Into the Breach

"Some do it fast and some do it better in smaller amounts"

Marilyn Manson - Count to 6 and Die


Back when I reservedly praised a Roguelike throwback called FTL for its captivating frustration factor I would've expected its developers to use its somewhat unexpected popularity to launch into some self-indulgent, Hollywood-envious glitzy cash sink of a project. As with the first, I'm not entirely enthused by their second release, Into the Breach, but its quality is once again undeniable. Again they indulged in the same nonsensical "neo retro" visual aesthetic (or lack of same) so there's little to note in that department except for some masterfully addictive anticipation-building delays in reward window pop-ups and menu scrolling. You don't have to like it, but note it.

Anyway:

Giant bugs are destroying the planet! Oh noes! Luckily your crack squad of mecha pilots can jump in from the future to go mano a mano with the evil insectoids. Go-go power something. As both your crew and your mechs change less during a play-through than your FTL ship, the adventure here manages to be even less engaging. In true old-timey fashion, the storytelling's limited to "go kill the big nasties" all the better to fast-forward to iron-fisted pugilism.

But then again, you have to hand it to them, in that respect it shines. Into the Breach boils down RPG mechanics to the point of returning to tabletop strategy, but manages to do so while leaving nothing behind. In fact it's harder to come up with turn-based game mechanics which weren't included.

Damage comes as melee, range, indirect, DoT, targeted AoE, PBAoE, ground AoE, cone AoE, line AoE, and can be altered by self-healing, group healing, HoT, health buffs, armor buffs, damage amps, immunity...
Not enough for you? Try terrain effects like fire damage, moving tiles, smoke blocking your attacks, water sinking non-mech ground units, insta-gib lightning, ice block immunity or hell why not, even the terrain dropping out from under ground units altogether.
And that's still just scratching the surface because the most important feature, the "puzzle-solving" element for which ITB gets applauded is movement and orientation. Friendly fire is very, very real for both your units and the bugs, and smashing things into each other causes damage. So most of the game actually revolves around pushing, pulling, jumping, teleporting, swapping and turning your enemies around to get them to frag each other, billiard them into mountains, into each other or your own units or at least get their sights off your buildings.

It's hectic, hair-raising stuff and quite rewarding. Half the time you get better results with non-damaging options, as your main objective is not to kill but to drag the fight out for four or five rounds without letting your buildings get damaged. And here's where my biggest quibble comes in: ITB is even more luck-based than FTL.

Others have said this, sure, but they tend to focus on the types of enemies spawning each round. I'd say rather the main problem rests with the "power grid" which acts as a stand-in for your "lives" from old games. Lose all those 7 points in the top left and the game is over, and in the late game it's not uncommon for the bugs to do 3-4 points of grid damage in a single attack. Not in one fight or even one round but a single bug's attack in one round.

Low sample pools increase sampling error. This is, in a roundabout way, why cheetahs and condors and so many other endangered species are pretty much doomed. It's much easier to align a perfect totality of disaster with fewer pieces. Your ITB grid has a small chance of resisting attacks, and I doubt I've had even one victory so far which did not involve some lucky roll of the "grid defense" dice. Compared to a thirty hit point spaceship, a seven-point grid is much more likely to get wiped out in the course of a single unlucky battle. Even if it is your fault (as has shamefully often been the case with inattentive old me) it still feels like you're being cheated somehow when you lose everything due to a single misstep after a dozen hard-won battles. Yeah, critical fumbles are a classic tabletop issue as well, but at least there you've got a GM to fudge the rules a bit and let you limp away with one hit point and keep the campaign rolling.

I love small numbers in games, and find such games more interesting than the pinball-sized readout of gold pieces or hit points in, say, WoW-clone MMOs. Small numbers and probability, though, do not mix well, at least not when affecting your adventure's most crucial metric.