X-COM XCOM 2 + War of the Chosen Expansion Thread

[MadMaxHellfire]

well, also the first nuxcom was superior to its sequel. it's very hard to do something worse than xcom...

 

[ArchAngel]

well, also the first nuxcom was superior to its sequel. it's very hard to do something worse than xcom...

I don't agree. Xcom 2 vanilla is way superior to NuXcom vanilla

 

[thesheeep]

My god, LW2 is utter rubbish.

I tried the previous version and really liked the additions, classes, etc.
It was fun.
But this version is just painful.

2nd mission. Moving rookie from cover A to cover B. Gets shot at by three overwatching soldiers (which was the point, wanted to get rid of the overwatch).
Gets hit only once, and only a graze even (wow!).
Immediately panics. Wtf?! You just ran through a deadly minefield an got barely scratched. She should get a morale boost and not panick!

So... my own soldiers have less morale than civilians in X-Piratez. Impressive.

I do the occasional reload if things go totally wrong, but if this is any sign of what to expect, I'll do more reloads than turns.

This infiltration stuff is also just... horrible. I don't want to wait 3 days when I already sent the guys on a mission that was advertised as easy just to then be completely overwhelmed if I don't spend additional intel.
Just let me spend the intel immediately and be done with it. I want to do missions and not wait around.
Who thought this nonsense was a good idea?

What happened to my Long War?
It is as if someone took a good mod and made everything super annoying.

Really, I should just play X-Piratez again. At least there, my gals have balls.

Edit:
Same mission. One soldier dies (to be expected from a squad of rookies, only the tough get to live), but the mission is a sure win otherwise, most enemies are down.
3/5 others panic (and remember that one panicked already).


What a shitfest.
Quickly removing this "thing" and installing X-Piratez, before I get so butthurt that I never want to touch the series again.

 

[ArchAngel]

I am sorry but you suck LOL

 

[not an artichoke]

There are plenty of legitimate criticisms to be made of LW2, but "The mechanics are bad because I don't like them" and "rookies should act like veterans" are not.

 

[thesheeep]

Are you guys fucking serious? A soldier that gets shot at three times (and not even really hit once) panics. One soldier dies and the entire squad panics?
I have about two decades of experience with almost all XCOM games, and such nonsense simply does not happen there. Not even in TFTD and that one is really hard on morale all around.
If this was normal for soldiers every war would be like two groups of rabbits running from each other

"The mechanics are bad because I don't like them"

In contrast to you, I brought something called an argument. I would call "this simply does not make any sense" an argument. Calling something nonsense if it simply is that has nothing to do with me liking it or not. I sure like a lot of nonsense sometimes.
And if anyone likes "wait for 3 days until you can *really* start the mission" as a mechanic, that are some very low personal standards...

"rookies should act like veterans" are not.

They are still soldiers. Trained soldiers.
Not civilians who have been given a gun. Those are the researchers and engineers.

 

[ArchAngel]

Are you guys fucking serious? A soldier that gets shot at three times (and not even really hit once) panics. One soldier dies and the entire squad panics?
I have about two decades of experience with almost all XCOM games, and such nonsense simply does not happen there. Not even in TFTD and that one is really hard on morale all around.
If this was normal for soldiers every war would be like two groups of rabbits running from each other

Graze or shot is same in Xcom. Graze is just less damage. Rookies are just prone to panic, no way around it. If you are playing with random starting stats (Hidden potential, I think it is on by default in LW2) your starting soldiers can have really low will attribute and be even more prone to panic.
In nuXcom 1 your soldiers panicked even more often and used to shoot each other and VIPs you had to protect. In Xcom 2 and LW2 at least they limited panic to shooting at enemy, doing Hunker or doing nothing. In UFO once you started losing soldiers many of them went panic or berserk as well, it was not as noticeable as here but the games are very different in many aspects. With lower number of soldiers in squads and needing to not lose any, panic would happen rarely in nuXcom and it would only make it so when you are low on troops you got even less chance to win the mission anyways.

"The mechanics are bad because I don't like them"

In contrast to you, I brought something called an argument. I would call "this simply does not make any sense" an argument. Calling something nonsense if it simply is that has nothing todo with me liking it or not. I sure like a lot of not nonsense sometimes.
And if anyone likes "wait for 3 days until you can *really* start the mission" as a mechanic, that are some very low personal standards...

It is so the game is not like in nuXcom 1 where you would have one squad for the whole game. LW1 had tired status after soldiers came back from mission as a counter for this. LW2 has you need to infiltrate for few days so that squad is not usable and you need to use 2-3 squads for different missions happening at the same time. It is a good mechanic and even logical with how your soldiers should not be able to get in and out from enemy controlled cities instantly.
If you don't understand this you deserve my L2P comment (same meaning as you suck).

"rookies should act like veterans" are not.

They are still soldiers. Trained soldiers.
Not civilians who have been given a gun. Those are the researchers and engineers.

No they are not. They are fucking civilians that decided to fight for the resistance. None of them went through any military training, they are just more useful as soldiers than scientists, engineers or those gathering supplies or intel on the field.
Actually in Xcom 2 the whole low level soldiers you got suck ass makes more sense than in nuXcom 1 or even older Xcoms where they missed most of their shots as well, died easily and were easy to panic or get mind controlled.
As I said before L2P, don't be so butthurt. There is rookie difficulty in LW2 if you are too butthurt to play on normal difficulty (Veteran) or higher.

 

[thesheeep]

And if anyone likes "wait for 3 days until you can *really* start the mission" as a mechanic, that are some very low personal standards...

It is a good mechanic and even logical with how your soldiers should not be able to get in and out from enemy controlled cities instantly.
If you don't understand this you deserve my L2P comment (same meaning as you suck).

Why should you not be able to get into enemy controlled cities instantly in a stealth helicopter?
That is kind of the point.
Same helicopter also takes your team out of said city instantly (well, called and then in X turns) and without being followed.

So there really is nothing here that would need my understanding.
A tired status, while being a bit blunt game-design wise, would make 10x more sense than this legwork crap.

They are still soldiers. Trained soldiers.
Not civilians who have been given a gun. Those are the researchers and engineers.

No they are not. They are fucking civilians that decided to fight for the resistance.

Nonsense.
If they were just civilians, they wouldn't know how to shoot a gun, act within a squad, military procedures, etc.
I don't doubt they were civilians once, and haven't had a years-long training, but by the time you recruit them, they must have had their military drill already or would just be dead weight (do we have any FARC people here who could explain this better?).
The experience I had was just like a bunch of teens fresh out of school, given weapons and then completely losing their shit when one of them drops. Despite them winning the battle (2 aliens left, iirc).

 

[Jimmious]

I like how you guys argue over how you should LARP your XCOM2 soldiers

 

[ArchAngel]

And if anyone likes "wait for 3 days until you can *really* start the mission" as a mechanic, that are some very low personal standards...

It is a good mechanic and even logical with how your soldiers should not be able to get in and out from enemy controlled cities instantly.
If you don't understand this you deserve my L2P comment (same meaning as you suck).

Why should you not be able to get into enemy controlled cities instantly in a stealth helicopter?
That is kind of the point.
Same helicopter also takes your team out of said city instantly (well, called and then in X turns) and without being followed.

So there really is nothing here that would need my understanding.
A tired status, while being a bit blunt game-design wise, would make 10x more sense than this legwork crap.

They are still soldiers. Trained soldiers.
Not civilians who have been given a gun. Those are the researchers and engineers.

No they are not. They are fucking civilians that decided to fight for the resistance.

Nonsense.
If they were just civilians, they wouldn't know how to shoot a gun, act within a squad, military procedures, etc.
I don't doubt they were civilians once, and haven't had a years-long training, but by the time you recruit them, they must have had their military drill already or would just be dead weight (do we have any FARC people here who could explain this better?).
The experience I had was just like a bunch of teens fresh out of school, given weapons and then completely losing their shit when one of them drops. Despite them winning the battle (2 aliens left, iirc).

Since you are obviously incapable of understanding like a normal person let me switch to my "talking to retards mode": L2P noob. Don't be butthurt about being a retard but try better around rising up and becoming better.

 

[thesheeep]

I like how you guys argue over how you should LARP your XCOM2 soldiers

More like, how to LARP your preteen schoolgirls being given a gun but no instructions.
Did you master the girly scream yet, ArchAngel ?

I'm having trouble with that over here. You seem to be able to get into the role far more easily.

Since you are obviously incapable of understanding like a normal person let me switch to my "talking to retards mode"

You mean like a normal person who buys your BS attempts at an argument?
Sorry, I just don't live in that fantasy world where soldiers panic at the sight of a weaker enemy.

 

[ArchAngel]

I like how you guys argue over how you should LARP your XCOM2 soldiers

More like, how to LARP your preteen schoolgirls being given a gun but no instructions.
Did you master the girly scream yet, ArchAngel ?

I'm having trouble with that over here. You seem to be able to get into the role far more easily.

Since you are obviously incapable of understanding like a normal person let me switch to my "talking to retards mode"

You mean like a normal person who buys your BS attempts at an argument?
Sorry, I just don't live in that fantasy world where soldiers panic at the sight of a weaker enemy.

You are a dumbass.

 

[Mazisky]

Nice article on Gamespot

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/xcom-lead-explains-why-some-triple-a-games-fail/1100-6449248/

Jake Solomon says he noticed that lot of people didn't like timers on missions and he should deal with it, i guess probably they'll avoid them completely in future expansion\sequels.

 

[Falksi]

Nice article on Gamespot

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/xcom-lead-explains-why-some-triple-a-games-fail/1100-6449248/

Jake Solomon says he noticed that lot of people didn't like timers on missions and he should deal with it, i guess probably they'll avoid them completely in future expansion\sequels.

I reckon the timer system is the least of the games issues. The fact that you can make all the right moves, and yet have you're whole squad wiped out in 1 turn is far worse. Not to mention the absolutely bland as fuck enemies & environments.

 

[Jimmious]

Nice article on Gamespot

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/xcom-lead-explains-why-some-triple-a-games-fail/1100-6449248/

Jake Solomon says he noticed that lot of people didn't like timers on missions and he should deal with it, i guess probably they'll avoid them completely in future expansion\sequels.

I reckon the timer system is the least of the games issues. The fact that you can make all the right moves, and yet have you're whole squad wiped out in 1 turn is far worse. Not to mention the absolutely bland as fuck enemies & environments.

If you get a squad wipe in XCOM 2, you most definitely didn'T do "all the right moves".

 

[thesheeep]

I reckon the timer system is the least of the games issues. The fact that you can make all the right moves, and yet have you're whole squad wiped out in 1 turn is far worse. Not to mention the absolutely bland as fuck enemies & environments.

I actually like the timers. At least in a lot of missions. It forces you to play differently than you would in the old XCOM games where you can usually move at your own speed.
Problem is that they really overuse it in the game - there should have been a better balance.

Really, the biggest problem is the game's pod/enemy activation system - especially in combination with the extremely screwed up line of sight and the fact that enemies get a free move (at least not shot) when they see you.
The original games' system where each enemy would just go about its business until it sees you was much preferable.
In XCOM 2, you can be as careful as you want to, you will at some point peek around a corner and end up in the line of sight of an enemy you could not have seen - and suddenly the whole game goes from "you're sneaky" to "'Sir! We are surrounded' 'Excellent, we can attack in all directions!'". It's just a total interruption of the flow, which is never a good thing in games.

If you get a squad wipe in XCOM 2, you most definitely didn't do "all the right moves".

Now that is just wrong.
It's in the nature of RNG based games to occasionally just screw you, no matter what.
It usually "only" costs you a soldier or two in games like this, but it might be more. And losing one or two soldiers is usually enough for most people to reload anyway.
Which is the main reason I'd never get the idea to play such games on iron man. I'm just too much of a perfectionist to play a game like this on iron man. If I fail, I want to do better, and not getting a chance at that annoys me too much. I'm certainly very good at games, but not flawless. So.. nah.

Besides, the random seeds in XCOM 2 already make sure you can't just reload a shot until it hits. You actually have to re-do the entire turn to see much of a difference.

Anyway, taking a wild guess, I think that most people talk about a squad wipe after 2-3 soldiers died "already" - since at that point, it is a safe assumption that the rest doesn't stand much of a chance anymore.

 

[Falksi]

I actually like the timers. At least in a lot of missions. It forces you to play differently than you would in the old XCOM games where you can usually move at your own speed.
Problem is that they really overuse it in the game - there should have been a better balance.

Really, the biggest problem is the game's pod/enemy activation system - especially in combination with the extremely screwed up line of sight and the fact that enemies get a free move (at least not shot) when they see you.
The original games' system where each enemy would just go about its business until it sees you was much preferable.
In XCOM 2, you can be as careful as you want to, you will at some point peek around a corner and end up in the line of sight of an enemy you could not have seen - and suddenly the whole game goes from "you're sneaky" to "'Sir! We are surrounded' 'Excellent, we can attack in all directions!'". It's just a total interruption of the flow, which is never a good thing in games.


Now that is just wrong.
It's in the nature of RNG based games to occasionally just screw you, no matter what.
It usually "only" costs you a soldier or two in games like this, but it might be more. And losing one or two soldiers is usually enough for most people to reload anyway.
Which is the main reason I'd never get the idea to play such games on iron man. I'm just too much of a perfectionist to play a game like this on iron man. If I fail, I want to do better, and not getting a chance at that annoys me too much. I'm certainly very good at games, but not flawless. So.. nah.

Besides, the random seeds in XCOM 2 already make sure you can't just reload a shot until it hits. You actually have to re-do the entire turn to see much of a difference.

Anyway, taking a wild guess, I think that most people talk about a squad wipe after 2-3 soldiers died "already" - since at that point, it is a safe assumption that the rest doesn't stand much of a chance anymore.

Agree with a lot of that. The game felt way more about avoiding upsetting too many pods than it's predecessor. That felt like the key to success, as opposed to being tactically astute.
One game I had all my troops in full cover and on full health, one badly wounded enemy in sight, moving forward on my last turn to kill him I upset an enemy pod which then had a free reign and wiped out all my squad.
Its not as good as it's predecessor Imo, nowhere near.

 

[ArchAngel]

If you get a squad wipe in XCOM 2, you most definitely didn't do "all the right moves".

Now that is just wrong.
It's in the nature of RNG based games to occasionally just screw you, no matter what.
It usually "only" costs you a soldier or two in games like this, but it might be more. And losing one or two soldiers is usually enough for most people to reload anyway.
Which is the main reason I'd never get the idea to play such games on iron man. I'm just too much of a perfectionist to play a game like this on iron man. If I fail, I want to do better, and not getting a chance at that annoys me too much. I'm certainly very good at games, but not flawless. So.. nah.

Besides, the random seeds in XCOM 2 already make sure you can't just reload a shot until it hits. You actually have to re-do the entire turn to see much of a difference.

Anyway, taking a wild guess, I think that most people talk about a squad wipe after 2-3 soldiers died "already" - since at that point, it is a safe assumption that the rest doesn't stand much of a chance anymore.

You are saying this like you could not lose half the squad in UFO or TFTD as well in one enemy turn.

Yea in Xcom 2 you can lose important soldiers that causes a cascade failure of the mission, but lucky for you, you can call extraction and get the fuck out. The game does not end by you losing one or two soldiers or by failing one of two random missions. The right move at that point is to do what is best to keep the rest alive so you can continue the campaign.

 

[thesheeep]

You are saying this like you could not lose half the squad in UFO or TFTD as well in one enemy turn.

I meant for all games of this kind.

But IMO, if that happened in UFO or TFTD, it is far more likely your own fault. You kind of need to "set up" yourself to get into such a bad situation, which takes a combination of many avoidable mistakes and/or bad luck.
In XCOM 2, you can just step onto one wrong tile, and then you're fucked. It all comes down to the pod/enemy activation system, I think.

In other words:
When something like that happens in UFO/TFTD, you feel like you're punished for a series of mistakes. Which is good. It teaches you.
When something like that happens in XCOM 2, more often than not, I felt like the game fucked me with a dice roll. It didn't teach me anything.

Yea in Xcom 2 you can lose important soldiers that causes a cascade failure of the mission, but lucky for you, you can call extraction and get the fuck out. The game does not end by you losing one or two soldiers or by failing one of two random missions. The right move at that point is to do what is best to keep the rest alive so you can continue the campaign.

I know. But that simply is not acceptable to many people.
"Must. Win. Every. Mission."
I consider that part of the perfectionism problem I mentioned before.

 

[Jimmious]

I'm not saying that you can't get unlucky but to get squad-wiped in one turn means you did a lot of things wrong.
XCOM2 provides a LOT of tools to disable enemies and get an advantage. If you don't use them, then obviously you don't play optimally.
What I agree with and is annoying in XCOM1 and 2 is that the game is made in a way where the best way to play is to try and wipe each enemy "pod" that you meet, in the same turn. Which completely doable, especially mid game and after but still, not the most "fun".

But I've finished both of them a couple of times and I never had a feeling that I did everything right and instead I got wiped. I lost a soldier or too, of course, but a wipe? Lose six guys in an enemy turn? You did something wrong. You triggered too many pods for your own good most probably

 

[ArchAngel]

You are saying this like you could not lose half the squad in UFO or TFTD as well in one enemy turn.

I meant for all games of this kind.

But IMO, if that happened in UFO or TFTD, it is far more likely your own fault. You kind of need to "set up" yourself to get into such a bad situation, which takes a combination of many avoidable mistakes and/or bad luck.
In XCOM 2, you can just step onto one wrong tile, and then you're fucked. It all comes down to the pod/enemy activation system, I think.

In other words:
When something like that happens in UFO/TFTD, you feel like you're punished for a series of mistakes. Which is good. It teaches you.
When something like that happens in XCOM 2, more often than not, I felt like the game fucked me with a dice roll. It didn't teach me anything.

UFO and TFTD had more "unfair" stuff that were out of your control (alien grenades or chrysalids coming out of darkness to wipe half your team; or I wonder how long took for people to learn that chrysalids going down are not always dead and you need to grenade their bodies and if you didn't they would get up a few turns later and now being closer to your team wipe 5-6 of them instantly; Alien Blaster Launcher wiping half your squad in Alien Base Assault mission in one of the two starting areas; Your first terror mission being vs CyberDisks and Mind Control when all you got are laser pistols and squaddies/rookies; and many more

You are still being dense. You refuse to accept rules of the game (Xcom 2) and whine when it kills you. I am sorry they didn't design the game exactly like you wanted. Go cry to your momma. Or grow the fuck up and L2P. Sorry but you are like the textbook example of someone that needs to L2P instead of being a butthurt complainer.

Yea in Xcom 2 you can lose important soldiers that causes a cascade failure of the mission, but lucky for you, you can call extraction and get the fuck out. The game does not end by you losing one or two soldiers or by failing one of two random missions. The right move at that point is to do what is best to keep the rest alive so you can continue the campaign.

I know. But that simply is not acceptable to many people.
"Must. Win. Every. Mission."
I consider that part of the perfectionism problem I mentioned before.

I don't care. That is not the flaw of the game, that is a problem of the people playing it. Admit you are not good enough for this game, and go play something more for your level of effort. I enjoy hard turn based games that kick your ass and force your to learn how to play and find any edge. I played UFO on hardest difficulty, I played Xcom 1 on hardest/ironman, Xcom 2 on hardest/Ironman, and I play LW2 on second hardest/ironman (When I manage to win on that difficulty I will try the hardest one as well). I never feel the way you do because I understand I am the one that needs to L2P instead of complaining.

 

[thesheeep]

UFO and TFTD had more "unfair" stuff that were out of your control (alien grenades or chrysalids coming out of darkness to wipe half your team; or I wonder how long took for people to learn that chrysalids going down are not always dead and you need to grenade their bodies and if you didn't they would get up a few turns later and now being closer to your team wipe 5-6 of them instantly; Alien Blaster Launcher wiping half your squad in Alien Base Assault mission in one of the two starting areas; Your first terror mission being vs CyberDisks and Mind Control when all you got are laser pistols and squaddies/rookies; and many more

I agree on the first terror missions, if that happens, well, bad luck. Same if you just start a mission and get immediately obliterated by an explosion (though I must say I have never had that happen, does it ever?).
But the rest is really a player's own fault. And a very basic one. If you keep your soldiers so close together that an explosions kills half of them - what do you expect? It is like the first thing you learn in these games to spread out your people enough to avoid explosions. Have two soldiers take cover like 2 tiles apart and you will catch a grenade.

Are you confusing the Chrysalids with something? Am I? They are the ones that turn your people to zombies, which then hatch more of themselves, right? I've never had them wipe my team instantly.

I don't care. That is not the flaw of the game, that is a problem of the people playing it. Admit you are not good enough for this game, and go play something more for your level of effort. I enjoy hard turn based games that kick your ass and force your to learn how to play and find any edge. I played UFO on hardest difficulty, I played Xcom 1 on hardest/ironman, Xcom 2 on hardest/Ironman, and I play LW2 on second hardest/ironman (When I manage to win on that difficulty I will try the hardest one as well). I never feel the way you do because I understand I am the one that needs to L2P instead of complaining.

Look, I have no problem admitting you are better at those games than I am. But I haven't said once that I could not beat anything. Where did you even get that? I was annoyed by bullshit design and decided not to subject myself to it. Of course I could beat it. I claim that I can beat any game in existence on a difficulty above normal.
I just wouldn't necessarily enjoy doing it and so I don't.

But when discussing games, you have to take into account who they were made for.
"A problem of the people playing it" is a flaw of the game. You cannot separate the game and its players when discussing mechanics, that is absurd.
And no game was ever made for the top 1-3% of players (which you seem to belong to?), who seem to enjoy being subjected to certain forms of bullshit.
Of course not, that would be business suicide. If XCOM 2 was like LW2 on release it would have been an utter failure.

The mission timers and the pod system are the most criticized topics of the game, and there is not a doubt the game would be significantly improved for the majority of players if those mechanics were altered.
I know you don't care about the majority of players, but that is just your failure to realize that they are the ones who will have to buy the games or you will never have a game to play to begin with.
Again, an opportunity for game mechanics options. Enable/disable mission timers. Problem solved.

 

[ArchAngel]

UFO and TFTD had more "unfair" stuff that were out of your control (alien grenades or chrysalids coming out of darkness to wipe half your team; or I wonder how long took for people to learn that chrysalids going down are not always dead and you need to grenade their bodies and if you didn't they would get up a few turns later and now being closer to your team wipe 5-6 of them instantly; Alien Blaster Launcher wiping half your squad in Alien Base Assault mission in one of the two starting areas; Your first terror mission being vs CyberDisks and Mind Control when all you got are laser pistols and squaddies/rookies; and many more

I agree on the first terror missions, if that happens, well, bad luck. Same if you just start a mission and get immediately obliterated by an explosion (though I must say I have never had that happen, does it ever?).
But the rest is really a player's own fault. And a very basic one. If you keep your soldiers so close together that an explosions kills half of them - what do you expect? It is like the first thing you learn in these games to spread out your people enough to avoid explosions. Have two soldiers take cover like 2 tiles apart and you will catch a grenade.

Are you confusing the Chrysalids with something? Am I? They are the ones that turn your people to zombies, which then hatch more of themselves, right? I've never had them wipe my team instantly.

Alien grenades have a good range. Even if you are careful you can lose a couple to a single one. Blaster Launcher has huge range and aliens often have it in Base assault missions. Often they blow themselves up with it, sometimes they are far away from your starting zone but sometimes on their first turn they use it well and blow up half your squad (and on your first turn you don't want to leave starting area so aliens don't get full AP of reaction shots).
Chrysalids one shot any soldier ignoring armor you wear. They got huge move speed and if they come from around the corner they can one shot more than one of your soldiers. Then you get zombies that when shot turn into more chrysalids and sometimes things can go crazy. And if you don't know you sometimes only knock them out (and it is super hard to know that without reading about it online or by experiencing the horror of "dead" Chrysalids suddenly getting up in the middle of your squad and proceeding to one shot every soldier in range), it will murder your squad. It is not a problem for normal aliens as AI was stupid in UFO and it didn't know how to pick up weapons left on ground but Chrysalids are weapons themselves

I don't care. That is not the flaw of the game, that is a problem of the people playing it. Admit you are not good enough for this game, and go play something more for your level of effort. I enjoy hard turn based games that kick your ass and force your to learn how to play and find any edge. I played UFO on hardest difficulty, I played Xcom 1 on hardest/ironman, Xcom 2 on hardest/Ironman, and I play LW2 on second hardest/ironman (When I manage to win on that difficulty I will try the hardest one as well). I never feel the way you do because I understand I am the one that needs to L2P instead of complaining.

Look, I have no problem admitting you are better at those games than I am. But I haven't said once that I could not beat anything. Where did you even get that? I was annoyed by bullshit design and decided not to subject myself to it. Of course I could beat it. I claim that I can beat any game in existence on a difficulty above normal.
I just wouldn't necessarily enjoy doing it and so I don't.

But when discussing games, you have to take into account who they were made for.
"A problem of the people playing it" is a flaw of the game. You cannot separate the game and its players when discussing mechanics, that is absurd.
And no game was ever made for the top 1-3% of players (which you seem to belong to?), who seem to enjoy being subjected to certain forms of bullshit.
Of course not, that would be business suicide. If XCOM 2 was like LW2 on release it would have been an utter failure.

The mission timers and the pod system are the most criticized topics of the game, and there is not a doubt the game would be significantly improved for the majority of players if those mechanics were altered.
I know you don't care about the majority of players, but that is just your failure to realize that they are the ones who will have to buy the games or you will never have a game to play to begin with.
Again, an opportunity for game mechanics options. Enable/disable mission timers. Problem solved.

OK, you don't like it. Go play something else. It is settled.
And for the record I also don't like the pod system and everything that happens because of it but the game is what it is. We cannot change it, we can only choose to play it or not. If we do choose to play it, being butthurt about it is pointless and one should instead learn to use tools give to them by this game.
And there are plenty of tools. Lots of people can finish Ironman/Impossible in LW2 and they face much bigger challenges than few panicked rookies.

 

[Falksi]

Not sure why it's so hard to believe Jim? I had 4 troops, full squad at that time, all in full cover with one wounded enemy to kill. Sparked a pod off on my last move and they flanked & killed several squad members, the others panicked, and the following turn the enemy finished them off. I reloaded the game and replayed several different ways and avoiding that or a similar scenario from said point basically boiled down to me acting with the enemy pod in mind. It killed the game for me, as that said to me savescumming and luck/pc decisions were too big a factor in the game.
2 feels far cheaper than Enemy Within to me. Still not a bad game, but a backwards step, and a game which has far bigger issues than the timer.

 

[ArchAngel]

Not sure why it's so hard to believe Jim? I had 4 troops, full squad at that time, all in full cover with one wounded enemy to kill. Sparked a pod off on my last move and they flanked & killed several squad members, the others panicked, and the following turn the enemy finished them off. I reloaded the game and replayed several different ways and avoiding that or a similar scenario from said point basically boiled down to me acting with the enemy pod in mind. It killed the game for me, as that said to me savescumming and luck/pc decisions were too big a factor in the game.
2 feels far cheaper than Enemy Within to me. Still not a bad game, but a backwards step, and a game which has far bigger issues than the timer.

What you describe can and has happened in Enemy Within as well. It got me a few times in Xcom 1 before I learned to not move forward with the last soldier. Or sometimes I did, but I knew well what could happen and I was prepared to face the consequences even if that meant losing the mission.
Each shot is a random chance and so is moving forward. As I said to thesheep, it is how the game works. You learn to play it as it is, not as you wish it to be and once you do, it does not really happen often or almost ever.