|
MechPlasma posted:You don't. That is literally the point on Ironman.
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 02:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 18:24 |
|
|
nnnotime posted:Yes, but this is Ironman with gamebreaking bugs, so you want some way to restore your game in case of such bugs, unless one is a masochist. The entire point of ironman is that it removes the temptation to load previous saves and try again by removing it as an option. Creating the ability to do so with the excuse of bugs destroys that purpose. It would make ironman NOT ironman because it relies on the player's self restraint to not save scum.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 02:38
|
|
|
nnnotime posted:Yes, but this is Ironman with gamebreaking bugs, so you want some way to restore your game in case of such bugs, unless one is a masochist.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 02:58
|
|
|
Without being a troglodyte, there's no in-game way to restore from a game-breaking fault like this on Ironman. However, the game doesn't have any save verification, so if you back up a save from Documents\My Games\XCOM - Enemy Unknown\XComGame\SaveData prior to each gaming session or something, you'll always have a fallback. This of course allows some amount of savescumming, but truthfully if you're willing to go back and manually restore saves like this you've already got your own punishment - namely, the mind-numbing tedium and annoyance of actually doing it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 03:24
|
|
|
MechPlasma posted:Remind me again why you guys are playing Ironman. Even if you really wanted to man it out, autosave is still a very nice thing for when some bug inevitably gets you from behind. The point of ironman is not to get crushed by one of the game's many bugs, no.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 03:32
|
|
|
Speaking of ironman, if you lose your volunteer on the final mission is that it? Do not pass go, do not restart, bye bye? unrelated story: last move of my turn, I put my star heavy armed with plasma behind a full cover brick wall. I order suppression on distant enemy. My heavy decides to fire the plasma straight through wall, vaporizing her cover. ALIEN ACTIVITY 
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 03:38
|
|
This poster loves police brutality, but only when its against minorities!
|
DeusExMachinima posted:Speaking of ironman, if you lose your volunteer on the final mission is that it? Do not pass go, do not restart, bye bye?
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 03:39
|
|
|
Flippycunt posted:
Still a very fun mod, but the end is slowly grinding me down. I just couldn't keep ahead of the tech curve and my fighters are barely taking down destroyers and I'm finally starting to lose on the ground.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 06:57
|
|
|
I did it guys  So um yeah the late game is still ridiculously easy, even on Impossible and I even made several huge "macro" mistakes on the strat-map that got me to 2 countries short of loosing and only getting my last satellite up in the month before assaulting the temple ship. I went in with 2 shivs and not even bothering checking my equipment (packed my sniper into titan armor by mistake) and you still just mop the floor with the whole mission. It really just starts very vary hard when you have to take out 6 HP thinmen with 4 hp rookies and then just keeps getting steadily easier (unless you gently caress up a crucial research race - e.g. try to skip lasers). And yeah, gently caress the bugs - I think they do happen quite a bit more on Impossible just because there are way more enemies running around per map. There is no way this would have been feasible on Ironman, none. There were at least 3 totally game-breaking moments I actually had to go back through several auto-saves to recover from. Ridiculous. Hopefully EW will improve on all this 
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 07:46
|
|
|
Coolguye posted:Due to the fact that every game is slightly different with regard to how many resources you get from specific UFOs, and the timing of these specific UFOs, any pro strat build order would be reliant on the random number generator liking you to a certain extent. Well no one in this thread was really a help, but this isn't true. I managed to crap out 4 sats in the first month pretty reliably, the only thing that;s a crap shoot is getting your second abduction + UFO in time to build an uplink. I haven;t really figured out what to do in the second moth, but I'm sure I'll think of something.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 08:26
|
|
|
Knuc If U Buck posted:Well no one in this thread was really a help, but this isn't true. I managed to crap out 4 sats in the first month pretty reliably, the only thing that;s a crap shoot is getting your second abduction + UFO in time to build an uplink. I haven;t really figured out what to do in the second moth, but I'm sure I'll think of something. That's EXACTLY what I was talking about. What good are those satellites doing you without that uplink? What could that money have done for you if you didn't waste it on the extra satellites you're not able to use? This poo poo changes a lot based on circumstance, and you just found out why. How are you breaking the game over your knee if you're wasting triple-digit credits that could be used building workshops, labs, the officer training school? You're just prioritizing satellites, and you're leaning on general guidelines. Exactly like the thread suggested you would. Mr. Wynand posted:It really just starts very vary hard when you have to take out 6 HP thinmen with 4 hp rookies and then just keeps getting steadily easier (unless you gently caress up a crucial research race - e.g. try to skip lasers). And yeah, gently caress the bugs - I think they do happen quite a bit more on Impossible just because there are way more enemies running around per map. There is no way this would have been feasible on Ironman, none. There were at least 3 totally game-breaking moments I actually had to go back through several auto-saves to recover from. Ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 08:42
|
|
|
Coolguye posted:Not that I disagree with you (I don't recommend anyone plays ironman due to the current bug status), but losing 1 soldier in the entirety of Impossible? You were using your autosaves for a lot more than circumventing game breaking bugs, my friend. Oh I wasn't trying to imply that's the only reason I reloaded. I don't think my save-scumming was too ridiculous mind you. For the most parts its learning how to avoid certain mistakes pre-laser/carapace (though granted, knowing where the scary triggers are going to be after a reload is a pretty substantial advantage). After that you really just don't loose peeps that often. I definitely would like a working Ironman because yeah of course, the game is going to play very differently when you'll just have to make do with permanently losing your A-Squad half way through the month.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 09:01
|
|
|
Coolguye posted:That's EXACTLY what I was talking about. What good are those satellites doing you without that uplink? What could that money have done for you if you didn't waste it on the extra satellites you're not able to use? This poo poo changes a lot based on circumstance, and you just found out why. How are you breaking the game over your knee if you're wasting triple-digit credits that could be used building workshops, labs, the officer training school? You're just prioritizing satellites, and you're leaning on general guidelines. Exactly like the thread suggested you would. I'm not relying on guidelines, I'm doing what I said I would and trying to figure out a build order that works most of the time and makes the later game easier. If you've got anything profound to offer, let me have it dude.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 09:10
|
|
|
nnnotime posted:Yes, but this is Ironman with gamebreaking bugs, so you want some way to restore your game in case of such bugs, unless one is a masochist. People seriously overstate the impact of the bugs. Some guys teleporting into your party isn't gamebreaking. A soldier dying to a flanking bug isn't gamebreaking. Heck, having to fail a mission because of a glitch isn't gamebreaking, even if you lose your entire squad. It is annoying, makes the game harder than intended, and means you have to alter tactics to roll with it, but people have completed ironman and enjoyed it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 14:22
|
|
|
Fangz posted:People seriously overstate the impact of the bugs. Do you play on Impossible? Because if not then you should know that bugs randomly causing you to lose missions doesn't just suck, it's hours of work down the drain as you spiral into oblivion even after "that great first terror mission." If you do play on impossible then please make videos because I would like to get better.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 14:32
|
|
|
Fangz posted:People seriously overstate the impact of the bugs. Some guys teleporting into your party isn't gamebreaking. A soldier dying to a flanking bug isn't gamebreaking. Heck, having to fail a mission because of a glitch isn't gamebreaking, even if you lose your entire squad. It is annoying, makes the game harder than intended, and means you have to alter tactics to roll with it, but people have completed ironman and enjoyed it. On Impossible, especially in the first 2 months, if at least half of what's necessary doesn't go as planned, the game will literally be unfinishable. Unfinishable as in, you will lose 3 countries each month on average if you lose 1 or 2 missions in a single month. Actually in Impossible, I believe you are guaranteed to lose at least 2 countries in the first month even if everything goes perfectly.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 15:13
|
|
|
Fangz posted:People seriously overstate the impact of the bugs. Some guys teleporting into your party isn't gamebreaking. A soldier dying to a flanking bug isn't gamebreaking. Heck, having to fail a mission because of a glitch isn't gamebreaking, even if you lose your entire squad. It is annoying, makes the game harder than intended, and means you have to alter tactics to roll with it, but people have completed ironman and enjoyed it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 15:19
|
|
|
Knuc If U Buck posted:Well no one in this thread was really a help, but this isn't true. I managed to crap out 4 sats in the first month pretty reliably, the only thing that;s a crap shoot is getting your second abduction + UFO in time to build an uplink. I haven;t really figured out what to do in the second moth, but I'm sure I'll think of something. You are supposed to build the 4 satellites in batches of 1 so that you can cancel the 4th one if need be in order to build the uplink.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 16:21
|
|
|
bobfather posted:On Impossible, especially in the first 2 months, if at least half of what's necessary doesn't go as planned, the game will literally be unfinishable. 3 actually (iirc)
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 17:19
|
|
|
MechPlasma posted:The save corruption bug is totally gamebreaking though. As is aliens not finishing their turn. The only way around that is to kill the whole pack the same turn it was revealed which is just not going to be possible on a lot I/I. And yeah I would just be keen as hell to find out how someone can deal with 5 packs teleporting up your rear end every 3 missions or so and not call it "game breaking"
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 17:23
|
|
|
Speak of the devil just had this save-corruption bug happen to me for the first time. First encounter ever with mutons, and managed to capture a thin man as well as a muton (lost a rookie though). Good job everyone! Head home to rest! Game crashes and save file corrupted 
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 17:40
|
|
|
Firaxis decision to link the patch to the expansion seems a wee bit bizarre, what with these lovely bugs still being around 1 year after release  Can loving hope they release the patch to the base game as well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 17:47
|
|
|
Pimpmust posted:Firaxis decision to link the patch to the expansion seems a wee bit bizarre, what with these lovely bugs still being around 1 year after release Maybe its related to how they have to pay to patch on consoles, so they're waiting until there's a matching income stream to do it. Though that's still rear end to customers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 17:48
|
|
|
Pimpmust posted:Firaxis decision to link the patch to the expansion seems a wee bit bizarre, what with these lovely bugs still being around 1 year after release I think that's pretty much a certainty. IIRC both xpacs for civ 5 was accompanied by a base game patch that brought it up to the same point, minus xpac gameplay features and content
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 17:51
|
|
|
dumpster17 posted:Maybe its related to how they have to pay to patch on consoles, so they're waiting until there's a matching income stream to do it. Though that's still rear end to customers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 18:16
|
|
|
Knuc If U Buck posted:I'm not relying on guidelines, I'm doing what I said I would and trying to figure out a build order that works most of the time and makes the later game easier. If you've got anything profound to offer, let me have it dude. You are making no sense whatsoever. The late game is relatively simple pretty much no matter what you do, as long as you get there with a strong XCOM base. Did you mean the early game? Because if so then building so many satellites and then not using them is provably making your early game harder. Build order is completely irrelevant. The early game, as you just found out, is too much of a crap shoot to say "queue a satellite on the 10th. Build a first uplink on the 14th." and so forth because there's zero guarantee that you're going to have enough resources to get it done. A lot of the interim building is dependent, too. Having steam somewhere in the first two levels completely changes optimal movements. The rule of thumb people have given throughout this thread and the last was 'rush satellites', and that's precisely what you've said you've done. Sub-optimally, as well, I might add, since you had so many satellites left over at the end of the month that could have had their resources put toward something more useful.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 18:21
|
|
|
Pimpmust posted:Can loving hope they release the patch to the base game as well. Pretty sure they said this in one of the EW interviews. There will be a patch for the base game close to EW's release. EDIT: there might be an issue with patching the console versions in regards to how much code can be modified by a patch on those systems.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 18:54
|
|
|
bobfather posted:On Impossible, especially in the first 2 months, if at least half of what's necessary doesn't go as planned, the game will literally be unfinishable. I've gotten past month 1 with a complete council. Ignored the first UFO so I could get the bigger one, rushed 4 satellites, got an uplink, and got really lucky with the location of abductions. Then I discovered that the Train Mission has a nasty bug: if you activate the train with your last move of the turn via dash, the game doesn't check to see if you're where you should be. Then it lets a zillion mutons and thin men come in and take potshots and ruin your game. That's a gamebreaking bug. I eventually did I/I but I think I'm like 2/21 or something in terms of games won. e: maybe 4 or 5 of those 21 were played to completion; it's pretty easy to tell when you're hopelessly hosed, and so much relies on month 1 and 2 that it's obvious early
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 20:52
|
|
|
I started a new game and I have a Support and a Sniper that made Corporal. For them I usually pick Sprinter and Snap Shot. I was wondering if I should pick the other upgrades instead?
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 21:46
|
|
|
BigRed0427 posted:I started a new game and I have a Support and a Sniper that made Corporal. For them I usually pick Sprinter and Snap Shot. I was wondering if I should pick the other upgrades instead? Sprinter is the right choice, but Snap Shot pales in comparison to Squadsight.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 21:52
|
|
|
BigRed0427 posted:Snap Shot. I was wondering if I should pick the other upgrades instead? Oh god, yes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 21:53
|
|
|
I always have one sniper with snapshot when I think it's going to be an interior/building kind of thing. But, really, once you get plasma pistols the +pistol damage and squadsight is how you should run it, because the pistol becomes about as good as the plasma rifle, and snipers become omnipotent Gods.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 21:59
|
|
|
Suitaru posted:Sprinter is the right choice, but Snap Shot pales in comparison to Squadsight. One thing I wish Snap Shot did was remove the accuracy penalty that sniper rifles have for closer ranges. I tried speccing a third sniper up for being a scout with Snap Shot, DGG (to try and take advantage of mobility to negate Snap Shot's penalty along with a scope), and Battle Scanner. If an emey was even just midrange to the sniper I ended up just using my pistol and wishing I had taken Gunslinger instead. On a related note, what are the mechanics for how for a soldier can see/shoot? I had so many issues with my Snap Shot sniper just not having a shot due to range.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 22:02
|
|
|
chami posted:One thing I wish Snap Shot did was remove the accuracy penalty that sniper rifles have for closer ranges. I tried speccing a third sniper up for being a scout with Snap Shot, DGG (to try and take advantage of mobility to negate Snap Shot's penalty along with a scope), and Battle Scanner. If an emey was even just midrange to the sniper I ended up just using my pistol and wishing I had taken Gunslinger instead. I can't imagine Snap Shot + DGG is a good combo. You take DGG when you expect your sniper to never ever need to use a pistol and instead sit on the high ground and fire away, which is something Squadsight snipers do. If you're taking Snap Shot, take Gunslinger too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 22:04
|
|
|
quiggy posted:I can't imagine Snap Shot + DGG is a good combo. Those have some synergy if your Sniper has a grapple, actually.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 22:10
|
|
|
quiggy posted:I can't imagine Snap Shot + DGG is a good combo. You take DGG when you expect your sniper to never ever need to use a pistol and instead sit on the high ground and fire away, which is something Squadsight snipers do. If you're taking Snap Shot, take Gunslinger too. Oh, it's because I forgot that sniper rifles had the range penalty in CQC so I didn't expect to have to switch to the pistol if things got close.  And like Snow Job said, it's pretty handy in the outdoors when I have the sniper zipping around in ghost armor flanking and killing folks.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 22:19
|
|
|
snapshot really should have been put against gunslinger, given that their intended function, providing the sniper with a better mobile attack, is the same. As it is the choice goes between a lack of squadsight vs a lack of damned good ground if you want a mobile sniper, which should be a really obvious pick for most people.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 22:28
|
|
|
FoolyCharged posted:snapshot really should have been put against gunslinger, given that their intended function, providing the sniper with a better mobile attack, is the same. As it is the choice goes between a lack of squadsight vs a lack of damned good ground if you want a mobile sniper, which should be a really obvious pick for most people. Having snapshot AND squad sight would be pretty broken though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 22:50
|
|
|
Flame112 posted:Having snapshot AND squad sight would be pretty broken though. kind of like squadsight and gunslinger? just saying.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 23:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 18:24 |
|
|
FoolyCharged posted:snapshot really should have been put against gunslinger, given that their intended function, providing the sniper with a better mobile attack, is the same. As it is the choice goes between a lack of squadsight vs a lack of damned good ground if you want a mobile sniper, which should be a really obvious pick for most people. Flame112 posted:Having snapshot AND squad sight would be pretty broken though. I wouldn't be surprised if Snapshot and Gunslinger were originally designed to play against each other but then the devs realized how broken it would be to let a sniper move and get a squadsight shot in the same turn. Honestly, I always go Squadsight and Gunslinger because with the pistol damage boost Snipers become almost as reliable with their pistols as Supports/Recruits with their rifles. In some cases, they become more reliable due to their accuracy and never needing to reload. That way I have snipers that I can chose if they sit in the back as railguns or move with the party and still be able to provide effective cover.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 23:09
|
|
