-
Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.
"This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.
Turn-Based Tactics Phantom Doctrine - "tactical Cold War conspiracy thriller" by Hard West devs
- Thread starter LESS T_T
- Start date
Grampy_Bone
Arcane
Must have bought this in a Steam sale awhile ago, finally got around to playing it...
...It's good! I'm really liking it so far but I can see how tedium can set in. Right now I'm getting new loot in most missions and I'm engaged in building up my team. Yet it's kinda like Dishonored in that all the fun toys are combat related but getting into firefights feels like playing the game wrong. Perhaps the devs just assumed players would always go in guns blazing? on the Morgue story mission the handler accused me of 'starting a gunfight in the morgue' even though I finished the mission full stealth. I have save-scummed some missions early on when I broke stealth but this was mostly due to not understanding the game's mechanics, now it's easy to full stealth a mission without reloads, even with a team of completely green level 2 recruits.
The final story mission in chapter 1 was mandatory combat, I really liked it but wished the game made it more clear. I went into it thinking I could somehow sneak away since so far every mission had allowed stealth. I think they should have had more distinction between open combat and sneaking missions. It's easy to play this and see so many ways it could be tweaked or improved, a lot of potential seems wasted.
Part of the problem is there's not much room for specialization. The idea seems to be you are this black ops leader who has to throw together this disparate team of misfits and try to complete these missions under various restrictions. In real life you can't craft perfect employees, you have to canvas for recruits, judge their strengths and weaknesses, make use of their specialties, and if possible train up their deficiencies, and this game simulates all of that pretty well. But for whatever reason it makes every recruit essentially a stealth master by default.
Lots of people saying the game should have more non-combat perks but it's hard to see how they could make the characters any more stealthy than they already are. All of the following abilities IMO should be either locked behind perks or severely nerfed without them:
-Walking up to/behind guards without alerting them
-Jumping down from ledges without harm/breaking through windows
-Picking locks (locked doors should be waaay more common) and shutting down security systems
-Wearing disguises (at minimum speaking the local language should be required)
-Concealing weapons while disguised
-Walking within 2-3 squares of normal guards while disguised
-Headshots with pistols
-Karate-chop takedowns, especially from the front
-Insta-body disposal
I wonder if the game was like this in an earlier build because I can't imagine the devs would overlook such concepts in a game that requires rare proficiency skills just to screw a silencer onto the end of a gun. I guess you could make someone with the Martial Artist perk, HP boost, awareness regeneration boost, and then use them exclusively for knockouts, but they aren't going to be all that more effective than anyone else. If the face-bonking ability were limited to a perk instead of being universal, such characters would be the lynchpin of any infiltration team, and almost too valuable to risk in combat. It would also make finding silencers and developing proficiencies a high priority throughout the game, since using stealth weapons would be the only way non-martial artists could contribute to stealthily neutralizing enemies.
In most spy fiction you don't see omni-competent agents unless they are solo operators like James Bond, Jason Bourne, etc. If you have a team of multiple field agents then everyone is a specialist; you have the stealth guy, the tech guy, the talky-talky person, the marksman, etc. In this game the skillsets are so broad it's hard to see the need for specialization. I can see creating close-combat specialists or snipers but the effort and luck required (because perks are randomized) to make that happen doesn't seem worth it. I think the game would have been better if it were class based. You could have soldiers, infiltrators, social experts, and support staff with the 'guy in the van' abilities (it's really odd to me that literally anyone can run the support tools with zero impact on effectiveness). Only the social people could use disguises, only the soldiers could use heavy weaponry, only the infiltrators could jump and sneak around and shut down security. You could also give them specific perk lists and special abilities to specialize them within their role, instead of the grab-bag of generic power ups that make up most of the game's perks.
I haven't even talked about the clue board, which I find super entertaining even though it is busywork. It's fun for LARPing, but it's another system that probably should have been re-thought. Right now it's not clear where upgrades even come from, solving an intel board seems to give very random rewards--sometimes people, sometimes items, sometimes a mission. Needs to be more consistent. I'm not even sure if the analysis job solves the board, gives more intel pieces, or both. When the game's systems are so unclear it's hard to make decisions. They should have done it so that the analysis job decodes the intel, which then either provide a tech upgrade, new recruit, story item, etc, or a piece of the clue board. The clue boards should have been limited to 1 per chapter, and solving them should be the only source of story missions. So the player generates leads from random missions, acquires intel, decodes and connects the dots, revealing persons of interest that lead to story missions. Instead it's just kind of this random thing that sometimes maybe drives the story. And sometimes the radio handler just hands you the missions. Okay then.
Woulda, coulda, shoulda. I'm still having fun.
...It's good! I'm really liking it so far but I can see how tedium can set in. Right now I'm getting new loot in most missions and I'm engaged in building up my team. Yet it's kinda like Dishonored in that all the fun toys are combat related but getting into firefights feels like playing the game wrong. Perhaps the devs just assumed players would always go in guns blazing? on the Morgue story mission the handler accused me of 'starting a gunfight in the morgue' even though I finished the mission full stealth. I have save-scummed some missions early on when I broke stealth but this was mostly due to not understanding the game's mechanics, now it's easy to full stealth a mission without reloads, even with a team of completely green level 2 recruits.
The final story mission in chapter 1 was mandatory combat, I really liked it but wished the game made it more clear. I went into it thinking I could somehow sneak away since so far every mission had allowed stealth. I think they should have had more distinction between open combat and sneaking missions. It's easy to play this and see so many ways it could be tweaked or improved, a lot of potential seems wasted.
Part of the problem is there's not much room for specialization. The idea seems to be you are this black ops leader who has to throw together this disparate team of misfits and try to complete these missions under various restrictions. In real life you can't craft perfect employees, you have to canvas for recruits, judge their strengths and weaknesses, make use of their specialties, and if possible train up their deficiencies, and this game simulates all of that pretty well. But for whatever reason it makes every recruit essentially a stealth master by default.
Lots of people saying the game should have more non-combat perks but it's hard to see how they could make the characters any more stealthy than they already are. All of the following abilities IMO should be either locked behind perks or severely nerfed without them:
-Walking up to/behind guards without alerting them
-Jumping down from ledges without harm/breaking through windows
-Picking locks (locked doors should be waaay more common) and shutting down security systems
-Wearing disguises (at minimum speaking the local language should be required)
-Concealing weapons while disguised
-Walking within 2-3 squares of normal guards while disguised
-Headshots with pistols
-Karate-chop takedowns, especially from the front
-Insta-body disposal
I wonder if the game was like this in an earlier build because I can't imagine the devs would overlook such concepts in a game that requires rare proficiency skills just to screw a silencer onto the end of a gun. I guess you could make someone with the Martial Artist perk, HP boost, awareness regeneration boost, and then use them exclusively for knockouts, but they aren't going to be all that more effective than anyone else. If the face-bonking ability were limited to a perk instead of being universal, such characters would be the lynchpin of any infiltration team, and almost too valuable to risk in combat. It would also make finding silencers and developing proficiencies a high priority throughout the game, since using stealth weapons would be the only way non-martial artists could contribute to stealthily neutralizing enemies.
In most spy fiction you don't see omni-competent agents unless they are solo operators like James Bond, Jason Bourne, etc. If you have a team of multiple field agents then everyone is a specialist; you have the stealth guy, the tech guy, the talky-talky person, the marksman, etc. In this game the skillsets are so broad it's hard to see the need for specialization. I can see creating close-combat specialists or snipers but the effort and luck required (because perks are randomized) to make that happen doesn't seem worth it. I think the game would have been better if it were class based. You could have soldiers, infiltrators, social experts, and support staff with the 'guy in the van' abilities (it's really odd to me that literally anyone can run the support tools with zero impact on effectiveness). Only the social people could use disguises, only the soldiers could use heavy weaponry, only the infiltrators could jump and sneak around and shut down security. You could also give them specific perk lists and special abilities to specialize them within their role, instead of the grab-bag of generic power ups that make up most of the game's perks.
I haven't even talked about the clue board, which I find super entertaining even though it is busywork. It's fun for LARPing, but it's another system that probably should have been re-thought. Right now it's not clear where upgrades even come from, solving an intel board seems to give very random rewards--sometimes people, sometimes items, sometimes a mission. Needs to be more consistent. I'm not even sure if the analysis job solves the board, gives more intel pieces, or both. When the game's systems are so unclear it's hard to make decisions. They should have done it so that the analysis job decodes the intel, which then either provide a tech upgrade, new recruit, story item, etc, or a piece of the clue board. The clue boards should have been limited to 1 per chapter, and solving them should be the only source of story missions. So the player generates leads from random missions, acquires intel, decodes and connects the dots, revealing persons of interest that lead to story missions. Instead it's just kind of this random thing that sometimes maybe drives the story. And sometimes the radio handler just hands you the missions. Okay then.
Woulda, coulda, shoulda. I'm still having fun.
Grampy_Bone
Arcane
What's different for the russians exactly? Different agents, different weapons, different trainings, different workshop upgrades? I'm playing CIA and so far in chapter 2 I feel like I've barely unlocked anything.
Wanted to revisit this to compare across to something else with a fresher memory. If you do get to the point of trying to play it under Win 11, you definitely need to make sure that the Visual C++ 2019 redistributables are installed (at least for the GOG version) or it's one of the few games which won't automatically run that I've come across.
Still have really mixed feelings about the game itself. May take up Eryfkrad's suggestion to not go CIA this time to see whether I have fewer complaints about the difficulty being all over the place as you spec up agents.
Still have really mixed feelings about the game itself. May take up Eryfkrad's suggestion to not go CIA this time to see whether I have fewer complaints about the difficulty being all over the place as you spec up agents.
LESS T_T
Arcane
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2012
- Messages
- 13,582
"Turn based tactical design fundamentals and a handful of tips - takeaway version" from Kacper Szymczak: https://www.slideshare.net/szymczak...entals-and-a-handful-of-tips-takeaway-version
There's also a slide with notes for postmortem of Phantom Doctrine from 2018: https://www.slideshare.net/szymczakkacper/phantom-doctrine-a-design-postmortem
There's also a slide with notes for postmortem of Phantom Doctrine from 2018: https://www.slideshare.net/szymczakkacper/phantom-doctrine-a-design-postmortem
rusty_shackleford
Arcane
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2018
- Messages
- 50,754
Is there any information on this?
Hard West was much better than Phantom Doctrine, which I was disappointed by.
LESS T_T
Arcane
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2012
- Messages
- 13,582
Except what's discussed here (that it is funded by Good Shepherd Entertainment, etc.) and the art on their website, I don't think so.
ArchAngel
Arcane
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2015
- Messages
- 20,081
It was very disjointed. It was fun at first but as soon as you move to next scenario with whole new characters, mechanics and story I kept losing will to continue. In the end I never finished all scenarios.
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2012
- Messages
- 28,371
Might not agree 100% with Kacper Szymczak with his choices of games(xcom2 essential?) , but this is some good stuff.
"90% should never miss" is stupid, it should fail 1 time out of 10
Silva
Arcane
Got an itch to revisit this, after dropping the CIA campaign out of boredom last time (this game would really benefitted from an "auto-resolve" function for missions). Ill try the KGB this time and see if it improves things.
rusty_shackleford
Arcane
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2018
- Messages
- 50,754
The same problem is solved by simply calculating the hit chance for each bullet individually rather than treating it as one attack that either hits/misses.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2015
- Messages
- 19,296
Some people really can't handle it, when that happens 4 times in row.
the system the nu XCOMs have (can't have multiple whiffs in a row) could help those players.
Kacper Szymczak
Arcane
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2014
- Messages
- 107
This pertains to 99% of the general public out there, not you edgelords over here.
Well, it is the number one most successful tactical out there. One does not get to discredit the big winners in the context of gamedev conferences
Me too.
Our new thing is my first game where I cared to make it actually fun to play, and the playtests so far suggest we're onto something.
DM me with your email address, will enlist you for the next round of playtests, if you wish.
ArchAngel
Arcane
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2015
- Messages
- 20,081
Uh, in 2022 that probably means another game with cards for combat
rusty_shackleford
Arcane
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2018
- Messages
- 50,754
In phoenix point each bullet's ballistics is calculated individually so there is no general "chance to hit". I don't think it was meant to solve this, but it does because a burst fire onto a target directly in front of you has essentially a zero percent chance of every bullet missing the target. I preferred it a lot over nu-XCOM/2's system.
old X-COMs also did a somewhat-detailed physical simulation using a voxel approximation of the world. I'd have to go refer to openxcom to remember how it works though.
Harthwain
Magister
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2019
- Messages
- 4,816
Only assuming it is supposed to average out in the long run. Otherwise you might not miss anything or miss more than 1 out of 10.
ValeVelKal
Arcane
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 1,605
Kacper Szymczak said:
ooooohhhh, as a producer / game lead (sadly on a FPS presently) that SECOND presentation is gold. All the explanations about how to solve line of sight issues, the problem you encountered, etc - great. I'll actually refer to the presentation when, and if, I finally work on my personally designed tactical game.
The reference list in the first presentation is missing Computer Ambush (1980) if you want to flex. It already had almost everything : cover, overwatch, posture, energy, debilitating wounds, morale, sneaking movement, pick-up weapons from the ground, leadership, escort/escape/plant bomb missions, melee (including freaking bayonets). It was only missing a campaign mode. I did an AAR here (with some folks from the 'Dex) and a review there.
Kacper Szymczak
Arcane
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2014
- Messages
- 107
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2017
- Messages
- 1,416
MCA might be looking for a door to get back into the business.
ValeVelKal
Arcane
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 1,605
LOL
I am senior prod / game lead / economy designer ; I think I could easily switch to full-fledged designer at this point, but I believe I am lacking a bit of experience for lead gd. Also I mostly did mobile, though IMo you learn better in mobile than in Console/PC. YMMV on that.
Though in truth I would totally try my chance and apply, if you were in France and not in Poland
- sadly I cannot travel the world anymore.
Last edited:
Silva
Arcane
So, restarting this with the KGB as suggested above. Should I go Hard Ironman? What Hard does besides not vanishing with corpses?
Oh, in the meantime, did some mod implement auto-resolve for secondary missions? My last CIA playthrough got me burned halfway due to repetiveness.
Oh, in the meantime, did some mod implement auto-resolve for secondary missions? My last CIA playthrough got me burned halfway due to repetiveness.
Forgive the dumb question, but isn't lead design the "head" of the project? Looks weird seeing a game being created with this role vacant. I may be speaking bullocks though, as I know nothing about game dev.
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.