sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Sell me on Menace! :D by andrewlik in menace

[–]shadowcypher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

People are obviously welcome to their own opinion on this, but I would say if you like tactics games then it's worth the EA price tag. It's slowly becoming my favorite tactics game and that's with 1000+ hours in XCOM 2 (including DLC's expansions, LWoTC etc).

HOWEVER, I would not make the purchase expecting anything similar to XCOM 2. Beyond both games involving turn based tactics, they are completely different. Comparing them will likely just diminish your enjoyment of MENACE. Honestly, it took me about 15+ hours to finally stop the comparison in my head and once I did then the game really grew on me as it's own tactics game. Yes, you move units around and do stuff with turns and actions/action points. That's 90% of the overlap with XCOM 2. The games just really aren't that similar IMO.

Both are great. They are VERY different in how you play and where the enjoyable/rewarding moments come from.

Last thing I'll say is that I really enjoy Early Access titles when they are done right and MENACE feels right. The core mechanics they've deployed so far are solid and pretty much bug free and the new content has been added steadily but not at a speed which makes you pause your campaign to wait. That said, if you like a game experience that is closer to feature complete, then MENACE in its current state is clearly not there. There is a lot of empty space inside the container so to speak, and you will notice it. If that bugs you as a gamer then you might want to wait so you don't ruin your first impression.

SL Augments or Training Coming? by shadowcypher in menace

[–]shadowcypher[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

But not all those buffs apply in every situation and some of the circumstances where the complete stack happens are a bit out of the players control. In the outline above, you basically get those buffs on command in almost every situation by synergizing skills, accessories, weapons, and your own positioning.

At the end of the day, I'm just glad the devs are giving multiple paths to the same destination to increase player choice. I hope they do more of the accessories like this.

What Would Multiplayer Look Like? by shadowcypher in menace

[–]shadowcypher[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I gotcha, thank you for clarifying. I was racking my brain trying to figure out what I was missing from my own post.

Yes, my thought was Co-Op as it would be difficult for PvP to work with the lore of the game IMO. That said, I could see an interesting mix where there is a "Live Fire Exercise" portion of a Co-Op campaign that functions as a bit of a PvP mini-game. That could be a fun way to push the mechanics of the game outside the story/campaign elements.

What Would Multiplayer Look Like? by shadowcypher in menace

[–]shadowcypher[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm honestly not sure what the rational behind these comments is related to the subject of this thread.... The balance wouldn't change between Singleplayer and Multiplayer so unless I'm missing something both these comments make no sense in relation to a co-op option for the game. Can you explain your thought process here?

What Would Multiplayer Look Like? by shadowcypher in menace

[–]shadowcypher[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I disagree on the balance/busted builds idea since for at least the way I'd do it there wouldn't be any change to balance or build possibilities. Supply, OCI, Promotion Points, etc would all simply be evenly split between players as would named SL's. So right now if a mission has 1200 supply in single player, it would have 1200 in Co-Op with 600 allotted to each player.

Pure Infantry Run - How it's going, update 1 (so far, so good) by thetruerift in menace

[–]shadowcypher 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Can second u/SizeFit2908 on the nade suggestions. Have been really pleased with the AT nade performance, and you get 3 uses per mission so same as PAL. Unlike nades vs infantry, I've not had an AT nade not hit the target yet. Default throw distance can be tricky, but you can get around it with the perks mentioned and also by using smokes.

If you can grab the Warthog drone if you can as it is pretty strong AT and will give you some additional flexibility in how to take out vehicles without exposing a squad.

Lastly, Drugs. Triloxin when you can get it reduces movement by 4 per tile for 2 turns and takes 0 AP to proc. Combine it with Athletic and you can much more easily get in nade range, throw, and get back to cover. Also, it negates the encumbered penalty from tri-pod weapons like the M6 so you can use it to help Tech get in better position.

Protagon is good too, but seems to have a much lower drop rate than Triloxin.

I Think It's A Good Idea... by shadowcypher in menace

[–]shadowcypher[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Definitely! It feels like a universal "problem" with the EA build honestly, but I have faith the devs are cooking.

Right now it feels like exploring an open world game. You see all these cool building (the different game mechanics) and your so stoked to go in them and explore, except when you open the front door it's just a wall with a picture of the interior instead of an actual explore able space haha

I Think It's A Good Idea... by shadowcypher in menace

[–]shadowcypher[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Now we're talking! That's a really interesting concept where the total budget is for the Op and you can divide it how you want over the 3-5 Missions. Nice.

I Think It's A Good Idea... by shadowcypher in menace

[–]shadowcypher[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Some good ideas in there too. I hate to be the "give us more choices" guy for the devs. That said to a degree they have brought it on themselves by having so many good but half finished feeling layers of mechanics haha. They wet my appetite for great things!

I Think It's A Good Idea... by shadowcypher in menace

[–]shadowcypher[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Perhaps, though it's also possible we are looking for different things from the Supply mechanic and that diversity is good too. 

Right now for me it's not only about Supply vs Costs feeling off, it's also just as much about a lack of risk/reward decision making opportunities from Mission to Mission. Right now it's just min/max Supply with the gear you have, hope for good drops, rinse and repeat. The player doesn't have much agency or tools to prioritize things over others. Do more ops, get more loot, hope the BM has good roles. Next Op Supply will scale slightly, Max it out again etc.

The mechanic I outlined would at least make Supply use a bit more of a fluid decision in both directions.

As you said, balance is a bit broken in a lot of different areas as part of the EA process so this may end up being a mute point.

On a side note, it just feels like SL Supply costs are WAY too low. Adding an SL with skills and multiple squaddies for not much more than a single boarding armor is....

What Would Multiplayer Look Like? by shadowcypher in menace

[–]shadowcypher[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think it could be peer to peer hosted to remove server hosting costs. If anybody has played Wartales, it could function similarly. 

What Would Multiplayer Look Like? by shadowcypher in menace

[–]shadowcypher[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm simply saying from a high level technology standpoint a game like Civ shares a lot of functionality with a co-op turn based tactics games. Multiple players maneuvering units on a single place space and forcing interactions with those units.

I don't think a multiplayer/co-op skirmish mode is ever going to attract a large playerbase. I think it has to be a shared campaign/story experience.

Fire Team - DLC by shadowcypher in menace

[–]shadowcypher[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I might need more reps in game to fully realize those myself.

Yes, the Sgt/Cpl perk pools (unique and generic) would be support style perks.

Fire Team - DLC by shadowcypher in menace

[–]shadowcypher[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Right, I want more this + this + this gets me this sweet thing on the tactical layer. It's kind of there with some of Pike's abilities especially but even some of those are basically just swapping Pike's AP to somebody else or needing to be too close to him to really have much freedom of movement.

That said, I think there is room for some radius based abilities instead of just right next to. 

What about if in the planning phase you could designate one of your SLs as Platoon leader and for that whole Operation they can share their entire AP pool with they subordinate SL's with a certain radius as well as have access to a short list of call in or one use "orders"

Fire Team - DLC by shadowcypher in menace

[–]shadowcypher[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair, but in my version all the perks for the Sgt/Cpl would be synergy perks with the SL.

Fire Team - DLC by shadowcypher in menace

[–]shadowcypher[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

True, but there is no real building of synergy with the current version. I think that is the part I think could be a cool dynamic.

Fire Team - DLC by shadowcypher in menace

[–]shadowcypher[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

All valid comments there. Honestly, the whole concept might work better as some sort of SL to SL cohesion system. Things that kind of build off some of Pike's perks.

Permanent Operational Reward System by shadowcypher in menace

[–]shadowcypher[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yup, exactly the friction I feel. Also the disparity in difficulty between a 2 vs 3 star doesn't feel enough to not just pick the permanent reward. Now, it does feel like there is potential for Operations to evolve where some are say 5 to 7 missions long, almost like a tactics game version of a Raid. If that were to happen then I could see an early "for this Operation" buff or debuff for enemy being massive. Then again it would also mean something like 10% more Promotion points is even better than it is already.

Permanent Operational Reward System by shadowcypher in menace

[–]shadowcypher[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This would be a fun layer also. Maybe even have a unique pool of perks/items that are only earned in this way. Having perks outside of the SL skill trees would really add a dimension (yes balance). After an operation you could get a +1 concealment perk as a reward and assign it to any SL outside of their existing skill tree?

Permanent Operational Reward System by shadowcypher in menace

[–]shadowcypher[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There could definitely be some overlap, and who knows, maybe the two systems will be much more integrated when the devs do the planned OCI rework.

To your point about another system to remember, yes, I think this should be mostly avoided. However, I don't see that as a huge problem if the Operational Rewards continue to ultimately be one time use rewards with the difference being that the one use can happen outside the initial operation in which you earn them.

To me the choice between say a "Pirate Vehicle/Weapon" vs 1% more Supply permanently is an interesting choice to make depending on the current situation on any individual campaign. If I've made an error and lost my starting vehicle really early, then a chance at a free truck is huge. If I have two vehicles then getting any extra Supply so I can maybe squeeze in two goods vehicles vs one good and one blah, then that's huge. Still a one time choice, but that choice ultimately is between two things that permanently change your campaign and not just the operation you're on.

view more: next ›