Bughunt

[Meridian]

Starving Poet 1 hour ago (edited)
It would be great if after turn 30 and aliens == 1, we could get knowledge of its position - something like "satellite/awacs is in position"  You could even tech-gate it so it makes sense lore-wise.

Would anyone be interested in this?
If yes, add your ideas how should it work in your opinion...

[Solarius Scorch]

Would anyone be interested in this?
If yes, add your ideas how should it work in your opinion...

Certainly not as the default setting. MAYBE as some form of special case, but the number of exceptions would be longer than a Pirate Queen's kills list.

I understand that searching for the last alien in the toilet can be a problem, but I think it begs for a different kind of solution. For example, I once proposed mechanics for surrender, it was briefly discussed; I can rewrite it.

[Dioxine]

Surrender/Escape mechanics makes more sense as it doesn't flush gamer's immersion into the toilet. Also, why 1? It's often the hunt for the last 2, or 3, or 5...

[Surrealistik]

Surrender/Escape mechanics makes more sense as it doesn't flush gamer's immersion into the toilet. Also, why 1? It's often the hunt for the last 2, or 3, or 5...

A % of the starting number makes sense.

[Dioxine]

The basic idea was simple. If every remaining enemy unit on the field has panicked, the AI turn ends with player's victory, and all remaining AI units count as captured.

[Meridian]

The basic idea was simple. If every remaining enemy unit on the field has panicked, the AI turn ends with player's victory, and all remaining AI units count as captured.

Panicking/morale is probably not the best criterion.
The enemies tend to panic when you kill many of them at the beginning/in the middle of the battle.

But once there are only a few left, and you search for them, they regain their morale (very quickly) and won't panic anymore.

[ivandogovich]

Overall, I very much like the idea of being able to end the combat at somepoint rather than continuing a tedious grind to find that last one or two remaining enemies.

As written in the opening post, I'd be fine with that.

Another way to consider this might be by enemy intelligence.  Use a ratio of the total of all remaining enemy intelligence scores and number of turns elapsed to determine if the enemy "surrender" or not.

[Meridian]

Also, just realized that the last enemy (resp. last two enemies) are allowed to cheat... and in unmodded xcom, they are by far the most dangerous foes... at least for me... accounting for 60-70% of all my losses (20-30% first turn reaction shots, and 10-20% the rest).

So, whatever we implement should somehow try to figure out if they are still capable of killing you or not.
E.g.:
- do they have a weapon?
- if yes, do they have a weapon that can penetrate your armor?
- if no, are they able to pick up a weapon somewhere nearby?
- are they locked in a room without doors?
- are they 2x2 units locked in a place with 1x1 corridors only?

There really might not be a solution to this dilemma, but please keep the feedback coming.

[Solarius Scorch]

I guess the % chance would make sense in some missions, as a winning condition. But not in every mission ever, since it would get in the way of many mechanics.

Regarding surrender: good point about the too high morale at late mission stages. I guess any surrender feature (which I will still support as a general concept) would need something more above the current mechanics. Maybe something like this:

- check all enemy units' Bravery every turn,
- If the % losses of their side is greater or equal the Bravery, make them "willing to surrender" (until the next turn),
- If all units are "willing to surrender", they do and the battle ends.

Note that this is irrespective of current morale, which already has different roles.

[Surrealistik]

I guess the % chance would make sense in some missions, as a winning condition. But not in every mission ever, since it would get in the way of many mechanics.

Regarding surrender: good point about the too high morale at late mission stages. I guess any surrender feature (which I will still support as a general concept) would need something more above the current mechanics. Maybe something like this:

- check all enemy units' Bravery every turn,
- If the % losses of their side is greater or equal the Bravery, make them "willing to surrender" (until the next turn),
- If all units are "willing to surrender", they do and the battle ends.

Note that this is irrespective of current morale, which already has different roles.

In otherwords, make damn sure you kill the robots.

[Arthanor]

Yes, as annoying as it is to hunt the last one, they can also be quite dangerous, both because they can cheat and because one tends to get sloppy at the end.

I like the "has no weapon and none in immediate LoS" check, as that's a good way to check if the enemy is still dangerous. Maybe a "hasPanicked" flag for battlescape units, which must be true for the unit to be allowed to surrender?

Another thing that was discussed before was a "can surrender" property, set to false by default in unit definitions. This allows modders to decide which units can surrender (GOs, Hostesses, Researchers, etc. Maybe none of the church because they are too indoctrinated) and which can't (chryssalids, mercs, etc.).

If only units that can surrender remain, and less than X% of the starting units remain, then a surrender occurs. Can add the "has weapon" check, but since it is possible to keep a weapon when panicking (ex.: by going berserk), I think the "has panicked" check might work better.

[Surrealistik]

I think it should be a selectable option.

Yes, there's a point to be made that the straggler bughunts can inflict casualties in CQC and with RF; on the flipside, the quality of life improvement is worth disposing of that IMO, particularly for a game as long and combat heavy as PirateZ.

I prefer Bravery to % of casualty comparisons as the basis for determining surrender. 'Mindless/beastial' units like robots/Reapers should probably follow the directives of their masters (i.e. they don't count for determining whether or not the enemy surrenders, unless no masters remain in which case they're a cockblock), though having them cockblock surrenders outright wouldn't be too upsetting (though it would defy verisimilitude somewhat).

[Dioxine]

Panicking/morale is probably not the best criterion.
The enemies tend to panic when you kill many of them at the beginning/in the middle of the battle.

This would favor 'shock and awe' tactics. Indeed their regain of Morale is strong, unless with lo-end AI Bravery (60-70). An alternate option would be: each time enemy panics, he takes a second, % Bravery check. If fails that one, has a 'broken' flag. If all survivors are 'broken', everyone surrenders.
Sure it's unreliable, and requires a new flag, but...
Also enemies can get double Morale hits from your kills if their current number is 5 or less.
That's a bunch of ideas, still imperfect.

[Boltgun]

I'd rather multiply the last enemies aggressiveness so they bum rush you. Or if they have no weapons and are not withing a gal's LOS, just make them disappear because they fled. And this starts under 2 enemies.

Or you can mark all enemies who panicked and notify that the enemy is routed, so you can end the battle early but with less kills and capture because your gals took your preference for quicker loot and let them flee. But that does not fix the problem if the last guy indeed did not panic.

[Surrealistik]

Thus far my vote goes to Scorch with the caveat that robot/mindless/beast flagged aliens don't count for the surrender check unless they're the only ones left, and you can refuse surrender (if you do, you won't get another chance to accept).