Stuurminator

You all don't get it. This is why you can't autofire with less than 15 rounds. Autofire inflicts Suppressed on enemies within weapon range. It doesn't matter if you hit them, or if you damage them, or what their morale is. If you use Autofire on them and they're within range, they're suppressed. Period. That's why you can't fire off a "short" autofire, because it includes an effect that can't be divided. That's why they made it a strict requirement. I can't say I'm the biggest fan of this design decision, but it is what it is.

You think wrong! I enjoy the lack of CtH and, in the context of Jagged Alliance, prefer it. I enjoy the additional tension and unpredictability it adds to combat.

So far, we've seen footage of the early game, with early game enemies, which are explicitly described by NPCs as poorly trained bullies. They look ragtag and unprofessional because that's what they are. I'm sure the more competent, later game enemies will have a more professional appearance.

In JA2, you could use burst fire even if you didn't have enough rounds for a full burst. This meant you'd pay the full AP cost and accuracy penalty and just put out fewer bullets. Why was this changed? Because in JA3, fully automatic fire "suppresses" the enemy, and I don't mean it's more effective at filling up a hidden value like in JA2 or Xenonauts, I mean that "suppression" is a condition that is specifically tied to automatic fire, so it must be a purely binary thing: either you meet the requirements and can suppress the enemy, or you can't. At first glance, I'm not a fan of this design, but I'm trying to keep an open mind.

It's not a matter of balance. If they build the entire combat system around grit so that every fight is about getting shot and not taking damage, but the resource management of maintaining that grit is a fair challenge, then that's balanced. It's not an abuse, and it doesn't need to be nerfed. But that's not the style of gameplay I want from Jagged Alliance.

They can sure put together a slick trailer, but I just don't see a lot of tactical depth on display. For some reason, the gameplay reminds of an old game, Abomination: The Nemesis Project. That game provided some tactical options in the form of special abilities, explosives, and turrets, but most of the time, you just moved your squad around overwhelming groups of enemies (whose AI was just "charge and attack") with massed fire. This game looks like the same thing, except with better graphics and a familiar IP.

I'm trying to have an open mind. Jagged Alliance has never been strictly realistic, and I encourage game designers to experiment with new ideas with each new installment of a series. All the same, some of these choices are a little out there. Throwing two grenades at once? Sure! Automatically tossing knives at anyone that gets close? Uh, kind of comic booky, but okay, I'll buy that. The whole grit mechanic? Autofire doing less damage instead of letting a higher spread do that organically? Eh...

Maybe you should explain what you mean by "missions". JA doesn't have multiple "missions" except for in Deadly Games. Do you mean an optional quest? In any case, the point is, I don't want my mercs to randomly be injured or captured. That's not Jagged Alliance's kind of gameplay. If a quest involves us evacuating an NPC that's already wounded when we show up, that's fine, but I expect the game to play fair when it comes to my mercs.

I'd be surprised if those two groups are almost equally sized. The old-school JA fanbase is fanatically devoted, but small. Most of the game's potential customers are probably coming from the new XCOM games. The only reason I have any hope that this game will feel like a true JA game is because the developers seem to be diehard fans of JA2, themselves.

It would affect the atmosphere for sure, but perhaps not for the better. There's a reason tactical combat games typically don't depict enemies begging for their lives or screaming in agony or calling out for their mothers when mortally wounded, even though these things may be realistic. You don't want players to feel sympathy or pity for the enemy when you're expected to slaughter hundreds of them over the course of the game. Seeing enemies desperately try to save the lives of their wounded comrades, and being incentivized to gun them down in the process, is probably not the gameplay a lot of players are looking for. There's also the fact that, in Jagged Alliance, first aid can save a merc's life but usually doesn't get them back in the fight, due to the penalties they suffer even after being bandaged. This is worth in the long run for the player, but since you're not expected to leave any survivors among the enemies, this means first aid on the enemy's part is just a waste of time. Your stories sound a little strange to me. In the first XCOM, you absolutely could pick up unconscious soldiers. Their bodies were considered objects an appeared on the inventory screen. In Jagged Alliance 2, no one remains unconscious after being bandaged up, unless by "unconscious" you mean Nails's energy was completely depleted, and even then I wouldn't expect it to remain so for several turns. I am 100% against this idea. If a mercenary is badly wounded in the course of gameplay and has to be carried to safety? Fine, that's great. If a quest involves an NPC being wounded, or unconscious, or missing a leg, or whatever, and has to be carried to safety? Fine, also great. Both of these cases occurred in X-COM 2 (the new one) and were fine. What I don't want is to load into a map and be told "oh no, Mouse tripped over a rock and is now dying, you better carry her to this waypoint in five turns or she'll bleed to death!" That's bullshit and not what Jagged Alliance is about.

It probably won't affect anything at the start of the game. Like Sci-Fi mode in JA2, it probably won't rear its head until halfway through.

Congratulations, now you have. I really enjoyed fighting the crepitus. As fun as it would be to battle Africa's entire ecosystem, we probably won't get that much variety. Every new animal is a new model they have to rig, new sound effects they have to acquire, and several new rounds of testing and balancing. We'll be lucky to get more than one type of angry animal.

I always love three-way fights. Being ambushed by bloodcats while fighting Deidranne's army was rare, but fun. Mutliple factions would be a neat way to get that same effect.

I wouldn't count on non-binary representation; it's not popular in a lot of the markets where tactical combat games are popular. We probably won't get a huge selection of voices, either, as those are a lot more resource intensive than I suspect you think they are. I hope we get a wide range of models (repurposing rejected NPC designs for IMP could help), but I won't count on it. Of course, since every mercenary seems to get a unique model instead of recolours, I suppose it's not necessary on any technical level for the player to pick their IMP's gender at all. Just pick their model and voice from a list, mix and match as you like.

Just the flag on the mercenary screen is enough; we don't need a list of accented voices. Accents would nice, granted, but probably more trouble (and budget) than they're worth. Native Arulcans had accents from all over the map and no one complained, anyway. Suggestion: if they do implement the ability to assign a flag to your IMP, they should include the Grand Chien flag in case you want to imagine your IMP is a local.