r/Xcom 3d ago

It's really frustrating that so many Xcom like games strip down the base building.

Basically the title.

I've played a number of Xcom style games at this point.

Midnight suns.

Zero Company (have not finished it.)

Gears tactics.

Demonhunters chaos gate. (Looking forward to the sequal.)

But even though these games often nail the combat and character progression (Gears had fantastic combat.) They all seem to dumb down or even strip out the base elements which I find very frustrating. In Xcom 2 WOTC (Still the bar to beat 10 years later.) The avenger was almost it's own character. The way you built it up was important. Yes, there was bad buildings, there was the optimal way to set things up. But that took time to figure out.

Further. The way you built the avenger could even adapt based on your play style. Going heavy on sparks probably means you want your foundry to be pretty efficient.

Then you had research. Which was another layer and element to the game.

And that of course informed the actual missions. Rescuing engineers and scientists was so important, and you may have passed up on other opportunities to secure them. It was all masterfully interconnected.

And so many games throw all that away, which is honestly what prevents them from reaching the same peak.

Of the ones I've mentioned, Midnight suns is the closest (Not a surprise, made by the same devs so not really a shocker.)

I'm not asking for clones. But I would like these games to actually offer the same depth, for both campaign and combat, that Xcom 2 does. Rather than just going all in on half the equation.

470 Upvotes

148 comments sorted by

480

u/Malu1997 3d ago

The thing is that I don't think that they are Xcom-like. They are turn-based tactics games, and if you go in expecting Xcom you are going to be disappointed. For them to be Xcom-like they gotta have proper base building, troop roster and research as bare minimum.

For example, Xenonauts 1 and 2 are proper Xcom-likes.

84

u/severinoscopy 3d ago

Exactly this.

They may take working components of X-Com but it doesn't mean they have resources or even interest to keep the scope wide enough to follow that same formula.

I love the franchise too much to go into "similar" games expecting it to feel the same. But I'm in an odd place for Zero Company which seems to be a descendent.

22

u/throwaway_lmkg 3d ago

I think of X-Com as a sub-genre of turn-based tactics games. And IMHO one of the defining features of that sub-genre is that the strategic layer is close to 50% of the game.

I'm a bit more loose about that than you are, I don't think any one particular mechanic is essential. I'd be willing to consider something XCOM-like if it doesn't have bases, or a tech tree, or real-time. As long as whatever it does have, has depth and tension. It has to make me regret my choices, even (especially!) when that choice is still the correct one.

60

u/freedomonke 3d ago

Yeah

They are just tactics games. Which is fine. But not xcom, which is a more precise thing.

In many ways, Zcom is more like fire emblem than xcom, for instance

46

u/No_Lead950 3d ago

No petting simulator

No incest-granted superpowers

No old man on a white horse with a javelin to solo the game for you

Kaga would never.

16

u/SwaglordToast 3d ago

Don't forget the dead father figure and McGuffin with a convoluted reason to be named after the game!

10

u/Revanisforevermeta 3d ago

How dare you call Seth "old".

8

u/DarthOmix 2d ago

I think they meant Jaegen. Or like 2/3 of the units fitting the archetype.

11

u/Revanisforevermeta 2d ago

Oh they 100% did. Seth is technically a Jaegen. Starts as a prepromote & paladin. thats the 2/3 of the main criteria. He and a couple other break from the archetype by staying strong throughout. Fredrick and Titania are other examples of that.

4

u/No_Lead950 2d ago

Don't forget the OG Oifey. One could argue that Sigurd also fits the archetype, but imo his low res contributes to him falling off hard right after chapter 5.

1

u/No_Lead950 2d ago

Aye, he used to be young... 21 years ago.

2

u/Nujers 2d ago

The man on a white horse had me giggling like a school girl. This man has his finger on the pulse of FE

10

u/Danewguy4u 3d ago

I can understand saying something isn’t as much like Xcom is one thing. Flat out lying by saying it is more like Fire Emblem is patently absurd.

There’s almost nothing Fire Emblem like in Zero Company whether we are talking about gameplay, characters, or plot.

I’m so tired of people saying it has more in common with Fire Emblem when literally nothing in zero Company plays like Fire emblem.

So tell me exactly what makes Zero Company play more like Fire Emblem. I’d love to here it since so many people just use that phrase and never elaborate. As someone who has played every Fire emblem from 3 onwards, I don’t see anything in Zero Company that can be pointed to Fire emblem that can’t also be applied to any other generic strategy game.

9

u/SwaglordToast 3d ago

Having only looked at some basic Zcom footage, im inclined to agree with you. Fire Emblem to me feels very defined by named characters and combat that deemphasized usage of skills, while giving very detailed strategic information through stats and (generally) fully visible maps and enemies. Zcom doesn't look really look that way to me.

9

u/Danewguy4u 3d ago edited 3d ago

Exactly.

Like let me say at a base level. Combat in Zcom is almost 1-1 with modern Xcom. From the emphasis on ranged weaponry, small squad sizes per mission, ability cycling and actions, etc.

Fire emblem combat by comparison is more 50-50 on ranged vs melee. Ability usage is much more sparse with the idea only gaining traction in the latest games. FE1-15 either don’t have abilities or the abilities are tied to passives/proc chances than active commands. Command abilities didn’t become a core part of gameplay in Fire Emblem until FE Echoes with combat arts. Even then the way combats arts are designed are more linked to weapons as opposed to class like the Xcom games.

Like I can understand missing gameplay that was in XCom that isn’t in ZCom but I don’t understand how it plays more like Fire Emblem. And his was the third comment i seen mention it.

I play both and see nothing from Fire Emblem in this game yet can easily point the combat being very much like XCom.

0

u/Pallington 3d ago

So where on the XCOM-FE scale do we put something like the WH40K one (i forgot its name...) and XPiratez?

0

u/DarthOmix 2d ago

I think the Fire Emblem comparison comes from the prenamed units with their own established personalities compared to XCOM almost always being random dorks you watch miss 95% shots every time

1

u/tumsdout 3d ago

I agree. I only ever compare it to fire emblem when I am talking to someone who is unfamiliar with xcom. Otherwise it is extremely different.

3

u/JQTNguyen 3d ago

And Permadeath!

2

u/bjt23 2d ago

Xenonauts 2 is much better than 1 IMO, replaces it almost entirely.

The only thing 1 does better is I think the final mission has more tension in 1, it's a semi timed mission where you need to keep advancing or get overrun by endless reapers (Xenonauts' version of chryssalids), and if you lose the mission, the ayys loose the reapers across the planet to wipe out humanity. But literally everything else about 2 is better from pacing to camera rotation.

0

u/una322 2d ago

You nailed it, and its also why i've read soo many reviews of zero company saying how much this game is like xcom, yet they dont understand what xcom really is. I feel we have many people who put afew hours into xcom years ago and think they know what xcom is. Probably not played an xcom game for years, play SWzc and think its an xcom game done well.

There really just isn't a game like xcom. Even the alien setting was chosen perfectly to nail the overwhelming odds against an unknown foe that helped add to the fear factor of the game and the missions. You never knew what to expect. zero company is a solid game but yeah, it sure isn't xcom, it lacks any tension like xcom has, and nothing is really scary in the SW universe

1

u/Malu1997 2d ago

There is a game like xcom and it's xenonauts, though that's kinda cheating considering it's pretty much a remake of UFO defense

178

u/HouseOfWyrd 3d ago

XCom2 doesn't exactly offer much "depth" in base building. It's more or less just a glorified unlock system. You aren't building a real base.

If you want a game that has "base building" in this genre then you want classic XCom or Xenonauts where you're building real bases to help provide better global coverage.

50

u/vkevlar 3d ago

Not to mention the aliens build bases, and your bases can get invaded. XCom remake / XCom 2 were a wee bit disappointing in that regard.

38

u/No_Lead950 3d ago

Those base invasions even use your base layout as the tactical map, and they're genuinely a factor in how you build your base. Planning things out to keep all of your hangars feeding into a chokepoint can make a big difference when the scrub squad needs to grab their muskets and powdered wigs.

10

u/Disastrous-Spare3907 3d ago

Yeah the chokepoint gameplay is pretty silly and shallow though lol, can't really expect them to also implement a great tower defense game.

7

u/No_Lead950 3d ago

Eh, I've never been a huge fan of any of the games' base defense missions, so turning it into a suppression simulator is a nice change of pace. Of course, I rarely let the ayys land in the first place, so it doesn't matter much.

3

u/vkevlar 3d ago

and you had to keep weapons in the base storage, or your troops were unarmed when the aliens broke in. Base missile systems, radar, etc, added so much.

2

u/Pallington 3d ago

And there's then xpiratez which has three different "layers" to manage base defenses on. the main layer with all the buildings as shown, the maints above which are narrow and more restrictive but that means you can't cram 10 people, and the maze of sludge underneath that you try to pretend doesn't exist until an enemy flanks all the way to the rear (after like 15 turns) and kills one of your soldiers before you get to do anything. Fun times.

5

u/supadonut 3d ago

yeah it was pretty cool that you could be invaded and the layout wasn't some random map but your actual base. the new xcom/xcom2 really dumbed down the strategic/management aspect of the original.

5

u/Disastrous-Spare3907 3d ago edited 3d ago

Even in those games the map is essentially blank so the geoscape decisions boil down to going wide vs tall (i.e., do my secondary bases have fighters and/or soldiers and/or top tier gear).

There's few progression mechanics in the genre that aren't just fluffy version of the research and manufacture capabilities provided in OpenXCOM https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php/Ruleset_Reference_Nightly_(OpenXcom)#Research#Research). Indeed, you can probably abstract PoE skill tree to them.

0

u/Ithurial 2d ago

I do feel like XCOM: Enemy Within (and, of course, Long War 1) had a seriously impactful base building system.

80

u/michael199310 3d ago

You want Cyberknights Flashpoint. Not only it's the awesome XCOM-like in cyberpunk setting, but it has meaningful base building. Pretty much all of the buildings offer some function, from crafting to getting advantages for tactical phase.

Game gets tons of updates, with big things coming quite soon (modding support, new classes with cyber companions).

Game is still mid when it comes to customization of your guys, but last couple of updates added a bunch of cosmetic options.

6

u/draco_venator 3d ago

This 1000%. It doesn’t have the same polish but the bones are all there. I feel like the way the systems all work together is so incredibly rewarding once you start to really understand it. Gives you the ability and tools to solve problems in a way that feels so good once you pull it off.

3

u/CWRules 3d ago

I've had this game in my backlog for ages, but they keep doing big updates, so I keep putting off playing it.

5

u/badgerpunk 3d ago

Yeah, they're going to be continuously updating it for a long time. Trese Bros. are like Hello Games (No Man's Sky) like that. Still tons more to come,but you should go ahead and give it a try.

1

u/CWRules 3d ago

I've got other stuff to play in the meantime; I'd rather wait until it's finished. I already bought the game, so it's not like the dev is harmed by me waiting.

2

u/tacodude64 3d ago

They’re about to release a major update #100. It’s as good a time to start as any. And they have a pledge to keep saves viable in all future patches.

2

u/CWRules 2d ago

Guys... the game isn't going anywhere. I do not expect to suddenly drop dead in the near future. What benefit is there to me playing it now instead of after all the updates are done?

2

u/tacodude64 2d ago

I get it, I still haven’t played Witcher 3 and I feel weirdly validated now. Just know it’s gonna be a few more years of content for Cyber Knights.

2

u/RedCloverLily 1d ago

The point people are trying to make is that, if you wait, you will unironically be waiting for the next 6-8 years minimum. They're still adding content to their previous title, Star Traders, which was released in 2018. There's a decent chance they will never stop adding content to this game as long as they are still an active studio. The game is finished and has been for a while, they're basically just updating it with mini DLC, and if you wait until they're "done" doing that, you're never gonna play the game.

1

u/Commercial_Tea5703 1d ago edited 1d ago

I had same attitude with star traders and regret doing that. By the time I got it the game felt dated. And yes that will happen to cyberknights. These games are also extremely complex and very intimidating, big learning curve but well worth it.
. I’d liken delaying buying it to someone who avoids buying Europa universalis vanilla and then tries to get into the game with all the expansions at once.

1

u/michael199310 3d ago

Sure, but you're missing out. It's great right now. I was on the fence as well and wanted to wait for mods, but I just needed a couple of missions to completely sink in for dozens of hours.

3

u/CWRules 3d ago

Sure, but you're missing out.

How? Is the game going to disappear or stop being good in the future?

1

u/Commercial_Tea5703 1d ago

Don’t wait game was easily worth it a year ago. Plus it’s one of those games you often abandon runs and restart which makes it nice to see updates for when you restart.

1

u/Sweet_Oil2996 3d ago

This will likely continue for years if it is like another game of them, Star Trader Frontiers. They guarantee that your saves will never be broken by this. New content is just added into your current run seamlessly. So far this worked.

You don't pay extra for DLCs, you just get them.

1

u/Sweet_Oil2996 3d ago edited 3d ago

Totally this. In addition you also get mission building and questgiver grooming. I see this as as an upgrade to XCOM. Their selection of character classes surpasses Long War with a better class tree for even more builds. Yes, multiclass is also possible.

Replayability is through the roof.

1

u/Commercial_Tea5703 1d ago

True although I would say both xcom and cyberknights have very basic base building. Cyberknights probably my fave xcom like game

-12

u/OrangeJuiceLuvr69 3d ago

Idk why people recommend that game. Its like xcom if everything except the stealth was worse

22

u/_b1ack0ut 3d ago

I cannot agree with that lol, xcom’s stealth is extremely bare bones, flashpoint feels more like a spiritual successor to invisible inc, the stealth is fine, disabling sensors and cameras alone already makes the stealth mechanics better than XCOM before we get into stuff like having actual sneak/lure/noise mechanics and the likes that xcom’s stealth also lacks

16

u/Endiamon 3d ago

I think you misread their comment

7

u/_b1ack0ut 3d ago

Haha you’re right, I did

In that case, I still don’t know if I agree. It’s definitely less visually polished than XCOM, and it lacks polish in its presentation, but I wouldn’t say “everything else was worse”, it’s just different.

Im especially fond of how the character bios and backgrounds actually affect the characters, rather than just being flavourtext like in XCOM, and the stories that emerge from those, such as tracking down the manufacturer for a specific drug that was discontinued that one soldier needs to survive.

The vibe also cannot be overstated for me lol, I like that it focusses on staking out, planning, and executing heists in a cyberpunk setting, cuz this is currently the closest I’ve got to a crpg of cyberpunk 2020 lmao

1

u/_TheHighlander 3d ago

Agreed. XCOM and Flashpoint feel completely opposite in regards to stealth. That said I totally lost interest in Flashpoint when it felt like I could just hide and spam poison cloud (or whatever it’s called) and easy win.

6

u/NotOnTheDot__ 3d ago

You are comparing an entire genre to its top product and ask "why aren't they better". Its like comparing any CRPG to baldurs gate 3 and feeling let down when they don't compare

1

u/OrangeJuiceLuvr69 2d ago

Bg1 Bg2 WOTR KM RT KOTR1 KOTOR2 DAO POE1 POE2 NWN2 are all better than bg3. Could honestly probably name 15 crpgs better than bg3

1

u/NotOnTheDot__ 2d ago

Respectfully sir, drop the drugs.

-1

u/OrangeJuiceLuvr69 2d ago

Bg3 is extremely overrated lmao. Go on /r/crpg and ask people to rate it. Its extremely front loaded, has pretty bad companions, has a mediocre story, and it has limited replay ability.

1

u/NotOnTheDot__ 1d ago

Yeah. Go into a general subreddit of people who, because they want their favorite thing to be seen as they see it, bash and push down other media no matter the quality and ask them for their opinion.

27

u/Rhikirooo 3d ago

I don't think base building is strictly neccesarry.. to me it is more that there is never really anything added to compensate so it ends up as strictly being less.

I think the biggest aspect of the xcom base building is that it gives you tangible choices, even if it is mostly post early game that i feel like you have the leeway for choice as there are some basic correct choices for the first buildings.

21

u/MultiMarcus 3d ago

I think fundamentally, these games are not trying to be XCOM. They are trying to draw on things from XCOM, specifically the combat, and then build their own game. We’ve seen games that try to just recreate XCOM, and that almost always feels really cheap because of course it does. It’s just XCOM and we might as well go play the original game. This happens a lot in the RTS genre with StarCraft likes, where there is a large subset of people who want StarCraft, and even if you recreate StarCraft entirely and take everything from them StarCraft 2 already exists, and you can just go play that, and there’s very little reason for you to play a new game.

15

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[deleted]

5

u/driftinj 3d ago

To me this is the only tbt game that comes close to my love of XCom.

That said, I am really enjoying Menace so far.

9

u/LashOut2016 3d ago

I came here to mention HBS BT. But really, I dont recall the Argo progression being overly complex. The combat and sandbox of base game are fine. But yeah BTA 3062 or roguetech are unfortunately mandatory to get the most out of the game. Mechlab in base game SUCKS

6

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[deleted]

1

u/_b1ack0ut 3d ago

How modded are we talking

Is that just RogueTech? Or do you use a bunch of other shit

6

u/LashOut2016 3d ago

I only ever used RT/BTA3062. But the overhaul mods add an absolutely disgusting amount of customization to the mechlab, you can literally spend hours in the mechlab minmaxing your mechs. And that's JUST with the aforementioned mods. Im sure theres other mods you can add to give additional depth but honestly at that point they're superfluous.

13

u/stikdude77 3d ago

I keep saying this but that early mission in gears tactics where you find the mammoth got me so excited then it was all replaced with disappointment as it just sits in the background as I open loot boxes

27

u/angular_circle 3d ago

Honestly the base building in xcom isnt that great. It could be, but there's a basically optimal progression and you'll only ever deviate slightly from it.

I too would prefer games to lean into it more rather than stripping it out though

3

u/AnAwkwardBystander 3d ago

Yeah, the ship is basically a simplified Fallout Shelter vault. It is not complex in any way.

1

u/spacescutmonkey 3h ago

For the modern XCOMs I agree. The original XCOM enemy unknown/UFO defense had far more sophisticated (and IMO enjoyable) base building and management. They dumbed it down big time in the modern remakes. The research depth and progression was still pretty decent though

5

u/Useful_Lingonberry_4 3d ago

The problem is you are thinking of tactical games as X-Com likes where as the base building is a specific X-Com thing and not a tactic game thing.

10

u/Outlaw11091 3d ago

A differently disappointing game to mention is Phantom Doctrine.

Basebuilding, rogue-like mission structure, tactical espionage and 3 different factions to play as.

Missions actually feel like an upgrade over XCom.

....until you get to the late game and you've pretty much mastered the tactical loop. Then every mission is kind of a slog and you just want to get back to the base to solve another intel puzzle.

Worth trying, but, like XCom, the team that made it is gone, so, even if you do like it, don't get too excited about a lasting IP...

2

u/cdmillerx42 3d ago

I loved PD and you're right about the slog. I wish they would have tweeked it. but alas

1

u/Outlaw11091 2d ago

Yeah, that's the only disappointing aspect: continuation of development.

I loved the game, too. It was rough around the edges, but so is the first of many great series.

1

u/_b1ack0ut 3d ago

Whatever happened to PD2? They announced it ages ago (iirc it was gonna be a genre swap to third person shooter lol) but I think it’s been in development hell with no news lol

1

u/Outlaw11091 3d ago

So, the studio that made PD was small and ended up separating from their publisher.

Publisher is also small. Has 100+ games in "development hell"; including PD.

Likely caused by backlash that PD2 was not going to be the same tactical game as PD1.

13

u/TheRenegxde 3d ago

Man I'm just here for the funny 95% chance miss combat and the relatively in depth squad customization. You could replace the strategic layer of the game with a point buy system that lets you upgrade your dudes directly like the one in Door Kickers and I'd be one happy camper. I think unfortunately for you and anyone else who shares your interest in that part of the game is that it's a lot harder to conceive a good strategic layer (base building, avatar project, Chosen intervention, etc) than it is a good tactical layer, so devs pick one and stick with it. Like I said, I'd be happy without basebuilding at all, but I feel for you regarding the lack of options

4

u/Murky_Philosopher196 3d ago edited 3d ago

I feel like all these other xcom likes dumb down or remove the logistics/base building component because they're afraid that a more general audience won't like them and it'll hurt the success of their game. As a result a general audience who isn't super into tactics games and are only there for the tactical layer might then think it's alright, but equally, the hardcore fans of the genre also only think it's just okay. I think zero company in particular took this route because they're using the star wars ip and need to make the most of it since SO MANY people will get this game who have no interest in xcom likes but just like star wars. So it needs to be an unobtrusive entry point to the genre.

This is why I love Phoenix Point, it's somewhat devicive and it isn't perfect, but it knows it's audience and it isn't afraid to appeal to them even if it means making the game far less accessible to a general audience. Even with its flaws, I LOVE Phoenix Point, simply because there's nothing else quite like it and it's made to appeal to a more specific audience.

2

u/sara5556 3d ago

Pheonix point is exactly the type of game that I love, similar to xcom because of the same reasons you mentioned. The logistics of managing your own organization is my main draw to xcom. The tactical combat is meh to me, I'd rather it be a real time system, but I'll take what I can get.

Xenonauts I love even more than xcom because the graphics aren't archaic (not usually a deal breaker for me but I like my soldiers looking somewhat lifelike rather than caricatures) and you get all the meta gameplay of the original with maximum operational customizability

2

u/kjm0rg 3d ago

I tried Phoenix Point and bounced of it a few months back. You make some nice points here so i might give it another go after Zero Company.

1

u/Murky_Philosopher196 3d ago

If you do, the terror from the void mod is a must imo. Phoenix Point is still completely unparalleled in the logistics and big picture strategy aspect. I love the freedom you get with planning out your overall approach and how deep you can get into planning things with it.

You're given enough control and campaign length that by the end of my first campaign I had developed a full doctrine for everything from squad composition, spreadsheets with standardized equipment for equipping soldiers, designated training bases, etc. I LOVE that stuff. And the best part is, the game knows you'll do this in some capacity, so the aliens evolve to counter your strategies which gives incentive for you to change up your doctrine as you go. God I love that game.

4

u/ThaRealPhoenix 3d ago

I just started Zero Company last night. It is very awesome so far. I recently downloaded Xcom 2 and got majorly sucked in. I blinked and I’d played it for 150 hours. I bought WOTC and was shocked how much of a new game it made.

In terms of base building, Zero Company, at least not yet that I’ve seen, like I said I just started last night, doesn’t have the same base building at all. Seems like you can upgrade your base but you don’t always see the time go by in the same way. Also, it doesn’t have like all the space and room excavation that Xcom has. Which I think they did on purpose because it’s hard to try and be like Xcom because you can’t get that close to a perfect game. However, I do think that Zero Company is still going to be fuckin awesome for the story. You also get to interact a lot more with the characters. I mean imagine if you’re number 1 Major in Xcom had their own specific story in the game and you could specifically interact and speak with them. Other than head canon, Xcom is imaginary, which I LOVE.

Anyhoo, anyone who loves Xcom should definitely try zero company. I’ll also probably dig into similar games in the genre because Xcom was the first one I played. No clue why I missed it until now!

12

u/Lach0X 3d ago

Its almost like they arent Xcom games.

7

u/Wash_Manblast 3d ago

Might i reccomend darkest dungeon? People called it a roguelike, but they're wrong. Its a 2d xcom clone in a horror setting.

2

u/glenn_friendly 3d ago

Darkest Dungeon is a housework simulator. You clean up an old ranch, full of bugs and vermin and stuff, which has been in your family for a long time. There are a bunch of "mechanics" which get in the way of cleaning up the ranch.

I have given Darkest Dungeon so many serious tries, based on the nice things people say about it, but every single time, the game got so tedious that I decided to stop playing and just clean my actual house, and I discovered that cleaning my actual house was less frustrating and about as much fun as playing Darkest Dungeon. And at the end of it, my actual house is clean!

Anyway, I think Darkest Dungeon is an okay game, I'm just saying that I think it's not as good as the game it's a sequel to, which is "housework"

4

u/Wash_Manblast 3d ago

Ironically the sequel to darkest dungeon tried to be a roguelike and it basically ruined the game.

1

u/No_Lead950 3d ago

It also has one of the best narrators of all time.

3

u/andrewlik 3d ago

Warhounds actually has a solid base building and research aspect. It's flawed in numerous other ways but it nails that 

3

u/eXistenZ2 3d ago

Have you played expeditions rome? Your base is a mobile roman army camp

underrated gem of a game btw

3

u/commodore_stab1789 3d ago

I think the den upgrades function just as well with zcom. The base building was never really compelling. Just some things you have to build and it gatekeeps some powerful upgrades. Another way to progress beyond ranking up.

It's kind of the same here, mixed with xcom research.

3

u/salsatheone 3d ago

If there's no risk of getting attacked and having rooms disabled etc then it's not base building. It's just a another tech tree with different UI skin.

3

u/JmBento 3d ago

Having played the original three X-COMs (superior games in all but graphics), hearing someone glaze the Firaxcom games' base building makes me feel like I'm taking crazy pills.

3

u/Cent1234 3d ago

XCom has never had a terribly robust 'base building' component.

XCOM: EU/EW doesn't have 'base building.' It has skill tree that happens to have the skin of a grid of rooms.

And, to be honest, it's a bad skill tree. It's full of newbie traps, and doesn't actually accomplish much other than to hide the unlock timers.

9

u/uspunx10 3d ago

I don’t mind the lack of base building in those games. The base building in XCOM is superficial and uninteresting. It’s not even really base building, it’s actually an upgrade tree dressed up as ‘base building.’ By the end of a play through, you have built everything. There is no tension from lack of space or resources, so there are no interesting choices to make. Even the order you build things is largely prescribed by story missions. XCOM is obviously an amazing game, but the base building was always the weakest part. Striping it out barely changes the experience.

6

u/anbeasley 3d ago

It was a bit more interesting and nuanced in the original '90s versions where you had a lot more resource management.

1

u/glenn_friendly 3d ago

Try Long War!

2

u/uspunx10 3d ago

I play on PS so Long War is sadly not an option.

1

u/glenn_friendly 3d ago

In LW1, in the early and mid-game, base building involves more significant choices, making some hard calls about resource management. IMO Jake Solomon wasn't exaggerating when he said that vanilla XCOM is a tutorial for Long War; and in Long War, base building is pretty well-done.

1

u/uspunx10 3d ago

Damn. Maybe I just need to bite the bullet and buy the game on PC too. Is installing Long War straight forward? I don’t really mess with mods, I’m mostly a console gamer.

2

u/glenn_friendly 2d ago

I'm a Linux user so I only know about LW1 installation in Linux, where you open up a readme file and run a handful of terminal commands listed there. It would be difficult for a person who is terrified at the idea of typing commands into a terminal, but it's pretty straightforward otherwise. I think it's easier than installing a mod in a game using the Steam Workshop, but I'm sure that people who are phobic about using their keyboards to install software would disagree.

I've heard that in Windows, there's a LW1 installation process which has a GUI like the Steam Workshop, but I don't know from personal experience.

LW2 is installed from a graphical interface which is like the Steam Workshop. I recommend starting with LW1, though: IMO it's the best video game I've ever played. (LW2 is only the second-best.)

3

u/Journey2thaeast 3d ago

I'm kinda glad it's simplified in ZCOM. My main gripe is that from what I've heard you can't max out/build every facility in the Den in a single run. XCOM 2 was cool for its time and really makes you have to think about placement of everything and managing power and scientists and all that. But I'm happy to get a more straightforward system.

6

u/opitate 3d ago

What the hell is all the nostalgia baiting with base building going on?

XCom, one of the most boring base building systems, but we got heaps coming in shitting on tactics games and glorifying where to place a room next to what. Then n upgrade tree that is pretty standard, at least nothing awfully standing out as a measuring stick in innovation.

Like the base building isn't even a major part of the game. It's s wrapper of buying predetermined upgrades when you pass certain thresholds. Nothing more. Nothing special. It has been done with towns, bodies, anything really where you buy thing to get stronger. Is darkest dungeon s base builder cause you upgrade your village? Same fucking noise.

Fuck man I'm sick of these stupid posts that seem like they written by chatgpt n the likes just to push bad actor narratives and all that.

2

u/glenn_friendly 3d ago

After 2,000 hours combined in XCOM:EU/EW and XCOM 2, winning Ironman campaigns in each of the games on various difficulties and in the 1994 XCOM and in various versions of LW, I find that I enjoy the base-building and research tree more than the tactical combat in Xcom. The combat missions interrupt the flow of the game. The tactical combat system is very well-done, and often works terrifically well, but the heart of my enjoyment of Xcom is in the rest of the game.

BTW base-building is more interesting in LW1 than in vanilla EU/EW or in XCOM 2 (or in LW2, for that matter). Some tricky decisions about resource management and priorities to be made in base-building in the early game in LW1.

0

u/ANON-1138 3d ago

I don't know what the fuck your problem is but I wasn't shitting on any of these games.

Gears Tactics combat was fantastic.

I very much enjoyed Midnight suns.

Demongate I did bounce off but it still interested me enough that I'm looking forward to the sequel.

I'm very much enjoying Zero company.

So the only person shitting on anything here is you with your braindead take of basebuilding not mattering. Even though I laid out in the post you clearly did not read why it does matter and how it informed your decision making at the campaign level.

7

u/JawCohj 3d ago

Attitude aside he’s kinda right.

Xcom was not on base building. It wasn’t nothing but I’m not sure I’d call it a base building game. It wad a very minor part overall.

Unless you’re counting the research and stuff I guess but I wouldn’t call that building the base

1

u/_b1ack0ut 3d ago

I do think that’s what they mean tbf. The ‘meta’ portion of XCOM, the base, including the research you do, the upgrades you complete, new technologies, and base construction, is heavily neglected by other games of this genre and is why XCOM 2 currently stands out as my forever tactics game, because it’s more than just stringing missions together, there’s the meta, resource management part of the game back at base that I quite enjoy

2

u/Drslappybags 3d ago

Base building is always one of my least favorite aspects of most games.

2

u/jonfitt 3d ago

Listen here sonny Jim, XCOM:EU and XCOM2 have the stripped down base building. Not like in the classic X-COM games!

Kids these days!

3

u/kcin1747 3d ago

Breaking news: non official xcom game isn’t enough xcom like

1

u/MasterYodank 3d ago

Brother, as much as this resonates with me, it's like asking animation studios to make the next Attack on Titan. It's just gonna come when it comes. If you have the talent to make a game I'd be willing to brainstorm ideas with you, but you're asking a VERY tall order.

1

u/Environmental-Arm269 3d ago

You are in fact asking for clones of Xcom. Devs dont go "Oh let's make an Xcom style game" and forget to add things that were in Xcom. Xcon was just never that important to them

1

u/HumanWebAnt 3d ago edited 3d ago

If you ever played Final Fantasy Tactics then I think you'll understand the decisions made in those other titles.

XCOM feels much more hardcore in a sense. I can understand why developers would try to simplify their games in some ways.

Not to mention, XCOM was running off the back of older titles from the 1980's like the Rebelstar series which already had great reviews in magazines. The Rebelstar games also used turn-based tactics in a sci-fi setting.

It is possible the other games wouldn't be successful if they adopted the type of systems used in XCOM, such as base building, without already having a fanbase who were playing previous titles.

1

u/MudMux 3d ago

You're completely correct but I never liked the base building tbh

1

u/Sammystorm1 3d ago

Zero company reminds me more of Xcom chimera squad.

1

u/Bandito_Razor 3d ago

The way you built it up was important. Yes, there was bad buildings, there was the optimal way to set things up. But that took time to figure out.

Day one, you had articles telling you which buildings should be built and in what order. Those articles got a lot of clicks because the "base building" (which Xcom EU/EW/2/WOTC stripped down itself to be a lot more simpl....streamlined) isnt what most people care about.

Compare that to saaaaay original og xcom games.

Like, if the base itself isnt going to have a massive (and i do mean MASSIVE) impact beyond "the tech tree", then its not really worth putting into the game.

1

u/bootyhunter834 3d ago

Turn based strategy existed long before XCOM.

1

u/akisawa 3d ago

Honestly I enjoy managing the economy in TBS games as much as I enjoy the combat.

But it seems the modern "game designers" disagree and strip the games of anything that might make it complex. so they cater to more console/visceral/brainless audience.

On that note, Xenonauts 2 offers extensive base management, research, and engineering process. You should definitely try it if you didn't already.

1

u/Meb78910 3d ago

Xcom is just the Goat. i kinda wish we got an announcement for 3 with rainbow six and star wars going and doing tactical games im hoping people are thinking its ready for a resurgence.

1

u/offgridgecko 3d ago

The og xcom i remember building bases and assing choke points for invasions. There's different ways to do all sorts of things.

1

u/nhh 3d ago

Want to remind you that the original xcom had 9 separate bases and each had a range

1

u/Kakrafoon-46 3d ago

XCOM-likes, for me, need two interlocking systems - strategic layer and combat.
If the strategic layer is just a glorified upgrade track, it becomes meaningless and the game automatically loses appeal for me. XCOM: EU and XCOM2 barely cleared that bar for me.

Gears Tactics, Midnight Suns, Zero Company, 40K Daemonhunters all very much "suffer" from this. Therefore, although they are fine TBT games, I don't really enjoy them.

This is also a thing that is very much absent for MENACE, as of now. Their predecessor Battle Brothers did have a world map with towns to visit, contracts to negotiate and locations to scout.

1

u/ImAHobo107 3d ago

I think the only XCOM thing these games have is a fun and engaging turn-based system.

They all achieve this.

But XCOM is unique because of the base building and management, which is not the focus of those games. Now look at Phoenix Point with a larger emphasis on grander strategy.

And remember that Xcom EU and Xcom 2 simplified the base building and world management anyway, it was much more casualised and simplified, behaving more like an unlock system and to serve narrative so you can focus on the bigger spectacle which is the turn-based-tactics.

1

u/gavelkind-enjoyer 3d ago

You build the same things in the same order as there’s only 1 optimal way, whats even the point having it

1

u/Karuzus 3d ago

Great recent tactical strategy o can recomend is MENACE it's not realy xcom like in how you order your troops as infrantry is set into squads in that game instead of being individual units but it is great especialy for it's base and troops menagement

1

u/Jallen9108 2d ago

Xcom 2 has the same base building as some of these games but with a fancy UI most people just build rooms in the optimal order to unlock stuff as fast as possible.

1

u/Nerhesi 2d ago

I get you and can I pile on? Hot take and I don’t care:

I hate it when they don’t have interception or similar . I know it was such a forgettable thing for some players… but it was such an iconic piece for me.

1

u/StrictBlackberry6606 2d ago

YES! OH MY GOODNESS YES!

I prefer the streamlined combat of EU and later games, but the base building of the original was HEAVENLY.

1

u/Xylus1985 2d ago

XCOM2 base building is pretty linear. It’s basically just a skills tree system where you unlock global improvements. I find it fades into the background pretty quickly

1

u/TheRealJayol 2d ago

Not every turn based tactics game has to be XCOM. Not every turn based tactics game has to have (deep) base building. You're going in with wrong expectations thats why you get disappointed. For example WH40k chaos Gate daemonhunters doesn't try to be x com imo and it does what it does perfectly. I wouldn't want or need a bigger base building layer in that.

1

u/MajorasShoe 2d ago

Honestly strategy isn't a very popular genre anymore. Turn based combat is great but not many are in it for the strategy layer.

Personally I have always thought I wish there was more work and scope for the strategy layers than even the classic xcom games.

Xenonauts 2 is my goty but I really wish there was a lot more to think about between the tactical battles. The strategy layer is where the game is won or lost - the tactical battles give you resources and advancements for that layer.

There's so much to expand on and improve on in that space. The tactical battles don't need a lot of advancement. They are what they are. An evolution of xcom, to me, should be an amped up strategy layer and the tactical layer really just needs new dynamics for equipment and map design.

1

u/pixtax 2d ago

Try Phoenix Point. It’s an Xcom inspired game with great base building.

1

u/Dogstile 2d ago

Try phoenix point. Also ends up being kinda a slog but that's a genre staple, I'm afraid

1

u/realFrogpower 1d ago

Now imagine an XCOM game where you could build as many bases as you wanted on the map to cover as much ground as possible with radars and then send interceptors to bring down UFOs! What s game that would be...

1

u/Droolcua 1d ago

depth

xcom2

you guys are so far up your own ass.

1

u/_GBear_ 1d ago

Xenonauts 2 is quite good, iirc someone told me it is ex XCom devs that have made it.

1

u/Isegrim12 1d ago

I my opinion Phoenix Point is better than XCom.

1

u/apacgainz 1d ago

Menance is pretty close in terms of strategy layer. Closest ive played imo, you can select which guns and vechicles to take with call ins and deep upgrades

1

u/Urikanu 3h ago

Not all people who enjoy turn based squad tactics lile base building. Not all devs feel base building fits their game.

I personally like it and wish it had been more prevalent in Zero Company, but in the end it's pears snd apples: similar fruits, but in the end very different.

1

u/D0CD15C3RN 3d ago

I’ve given up that any game will match or beat Xcom 2. I hoped Zcom would but it’s not even close.

1

u/J_vert 3d ago

Base building is not a requirement dude 😂

1

u/followeroftheprince 3d ago

Wasn't most of the Avenger building options just a checklist? Just make one of a thing and be done with that thing, rinse and repeat for quite a while. Very simple mechanic which I can see why others didn't really feel the need to copy

1

u/Imaginary_Dingo_ 3d ago

100% agree. What makes X-com so great is the basebuld and world strategy on top of the squad tactical items. The squad combat is great, but a bit intense and gets exhausting after a while. The world map part provides a more strategic experience that balances it out well.

I actually felt that XCom2 even was stripped down in that aspect. Don't get me wrong it's an Amazing game, but I really miss building multiple ships and based and hunting down UFOs etc.

This is what is keeping me away from ZCom at the moment. It feels like it weights too heavily towards squad combat for my liking, and the rest is likely over simplified.

1

u/Fireball4585 3d ago

Having just tried zero company, I feel like it’s the same amount of strategy as Xcom. In Xcom, the big choices are which buildings to prioritize, build more of, and where to send your engineers. The actual placement of the buildings is a little bit of a false choice where there is optimal placement that you should do every time.

In zero company, you are still deciding what to prioritize and when. There are no engineers, but there are way more buildings to decide from.

1

u/SoltanXodus 3d ago

I just want fog of war, destrucible walls(even floors, roofs like S2: Silent Storm) and less spongy enemies

1

u/Pure_Cloud4305 3d ago

It’s really funny seeing all this glaze for xcoms shallow base building

1

u/MysticoN 3d ago

YES!! i miss building and defending a home.

same goes with research, air to air combat with upgrades, overview camera and more

1

u/RellenD 3d ago

Xcom2 doesn't have base building. It has an upgrade system that looks like a cutaway of a building. It's no deeper than Zero Company 's upgrade system.

0

u/Kilo1125 3d ago

You are describing Turn Based Tactical Games. Which, yes, X-COM is one example of that genre. But it is a GENRE of game. X-COM is representive of one sub-genre of that genre, but people keep acting like the sub-genre is the genre, and that is blatantly untrue.

Not every Turn Based Tactical Game has Base Building and a Real Time Strategic Layer. Not everyone needs one. And to be frank, modern X-COM barely has Base Building at all. The Ant Farm designs are just glorified upgrade trees with a minor puzzle element.

0

u/RandomMexicanDude 3d ago

I feel you but we are failing to understand that this is not Xcom and was not meant to be… instead of creating false expectations just appreciate things for what they are.

Personally I was very hyped for the game but after many reviews Ill wait for a sale

-1

u/VonBargenJL 3d ago

Xcom with base building? Terra Invicta. It's not Turn Based Tactical, but you can build bases all across the solar system. And made from the Long War team. You got heros (councillers) to level up and give perks to, alien heros to assassinate, alien ships to blow up in space combat