laser cannons means you can take down UFOs in less time using defensive tactics, meaning you can field a smaller air force, so you ultimately don't need as many interceptors. So there's the 'expected value per damage per second', and the 'most cost-effective air force', which is more abstracted and slightly more difficult to model. At some point though, abstract calculations cease to be relevant because RNG swings so if it works (for you) then it just works. Sometimes.  Thanks for explaining your reasoning so I don't have to think about it. I haven't used Long War and after seeing this probably won't just because the gratuitous (more-is-more just for the sake of it) additional features/mechanics/complexity is just a bit too excessive for my dumb scienceengineer brain to process with finite time.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 16:27
|
|
|
Good loving luck on this next mission. I assume the soldier named after me is gonna be going along and it doesn't seem like mobility is something gunners specialise in. It'll be interesting to see how you make lemonade out of that one.SaffronKit posted:As for Purerok, I'm going to be We can never have enough bad puns.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 16:44
|
|
|
silentsnack posted:At some point though, abstract calculations cease to be relevant because RNG swings so if it works (for you) then it just works. Sometimes. Maybe, but its fair to say that given how many interceptions you have for the entire campaign that your average DPS should be close to expected DPS. Probably what throws the wrench into calculations the most is the fact that pilots and interceptors get better over time with experience and foundry projects. Saffron: I did some calculations and it was about a ProfessorBooty fucked around with this message at 17:12 on May 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 16:52
|
|
|
ProfessorBooty posted:Maybe, but its fair to say that given how many interceptions you have for the entire campaign that your average DPS should be close to expected DPS. Probably what throws the wrench into calculations the most is the fact that pilots and interceptors get better over time with experience and foundry projects. Obviously, he was scared of Van Doorn. Can't say I blame him.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 16:58
|
|
|
Revenge of the fatigue spiral. 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 17:27
|
|
|
ProfessorBooty posted:Maybe, but its fair to say that given how many interceptions you have for the entire campaign that your average DPS should be close to expected DPS. Probably what throws the wrench into calculations the most is the fact that pilots and interceptors get better over time with experience and foundry projects. Law of Large Numbers, yes... but the point there was more that strategy matters more, though it can still be impacted by random events early in the game since LLN only applies when N is already large. Just to cherrypick an example from vanilla EU/EW: if you ignore the first (small scout) UFO so it calls a large scout AND the RNG feels like it, you may get 4 intact computers and 2 power sources, two weeks into the game which is when getting a few more resources can significantly increase your options that first month. 0.5^4 * 0.33^2 = 0.68% chance of getting 4*(40-20)+2*(75-30)=$170 between best and worst case, or you can clear the game with two UFO interception/assaults ever. Might be useful for a particularly insane min/max player or maybe a speedrunner? Which brings us back to: strategy. If the strategy+tactics game is sufficiently RNG-proof then abstract optimizations don't matter as much? That said, sign me up for whatever amuses you most.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 18:04
|
|
|
silentsnack posted:Which brings us back to: strategy. If the strategy+tactics game is sufficiently RNG-proof then abstract optimizations don't matter as much? Good point - I typically think of the very long game when making decisions, especially in this game due to severe lack of early game resources (1 downed UFO in the first month, when I expect 2 - 3, sometimes 4. Not to mention being a little too grenade happy in March). So my interception game is part of that, the other part is taking advantage of the NA bonus (cheaper interceptors/maintenance). Too bad I can't name my engineers, but I'll be happy to give you a gun one of these days 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 18:13
|
|
|
ProfessorBooty posted:Maybe, but its fair to say that given how many interceptions you have for the entire campaign that your average DPS should be close to expected DPS. Probably what throws the wrench into calculations the most is the fact that pilots and interceptors get better over time with experience and foundry projects. So what you're saying is you might need to change my nickname if this keeps up. I may never live up to van dorn in kills, but I will always beat anyone in the number of bullshit rolls I get. On another note, I'm looking forward to getting to see Aggression in action eventually. That thinman demonstrated that I get almost 70% crit chance alone with just Lone Wolf and a flank, I can't wait to see a 100%/100% hit/crit chance when I flank someone. About how much damage would that do with a full damage ballistic shotgun roll + crit on top?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
Max damage with ballistic shotgun + crit + Ranger + targeting module ( ) = 15 damage with a basic shotgun. Add VPT then we get 18 damage.e: Add bring'em on then it would be 19-24, but I'm not sure if I'm taking Bring 'em On. ProfessorBooty fucked around with this message at 18:59 on May 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 18:56
|
|
|
ProfessorBooty posted:Max damage with ballistic shotgun + crit + Ranger + targeting module ( You have no idea how badly I am looking forward to seeing this build completed. And that's just with a BASIC shotgun. Keep talking like that Booty and I might just give up my first claim on being MEC'd. 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
Calculating air weapon dps without taking into account UFO armour leads to an inaccurate picture. Sure, Scouts, Fighters and even Raiders have low enough armour that it's not a big deal, but even upgraded Lasers are sorta poo poo against anything Destroyer tier and up. Skipping Laser Cannons for Coilguns was completely doable when I tried it in b14, so I look forward to how it goes in b15. Edit: The higher base DPS of Laser Cannons against Coilguns is deceptive. Crit chance of air weapons is based on the difference between the armour penetration of a weapon and the armour of the target. Lasers have less armour penetration and therefore usually much lower crit chance. The downside of high crit Coilguns is that the chance of total UFO loss is heavily influenced by the amount of overkill. Corvinus fucked around with this message at 20:09 on May 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 19:56
|
|
|
Kaislioc posted:Revenge of the fatigue spiral. So is this where missions might have to start being ignored, obviously this one can't because its a Council mission, to recover soldiers from fatigue/exhaustion or was this a string of bad luck having 3? missions so close together?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 20:07
|
|
|
Kibayasu posted:So is this where missions might have to start being ignored, obviously this one can't because its a Council mission, to recover soldiers from fatigue/exhaustion or was this a string of bad luck having 3? missions so close together? I'm not sure how the timing of missions is determined. Missions used to be more clumped up in the beginning of the month then they would taper down. In some version 14 iteration they changed it so they were more spread out, but it seems the missions are doing this thing where they're clumped, but spread out at the same time. It doesn't help I keep on getting my soldiers hurt for no good reason 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 20:11
|
|
|
It's alright I didn't promote this mission. I'm just glad this mission didn't have any bugs or severely wounded squad soldiers. edit: I volunteer to go on the bomb disposal mission if you need experienced soldiers. SgtSteel91 fucked around with this message at 22:32 on May 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 22:22
|
|
|
Holy poo poo, the balls on that thinman. Is that the first mission where no one has come back wounded?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
Mission 7 and 8 went pretty well 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2015 01:12
|
|
|
To the poor rookies who are about to get nuked, we salute you.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2015 01:28
|
|
|
Hey, I may not be killing things with my rockets like Van Doorn, but I am apparently befriending the ghosts that inhabit the bar.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2015 01:49
|
|
|
"Yeah, he's doing okay" - 5 Missions, 9 kills. Van Dorn - 3 Missions, 18 kills. Just providing we don't get any missions in 4 days... Start Geoscape. Get Council Mission. Veloxyll fucked around with this message at 06:16 on May 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2015 06:11
|
|
|
Yeah you're getting slammed by missions right now. At least the last one went pretty smooth except for that yolo Thinman.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2015 07:07
|
|
|
This next mission is going to be interesting, the pressure is certainly mounting. I think the aliens are really low on resources though? So hopefully the forces deployed aren't too strong (or do council missions not count for the alien resources mechanic?).
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2015 11:20
|
|
|
Phrosphor posted:This next mission is going to be interesting, the pressure is certainly mounting. I think the aliens are really low on resources though? So hopefully the forces deployed aren't too strong (or do council missions not count for the alien resources mechanic?). Alien resources only affect the missions aliens go on. Alien research wholly determines what aliens can be fielded (I elaborate a little here)
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2015 14:16
|
|
|
So, I've been out of the country and unable to provide air war commentary, but it looks as though things are going as well as can be hoped for and our raw talent is earning their wings on every sortie. Too bad about the shortage of boys on the ground though, it's almost as though you guys could benefit from close air support... Just more rambling from a fighter with too much time on his hands. See you in the hangar tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2015 16:41
|
|
|
 Youtube Link First Bombing mission of the campaign. The randomized bomb location and nodes wasn't so bad, what tripped me up the most was the new mechanic where random drop-ins happen in cover. I was under the impression that they drop into some sort of cover, and they can drop in flanked, but it appears they spawn in cover in relation to your soldiers. This doesn't take away from using overwatch strategies to kill them as they spawn (they don't actually take cover until after all the reaction shots have been made - at least, that's what wghost says), but it does mean some strategy is needed to control how the drop-ins appear. I think I know how I'll deal with it next time we have a bombing mission, but I'll discuss that when its relevant. Also, let me know if you think that sight-range indicator mod is too cheaty. I'm not going to have it on all the time (too messy looking), but it is handy to have it available when it occurs to me that I need to count so things go by a little faster. Congratulations Puukko naamassa in becoming a Corporal! Puukko naamassa needs a nickname!My nickname suggestion for Puukko: Rapea (Which, according to google translate, is Finnish for 'crispy'), in honor of his first mission, where he and Car Bomb went to the medbay holding hands. Perk Talk Disabling Shot v. Precision Shot v. Snapshot I put Disabling Shot on my 'urban' snipers. This is a vital skill for the early game. Don't go into June without a couple Disabling Shot snipers. Precision Shot I put on my crit/damage snipers. Snapshot I put on my In the Zone monster snipers. All great perks. Note that you can have both snapshot and squadsight in Long War. ProfessorBooty fucked around with this message at 15:32 on Jun 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2015 12:54
|
|
|
I actually like that sight-range mod. Don't see anything wrong with it? I mean, all it does is save time counting. Also that RNG, holy poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2015 13:36
|
|
|
Well, those were a bunch of lucky overwatches... "I need a moment"  Also, that mod isn't cheating. It's saving time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2015 14:03
|
|
|
Now that was peak mission wise so far. As for the sightline mod, keep it man. It just saves you time you would have been taking anyway, and it's cool for us too be able to see it too. Evil Kit fucked around with this message at 15:11 on Jun 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2015 15:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 21:56 |
|
|
Yeah, if you're going to count squares anyway it's best we can see it as well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2015 15:04
|
|
