does killing gives experience?
- Thread starter kstanb
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
All pilots get the same base XP which is increased by mission difficulty.
So on the easiest mission everyone will get 400 XP (I think that's what the base was). On harder ones you might end up with 2000 XP each.
But individual kills and such don't matter.
So on the easiest mission everyone will get 400 XP (I think that's what the base was). On harder ones you might end up with 2000 XP each.
But individual kills and such don't matter.
It absolutely was. Incentivizing non-shooting actions (spotting, evasion, tanking, etc.) means that you're not having to grind out kills on all your mechwarriors just to keep them advancing.
I think it was. I don't like having to pass on a turn because another character really needs the arbitrary EXP awarded by delivering the killing blow. Kinda silly if one person can deliver 99% of the damage and someone else gets the last 1% but gets all the credit.
Also, if it wasn't this way your spotters and sensor lockers would get left in the dust.
Yes. A thousand times yes.
Otherwise objective missions like escort, recovery, and assassination would turn into regular deathmatch as you tried to maximize EXP. Players who played the objective like a good mercenary would be punished with less experience.
You are there on the planet to do a mission. You do the mission as best you can, and get EXP for it. If you want to be more efficient at getting EXP, then you get more efficient at doing the missions. That's how it should be!
I think so. That way pilots can be focused on roles and not kill farming. My scouts w/sensor lock should not lose out by spotting targets for the missile boats.
Last edited:
Yeah, I always prefer fully shared XP over per kill stuff. You're supposed to be working as a team, not having your group each try to kill steal each other for gains.
If it were per kill, then you'd be constantly trying to set up kill shots with specific characters, and your more support oriented characters (ones focusing on scanning and scoring knockdowns) would fall far behind. Plus it never makes sense for one person to do that last tick of damage and suddenly get all the reward for it.
Some games do use a percentage based system. So if one person does 90% of the damage and another does the last 10%, the XP gained is split in the same manner. But that still leads to massive imbalance between party members. You'll have the damage dealers shooting up levels while the tanks and healers get nothing. That's perhaps "realistic" (as if gaming is realistic to begin with), but it's not good for gameplay value.
If it were per kill, then you'd be constantly trying to set up kill shots with specific characters, and your more support oriented characters (ones focusing on scanning and scoring knockdowns) would fall far behind. Plus it never makes sense for one person to do that last tick of damage and suddenly get all the reward for it.
Some games do use a percentage based system. So if one person does 90% of the damage and another does the last 10%, the XP gained is split in the same manner. But that still leads to massive imbalance between party members. You'll have the damage dealers shooting up levels while the tanks and healers get nothing. That's perhaps "realistic" (as if gaming is realistic to begin with), but it's not good for gameplay value.
Yes, unless there is a way to reward recon pilots (how, I cannot think about), it is better to have a collective reward
Surprised to see that. Wrong decison in view- Too simple.
In my opinion, Mechwarriors should get an overall pool of experience for a mission, but if one Pilot kills 3 Mechs by himself (as one did in my last misson), he should receive some extra experience for that. Anyone who helped would receive `assistance` experience which would be a little less.
In my opinion, Mechwarriors should get an overall pool of experience for a mission, but if one Pilot kills 3 Mechs by himself (as one did in my last misson), he should receive some extra experience for that. Anyone who helped would receive `assistance` experience which would be a little less.
Could have all kinds of rewards giving various amounts of EXP, some for assisting actions, some for direct combat actions, etc. It would require a lot of testing to get the balance right, and would add very little to the game.
In the end, your goal is to get the mission done. It doesn't matter if your mechwarrior soloed 3 mechs on a recovery mission if he had to delay the extraction while it happened - better to reward the player for playing the objective.
Rewarding the player for seeking out combat whenever possible is the opposite of what a merc company should be rewarded for. There's already the salvage mechanic for that.
In this scenario, my sniper pilot, who sits in the back and shoots AC rounds into downed mechs, would gain more experience than the front-line units that put that mech on the ground to begin with. That's silly.
I could see offering varying amounts of bonus experience for certain accomplishments, like, say a headshot kill on a heavy or assault, a one-shot kill on a light, a sensor lock that results in a same-turn kill, etc.
Even this would still reward the player for seeking out combat where it wasn't needed.
Well, if you've played a game like the XCOM reboot where it's per-soldier, you'll see how much this leads to micro-managing fresh recruits to get them enough kills. That can be annoying.
It doesn't make sense to put the least experienced grunt with the poorest initial aim and survivability up front, to get the most kills. You can lose a lot of recruits that way. It can also lead to time-wasting and dangerous maneuvers like trying to hold back the last killing shot on an enemy unit, so the scrub can get the final shot for the XP.
I much prefer this system where it's considered squad-level XP just to be in combat together, and rewarding support efforts like scouting.
Who did more to "kill" the enemy mech? The guy who stripped off the armor and half the internal structure or the guy who one laser finished the mech off?
Look. I like it realistic. The guy who does the most work naturally gains the most experience. This accounts for real life too. Simply manage your men if you want to spread that about. Heck, you have to do that to some extent if you have more than 4 Mechwarriors.
This has worked fine for multiple games, especially realism-orientated ones and Xcom does it fine.
I also like seeing the people who do the most work get the greatest rewards. Stop being so negative, people. Be more positive.
This has worked fine for multiple games, especially realism-orientated ones and Xcom does it fine.
I also like seeing the people who do the most work get the greatest rewards. Stop being so negative, people. Be more positive.
It's not being negative to point out that micro-managing recruits, so they get enough XP, requires more time and effort. And this game is already getting flack for the pacing of the missions.
The technical issues slowing things down might be improved, but I don't think the missions need to take more turns than they do now. And they would, if you had to micro your recruits for XP.
The technical issues slowing things down might be improved, but I don't think the missions need to take more turns than they do now. And they would, if you had to micro your recruits for XP.
How do you define most work? just who killed more?
imagine your recon pilot, in a small vulnerable mech, sensor locking and running/ dodging all the bullets and getting hit occasionally., while there is some dude parked far away and just shooting missiles and long range guns.. who worked the most?