Question about Havens population decreasing for no reason and Haven destruction during war

[bigd]

Why is it that when I visit havens they show the population decreasing? Is there anyway that they can repopulate or is each haven on a time limit where it will eventually hit 0?

When it comes to war, why is it that the havens get destroyed after the attacking faction wins? Can they instead capture it, increasing their faction population count, strength, and research lvl? It should be only the creatures can destroy them or use them as a base of operations to strike deep inland.

[Leo3ABP]

Messaggio originale di bigd:

Messaggio originale di Jivebot:

Scroll tot he bottom of the first tab in your pheonixpedia. It outright states most havens have more mouths to feed than food to feed them, so there's a nonstop starvation die off. It ramps up for havens in mist zones because gathering supplies becomes much riskier

It's basically a built in timer and like all timers, I hate it.

Yea I hate games on a timer until defeat. I like to sit back and watch the factions fight each other and make peace. If the aliens are left unchecked, they can eventually overrun everything. I hate playing games that makes you rush through it. I like to play at my own paste.

I think timerphobia soon will be a thing, seeing how some gamers react on anything that might look as a timer. Having played a lengthy campaign on Hero, loosing virtually all havens in America and many in europe-asia, almost loosing, bouncing back and then winning the campaign around 5 or 6 month in iirc, I still had around 50% on my "timer". So seriously, how can this timer be an issue? Are you planning on spinning the globe for years, doing nothing but countless have defence missions or something, so the timer is an issue for you?

[Crypto Gamer]

Some people hate timers,even if "the timer" here is more generous from my experience on hero(60%pop left early month 3 end game)than in new Xcoms 3.difficulty no mods.I even left a few havens to die cuase I was lazy,lack of real life time to activate&clear bases near them.

However unlike Xcom 1 and 2 there is NO WAY to reserve the progress like Old PP ODI,avatar projects,panic and there is no second wave option for more relaxed "timer" or mod to remove it fully like Xcom2 mods.

That being said,factions should not completely destroy each other havens,but lose like 50% haven pop other 50% becomes the new faction if it wins and or flees to the nearest independent haven.There could be a new protect the refuges mission.

Or maybe at the cost of resources PP could make refuge PP haven as a new DLC.

Trading,giving food to a haven could reduce/stop starvation for a while.There could be a new research which PP can give to the Allied faction(s) at the cost of PP research time giving better food production which would decrease haven starvation.

So like Xcom2 give more tools to reduce the timer so the player IS and FEELS more in control of his/her game.However this will COST the player resouces.
Like in Xcom 2 WOTC I CAN CHOOSE to reduce avatar project covert ops&resitance order but as an alternative cost I won't be able to attend get a new weapon mod covert ops or use a different resistance order for tactical/geoscape advantage.In XCom 1 EW I can manufacture sats for panic or buy a scope/armor etc. to get easier tactical.
IN PP I defend the haven for the 100th time or I get punished by the "timer".Where is the player CHOICE in that?Where are the alternatives to slow down the timer.

More ways to reduce the timer would be awesome even if Imo the timer is generous already.This would require more game polish/game balance though.Having more player choice but not too many is not a bad thing in my book.More mission/map types would be welcomed as well.

[Leo3ABP]

Then why bother with having a timer at all?
Making it even more generous and revertible, which would most likely require a serious redesign of geoscape gameplay and thus cost developers time and resources, while essentially bringing nothing to a game is wasteful. Then it would be simpler to add a toggle in options menu that simply stops population decrease and hides the timer gui. Same effect for a fraction of resources.
If, on the other hand, you go and balance it so that it is always a race against time and struggle to keep timer up, then the very same people that complain now will complain even more about it, meaning that all resources and time spent on expanding timer mechanics were, again, wasted.
I think a lot of people here are not fully understanding the implementation and consequences of their suggestions, certainly not from a development and game balancing point of view. So if you really think that the timer is somehow ever so problematic for you (even though you either need to be terrible at this game, or actively sabotage your campaign yourself to run out of "time"), then petition for a toggle switch, timerphobia mode, instead of various nonsensical ideas that will never get implemented because even you yourself will not like how it will play out in the end.

[Crypto Gamer]

Messaggio originale di Leo3ABP:

Then why bother with having a timer at all?
Making it even more generous and revertible, which would most likely require a serious redesign of geoscape gameplay and thus cost developers time and resources, while essentially bringing nothing to a game is wasteful. Then it would be simpler to add a toggle in options menu that simply stops population decrease and hides the timer gui. Same effect for a fraction of resources.
If, on the other hand, you go and balance it so that it is always a race against time and struggle to keep timer up, then the very same people that complain now will complain even more about it, meaning that all resources and time spent on expanding timer mechanics were, again, wasted.
I think a lot of people here are not fully understanding the implementation and consequences of their suggestions, certainly not from a development and game balancing point of view. So if you really think that the timer is somehow ever so problematic for you (even though you either need to be terrible at this game, or actively sabotage your campaign yourself to run out of "time"), then petition for a toggle switch, timerphobia mode, instead of various nonsensical ideas that will never get implemented because even you yourself will not like how it will play out in the end.

A simple second wave option could suffice or options,like no starvation mode,no timer,increased timer,etc.
Xcom 1 and 2 both had good second wave options for those who want it to increase replay factor and decrease or increase certain parts of the game like timers.
Current geoscape could stay the same even with or without timer.Other more developer resource costly things could come with the upcoming 3 dlcs.

However I think the timer issue is not that big.I think if you do exactly nothing on hero zero haven def,zero bases destroyed then you lose in 4 months.6 months at rookie.3 at legend.Still toggable options could make more ppl happy than not happy.

[Leo3ABP]

Messaggio originale di Crypto Gamer:

Messaggio originale di Leo3ABP:

Then why bother with having a timer at all?
Making it even more generous and revertible, which would most likely require a serious redesign of geoscape gameplay and thus cost developers time and resources, while essentially bringing nothing to a game is wasteful. Then it would be simpler to add a toggle in options menu that simply stops population decrease and hides the timer gui. Same effect for a fraction of resources.
If, on the other hand, you go and balance it so that it is always a race against time and struggle to keep timer up, then the very same people that complain now will complain even more about it, meaning that all resources and time spent on expanding timer mechanics were, again, wasted.
I think a lot of people here are not fully understanding the implementation and consequences of their suggestions, certainly not from a development and game balancing point of view. So if you really think that the timer is somehow ever so problematic for you (even though you either need to be terrible at this game, or actively sabotage your campaign yourself to run out of "time"), then petition for a toggle switch, timerphobia mode, instead of various nonsensical ideas that will never get implemented because even you yourself will not like how it will play out in the end.

A simple second wave option could suffice or options,like no starvation mode,no timer,increased timer,etc.
Xcom 1 and 2 both had good second wave options for those who want it to increase replay factor and decrease or increase certain parts of the game like timers.
Current geoscape could stay the same even with or without timer.Other more developer resource costly things could come with the upcoming 3 dlcs.

However I think the timer issue is not that big.I think if you do exactly nothing on hero zero haven def,zero bases destroyed then you lose in 4 months.6 months at rookie.3 at legend.Still toggable options could make more ppl happy than not happy.

Yes, toggle option is the most reasonable response in this case.

[Yme]

There should definitely be a slew of second wave options to make the game more enjoyable at a casual, beginner level. However, I'm not sure how you can remove the population count and still make it fit the game thematically. Maybe you can have random missions where you find new survivors and transfer them to a haven of your choice, thus pushing back against the population counter?

[Oregano Gangsta]

I remember the original defeat condition was if there was too many Pandoran bases then you lose which then changed to if the human population goes below acceptable limit condition (It was either during the year it was egs exclusive or just during the backer builds)

[Mistfox]

Er... just in case people misunderstood, it really isn't a "timer" at all. It's a population counter and that is how you "freeze" it. If the world population is stabilized against the mist through repellers and the havens have enough food, the counter stops dropping. A stable enough game can actually run indefinitely. Or at least until the factions get stupid and fight among themselves.

[Remove skull merchant]

You cannot let your soldiers stay a while to help "repopulate", this is not that kind of game...

[Mistfox]

Messaggio originale di Dr. Albert Schweitzer:

You cannot let your soldiers stay a while to help "repopulate", this is not that kind of game...

ROFL! Good one!

As for people "trickling in" to the havens, I think people miss the part of the lore that the first "Mist Invasion" was 25 years before the "current" game time. Anyone that could make it into the havens have already did so or are dead. 25 years is a long time to live in the wilds with mutants and mindcontrolling mist flooding the world.

[SpiteAndMalice]

Messaggio originale di Mistfox:

Messaggio originale di Dr. Albert Schweitzer:

You cannot let your soldiers stay a while to help "repopulate", this is not that kind of game...

ROFL! Good one!

As for people "trickling in" to the havens, I think people miss the part of the lore that the first "Mist Invasion" was 25 years before the "current" game time. Anyone that could make it into the havens have already did so or are dead. 25 years is a long time to live in the wilds with mutants and mindcontrolling mist flooding the world.

So has the mist covered the earth once already and then been pushed back? And if so how the did havens offer protection against it the first time around in such a way that isn't then effective whilst the mist is spreading on this second occasion? (Sorry, I've had little to no interest in reading the lore, but this part of the history does sound interesting).

I think personally I'd just go live somewhere windy, or would you want somewhere not windy? I don't know, whichever way it is... I'd probably just grow a big hedge. ;-)

[SpiteAndMalice]

Messaggio originale di Dr. Albert Schweitzer:

You cannot let your soldiers stay a while to help "repopulate", this is not that kind of game...

That's DLC 4 ;-)

[Mistfox]

Messaggio originale di SpiteAndMalice:

Messaggio originale di Mistfox:

ROFL! Good one!

As for people "trickling in" to the havens, I think people miss the part of the lore that the first "Mist Invasion" was 25 years before the "current" game time. Anyone that could make it into the havens have already did so or are dead. 25 years is a long time to live in the wilds with mutants and mindcontrolling mist flooding the world.

So has the mist covered the earth once already and then been pushed back? And if so how the did havens offer protection against it the first time around in such a way that isn't then effective whilst the mist is spreading on this second occasion? (Sorry, I've had little to no interest in reading the lore, but this part of the history does sound interesting).

I think personally I'd just go live somewhere windy, or would you want somewhere not windy? I don't know, whichever way it is... I'd probably just grow a big hedge. ;-)

Yes, there were 2 previous mists, it's in the research files under Atmospheric Analysis. I think it was in 2022, 2032 and now 2045 and it seems to be a cyclic phenomena. The havens do work in keeping the mist away from the people so you don't get people jumping into the sea for no reason any more but they are vulnerable to physical invasion. It still beats being in the wild surrounded by mutants though. The thing was worldwide so I doubt a hedge will work. Mist is not just air but a cloud of living organisms so a "non-windy" place won't work, they'll just fly into anywhere that they are not, wind or no wind. Though mountains seem to work. Most Phoenix bases are on top of mountains.