GODSPEED

October 20, 2021

2 hours ago, Wigen said:

I know, I know, I read his analysis with great interest, but I also wanted to describe my feelings. Maybe not in that detail as @Kordanor, but still... 😁

I have also watched the video quite a few times.. I was a little more focused on everything after 1 minute, haha!

I saved all the wallpapers/screenshots from the website to my pc and set them as slideshow wallpaper 🙄

So you aren't alone to be crazy 😋

October 19, 2021

@Kordanorhas posted some details about his analysis of the trailer somewhere around these forums.. 😁

October 18, 2021

3 hours ago, LXant said:

...we don't know what to expect, as not much is known.

Until the magazine comes out, someone buys it and then shares this info with us, the upcoming FAQ is our best bet to get our hands on new info.

I would 'guesstimate' that the bigger the studio, the more the game will be streamlined for a bigger audience. Not only for profit reasons, but big studios do not usually handle niche products (unless it's that kind of studio with a publisher of niche games, like Matrix Games / Slitherine).

At the same time, higher budgets can also mean better visuals, better audio, voiceovers and overall game polish.. and as much as I don't put my faith in graphics as much as gameplay, it would be nice to have a modern isometric JA-style game with real-world firearms.

Haemimont, from the few games I've played, have a good eye for detail and intricacies. Surviving Mars is what I would call a pretty well balanced game. It's not overly complex, but it is far from being a simplistic game. As long as they can keep this level of detail, management and complexity in JA3, I think I should be happy.

Anyways, thanks for our ranting conversation @LXant, maybe I will try to look at possible changes in JA3 as not such a negative thing 😏

October 17, 2021

2 hours ago, LXant said:

I can see why you like inventory management. Scarcity adds to the experience of dealing with limited resources, of improvising and a feeling of accomplishment when overcoming such a challenge.

This is where I find the addition of detail and complexity - like the addition of individual magazines & weapon condition - play an enormous role in this inventory managment.

Eventhough, I do not consider it a very good game, because it is so clunky, the camera is so frustrating and the personality is non-existant, I still think 7,62 High Calibre to be one of the BEST TACTICAL games the PC has had. Simply because you will often find weapons and gear in such a bad condition, you really take a gamble if you decide to use it... and you MUST make a choice, because you have realistic inventory space. You also need to worry about having magazines for your weapons, because if you only have 1 mag and you empty it in combat, it takes so long to fill that mag with individual rounds that you'll be in trouble.

I really enjoy that level of planning and "micromanagement".

2 hours ago, LXant said:

But most of the time the logistics part feels unnatural and at times arbitrary. Usually you encounter a great number of enemies, supply with basic weapons, ammo and other equipment shouldn't be an issue thanks to that. It only is because those basic things - while being used against you mere moments ago - simply don't drop as loot. It creates a shortage of something that should've been there in abundance.

The question is, how should the game handle this? 100% loot would be realistic, but it would remove the challenge. Less loot would give you a challenge, but go against realism. Which is why I willingly accept the modern abstraction of making basic items like cheap firearms or ammo free/unlimited. It allows you to focus on collecting rare and special items.

But it seems we'll have to wait on this one until we get to see the full extent of inventory management. I would like to note, however, that - like you - I want a multifaceted inventory with more than 4 or 5 slots. At least weapon customization is in, something both of us should enjoy.

I completely agree with you and understand exactly what you are talking about. It is a hard challenge to integrate. If I try to put myself in the feet of a dev team, I would rather go with the route and system you like, versus the complication I like.

I've been playing around with one of the options in Jagged Alliance 2 1.13 that let's militia arm themselves from the inventory in the sector. In the .ini you can control if they take from Weapon, armor, face items, ammo, knives, grenades, etc...

This has kind of "fixed" the problem that when you play with "Enemies Drop All", you can easily get too much money too quickly, limiting the financial difficulty. (Yes, you can also limit the amount of money from selling items from enemies, but that didn't feel "realistic".)

Does it sometimes become overly-complicated with moving ammo and weapons from location to location to arm different sector militia? Yes it does. Sometimes I feel like a battle, but I must take care of this management. So yes, I completely understand why such a feature would NOT be implemented into a mass market game.. you have to be a little crazy in the ehad to want to spend time moving ammo around. 🤪

This is where I felt like there are thigns we can do to make this better. JA3 could have some dealers/vendors that you hire and pay huge amounts of money to provide weapons and ammunition to militia you train.

You could have a few different types of weapons (weapon type, ammo type, condition: surplus, old, modern, bad condition, brand new) that all change how much it would cost you.

This way, I feel, it remains "realistic" where in my mind I have the sense that the militia are not just "born witha gun in hand from harry potter magic", but it avoids the tedious amount of work from having to phisically move mercs that are paid a fortune to fight, but are pack mules for ammo and weapon containers... (I guess that's why I like M.E.R.C mercs more now then I used to.. 😁).

2 hours ago, LXant said:

It is hard to tell how many hours I spent with Skyrim/Oblivion/Morrowind over the last decades... and I could argue that hardly anybody plays those games for their story. The freedom of choice is the main selling point of those games.

Story-driven games on the other hand limit that freedom to give the player a clearer direction.

This puts JA in a bit of a hard spot, as it tries to tell a compelling story while at the same time aims to give the player a sandbox experience. Maybe that's why so many JA sequels failed, because they failed to walk that fine line?

Tell me about it... from my Steam hours in Skyrim, I have spent about 125 hours over the Covid lockdown with heavy-duty Skyrim modding... at one point I had passed the 250 active mods and the game was running stable.. (I wanted an achievement for that 😅). I enjoy playing Elder Scrolls and Fallout 4 even if inside they feel e little empty. That's where I feel different elements can come into play and compensate.

I enjoy photography and I like nature... so at one point I had something like over 600 screenshots while the game was modded. I enjoy the worlds Bethesda craft. They are good at creating immersion through interesting locations and peaking your curiosity.

2 hours ago, LXant said:

While I agree with you in principle, I disagree from a standpoint of game design.

Chances and uncertainties are fine, I'd even say important. However, a game still needs to tell the player crucial information, so that their choices are more than lucky guesses or the result of trial and error. If there's an element of chance, the player needs to be told about it. XCOM got that right, as you had effective weapon ranges, weapons had dmg ranges and, of course, the infamous hit chances. And if the trailer is right, it seems that JA3 will follow suit.

If something isn't 100%, it can fail. As a player I understand and accept it, because the game tells me that there's a 10% or 30% chance to fail something beforehand. Or if there's a dmg spread between 10 and 20. I accept it, because the game told me BEFORE I chose to go with it. Failure becomes a consequence of accepting the possibility of it happening.

But when the game doesn't tell me with how much movement I'm left when moving somewhere, when I won't know if I can see/attack/flank someone when I move to a certain tile, when I don't know if something counts as half or full cover... then failure becomes a consequence of lack of information. It is a frustrating experience and overall bad game design. That's where people start complaining, and rightfully so.

Some people enjoy that kind of unfair design, but most people don't.

There are a few systems that I REALLY enjoy:

Back in Action - While I think it's a pretty decent tactical game, it unfortunately feel a little flat when it came to being a Jagged Alliance game. I really enjoyed the way the interface tells you how your shot will do. It tells you in increments of how your mind would perceive chance-to-hit; I have a high chance to hit, I have a low chance to hit, I will certainly hit. (I forget the exact words used, but it is an approximation instead of percentage).

7,62 High Calibre used a similar system. These games show a line to the enemy you are aiming and at the same time, you get to see if there are objects or terrain that would hinder the shot.

In JA2 1.13, I always play with one of the .ini settings for Chance-to-hit display to be based on the mercs attributes.
So, let's compare Flo and Gus. Flow is horrible with a gun and is an absolute newbie.. her 'estimation' if she can hit the target or not is VERY flawed. You do not trust that indication too much. Gus, on the other hand, is a seasoned veteran. If he thinks he'll hit the target, he most likely will.

2 hours ago, LXant said:

That's a very unfavorable view on interviews. 🙂

I mentioned them because some of those went beyond simple advertising and explored the thought processes that led to certain decisions. It was interesting to learn of the challenges and problems the Devs had when trying to adapt an old game. Why did they change this? Why did they do that? It was very insightful.

We might like certain aspects in old games because we associate them with our childhood, but there are many people who never played the old games, who simply lack that feeling of nostalgia. And they don't hesitate to point out elements that are simply not fun or borderline unfair.

Hearing those hardcore X-Com fans describe the difficulties when creating the remake helped me understand that not everything was simply "watered down" to make more sales. They were as surprised as everyone else when the game became a huge financial success. Turn-based tactical games were dead back then, the whole genre is still a niche product. Turn-based strategy is generally better received, but - as you said - also remains a niche compared to other genres.

We might never agree on this one, but I see XCOM as a step in the right direction. It started the renaissance of the whole niche, which is why we even get JA3 now; development began shortly after XCOM2 released and proved that the success of XCOM1 wasn't just a fluke. It is only natural that JA3 will try to build upon and improve on some aspects of what XCOM2 had to offer.

I don't know if you know, but XCOM actually had a bunch of talented modders that created awesome mods for it. Long War was the biggest and most popular one. Their work was so impressive that Firaxis involved them in the development of XCOM2. A huge part of why XCOM2 is so moddable, has thousands of mods and still gets mods to this day is thanks to that group of modders. They even founded their own dev studio btw, Pavonis Interactive.

If JA3 comes even close to the success of XCOM2 and gets a mere fraction of its mod support, it would be a huge win in my books.

Well, then I was wrong in my assumptions! Thank you for correcting me, I won't repeat my innacurate comments. 😇

2 hours ago, LXant said:

As it is, the interrupt mechanic is out and we get overwatch instead. And I suspect the reason for that change was, as you correctly pointed out, the unpredictability of the whole concept.

I understand that this is something you like, that there's always a risk of getting killed by something that is impossible to account for. It is very similar to reaction fire in the first X-Com games.

This touches on the aforementioned subject of giving players reliable information. Elements that heavily punish players in random unpredictable acts simply need to be tamed. Not to cater to all platforms, but to make things more predictable for the player.

We might also disagree here, but too much randomness - especially when the consequences are as severe as perma-death - is what constitutes bad game design. Many people find no fun in getting punished for something that was a) outside of their control and b) not clearly communicated by the game beforehand.

Again, some players might enjoy unfair game design, but most people don't.

Well, I completely see what you mean.. I am not against it either. I mean, there are games where I do enjoy Overwatch.

To be honest with you, much of my resistance to it has to do with the Jagged Alliance IP. Not for gaming in general. As much as I enjoyed game like X-Com Apocalypse and some others that I also don't revisit very often... Jagged Alliance 2 holds a dear place in my heart. Not out of nostalgia! Simply because I play it regularly.. 1-2 times a year, since 2001 (I was late to the party unfortunately).

In my opinion, for my own likes/dislikes in gaming, Jagged Alliance 2 with some of the 1.13 features added, is one of the games that walks the line between so many sublte details that blend together so well, I've never found ANYTHING even remotely close. 7,62 High Calibre is a superior TACTICAL game. There are details I enjoy more... but it is horrible in every other department! JA2's isometric single zoom makes moving the camera as basic as possible, so it never becomes a struggle. Also, it has subtle humour, interesting mercs with personalities.. I've yet to even have the combination of every merc.. I still even think there are a few mercs I never played with!

As much as I enjoy the world of nu-Xcom/Phoenix Point, they lack the detailed realistic weaponry and inventory maangement that I enjoy.

Now, add to that the interrupt system, which, unless I am wrong again (always such a possiblity 😅) is an incredibly UNIQUE feature that is the blending of roleplaying elements. This is where I feel that any attempt at "changing" it, will elad to a COMPLETELY different feeling.

Jagged Alliance 2 is a Roleplaying Strategy game first. The roleplaying stats play such an important role in the gameplay mechanics... and not once have I ever felt (or have I ever heard) anyone complain about the system.. on the contrary, it is often praised for how well it is blended into the game and how "invisible" it feels. You never 'suddenlly' become good from a single number or unlock a feature.. it perfectly represents experience at varying degrees. When you think that the Mechanical and Medical stat can be directly impacted by the Dexterity stat (vice-versa) and Dexterity also serves to be able to fire a shot or more per turn. You have a very deep, complex and multi-layered system that helps to greatly differentiate mercs and what you might decide to use them for.

Sure a high mechanical merc might be better at fixing things, but maybe his low wisdom means you prefer giving the toolbox to a high wisdom merc with lower mechanical skills so that his mech and dex will eventually surpass and be better.

These are such basic examples of how deep you can take this system..

It's uniqueness is why I have such a strong will to fight for a simple copy/paste of it. I am usually against simply copy/pasting others works and I realize that as a dev team, you want to create your own thing, not just copy... but this is a unique case that I seriously just wish they would import that system.

2 hours ago, LXant said:

This is where our experiences differ. I spent countless hours customizing my soldiers, giving them biographies, using visual mods to make them even more unique. The campaigns I fought in XCOM2 are among the most memorable I ever had.

When thinking back to Apoc, I don't remember my soldiers. Also, the aliens were not memorable or important for the whole experience. What made the game great was the destructable environment, all the interactions within the city, destroyed buildings after hard battles in the sky, raids against various organizations. It was a huge sandbox that I greatly enjoyed, but it never made me truly care about my soldiers or the main mission. XCOM2 was the exact opposite, which was closer to the original games in that regard.

That puts JA2 in a special place for me, as it somehow unifies the strenghts of both worlds, giving me soldiers that I care about, a clear direction and at the same time a sandbox experience that I like.

From what little we know about JA3, we might get something very similar. At the very least I'd love to have XCOM2-like customization options.

Hey, if I can have different comouflage, backpacks, vests and gear that show up on my mercs in JA3, I would be happy. That was always THE big thing that felt a letdown in JA2. (Creating sprites with al the movements in JA2 is very complex and long work, so they had to rely on basic handgun/rifle look).

2 hours ago, LXant said:

What do JA2 players want? Not always the same thing, that much is clear. And given the high costs of game development (especially when compared to two decades ago) some concessions will be necessary to make it more appealing for a broader audience.

Like you, it leaves me a bit concerned, as we don't know where that line is drawn. For now, from what we heard, no major feature seems to be missing. If the gamestar magazine is right, that is. Without seeing for myself I will remain sceptical.

But tbh, while I hope for the best, I'd already call it a success if it doesn't kill the entire franchise. And we all know that this could very well happen, as JA3 is the biggest JA project in a long time. Financial failure could mean another 20 years of small pay-to-win/mobile JA games.

That makes mod support the maybe most important feature of all.

There seems to be 2 camps of players when it comes to Jagged Alliance.

Those who want something in the vein of 1.13 and those who would be happy with the same modern re-interpretation as nu-Xcoms.

I'm one who would like 1.13 features with the same system as JA2, but with revamped graphics and upgraded elements, like visual gear.

Look, often, in gaming, it's a little give-and-take; meaing, we have things we really like, but even if a game doesn't answer all those needs, it sometimes compensates with something else.

If JA3 feels a little too basic for me in it's roleplaying aspect, then maybe some of the graphical features, maybe the mercs, maybe the story.. maybe all those other things will come and compensate for something I feel is missing?

It's still hard to know at this point.

Maybe this is why I have strong opinions? I've yet to know EXACTLY what to expect, and because of the way I personaly find PC gaming has been going in the past 20 years, I'm expecting the worse, so I am trying to push for the details I want them to keep?

Cheers @LXant! 🍻

-PS- Maybe we should take this convo to a new topic... we've hijacked the gamestar interview post. Apologies!!!

October 17, 2021

4 hours ago, LXant said:

What you describe as strong points in those old games, I experienced as irritating and at times confusing. Let's take X-Com and TftD as an example: There was no fun in buying stacks of ammunition and equipping my soldiers again and again before each mission.

Yes, it is more complex than a simplified inventory, but there's no challenge in that kind of complexity. It just eats time, it doesn't do anything for gameplay. True, it adds the illusion of freedom, and - like you - I actually dislike arbitrary equipment restrictions. BUT: once I got my team, roles and equipment didn't change anymore. I'd give them exactly the same things I gave them in the last few missions. As if, surprise, their class was set and their role was determined. While I always had the freedom to equip everyone as I saw fit, I chose not to.

This is where I find this to be part of the fun of wargaming. A more in-depth (slightly game-ified) way of creating a layer of logistics.

Having LIMITED access to ammunition means you are way more careful with how you use it, it might impact who you hand the ammo to or if you don't hand ammo to a character.

To me, this is plain and simple the part where you plan and you organize. I used to play some milsim-lite airsoft with a dozen friends, as a team thing. A big part of the enjoyment (for some of us) litteraly to count equipment, organize and create scenarios of limitations and organizing who has what and how much. Wondering what pouches we might need for our scenario or not. Some other players, they just really didn't care much, they always came to the game with everything the same.. that's how they had fun.

Naturally, this "logistics" detail works well with games that approach a more "wargame" feel. I do think Jagged Alliance, 7,62 High Calibre, Silent Storm, etc.. do take many scaled-down elements from traditional wargames. Something that was completely removed from newer-style turn-based games.

4 hours ago, LXant said:

This is something that is also true for many other games btw, like RPGs (since you mentioned D:OS2), be it Baldurs Gate, Kingmaker or the newly released WotR etc. There you also level certain characters in a specific way and stick to your idea, despite all the freedom of equipment.

While the idea of having a restriction might be offending, its impact on how we actually play the game is arguably small. That's what I try to say here.

I agree that I consider it differently when playing D&D, because in D&D, classes have a big impact on your choices.. but that is also why I think a game with character and personality or stronger writing compensates for other elements that are lacking.

As an example, Baldur's Gate 2 has such a strong story, among the best written villains in video games and a more mature theme, so I overlook the personal freedom of each character and I appreciate and work with the limitations I am given.

Take a game like Skyrim though, or even Oblivion. You have so much freedom.. almost completely classless, a little bit how I like it... but the writting and story are so poorly done that it doesn't compensate, so to me, they feel empty.

4 hours ago, LXant said:

Inventory management and ammo shuffling aside, counting AP, varying AP costs between soldiers, unclear AP costs when moving over different surfaces, many issues with positioning, cover and line of sight etc. were also weak points that I'm glad were improved. You called that a challenge, learning from experience, a game not holding your hand. I call it guesswork and unclear communication of crucial information. It was okay in the 90s, to some degree in the early 2000s. I didn't complain because I didn't know better. But now? A game not telling you what your action actually entails is just bad game design.

I don't call these weak points... I call these learning.

Do you calculate how much energy your body will expend walking through snow compared to walking on a sidewalk that has no snow? No... You learn from the action, you learn from the experience that okay, when I walk through heavy snow, I must do this or that to ease my steps and waste less energy.

Having lesser information in a video game, leads to learn from what you experience, even if there are no numbers. I think this is EXTREMELY important, because it works your logic skills, it helps develop and still grow your logic center in the brain, even as you play a game. This is the way it feels to me and the way I enjoy games. Just like I REALLY hate when shooters have shooting mechanics that are too constant. Something feels... abnormal.

When you shoot a gun, regardless if it's a real gun, a water gun, an airsoft gun or a paintball gun, even if you were to set your rifle on a bench and have it not move a hair.. your shots would change where they hit. So I look for video games that replicate this closely. I really dislike when video games have such accurate pistols it feels you can snipe a head at 200m no problem, just because you know that it is a 100% constant trajectory and placement at every shot.

Now, yes, for sure, there has to be some elements in video games where concessions MUST be made for the sake of playability.. but that is where I would much rather pick up a game like Arma, then a game like Counter-Strike (I have played both and enjoy either for what they are, but if I had to pick.. I'd pick realism any day!).

I do not see lack of information as bad game design.. I actually see well hidden numbers as a way to recreate a more organic and realistic feel.. because, like many thigns in life, things are often a gut feeling, a reflex or a feeling. We act on those.

Just like in JA. If you take two Assault Rifles, one has a damage output of 52, and the other of 56. Which one will you take? Have you considered HOW the weapon handles? Maybe the 52 dam rifle will have higher chance at hitting an 3 rounds auto versus the 56 dam. 1.13 has taken great care to try and number these details.. but I still rather just experience it from using the weapons.

I get annoyed when everything just becomes a matter of simply choosing the highest rated number out of the weapons. That is how many modern looter-shooters, rpgs and turn-based games do it. You simply compare numbers.. it takes away most "feeling" and your own simple bias, because you know that there is a better number.

4 hours ago, LXant said:

I don't know if you followed some of the interviews the Devs of XCOM gave. It is interesting because it shows why certain things had to change, even when great fans of the old games were part of the Dev team; fans that loved the old games as much as we do.

That Firaxis is on the right track is evident when you compare Phoenix Point and XCOM/XCOM2. Julian Gollop deserves all the praise for creating the original X-Com, but Firaxis clearly has a better understanding of how to create a good game. As I said in another thread, they managed nothing less than the revival of a dead genre and inspired other developers to make similar games.

This is where I am in EXTREME disagreement. To start, I do not follow interviews, because, usually, interviews are to paint a glorious image on their product. No one will give a very neutral interview.. questions will be answered to promote their product, show how much work was put in and will be done to help sales.

And I do not consider the new Xcoms to even come close in quality compared to the old ones. What did the new ones achieve? Financial success? Wider audience? Financial success through cutting down on features and making it accessible to almost every modern platform. Naturally, ANY game you open the door to a huge audience, if done with a certain level of quality, will fare better than being released on PC alone.

I do not view this as a success. I don't judge how good a movie, a game or a book are on how much they made from profit.

Turn-Based Strategy games never died.. we've had so many since 1999. All the new Xcoms did, was give it a more cinematic feel and make it easily accessible to a wider audience.. while stripping it down to a boardgame level. I love boardgames.. but when I play boardgames, not PC games.

To me, the new Xcom was the first game to announce the downfall of Turn-Based Strategy games. Now, instead of having PC games with a complexity and detail that is relevant to the platform, we are handed watered-down games that copy, modify or tweak the new xcom system, because that game was a financial success.

I think we're still lucky that some studios like Slitherine still exist, because they keep pumping out old-school turn-based strategy games for it's niche audience! I praise that effort!!

4 hours ago, LXant said:

Which brings me to JA. It was a good game in its time and I greatly enjoyed it (I wouldn't be here otherwise). But it suffered from the same weaknesses that I described here. AP counting, unclear interrupt mechanic, inventory shuffling, too much trial and error and so on aren't exactly part of a good game design.

What weakness? Is there a cult following of the first new Xcom? are there still mods being conceived for it? Updates on a regular basis?

Jagged Alliance 2 1.13 is still going strong. They are still finding ways to implement and tweak features. New FULL mods coming out for it.. on top of a very extensive library of EXTREMELY well-done mods that are balanced, enjoyable and not too "cheap" feeling.

The game never even had multiplayer, yet they worked so hard on the engine, they managed to integrate a multiplayer feature into it!

I did not greatly enjoy Jagged Alliance 2 (as in when it came out)... I STILL greatly play it (as in; enjoying it as much as since the year 2001 when I found it). I even took a pause from my game at the moment to respond here.

No other game has me coming back for more mods, more games and more time than titles like Jagged Alliance 2 has.. and I will enjoy it for another few decades, regardless the success or failure of JA3.

4 hours ago, LXant said:

That's why I'm quite happy with Haemimont implementing some of the more popular elements of modern XCOM design: The old AP count was drastically reduced, you have much clearer information about movement, attacks and cover (and three stances to choose from if you don't have any cover I think), the overwatch system is also superior compared to the old interrupt system...

There's just one challenge that even Firaxis didn't manage to overcome with both of their games: combat pacing. Without strict time limits the player is rewarded for slowly crawling and overwatching everything to death. That makes combat boring. JA2 is also guilty of this very thing: waiting in the darkness, luring single enemies to you and then going for interrupts was the way to go. It was fun at first, but quickly became repetitive and boring. There was not much of a variation in mission types either.

Jagged Alliance 2, in its bog-standard base game has AI as advanced as any other TBS game honestly. 1.13 has seriously given that major tweaks. I can't remember just sitting around waiting for the enemy to pile up. Sure, luring an enemy to you is a very commmon tactic in video games.. but overwatch brought that on by it's own poor design.

In Jagged Alliance 2, as you put it, and some others also say this... this "archaic" system of misunderstood interrupts is the basis that should NEVER be removed.

It helps balance out the sitting to lure the enemy tactic.. as you can never be 100% certain that you WILL interupt the enemy. Sometimes, you interrupt the enemy, you take a shot, but your muzle flash creates an interrupt for another enemy who does hit you!

Please tell me how many games have such a cool system that has more layers that simply pressing the button to sit and wait for the frist enemy to enter your cone?

Firaxis wanted to bring the game down to a ridiculously "gameified" simplistic level to catter to ALL platforms.. so they shot themselve in the foot and needed to correct it by making you rush through missions in Xcom 2. So that game became a turn-based puzzle game.

The whole point of the turn-based strategy games it to give you that "time" to evaluate, think and plan a strategy, or react to one. Xcom 2 made you rush so much that you have no room for error... creating an environment very far away from wargames.

4 hours ago, LXant said:

Time limits are generally disliked, but most people can't argue with the results: they forced many XCOM2 players to choose a more aggressive approach. It made engagements more dynamic and memorable, you actually had to use your skills and do some planning in advance. And that is something you can only do if the game gives you the necessary information.

Looking at JA3, I think the better way would be not to punish players for failing a time limit, but to reward them for being quick. I hope JA3 will go this route. That would discourage overwatch-crawling without forcing time limits down our throats. But it is too early to comment on it, just that I'm curious what the Devs have in mind here.

Looks like I couldn't resist my urge to ramble away at it. Oh well... I hope my rant didn't bore you.

I remember nothing in xcom as being memorable. None of the characters I controlled were interesting.. no enemy was interesting. They were all generic.

I easily remember some major huge battles I've had in JA2, I easily remember the feelings I had the first time I entered some locations, because of the feeling they gave. Like the prison in Tixa. I remember being super creeped out and so curious and full of mystery on that map.. and the battles I've had in the prison underground. Or big battles I've taken part in between militia and the queens forces. I remember lines mercs say, or how the queen is such a funny character.

Nothing in xcom is memorable... yet, I remember taking down entire levels in X-Com apocalypse because that rocket missed its shot and destroyed a huge part of the building for which I was trying to gain favors from its faction.

I won't even talk about Phoenix Point.. other than, that is the only and last game I've pre-ordered in the past decade. It's super fun the first few hours, then it simply falls flat. It lacks any character.. it's just as generic and unmemorable. I don't remember any battles other than a frustrating one, because the generated maps created a lock in gameplay that couldn't be resolved.

I sincerely hope they will NOT go that route with JA3. I don't expect 1.13 level of detail... I just expect a game that a niche of players will love to death. Mod support or not... if the game lacks what most JA2 players want from it... it will fall flat like most attempts.

If it's redeeming factor is the fact that it "succeeds" because it copied/tweaked one of the newer systems to be accessible to as wide an audience as possible... I'll consider that a failure.

Your rant was NOT boring! I appreciate that you took the time and responded with a rant that I was glad to read. I respect someone who can speak his mind, regardless if it is my opinion or not. As long as we can do it in respect, I don't see these arguments as a negative.. to the contrary, someone can say something that makes us think and at least it gives us another opinion to consider. I think that this is important.

Keep in mind, we can both agree to disagree simply because we like different things, or even similar things, for different reasons!

October 16, 2021

8 hours ago, LXant said:

I've played all of the games you mentioned (and some more), so naturally I'm a bit curious: why do you seem to dislike more modern approaches for turn-based strategy?

I'm not one who appreciates simplification of elements in a game that can pause or wait for me to finish my turn.

Quite the opposite, I rather mechanics that are a little more hidden, with many complications. I tend to enjoy games like 7,62 High Calibre, Silent Storm 2, Baldur's Gate 2, JA2 1.13 with many of the more complex options like strong suppression, weapon resting, etc.. So I enjoy the old X-Coms, mostly Apocalypse for the complexity of the game world, its factions the completely destructible environment. Having to calculate AP's and how to properly use them.

Cover should be pretty self-explanatory.. I rather use logic than always wait to judge depending on the shield icon being half or full. I like games that offer me absolute freedom in how, who, when, where and with what. I would rather a game that I learn by my own mistake that I should not have run this far, because I now don't have enough AP to take a shot, instead of a game that shows me two different ranges of movement.. I'm not the brightest and most intelligent person, by far... but I do like being able to learn limits on my own. I don't need the game to hold my hand with waypoints to where I need to go or how far I can move. I want to figure it out myself.

I should be able to give ANY character ANY weapon, bomb, grenade, lockpick, gear and see them fail as I see fit. I do not want imposed restrictions.

Often, newer games favor simplistic action points, arbitrary rules and you feel like you have VERY limited options during combat. You can never be imaginative or TRY things for fun. Combat becomes a little tedious and inventory, gear, clothing is all very basic. I find no enjoyment in that.

I won't even talk about the new-xcoms, because, eventhough I enjoyed the first time I played them, I dislike those games for how they treated the IP and I am unable to go back without feeling like it's boring me to death. Xcom 2 is a great example of limiting strategy. It's become more of a timed puzzle game that limits freedom.. so, the opposite of what I enjoy.
Phoenix Point just falls short after a few hours of play.. D:OS2 has a poor story, boring characters and is so level capped that it offers little freedom how or when you approach areas.

Sorry for my ramble.. I do that a lot.

In short:

+ Complexity {I judge the pros/cons of every one of my actions}
+ Detail {ammunition types, magazine sizes, pouches, equipment}
+ well hidden mechanics {I want to judge my cover and learn from my mistakes, I want to judge how far I can move}
+ Well-designed maps {generated maps look and feel generated and take away from immersion because often doesn't make "sense".. or locations that are just as generic as every previous location}
+ freedom (I decide if I want to camp the enemy, I decide if I want to rush or take 5 hours to kill the last 2 enemies)

- showing me the limits of everything I can do (I'm not so stupid I need the game to hold my hand at every turn!)
- Quest pointers (same as above)
- simple inventories with absolute minimum basic 2-3 items
- locked abilities/weapons to classes {Silent Storm 2 compensates in other areas, so it's forgiven here, Baldur's Gate as well}

October 16, 2021

16 minutes ago, Hendrix said:

I thought it would be for best to continue our gun discussion here. Hope you don't mind.

Respecting the forums Topic is a good thing; good idea!

Laws in Sweden are somewhat strict I would say. If it can help ppl be sensible and if it really helps lower crime, then I guess it's a fair trade. It's just unfortunate that it seems to have the bigger impact on our "type" of gun user; I enjoy guns for the mechanical aspect, the "fireworks" and simply fun plinking.

Our Laws here in Canada aren't exactly the same... but they are a little strict as well. I'll also try to be brief.

You have to pass the Canadian Firearms Safety Course (CFSC) for the class of permit you want.
If you pass, you can then apply for a Possession and Acquisition Licence (PAL)

We have 3 classes of permits;
- Non-Restricted
- Restricted
- Prohibited

NON-RESTRICTED includes most rifles and shotguns. These usually have more of the hunting/sporting look, although there are quite a few exceptions.
Course is a 1 day Handling and Safety Course

RESTRICTED includes Handguns and other guns with a barrel shorter than 47cm or 66cm for rifles that could be folded (or reduced to that size and still functional).
Course is a 1 day Handling and Safety Course

PROHIBITED is pretty much any automatic or handguns with extremely short barrels, like a snub-nose, a 32 calibre round (why .32 ? no one knows!) and other sawed-off weapons, like a sawed-off shotgun that would have a stock but very short barrel.
I'm not certain what the requirements are to own this class, but it is reserved to military, museum collectors and very specific occasion.. you do not really have your "commoner" with this permit (unless you're a business owner who handles these types of firearms).

==========
These "restrictions" are VERY odd in Canada, because they often take firearms and reclassify them over time.. usually towards a more restrictive nature. It is often done by the "look" of the firearm. If someone in the government believes a certain rifles looks too militaristic, it will fall into the Restricted or even Prohibited classes.

As a Non-Restricted permit owner, I can own an SKS, KAR98, Mini-14/30 and pretty much many surplus bolt-action/semi-auto military rifle, but I could not own an M14 unless I gave in my application for Restricted firearms. Then you have rifles like ANY of the variants, clones, copies of the SVD, Tiger.. Russian, Chinese... those are Prohibited for some VERY odd reason, why? It makes no sense, because the 7.62x54r is a very cool round that you can buy in quantity from surplus and all.. but you can have a Mosin-Nagant with it.

There is also an extremely odd regulation on magazine size. For any centerfire rifle, you cannot have a magazine/clip that can hold more than 5 rounds. My SKS has the internal magazine welded with a stopper that doesn't let it take more than 5 rounds (even if you noticed the loading clips have 10 (that's just for ease of inserting the rounds). So no hunting rifle, semi-auto, bolt or otherwise can accept more than 5 rounds.

Now the strange part is that doesn't apply to rimfire (.22 and its derivatives).. I can have a Ruger 10/22 with a 100round drum mag, no problem. It also doesn't apply the say way to pistol caliber rounds. So let's say the Beretta CX4 Storm is a Non-Restricted firearm, but I can use the 10 Round magazines with it, even though it is a centerfire rifle. As long as it isn't a pistol, I can use the mag capacity of the pistol in a rifle with the Non-Restricted permit.

Oh, and this capacity restriction, doesn't apply to Shotguns. You can load whatever you want in a Shotgun.

Now, that is the "easy" Non-Restricted PAL. The Restricted becomes complicated in the sense that there are very heavy regulations. One you have passed your course, you must enroll into a club to be able to buy and shoot handguns (and other Restricted firearms). You have to be part of that club for however long you want to maintain your permit.

When you want to go shoot your Restricted firearm, you have to register that day with the RCMP to have it approved. So as I am driving to the Range (indoor/outdoor), I would not be allowed to stop anywhere in between my home and the range. No drive-thru restaurant, no banking, no picking up groceries. Then, you can also be randomly selected to be visited by an RCMP agent who will inspect how you have your firearms secured at home, they must be locked behind two doors.. so your front door and another locked door (you cannot simply put a lock on your wardrobe, it has to be a secure thing, like a gun cabinet).

In any case, the courses are the easy part. A weekend and you can easily have both the Non-Restricted and Restricted courses passed. It's simply a matter of how to securely handle firearms... and for ppl like us (you seem like a sensible person), gun handling and security is often almost "natural".
Even when I used to play airsoft, before ever having a firearm permit, I would never put a finger on a trigger.. always pointed the muzzle in a safe direction.. the basics really. They also teach you different types of firearm mechanical functions, parts and calibers....

....if you've played Jagged Alliance 2 and you've become anything like us, you almost know more than the teacher 😁 (and I am saying that as a joke.. many of the teachers have taught Law-Enforcment personel).

In any case, I live in the city, so unfortunately with the lockdows we've had I simply haven't been shooting as much in the last couple years. I haven't even been since the re-opening of everything really.

Here in my city of Montreal, firearms aren't well regarded by the general population.. so you take great care not to scare anyone, or else the problems with the law after would be a nightmare.

Anyways, hope that wasn't too boring.. but somehow I doubt talking gun laws is boring to a gun nut..
ANY reason to talk guns is a good reason!

I'll take a look at those models you mentionned... maybe you can post some pics.. this is the RIGHT topic after all!

I also own a pump 12-gauge..

October 15, 2021

Just interested in getting our minds going; either from nostalgia for those who haven't played in a while or for those who play regularly, do you have a merc or two that you ALWAYS like to have?

October 15, 2021

3 minutes ago, Hendrix said:

Nothing wrong with being skeptical. I am starting to feel like that old pipe smoking man on his poarch who rants at todays young'uns about the good old days of gaming. I mean what is the worst case? They botch this game and we go back to play 1.13 for another 5,6,7 years untill the next idio... suicida... I mean OVERLY optimistic game studios have a try at the franchise. 😂

Oh jeez... tell me about it!

😑

When you talk Turn-Based games and they say xcom and you think they are talking Apocalypse.. and they have no idea what that is.. and then you try to explain the beauty of JA2... and they are just like: "have you played Divinity Original Sin 2?"

sigh

If these guys botch JA3... we'll need to join forces.. 9mm + 7.62x39mm before anyone else ever attempts another failure.
[seriously, to anyone reading that; it is a JOKE!!!...I have no violent tendencies other than in JA2!!!!!!]

October 15, 2021

3 minutes ago, Hendrix said:

Yupp, Ruger PCC 9x19, my model is a "Canadian" version with 470mm barrel lenght. I have mine on a hunting permit (like all my guns), the shorter barrel versions are only allowed for competition shooting here in Sweden. Really fun "plinkster" and serves well when the foxes and badgers starts to roam around the house. And the most important fact is: Yes, it takes glock mags. 😁

It's really neat, I like it... it has a little bit of that tactical flair, without looking overly ridiculous you know.

I somehow had this idea you might have been Canadian, because that is the type of plinksters we can use here. My SKS is also on my basic 'hunting'/sporting permit.

I am guessing Sweden and Canada must have VERY similar laws for some reason.. or else I'm almost certain we'd be posting pics of some Kalashnikovs... 😇

I did go and pass my "restricted" (for shorter barreled rifles, pistols and revolvers) course and passed with flying colors... but I haven't really gotten into the Pistols/Revolvers, because our laws are pretty harsh on those.

3 minutes ago, Hendrix said:

Damn, an SKS! Would love to try one! I did get to try a few shoots with an (I belive) AKM back in my army conscript days and the 7.62x39 was in my opinion a fairly pleasurable round to shoot.

Yes, as anything Russian; overbuilt! It's heavy, so it's not a hard (on the shoulder) shooter like a light hunting rifle with a powerful round. I've been debating switching over the stocks to those polymer ones... but I kind of like the look of the plywood stocks... it kind of makes me 'think' of an old-school AKM or 74.

October 15, 2021

Hey! I'm glad to hear these things...

...and I really don't WANT to sound like the party-pooper, but I want to see gameplay before an interview report.

I might sound skeptical (I probably am feeling a little skeptical to be honest), but I think the past decade and a half of poor pc game revivals and poor releases with over-hyped promises has taught me that whenever I've gotten my "panties" all tightly wound up... ...it ends up not feeling so good after!

October 15, 2021

38 minutes ago, Hendrix said:

That's a nice Ruger! Haven't seen it before.. is it a takedown model? I've been wanting to get an easy-to-carry .22 plinker that folds up and stores small. 9mm sounds way more fun though!

Well then, if we're going full nude... might as well pitch in!

October 15, 2021

1 hour ago, Hendrix said:

*Looking over the shoulder at my gun cabinet*

I wonder why... 😂

They took on the wrong game to piss off its crowd!! 🤣

October 14, 2021

1 hour ago, Wigen said:

The answer is a bit laconic, but I think you will be happy 😉

Thank you for keeping us up-to-date!

🍻

October 13, 2021

I think they are busy implementing all the up-to-date 1.13 features.

Hey, forget a 1.00 release.... just call it Jagged Alliance 3.13!!

October 13, 2021

1 hour ago, saintpumpkin said:

just a guy which play Vanilla JA2 from 1999 (don't like 1.13 at all or simply want to replicate the original experience).

You should ask for an easy way to mod the game in my opinion because not everyone wants a "more complex" game.

I'm not really certain what you mean though. And my troll comment was really a joke!!

1.13 doesn't change anything from standard JA2. Any and ALL complexities they added or built on are completely and absolutely optional!

1.13 is more like an unofficial patch. The simple matter of being able to play JA2 but with a slightly higher resolution to scale with modern displays, in itself makes 1.13 a must.

Not only that, but 1.13 is a foundation. It's simply work that permitted the externilization of information to make modding easier. So, 1.13 is one of the most basic foundation for complete mods and simple map reworks.

Gold edition JA2 1.12 already was the start of it in a way, it upped the res and fixed stuff.

I'm not really sure why you are against 1.13 when it's what a mod should do.. Permit for harder difficulties, open up things that the original devs never had time to complete and permit more comfortable play on modern systems..

..all that while keeping JA2 absolutely intact!

October 13, 2021

4 hours ago, Hendrix said:

I have given this a really long thought.

...and Sir-Tech couldn't come up with a better description than that!

You pretty much wrote down most of what I think of JA2 and what I want for JA3.

...when you're fighting around with SMGs and basic rifles and you got a black shirt taking bursts with a Kalashnikov...

Oh Jagged Alliance! What have you done to me!!?

October 12, 2021

Are they afraid of us or something?

I mean, we're only a FEW nutjobs!

...better than the Steam discussions section in any case.

October 12, 2021

2 hours ago, saintpumpkin said:

.... and please, just stop asking for 1.13 features. That's just nerdy stuff.

What's this!??

Our first troll here!!?

Well, putting aside my sarcasm...

...Jagged Alliance 2 is a nerdy game!

I would think that MOST 1.13 players would like some/many features integrated into JA3.

It's kind of natural; just as JA2 upped the complexity on JA, we would like the complexity upped from JA2.

So if to you that is "nerdy", then hey!!! We're all a bunch of nerds..

..time to party like its 1999!!! 🤓

October 11, 2021

On 10/9/2021 at 3:23 PM, Sarin said:

Aren't you a little bit overreacting? Most serious developer teams have someone taking care of social media and PR full time without having any say in the actual game design.

With the amount of times us die hard JA2 fans have been burnt by "promises", illusions and hopes of a proper Jagged Alliance game, I think we're FAR from overreacting here!

Quite the opposite, I think we've had enough of the Jagged Alliance being handled by those who have no idea WHAT Jagged Alliance is. At some point, enough is enough, if we "beat around the bush" or are constantly saying things like (we'll see, maybe it will be good).. we'll be dissapointed yet again!

For once, since Jagged Alliance 2, we have a dev team that has more experience making games, and also probably a bigger budget... but they are backed by a Publisher who signed off on that Rage game... which has NO SIMILARITIES with Jagged Alliance! They used names and themes that are close, that's it!

Unless fans are VERY CLEAR about what is acceptable or not, we have absolutely NO CHANCE of them making a proper Jagged Alliance game.

It's a game, I realize that, I won't lose sleep or go into depression because they would release a mediocre JA game... but I sure as hell want a proper 3rd entry!

October 11, 2021

On 10/8/2021 at 9:19 AM, Jack_Aufenhand said:

It was such a perfect formula.

...and that's what I think everytime I play Jagged Alliance 2.

Another detail I ALWAYS greatly enjoy in JA2 are the firefights that involve lots of enemies and lots of militia. It's really fun to sit back and take part in those huge battles.

I really hope that JA3 let's you join in battles with militia and that it won't just be an auto-resolve thing.

October 11, 2021

One Improvement I would enjoy seeing is concerning Militia, their training and how they are armed.

In Jagged Alliance 2, you simply train milita and they come armed and ready.

In Jagged Alliance 2 1.13, you can - through the .ini settings - set the militia to use the sector inventory (in which the militia is) to arm themselves, all the way from guns, grenades, ammunition, armor and face gear.
This is a setting I found hard at first.. and especially early stages of the game, when you deal with the major counter-attack at Drassen (optional as well).

After using those settings, I would have a hard job seeing myself playing without them. Having to provide weapons in each sector you train militia (if you don't, they'll arm their fists!! 🤪) is a fun logistics challenge and also means the rest of the game is slightly more challenging financially as you will constantly need to update weapons and ammo (transporting them to militia occupied sectors) to more "modern" things as you progress. (The Drop All Items is a must with this game mode!)

That said, it still is a lot of work, ferrying ammo and guns to sectors..

One thing I would like to see in Jagged Alliance 3, are weapon vendors.. a little bit like Tony. Maybe something along the lines of setting up a relationship with a particular faction/vendor to equip parts of your militia with varying degrees of equipment. You could spend varying amounts of money for different lots of weapons.. let's say surplus rifles, surplus ammunition, etc... Naturally, all at a great cost.. ..but what are those diamonds for if not to fund your militia!!?

In short, I would like to see a little more complexity than in JA2, but a slightly less than JA2 1.13 options.

October 10, 2021

4 hours ago, SWi74 said:

Half of the stuff here isn't answerable anyway.

🤣

hmm.. thinking about all the conversations that have been going on here. I think most of the ideas, hopes, fears.. could have been avoided had they been active on the forum day 1.

It's been 2 weeks and not a single word. So what's left of us to do but to start trading arguments, ideas and things we want?

If I was at Haemimont, I would NOT want to join here right now.. I'd probably be ddepressed and take another week off...

.. goddamnit!!! now I gotta simulate chambering that +1 round!!!! 🥵

😂

October 10, 2021

3 hours ago, SWi74 said:

Love the idea of having magazines as equipment. Haven't played it anywhere, but it fits the JA style perfectly. The actual metal holding the rounds is pretty valuable. Most guns would have just one and a spare should be a rare find to celebrate.

7,62 High Calibre

It's a buggy game, it's very stiff and clunky... but I couldn't imagine a tactical video game life without having played that game. The one you get on steam also comes with a "mod" that fixes a few issues.

..oh.. and guess what..

Magazines is far from being the only complexity to that game!

When you find a roll of tape, (red or blue tape, can't remember), you can tape 2 magazines together (upside down from one another) and it is litteraly represented on screen.. and it helps with quicker reloads versus having to remove a magazine from a pouch.

Every gun has it's own unique slots for equipment that can realistically fit there. You cannot fit a 4x Acog on a dragunov, because it requires a scope for the SVD sidemount. You have no rails on an SKS, but you can attach laser to barrel ends because they clamp on barrels.

Stocks can be collapsed and opened. You can select the approximation amount of rounds when firing on fully auto.

When your mercs have night vision mounted, you can activate it or deactivate it without removing the entire apparatus. When you activate it.. you see the world in night vision yourself.

I mean, apart from the crappiest writing, stiff animations and clunky controls.. it's the best tactical game if you're into the technical side of guns.

I really wish Jagged Alliance 3 would simply keep the roleplaying system from JA2.. but aim towards a slightly more accurate representation of guns, gear and tactics.

October 9, 2021

Taking this new information into account, I guess I'll correct some of what I said in another topic.

On 9/20/2021 at 12:16 PM, GODSPEED said:

But. Yes, BUT, I would like to say something, because us JA2 fans, especially the ones who have really got themselves into 1.13 mod... we have to be realistic and NOT EXPECT 1.13-like features.

Correction:
we have to be realistic and NOT EXPECT JA2-like features.

On 9/20/2021 at 12:16 PM, GODSPEED said:

1.13 was a labor of love by the most devoted fans and a thing of love for JA2. It is incredibly important not to put those expectations on devs that: 1. most likely NEVER even played JA2, 2. aren't necessarily in love with the type of setting in JA2, 3. don't necessarily care for "realism" and 4. aren't necessarily weapon buffs or gun nuts.

Correction:
1. have NEVER even played JA2

On 9/20/2021 at 12:16 PM, GODSPEED said:

You cannot expect 1.13 level of dedication that is STILL being worked on by ppl who are making a game for work. The passion, commitment, love and dedication is NOT that same, regardless how they market it.

Correction:
You cannot expect JA2 level of detail.

2 hours ago, Inveris said:

I still have the conviction that I must have misunderstood something, but this literally indicates, that the JA2 sequel is going to be made by people who have never played JA2 and even they don't know what version choose to play (JA2 or Wildfire or 1.13).

I don't mean to break anyones bubble here, nor am I trying to act like a know-it-all... but when I first saw the trailer reveal.. I was pretty excited!

But, once I gave that excitement a week, I decided to go take a closer look at the video by my own self and "studied" the screenshots, the video gameplay section and everything I saw; pretty much told me these devs hav NOT played that game.

I've been in a few conversations with other members on this forum, especially when it comes down to what is acceptable as changes in gameplay mechanics whitin the game.. and as much as I respect everyones opinion of what changes are acceptable or not, these aren't even discussions we should be having!

Let me repeat that clearly:
IF WE HAVE TO DISCUSS WHAT CHANGES TO THE CORE MECHANICS ARE ACCEPTABLE, SOMETHING IS TERRIBLY WRONG!

If this dev team, or those who make the decisions about JA3, had EVER played or even CARE about the Jagged Alliance name, they would know that Jagged Alliance 2 has quite a few unique mechanics and features that are in no other game and they would do their best to keep that core uniqueness intact..

..instead, we've been presented with a modern Turn-Based Strategy game (aka Phoenix Point, new xcrap..com and derivatives) and it's been dressed up with a few famous names thrown-in, a few faces we know and a "look" that could pass for Jagged Alliance.

2 hours ago, Inveris said:

Maybe these people do not play an important role in this entire production, but what is the point of talking to someone about JA2, who does not have the slightest idea about the JA2.

But I still have hope I read something wrong.

How are you supposed to pass on relevant information to the team if you "think" you understand what JA2 is all about, but you've never experienced it?

You've not misread anything. We're dealing with pretty much the same issues we've dealt with in every past attempt at a JA revival; a lack of understanding, passion and respect for what they are trying to "revive".

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

DevDiaries

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by GODSPEED