How does BB compare to XCOM 2 in terms of strategy?

[full stamina gaming]

I got BB in the recent sale and played just under 2 hours of it. It seemed fun so far, but it wasn't enough to really get a feel for the game since the low level bros I was using had pretty much no skills and combat was extremely simple.

How does BB hold up in terms of strategy (in combat) against XCOM 2? Is it comparable at all? I have several hundred hours and loved the variety of builds and squad compositions in it and the different kinds of situations you have to respond to. Does BB grow meaningfully in complexity? Do bros get interesting skills later on? I'm very short on money so I'd like to make the most informed purchase possible. Thank you in advance ♥

[Uncle Khai]

You value that hill! You accept engaged them open area then what result do you expect? You fail in noob trap spearwall! And now you said you don’t do any mistakes? -_- really

Like what you said I can know you play the lone wolf origin! Recruit 2 bros, 3 vs 7 right? Do you can win without loss? I say YES! Why don’t bait them? Separate troops? You wear armor with big sword not mean you can just like that head on them! If you have 1 bro can trade 3 thugs that a huge win! run couple turn to buy time for lone wolf kill some! Why do you not think like that? play like AI, death like AI

[Uncle Khai]

The guy Random99 really don’t know what talking about! you can beat BB with 1 build type or any type you want for every bro you want to any kind of enemy! But why we don’t do it? Because It boring! 12 mansplitter, 12 duelist, 12 2h mace, 12 hyrid build… bla bla bla

About xcom2, never use same class except for some specific mission(ex: counter chosen), because you want flexible ability and tools you can play each turn!

Now talk about mission/contract! Who said they both equal? You lose a contract fine, do another, not the end of the world! Mission Xcom 2 different, you lose mean campaign be fk up! When you turn on dark event permanent the thing even more intense!

Bb don’t have time pressure! Only time grind! And it grind the loop a lot, xcom 2 we have time mission pressure and time campaign avatar projects! If you are truly veteran player xcom you will know we always put time to reach to the limit! Make game always in situations win/lose in one moment! When You do a wrong move mean game over!

What I write here not mean I say BB bad compare to Xcom! It not just reach to that level, the truly feeling pressure of tactic game! Bb is a rare gem! It is different and still can development more after 7 years

[MagnusGrey]

Its ok if someone likes a game more than you do you know.

[Santo]

I disagree in that BB has less tools that XCOM, IMHO it's completely the opposite: in XCOM you have weapon tiers, but you don't have to ponder what weapons to use depending on the enemy. Heavy soldier gets heavy weapon, assault gets shotgun, sniper gets sniper rifle, the rest regular rifles, that's all.

Not taking differences in the campaign side of things into account because OP specifically says he refers to combat. My take would be that the main difference is that XCOM missions feel like an adventure: there's usually a setup of exploration and positioning, then the actual battles, because there are several fights per mission. How you handle exploration to uncover enemies is important -- if you are too separated, or advancing carelessly without good cover, or without careful positioning of your troops, you are screwed. Battle Brothers battles are more streamlined in that sense: it's almost always one party facing the other in a (more or less) open field. The tactical depth is not so much in interacting with the battlefield than in choosing carefully your gear, positioning your troops in just one movement or two, and then identifying the main threats and managing risks and chances while you deal with them.

That said, BB is way more brutal than XCOM. There is more room for error in XCOM, at least in my experience (and its rng is actually skewed, if just a little bit, in the player's favor). Flashy skills can get you out of a tight spot and if you do things right the most dangerous enemies will not even have a chance to shoot you.

[99Random]

引用自 Uncle Khai：

The guy Random99 really don’t know what talking about! you can beat BB with 1 build type or any type you want for every bro you want to any kind of enemy! But why we don’t do it? Because It boring! 12 mansplitter, 12 duelist, 12 2h mace, 12 hyrid build… bla bla bla

About xcom2, never use same class except for some specific mission(ex: counter chosen), because you want flexible ability and tools you can play each turn!

Now talk about mission/contract! Who said they both equal? You lose a contract fine, do another, not the end of the world! Mission Xcom 2 different, you lose mean campaign be fk up! When you turn on dark event permanent the thing even more intense!

Bb don’t have time pressure! Only time grind! And it grind the loop a lot, xcom 2 we have time mission pressure and time campaign avatar projects! If you are truly veteran player xcom you will know we always put time to reach to the limit! Make game always in situations win/lose in one moment! When You do a wrong move mean game over!

What I write here not mean I say BB bad compare to Xcom! It not just reach to that level, the truly feeling pressure of tactic game! Bb is a rare gem! It is different and still can development more after 7 years

It was your magic hand waving away of BB features in order to justify your opinion of simplicity that invalidates your conclusion.

Try again.

[Heron]

引用自 full stamina gaming：

Thank you all for the detailed thoughts. I read all of your responses and they were all very helpful. I think I'll keep the game after all.

Glad to hear it! Have fun. :)

[Draba]

引用自 full stamina gaming：

Thank you all for the detailed thoughts. I read all of your responses and they were all very helpful. I think I'll keep the game after all.

Good choice, if you got BB in a sale it was basically stealing :)
Some variety for the time you get bored of XCOM.

引用自 Santo：

I disagree in that BB has less tools that XCOM, IMHO it's completely the opposite: in XCOM you have weapon tiers, but you don't have to ponder what weapons to use depending on the enemy. Heavy soldier gets heavy weapon, assault gets shotgun, sniper gets sniper rifle, the rest regular rifles, that's all.

First the most important disclaimer: don't remember base XCOM:EU/EW that much, my post is about Long War mod.
It is very popular and the devs themselves recommend it, BB has Legends but I don't think it's on LW level.

Armor:
- heavy or mobility choices on every tier, can also have def/will boost or damage resistance
- varied item slot count and special resists
- specials like grappling, flying, invisibility

Weapons:
- smg/shotgun/carbine/rifle/heavy rifle are actual options for most soldiers, SAW/LMG for gunner, marksman rifle/sniper for sniper with pistol boost options
- tiers themselves have their minor advantages, aren't just plain upgrades

Control/debuff:
- flashbang, chem grenade
- suppression, disabling shot
- mind fray, mind control
- shredding from rockets/ammo/perks

Defense, buff:
- smoke grenade variants
- telekinetic field, mind merge, psi inspiration, distortion fiel, regen biofield

Cover destruction, area denial, reliable damage:
- grenades, rockets
- psi kinetic strike, pyrokinesis

Scouting:
- motion scanner, battle scanner
- bioelectric skin

All soldiers get some very nice options from equipment and abilities, and later on gene mods and psi/officers are stacked on top of these.
There is decent variety within the same class with 3 choices on each tier (abilities are generally much more significant than in BB), and there are special soldiers in MECs/shivs.
Quite a few BB bros share a good portions of their perks, and perks do not affect how battles play out anywhere as much as in XCOM.

Again, comparison is against a mod but LW is basically mandatory so I think it's mostly fair.
Original question was about variety/tactical options, no shame in that part being simpler than the best game in the genre.

[Terran]

XCOM 2 gets some crazy stuff. I mean you have psychic nukes, rocket launchers, grenades of every type, unique heroes with magical abilities and stuff. I'm not sure what you'd get outside of shield swapping and throwing weapons in Battle Brothers.
I think BB still does it better though, overall.
But yeah Draba put it better than I ever could have.

[Lathanx]

In terms of perks, all the meta builds pretty much use the same 10-11 perks anyway with little variation, so that's already kind of a downer. I mean you can go against the meta, but in terms of optimization, there's not much wiggle room at all.

Perks in battle brothers is like choosing one really really really good one, or a crap perk, the majority of perks in battle brothers are complete and utter garbage, which isn't really great game design tbh.

In terms of weapons and abilities, xcom 2 has it pretty much beat, it's not even a contest and xcom 2 has less rigid class building with the advent of the advanced warfare center.

Now fun factor? I enjoy BB a lot more, but xcom does some things better, believe it or not.

[Trappist]

Trousers

[Red Bat]

引用自 Santo：

I disagree in that BB has less tools that XCOM, IMHO it's completely the opposite: in XCOM you have weapon tiers, but you don't have to ponder what weapons to use depending on the enemy. Heavy soldier gets heavy weapon, assault gets shotgun, sniper gets sniper rifle, the rest regular rifles, that's all.

Not taking differences in the campaign side of things into account because OP specifically says he refers to combat. My take would be that the main difference is that XCOM missions feel like an adventure: there's usually a setup of exploration and positioning, then the actual battles, because there are several fights per mission. How you handle exploration to uncover enemies is important -- if you are too separated, or advancing carelessly without good cover, or without careful positioning of your troops, you are screwed. Battle Brothers battles are more streamlined in that sense: it's almost always one party facing the other in a (more or less) open field. The tactical depth is not so much in interacting with the battlefield than in choosing carefully your gear, positioning your troops in just one movement or two, and then identifying the main threats and managing risks and chances while you deal with them.

That said, BB is way more brutal than XCOM. There is more room for error in XCOM, at least in my experience (and its rng is actually skewed, if just a little bit, in the player's favor). Flashy skills can get you out of a tight spot and if you do things right the most dangerous enemies will not even have a chance to shoot you.

The problem here is you are arguing that XCOM 2 has less variety because the different classes use the same weapons, but you aren't realizing that the classes themselves are widely different, moreso than anything in BB.

I also VERY strongly disagree that BB has less room for error unless we are talking about the lowest difficulty in both games. On the hardest difficulty, XCOM 2 almost becomes an insanely brutal puzzle game and sometimes makes me feel like you almost have to lose a few missions or at least a few soldiers due to RNG generating seriously unfair situations. That's XCOM 2, with all the extra crap the game and the DLC actually gives to the player to compensate. The first game is actually even more extreme in that case with the highest difficulty level in that game being an exercise in masochism due to it forcing you into an almost linear campaign.

All that being said. I don't think you can separate combat difficulty from campaign difficulty in BB. The open ended nature of BB means the combat difficulty is always going to be heavily in the player's control since they usually control what fights they pick. Yes the game scales with the player, but the player can account for that too.

引用自 Davaeorn：

Perks in battle brothers is like choosing one really really really good one, or a crap perk, the majority of perks in battle brothers are complete and utter garbage, which isn't really great game design tbh.

Slight pushback on this. It's not so much that BB has a lot of garbage perks as it has some perks that simply can't compete with other ones. Steel Brow and Nine Lives for example can't really compete with Colossus and Gifted.

[Natasha]

引用自 Davaeorn：

In terms of perks, all the meta builds pretty much use the same 10-11 perks anyway with little variation, so that's already kind of a downer. I mean you can go against the meta, but in terms of optimization, there's not much wiggle room at all.

Perks in battle brothers is like choosing one really really really good one, or a crap perk, the majority of perks in battle brothers are complete and utter garbage, which isn't really great game design tbh.

In terms of weapons and abilities, xcom 2 has it pretty much beat, it's not even a contest and xcom 2 has less rigid class building with the advent of the advanced warfare center.

Now fun factor? I enjoy BB a lot more, but xcom does some things better, believe it or not.

There's plenty of wiggle room, just don't be a cuck and use meta builds, simple.

All builds are more or less viable.

[Lathanx]

引用自 Natasha：

引用自 Davaeorn：

In terms of perks, all the meta builds pretty much use the same 10-11 perks anyway with little variation, so that's already kind of a downer. I mean you can go against the meta, but in terms of optimization, there's not much wiggle room at all.

Perks in battle brothers is like choosing one really really really good one, or a crap perk, the majority of perks in battle brothers are complete and utter garbage, which isn't really great game design tbh.

In terms of weapons and abilities, xcom 2 has it pretty much beat, it's not even a contest and xcom 2 has less rigid class building with the advent of the advanced warfare center.

Now fun factor? I enjoy BB a lot more, but xcom does some things better, believe it or not.

There's plenty of wiggle room, just don't be a cuck and use meta builds, simple.

All builds are more or less viable.

*Just don't be a cuck*

Okay and you're blocked. This forum is trash, thanks for confirming it.

*There's plenty of wiggle room*

Wiggle room to be mediocre, no thanks. There is no build variety, it's all the same 10 perks, different depending on role but they're all pretty similar.

Yeah sure i *could* take backstabber, but why? What is the point? Same with relentless or overwhelm, pretty pointless. Yes if i could take all the perks i would, but you only get so many.

[Lathanx]

引用自 Red Bat Media：

引用自 Santo：

I disagree in that BB has less tools that XCOM, IMHO it's completely the opposite: in XCOM you have weapon tiers, but you don't have to ponder what weapons to use depending on the enemy. Heavy soldier gets heavy weapon, assault gets shotgun, sniper gets sniper rifle, the rest regular rifles, that's all.

Not taking differences in the campaign side of things into account because OP specifically says he refers to combat. My take would be that the main difference is that XCOM missions feel like an adventure: there's usually a setup of exploration and positioning, then the actual battles, because there are several fights per mission. How you handle exploration to uncover enemies is important -- if you are too separated, or advancing carelessly without good cover, or without careful positioning of your troops, you are screwed. Battle Brothers battles are more streamlined in that sense: it's almost always one party facing the other in a (more or less) open field. The tactical depth is not so much in interacting with the battlefield than in choosing carefully your gear, positioning your troops in just one movement or two, and then identifying the main threats and managing risks and chances while you deal with them.

That said, BB is way more brutal than XCOM. There is more room for error in XCOM, at least in my experience (and its rng is actually skewed, if just a little bit, in the player's favor). Flashy skills can get you out of a tight spot and if you do things right the most dangerous enemies will not even have a chance to shoot you.

The problem here is you are arguing that XCOM 2 has less variety because the different classes use the same weapons, but you aren't realizing that the classes themselves are widely different, moreso than anything in BB.

I also VERY strongly disagree that BB has less room for error unless we are talking about the lowest difficulty in both games. On the hardest difficulty, XCOM 2 almost becomes an insanely brutal puzzle game and sometimes makes me feel like you almost have to lose a few missions or at least a few soldiers due to RNG generating seriously unfair situations. That's XCOM 2, with all the extra crap the game and the DLC actually gives to the player to compensate. The first game is actually even more extreme in that case with the highest difficulty level in that game being an exercise in masochism due to it forcing you into an almost linear campaign.

All that being said. I don't think you can separate combat difficulty from campaign difficulty in BB. The open ended nature of BB means the combat difficulty is always going to be heavily in the player's control since they usually control what fights they pick. Yes the game scales with the player, but the player can account for that too.

引用自 Davaeorn：

Perks in battle brothers is like choosing one really really really good one, or a crap perk, the majority of perks in battle brothers are complete and utter garbage, which isn't really great game design tbh.

Slight pushback on this. It's not so much that BB has a lot of garbage perks as it has some perks that simply can't compete with other ones. Steel Brow and Nine Lives for example can't really compete with Colossus and Gifted.

I mean you can push-back all you want, but at the end of the day if the perks aren't being used past day 10 and have no value outside of fodder that you send into die anyway, sounds like trash perks to me.

I'd have more fun with the game if all perks were truly worth using, then off meta builds would be more interesting and less of a meme.

[Heron]

引用自 Davaeorn：

Yeah sure i *could* take backstabber, but why? What is the point? Same with relentless or overwhelm, pretty pointless. Yes if i could take all the perks i would, but you only get so many.

You are severely underestimating initiative builds if you think overwhelm is useless.

Backstabber is great on dedicated backliners with whips in their pockets. It's useful even with 90+ matk against shielded and dodgy targets where you wouldn't get close to 95% to hit chance otherwise, especially with disarm.

Almost every perk in BB can be useful depending on the circumstances. Some only in early game, but most even in late game.