Let's Play X-COM: UFO Defense!

[Zixinus]

On the note of weapons:

SMGs might be actually good if they were the same size and handedness as the pistol, just able to auto-fire. However, your carbine already is able to auto-fire and is far better balanced than the SMG. Thus it would be rather pointless.

As a note, its interesting that the game notes that its 6.7mm. That is actually within the range of an ideal assault rifle/carbine round: light enough for automatic fire but big and heavy enough for long range lethality.

So, why use a sub-par weapon when you already have the best available? Most players will want the best weapon anyway and will immediately discard any other weapons as soon as possible. So why bother with 1000 different weapons that you have to balance individually when you have only one at the beginning that's fine as it is?

[Vendetta]

And then you replace them within the first month with laser rifles and laser pistols (which have auto shot) anyway, so the point is redundant...

Pointless redundant details do not add to a game.

[Ryan Thunder]

On the note of weapons:

SMGs might be actually good if they were the same size and handedness as the pistol, just able to auto-fire. However, your carbine already is able to auto-fire and is far better balanced than the SMG. Thus it would be rather pointless.

As a note, its interesting that the game notes that its 6.7mm. That is actually within the range of an ideal assault rifle/carbine round: light enough for automatic fire but big and heavy enough for long range lethality.

It is? I always thought that would be the 7.62 NATO.

It's also said to be some kind of fully-automatic sniper rifle, if I'm not mistaken, which frankly is ridiculous given its effective range in the game and the calibre of the round fired. Most military sniper rifles I'm aware of are large-calibre weapons.

So why bother with 1000 different weapons that you have to balance individually when you have only one at the beginning that's fine as it is?

You're exaggerating severely. They could benefit from a machine gun that could auto-fire more often than the jack-of-all-trades rifle to lay down suppressive fire. They could benefit from a sniper rifle that can actually hit and kill things at a reasonable distance. They could benefit from a slug-firing shotgun that can actually kill things at close range. Etc.

Furthermore, they could also benefit from an order of Dragonskin to replace those silly pajamas they wear.

[Vendetta]

It's also said to be some kind of fully-automatic sniper rifle, if I'm not mistaken, which frankly is ridiculous given its effective range in the game and the calibre of the round fired. Most military sniper rifles I'm aware of are large-calibre weapons.

All weapon ranges are infinite in X-Com. Sight range is only 20 squares in light (9 in darkness) but if you've got a spotter you can shoot from one end of the tactical map to the other. Range doesn't affect accuracy or damage calculations (except for explosion damage, which is reduced 10 per square from the origin point)

You're exaggerating severely. They could benefit from a machine gun that could auto-fire more often than the jack-of-all-trades rifle to lay down suppressive fire.

There's no such thing as "Suppressive fire" in the X-Com series. Different fire modes are just playing the odds of hitting the target against the amount of damage you need to do and the chance of reaction fire. Also, a laser rifle can fire 7 shots in a turn (2 auto 1 snap), and 3 hits will drop a Muton, the toughest normal enemy.

They could benefit from a sniper rifle that can actually hit and kill things at a reasonable distance.

See previous note about lack of range calculations in X-Com

They could benefit from a slug-firing shotgun that can actually kill things at close range.

It's called a laser rifle. You research it within the first month and it makes all previous weapons irrelevant.

Furthermore, they could also benefit from an order of Dragonskin to replace those silly pajamas they wear.

Armour research already exists.

Seriously, you are asking for surface details that would make no difference at all to the game, because the level of abstraction it works at makes them irrelevant.

Abstraction is largely a good thing in game design, as it means the players' decision is concentrated on actual tactical choices not on fiddling details that make no difference.

[White Haven]

It's called a laser rifle. You research it within the first month and it makes all previous weapons irrelevant.

Ahem. All previous non-explosive weapons.

[Ryan Thunder]

Armour research already exists.

Researching alien alloys just wastes my scientific resources without yielding so much as a progress rating. (Isn't "Unknown" just their way of saying "haha, no." anyways?)

The existing body 'armour' is shit protection.

Seriously, you are asking for surface details that would make no difference at all to the game, because the level of abstraction it works at makes them irrelevant.

Abstraction is largely a good thing in game design, as it means the players' decision is concentrated on actual tactical choices not on fiddling details that make no difference.

What? These aren't "fiddling details that make no difference." They're realistic military hardware, which is quite a bit more dangerous than the stock shit they force on you.

The level of abstraction is so high that a weapon that is intended to be a minigun is limited to some six rounds of fire in a turn from a stationary position.

The fact that I am limited to a measly jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none rifle with a non-standard calibre and ludicrously tiny clip is too much, especially when a wide array of superior weapons for close-quarters combat already exists and has existed for decades.

Forget the other guns. They have the same issues; you can't replace the whole gamut of infantry weapons with just analogs for a pistol, a rifle, and an anti-tank rifle (which have been obsolete for a while, anyways, if I'm not mistaken.)

Additionally, the fact that the game has "tiers" of weaponry is a failing in and of itself. Research should yield additional options, not obsolete your entire armoury.

Of course, this would require said armoury to actually be useful to begin with, I suppose.

[Vendetta]

Ahem. All previous non-explosive weapons.

True. Bigger bangs have to wait for the Blaster Launcher.

Researching alien alloys just wastes my scientific resources without yielding so much as a progress rating. (Isn't "Unknown" just their way of saying "haha, no." anyways?)

Then you don't have enough scientists. You should aim to have around 100 by the first couple of months. "Unknown" progress means the project has more than 2/3 of it's total run time (in man-days) to run.

What? These aren't "fiddling details that make no difference." They're realistic military hardware, which is quite a bit more dangerous than the stock shit they force on you.

In gameplay terms they are completely irrelevant. You have a gun that does damage X with accuracy Y%, those are the only things that matter. What it's called and what it looks like mean precisely dick, and all of your starting guns are replaced wholesale by the laser rifle and pistol anyway because it has infinite ammo and will handily kill anything up to a Muton in one turn

Forget the other guns. They have the same issues; you can't replace the whole gamut of infantry weapons with just analogs for a pistol, a rifle, and an anti-tank rifle (which have been obsolete for a while, anyways, if I'm not mistaken.)

Yes, you can, it's called abstraction, and it makes actually playing the game more fun because you are able to get down to making gameplay relevant tactical decisions that much quicker because you aren't fiddling about finding out which weapon graphic gives you the firmer erection.

[Zixinus]

It is? I always thought that would be the 7.62 NATO.

No, althought it was intented to be. The recoil impulse is just too high and heavy for it. If it were the ideal bullet, it would be used by every assoult rifle today.

Originally, it was the 7x43 British for the EM-2. Canada, Britain and Belgium was satisfied with it. Of course, Americans did what Americans always do: announce that the solution that works for the rest of the world to not work for them and stick to a solution that doesn't really work for them either, but by God, its American. This is what resulted in the 7.62 NATO, which is too strong for full automatic fire.

Of course, the solution didn't work, because of the high weight and recoil. Thus, Americans again did what they often like to do, is instead of a slight adjustment, they fall on the other side of the horse, hence the 5.56 NATO. This too does not work quite the way it should, for reasons I won't get into right now.

Of course, if the Americans would have shut the fuck up and would have adopted the 7.4 British along with the EM-2, there wouldn't be this mess and we wouldn't see steps of idiocy like the M4, where they had to cut the barrel in order to do something that adopting a bullpup configurations would have solved.

Read the story here (the full story is only within the book, which if you excuse some wanking, is quite good):
http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/256brit.htm

I recall that SOCOM highly favours the 6.8 Remington.

It's also said to be some kind of fully-automatic sniper rifle, if I'm not mistaken, which frankly is ridiculous given its effective range in the game and the calibre of the round fired. Most military sniper rifles I'm aware of are large-calibre weapons.

Depends on what you define as "sniper rifle" and what ranges. In short, urban ranges, you don't need a true sniper rifle or person, just someone with a above-standard accurate rifle and skill.

You're exaggerating severely. They could benefit from a machine gun that could auto-fire more often than the jack-of-all-trades rifle to lay down suppressive fire.

Suppressive fire doesn't quite exist in X-com, mostly because of the fact that the enemies don't tend to take cover, thus again, becoming a pointless weapon.

Furthermore, you can hardly fire a machine gun from the shoulder and most of the scenarios are too fast to lay out a machine gun.

Plus, unless you are willing to sacrifice the utility of three other members, the bullet will be the same as the one used from an assault rifle. What advantages there when you already have a decent carbine that can also deliver automatic (or at least, burst) fire?

They could benefit from a sniper rifle that can actually hit and kill things at a reasonable distance.

Sniper doesn't mean "snap-shooter". Snipers have to aim their rifles just like everybody else and the main reason that teams often miss is that they're don't have time.

Plus, a sniper rifle would be make the sniper even more impotent against treats than otherwise.

They could benefit from a slug-firing shotgun that can actually kill things at close range. Etc.

Actually, I would argue for an automatic shotgun or even semi-automatic shotgun using specialised ammo. However, this again, would be unwise:

Automatic shotguns would have to fire either buckshot or slugs. Buckshot might not stop a wild boar, never mind an genetically-engineered tough-hided alien soldier. Plus, buckshot degrades with distance.

I would have to check data on this, but I'm not sure a slug would offer that much better performance against a rifle bullet.

The only possible advantage would be special bullets. Special bullets would either be not reliable enough, both the bullet's effect, accuracy and the gun itself. If you were to take maximum advantage of special bullets, you would have to switch to them mid-battle, an obviously unwise idea.

Personally, an underbarrel grenade launcher would have been more pointed effort, but I can see how that would screw with game balance, thus cut.

Furthermore, they could also benefit from an order of Dragonskin to replace those silly pajamas they wear.

Dragonskin is intended against bullets and shrapnel, not plasma fire or claws of monsters.

That, and Dragonskin was made after X-com was published.

The level of abstraction is so high that a weapon that is intended to be a minigun is limited to some six rounds of fire in a turn from a stationary position.

The auto-canon is a minigun? I thought it was an automatic cannon, with the explosive bullets and all.

Also, the reason for that, is game balance.

If you had a weapon that would obliterate anything it is pointed at, there wouldn't be much fun to play the game, now would it?

an anti-tank rifle (which have been obsolete for a while, anyways, if I'm not mistaken.)

I recall that they are still issued and made. They don't work against tanks anymore, but against vehicles (like, say, the multi-million dollar fighter jet that can be turned into multi-million dollar scrap by one bullet) it still serves well. Plus, it can still ruin anybody's day if they happen to catch a bullet from one of these.

What? These aren't "fiddling details that make no difference." They're realistic military hardware, which is quite a bit more dangerous than the stock shit they force on you.

Realistic isn't always good for video games. They can be good measure as immersion, but the point of a game is to be an actual game, not a simulator.

If you want realistic, get a combat simulator, I think you can actually buy simulators that actual soldiers learn combat with.

But the rest of us, including this gun-nut, is willing to forgive or even embrace unrealism for the sake of fun and a good challenge.

The fact that I am limited to a measly jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none rifle with a non-standard calibre and ludicrously tiny clip is too much, especially when a wide array of superior weapons for close-quarters combat already exists and has existed for decades.

Which will suck for one reason or another. Why not just make ONE weapon that sucks just a little but is good for any situation, rather than make one gun that's only good for one kind of situation.

I may be going over the expansions of the developers here, but try this:

Imagine yourself as someone who has developed X-Com, the institution. You are given the task of finding the best weapon possible for soldiers facing the unknown.

Here is what you know:
- The possible fights will be carried out in relatively short ranges, likely not exceeding 300 meters.
- Fights will happen in any area, in any time. Fights are likely to happen in urban areas, so size is a factor.
- Fights will be short, but highly intense and thus bullet must count.
- Your enemy is likely to be better equiped and armed than you are.
- Your enemy is unknown and its tactics are unknown.
- Since we operate in secrecy, our logistics should be as simple as possible.
- Requires minimum cross-training.
- Requires minium R&D, so it can be put into service quickly put into service.

So, what are you gonna do?

Are you gonna issue 5 different weapons, or are you gonna try and make a single weapon that can perform all roles fairly well, so that any soldier can account for any unexpected situations?

Personally, the only flaw I see in the X-com weapons is:
- Instead of a long-range scope, use a red-dot reflex sight that can adjust between 1x and 4x. This might be an invention of the last couple of years.
- Put in an underbarrel grenade launcher, allowing the use of a variety of grenades.
- Allow the use of a drum magazine. Risky and bulky, but the higher ammunition cap might be worth it

[MJ12 Commando]

Researching alien alloys just wastes my scientific resources without yielding so much as a progress rating. (Isn't "Unknown" just their way of saying "haha, no." anyways?)

If you have 50-100 scientists it doesn't take that long (a couple of days, a week or two at most) to get both Alloys and Personal Armor.

The existing body 'armour' is shit protection.

It protects well enough against light fragmentation and glancing blows from rifle-caliber rounds. I think the problem you have is with the aliens having far superior weapons to you, which is an intentional facet of game design. If you don't like that you can't finish the game with an assault rifle and grenade launcher, play UFO: Aftershock or something. Which is a fun game, but it's not X-Com.

What? These aren't "fiddling details that make no difference." They're realistic military hardware, which is quite a bit more dangerous than the stock shit they force on you.

The level of abstraction is so high that a weapon that is intended to be a minigun is limited to some six rounds of fire in a turn from a stationary position.

The autocannon is a heavy repeating weapon that fires high-caliber projectiles, if the damage rating and ability to load high-explosive or incendiary ammunition didn't clue you in on that.

The fact that I am limited to a measly jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none rifle with a non-standard calibre and ludicrously tiny clip is too much, especially when a wide array of superior weapons for close-quarters combat already exists and has existed for decades.

Forget the other guns. They have the same issues; you can't replace the whole gamut of infantry weapons with just analogs for a pistol, a rifle, and an anti-tank rifle (which have been obsolete for a while, anyways, if I'm not mistaken.)

A wide array of weapons that won't help you at all. What's a SMG going to do besides plink off while you get vaporized? X-Com uses .50 pistol ammunition because they're pretty sure that you won't be stopping aliens without any less (and they're right). How's a LMG going to help when the aliens generally not only have better reflexes but accuracy than your soldiers until the late-game? Or a sniper rifle that takes time to set up and more time to line up a shot?

Additionally, the fact that the game has "tiers" of weaponry is a failing in and of itself. Research should yield additional options, not obsolete your entire armoury.

Of course, this would require said armoury to actually be useful to begin with, I suppose.

Take a few potshots against civilians. The weapons are useful when shooting at human targets, the problem is that the aliens are just, you know, blessed with superior technology. Which is why most weapons become "obsolete". All the alien plasma weapons and the laser rifle/XComUtil Heavy Laser are useful until the lategame, though. The game was designed so that your early arsenal is mostly obsoleted (although due to the incendiary damage bug the Autocannon/IN is still usable for a fair while) by weapons that are just plain better.

[Vendetta]

Additionally, the fact that the game has "tiers" of weaponry is a failing in and of itself. Research should yield additional options, not obsolete your entire armoury.

Of course, this would require said armoury to actually be useful to begin with, I suppose.

Take a few potshots against civilians. The weapons are useful when shooting at human targets, the problem is that the aliens are just, you know, blessed with superior technology. Which is why most weapons become "obsolete". All the alien plasma weapons and the laser rifle/XComUtil Heavy Laser are useful until the lategame, though. The game was designed so that your early arsenal is mostly obsoleted (although due to the incendiary damage bug the Autocannon/IN is still usable for a fair while) by weapons that are just plain better.

The default rifle will take down Sectoids and Floaters with no significant trouble, and it's pretty accurate. Only thing that's a problem before it gets replaced is Cyberdiscs, and aimed shots are expensive on the TUs.

[MJ12 Commando]

The default rifle will take down Sectoids and Floaters with no significant trouble, and it's pretty accurate. Only thing that's a problem before it gets replaced is Cyberdiscs, and aimed shots are expensive on the TUs.

Well sectoids can reliably survive one shot, and floaters reliably can survive 2-3 (especially the commanders and high-level guys who are quite durable). They're decent against Sectoids and Floaters and end up marginal against everything else.

I rarely use aimed shot until I get very high-accuracy soldiers, since autofire has comparable accuracy (sometimes superior) with the chance of multiple hits and a lower TU impact. And besides, anyone who dies from friendly fire? Killed by the aliens.

[Vendetta]

Well sectoids can reliably survive one shot, and floaters reliably can survive 2-3 (especially the commanders and high-level guys who are quite durable). They're decent against Sectoids and Floaters and end up marginal against everything else.

Sectoids don't survive a rifle hit too often, they have 30HP versus the rifle's damage range of 0-90, and they have pathetic armour (4 frontal armour less back and sides) which is flat across all their ranks. On average a sectoid has a 1/3 chance of surviving a rifle shot.

Floaters have 35-45HP depending on rank and similarly puny armour (8 frontal, 16 for Leaders and 24 Commanders) so even a Floater Leader, which you'll probably only see on terror missions whilst you're still using rifles will only have around a 60% survival chance from a single rifle hit (-16-74 damage), and two should doom them unless you're really unlucky.

(Damage is calculated by generating a random number within the damage range, multiplying that by the effectiveness against that type of target, which for AP ammo is 1 against everything except Cyberdiscs and Mutons where it's 0.8 and 0.6, and then deducting the armour value for whatever facing was hit)

You won't generally encounter Leaders much whist you're still using rifles, and certainly not Commanders who only appear on bases and battleships, so their improved armour won't be much of a factor.

The rifle is actually still relatively effective until you're meeting Snakemen, whose armour starts being a problem (20 frontal and high all round).

[Nephtys]

The Rifle isn't that bad in X-COM. Mutons even aren't THAT nasty of a foe, it'll just take multiple hits. The ammo magazines are big enough with 20 rounds to last unless you're hosing down autofire. It's decently accurate too. Just that you know, Laser rifles are supposed to give you that parity you need. High accuracy, autofire, light weight, no ammo. Not that big of a deal, considering it'll be your mainstay weapon until Aliens start issuing Heavy Plasmas to everyone.

Now in TFTD, good lord. Dart Guns and Harpoon rifles vs Lobstermen? That's like 15 hits to even have a chance of bringing one down. and each gun only has 10 rounds in those piddly little harpoon clips. But that's another story...

[Zixinus]

Now in TFTD, good lord. Dart Guns and Harpoon rifles vs Lobstermen? That's like 15 hits to even have a chance of bringing one down. and each gun only has 10 rounds in those piddly little harpoon clips. But that's another story...

What's sad about that, is that there are specialised underwater weapons and some of them aren't even that old.

The SPP-1 was produced in 1971 under the Soviet Union.
Then there is the APS an assault rifle

Also, HK also produced a pistol for underwater use, the P11.

So, its really just the game developers wanting the game to be harder, I guess.

[Vendetta]

The Rifle isn't that bad in X-COM. Mutons even aren't THAT nasty of a foe, it'll just take multiple hits.

You'd have to be lucky with a normal rifle to take down a Muton without him getting to turn round and reaction fire you into next week. They have 125 health and 20 armour all round, and a 40% damage reduction against AP ammo. You're talking 4 hits minimum if they all do within their top 10% damage, and much more likely that he'll shrug a couple of them off.

Laser Rifles are perfectly adequate against a muton though. Can't one shot them (do -20-100 vs. 125 health), but 2-3 shots will usually do the trick.

[Vendetta]

Now in TFTD, good lord. Dart Guns and Harpoon rifles vs Lobstermen? That's like 15 hits to even have a chance of bringing one down. and each gun only has 10 rounds in those piddly little harpoon clips. But that's another story...

What's sad about that, is that there are specialised underwater weapons and some of them aren't even that old.
.

And they're about as puny as X-Com's underwater weapons at the start, with low lethal range and low ammunition...

[Coalition]

From the game, the standard rifle is:
* Auto: 35% (Accuracy 35%)
* Snap: 25% (Accuracy 60%)
* Aimed: 80% (Accuracy 110%)
and 30 AP damage.

For a SMG, I'd change it to:
* Auto: 15% (Accuracy 15%)
* Snap: 10% (Accuracy 25%)
* Aimed: 20% (Accuracy 30%)
Also, change the clip size to 6, to reflect the fact that you are likely firing it on 3-round bursts each time, and Auto fire is just firing a 9 round burst. Damage remains the same. This is basically a lower accuracy rifle, but you can fire it more often. Good for short-range fights.

For a bolt-action Sniper Rifle:
* Snap: 65% (Accuracy 100%)
* Aimed: 100% (Accuracy 150%)
Change the clip to 6 since most Sniper rifles have smaller clips. Likely have to increase the damage compared to standard rifle, maybe 45 AP or higher?

For a semi-auto Sniper Rifle:
* Auto: 40% (Accuracy 60%)
* Snap: 45% (Accuracy 80%)
* Aimed: 90% (Accuracy 135%)
Not as accurate as a Bolt-action, but you do have more flexibility, plus a 6-round clip means you can send 50 caliber death downrange in 2 groups, then reload for next turn. Similar damage (or slightly less) compared to bolt-action Sniper Rifle.

[Vendetta]

And then it's all irrelevant after a month because you've researched laser rifles.

[Ohma]

What's sad about that, is that there are specialised underwater weapons and some of them aren't even that old.
*blahblahblah*
So, its really just the game developers wanting the game to be harder, I guess.

What difference would that make? It's not like changing the weapon names and graphics would've made them do any higher math against the aliens.

The bigger problem as I see it in terms of weapon damage in X-Com, is that most of the weapons just do too much damage compared to how much health and armor anyone will usually have. I'm not saying that it should be more like a typical CRPG where it takes like, twelve hits to bring anyone down, but it seems weird that there's armor and a wound system when neither really comes up all that often. I mean, yeah, once your dudes are wearing armor they start dieing less, but not really all that much less. I just think it would work better if the damage/health/armor math were shifted so that you started out with your guys being about as likely to die in one hit as they are when they're wearing personal armor (which is still pretty likely, but it would mean that giving them real armor makes more of an observable difference, and you'd have more times where someone is just critically wounded instead of dead). I also might throw in a crappy version of the Med-Kit you could buy from the start...that has like, only one charge or something...

Also I never realized that there aren't range penalties...that would explain a lot...

[Vendetta]

Well sectoids can reliably survive one shot, and floaters reliably can survive 2-3 (especially the commanders and high-level guys who are quite durable). They're decent against Sectoids and Floaters and end up marginal against everything else.

Sectoids don't survive a rifle hit too often, they have 30HP versus the rifle's damage range of 0-90, and they have pathetic armour (4 frontal armour less back and sides) which is flat across all their ranks. On average a sectoid has a 1/3 chance of surviving a rifle shot.

Floaters have 35-45HP depending on rank and similarly puny armour (8 frontal, 16 for Leaders and 24 Commanders) so even a Floater Leader, which you'll probably only see on terror missions whilst you're still using rifles will only have around a 60% survival chance from a single rifle hit (-16-74 damage), and two should doom them unless you're really unlucky.

(Damage is calculated by generating a random number within the damage range, multiplying that by the effectiveness against that type of target, which for AP ammo is 1 against everything except Cyberdiscs and Mutons where it's 0.8 and 0.6, and then deducting the armour value for whatever facing was hit)

You won't generally encounter Leaders much whist you're still using rifles, and certainly not Commanders who only appear on bases and battleships, so their improved armour won't be much of a factor.

The rifle is actually still relatively effective until you're meeting Snakemen, whose armour starts being a problem (20 frontal and high all round).

Edit: Math is a bit off here. Floaters and sectoids have about a 50/50 chance to survive, I overestimated base rifle damange. The range should be 0-60.

[MJ12 Commando]

Sectoids don't survive a rifle hit too often, they have 30HP versus the rifle's damage range of 0-90, and they have pathetic armour (4 frontal armour less back and sides) which is flat across all their ranks. On average a sectoid has a 1/3 chance of surviving a rifle shot.

That's the heavy cannon IIRC with the 0-90 damage range, the Rifle's is 0-50 if I recall.

Also, you guys USED rifles in TFTD? I either gave the guy a thermal taser and grenades (if he didn't have the strength to use a gas cannon) or a gas cannon (if he did). Seriously, hitting people in the face with a freeze stick is far more effective (and also gets you the live captures you need to get armor fast).

The one thing I liked about TFTD is that Mag. Ion Armor and Ion Armor were ridiculously tough, capable of shrugging off even sonic cannon shots over 50% of the time to the front plates (shrugging off, as in literally no damage). One shot kills to the front or rear were pretty uncommon.

[Vendetta]

That's the heavy cannon IIRC with the 0-90 damage range, the Rifle's is 0-50 if I recall.

The rifle is 0-60 (hence me correcting myself). The heavy cannon is 0-112.

[Zixinus]

What difference would that make? It's not like changing the weapon names and graphics would've made them do any higher math against the aliens.

Sincerly? Nothing really, I'm just being a stupid nerd.

What was implied however, is that aqua-x-com uses dart rifles and harpoon rifles due to the fact that guns don't work underwater. I just pointing out that there ARE military weapons meant for underwater use, that would actually give a bit less ridiculous pretence to the initial weapons of aqua-x-com.

[Ryan Thunder]

For a SMG, I'd change it to:
* Auto: 15% (Accuracy 15%)
* Snap: 10% (Accuracy 25%)
* Aimed: 20% (Accuracy 30%)

Best make it a carbine, then, if the damage is the same. I'd say add 5% to the TU costs and accuracy, but that's just me.

An LMG should look something like this:
Auto: 15% (Acc: 20%)
Snap: 10% (Acc: 45%)
30 AP damage, 100 round magazines that take up four spaces in the equipment screen. Yes, I am aware that this limits you to at most, two additional magazines, but that's 300 rounds, and the most you can fire in a turn is 19. While a potential 19 shots per turn might sound a little extreme, the gun and ammunition are heavy and will hamper the mobility of your trooper.

<sniper stuff>

I wouldn't differentiate between semi-auto and bolt-action rifles, myself. These aren't actual snipers, just designated marksmen, so they would probably benefit more from a semi-automatic weapon, anyways. I wouldn't give it automatic fire, though.

The ammunition capacity is ludicrously low, when you think about it. The rifle should have a 30-round clip, the pistol 8-12 or so.

And then it's all irrelevant after a month because you've researched laser rifles.

Yes, Vendetta, I think we all understand that you believe the weapon layout is perfect as is, and that the ludicrous levels of abstraction that limit the avaliable tactics to "bring the biggest bloody gun you can find" are a good thing.

[Nephtys]

One thing to note though, I REALLY loved TFTD's 'Fluff Pack' that came with it's manual. It had an except from officer training material that was sent to X-COM Field Commanders, about what to expect from the alien threat. It had stuff like 'We should engage them with heavy tank and chopper support, advance with overwhelming artillery, attempt to identify command and control posts, etc', and little pencilled in notes in the margins laughing at how completely inaccurate that was when the war actually played out.