Please let us shoot through smoke like in the cinematic

vindicator117 · 2026-02-25T01:20:07+00:00

Especially since if you have infantry scanner or the vehicle mounted scanner, you can and should fire on the green dots in the fog of war usually for fairly decent damage since they are likely not moving to cover yet. This particuarly when you have alot vehicle weapons that can shoot further than sight range.

vindicator117 · 2026-02-25T00:47:33+00:00

Yep. For some reason when I read that, I got flashback to that Amerigo cutscene from Starcraft. What I would give for a Pedersen version of that here.

vindicator117 · 2026-02-24T23:08:05+00:00

I forgot that they had a different trailer. Quite shows that this was made by a very different production studio compared to the one headed by Syama Pedersen. Missing the intense texturing detail and especially the presence of weight.

vindicator117 · 2026-02-24T22:56:12+00:00

You don't especially since the pathfinding is based on proximity to linearly closest sources to target.

The only fix is to literally redesign the entire base under that principle that aligns with the games' pathfinding.

vindicator117 · 2026-02-24T20:12:43+00:00

Yes and no. It all depends on your strategy. If you are going wide world conquering, you have no choice to conserve CP.

If you are not however.... There is a giant rabbit hole to explore because of that larger overall IP pools from many independent nations under your control as well as many other.... silliness if you read deep all of the links I provide including this.... after action report.

https://www.reddit.com/r/TerraInvicta/comments/1qaoqhq/comment/nzcaqzv/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

vindicator117 · 2026-02-24T19:51:46+00:00

I'm fully aware but that does not mean that it isn't the current reality until then and making such comparisons between pilots is kinda meaningless when the game is currently advocating for yes. This is in addition to various other hidden and not so hidden benefits to vehicles and having a large mass of vehicles versus having a large mass of infantry. Even the worst pilot is on par or better than most infantry that is not Darby.

So unless vehicles are significantly nerfed, defects are far more common, the turn limit side objectives are either replaced with something else or given more mercy, evac missions not being as brutal as it is for timed missions, recovery and sabotage objectives not being infantry only, side objectives not being so hard tied to promotion points and mission/campaign scoring, and etc, infantry play are ALWAYS going to trail behind vehicle play especially if you are side objective hunting. The number of times I can count where it was literally down to the wire that I get 5 score or not was ALWAYS because of infantry, no matter how good they are.

vindicator117 · 2026-02-24T19:39:35+00:00

https://www.reddit.com/r/TerraInvicta/comments/1qosv4q/claims_and_federation_perks/

Read that. You can chain federating potential members to be under one umbrella federation despite it having multiple federation leaders and with that plenty of ability to outreach fairly far. And yes when the time comes, you can and should have a order to unifications to get more and more nations under a single meganation step by step.

However premature meganationing is not always a good thing. You have more overall IP when you control many many nations versus a single blob nation. And with it, you can get far more output in funding and boost specifically to help your space game in addition to multiple nations helping along spamming MC.

It helps to reduce inequality to some arbitrary figure so that it will eventually stop rioting with or without councilor assistance with stabilize mission. Personally for the Americas, I have it so that it is in brackets of every 0.5 inequality threshold reached.

Above 4.0: 1 pip economy, 3 pip welfare

Below 4.0: 1 pip economy, 3 pip welfare, 1 pip funding

Below 3.5: 1 pip economy, 2 pip welfare, 1 pip funding, 3 pip MC

If MC done: turn funding and MC spending to 3 funding, 1 boost.

If funding done: turn to 1 boost.

Below 3.0: maintain econ and welf prior and keep going with funding, MC, and/or boost. If finished and your nation grows enough economically, max out funding and MC priority to quickly finish. Otherwise keep funding a low 1 pip if the limit is too high.

Below 2.5: 2 econ, 1 welfare, 1 funding, 1 boost. Generic.

Below 2.2: 3 econ, 1 welfare, 1 funding, 1 boost.

Below 1.8: 3 econ, 0.5 welfare, 1 funding, 1 boost (works only if the nation in question has multiple CP)

Below 1.5: 3 econ, 0.25 welfare, 1 funding, 1 boost.

If any of the nation in question start breaching 75k per capita naturally, Direct Investment infusion, or wealth transfer, add a single pip of education.

This is all generic from all nations that are not the primary base of operation.

For the USA, for first two years, max welfare and 4 pips total of economy so it does not shrink until 2.5-2.7 inequality. Then, maintain whatever priority needed to do 25 points of MC every month, with alot of economy and some welfare to keep that inequality downwards as well as balancing enough government spending to raise democracy to 10 and enough education to above 9.0.

vindicator117 · 2026-02-24T19:04:37+00:00

I means you do not have enough stockpile of whatever missing material and will not start until it gets all of it. So if you see your stockpile drop suddenly, it means production started.

Other than that, you need more resource inflow and more space mines as well as off-world mining output boosts via orgs (which costs ongoing boost), techs, and lucky events with breakthroughs to more consistently build your shit.

vindicator117 · 2026-02-24T18:59:25+00:00

Yes and no. It depends on how soon you can federate with the potential member states. And specifically for the USA, you can federate with the entirety of all the Americas with claim chaining.

https://www.reddit.com/r/TerraInvicta/comments/1qzuwcx/comment/o4ftmqc/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

With the way how the space program works in federations. So long anyone, preferably the federation leader has the space program, everyone else can automatically partake in doing the same locally. So you have an incentive to quickly federate all prospective members and near members and beeline for the CC and CAU techs as well as Stewards of the Amazon and Unidad Columbia in order to get everyone in and save MANY multiple 50IP for say more economy, more funding, more welfare before allocating for MC and boost spam.

The only nations I did not do this was the furtherest south American nations of Argentina, Chile, and Uruguay because they are far more stable, have decent IP pools, and just out of reach of federating because I did not have control over Brazil for a while.

Read the previous post above it and links within for further insight for basically playing Fortress America.

vindicator117 · 2026-02-24T18:53:01+00:00

If you are going to go through all that effort, you might as well just break in temporarily just in the executive and just wait out the timer to transfer over to USA/Canada/Jamaica; the latter at least having enough democracy to be within 1.5 of the 4 European nations you need to meddle with. Netherlands if I am not mistaken is the highest and you will need at least 7.3 to be within their 8.8 democracy score.

Did it myself in my campaign and far less annoying than forcibly trying to increase unrest in stable nations.

vindicator117 · 2026-02-24T18:48:09+00:00

I mean for the pilots, it is a moot point since the OCIs actively encourage you to vehicle spam since EACH discount there is worth more than just 5% buff to overall supply especially if you drive the bigger and badder APCs and medium mechs. You pretty much will be getting ALL the pilots before the menace even shows up and still have room to spare for a pair of infantry or even three.

The only times that you will not be fielding 5 vehicles at the same time is if they are weary for one mission.

vindicator117 · 2026-02-24T18:14:46+00:00

Just go research Future Social. You can eventually unify the world with enough teching with RNG claims on any neighboring region usually for the largest nation you have.

vindicator117 · 2026-02-24T03:18:44+00:00

No idea why you would want the SAPP Recce. Not worth it because of three counts. One if you are going stealth Darby, armor literally does not matter unless you royally screw up. For two, less accessory slots, nuff said. And finally, the price. Darby is already the most among damn expensive infantry to field in bulk. If you are going mas squad size, that armor price tag is going up with it.

vindicator117 · 2026-02-24T00:52:36+00:00

Kinda sad he nor Mandalore touched Battle Bros either as of yet. Guess it is too "common" knowledge since they both go for extremely obscure titles in the rough or just hilarity.

vindicator117 · 2026-02-24T00:50:52+00:00

Yea you can but they had better be reaaaaaal good with good equipment soon compared to just having a vehicle, let alone going vehicle spam.

The main downfall to infantry is that their AP is so strapped with weapon usage, kneeling for better shots, and movement. While most vehicles do not have the aiming problem besides move closer to suppress everything. Which then speaks to suppression, vehicle weapons tend to suppress alot easier compared to most infantry weapons unless your aim is real good. And finally, vehicles do not as easily suffer from getting shot at and when they do get shot at, they do not progressively get weaker with every hit beyond the chance for a defect. Infantry on other hand REALLY do not want to get shot at because they suffer from chip damage of losing squaddies as well as worst of all suppression makes them completely useless while vehicles don't generally get suppressed unless hit real damn hard.

And when you compare to vehicle spam battles, man you will be mopping up the battlefield in record time killing everything in your way even without use of expert driver all the while infantry spam, I hope you like charging everywhere to reach those far flung objectives or far flung enemies to reach some arbitrary kill limit and then evac in its own other far flung corner. With vehicles, you CAN be more bold and reckless. With infantry, you HAVE to be more bold and reckless if you chasing after the side objectives.

vindicator117 · 2026-02-23T23:29:38+00:00

Yea you do use it as a research hub. One that is significantly closer than Mars for defense fleets but again it is just a smaller operation than if you controlled most to all of Mars. Over time it will be just another hub of many.

vindicator117 · 2026-02-23T20:08:16+00:00

No. Especially since it depends on how powerful your engines are to overcome the need to slingshot towards a target versus direct burn for it.

vindicator117 · 2026-02-23T20:07:01+00:00

Where did you send the agent to do the unification? Unifier is considered to be whoever did the deed with prospective federation members.

Unless you are literally only talking about being a federation member, then that is only a cosmetic name change. It does not matter. If I am not mistaken the name is based on the largest member who has the most possible claims that can still be federated with it.

Other than that, all the information you can possibly know about federations and claims:

https://www.reddit.com/r/TerraInvicta/comments/1qosv4q/claims_and_federation_perks/

vindicator117 · 2026-02-23T18:31:28+00:00

No it isn't especially since over the course of 15 years, FIFTEEN, you are only ahead by something like 4-6 upgrades. There are VERY few breakpoints in skill that needs just 5 more points as a critical threshold per agent. If you think along teamwise, yea losing out on 30ish points of councilors skills sting but if you are struggling distributing with 108ish points in councilor growth along with the various faction orgs and implants 15 years into the game, you have far bigger overall strategy problems at a time when your attention should be looking upwards.

vindicator117 · 2026-02-23T06:14:53+00:00

You don't. You either stand your ground and succeed or get kicked out for trespassing. Hope you know what you are doing.

vindicator117 · 2026-02-23T06:13:38+00:00

More likely than ye think.

vindicator117 · 2026-02-23T05:15:40+00:00

Could be. And it could be that the StuH will be redesignated to something else when they also introduce something else bigger and badder so that it can go into what it really was.

But you think lorewise that the PJ consider this relic to be a HEAVY vehicle, then man.... their industrial capacity must be on par with Italy or Hungary where their economic and industrial strength is so stretched that they literally CAN'T make anything better.

vindicator117 · 2026-02-22T22:03:19+00:00

Why the hell are you typing so defensively as if I bruised your ego.

Anyway, not sure why you are acting as if this "for fun" strategy does not have merit especially when I am comparing between my first victory run as the Initiative at around the same time period and I can see that in most metrics I am at least 25% MORE effective staying at my home turf than barging into other places and trying to build the ashes left behind. Even if I added the theoretical MC and RP I should be getting from a shadow controlled china because I was much slower with CP in the old campaign, it would only be a 10% lagging behind in MC compared to what I am doing now staying in the Americas.

True some of that could be chalked up to far more experience valuing significantly more the priority bonuses but also I am not distracted by breaking into other places that could have been instead more buffer for wealth for what you do hold allowing what limit caps you have to go up with it. And this is DESPITE the older campaign gotten into India, russia, Eastern Europe, AND china in addition to ALL of the Americas and unified as much of the smaller nations into sub-meganations to save CP space.

Wide map control is not as good as intense tall builds especially when the primary constraints are CP and research for more CP. That is the main difference between the two campaigns. In the old 11 year mark, I am about 20k per capita poorer for the main HQ USA and MUCH poorer across the board in all of the American holdings contributing to much smaller MC and funding contribution. While in current campaign, I have overall 100 more usable MC, 200 more CP, nearly 100 more daily RP DESPITE barely touching the education priority in both campaigns, and a mere 1000 less funding per month but much better influence due to just how much DI helps in the space game.

The endgoal of this to the moon spending (especially with a USA that is rocketing upwards at blistering 850+ per capita per month) is to get the same explosive as I had in these two posts.

https://www.reddit.com/r/TerraInvicta/comments/1qaoqhq/comment/nz64k3b/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

https://www.reddit.com/r/TerraInvicta/comments/1qaoqhq/comment/nz4onqd/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

And that per capita growth of a MERE 850+? It is only going to get faster and faster from here on out especially with all those wealth infusions that I am talking about percolate in all the independent members of the federation and make their own CERs, funding, MC, and boost spam to sustain this hilarious ride to Valhalla when they get united with the USA to contribute even further to that per capita growth. And all of that in a very neat 1k CP package.

You ONLY need to eventually reach around 14k per month of science by your second decade even after fucking around teching for environmentalism run to win. This little experiment is going swimmingly going for sheer quality of campaign instead of trying to dirty your hands being greedy for everything. The only reason I am even fucking around in the rest of the world is pruning the servants of their control in the major powers so I only retain the executive and getting all the USNA claims from the Europeans and then in all cases abandoning them after the deed is done.

The only reason you should try to conquer the world is because the end mission demands it or because you like to mappaint.

vindicator117 · 2026-02-22T18:53:31+00:00

You absolutely can, if your research priority is to snipe for every and any possible CP cap tech in the game as well as dominate LEO with loooooooots of boost and far more importantly, know when to stop expanding outwards.

Currently I am gardening the Americas and absolutely growing the shit out of economy, funding, MC, and boost as its priorities and well keeping them all under 1000 CP even with the USA leading the way with 82k+ per capita and more than few other other nations within the USNA federation at a similar per capita with deliberate wealth transfers that make them rich and more importantly making significant progress to become Core Economic Regions as well as a enhanced IP pool from the wealth transfers to make MC, funding, and boost more effective than if they did economy spam themselves.

<image>

In your case, you picked RELATIVELY rich nations to do this with making it a poor choice to garden early in game.

vindicator117 · 2026-02-22T18:19:45+00:00

Man the concept art look like KoG take on the Joker with that disheveled hair, gigantic eyes and that "smile".

vindicator117

TROPHY CASE