I'm not much further than you, also play on hard, and I have to agree that so far the game has been getting easier, not harder.

It's definitely too easy to solo-stealth your way through a level and avoid everyone. I can understand civilians being clueless and unaware, but enemy agents and guards present no problem at the moment.

I would expect that after kidnapping one of their agents, they would realise that he was missing and at least step up their security or something - I know if you knock out three people they patrol more aggresively (and start taking any loot they pass, reactivating cameras, etc) - so they should definitely start doing that once you knock out the actual "target". Either that, or a number of turns after the target has been knocked out or killed, go into combat mode.

I reckon it would also make a difference if safes etc. were alarmed (even if connected to the same systems as the cameras), so that agents can't just loot them with no consequences until they're deactivated.

Also, doing something dodgy in view of a camera (with a disguised agent) should raise some kind of alert I would think, such as breaking into a cabinet or photographing documents or knocking someone out.

It also appears that it's only the "Agents" that can see through disguises - ideally the "SEC-*" guys should be able to as well, at least at close range. The actor skill should be nerfed so it only gets you past the "SEC-*" guys, but can still be busted by "agents" (again, at close range).

Avoiding patrols would be much harder if it wasn't possible to just crash through windows everywhere. Though the game would need a waypoint system ala XCOM/XCOM2 otherwise it would be infuriating to have the alarm go off due to the path making you window dive.

Apart from that, the combat itself seems a tad too easy on hard at the moment. Agents definitely shouldn't be able to survive getting hit by a chopper's chain gun, even from full health if they're out in the open.

Groups of guards, especially reinforcements, could be tad more aggressive. While I appreciate that they're not dumb enough to just charge head-long into my overwatch death zone, one would think they could use flashbangs and storm the building (at least if they're high-tier enemies, such as SWAT teams, military units, especially the SEC guys). This would naturally require flashbangs to not only remove awareness but also overwatch for a turn.

Finally, I only recently realised that a "compromised evac" only gives you the +40 danger level once, meaning if you miss the 2 turn extraction window, you don't need to rush as much any more (still can't totally dawdle because of the reinforcements). I haven't tried this yet, but I suspect this could be abused to farm reinforcements until you got too injured or bored to continue. I would have expected the danger level penalty to increase for every turn you delay.

Minor change for displaying weapon stats:

Currently we see how many AP/FP it takes to reload a weapon - yet we do not see this for each of the different shot types. I suspect that all weapons of a certain type have the same stats in this area, but it would still be nice to see in the stat display.

Currently, the only way to find out how much AP/FP a shot will cost you is to select the weapon and choose the shot type. Strangely enough, I believe the awareness cost (if there is one) is displayed for head shots in the stats (unless I'm wrong, in which case it should be displayed as well).

Speeking of the display of weapons' stats it will be great in my opinion to have some kind of reminder in missions like "this weapon have piercing bullets" or "this gun will deal bleeding damage over time" here again only way to remember... try it.

Missing shots happens often in real life combat, even at close distances by trained shooters. Combat shooting is much more difficult than hitting paper targets at a range with a much higher chance to miss. Even shotguns firing buckshot can and do miss in real life. The spread is much tighter than shown in game, a matter of inches not feet at close range.

Adding a separate chance to hit mechanic may not be necessary however. Instead it could be simulated by adjusting damage values to frequently be reduced to zero. The primariy determinant of degree of damage for a given firearm in combat is the accuracy of the shot to hit something vital. Low damage would be a nonvital hit or a hit absorbed by soft body armor and no damage would be a miss or hit absorbed by hard body armor.

Cover works in real life, to varying degrees of effectiveness. In the game it appears to have little to no value currently. Line of sight is easily obstructed by cover or by concealment in real life. In the game it appears to rarely be obstructed.

I am at around 10 hours of play time right now... so I hope I haven't touched a lot of the content. I did go through a bunch of missions already, so I think I have a decent handle on the tactical side of things, and early-game strategic part.

Before going any further, allow me to emphasize that I am enjoying Phantom Doctrine a lot. Pretty much as much as I enjoyed Hard West (and which strengths certainly affected my decision to buy PD itself right now). While I am disappointed at a lot of unfulfilled potential, this is merely because I would love to see Phantom Doctrine be something even greater than it already is (also, I enjoy complex simulations that much more ;) )

Prepare for a wall of text, in no particular order or importance:

* No simulation of sound *

For a game that relies a lot on "stealth" phase, that's a big thing. This lack allows for some silly things like jumping through a window into "trespass" zone right next to a guard, just because they are looking away. Or running past another at a tile distance with impunity. No need to sneak, every agent watched enough animu to be a true ninja, I guess >.< In the same vein, the spotting cone is hilariously restricted at 1 tile distance. Meaning your agent can readily do whatever they want right to the side of somebody without them reacting. I'm just going to ignore the fact that even "silenced" weapons still make a rather distinct and audiable sound.

Anyway, bigly disappointed at the lack of sound detection mechanics. To be honest, it is not even something that seems to would have required too much effort to implement...

* Takedown and body disposal *

A really missed opportunity here. Disposing of an incapacitated person is far too abstract, to the point where it breaks the immersion for me when I am in the middle of a small room with two "active" civilians but my agents somehow manage to clear the evidence of another witness being removed just because the civies did not have immediate line of sight to the body of their fellow.

Would have been that much more engaging to have civilians carry some interactive elements, such as keys to certain doors, potential disguise drops, or even occasional intel in case of high-ranking civies (i.e. a police commissioner with a captured agent, or a head physician in the asylum/"interrogation" location).

Body disposal would have greatly benefited from being more detailed, preferably by using environmental elements to "hide" the evidence (stuffing a body in a closet). Absent such easy elements, it would have been that much more interesting if it were possible to pick-up and re-locate the body (presumably somewhere any guard would not investigate) instead of having this abstract "dispose of body" animation.

It should also not be possible to "dispose" of a body within short distance of NPCs (whether soldiers/guards or civilians) absent actual noise handling mechanics.

* More details to disguises *

So far you are either disguised, or not, and you seem to only be able to set that condition prior to mission. There is also a perk that makes your disguises foolproof ("Actor"), but that seems to be pretty much the extent of them that I have experienced.

Disguises and languages have so much more potential to them. Disguises could have had "quality" levels indicating the care taken to prepare a convincing display. Pre-mission assignment being of a higher "quality" than something picked up in the field (really bummed at being unable to dress in clothing stolen from an incapacitated NPC to serve as even a poor "quality" disguise - say, something passable at reasonable distance away, but being detected by guards on closer inspections). To go hand in hand with greater detail of implementation of the "language known" skills of our agents, some areas could require interaction with guards to pass into more restricted parts of them. For instance, having a guard by the fence requiring interaction (in Arabic) prior to having the gate unlocked to pass into the facility grounds in the opening mission for CIA would be one example of it. Under such implementation, the initial language would have generally be based on country the mission takes place in (duh), but perhaps running "Recon" would also provide additional acceptable language. Say, East Bloc scientists from another country in the Pakistani opening CIA mission making it possible to use their national language instead (e.g. Russian).

* Interacting with windows *

Again, so much potential for a more immersive handling. I'd preferably see a differentiated handling of each, with different levels of "secured" allowing different interactions, but even keeping things simplified for the sake of engine handling (or whatnot), having the ability to spend "Action" and "Fire" point on unlocking a window to get through without breaking it would really be a nice addition. Especially if at least partial noise handling makes an appearance. Meaning any guards within certain radius would react to nearby window breaking, either through outright alert (which should be a given if the act of going through window is witnessed, non-tresspass area or not), or by making them approach to investigate and raise alarm when in sight of the broken window if either side of it is a "tresspass" area.

* Guards mechanics *

There are too few patrols so far. It is much too easy to have a free run of most of the "tresspass" areas with impunity. No security checkpoints requiring interaction (and disguises, and appropriate language skill!). Binary tresspass/no-tresspass marking lacks "realistic" granularity (having a more "secure" area within the target location has so much potential for more detail and gameplay to it :( ).

"Some guards failed to check in" alert is happening much too fast. Even with current implementation of security handling, it would have been that much better to have different levels of "vigilance" assigned to each mission. On high vigilance target areas the failed check-in alert would occur more rapidly, but it would have made that much more sense (and made the game all the more enjoyable) if low vigilance zones relied solely on patrols registering empty locations that should have been guarded (for instance by assigning a static "guard here" tile that, when absent of a guard, would trigger the alert).

Having multiple "security" levels would also affect the "vigilance" rating of guards inside them. Meaning guards in "low-security" areas would not trigger "check-in failure" as fast as guards inside "high security" part of the location.

* "Planning" stage and several levels of "security" in target locations *

Prior to launching a mission with "Recon" performed for it, it would have been nice to get a layover map with indication of "static" guard locations, expected patrol routes, cameras and security stations, locked doors and intel and loot locations. Basically any interactive element in the zone. Double cookie points for having this information accessible during mission just for players' convenience.

It would also allow for more detail to "Recon" missions and greater depth to mission preparedness. It would make it possible to implement several levels of security for target locations. Currently it's a binary "free access" and "no tresspass" set. It would have been that much more interesting (and tying in with some of the other enhancements I mentioned above) if this was more nuanced. As an example, aside from the "free access" area, for important locations have a "low security" ring around the core "high security" area. "Low security" would make guards less attentive to detecting disguises (and not require interaction to move around). Security stations within that zone would be only tied to cameras within itself. "High security" would feature increased number of troops (both stationary and patrols), and interactive "checkpoints" requiring good disguises and language skills to pass through without force. Perhaps add some kind of "skill check" to allow passing of additional agents within the same turn if it makes sense given the map (i.e. "just a prisoner transfer, mate" in case of a prison).

Areas with several levels of security could also require additional "Recon" attempts to get information on the high security parts of it. Or even additional "actions" required (or outright missions to secure specific intel/keys/passphrases) accomplished prior to attempting infiltration of the target.

* Language use *

Limited interaction and utilization, as mentioned above. "Analyst" job could also be expanded by having intel pieces come with "language" assignment that would either require a profficient agent to handle, or increase the time required to process by non-fluent one (outsourcing translation).

* Trespassing *

Interacting with doors and windows leading to "trespass" areas should also trigger alarm when witnessed, aside from the potential "noise" implementation mentioned above.

* No melee weapons *

While Takedown is very useful, there were several situations where I really, really would have liked my agent to have a simple knife available. Since Takedown is HP-reliant, it would have made for a nice and presumably "silent" way to weaken an enemy agent for a follow-up Takedown by another one of mine.

* Icons on Intel and loot placeables *

with the lack of a map overlay, I found the intel and loot placeables somewhat difficult to spot. It would be really nice if they got their own icon over them (similar to how security stations are indicated) as a "quality of life" nod toward players. This is not exactly the type of a game in which I would care for "spot-and-click" adventure elements.

Bloody GOG forum spazzing out again...

* Non-Tactical but a big one - Intel Board handling *

The analysis of intel would have carried an immensely greater personal appeal if it was possible to "high-light" any word or word combination within the document. Obviously only valid matches would matter... but one should be able to link any irrelevant "match" on the board itself, just with no result whatsoever other than a spiffy twine going from one pin to another. Right now "click until something registers" is a perfectly viable way of handling this part of the game. Which is a huge shame, because if you made it more of a "puzzle" element that requires actual reading and... well, analysis (with perhaps an option to use current "EZ mode" way for people who don't care for such things), it would fit the feel of the game so much better. Aside from being an actual challenge on its own. I don't think comparing two short snippets of text for word matches is that difficult of a task, anyway, but at least there'd be a sense of acomplishment from figuring out valid connections between intel pieces.

Current implementation not only takes away that enjoyment, it's so simple that it feels like an unnecessary time waste :(

* Multiple hideouts and other logicistics considerations (weapon/equipment purchase) *

Perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't understand why it's not possible to establish a hideout prior to needing one. Would also be nice if you could send agents to build upgrades in each separately, with appropriate addition of related potential perks reducing the cost and/or time required to do so.

Likewise, maybe it's just "game progression" thing, but why isn't it possible to assign an agent to make contact with weapon/equipment suppliers from the get go? Personally, I would think it should be implemented for each map pip separately, and be a mission that results in a timed access to such a "purveyor." It opens up the possibility of a "bust" either by local enforcement (with, aside from raising heat and compromising identity of the involved agent adds the potential for agent-recovery mission if they were captured), or enemy agents. That in turn allows different ways of handling establishing such contacts, rewarding preparedness.

In other words, while having a short-timed "get stuff" action would still allow additional equipment access for a specific mission, it would be offset by increased risk of a "bust" (or even just heat increase). On the other hand, having agents take long-timed "establish contact" action prior to any potential mission would minimize the risk (should still have some potential for it, or the potential for being countered by enemy agent), and establish a longer-lasting presence of a "vendor" in that map pip (still expiring after some time, but taking much longer than the "quick" version of it).

For that matter, USED weapons should be disposed off after a mission (though mods probably deserve to be recovered). If you are a secret operative, you probably don't want to be draging around something that could generate a ballistic match to a dead body from a past operation... ;)

But it would require a more reliable way of obtaining new weapons than just "loot."

For added funsies, you could add "ownership" tags to looted weapons and expand on it. So, if my agent takes out a target in one map pip with a weapon "found" in another country, they would not generate as much "heat" on themselves as using "free market" weapons obtained by the methods described above. Basically leaving false leads for any potential investigation. Of course, this in turn would allow enemy agents to run their own investigation that, if successful, would result in compromised identity of the agent... possibly without the player having an indication of such a breach.

Frankly, I think "Heat" handling should really be improved to something more nuanced, and not immediately apparent to the player, but that's a whole post of its own, and probably too demanding to put in place now.

In conclusion, again, I want to stress that I consider all the above merely an improvement of the already enjoyable experience of Phantom Doctrine. Some things are more jarring than others in terms of personal preferences, but I understand the realities of development limitations.

Still, if you could consider adding any (or all) of the above modifications, I'm rather certain nobody would complain (well, maybe about the analysis part, since not everybody actually enjoys mental puzzles ;) )

Anyway, thank you for developing the game in the first place. I'm having a blast with it.

(It took me literal half an hour to get this post up on GOG boards... had to cut it in half and edit in remaining pieces two-three paragraphs at a time, frequently with "edit" post submission resulting in no change to the original whatsoever. This separate post is the result of - I think - running into unreported character limit. Or something. No idea since I get no error messages on my end. I think you CFG folks might just want to provide us with a feedback e-mail if you're serious about getting more nuanced responses than GOG forums appear to like...)

One of the things I would like, and dind't find is the ability to now and then go back to check out some of my old conspiracy boards. I mean, I do know that some codenames that appear in earlier ones, but aren't the 'important one' come back later, and it would be fun times to late in the game go through your old files and say 'Oh shit, so THAT'S what Paradise Lost is.

More annoying thing is that sometimes, soldier's patrol route leads to them having to follow a really, really long path. Perhaps they need to get somewhere on their patrol route but the shortest route is blocked and they need to cross half the map to get there. It isn't caused by my agents blocking a doorway, and it leads to turns taking really long as every turn I gotta wait ten seconds for that agent to ponderously make their way. Perhaps a 'speeding up' when that happens, or a quick 'check' to make sure that all guards can have patrol paths that they can do with a relatively normal amount of movement?

Edit: Checking further, there's not really anything stoppign the guard. He just has a really long patrol route and pretty much wanders across the whole map in one turn. Not sure if that is working as intended?

Thank You !

Just, thank you. I get so tired of seeing people crying to nerf this ability or that ability, because they can't restrain themselves from using (and frequently exploiting) something that they regard as unfair. Don't like the way something works in certain situations? Then don't do it. Sheesh.

Hi,
I only have someone Quality of Life suggestions:

1. Could you indicate in the Weaponinfo, which Agents are trained for this or that particular gun? I mean when you hover the mouse above a gun in your inventory to see all its stats, there should also be a Line listing all the Agents trained on the gun. Its a bit annoying to find a new gun on a mission than have to go through all my agent files to see who can actually use it.

2. The color indicator for Lootboxes and Secret Files should be more obvious. I sometime find myself searching the map for that last secret document for minutes, only to find it in a bright lid room, where the blue indicator is hardly visible.

3. Agents on a leave of absence shouldnt take their equipment with them. If an agent goes rogue and escapes than thats ok. But if they ask me to go somewhere, they should leave their guns, armour and tools at the base. Selfish pricks! ;)

4. I like the way you handled the way of agent avaibility for missions, so that i can use all agents, regardless if they are currently posted across the globe, as long as they are not travelling or not on assaignment. BUT i would like them to return to their previous postings after the mission not all return to mother base. I try to keep two agents in each of the region, to have faster response times, so its unfortunate that they all return home and i have to reassign them again.


Thats all for now. Thank you for that great game!

Well, hard mode is supposed to be, well... hard. I like the changes to the combat system, but at least for hard mode, it needs to be balanced to make up for it - well parts of it do. At the moment, one of the culprits is how you can get almost anyone to instantly assault anything, so unless you have tons of agents currently travelling, it's too tempting to just ensure you take max agents for all missions. I attempted to limit myself to only using agents that are actually on-site, but since they teleport back to base instantly afterwards that screws things up too much. I still limit myself to only using agents that have 100% health and whose ID is not compromised, even though compromised ID doesn't appear to actually affect anything if used for assaults (due to instant teleport there and back), while health only affects the main team (irrelevant for support teams).

True, if you end up not being able to scout a mission beforehand, it becomes significantly more difficult, since you cannot use any support or disguises; however, even then the missions aren't as challenging as they should be. So while it makes sense that a mission you managed to discover and scout, is generally smooth sailing - you'd hope so, since your guys have put effort into planning it, you've got some disguises, etc. - you'd also expect that things would get tougher when combat starts, or at least when reinforcements come in, or airstrikes are called in. Without that kind of planning, I'd expect the missions to be doable, but potentially suicidal.

I already tend to only use light body armor - I like how anything heavier than a flak jacket is seen as "hostile", so it's supposed to be a trade off - but you don't really need anything heavier than a flak jacket most of the time.

I hardly ever use med kits (rarely bother bringing them), and only really use smoke grenades when I'd rather escape than shoot yet another batch of reinforcements (such as when I'd prefer to get to the evac zone before my heat goes up and I have to move base yet again).

Judging by the vast amount of potential agent recruits you get - just recently the intel from one mission finished off two separate cork board files: one gave me 3 potential agent recruits, then the other gave me another 2 (plus location of an enemy cell) - I expected that they'd drop like flies. Basically it seems that every few days game-time, I get another "potential recruit" added, but since I've had a full roster for ages, I haven't needed them, so they just replace the available recruits (since we're limited to 5 potentials at a time).

So, if assaults took travel time into account (like every other location-based agent action), it would make it more difficult to always bring an army for an assault. That said, even assaults that limit you to 2 agents aren't that hard even without support, though they do appear more balanced (there have definitely been times where I had to bail a mission before grabbing everything, for example, and it was some time before it was worth capturing agents instead of just killing them). It's the larger missions (6 agents + support) that could do with more enemies, especially when reinforcements come pouring in. While it's definitely better than enemies aren't taking accurate shots from halfway across the map any more, now they go down so much easier than our guys, so there probably should be more of them (enemies, especially reinforcements) to offset that.

Also, overwatch - for all sides - should probably get a range increase. Most of the time I forget I even have the laser ability, since it's so rare to trigger overwatch - and even when I do, it's usually dodged. I seem to have slightly more mileage with enemies running into me, which is cool.

That's all I can think of at the moment. Yeah I kind of started on hard mode and took a detour and got lost - but anyway, if devs are still (or at all) reading this: game's been getting better with each patch, we're getting patches on GOG within 24 hours or so of Steam, it's much appreciated! Am anticipating what next patches bring...

Some additional quick notes taken while playing some more (though I do wonder if anybody reads our posts here...):

Please add more facial models and voice-overs (hell, you could ask the community to submit their voice samples and just clean up the ones you like, it sure worked for a few games I helped with). Or at least a "Silent" voice set. About half of the ones provided are sordidly juvenile.

* Carrying a body should be at least suspicious (triggering attempt to close for verification by guards), at a very long sight range. Presumably also immediately triggering alert if spotted within no-trespass area with similar increased detection range on it.
* Allow weapon use while carrying bodies, with damage penalty. Greater for weapons generally requiring 2 hands. LMGs impossible to use. At least pistols should absolutely be possible to fire (albeit with some penalty). It's a "feature" of the presented carry method.
* Guards without LOS/outside of effective weapon range should move toward agents seen by other hostiles. If none, head toward "gunshot origin" map point. Alternatively, have some guards set as "roamers" that would follow this, while others are "sentries" and would retain their position protecting specific entry points/areas.
* Exfil under fire - if exfil is attempted with enemies within (hightened due to combat phase) sight range and/or half the effective weapon range (whichever greater), potential for additional wounds on agents. Up to possibility of destruction of the escape vehicle and either death or capture of each agent on board. Add a warning when exfil under fire is attempted.
* If exfil location is compromised, guards should move toward either detected agents or exfil area, whichever is closer. Guards near exfil area should take defensive positions.
* Include all agents in the arrival/evac cutscenes :(
* No dodging shots from undetected agents taken in Infiltration mode!
* Make most doors (or at least those leading outside) locked. "Easy" doors simply require spending fire point on unlocking, harder work as they do now.
* Make it possible for two agents above and below to "hand down" incapacitated body. If there is no "receiver" below, incapacitated body can be "tossed" at the cost of potential further injury (requiring additional stabilizing, and extending recovery time if friendly) or outright death due to mishandling. Also, allow "dragging" for short-distance (three tiles max?) repositioning at the cost of a movement point.
* Change medikits to be required to stabilize, do not allow restoration of HP beyond set percentage (say, 10%) of max HP value
* Make takedown attempt within enemy (including target's) LOS trigger Overwatch fire
* Have stationary disguised agents build up "suspicion." Perhaps add perks to allow better impersonification (i.e. "maintenance" or "nursing") to correspond to disguise and lower the possibility. High enough "suspicion" triggering identification check, or outright combat phase.
* "Released" agents have weapons equipped?
* Pause on strategic events (agent arriving at location, new hotspot, etc)
* Have non-concealable firearms carried in a duffel bag (would be nice to have this added in terms of duffel graphic model in-game). Getting them ready takes a fire action, character with heavier weapons out is considered "hostile" regardless of active phase (no carrying MGs under the jacket)
* Analysts do not gain experience for completed jobs? Not sure if also applicable to forger task, but my dedicated forger did not seem to receive any.
* Successful Recon should provide at least an overview of the mission - expected resistance (number of guards/average quality of them), number of enemy agents on site (if applicable), cameras and security stations.
* Would be nice if potential evac zones could be set by the player. Basically set up more of them for each map, and allow the player to designate two or three as the "active" potential (preferably in pre-planning phase of a mission which is sadly missing)
* If an agent's identity is compromised during a mission at a specific geographic location, it should be that much more dangerous for the agent (even with new identity) to return to that country at least for a specific time period (increased Heat from missions there, at least). Better yet if it required a separate mission to destroy any evidence of the agent's presence in possession of local authorities

* BUG: In 1.3 it was occasionally possible to assign agents to a mission even if they were on the other side of the world. Not sure if fixed in 1.4
* Suggestion: change the word "dodge" (when describing avoidance of enemy fire) to "miss" or "avoided" because there's only one Neo.

* Post-mission voice-over about the "shootout" at Beirut morgue happens even if all targets were eliminated using takedown. Having it called an "incident" would have been much better, though probably too late to re-record the audio now.

Lastly, my personal impression is that there are two major areas that could use marked improvement: additional granularity of "access" to specific parts of mission area, and improved guard behavior. After that, increased interaction between guards, civilians and agents would really help improve "infiltration" phase. Disguises should be tied to specific areas of the map only, or be tier-dependent with additional training required for those allowing greater access.

As an example, an agent disguised as a "nurse" should not be allowed to run over rooftops or enter security station areas (or at least not unchallenged by the guards). This would not only prevent disguises from being as powerful as they are right now (especially combined with Actor), but would also improve of the complexity of the Infiltration phase (and, presumably, lead to a more engaging experience with it than "run around picking up everything"). Add checkpoints that require SOME interaction between guards and the agent (and presumably appropriate language), or at least a "keycard" or a pass that needs to be obtained from a specific civilian or placement location.

Break up mission flow to be more nuanced. Add more objectives even to the pseudo-randomized missions. Recover captured agent? Why not have a secondary objective requiring destruction of preliminary information obtained from and about the agent (basically a "documents" placeable that needs to be recovered), or elimination of a specific interrogation officer that may or may not be immediately around the agent? In this example, if the player cannot accomplish the secondary objective, the rescued agent joins with compromised identity.

The more I play the more I wish Phantom Doctrine spent more time in development. The foundations are solid, but there is so much more that could have been done with this fantastic engine and concept.

Like with everything else it's all a question of the budget at one's disposal.
And catering not too much to one portion of the audience (usually the one that puts intricate complexity and ever-challenging difficulty before everything else). At the end of the day even independent developers still have to meet deadlines and sell enough units to at least break even.

How cool would it have been if there was no checklist of the amount of loot and the pieces of intel you can pick up during assault missions at all and the containers with the loot and the intel objects would only become highlighted once you actually enter or have line of sight into the room (e.g. through a window) said items are stored in?

Or if every time an ID is compromised and you'd have to get the agent in question a new one you'd also have to customize the appearance of the agent, not necessarily to match the new photograph as accurate as possible (which the limited customization options wouldn't even allow for in the first place) but, let's say in at least 3 critical aspects (different hairdo, different eye color, facial hair for male agents/make up and/or accessories for female agents), for the new ID to actually work?

I'd love to have ALL the nice things too but that'd make it even more niche (and, I imagine even less well received, not to mention less profitable) than it already is.

i see your point here... Yet as a side minigame, i already felt it was quite well made.

now for the major problem you are raising (and that is valid), i can allow myself to come up with two statements, that may not solve the issue itself but swallow it a bit easier:

1) some other games were ENTIRELY built upon such "click until somethimg registers" or "click every spot on the screen" or "try out every items" mechanism: they were called old school "point'n'click" and now more recently "hidden objects" games.

2) let's assume the agents in the game are well trained professionals much smarter than us players at their task and that they can spot the relevant informations (and maybe behind the curtain are crossing references so they know what we click on is actually safe bets/safe answers)... Much as there is no RNG in this game regarding firing weapons, they just hit the target.

Of course it is a bit of hyppocrisy, but hey, it sort of explain the thing with lore, so.

Plus, remember that the game allows player to directly assign agents to the task of recovering those keywords automatically (with a few ingame-hours costs) without even bothering the player with it.

Still i see your point, it is valid... but i ask to myself: what would happen, gameplaywise, if we could select any keyword or even irrelevant portions of text ? (that, and the problem of such handpicked keywords, regarding localization). We could sometimes arrive in a dead end and sort of a bit frustrated for what is, for me, just a minigame for sake of immersion, where the core of the game is Turn Based Tactical + Strategic Base Management.
Though, yes, then, the whole fact of assignation of agents to the task would be more meaningful then...

Imagine, it's like if a 4x game suddenly would stop your gameplay loop of strategy thinking to impose you to succeed a guitar hero-style gameplay to gatekeep you from continuing the game. You can safely bet many people would now complain of the siuation as well.

Of course dont take what i say too seriously or personally.. I'm certainly very biased because i so far like this game a lot already :)

it is, in a way... the language appears in green on your character you select, if it's compatible with the area of the mission

So if an agent speaks Russian and English has one of those in green and the other in white when in the team loadout screen, green is the language that will grant you distraction ability.

well, this is a crude but efficient way to enforce what i consider as the original/unique gameplay of Phantom Doctrine. For once it's not a turn based tactical about shooting and pewpew ing and killing all around until victory... but it's about observing surrounding, planning, infiltration and stealth.

Except for rare circumstances and/to a limited extent, i consider that triggering alarm IS a mission failed. Sometimes you may trigger it but have just enough time to escape alive (but wounded) with or without the objective completed or not (considering evac has a 3 turns long to get in effect)

You dont play soldiers or swat teams who are here to breahc and enter and fully neutralize an entire area off terrorists or sich (there are other games for that, in fact). You are spies, in the shadow.

sure, ok, my post may offend you, not please you, not solve your issue with the game or whatever. But AFAIC, remove this infiltration point off the game and you just drain it from its core and turn it into a generic tactical game... and in that department, competition is way too fierce for it to ever have any legit reason to keep being around the market.

Now a question for you: go in a city block, generate gunshot noises (with actual weapon or firecrackers) and/or have someone seen shot or discovered as muredered by gunshot and tell me how long will be the local authorities' average respond time, andif they will drop the case after one or two patrols gone silent/reported from missing for going to check in this area ?

"oh we had a gunshot alert and a person murdered on the 15th avenue... Bob, Mike, Julia and Luke already got dispatched there 30 minutes ago but we had no news from them since that time..." "Baaaah, nevermind, must be nothin serious.. Gimme that doughnut, please !"

Now same question in a high-surveillance or high-security area monitored by governement agencies or higher grade of domestic defense (such as military facility/lab, or near a nuclear powerplant and such) and tell me if backups will wait for 30 min for you to have the time to just walk away in peace ?