My issues with the game as it stands and how I think it can be improved.

[Godzilla]

15 minutes ago, Solaris_Wave said:

JA3 definitely requires further development and testing, not just big fixing at this point. I am certainly not in a hurry for the game. I can fully appreciate the fact that it is Haemimont's game but there have been lots of posts that have the same opinions about things that people are concerned about. If they are not keen, they will probably still buy the game but it might be seen as another missed opportunity. Good and certainly better than the previous games after JA2, but not great. Not memorable.

Accurate. The features that are used in JA3 dont make it a bad game, just not a jagged alliance or strategy genre game. It comes off a lot like a CRPG with guns.

Unfortunately in order to make correct redesigns the entire game would have to be rebalanced and redesigned with the design choices in mind, everything from cth to larger maps with bigger encounters to more complex inventory and item stat systems.

Edited May 11, 2023 by Godzilla

[chr_isso]

48 minutes ago, Godzilla said:

Accurate. The features that are used in JA3 dont make it a bad game, just not a jagged alliance or strategy genre game. It comes off a lot like a CRPG with guns.

Unfortunately in order to make correct redesigns the entire game would have to be rebalanced and redesigned with the design choices in mind, everything from cth to larger maps with bigger encounters to more complex inventory and item stat systems.

I think larger maps and more complex inventory can easily be implemented, even in the current state of the game.
And I still have to get my hands on the game itself to truly decide if we need larger maps.

but inventory: yes.
this is waaaaay to simple.

[Solaris_Wave]

So far, my concerns are as follows:

1) Maps might be too small, restricting various types of approach and making certain weapons less useful.

2) Line Of Sight seems short for the enemy when there is nothing to obstruct their view, the weather is clear and it is daylight.

3) Being able to aim at any body part, at any range. Even if accuracy chances are less, how can you choose to aim at specific parts of a human that is a long distance away and moving around?

4) Damage reduction when firing burst or auto. There are other ways around dominating with automatic fire, that I suggested in the Combat Developer Diary, and with that said, I still found semi-auto fire was superior in JA2.

5) Inventory system is far too basic. The shared inventory sounds poor. I also would rather see a grid system, instead of slots, like in old X-COM and Silent Storm. If slots have to be in, then surely load-bearing apparel with sub-slots?

Item weight and item size are both important.

How are loose items handled, such as shotgun cartridges and 40mm grenades? Where are the bandoliers and carry bags? What about medical equipment taking up lots of room with small items?

6) Lack of interrupt actions being used by the enemy. If, during testing, it was found that you could run up to an enemy and shoot full-auto into them, why is there no defence against that? What is the target doing or his comrades?

 

7) Using scrap to build weapon items such as precision optics, stocks, lights, lasers and bipods. This is not a post-apocalypse setting where everything is jury-rigged or salvaged. Plus, how on earth are you supposed to make precision items in that way? Factories and companies exist for a reason. If the individual can do all of those things themselves, they really must be amazing.

Also, why should the item be unremovable? Unless an attachment was welded on because the gun was older and didn't have rail mounts, dovetails or brackets, you should be able to remove it. Not only that but some things like lights could be taped onto the gun.

 

8 ) [Space included so I don't get a smiley face.] Certain cosmetic choices. Blood splatter is very comical looking. I reported it before so it may have been changed by now but the cloud of blood is huge and cartoony. Also, the colour might be too bright.

While seeing that blood, no part of the character models seemed affected themselves. I'm not looking for a super gory game as I don't need that. However, one enemy got hit at point blank from a double-barrel shotgun and aside from the huge load of tomato ketchup that appeared, not a lot else was shown.

Damage numbers are too large and make the game look something like Destiny, with points rolling off the enemy.

 

9) Anyone that has received significant wounding should move more slowly and even look injured. If the person is classed as 'Almost Dead', they shouldn't be doing forward rolls.

10) Lack of audio responses from enemies (or even mercs) when hit. Also, some gunshots sounded a little too quiet, while ricochet noises were just as loud.

 

 

Those points are just a few and can be added to, or alongside what others have suggested.

[Grim]

1 hour ago, Solaris_Wave said:

So far, my concerns are as follows:

1) Maps might be too small, restricting various types of approach and making certain weapons less useful.

2) Line Of Sight seems short for the enemy when there is nothing to obstruct their view, the weather is clear and it is daylight.

3) Being able to aim at any body part, at any range. Even if accuracy chances are less, how can you choose to aim at specific parts of a human that is a long distance away and moving around?

4) Damage reduction when firing burst or auto. There are other ways around dominating with automatic fire, that I suggested in the Combat Developer Diary, and with that said, I still found semi-auto fire was superior in JA2.

5) Inventory system is far too basic. The shared inventory sounds poor. I also would rather see a grid system, instead of slots, like in old X-COM and Silent Storm. If slots have to be in, then surely load-bearing apparel with sub-slots?

Item weight and item size are both important.

How are loose items handled, such as shotgun cartridges and 40mm grenades? Where are the bandoliers and carry bags? What about medical equipment taking up lots of room with small items?

6) Lack of interrupt actions being used by the enemy. If, during testing, it was found that you could run up to an enemy and shoot full-auto into them, why is there no defence against that? What is the target doing or his comrades?

 

7) Using scrap to build weapon items such as precision optics, stocks, lights, lasers and bipods. This is not a post-apocalypse setting where everything is jury-rigged or salvaged. Plus, how on earth are you supposed to make precision items in that way? Factories and companies exist for a reason. If the individual can do all of those things themselves, they really must be amazing.

Also, why should the item be unremovable? Unless an attachment was welded on because the gun was older and didn't have rail mounts, dovetails or brackets, you should be able to remove it. Not only that but some things like lights could be taped onto the gun.

 

8 ) [Space included so I don't get a smiley face.] Certain cosmetic choices. Blood splatter is very comical looking. I reported it before so it may have been changed by now but the cloud of blood is huge and cartoony. Also, the colour might be too bright.

While seeing that blood, no part of the character models seemed affected themselves. I'm not looking for a super gory game as I don't need that. However, one enemy got hit at point blank from a double-barrel shotgun and aside from the huge load of tomato ketchup that appeared, not a lot else was shown.

Damage numbers are too large and make the game look something like Destiny, with points rolling off the enemy.

 

9) Anyone that has received significant wounding should move more slowly and even look injured. If the person is classed as 'Almost Dead', they shouldn't be doing forward rolls.

10) Lack of audio responses from enemies (or even mercs) when hit. Also, some gunshots sounded a little too quiet, while ricochet noises were just as loud.

 

 

Those points are just a few and can be added to, or alongside what others have suggested.

1) I don't understand your point. The only way certain weapons would be less useful is with too large maps. Those would be melee, pistols, smgs, throwing, grenades... Too small maps may only affect snipers and rocket launchers at most, yet snipers are reportedly already very strong in the game.

2) No, you're talking about stealth detection, not line of sight. It can look a bit stupid, yes, but to balance the feature it is necessary to allow mercs to approach stealthily rather close to the ennemy.

3) I don't understand this critique. Of course anyone can aim at a bodypart at any range. The unlikely is to effectively hit that body part. My problem with this is with the current system of aiming, if you miss you cannot hit another body part. This is a major issue in the design yet Boian already said in another thread they would reevaluate it.

6) Boyan already said there were another sources of interrupts, and enemies later in the campaign would be more of a challenge. I've seen some perks with interrupt effects, like when shot at you can shoot back, or a melee one like attack of opportunity (D&D).

7) I loved JA2 and 1.13 inventory system, but let's pretend to be the devil's advocate. Heamimont system simplifies a lot the clutter. You need a weapon mod, you build it from only one stack of scrap. You don't have to amass dozens of secondary items in your inventory. It is logic with the inventory system they chose, simple and with only a few slots per merc. Actually closer to JA1 than JA2. My concern with this current system is that You cannot get back that scrap removing the mod it seems.

I kinda agree with the rest.
 

Edited May 11, 2023 by Grim

[Solaris_Wave]

54 minutes ago, Grim said:

1) I don't understand your point. The only way certain weapons would be less useful is with too large maps. Those would be melee, pistols, smgs, throwing, grenades... Too small maps may only affect snipers and rocket launchers at most, yet snipers are reportedly already very strong in the game.

If the maps are too small, then a pistol is just as good as a bolt-action rifle in terms of range. I know that the rifle will do more damage but it is going to be more cumbersome (provided that sort of thing is in the game). Some assault rifles will be better than heavier battle rifles without losing too much in terms of damage per bullet. I thought that JA2's design meant that sniper rifles dominated but would you really need them at all in JA3 if the ranges are less?

 

1 hour ago, Grim said:

2) No, you're talking about stealth detection, not line of sight. It can look a bit stupid, yes, but to balance the feature it is necessary to allow mercs to approach stealthily rather close to the ennemy.

I was referring to a scene in a video where your mercs weren't able to be spotted, while they were prone, in daylight, with little in the way of things in front of them. I wasn't sure if this was due to it being a tutorial mission that demonstrated stealth. The only reason why I brought this up was because I was wondering what the difference would be when such a situation would take place at night or in bad weather.

 

1 hour ago, Grim said:

3) I don't understand this critique. Of course anyone can aim at a bodypart at any range. The unlikely is to effectively hit that body part. My problem with this is with the current system of aiming, if you miss you cannot hit another body part. This is a major issue in the design yet Boian already said in another thread they would reevaluate it.

It isn't that easy to aim at a person's head or hands from a long way away. Why should you be able to specifically see and aim at such an area if the target is small, due to distance? You aim at the general profile of the person and pull the trigger. The bullet may then hit a random part of the body. That is why I think that body part aiming should be restricted to close range. Beyond that, you can only aim at a general human target. The bullet then randomly hits a body zone with the greatest chance being the torso, followed by arms and legs and then the head.

You can aim at a specific body part if looking through a scope but your skill must be high enough and the target must not be sprinting. Ideally, they shouldn't have moved from that spot in the last turn.

I have said this before repeatedly. If you can just aim anywhere you like all the time, you will try and go for the head, especially if the target is wearing so much armour it absorbs lots of bullets like it did in JA2.

I am just going by my experiences of that game. Single shots, enabling aimed fire to the head was the quickest and most efficient way to kill an enemy, especially in the late game when the enemies were elite, numerous and well armoured (and could survive your shots enough to counter-attack).

As an aside, I don't mind the idea that a bullet missing the arms could then strike the torso but if you aim for the head and miss, should that bullet really then be allowed to hit another body part? Surely, the bullet would fly past the head and carry on going.

 

1 hour ago, Grim said:

7) I loved JA2 and 1.13 inventory system, but let's pretend to be the devil's advocate. Heamimont system simplifies a lot the clutter. You need a weapon mod, you build it from only one stack of scrap. You don't have to amass dozens of secondary items in your inventory. It is logic with the inventory system they chose, simple and with only a few slots per merc. Actually closer to JA1 than JA2. My concern with this current system is that You cannot get back that scrap removing the mod it seems.

I say again, how are you supposed to build precision optics and lasers from the same amount of scrap that you could build a foregrip from? It seems it is done for convenience's sake but it is taking artistic license too far. It makes more sense to me to buy those items and have an inventory at your base or storage site, where you can attach and detach them from any gun that is compatible.

It isn't making things complicated, it is just making them plausible. Besides, I personally didn't mind having all those items at the base, to choose from.

[Grim]

52 minutes ago, Solaris_Wave said:

If the maps are too small, then a pistol is just as good as a bolt-action rifle in terms of range. I know that the rifle will do more damage but it is going to be more cumbersome (provided that sort of thing is in the game). Some assault rifles will be better than heavier battle rifles without losing too much in terms of damage per bullet. I thought that JA2's design meant that sniper rifles dominated but would you really need them at all in JA3 if the ranges are less?

It seems weapon ranges are shrinked in JA3 like in JA2, to fit the map size and more importantly, to allow all weapons to be viable.
Too large maps would actually be very tedious in a tun based game.

 

Quote

I was referring to a scene in a video where your mercs weren't able to be spotted, while they were prone, in daylight, with little in the way of things in front of them. I wasn't sure if this was due to it being a tutorial mission that demonstrated stealth. The only reason why I brought this up was because I was wondering what the difference would be when such a situation would take place at night or in bad weather.

I know the video/discussion you are talking about, I saw it. Yes it looks a bit ridiculous, but it was the same in JA2 and for a good reason, the same as above, the shrinked weapon/engagement ranges. Therefore, the mercs have to be able to close the enemy enough to engage with melee/pistol/throwing stealthily.
In worse conditions, they will be able to engage really close, but if not silent, the fight will begin and alarm a lot of opponents.

You know what, I guess I understand where you are coming from, I played AIMNAS + large maps and it was a blast, but this is a completely different experience, they are doing JA3, a tactical game with a lot of freedom of gameplay, not a military sim. They have to balance the game and make some hard choices in favor of gameplay and at detriment to realism.

 

Quote

It isn't that easy to aim at a person's head or hands from a long way away. Why should you be able to specifically see and aim at such an area if the target is small, due to distance? You aim at the general profile of the person and pull the trigger. The bullet may then hit a random part of the body. That is why I think that body part aiming should be restricted to close range. Beyond that, you can only aim at a general human target. The bullet then randomly hits a body zone with the greatest chance being the torso, followed by arms and legs and then the head.

You can aim at a specific body part if looking through a scope but your skill must be high enough and the target must not be sprinting. Ideally, they shouldn't have moved from that spot in the last turn.

I have said this before repeatedly. If you can just aim anywhere you like all the time, you will try and go for the head, especially if the target is wearing so much armour it absorbs lots of bullets like it did in JA2.

I am just going by my experiences of that game. Single shots, enabling aimed fire to the head was the quickest and most efficient way to kill an enemy, especially in the late game when the enemies were elite, numerous and well armoured (and could survive your shots enough to counter-attack).

If you only aim at the general shape, you will never be a good shot. If you aim at a very specific thing, you will have a chance to do it. In the end, it may be a very subtle thing concerning your aiming action, like pointing very very very little upwards/downward/left/right depending on what you want to hit, but you can always "aim" at something. Once again, that does not mean you should be able to have good odds to do it. That's where the game has to calculate a reasonnable CTH or bullet trajectory.

 

Quote

As an aside, I don't mind the idea that a bullet missing the arms could then strike the torso but if you aim for the head and miss, should that bullet really then be allowed to hit another body part? Surely, the bullet would fly past the head and carry on going.

You may not understand how shooting is working in JA2 and JA3 :
You have a CTH the target.
>If you score under the CTH, you hit, and the bullet goes straight at the point you aimed at.
>If you score over the CTH, you miss, and then the game calculates a random trajectory for the bullet, diverging on x and y from the original coordinates in the plane of the point you aimed at (or something like that). If that new trajectory crosses the path of something, it interacts (wound, ricochet, penetration...)
If you aim at the head, the missed shot can end up anywhere, but statistically has a chance to hit the original target in the torso>arms>legs.
 

Quote

I say again, how are you supposed to build precision optics and lasers from the same amount of scrap that you could build a foregrip from? It seems it is done for convenience's sake but it is taking artistic license too far. It makes more sense to me to buy those items and have an inventory at your base or storage site, where you can attach and detach them from any gun that is compatible.

It isn't making things complicated, it is just making them plausible. Besides, I personally didn't mind having all those items at the base, to choose from.

Yes, it is taking artistic license far, I agree. But the gameplay benefits are non negligible. It seems in JA3 you will be roaming a big map, and not necessarily have a "base". The player has to be able to use mechanics and mod weapons in the field. Cluttering the inventory with dozen attachments seems a bad idea.
That said, in JA2 there were some military grade attachments, sure, but there were the DIY attachments too. They did a mix of both worlds here.
One other thing you might have missed is the other ingredients/parts necessary for certain attachments (steel tube, chip, lens,...?). A foregrip will only need scrap, where a scope will need lenses, as example.

I agree with you on several topics, but I feel like you are pushing a bit too far on some aspects without considering the compromises that have to be made for the game to work (on several levels, gameplay, audience, complexity vs playability, fun vs chore).

[WILDFIRE]

I still hope the stealth mode and AI work in the end as intended. Right now I rarely saw that a stealth approach really worked, because the enemies spotted the mercs very easy and the stealth attack often rang the alarm immediately. Sure maybe that is intentional but I hope they find the right balance so that stealth is not easy but still possible and rewarding.

 

As Grim already mentioned regarding the inventory system the devs really simplified the clutter which is a good thing but still I think weight, backpacks, LBE gear and different weapon sizes for the inventory space are definitely missing.

 

The missing animations for knocked over enemies and for a wounded status need to be added. The same goes for a better body and voice feedback when mercs/enemies get hit by a bullet. Visible wounds would be a nice addition.

 

And the bullet trajectory problem where you aim for a specific body part but if you miss you can not hit another part is something that really needs to be reworked.

[Xeth Nyrrow]

7 hours ago, Solaris_Wave said:

So far, my concerns are as follows: <snip>

This list is extremely solid and I think the majority of people can agree on the majority of the points raised.

I think I had an epiphany here, a solid JA successor game isn't really possible in today's game development culture/business. The game we all want takes too many resources for an indie studio to pull off and studios with enough funding don't have their ear to the ground with the player base to be able to capture what we are asking for.

JA3 devs are trying their best though but relied on internal testing too much. If they did any external testing, it was from people who are not big JA fans. Also throw in that pretty much no dev team wants to make JA2+ and wants to put their own spin on it as well as market pressures to make a game for the, "cool kids" of today and here we are.

[Solaris_Wave]

3 hours ago, Grim said:

>If you score over the CTH, you miss, and then the game calculates a random trajectory for the bullet, diverging on x and y from the original coordinates in the plane of the point you aimed at (or something like that). If that new trajectory crosses the path of something, it interacts (wound, ricochet, penetration...)
If you aim at the head, the missed shot can end up anywhere, but statistically has a chance to hit the original target in the torso>arms>legs.

That makes more sense from your explanation. Beforehand, I was imagining that a missed shot would get almost a free chance at another part of the body.

 

3 hours ago, Grim said:

I agree with you on several topics, but I feel like you are pushing a bit too far on some aspects without considering the compromises that have to be made for the game to work (on several levels, gameplay, audience, complexity vs playability, fun vs chore).

I have to respectfully disagree on that viewpoint. I wasn't thinking of going for outright complexity and I was definitely thinking of how things can work in terms of gameplay. I am mainly trying to veer towards a realistic slant but only because of considering what is more believable. That said, I am not going for realism over what is actually fun. Everybody has a different perception of what that is, however.

I just don't want to see simplification for the sake of it. Games might not be as complex as what they used to be, in the days of big manuals, but I get the impression that today's generation is considered to be less patient, easily distracted and wanting immediate gratification unless they decide to look elsewhere. If that really is the case, then humanity might be declining in terms of intelligence. That though, is a subject for another time and place.

[Stuurminator]

4 minutes ago, Solaris_Wave said:

That makes more sense from your explanation. Beforehand, I was imagining that a missed shot would get almost a free chance at another part of the body.

The irony is that a lot of people (including me) are unhappy about missed body part shots not hitting other parts of the body, but the odds of such an event are so slim it might never occur in a given game even if it's enabled. 🫠

[Solaris_Wave]

15 minutes ago, Stuurminator said:

The irony is that a lot of people (including me) are unhappy about missed body part shots not hitting other parts of the body, but the odds of such an event are so slim it might never occur in a given game even if it's enabled. 🫠

I think that, with it enabled but with a slim chance of it happening, it will add to the fun unpredictability of combat. That is why I also wanted JA3 to avoid copying JA2 (which is a rare thing) by not being allowed to aim at specific body parts, except for the reasons I have previously mentioned. You then get surprised when your shot hits a critical location instead of the torso, causing an extra effect to occur, along with standard blood loss and health depletion.

Unpredictable, dynamic combat from surprise head and limb shots, no visible and specific CtH display, watching errant bullets hit something else instead. That sounds good to me.

Edited May 11, 2023 by Solaris_Wave

[Grim]

1 hour ago, Stuurminator said:

The irony is that a lot of people (including me) are unhappy about missed body part shots not hitting other parts of the body, but the odds of such an event are so slim it might never occur in a given game even if it's enabled. 🫠

Why? No, it depends on the sway given to the missed shot, but in many situations the odds of hitting should be non negligible. Shooting up close should give plenty of miss -> lucky hit.
If you have played JA2 1.13 NCTH, all the shots use the miss code from JA2, with parameters to manage the hit cone width. In that mode, you actually hit people, you know, less often than in JA2 vanilla, but only because this is intended.
 

[DougS2K]

12 hours ago, Solaris_Wave said:

7) Using scrap to build weapon items such as precision optics, stocks, lights, lasers and bipods. This is not a post-apocalypse setting where everything is jury-rigged or salvaged. Plus, how on earth are you supposed to make precision items in that way? Factories and companies exist for a reason. If the individual can do all of those things themselves, they really must be amazing.

Also, why should the item be unremovable? Unless an attachment was welded on because the gun was older and didn't have rail mounts, dovetails or brackets, you should be able to remove it. Not only that but some things like lights could be taped onto the gun.

Yeah, this system for weapon mods is just so bizarre and nonsensical. I'd be ok with being able to craft a few things this say like say a double mag or something, but a scope or a bipod??? I'd much prefer to have weapon mods that that separate items which are bought, found, and swappable between weapons. 

[Solaris_Wave]

I like the idea of minor customisation, such as taping mags together or strapping a light onto a gun that has no mount for it but this scrap system being universal is a real disappointment. Not only that, but taping magazines is pointless because the shared inventory system sounds as if no merc carries mags on their person.

To me, the CtH debate is minuscule compared to these.

[DougS2K]

7 minutes ago, Solaris_Wave said:

I like the idea of minor customisation, such as taping mags together or strapping a light onto a gun that has no mount for it but this scrap system being universal is a real disappointment.

Agreed. These things make sense.

7 minutes ago, Solaris_Wave said:

Not only that, but taping magazines is pointless because the shared inventory system sounds as if no merc carries mags on their person.

Bahaha Good point. They would have to implement mags first I guess.

7 minutes ago, Solaris_Wave said:

To me, the CtH debate is minuscule compared to these.

Couldn't agree more. 

[Godzilla]

2 hours ago, Solaris_Wave said:

I like the idea of minor customisation, such as taping mags together or strapping a light onto a gun that has no mount for it but this scrap system being universal is a real disappointment. Not only that, but taping magazines is pointless because the shared inventory system sounds as if no merc carries mags on their person.

To me, the CtH debate is minuscule compared to these.

There are good reasons for the scrap system, but a lot of bad ones.

On the plus side it makes all mods individual which is good, if you find one silencer and can just reattach it to any gun, well now you messed up progression by basically granting you an attachement to any weapon for the rest of the game. But if you have per weapon attachments then you still need to progress other weapons, just finding them isnt enough.

On the downside if you have 100 parts you can just get any high level gun and get a silencer for it immediately.

[Godzilla]

16 hours ago, chr_isso said:

I think larger maps and more complex inventory can easily be implemented, even in the current state of the game.
And I still have to get my hands on the game itself to truly decide if we need larger maps.

but inventory: yes.
this is waaaaay to simple.

Its not just larger maps its what is the average range of engagement. So far it seems like a lot of engagements can be started with a conversation or by staging an ambush from very nearby.

Thats why I said this JA reminds me significantly of CRPGs. A lot of CRPG philosophies like an open world based around mostly free travel snd then interaction and only then theres combat that you usually have to trigger with a conversation or by setting up your characters in close vincinity and attacking.

Edited May 11, 2023 by Godzilla

[WILDFIRE]

I am not sure about the current loot system. I do not like the idea that you can only find loot at specific places. Also these big loot/object icons give the impression that you play more of a console title.

 

I want to loot nearly all objects in a room/environment and not everything should be presented in a obvious way. There should be also secret places with secret loot so that you can have fun while you explore all areas.

[D13]

On 5/11/2023 at 9:23 AM, Solaris_Wave said:

9) Anyone that has received significant wounding should move more slowly and even look injured. If the person is classed as 'Almost Dead', they shouldn't be doing forward rolls.

 

This is actually my main concern after watching beta videos, for tactical reasons:

a.) In JA2, having to decide whether to use a turn to injure 2+ enemies or rather kill one of them can be very interesting. I hope this will be in JA3 as well. The decision how to handle multiple enemies is an important part of JA tactics.

b.) Bleeding: rescuing an injured merc during a battle can be great fun. But there is also the tactical aspect. If an isolated merc or an enemy is injured, that alone can instantly change the pace and required tactics of a battle, because suddenly time is running against whoever is bleeding out.

From what I have seen, there is a (rare?) "bleeding" event after which an injured character loses HP with every turn. I just hope that happens frequently enough, and that it becomes more likely to occur the more severely wounded a character is.

 

[Solaris_Wave]

2 hours ago, D13 said:

a.) In JA2, having to decide whether to use a turn to injure 2+ enemies or rather kill one of them can be very interesting. I hope this will be in JA3 as well. The decision how to handle multiple enemies is an important part of JA tactics.

That is an important factor. Usually, you would try to lessen the numbers as quick as possible. The less enemies there are, the less attacks can be made against you. However, the alternative can be to cause enough damage to multiple enemies in an effort to weaken those attacks or some other capability, especially if there are multiple dangerous enemies that can seriously beat you. Wound multiple enemies enough and they might collapse next turn, try to flee or not have enough energy to shoot or try close combat.

The only problem with choosing that alternative is if your attacks have no real effect on an enemy who is still alive. If they are badly wounded but act as if they are otherwise completely strong and healthy except for their hitpoints, they will continue to dish out as much damage as normal, move at standard speeds and basically be just as dangerous as if you had never hit them in the first place. In that scenario, there really isn't much point in trying to weaken multiple enemies if they don't receive negative effects to their stats. You might as well just focus on one enemy at a time and making sure that they die quickly to lessen the overall number of attacks.

I would like to see badly wounded enemies really act like they are badly wounded. They can still fight and move but they are not able to keep up with their healthy comrades. I know much of that is apparently in the game, such as blood loss, stamina loss, concussion, limb damage but I would like to actually see it as well.

[Lunokhod]

8 hours ago, Solaris_Wave said:

I would like to see badly wounded enemies really act like they are badly wounded. They can still fight and move but they are not able to keep up with their healthy comrades. I know much of that is apparently in the game, such as blood loss, stamina loss, concussion, limb damage but I would like to actually see it as well.

100%. Im ready to pay for DLC with more different animations. This is what brings life to the game.