Xenonauts 2 tank
![xenonauts 2 tank xenonauts 2 tank](http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/xenonauts/images/2/22/2014-03-30_00006.jpg)
I think that's more interesting than reducing some magical meter that somehow prevents an orbital cannon from firing.
![xenonauts 2 tank xenonauts 2 tank](https://i.pinimg.com/564x/fe/29/b8/fe29b83da5da5f1287479858d8f1f2b1--tank-design-military-tank.jpg)
I disagree with the design of the mechanic because the way a campaign ends should feel more interactive - say, an overwhelming base raid by alien forces and you mount a doomed last stand, instead of just getting orbital bombed. Which is fine if that's what you want to encourage - however it seems the intent of this entire mechanic is directed towards ending a campaign that is not going well. If there's a system in place that removes the ability for these cannon strikes to occur.I'm not entirely sure what it provides for the gameplay other than an additional requirement to capture people repeatedly. Then the player's focus is just doing the best they can.Īnd yeah - players will reload whenever something happens that is preventable - but there's no sense in exacerbating that even further. In this system looks like something will be hit no matter what - which means that no amount of reloading will really change the end result. Then again, maybe that's what the devs are aiming for - an overwhelming feeling that no matter how well you do, nothing is ever enough. So looking at this mechanic from the POV of the player, won't it feel more like "I did all of this - completed missions, shot down UFOs, did everything right - and then everything I worked for was nullified by a single blast of that stupid cannon!" rather than "I successfully managed to keep the panic at the same level as it was before through my actions! Yay". So Blizzard reversed it: you instead gained a "bonus" to XP after resting, which gradually disappeared, the "well rested" bonus, which was well received by the community - even though the actual effect is identical. TL DR in early World of Warcraft, Blizzard implemented a mechanic where if you didn't rest in a tavern, you'd gain less and less XP from killing mobs, and players hated it. There's a famous example from early World of Warcraft, detailed in this Gamasutra post: negative reinforcement: you want a certain behaviour from your players, and you can either guide them towards it using the carrot or the stick. From a game design POV this is a question of positive vs. That's the idea, and it might work (it's their game, they can do what they want!), but I personally think it's a bit risky. The anti-death-spiral mechanic remains viable as capturing/interrogating prisoners is demanding. Capturing the flight computer instead of blowing it up might also yield some intel. A grunt could give you almost no intel while an officer would give a good chunk etc. What if the player could through combat missions/interrogating prisoners find out the next target of the cannon and then surreptiously warn the government in charge, letting them initiate evacuation procedures and thereby minimizing casualties? It could be very neatly integrated as a perpetual bonus objective in every combat mission and give a good reason to keep capturing aliens even after the first one. This is similar to XCOM2:s (excellent) "Avatar project" death counter except that 1) the counter going up did not (story-wise) equal millions of deaths and 2) there was a clear and obvious way to make the counter go down (blowing up bases or doing story missions). Mechanics that don't give the player any chance to counteract them can end up feeling a bit.unfair.