Hey no worries.
It’s a little selfishly motivated to be honest, I’m trying to think about the games I play with more critique so that I can more easily critique my own game (when I get there). But even so, happy to help. 
The missions objectives could indeed use some variation but I like to keep things simple. After all, the player was sent there to specifically protect the cargo. I’m currently testing some secondary optional objectives that could add a tiny bit of variation. I have also planned some more decorative objects to add visual variation to the mission sites.
Perfectly reasonable. Secondary objectives are a great idea. It’s always nice to have a risk vs reward option, or something to push for when “just winning” becomes easy. The leader board helps with that obviously. A letter ranking after each level could also be a good motivation to replay levels, up-skill and embrace the game’s systems.
Currently there is only the blinking white indicators at screen edges that notify player when a container is getting damaged off-screen. Perhaps that indicator should become more visible when the container is badly damaged and maybe play some kind of a warning sound.
This should already be there. It should show white indicators at the screen edges but they might not be visible enough…
Good idea. I’m not the most observant person, but I totally missed the white indicators. I guess when there are enemies on screen my focus is on them, so I probably only looked to the edges when I had no one to fight - hence spotting the red ones.
This is a common problem for a new player before learning that the heights matter. So far the only thing I’ve come up with to make this more visible is the dimming of the aiming reticule when there is no line of sight to target. Then again, hitting the ground does no real harm as the weapons won’t (directly) damage the player.
Yeah this is a tricky one. Something I’ve seen in games with similar considerations is a second reticule that shows up if the bullet will hit an obstacle. It’s usually connected by a line to the main reticule and indicates where the bullet will actually land. This is difficult with weapon spread though as “where it will land” is a region not a point. It’s fairly obvious when it happens already, but you could also use a puff of dust when a bullet falls short to further highlight it. It’d also look cool when you’re assault rifling the side of a hill and loads of dust kicks up which the enemies then burst through.
A semi-relevant technique I’m aware of is to give the player’s bullets two different collision sizes: a small one (or ray trace) for eg. terrain and obstacles, and a bigger one (or a sphere cast) for enemies. Both collision checks are ran and the one that hits closest to the source counts. Sometimes the collision check to hit enemies is bigger than the bullet. The player doesn’t notice, but it means sometimes when their shot would hit an obstacle, it instead goes past, and sometimes when they would JUST MISS the enemy, it still hits. The inverse can be done for enemy bullets, making cover easier to use and giving the player lots of exciting near-miss moments (when truthfully, if it was fair they would have been hit). Since you’re adding more decorative objects, there will be more opportunities for cover in the game, so this could become more relevant. The key to stuff like this is that the player doesn’t notice the cheat, but still gets the benefit (who knows, maybe you’ve already done it!).
This has already been changed in the current development version. I decided to remove the score costs on all devices because, like you said, it disincentivises using them for no real reason
Glad to hear it! I look forward to seeing your next showcase. 
