🚀 go-pugleaf

>Please feel free to comment and make suggestions, anything to improve my
>chances are welcome!
>

I'd like to take the opportunity; I often have what I consider to be good
ideas, but never seem to get around to putting them out...

>Bases & building...
>
>    Primary base location has become Midway Island, hence the name, 'Midway
>React'.  I kinda like it and its stuck.  It may not be the perfect placing

I have always dropped my first site in the middle of the Atlantic, right
between Europe and NorthAm; mainly because that puts your initial "service
area" in range of the higher-paying customers.  In other words, it seems
more cost effective to me.  Like yourself, I'm also hung on naming
conventions: my first base usually gets named ATLANTIC DEEP, the others
named similarly (YELLOW DEEP in the Yellow Sea off of China, for example).

Another consideration: later in the game when money is reasonably available,
I build "mini-bases" that consist of only sonar facilities, and possibly a
sub pen with a dedicated interceptor.  I call these DETFAC's (DETection
FACility); since I usually stick one at the North Pole, that base gets named
ARCTIC DETFAC.  These bases provide one and only one primary purpose: expand
your search ability.  They seldom get improved upon (qv) and if they get
whacked by an Alien attack, I don't sweat it.

>    As we all know, the first base design is a mess.  I used to first get
>the top sub pen moved to between the lower two, and start work on an alien
>containment, wide area sonar and additional stores/living quarters.
>However, in retrospect, I am beginning
>to feel this is additional moving of the sub pen is work which can be left
>until later.

Agreed on both counts.  For Base 1, I usually just focus on adding the stuff
to get going in style: one or two extra labs, extra living quarters,
storage, WA Sonar, Alien containment:  pretty much in that order.

I also whack the technicians as useless, but I go that route one step
further: my very FIRST hiring and firing decision is with the aquanauts.  I
inspect my team, and IMMEDIATELY "fire" anyone with a Bravery of 20 or less.
I don't worry much about the other stuff at this point in the game, but I
won't put up with one of my aquanauts panicking and running the first time
he/she sees a frightened Sectoid fifty yards away.

REORGANIZING THE BASE LAYOUT: I've studied the XCOM strategies and I know
the difference an effective base layout makes, particularly with respect to
coming under a base attack.  But frankly, I personally can't justify the
costs (time, money, and loss of use) just to reorganize.  Hence, I recommend
saving the "perfect base layout" theory for future bases; leave the original
one alone, and consider altering it after you're better established, when
your other bases can take up the workload of the first one when it goes
offline for remodeling.

ARMING: with the initial weapons, I agree with you wholeheartedly about the
cannons.  Throw em away.  Whoever would chase down an Alien Sub with cannon
is just trying to piss the alien off until it surrenders from exhaustion.
My attack subs use weapon mixes: one DUP, one Ajax.  That way the Cuda has
both range and volume of firepower.  If you manage to not bring an alien sub
down with one sortie with this loadout, it needed two sorties anyway.

A NOTE ON `NAUTS: I prefer to house 12 Nauts at my base.  This keeps 8 on a
RTG status (ReadyToGo) for the usual mission, and leaves 4 in reserve.  I
use the reserve troops as replacement for injured Nauts.  If at all
possible, NEVER send an injured Naut out to fight.  If I'm responding to a
major event (terror mission, base attack, raid on an intact alien sub) I
send EVERY fit and able aquanaut; hopefully I can muster ten, if not the
full compliment of 12.

Of course, if YOUR base is under attack, EVERY TROOPER WHO CAN CARRY A GUN
(injured or not) throws in to defend.

As the game progresses, I increase my troop number to 16, mainly for
training purposes (qv).

>Equipment issues...
>
>   When it comes to equipment, I sell off the dye grenades, torpedo
launcher
>+ torpedo's and dart guns go as well, keeping only PDG's, grenades, Harpoon
>rifles, plus the heavy weapons, however the AP rounds get ditched
>immediately in favour of the area affect ammo - HE and Phosphor rounds.

Again, I agree totally.  The only weapons I initially keep are the Harp
rifles, autocannon, and grenades.
With the autocannon, I primarily use phosphor and HE rounds, but I keep a
few clips of AP handy for one intended purpose: "inside work", when the Naut
actually enters an alien sub.  The first time you fire off a burst of HE or
phosphor rounds when you're clearing out the inside of an alien sub and you
get a "friendly fire" casualty, you'll see what I mean.  That extra clip of
AP rounds minimizes collateral damage but still keeps the auto-toting
soldier useable.

Interestingly, my main use of phosphor rounds is for illuminating dark areas
in night engagements (which I try to avoid if at all possible; the aliens
see too well in the dark).  Since I try to avoid night engagements, I don't
keep illum grenades on hand.  Also, I feel that the benefits of using smoke
rounds are too few to bother with developing tactics for their use.  There's
usually plenty of terrain to provide cover.  If there ISN'T enough terrain,
that works both ways: the aliens have no cover, either.

Torpedo Launchers are a waste of time.  The weight of the weapon and it's
limited ammunition makes them NOT very use-efficient.

THERMAL TAZERS:  I don't make great use of them at the beginning of the
game; you've got more important things to worry about.  At best, I'll arm
the two ReconNauts with them, in case they get lucky and blunder on an
opportunity to ZAP an alien; when the time comes that I need to study a
particular live alien, I'll make the effort to "corner" one, and send the
ReconNauts in after it.  Only in the later stage of the game do I use TAZERs
regularly: when I develop my Aquanaut Training Program (qv).

HVY WEAPONS: Inspect each Naut; the ones with the high Strength/Stamina are
the ones you want to be your "heavies", carrying the Autocannons.  Try em
out.  If they still seem slow (due to inherently slow speed), put em back in
line as regulars.

SQUAD ORGANIZATION: My eight-man squads are usually organized as follows:
four "regulars" equipped with rifles and a grenade apiece; two ReconNauts
equipped with pistols, tazers and motion detectors; and two "heavies" with
Autocannon ONLY.  As the game develops, the equipment will upgrade,
naturally; and as the aquanauts develop better physical characteristics,
they'll carry a few "extra's", like an extra grenade or two.

Also: when I find a Naut who carries heavy weapons satisfactorily, I change
his name, by adding "(HW)" to the end of his existing name.  That way I can
tell at a glance that a given Naut is one of my weapon specialists.  The
same goes for ReconNauts "(R)" and Molecular specialists, who get a "(*)".

I don't bother with PDG's; invariably, I end up arming and deploying one
somewhere, and either forgetting about it and rediscovering it the hard way
(whoops!), or needing to get past it at a later date.

>Research...
>
>    Scientist primarily research the Medi Kit above all else.  First reason
>is the safety and survival of my operatives, and secondly, when I can
afford


I go straight for the Particle Sensor; followed by the MedKit, then gauss
weapons.  I have no problem with gauss weapons.  They may not provide much
cash return, but an aggressive Destroy-And-Salvage policy will keep you in
plenty of money.

Except for learning HOW to make them, I don't worry too much about building
or equipping with MedKits until such a time as you develop Armor for your
aquanauts.  Before armor, I'd guess that 85% of the time that a Naut gets
shot by an alien, he dies.  It's a cruel philosophy, but it's statistically
efficient.

After successfully researching and building armor (plastic or whatever),
your Nauts are actually at a point where they can usually take a shot and
live long enough to use a medkit.  It's at this point that I try to ensure
that EACH aquanaut is equipped with one!

>    As a side note, in the current game I play, I tried an experiment.  I
>didn't research sonic weaponry until I had funds to get a decent size
>research base up and running.  My observations suggest this forced the

This sounds like a VERY reasonable estimate.  I'd bet money that alien
advances in XCOM's 1 thru 3 are based on player advances (among other
things, like force size)...

>    In my current game, I researched all non-weapon alien technology and
>items; corpses etc.  I sold off all items, bar one of each item, except
>sonic pulsers and sonic weapon clips, which I kept around 10 of each

My own research method is less organized; I just cram as many labs and
scientists into a base as possible and go at it.  For big ticket items
(equipment, new subs, etc) I try to hammer the research with 30-50
scientists at once; the minor items (interrogations, corpses) usually get a
staff of ten or fifteen.

Is there a reason to keep more than one corpse/prisoner?  I've never been
aware of any benefit...

>Tech & building priorities...

No poignant agreements or disagreements, except to say that I seldom build
stuff solely to sell it.

>Squad deployment...

>    These early missions mean the gunners are primarily heavy weapons,
>supported by Harpoon riflemen.  The riflemen act as a kind of second scout
>for the squad.  If they spot something moving in their area, the autofire
is
>a very useful facility on the HydroJet Cannon, especially HE.  However, I
>have a fondness for Phosphor myself - maybe I'm a closet pyromaniac and
just
>don't know it! :-)

Ahh, tactics.  I LOVE discussing tactics...

The following applies to "normal" deployments (shot down subs, etc).

Remember my 8-man squads mentioned above?  The exit the Triton as follows,
when possible.  First, I use the buddy system.  A two man team will usually
save you if you run into any nasty surprises.  First pair out the door (when
possible) is a ReconNaut and a regular, headed for the right edge of the
area at a dead run.  Second pair is the same, headed for the LEFT edge.
IMPORTANT: the other four don't leave the sub yet; wait for the next turn.
On the NEXT turn, the teams that left continue to their edges.  Meanwhile,
back in the sub, pair up your remaining Nauts in Heavy/Regular teams (one
each), then deploy them closer to the center of the map but still on either
side.

You end up with a line of teams as follows, from right to left:
Recon/Regular, Hvy/Regular, Hvy/Regular, Recon/Regular.  When they're all in
position, advance them forward.  Deal with each "problem" as you encounter
it: hold up the rest of the line while the team that encountered the Hostile
takes em out.

There are, of course, exeptions to this rule.  One: if one of your teams
locates a hostile, and at the same time ANOTHER team locates one (or comes
under fire from an out of site location), you can't really have the second
team hanging around like a moving target while it's waiting for T1 to deal
with it's problem.

Secondly, if your squad comes under Molecular Control Attack, SCRAMBLE.  You
have to locate and neutralize that bad boy AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.  An alien
attacking with Molecular is unique in that he has the potential to inure
MANY of your Nauts: by controlling ONE and forcing him to attack the OTHERS.
This is unlike your raygun-toting alien who can only shoot at one Naut at a
time; and, if you think about it, it's unlike your grenade-toting alien,
also.  A grenadier can only whack a bunch of enemy units IF THEY'RE ALL
CLOSE ENOUGH TOGETHER (a classic tactical mistake).

Needless to say, aliens attacking with any form of mind control (in the
other XCom's, too) get immediate Top Priority in my tactical evaluation.

>    Terror missions can be really painful during the early stages of the
>game, especially if you are still using terran weapons.  These two part
>missions can see you without ammo, and in a worse case scenario, having to
>abandon the mission, due to no offensive capabilities.  Hence the Thermal
>Tazer being standard issue.  It may mean you get some casualties, but could
>mean the difference between completing the mission or risk continued alien

You go, boyo.  I usually avoid terror missions like the plague until I've
developed alien weapon research as a minimum.  Then, when I'm on Stage 1 of
a terror mission, I go out of my way to scrounge weaponry from dead aliens
before proceeding to Stage 2.


A NOTE ON TRAINING: In the later, more developed stages of the game when
money is plentiful, I build two more specialized bases: TRAFACs and MOLFACs.

TRAFACs, or TRAining FACilities, are where the brand-spanking new recruits
go to.  They are typically equipped with obsolete weapons and outdated armor
(which means Plastic if I've developed and deployed the Mag Ion Armor, or
NONE if Plastic is the best I've got.)  To be blunt, the Nauts who survive
training at the TRAFAC become the replacements for the casualties at my
regular bases.  So if, say, one of my Hvy Weapon Specs at ATLANTIC DEEP
becomes a KIA, I transfer a qualified replacement from SUBO TRAFAC to A-DEEP
and re-equip him with the good stuff.  TRAFACs also serve two other
purposes.  I use the TRAFAC squads to do the minor jobs (mopping up at
shot-down scout subs, etc) and also as capture teams.  When it becomes
absolutely imperative to capture live aliens, and the shoot-down site is a
minor craft (non-battleship) I send the TRAFAC team, each one equipped with
a tazer (in exception to my earlier statement).  In my games, it's not
unusual to have a TRAFAC team travelling halfway around the world to secure
a shoot-down site that a DETFAC far away intercepted!

In short, TRAFAC Nauts are expendable.  If they survive, you end up with
better qualified replacements than simply hiring em brand new.  Of
interesting note, I also station a HIGHLY qualified naut at each TRAFAC to
act as a Training Officer.  I do this for the morale benefit; a veteran naut
on-the-scene with the rookies will help keep them from fleeing in fear the
first time one gets a potshot fired at it.

My other special facility is a MOLFAC, or MOLecular FACility.  Aside from
maybe keeping a few Nauts around for security, or a sub pen so that the
facility can perform intercepts, the only thing I build there is Molecular
Control Training Facilities.  Then, each month, I rotate nauts out of other
facilities to the MOLFAC for training.

It's certainly more advantageous to simply have a molecular facility built
directly at your primary bases; the Nauts there can be trained/evaluated
while still "on duty".  But with facility space-available being at a premium
on your front-line bases, having a dedicated facility allows you to mass
train/evaluate your Nauts at higher volume and without the risk of wasting
your time, should one be KIA'd early in the "training month" (and thereby
wasting the slot he held in the training.)  As a minimum, I use the MOLFAC
for evaluating candidates, then send them back to their regular assignment.
If they show promise as Molecular Warriors, they get top dibs on further
education at their parent base.


There is a lot more that I could add, but for now, I'll end here; this
message is already way too long for reader comfort.

Cosmo

>Please feel free to comment and make suggestions, anything to improve my
>chances are welcome!
>


I'd like to take the opportunity; I often have what I consider to be good
ideas, but never seem to get around to putting them out...


>
>Bases & building...
>
>    Primary base location has become Midway Island, hence the name, 'Midway
>React'.  I kinda like it and its stuck.  It may not be the perfect placing


I have always dropped my first site in the middle of the Atlantic, right
between Europe and NorthAm; mainly because that puts your initial "service
area" in range of the higher-paying customers.  In other words, it seems
more cost effective to me.  Like yourself, I'm also hung on naming
conventions: my first base usually gets named ATLANTIC DEEP, the others
named similarly (YELLOW DEEP in the Yellow Sea off of China, for example).

Another consideration: later in the game when money is reasonably available,
I build "mini-bases" that consist of only sonar facilities, and possibly a
sub pen with a dedicated interceptor.  I call these DETFAC's (DETection
FACility); since I usually stick one at the North Pole, that base gets named
ARCTIC DETFAC.  These bases provide one and only one primary purpose: expand
your search ability.  They seldom get improved upon (qv) and if they get
whacked by an Alien attack, I don't sweat it.

 >    As we all know, the first base design is a mess.  I used to first get
>the top sub pen moved to between the lower two, and start work on an alien
>containment, wide area sonar and additional stores/living quarters.
>However, in retrospect, I am beginning
>to feel this is additional moving of the sub pen is work which can be left
>until later.


Agreed on both counts.  For Base 1, I usually just focus on adding the stuff
to get going in style: one or two extra labs, extra living quarters,
storage, WA Sonar, Alien containment:  pretty much in that order.

I also whack the technicians as useless, but I go that route one step
further: my very FIRST hiring and firing decision is with the aquanauts.  I
inspect my team, and IMMEDIATELY "fire" anyone with a Bravery of 20 or less.
I don't worry much about the other stuff at this point in the game, but I
won't put up with one of my aquanauts panicking and running the first time
he/she sees a frightened Sectoid fifty yards away.

REORGANIZING THE BASE LAYOUT: I've studied the XCOM strategies and I know
the difference an effective base layout makes, particularly with respect to
coming under a base attack.  But frankly, I personally can't justify the
costs (time, money, and loss of use) just to reorganize.  Hence, I recommend
saving the "perfect base layout" theory for future bases; leave the original
one alone, and consider altering it after you're better established, when
your other bases can take up the workload of the first one when it goes
offline for remodeling.

ARMING: with the initial weapons, I agree with you wholeheartedly about the
cannons.  Throw em away.  Whoever would chase down an Alien Sub with cannon
is just trying to piss the alien off until it surrenders from exhaustion.
My attack subs use weapon mixes: one DUP, one Ajax.  That way the Cuda has
both range and volume of firepower.  If you manage to not bring an alien sub
down with one sortie with this loadout, it needed two sorties anyway.

A NOTE ON `NAUTS: I prefer to house 12 Nauts at my base.  This keeps 8 on a
RTG status (ReadyToGo) for the usual mission, and leaves 4 in reserve.  I
use the reserve troops as replacement for injured Nauts.  If at all
possible, NEVER send an injured Naut out to fight.  If I'm responding to a
major event (terror mission, base attack, raid on an intact alien sub) I
send EVERY fit and able aquanaut; hopefully I can muster ten, if not the
full compliment of 12.

Of course, if YOUR base is under attack, EVERY TROOPER WHO CAN CARRY A GUN
(injured or not) throws in to defend.

As the game progresses, I increase my troop number to 16, mainly for
training purposes (qv).

>Equipment issues...
>
>   When it comes to equipment, I sell off the dye grenades, torpedo
launcher
>+ torpedo's and dart guns go as well, keeping only PDG's, grenades, Harpoon
>rifles, plus the heavy weapons, however the AP rounds get ditched
>immediately in favour of the area affect ammo - HE and Phosphor rounds.


Again, I agree totally.  The only weapons I initially keep are the Harp
rifles, autocannon, and grenades.
With the autocannon, I primarily use phosphor and HE rounds, but I keep a
few clips of AP handy for one intended purpose: "inside work", when the Naut
actually enters an alien sub.  The first time you fire off a burst of HE or
phosphor rounds when you're clearing out the inside of an alien sub and you
get a "friendly fire" casualty, you'll see what I mean.  That extra clip of
AP rounds minimizes collateral damage but still keeps the auto-toting
soldier useable.

Interestingly, my main use of phosphor rounds is for illuminating dark areas
in night engagements (which I try to avoid if at all possible; the aliens
see too well in the dark).  Since I try to avoid night engagements, I don't
keep illum grenades on hand.  Also, I feel that the benefits of using smoke
rounds are too few to bother with developing tactics for their use.  There's
usually plenty of terrain to provide cover.  If there ISN'T enough terrain,
that works both ways: the aliens have no cover, either.

Torpedo Launchers are a waste of time.  The weight of the weapon and it's
limited ammunition makes them NOT very use-efficient.

THERMAL TAZERS:  I don't make great use of them at the beginning of the
game; you've got more important things to worry about.  At best, I'll arm
the two ReconNauts with them, in case they get lucky and blunder on an
opportunity to ZAP an alien; when the time comes that I need to study a
particular live alien, I'll make the effort to "corner" one, and send the
ReconNauts in after it.  Only in the later stage of the game do I use TAZERs
regularly: when I develop my Aquanaut Training Program (qv).

HVY WEAPONS: Inspect each Naut; the ones with the high Strength/Stamina are
the ones you want to be your "heavies", carrying the Autocannons.  Try em
out.  If they still seem slow (due to inherently slow speed), put em back in
line as regulars.

SQUAD ORGANIZATION: My eight-man squads are usually organized as follows:
four "regulars" equipped with rifles and a grenade apiece; two ReconNauts
equipped with pistols, tazers and motion detectors; and two "heavies" with
Autocannon ONLY.  As the game develops, the equipment will upgrade,
naturally; and as the aquanauts develop better physical characteristics,
they'll carry a few "extra's", like an extra grenade or two.

Also: when I find a Naut who carries heavy weapons satisfactorily, I change
his name, by adding "(HW)" to the end of his existing name.  That way I can
tell at a glance that a given Naut is one of my weapon specialists.  The
same goes for ReconNauts "(R)" and Molecular specialists, who get a "(*)".

I don't bother with PDG's; invariably, I end up arming and deploying one
somewhere, and either forgetting about it and rediscovering it the hard way
(whoops!), or needing to get past it at a later date.

>Research...
>
>    Scientist primarily research the Medi Kit above all else.  First reason
>is the safety and survival of my operatives, and secondly, when I can
afford


I go straight for the Particle Sensor; followed by the MedKit, then gauss
weapons.  I have no problem with gauss weapons.  They may not provide much
cash return, but an aggressive Destroy-And-Salvage policy will keep you in
plenty of money.

Except for learning HOW to make them, I don't worry too much about building
or equipping with MedKits until such a time as you develop Armor for your
aquanauts.  Before armor, I'd guess that 85% of the time that a Naut gets
shot by an alien, he dies.  It's a cruel philosophy, but it's statistically
efficient.

After successfully researching and building armor (plastic or whatever),
your Nauts are actually at a point where they can usually take a shot and
live long enough to use a medkit.  It's at this point that I try to ensure
that EACH aquanaut is equipped with one!

>    As a side note, in the current game I play, I tried an experiment.  I
>didn't research sonic weaponry until I had funds to get a decent size
>research base up and running.  My observations suggest this forced the


This sounds like a VERY reasonable estimate.  I'd bet money that alien
advances in XCOM's 1 thru 3 are based on player advances (among other
things, like force size)...

>    In my current game, I researched all non-weapon alien technology and
>items; corpses etc.  I sold off all items, bar one of each item, except
>sonic pulsers and sonic weapon clips, which I kept around 10 of each


My own research method is less organized; I just cram as many labs and
scientists into a base as possible and go at it.  For big ticket items
(equipment, new subs, etc) I try to hammer the research with 30-50
scientists at once; the minor items (interrogations, corpses) usually get a
staff of ten or fifteen.

Is there a reason to keep more than one corpse/prisoner?  I've never been
aware of any benefit...

>Tech & building priorities...


No poignant agreements or disagreements, except to say that I seldom build
stuff solely to sell it.

>Squad deployment...


>    These early missions mean the gunners are primarily heavy weapons,
>supported by Harpoon riflemen.  The riflemen act as a kind of second scout
>for the squad.  If they spot something moving in their area, the autofire
is
>a very useful facility on the HydroJet Cannon, especially HE.  However, I
>have a fondness for Phosphor myself - maybe I'm a closet pyromaniac and
just
>don't know it! :-)


Ahh, tactics.  I LOVE discussing tactics...

The following applies to "normal" deployments (shot down subs, etc).

Remember my 8-man squads mentioned above?  The exit the Triton as follows,
when possible.  First, I use the buddy system.  A two man team will usually
save you if you run into any nasty surprises.  First pair out the door (when
possible) is a ReconNaut and a regular, headed for the right edge of the
area at a dead run.  Second pair is the same, headed for the LEFT edge.
IMPORTANT: the other four don't leave the sub yet; wait for the next turn.
On the NEXT turn, the teams that left continue to their edges.  Meanwhile,
back in the sub, pair up your remaining Nauts in Heavy/Regular teams (one
each), then deploy them closer to the center of the map but still on either
side.

You end up with a line of teams as follows, from right to left:
Recon/Regular, Hvy/Regular, Hvy/Regular, Recon/Regular.  When they're all in
position, advance them forward.  Deal with each "problem" as you encounter
it: hold up the rest of the line while the team that encountered the Hostile
takes em out.

There are, of course, exeptions to this rule.  One: if one of your teams
locates a hostile, and at the same time ANOTHER team locates one (or comes
under fire from an out of site location), you can't really have the second
team hanging around like a moving target while it's waiting for T1 to deal
with it's problem.

Secondly, if your squad comes under Molecular Control Attack, SCRAMBLE.  You
have to locate and neutralize that bad boy AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.  An alien
attacking with Molecular is unique in that he has the potential to inure
MANY of your Nauts: by controlling ONE and forcing him to attack the OTHERS.
This is unlike your raygun-toting alien who can only shoot at one Naut at a
time; and, if you think about it, it's unlike your grenade-toting alien,
also.  A grenadier can only whack a bunch of enemy units IF THEY'RE ALL
CLOSE ENOUGH TOGETHER.

Needless to say, aliens attacking with any form of mind control (as in the
other XCom's, too) get Top Priority in my tactical evaluation.

>    Terror missions can be really painful during the early stages of the
>game, especially if you are still using terran weapons.  These two part
>missions can see you without ammo, and in a worse case scenario, having to
>abandon the mission, due to no offensive capabilities.  Hence the Thermal
>Tazer being standard issue.  It may mean you get some casualties, but could
>mean the difference between completing the mission or risk continued alien


You go, boyo.  I usually avoid terror missions like the plague until I've
developed alien weapon research as a minimum.  Then, when I'm on Stage 1 of
a terror mission, I go out of my way to scrounge weaponry from dead aliens
before proceeding to Stage 2.

There is a lot more that I could add, but for now, I'll end here; this
message is already way too long for reader comfort.

Cosmo

Cosmo wrote...

I'd like to take the opportunity; I often have what I consider to be good
ideas, but never seem to get around to putting them out...

Bases & building...


>I have always dropped my first site in the middle of the Atlantic, right
>between Europe and NorthAm; mainly because that puts your initial "service
>area" in range of the higher-paying customers.  In other words, it seems
>more cost effective to me.  Like yourself, I'm also hung on naming
>conventions: my first base usually gets named ATLANTIC DEEP, the others
>named similarly (YELLOW DEEP in the Yellow Sea off of China, for example).


I understand the logic, but ultimately, this seems likely to be flawed,
based on what I have read.  We share similar philosophies though, it seems.

    Europe, Asia, Africa and Russia all fall under one huge area.
Therefore, wouldn't it be more logical to set up a base which can protect
the majority of funding nations?  Also, as the Med. Sea is the most
expensive area to set up a base - $1m!, it was mentioned this would be an
ideal site to set up base initially, since it cuts costs, for one month at
least, as well as allowing a protection zone for a large number of funding
nations.  I have moved 'Midway React' to the Med in my new game, to figure
how this balances out - still to early to make any worthwhile comments on
though.

    As the US is so big, you would need at least a couple of bases - East
and West coasts to be effective, not to mention both North America and
South - Mexico, Brazil etc.  I would imagine this would be a case of placing
your second and third bases in these areas - Gulf of Mexico and probably
somewhere near Hawai [I didn't spell that correctly, sorry!]

    Anyway, it seems likely we have both been 'stuck' in a set pattern which
could ultimately hamper progress, even though we have failed to recognise
it.  I've decided to move my initial base to the Med, based on the start up
costs and the number of funding nations, which I _hope_ will offer a better
return in the long run.

>Another consideration: later in the game when money is reasonably
available,
>I build "mini-bases" that consist of only sonar facilities, and possibly a
>sub pen with a dedicated interceptor.  I call these DETFAC's (DETection
>FACility); since I usually stick one at the North Pole, that base gets
named
>ARCTIC DETFAC.  These bases provide one and only one primary purpose:
expand
>your search ability.  They seldom get improved upon (qv) and if they get
>whacked by an Alien attack, I don't sweat it.


    I've never been one on setting up these 'listening posts', but after
reading various posts and the USG, I am beginning to see the obvious
benefits.  My bases have been a) Primary HQ b) Research facility c)
Manufacturing facility d) Secondary strike bases.

I've been playing with only one major Naut base, which has led to missed
oportunities with terror sites.  My conclusions will now lead to two, at
least Naut bases for 'hot spots' which occur at the beginning [usually] of
the month. I. E. terror sites usually spring up after the monthly report
from the funding council.

For the new game I'm playing, I'm going to be moving R&D and manufacturing
to the poles, with the hope that this will keep them out of harms way, while
my other bases deal with the alien incursion.  Whether this will work
remains to be seen...

>>    As we all know, the first base design is a mess.

>Agreed on both counts.  For Base 1, I usually just focus on adding the
stuff
>to get going in style: one or two extra labs, extra living quarters,
>storage, WA Sonar, Alien containment:  pretty much in that order.


>I also whack the technicians as useless, but I go that route one step
>further: my very FIRST hiring and firing decision is with the aquanauts.  I
>inspect my team, and IMMEDIATELY "fire" anyone with a Bravery of 20 or
less.
>I don't worry much about the other stuff at this point in the game, but I
>won't put up with one of my aquanauts panicking and running the first time
>he/she sees a frightened Sectoid fifty yards away.


I understand your point, but the way I play it, those Nauts are going to be
cannon fodder, unfortunately, so it means I either play it safe [reload the
mission every time a naut is killed], or send out the scouts and pray that I
can outwit the aliens during these early missions, which is highly likely
[depending on the difficulty setting, naturally!]

>REORGANIZING THE BASE LAYOUT: I've studied the XCOM strategies and I know
>the difference an effective base layout makes, particularly with respect to
>coming under a base attack.  But frankly, I personally can't justify the
>costs (time, money, and loss of use) just to reorganize.  Hence, I
recommend
>saving the "perfect base layout" theory for future bases; leave the
original
>one alone, and consider altering it after you're better established, when
>your other bases can take up the workload of the first one when it goes
>offline for remodeling.


Yeah, I have to agree, I am sceptical about major reorganisation of this
initial base.  From what I remember from previous games, the aliens _don't_
appear all over the base, irrespective of what has been said about this.
They still seem to congregate in the airlock and sub pens.  Even so, I tend
to build bases now with a stores attatched to the airlock, as this means
additional equipment is alway nearby, should things go awry.  Therefore, new
bases are built with an airlock in the middle, sub pen one side and stores
the other, branching off as needed from there.  Depending on base
requirements means this can be changed - as in either R&D, or manufacturing
bases, which will not have a sub pen and will be built with the task at
hand.

>ARMING: with the initial weapons, I agree with you wholeheartedly about the
>cannons.  Throw em away.  Whoever would chase down an Alien Sub with cannon
>is just trying to piss the alien off until it surrenders from exhaustion.
>My attack subs use weapon mixes: one DUP, one Ajax.  That way the Cuda has
>both range and volume of firepower.  If you manage to not bring an alien
sub
>down with one sortie with this loadout, it needed two sorties anyway.


In the past, I have kept one sub with only cannons.  This was, in retrospect
a poor decision.  It has limited usage, due to the weapons and the 'Cuda
could be better employed as an offensive craft.  Ultimately, its down to us,
but I don't use this strategy any more, its not effective IMHO.

>A NOTE ON `NAUTS: I prefer to house 12 Nauts at my base.  This keeps 8 on a
>RTG status (ReadyToGo) for the usual mission, and leaves 4 in reserve.  I
>use the reserve troops as replacement for injured Nauts.  If at all
>possible, NEVER send an injured Naut out to fight.  If I'm responding to a
>major event (terror mission, base attack, raid on an intact alien sub) I
>send EVERY fit and able aquanaut; hopefully I can muster ten, if not the
>full compliment of 12.
>
>Of course, if YOUR base is under attack, EVERY TROOPER WHO CAN CARRY A GUN
>(injured or not) throws in to defend.
>
>As the game progresses, I increase my troop number to 16, mainly for
>training purposes (qv).


I also go with 12 nauts, irrespective of the mission.  If there are nauts
who have low bravery during early missions, they are less likely to come
under MC attack, due to the way the game monitors your own progress.  They
are less likely to come under MC attacks, which give you the advantage, even
though they are pretty useless in all fairness.  It takes a couple of
missions to figure out who's of any worth initially.  I don't sack anyone
during the first month, if ever.  Those who are runts get a basic kit -
PDG's, Bang Stick and Medi Kit.  The reason being - If they come under MC
control, they don't start lobbing damned grenades into my squad. [the MC
control only appears to work with projectile weapons and alien technology:
it doesn't seem to like to play with PDG's, which ultimately means, if and
when I get control back over my trooper, they maybe freaked out, but I also
have the chance I can use them for at least some of the mission].  Hiring
and firing only adds to the cost of start up, which during the early months
is pretty critical.

>>Equipment issues...


I had not considered the AP ammo to be of any use - your comments give me a
new way of thinking about this - thanks!!!!

I also use the Phosphor rounds for night work, if needed.  Plus they keep
Gillmen and Aquanoids pretty upset when they are on fire [ with the added
bonus of lighting the surrounding area ;-) ]


>THERMAL TAZERS:  I don't make great use of them at the beginning of the
>game; you've got more important things to worry about.  At best, I'll arm
>the two ReconNauts with them, in case they get lucky and blunder on an
>opportunity to ZAP an alien; when the time comes that I need to study a
>particular live alien, I'll make the effort to "corner" one, and send the
>ReconNauts in after it.  Only in the later stage of the game do I use
TAZERs
>regularly: when I develop my Aquanaut Training Program (qv).


    I can't recommend the Bang Stick enough!  I _never_ used to bother with
them, but since I reinstalled and started playing again, I have been more
experimental with my games.  I recommend you try sticking with the Tazer, as
it does not require ammo, costs nothing [bar initial purchase] and is a one
handed weapon - every trooper gets one of these toys as they are so useful.


>
>SQUAD ORGANIZATION

The naming issue is roughly what I have also done - a logical and useful
point!

PDG's - Don't under estimate the usefulness of them!  Terror sites are
especially fraught with unexpected surprises which can eliminate your squad
when you least expect it.  For instance, if you spot something moving during
the alien movement phase, but have no area effect weapons to take out the
rough area it was spotted in, at least you have PDG's to use as back up and
restricting the alien's movement [which is a moot point, as they always
appear to move where ever they want, no matter if a PDG has landed next to
them :-)]  I don't go anywhere without them.  They could mean the difference
between life and death, especially with those nauts who are coming under MC
attack!


>>Research...


I've never really seen a use for the Sensor - I spend my turns moving my
units around, so they always show up as huge blobs on the screen.  The way I
see it, that trooper could be using his TU's moving and scouting.  However,
I am considering whether they will be useful on terror sites...  I have yet
to come up with an argument to swing the balance in favour of the sensor
though.

Gauss tech is, imho, a waste of time.  You have to research it, then
manufacture the ammo.  Considering the damage compared the the Terran HVY
weapons, it just doesn't seem worth the effort.  I could use my techs to
produce Medi Kits which I can use and also sell, plus if I use medi kits,
they get replenished after every mission - a never ending fountain of
healing, compared to the limited capacity of Gauss technology.  I can buy
ammo which has more stopping power for the HydroJet and Gas Cannon - the
HydroJet has auto fire _and_ area effect, so it is more useful to me,squad
and XCOM in the long run.


>My own research method is less organized...

Each to their own, but be aware of the following;

Each species of alien has various ranks - technicians, squad leaders,
medics, navigators and commanders.  However, only Lobstermen, Gillmen,
Aquanoids and Tasoths will have all of the above.  In fact, its only the
Lobstermen which count in any real significance above all else.  Tasoths are
useful due to the MC tech, but I believe you can gain this tech by capturing
a live terrorist.  I can't rightly recall if this is true though, so correct
me if I am wrong.
    Therefore, it makes sense to capture live aliens and keep them for
interrogation.  I am now employing a tactic in which I actively kill any
unconscious soldiers of any race, due to a bug in the game which limits the
amount of live aliens you can keep, no matter how many containment pods you
build.  Even then, I am now monitoring how many of each rank I will keep of
each alien type, to cut down the chances of screwing up potential research
opportunities.
    As for corpses, once researched, ditch the lot of them, they serve no
useful purpose other than gaining a small sum on the open market.

>>Tech & building priorities...

>No poignant agreements or disagreements, except to say that I seldom build
>stuff solely to sell it.


Still, I would recommend building the Craft Gas Cannon as a means for
additional funds, if your research has met with a dead end for the time
being.  Those technicians can pay for themselves by building the CGC until
another research opportunity presents itself.  Heck, that additional cash
can't hurt :-)

>>Squad deployment...

>Ahh, tactics.  I LOVE discussing tactics...

>The following applies to "normal" deployments (shot down subs, etc).
>
>Remember my 8-man squads mentioned above?  The exit the Triton as follows,
>when possible.  First, I use the buddy system.  A two man team will usually
>save you if you run into any nasty surprises.  First pair out the door
(when
>possible) is a ReconNaut and a regular, headed for the right edge of the
>area at a dead run.  Second pair is the same, headed for the LEFT edge.
>IMPORTANT: the other four don't leave the sub yet; wait for the next turn.
>On the NEXT turn, the teams that left continue to their edges.  Meanwhile,
>back in the sub, pair up your remaining Nauts in Heavy/Regular teams (one
>each), then deploy them closer to the center of the map but still on either
>side.


Hmm... I have opted for a high reaction gunner and scout mix for now.  The
door opens and the first two nauts do a left and right scan.  Next, I send
out one square,the naut with the highest reaction rate.  If they can see
anything from this vantage point, they can do so on the spot, again looking
up and down from their position.  Next turn, provided they have not
attracted any fire/grenades, I send out a scout to the nearest available
cover, which _appears_ to offer the best protection.  This is repeated with
the next two operatives - high rate reaction and a scout.  The gunners
maintain position either side of the door, while the scouts head for
opposite directions, if viable.  This situation is maintained until I have a
decent view of the local area.  The nearest cover is located and secured
with my scouts, then my gunners move to that position.  Next I move my
'secondary/support' gunners into position around the entrance to the Triton.
Depending on any spot hidden movement during the early turns, I move my
troops to cover, while the scouts move ever outwards.  In the meantime, I
have up to two grenadiers lurking two squares away from the sub entrance,
just in case of spotting an alien which cannot be dealt with by direct fire,
or if my operatives miss during their turn.  If this is the case, the
grenadiers prime and lob the grenades in the area or as near to the hostile
as possible.  This appears to act as a deterent if not incurring any forseen
damage to the hostile.
    Even so, this plan has met with incidents when every attempt at taking
out hostiles has met with poor performance from my nauts and ended with
fatalities... Each mission is unique, but basic and common sense should be
applied during deployment - just remember a cluster of nauts means one
grenade...

>Secondly, if your squad comes under Molecular Control Attack, SCRAMBLE.

See my reply regarding a standard basic kit for nauts, especially those who
have been prone to MC attacks - PDG's are useful in this situation.  I now
sack any naut who comes under frequent MC attack, until I can establish
their stats with the MC lab.  Those who are weak go, irrespective of rank.


>
>>    Terror missions can be really painful during the early stages of the
>>game, especially if you are still using terran weapons.  These two part
>>missions can see you without ammo, and in a worse case scenario, having to
>>abandon the mission, due to no offensive capabilities.  Hence the Thermal
>>Tazer being standard issue.  It may mean you get some casualties, but
could
>>mean the difference between completing the mission or risk continued alien
>
>You go, boyo.  I usually avoid terror missions like the plague until I've
>developed alien weapon research as a minimum.  Then, when I'm on Stage 1 of
>a terror mission, I go out of my way to scrounge weaponry from dead aliens
>before proceeding to Stage 2.

>A NOTE ON TRAINING:


>In short, TRAFAC Nauts are expendable.  If they survive, you end up with
>better qualified replacements than simply hiring em brand new.  Of
>interesting note, I also station a HIGHLY qualified naut at each TRAFAC to
>act as a Training Officer.  I do this for the morale benefit; a veteran
naut
>on-the-scene with the rookies will help keep them from fleeing in fear the
>first time one gets a potshot fired at it.


    I like this idea and have used a similar but less focussed approach - I
am going to use this in my current game - Thanks for the idea!!!
>
>My other special facility is a MOLFAC

I understand your point, but does it not mean any _good_ nauts are out of
action for a month while in training?  Don't you miss the good nauts while
they are out of the picture???

End of response - further comments follow:

Excellent post, thanks a lot.  It's taught me to rethink my approach and I
am going to implement some of the ideas you mentioned.  Please keep adding
to the thread Cosmo, I've really enjoyed reading how you approach the game.

Thanks

Detonate

Could you send me the whole list so I can put it in the strategy section of my
site at http://www.angelfire.com/la/wakko98
if so e-mail me at pmatherne@hotmail
please feel free to include any copyright information you wish.

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp   Create Your Own Free Member Forum

I spoke to Microprose UK on Wednesday, since they are a local phone call away and within spitting distance of where I live.  They say both UFO & TFTD are on their powerplay label and you should be able to order it from 'good' gaming stores.  That is, of course, if you know of any 'good' gaming stores :-)

Try Special Reserve, or Gameplay through mail order.  Other than that, it's down to the nearest game store with any clout!  Games exchange, if you know of a local store, may stock it, but don't hold your breath.

HTH

Detonate

Not sure who you're talking to here...

Are you asking for a list of tips, a FAQ or what?  Bear in mind what I and
others have written so far are based on personal experience, as well as
information gleaned from different sources.  See my latest posting for some
information which may be interesting....

Detonate

wak...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
<6tccg3$4ib$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>Could you send me the whole list so I can put it in the strategy section of
my
>site at http://www.angelfire.com/la/wakko98
>if so e-mail me at pmatherne@hotmail
>please feel free to include any copyright information you wish.
>
>-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
>http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp   Create Your Own Free Member Forum