Choosing promotions?

[Countdown]

This feature has now been removed from OXCE+.
Thanks to all potential future abusers and exploiters and all overly worried and excessively restrictive critics.

As a curious bystander, what happened, why are you removing it? This seemed like a really cool feature even if it's not something I'd use myself since I like promotions to be a surprise.

But I feel like I've heard a lot of other people lamenting that this feature wasn't available. What was the potential abuse/exploitation and why were people critical (especially since there was no reason they had to use it)? This has peaked my interest.

[Meridian]

What was the potential abuse/exploitation and why were people critical (especially since there was no reason they had to use it)? This has peaked my interest.

For example, there is a feature to pay higher salaries to high-ranking officers... which you could abuse by demoting everyone before the end of the month.
Not that anyone sane would do that... but I got sick of complaints and succumbed to pressure.

[Solarius Scorch]

I would like to add that there were long discussions on the Piratez Discord channel regarding what to do about it, with no good solution. So the degrading mechanics was indeed unviable for balance reasons.

As a modder, I actually breathed with relief when this element was removed, and I think Dioxine did too.

[Zyzyfer]

I would like to add that there were long discussions on the Piratez Discord channel regarding what to do about it, with no good solution. So the degrading mechanics was indeed unviable for balance reasons.

As a modder, I actually breathed with relief when this element was removed, and I think Dioxine did too.

Why do you care? It's a single player game if I want to abuse by editing all my stats to 255 (made for a really boring game- and its the first & last time i did that), let them. For the rest of us who prefer to rp a bit this looked like a really nice feature.

[Countdown]

Sounds like rather than the ability to demote soldiers, it would have been more optimal to actually choose promotions at the end of a given mission when they become available (and not let you change them after that). Rather than a post-mission screen with a list of promotions, it'd give you a screen where you could choose to promote a given number of soldiers (based on whatever ranks are available).

But I imagine that would be very complex to code into the game and probably come with it's own set of issues/exploits I'm not considering. Plus, with that method, you'd have to make it an "option" rather than a common feature, because there are many who feel the same as me and wouldn't want to choose their own promotions.

Anyway, I applaud your efforts. Carry on.

[Solarius Scorch]

Why do you care? It's a single player game if I want to abuse by editing all my stats to 255 (made for a really boring game- and its the first & last time i did that), let them. For the rest of us who prefer to rp a bit this looked like a really nice feature.

Because it is bad design.

I don't mind people hacking saves or making cheat modes, it's their life and their entertainment. There are ways to draw fun from this. But as a developer of a mod meant for other people I can't do this stuff, because it's unprofessional.

Also please consider that there are many players who will do anything within their rights to win; anything that is not specifically forbidden is fair game to them. Then they come and complain that the game is too easy (or worse - brag how unstoppable they are). What am I supposed to do, make the game impossibly hard to give these people a challenge and make it hell for everyone else? Nah. But if I let them be, other players will feel like suckers, because their soldiers will be weaker, their bases will be smaller, etc. So leaving such exploits actually promotes playing dirty and ruthless micromanaging, which is a very bad thing in itself.

[Kjotleik]

For example, there is a feature to pay higher salaries to high-ranking officers... which you could abuse by demoting everyone before the end of the month.
Not that anyone sane would do that... but I got sick of complaints and succumbed to pressure.

This had to be controversial. I understand why it was removed.

But was it only the financial gains from demotion that was the reason for removing the option?

If so: How hard would it be to let demotion cost.... let's say 2x Salary of rank (before demotion)?
You would lose money doing it, and the game would fill up the free ranks again at the first possible opportunity.
Consistently demoting would then cost twice as much as just letting them be.

Not that I would demand such a game-mechanic, but it would perhaps be fun to play around with it for a game (or two).
Demoting soldiers causing friendly-fire casualties, or missing important shots that leads to aliens reaction-fire killing team-mate(s). Hm.   

[ohartenstein23]

If so: How hard would it be to let demotion cost.... let's say 2x Salary of rank (before demotion)?
You would lose money doing it, and the game would fill up the free ranks again at the first possible opportunity.
Consistently demoting would then cost twice as much as just letting them be.

This was one of the many options discussed for how to try and balance the increased cost by rank with the demotion button, but there was no consensus on what exactly the penalty should be, and it would have been a pain to code all the possible options in to make everybody happy.  Thus the simpler solution was to remove the demotion button, and let people edit their saves to demote if they really felt it was necessary to punish a soldier.

[Zyzyfer]

Because it is bad design.

I don't mind people hacking saves or making cheat modes, it's their life and their entertainment. There are ways to draw fun from this. But as a developer of a mod meant for other people I can't do this stuff, because it's unprofessional.

Also please consider that there are many players who will do anything within their rights to win; anything that is not specifically forbidden is fair game to them. Then they come and complain that the game is too easy (or worse - brag how unstoppable they are). What am I supposed to do, make the game impossibly hard to give these people a challenge and make it hell for everyone else? Nah. But if I let them be, other players will feel like suckers, because their soldiers will be weaker, their bases will be smaller, etc. So leaving such exploits actually promotes playing dirty and ruthless micromanaging, which is a very bad thing in itself.

I find your logic baffling (but to each their own), with that said everything can be manipulated with exploits and/or macro programs etc. (does this mean you will never release another mod upon hearing this!?).
Even the big companies with big budgets can't stop cheating so don't beat your self up if a couple of players brag about the difficulty of the game after manipulating the game to make things easier (this has zero implication on my games).

At least XCOM is single player game and one will never have to go up against anything other than the AI. Why even bother with all the rank exploit- when one can just give one self all the money one needs by way of simple editor like winhex, one can also edit the script and make the price/cost of scientist/engineers/soldier =$0 etc. regardless of your mod.

edit: With that said the ability to choose promotions would be a really cool feature.

[Solarius Scorch]

I am baffled by your bafflement, I believe my post was very clear. Clearly it's not.

[Zyzyfer]

I am baffled by your bafflement, I believe my post was very clear. Clearly it's not.

[Solarius Scorch]

I pity your family.

[yrizoud]

Also please consider that there are many players who will do anything within their rights to win; anything that is not specifically forbidden is fair game to them. Then they come and complain that the game is too easy (or worse - brag how unstoppable they are). What am I supposed to do, make the game impossibly hard to give these people a challenge and make it hell for everyone else? Nah. But if I let them be, other players will feel like suckers, because their soldiers will be weaker, their bases will be smaller, etc. So leaving such exploits actually promotes playing dirty and ruthless micromanaging, which is a very bad thing in itself.

I think I see what Solarius means : if the game tells me "You have to manage ranks", I will know that I am supposed to analyze situations, determine what choices I have, and determine which one brings most benefits. If the feature easily allows removing some game risks with no drawback, it is a poorly-designed or poorly-balanced feature.

In this case, I think the feature of manual rank assignment rather belongs to an in-game character editor : If a screen lets you change soldiers stats, and rank, gender and looks (more user-friendly than numbers in yaml file!) it fills the needs of RPers and people who feel they have been cheated by the RNG, while it's clear that it's outside the scope of the vanilla-balanced game/mod.

[Meridian]

Anyway, modding is a form of art, as it manipulates perception and emotions. Therefore it is not easy to explain to a layman sometimes. Sorry if it sounds haughty, but I've been in this business for over a decade and it's just how it is.

Just want to add, that this is not the only definition or interpretation of modding.
It's perfectly valid, just not the only one.

For me, modding is nothing of above... and certainly not an art!
Modding for me is adding variety (so that base game doesn't get boring/repetitive); and maybe adding some challenge, so that it doesn't get too easy. And everything and anything added must have a real tangible purpose, no fu*king poetry.

I explicitly don't want mods to manipulate my perception and/or emotions; and if they do, I try to do everything to ignore it. I also absolutely hate it, when mods add things, which don't serve any "real purpose"... e.g. needing an aquarium for captured fish, instead of just using a perfectly fine alien containment (if it's versatile enough for aliens, I'm sure we can put a little water in it too)... drives me mad. Just like I find "modern art" a waste of human potential, I find such features in mods a deliberate and targeted waste of my time. Adding things like that should be a modding-crime.

This post is intentionally harsh, but I needed to say it that way.
Please don't be offended, it's nothing personal.

Because it is bad design.

I don't mind people hacking saves or making cheat modes, it's their life and their entertainment. There are ways to draw fun from this. But as a developer of a mod meant for other people I can't do this stuff, because it's unprofessional.

Also please consider that there are many players who will do anything within their rights to win; anything that is not specifically forbidden is fair game to them. Then they come and complain that the game is too easy (or worse - brag how unstoppable they are). What am I supposed to do, make the game impossibly hard to give these people a challenge and make it hell for everyone else? Nah. But if I let them be, other players will feel like suckers, because their soldiers will be weaker, their bases will be smaller, etc. So leaving such exploits actually promotes playing dirty and ruthless micromanaging, which is a very bad thing in itself.

By that logic the original xcom would be the worst game in history.

Yet, it's one of the best!

[Solarius Scorch]

Any work that affects emotions is art by definition. Not necessarily good art, but still.

Let's say you are a modder and I am a player. I lost a soldier. I am annoyed. I felt an emotion because you somehow planned for it - not directly, but you devised conditions for losing soldiers and an environment that promotes not losing soldiers. That's all!

Many people thing that art is god knows what, while in fact it is nothing special. A flower painted on a wall is art, even though everybody can do it in two seconds. I really didn't expect it to be arcane knowledge.