Special Feature: The Evolution of XCOM (Part 3)
This article is part of a series. Click here for an introduction to XCOM and Part 1: Enemy Unknown.
Part Three: Long War
Long War (LW) is an overhaul mod for Enemy Unknown (EU) and its expansion, Enemy Within (EW). It was developed by a team of modders led by Johnnylump and Amineri, now known as Pavonis Interactive. The earliest versions of the mod first appeared not long after the release of EU in 2012, and after many iterations, the final version was published in December 2015. The mod has been endorsed by more than 30,000 players, including the lead designer of EU and EW, Jake Solomon: "We're basically a 20-hour tutorial for Long War, and that's okay."
Whereas EU and EW are tactical combat games with strategic elements, LW could be better described as a comprehensive strategic simulation, adding depth, complexity, and realism to every facet of XCOM gameplay. Some of the key changes that help define the LW experience:
Many of the overpowered options in EU and EW are severely nerfed, forcing the player to develop a more complete understanding of the resources available to them. This is particularly noticeable in the length of the campaign. One new storyline objective in LW is to capture and interrogate an Ethereal, the highest ranking member of the alien collective. These creatures don't appear until nearly a year of in-game time has elapsed, eliminating the possibility of rushing the campaign to avoid high-level enemies.
Long War (LW) is an overhaul mod for Enemy Unknown (EU) and its expansion, Enemy Within (EW). It was developed by a team of modders led by Johnnylump and Amineri, now known as Pavonis Interactive. The earliest versions of the mod first appeared not long after the release of EU in 2012, and after many iterations, the final version was published in December 2015. The mod has been endorsed by more than 30,000 players, including the lead designer of EU and EW, Jake Solomon: "We're basically a 20-hour tutorial for Long War, and that's okay."
Whereas EU and EW are tactical combat games with strategic elements, LW could be better described as a comprehensive strategic simulation, adding depth, complexity, and realism to every facet of XCOM gameplay. Some of the key changes that help define the LW experience:
- Rather than generating missions randomly, the aliens actively harvest resources, conduct research, and evaluate the threat level that XCOM presents, then design mission calendars to achieve specific objectives
- A higher density of tactical missions combined with a soldier fatigue mechanic forces the player to maintain a broad roster
- The 4 original soldier classes have been broken out into 8, each with a more diverse perk tree to enable more specialization
- Enemy units gain additional perks and stat increases as the campaign progresses, so even the earliest foes can be a serious threat when encountered in later missions
- A substantially longer storyline with more difficult objectives to complete, forcing the player to engage with the most dangerous enemy ground units and fighter craft
Many of the overpowered options in EU and EW are severely nerfed, forcing the player to develop a more complete understanding of the resources available to them. This is particularly noticeable in the length of the campaign. One new storyline objective in LW is to capture and interrogate an Ethereal, the highest ranking member of the alien collective. These creatures don't appear until nearly a year of in-game time has elapsed, eliminating the possibility of rushing the campaign to avoid high-level enemies.
Constraint |
Evaluation |
Impossible Ironman |
The difficult curve has changed dramatically compared to EU and EW. The beginning months are much more forgiving, but enemy progression ramps up much faster, particularly in the air war. If the player were free to invest fully in the ground game, it would be substantially easier to get ahead of the difficulty curve. However, the unrelenting superiority of the alien air force forces the player to constantly divert resources, making the tactical game much more challenging. |
No robotic units |
Most tactical roles can be filled equally well by both human and robotic units, with the exception of tanking damage, where upgraded MECs are unparalleled in their survivability. In the later stages of the campaign, enemy damage output is often so overwhelming that front line combat becomes totally impractical without MECs |
No genetic modifications |
As with EW, ignoring gene mods may make the game easier. It decreases the pressure to play aggressively to retrieve Meld canisters, and allows the player to skip the Genetics Lab in favor of more powerful structures. |
No invisibility |
The combination of a concealed Scout with a high ranked Sniper can be devastating, specifically because the enemy AI has no countermeasure for it. Removing this tactic is especially challenging for Alien Base Assault missions, where the awkward terrain works well for Snipers but is not conducive to front line combat. |
No plasma weapons |
The difference in damage output between plasma weapons and the next highest tier is not large enough to justify the cost. Plasma weapons feel like a luxury rather than a serious strategic objective. |
Design Analysis
After many design iterations, XCOM has arrived at a game that is both difficult to beat and difficult to break. On a practical level, the success of LW is owed in part to the interaction between the designers and the testers. On a theoretical level, I believe there are 3 key takeaways that explain what makes LW such a compelling and well-balanced experience:
1) Every choice should present real opportunity cost. In all versions of XCOM, successful operations reward the player with alien artifacts that can be researched or sold on the "gray market". In EU and EW, required materials for research projects are easily met, especially with the increased enemy count on Impossible difficulty. As such, items can be consistently sold on the gray market for extra cash with no real opportunity cost.
In LW, each alien artifact can be used in a much greater variety of ways. For example, if the player has a surplus of Floater Corpses, they can be researched to improve mechanized unit armor, or repurposed into targeting modules for aerial craft, or traded to council nations in exchange for additional engineering staff, or sold on the gray market for cash. All of these choices provide real value and real opportunity cost, challenging the player to think critically about their priorities at every phase of the campaign.
2) More powerful options should require more skill to use correctly. Consider the two weapon classes available to the Gunner, the SAW and the LMG. The LMG has better damage output, longer range, and greater ammo capacity. However, its weight imposes a severe mobility penalty, and it cannot be moved and fired in the same turn. A player who is uncertain of how to position their Gunner may opt for the versatility that the SAW affords, but a skilled player can find ways to compensate for the LMG's penalties, and is rewarded with its superior firepower.
3) Perhaps most importantly, the player should be encouraged to compose many decisions into a coherent solution. In EU and EW, many of the choices presented to the player exist in silos, where it is enough to ask, "What seems like the best choice of the available options?" Consider some of the earliest decisions that are made in an XCOM campaign: the starting location for the base, the opening research path, and the gear loadout for tactical missions. The player can choose Africa "All In" for the extra cash, storyline research to finish the campaign quickly, aim bonus items for Snipers and grenades for everyone else.
LW features a much more interconnected web of resources and challenges, and as a result, the isolated decision making highlighted above is not sufficient to win the war. Instead, the player must identify a clear overarching strategy that informs every decision. A popular concept in the early game is to push for a strong air force, sacrificing research and tactical investments in order to protect the XCOM satellite network.
Guided by this principle, the player might choose the Egypt "Advanced Repair" starting location to reduce fighter craft repair times. Early research is focused on rushing to Advanced Beam Laser tech, unlocking Laser Cannons for the fighter craft. This expense leaves very little budget for combat gear, so the player compensates by equipping shotguns and flashbangs for quick engagements against early enemies, then transitioning to LMGs, battle rifles, and offensive grenades when heavier units hit the field. The strong air force generates more crashed UFO missions, so the player assigns officers with the "Stay Frosty" perk to reduce soldier fatigue. When considered in isolation, none of these choices are inherently overpowered. Instead, they emerge naturally when the player's decisions are informed by their central strategy.
After many design iterations, XCOM has arrived at a game that is both difficult to beat and difficult to break. On a practical level, the success of LW is owed in part to the interaction between the designers and the testers. On a theoretical level, I believe there are 3 key takeaways that explain what makes LW such a compelling and well-balanced experience:
1) Every choice should present real opportunity cost. In all versions of XCOM, successful operations reward the player with alien artifacts that can be researched or sold on the "gray market". In EU and EW, required materials for research projects are easily met, especially with the increased enemy count on Impossible difficulty. As such, items can be consistently sold on the gray market for extra cash with no real opportunity cost.
In LW, each alien artifact can be used in a much greater variety of ways. For example, if the player has a surplus of Floater Corpses, they can be researched to improve mechanized unit armor, or repurposed into targeting modules for aerial craft, or traded to council nations in exchange for additional engineering staff, or sold on the gray market for cash. All of these choices provide real value and real opportunity cost, challenging the player to think critically about their priorities at every phase of the campaign.
2) More powerful options should require more skill to use correctly. Consider the two weapon classes available to the Gunner, the SAW and the LMG. The LMG has better damage output, longer range, and greater ammo capacity. However, its weight imposes a severe mobility penalty, and it cannot be moved and fired in the same turn. A player who is uncertain of how to position their Gunner may opt for the versatility that the SAW affords, but a skilled player can find ways to compensate for the LMG's penalties, and is rewarded with its superior firepower.
3) Perhaps most importantly, the player should be encouraged to compose many decisions into a coherent solution. In EU and EW, many of the choices presented to the player exist in silos, where it is enough to ask, "What seems like the best choice of the available options?" Consider some of the earliest decisions that are made in an XCOM campaign: the starting location for the base, the opening research path, and the gear loadout for tactical missions. The player can choose Africa "All In" for the extra cash, storyline research to finish the campaign quickly, aim bonus items for Snipers and grenades for everyone else.
LW features a much more interconnected web of resources and challenges, and as a result, the isolated decision making highlighted above is not sufficient to win the war. Instead, the player must identify a clear overarching strategy that informs every decision. A popular concept in the early game is to push for a strong air force, sacrificing research and tactical investments in order to protect the XCOM satellite network.
Guided by this principle, the player might choose the Egypt "Advanced Repair" starting location to reduce fighter craft repair times. Early research is focused on rushing to Advanced Beam Laser tech, unlocking Laser Cannons for the fighter craft. This expense leaves very little budget for combat gear, so the player compensates by equipping shotguns and flashbangs for quick engagements against early enemies, then transitioning to LMGs, battle rifles, and offensive grenades when heavier units hit the field. The strong air force generates more crashed UFO missions, so the player assigns officers with the "Stay Frosty" perk to reduce soldier fatigue. When considered in isolation, none of these choices are inherently overpowered. Instead, they emerge naturally when the player's decisions are informed by their central strategy.