OpenXcom Forum
OpenXcom => Suggestions => Topic started by: MrFrustrated on August 26, 2014, 03:43:07 am
-
It makes no sense that alien ships have no outward damage. The only damage you ever see is from exploding power sources, but nothing from the cannonfire, laser cannonfire, plasma cannonfire, missles or fusion launchers.
The soldiers only carry one weapon strong enough to peirce the outerhull, the blaster launcher. I would assume the craft weapons do more. At the very least, a single shot from the starting interceptor cannon (10 craft damage) has to do as much damage as a heavy cannon ap round (56 personnel damage) your soldier carry. That's roughly 1 to 5.5 ratio. Which means that even the crappy weak crasft missles should be tearing holes in alien ships since 70 craft damage would equal almost 400 player damage.
So yes, I wish thier was a mob that including random damage (a few holes, a few fires, a few dead aliens) done to shot down ufos.
-
I'm not sure how it would affect tactics and the general feel of the game, but yes, I think it's worth considering.
-
With a close thinking, I have made no change in UFOs, but in some humans weapons :
- heavy explosive able to make one square hole in UFO wall, but with reduced radius blast and weight enought big to not be used like a grenade. If we can make missile with explosive as powerful to pierce UFO, why soldier can't bring them ? warhead of a missile isn't so big when you delete all propulsion system.
- HWP weapon power raised to match craft weapons. Laser has 140 power, so it can make hole in UFOs wall (not each time). canon HWP can't : craft cannon gain much power by the craft speed. Plams HWP also have much power to heavy plasma of soldiers. (hey, why the hell naming that "Heavy" weapon plateform if they can't carry heaviest weapons than soldiers ?)
- Rocket don't change. They are really smaller than a missile.
There is also a mod with plasma torch.
Maybe these not exactly what you want but can give the feeling you search by making hole in UFOs ?
-
I think the intention was more like "hey, I shot down that UFO, I hit it several times, why does it not show any hull damage?"
I posted a similar suggestion a while ago... since the battlescape engine is capable of setting off explosions pre-battle (Power Sources!), it would totally make sense to keep track of the damage the UFO took during the interception and setting off some additional small explosions to simulate weapon impact damage.
(also, additional explosions could be used to create a fake "crash path" in the surrounding terrain...)
-
to be honest it seems a lot less like a 'crash' and more like being 'forced to land'.
what happens when you knock something out the sky? it plummets headlong to the floor. It does not land neatly down as if it leisurely landed. it'd be cool if there was a crashed tileset for each ufo. I suppose you could also add in a hole somewhere in the hull to artificially simulate the killing blow from the interceptor.
-
to be honest it seems a lot less like a 'crash' and more like being 'forced to land'.
what happens when you knock something out the sky? it plummets headlong to the floor. It does not land neatly down as if it leisurely landed. it'd be cool if there was a crashed tileset for each ufo. I suppose you could also add in a hole somewhere in the hull to artificially simulate the killing blow from the interceptor.
I guess that depends heavily on the type of damage that forced the... let's say... "unintentional deviation from planned flight path".
hull badly damaged
--> emergency landing (UFO does not need lift surfaces, but if the wind blows through and the aliens can't take it anymore, they land)
navigation systems blown
--> probably emergency vertical landing: Power Source goes into "safe mode", no more horizontal movement, controlled vertical descent
navigator(s) incapacitated
--> see "navigation systems blown"
power source(s) inactivated
--> all-out crash. I assume the UFOs do feature some kind of dampening system / energy shield / whatever, so even an impact from high altitude can be survived by aliens on board. depending on the angle of impact, additional damage may ensue.
that's why I'd like to see some kind of (Geoscape-)damage-dependent system of applying (Battlescape-)damage to the UFO...
-
to be honest it seems a lot less like a 'crash' and more like being 'forced to land'.
what happens when you knock something out the sky? it plummets headlong to the floor. It does not land neatly down as if it leisurely landed. it'd be cool if there was a crashed tileset for each ufo.
Maybe that's why UFOs "crash" far before damage we done to them reach their real hull resistance. And why other are just blow in pieces, not even recoverable in crash site.
-
Excellent ideas, Arpia! Now if only we had the option of targeting specific vital systems... :)
I also found this: https://openxcom.org/forum/index.php?topic=654.msg6198#msg6198 - still viable.
But I was actually looking for this conversation: https://openxcom.org/forum/index.php?topic=2120.msg21137#msg21137
This subject really is as immortal as Jason. :P
-
Excellent ideas, Arpia! Now if only we had the option of targeting specific vital systems... :)
nah, targeting them shouldn't be possible... although, that would be a way to include "EMP" weapons: they would simply temporarily disable the navigation systems. otherwise, I'd say it's a random thing.
and yes, the subject is immortal. probably because good ideas die hard :P
-
Considering that Explosion Size in vanilla xcom is directly proportional to explosion damage . . .
And in real life the size of an explosion increases by the Cube Root (3rd power) of its firepower this dictates . . .
The relationship between Damage and Firepower is of the 3rd power.
If we consider that a Hand Grenade has 1/2 Kilo of High Explosive in it (which does 50 damage) . . . then a Blaster Launcher (200 damage) has as much firepower as (200/50)^3 divided by two kilograms of high explosive.
Handheld Blaster Launcher warheads have a conventional explosive power equal to about 30 Kilograms of plastic explosive.
Considering the officially stated yields of various kinds of air-to-air missiles most of them have between 10 and 50 Kilograms of high explosive. The Hellfire air-to-ground missile itself has like 30 pounds (15 kilograms) so even it does a little less damage than a Blaster Warhead (about 160 damage).
So that means conventional air-to-air missiles actually explode for a Battlescape equivalent of 140 to 240 Explosive Damage depending on the kind of missile.
Stingray Missiles are pretty small in the base inventory (0.4 each) so that means they're probably in this range.
Avalanche Missiles are more like the Phoenix Missile, legendary for both its range (100 miles) and its firepower (650 pounds, or 300 kilogram warhead). But who knows maybe it does less because its range is also alot less too. Its probably still doing the equivalent of 300 Explosive Damage in battlescape though.
So how much you think a Fusion Ball striking for 230 air-combat damage is gonna do on the battlefield? If its nearest equivalent only does 100 points.
===
However Air Combat takes a bunch of other things into consideration too, and sometimes less things into consideration than battlescape. This is the overall Effectiveness of the weapons, firing at an evasive aircraft which an indirect shot will probably bounce off of like D&D Armor Class.
Air to Air missiles typically rely on Fragmentation damage to blow up enemy aircraft via a proximity blast. This is useless against alien UFOs though because shrapnel is peanuts to alien alloys, it takes dierct hit shaped charge explosives to damage them.
The cannon rounds probably have their efefct because they would be Depleted Uranium.
-
A very interesting analysis, but:
If we consider that a Hand Grenade has 1/2 Kilo of High Explosive in it (which does 50 damage) . . .
I think it's way too much. I'd say 0,2 kg at most. (Unless I'm misunderstanding something.)
-
I think it's way too much. I'd say 0,2 kg at most. (Unless I'm misunderstanding something.)
Inventory weight of Grenades is 3 pounds.
One pound of explosive and double as much for the casing seems appropriate.
If I recall a typical real-world grenade of the suggested shape of the xcom grenade only weighs near about 1 pound and would have about 0.2Kg of explosive in it. So these grenades are darn-tootin-big like the Mills Bomb and similar defensive grenades from earlier wars (tv trope:they dont build them like they used to).
Another basis for measuring it would be the High Explosive device (110 damage, weight 6 pounds), which is basically a chunk of explosive with a detonator stuck in it.
But in that case id say its a more advanced mix of military grade explosives with a force multiplier on par with nitroglycerin (TNT x 1.5). Otherwise it wouldnt cost so much.
(is there really a game balance associated with such low inventory store costs, I mean when you cant even buy a few demolition packs at $1500 a pop how can you fight a war).
That would bring its firepower up to 9 pounds. And while that's 4Kg not 5Kg (as the prior calculation suggested), the ballpark figures are about the same. Since a difference of (4/5)1/3 is less than 10% adjustment on the damage itself.
Blaster Launcher Warheads are still on par with being a Hellfire Missile, an Aim-9, and most other air-to-air missiles all by itself.
-
OK, makes sense... :)
-
Does not. No matter how sound is your logic, your assumption that 1 xcom weight unit = 1 pound is completely baseless. Not to even mention that we're talking about a game where people can see 20m away and the accurate range of personal arms seems to be little more. Trying to apply mathematical formulas here, while being, I admit, fun, is bound to lead us into coockoo land. Or simply prove whatever the poster wants to be proven. For example: I ASSUME that the sight range of a soldier is about 200 metres (typical effective sight range in a diverse environment), and the blaster bomb has 11 tile blast radius, so the blast bomb explosion radius is 110 metres, which puts its yield in multiple-ton-TNT range. Logical? Logical. Proven? Not really. No offense meant, but if you're trying to use science to prove something, you must be measured by scientific standards.
-
Prove something...? I thought this was purely fun/academic. If there was something the author wanted to prove, I forgot about it long ago. :P
-
There other problems :
- items weights are not proportionals. a pistol is 5, a pistol clip 3 and a rifle 8 ? (So either the pistol is totally made of cast iron or the rifle is on plastic ?)
- all clip ans 1x1 sqares item do "3" weight no matter what they are
- the sight range is limited, but not the throw range so we can have ingame soldiers able to throw a grenade farther than with a grenade launcher
and of course all prices in vanilla's are really weird.
-
External UFO damage depending on weapons damage would be nice.
There other problems :
- items weights are not proportionals. a pistol is 5, a pistol clip 3 and a rifle 8 ? (So either the pistol is totally made of cast iron or the rifle is on plastic ?)
Pistol in UFO is a heavy large calibre pistol like Desert Eagle, not a typical military pistol.
- all clip ans 1x1 sqares item do "3" weight no matter what they are
I think it's because how the throwing range is calculated - it's possible for a 30 strength character to throw a "1" weight item over 100 metres. A rookie with strength of 30 can throw an "2" weight item 40 metres or even more. So a 3 is probably the minimum wage to introduce meaningful strength differences for grenade throwing and generally prevent throwing items across the map.
- the sight range is limited, but not the throw range so we can have ingame soldiers able to throw a grenade farther than with a grenade launcher
Judging by how a 100m line of sight slows the game down on a modern comp, I suspect that a comp from 1994 simply wouldn't be able to take a line of sight all across a board 50-60m board.
-
I don't think that this argument (simulation vs. tactical abstraction, aritmetical vs. logarythmical) can be definitely proven either way as it depends much on the subjective feelings of a given player... But please do your math before posting. Even a Desert Eagle pistol is only about half as heavy as a very light assault rifle, not over 3/4 as heavy. And the XCom rifle certainly doesn't seem described as a light weapon to me (although there isn't any definitive PROOF against it, granted).
-
I don't think that this argument (simulation vs. tactical abstraction, aritmetical vs. logarythmical) can be definitely proven either way as it depends much on the subjective feelings of a given player... But please do your math before posting. Even a Desert Eagle pistol is only about half as heavy as a very light assault rifle, not over 3/4 as heavy. And the XCom rifle certainly doesn't seem described as a light weapon to me (although there isn't any definitive PROOF against it, granted).
5 is a bit more than half of 8. Empty AK-47 weights 7,7 lbs. Desert Eagle Mark XIX weights 4,4lbs. Magazine warps the weight because it's affected by the minimum practical item weight of 3. Magazine doesn't weight 3 because it's that heavy but to make throwing it across the map impossible.
-
How do we say french "CQFD" in english ? QED ? Sturm, you just demonstrate there is not point to search realistic rexplaination while there is mechanical programming reasons which imply bias.
(and i have seen nowhere the vanilla's pistol is a desert eagle, which seem weird to me because there is no point to use this in military theatre. If we want realism, in my opinion, xcom will use a FN P90 and his dedicated pistol FN Five-seveN. Why ? because it take time but we finally understand that a lighter but faster bullet is really more usefull than a heaviest slow one, like the .44 for example, well known but obsolete, and two weapon able to fire the same ammo is really practical).
But in 90's, theses weapons where new and not well known maybe that why vanilla's give weaponry out of date.
In my opinion, in a game we must search coherency more than realism ;) So come back to ths subject, external UFO damage for me seem change all the game. And I don't think it's for the better because if UFOs are in pieces and half the crew already dead or badly wounded, missions will become far too easy, no ?
-
So come back to ths subject, external UFO damage for me seem change all the game. And I don't think it's for the better because if UFOs are in pieces and half the crew already dead or badly wounded, missions will become far too easy, no ?
of course it needs to be balanced so the end results are more or less the same as in the vanilla game, but we already have moderate to severe destruction from exploded power sources... btw, I remember from the original that sometimes I arrived and found medium scouts reduced to floor tiles and 1-2 walls, with only one alien still alive, and sometimes only a destroyed interior with all of the hull intact. I've yet to see this kind of variation in UFO destruction in openxcom... did the mechanics for power source explosions change somehow?
I think it would make sense to randomize power source explosion strength AND add UFO hull damage from xcom weapons. the mean net amount of destruction would probably stay the same, but both measures would increase immersion (in my opinion).
-
5 is a bit more than half of 8. Empty AK-47 weights 7,7 lbs. Desert Eagle Mark XIX weights 4,4lbs. Magazine warps the weight because it's affected by the minimum practical item weight of 3. Magazine doesn't weight 3 because it's that heavy but to make throwing it across the map impossible.
You're going in circles here. You're defending the notion of the gun having realistic weights by saying they have unrealistic weights because game. But this is very OT...
Afaik the explosion strength of the Power Source is already randomized...
However what would go against adding external weapons damage (potentially, I'm not saying I'm against the idea): we don't know if the UFOs sustain any external damage at all; if they were simply shot until stopped working, they'd go straight down and smash into a million pieces... Maybe the human weapons merely cause their power systems/forcefields to overload and force emergency landing... that sometimes leads to power source overload and explosion. That'd explain why they're either seemingly undamaged or blown to pieces, with nothing in between.
-
Maybe the human weapons merely cause their power systems/forcefields to overload and force emergency landing... that sometimes leads to power source overload and explosion. That'd explain why they're either seemingly undamaged or blown to pieces, with nothing in between.
that's an explanation that actually makes sense, in-game-wise... maybe we should add that as a fluff text somewhere ;)
I'd still prefer my version :D (oh, I forgot to add: I'd also randomize the elerium amount of intact power sources, to preserve continuity)
-
(oh, I forgot to add: I'd also randomize the elerium amount of intact power sources, to preserve continuity)
Elerium being more tricky to obtain is always a good idea; it helps to preserve its special status (also it could lead to RANDOM LOOT lists, halleluyah!). However a certain part of the community would likely shred to pieces a person who'd actually implement it :)
-
You're going in circles here. You're defending the notion of the gun having realistic weights by saying they have unrealistic weights because game. But this is very OT...
That's guns, not ammunition. Guns (Rifle and Pistol and Plasma weapons and Rockets and Rocket Launcher) seem to sit at the point of weight scale where there's still weight in pounds. Lower end of scale is limited because of the throwing calculation - which makes bizarre grenade and magazine weight and weights on heavier items like corpses are in some different units due how encumbrance works - with corpse weight in pounds, carrying a corpse would leave character with 7 action points or something like that.
However what would go against adding external weapons damage (potentially, I'm not saying I'm against the idea): we don't know if the UFOs sustain any external damage at all; if they were simply shot until stopped working, they'd go straight down and smash into a million pieces... Maybe the human weapons merely cause their power systems/forcefields to overload and force emergency landing... that sometimes leads to power source overload and explosion. That'd explain why they're either seemingly undamaged or blown to pieces, with nothing in between.
If aliens had forcefields, landed alien craft would have intact forcefield generators that could be researched. I agree that UFO systems certainly aren't completely disabled though.
Maybe aliens would emergency land by themselves when their craft is sufficiently ventilated? Larger alien craft probably could take quite a battering before that. Crash landed Battleship could literally have a large part of the outer hull stripped off it. It could look like a water battleship after taking 15 torpedo hits except without sinking.
(https://i.imgur.com/4BVnGhJ.png)
-
There is some beauty to that vision, I agree... What supports it is the fact that UFO power source (/propulsion), by the descriptions, seems to not care about aerodynamics at all. However... With the outer hull breached, travelling at 5000 knots through the atmosphere would end very badly for the inner workings of the ship, including its crew... IMO it's reasonable to assume that the internal walls lack thermal shielding or superconductivity or whatever (ruling out the forcefields, which are indeed ungrounded in any canon material), or/and simply the ruggedness to survive such pressure and heat conditions. If the external damage is ever implemented, it'd have to be complemented with a "sufficiently damaged UFOs slow down" mechanics.
-
there's actually another problem: what if the calculated damage destroys the only grav lift that allows non-flying units access to the upper UFO levels? this could lead to ground missions where you cannot access parts of the map... very frustrating.
-
there's actually another problem: what if the calculated damage destroys the only grav lift that allows non-flying units access to the upper UFO levels? this could lead to ground missions where you cannot access parts of the map... very frustrating.
True, but I think that's the price for having more advanced mechanics.
Also, bring grenades. ;)
-
I've never thought about that. :-\
Can't the grav lift be modified to be almost indestructible like XCOM crafts?
But generally I'd vote for external UFO damage and even crash damage/fire/smoke/ in the map itself.
moriarty's suggestion on damage types sounds great, depending on what got destroyed the UFO either lands or crashes with different consequences.
-
Damaged UFOs could be handled by separate map files.
-
I've never thought about that. :-\
Can't the grav lift be modified to be almost indestructible like XCOM crafts?
actually, the grav lift itself IS indestructible afaik. but the floor tiles around the upper level aren't :D
Damaged UFOs could be handled by separate map files.
sure, but that's a lot of work. especially if we want to include all the newly built UFOs like lukes additional UFOs :o
-
Pistol in UFO is a heavy large calibre pistol like Desert Eagle, not a typical military pistol.
I believe the ufopaedia in vanilla said the pistol was 9mm.
The rifle was also 6.7mm which is roughly equivalent to a .270winchester (which is between a 5.56mm and 7.62mm nato in power). So its not really a heavy duty rifle either. Though it does have good accuracy.
But even a Desert Eagle (44mag or .50ae) would do more damage than that rifle.
What supports it is the fact that UFO power source (/propulsion), by the descriptions, seems to not care about aerodynamics at all.
What I think the designers had in mind was, the Power Source/Engines for the ship determine if it is airborne or not.
Apparently they are pretty fragile, and the equivalent of buffeting from external explosions (like theatrical Bridge Shaking in Star Trek) can cause them to malfunction and explode when they are turned on. Kinda like dropping your laptop while copying files can crash the hard drive.
Since smaller UFOs can actually get destroyed its a fair bet to say that any actual Hull Breaching of the ship really does destroy them, not just blowing up the power source but tearing the ship apart.
So maybe the UFOs are a hell of alot tougher than expected and they only get shot down because of "shaken baby syndrome".
-
I believe the ufopaedia in vanilla said the pistol was 9mm.
"The standard issue XCom pistol is a high powered semi-automatic with a 12 round capacity."
The rifle was also 6.7mm which is roughly equivalent to a .270winchester (which is between a 5.56mm and 7.62mm nato in power). So its not really a heavy duty rifle either. Though it does have good accuracy.
But even a Desert Eagle (44mag or .50ae) would do more damage than that rifle.
I think that X-Com uses a penetration-based damage model. Which means that higher energy and lower calibre trumps over momentum (though with .270 winchester, momentum would still be a bit higher for the rifle bullet).
What supports it is the fact that UFO power source (/propulsion), by the descriptions, seems to not care about aerodynamics at all.
What I think the designers had in mind was, the Power Source/Engines for the ship determine if it is airborne or not.
Apparently they are pretty fragile, and the equivalent of buffeting from external explosions (like theatrical Bridge Shaking in Star Trek) can cause them to malfunction and explode when they are turned on. Kinda like dropping your laptop while copying files can crash the hard drive.
Since smaller UFOs can actually get destroyed its a fair bet to say that any actual Hull Breaching of the ship really does destroy them, not just blowing up the power source but tearing the ship apart.
So maybe the UFOs are a hell of alot tougher than expected and they only get shot down because of "shaken baby syndrome".
The thing is that larger UFOs don't actually get thicker armour than smaller ones. They are just larger. On the other hand X-Com made alloy craft that use thicker armour while staying small.
-
I think that X-Com uses a penetration-based damage model. Which means that higher energy and lower calibre trumps over momentum (though with .270 winchester, momentum would still be a bit higher for the rifle bullet).
Thank you, I stand corrected about the pistol.
In reality (like, real world reality) the formula for Penetration works alot like this:
60 x Mass x Velocity Multiplier x Density of Target-1 x Diameter-2
(units are grams, meters per sec, grams per cubic cm, millimeters for diameter)
The Velocity multiplier is LOG[ ((Bullet Density x Velocity2) + Bullet Tensile Strength) x (Tensile Strength of Target)-1 ]
So if you have a Hardened Steel bullet shooting a Hardened Steel target at 750 meters per second (roughly high powered rifle speed) the Velocity multiplier will be LOG[ ((7.8 g/cm x 7502) +120000 Pa) / 120000 Pa ] = ~1.57 (unitless)
Completing this equation if the bullet weighs 150 grains (9.75 grams) and is 7.62mm wide the overall Ideal penetration will be . . . (this is for a 7.62mm all-steel armor piercing round)
9.75 x 94.2 x 7.8-1 x 7.62-2 = ~2 cm of hardened steel armor
Using the example of a .50BMG armor piercing round (43g @ 850m/s) will produce penetration of 3.45 cm against likewise armored material (which makes sense because even a standard ball round will penetrate 1.5cm of steel plate armor).
Granted its not a foolproof equation, such as when you introduce things like Incendiary Armor Piercing or Hollowpoint expansion, but it is derived from one involving alot more physics, condensed into simple logarithms rather than integrals. And it is an excellent guide for figuring out the ballpark figure (probably within 25%) where the penetration for something is going to be.
(as for my source, I found it back in 2006 at random, and have been putting it to the test ever since then, and have since lost the webpage link and documentation for it)
The relationship between Penetration and Velocity is not linear. And it increases at a slower than 1:1 ratio as velocity increases, but since its based on a number of factors its not readily apparent how it will be affected.
Evidently the Material Strength of the bullet also doesnt matter as much as its Density. But since a bullet breaking up or deforming would effecitvely alter its Diameter mid-penetration it does matter,more than this equation suggests.
And all of that was just to let you know . . . that the Energy of the shot really doesnt matter, despite common conception of it. Its more like Momentum vs. Diameter rather than Energy (and its even less than Momentum because Velocity is not at a 1:1 ratio).
If you want to increase penetration, Lower the Velocity, and increase the Mass, while decreasing the Diameter.
An ideal penetrating bullet will be long and rod-shaped, made out of Tungsten (almost as heavy as uranium), and it will be narrow. Like a Flechette. Except it needs to be wide enough not to snap under pressure so it can't be sub-caliber like the (less than 5mm) rounds developed in the 60s.
So getting shot with something cruising at poor pistol velocity could end up with more penetration than a .50, though it would be heavier and because of ballistic arc it wouldnt have as much range.
Though a heavier bullet also has better range than another one going the same speed because of Air Resistance, which acts like the bullet has to penetrate the air just as much as the target itself.
What Velocity does for you is it increases the Range of the shot and it increases the Physical Damage that it causes on impact. It does increase the penetration, but not by much. And it comes at a great cost of energy to push it up to speed.
This also debunks the notion of a Railgun having excellent penetration. Yes a railgun has good penetration but according to these calculations the realistic velocity a railgun might have (about as fast as an orbiting satellite, something like 10 times rifle velocity) . . . would only be like 2-3 times as much by weight.
What it does do is an absolutely enormous amount of Physical Damage, and have a flat trajectory arc like a laser.
(and you can forget "relatavistic" railgunss, since as soon as it fires it will generate a nuclear strength explosion from pushing the air out of the way in front of the gun, good way to kill yourself)
-
One way to simulate damage is to roll for every outer ufo wall and if its "crit" then explode that tile. Something like current power source explosion.
-
One way to simulate damage is to roll for every outer ufo wall and if its "crit" then explode that tile. Something like current power source explosion.
True. Luckily getSpecialType() == ALIEN_ALLOYS seems to return only the outer walls. Here's how 15% 3m radius explosions look like (The terror ship could be 25%, though. I don't remember).
The main problem is that aliens get spawned outside, so it's impossible to take casualties in-air into account.
-
Very nice. I'd say between 0% and 7% should be enough, though... otherwise the UFO has too many entrances, and breaching it loses the thrill.
Thank you, this is a very important first step!
Do you think it would be possible to keep track of the damage values of each hit the UFO took?
-
Very nice. I'd say between 0% and 7% should be enough, though... otherwise the UFO has too many entrances, and breaching it loses the thrill.
On the other hand you can have several exits from UFOs from which the aliens can come out without warning you with door sounds. It's also more difficult to secure every exit with mines.
Do you think it would be possible to keep track of the damage values of each hit the UFO took?
Well, it should possible. I don't have skills to program it yet, though. The damages could be written into a table or something like that would then be read when generating the battlescape, doing number and damage of "hits" based on the hits in the table. The game could run through tiles multiple times exploding them until all "hits" are used up.
-
that's what I was aiming at, precisely :)
we could then define hit damage levels for different size explosions. something like this:
60-100: radius 0 explosion (1 tile destroyed)
101-140: radius 1 explosion (3x3)
300+: radius 2 explosion (5x5)
rationale:
- the standard cannon shouldn't be able to completely destroy a UFO hull tile (especially not with a single hit, because it has such a high rate of fire)
- the laser cannon and stingray should have a hard time creating a man-sized hole
- the avalanche should regularly destroy a tile, but not always
- plasma cannon should burn holes most of the time
- fusion balls should cause large holes sometimes
for reference, here's the vanilla values:
cannon: damage 10 (5-15)
stingray: damage 70 (35-105)
laser cannon: damage 70 (35-105)
avalanche: damage 100 (50-150)
plasma cannon: damage 140 (70-210)
fusion ball: damage 230 (115-345)
small scout: damagemax 50
medium scout: damagemax 200
large scout: damagemax 250
abductor: damagemax 500
harvester: damagemax 500
terror ship: damagemax 1200
supply ship: damagemax 2200
battleship: damagemax 3000
-
+1
This is exciting!
-
that's what I was aiming at, precisely :)
we could then define hit damage levels for different size explosions. something like this:
60-100: radius 0 explosion (1 tile destroyed)
101-140: radius 1 explosion (3x3)
300+: radius 2 explosion (5x5)
rationale:
- the standard cannon shouldn't be able to completely destroy a UFO hull tile (especially not with a single hit, because it has such a high rate of fire)
- the laser cannon and stingray should have a hard time creating a man-sized hole
- the avalanche should regularly destroy a tile, but not always
- plasma cannon should burn holes most of the time
- fusion balls should cause large holes sometimes
for reference, here's the vanilla values:
cannon: damage 10 (5-15)
stingray: damage 70 (35-105)
laser cannon: damage 70 (35-105)
avalanche: damage 100 (50-150)
plasma cannon: damage 140 (70-210)
fusion ball: damage 230 (115-345)
Note that these damages are on completely different scale than the Battlescape damages. Cannon would be more powerful than hand-held and HWP-mounted cannons as the first are limited by the ability of soldier to withstand recoil (why does the heavy cannon and auto-cannon have AP ammo by the way? And what's the deal with the multiple barrels of auto-cannon? In Laser Squad auto-cannon was HE-only and had only one barrel which makes more sense and the second has a pretty short barrel - aircraft auto-cannons are usually about 2m long and weight about 100 kgs. IMO craft's auto-cannon would do similar-level damage as heavy plasma. Which would mean a certain (about 12%?) chance for each hit destroying one tile.
Sidewinder which is a RL equivalent of Stingray has much heavier warhead than any weapon on Battlescape. It has a warhead that is 2-3 times heavier than a whole Large Rocket. Assuming all missiles rely on direct hits, all of them should be easily able to make holes in UFO. Avalanche hits would probably be very nasty.
Aircraft missiles are HUGE. Sidewinder is 3m long. Phoenix is 4m long.
The main challenge for a Battlescape damage system is that all damage would probably be located in the rear area of UFOs because interceptor is simply chasing the UFO. It seems that UFOs just fly on auto-pilot until the crew realises that they are being attacked and increases speed to outrun the interceptor.
So, a completely mangled rear area of the UFO would be be more probable than mild all around damage that is the result of re-using the Power Source detonation code.
-
Avalanche is NOT Phoenix... even if it looks like one. Probably a Phoenix modded for less range and more speed and/or EM shielding. And, the Pedia says it carries a nuke, convenient to forget as it might be :)
The main problem with outward damage is... that UFO breaching, a major feature of this game, is suddenly a whole lot easier as you can mount a multi-pronged assault. Sure, as things are in vanilla, you can mine the exit and wait till turn 20, but abusing the routine that was meant to save the player the hassle of finding the last alien is sort of cheating. Going slightly OT I'd rather have a timer: do your thing within 20 turns or the govt is calling an airstrike to wipe the aliens out.
-
Avalanche is NOT Phoenix... even if it looks like one. Probably a Phoenix modded for less range and more speed and/or EM shielding. And, the Pedia says it carries a nuke, convenient to forget as it might be :)
Oh God, these craft weapon descriptions are non-canon and absolutely horrible XD (original X-Com had no craft weapon descriptions). I don't know what the person who wrote them was thinking XD .
True, I haven't noticed that Phoenix had range of over 100 miles. Phoenix is already Mach 5, though.
The main problem with outward damage is... that UFO breaching, a major feature of this game, is suddenly a whole lot easier as you can mount a multi-pronged assault. Sure, as things are in vanilla, you can mine the exit and wait till turn 20, but abusing the routine that was meant to save the player the hassle of finding the last alien is sort of cheating.
Aliens usually come out multiple times before turn 20 - they just don't know where the player units are. The main reason I mine entrances is to avoid an alien coming out and shooting my operatives while they gather to enter the UFO. Personally, I don't like UFOs with holes in them because ability to come out on my flanks and rear is much more useful for aliens than ability to enter the UFO through different entrances is for me.
20 turns would be a few to several minutes. I don't know why government would
-
Note that these damages are on completely different scale than the Battlescape damages.
yes, I am aware of that.
The main challenge for a Battlescape damage system is that all damage would probably be located in the rear area of UFOs because interceptor is simply chasing the UFO. It seems that UFOs just fly on auto-pilot until the crew realises that they are being attacked and increases speed to outrun the interceptor.
So, a completely mangled rear area of the UFO would be be more probable than mild all around damage that is the result of re-using the Power Source detonation code.
actually, given the mostly-circular design of UFOs as well as the fact that the air combat window can only be a gross simplification of what's really going on, I'd say that a random damage system is perfectly fine. UFOs use a gravitational propulsion system, they can very well rotate in-flight to fire at you, exposing different sides to incoming fire.
the xcom approach (the original game design) was always to make stuff very much random - that way the player can interpret a lot into it, but always encounters surprises.
oh, and please don't de-rail this thread with the real world weapon discussion, that doesn't lead anywhere.
my table above is a suggestion of in-game mechanics that try to make sense within the game setting. it will have to be playtested, of course. too many holes in UFO walls may be a terrible idea... on the other hand, I think it increases the tactical depth of the game: use overly powerful weapons, and you get less loot. a 3x3 hole in the wall of a medium-sized UFO is perfectly capable of destroying stuff inside the UFO that you want to recover. (the next step would be to tie power source explosions to the power of the shots that hit the UFO... if you want to recover elerium, you better wear it down instead of nuking it).
-
Oh God, these craft weapon descriptions are non-canon and absolutely horrible XD (original X-Com had no craft weapon descriptions). I don't know what the person who wrote them was thinking XD .
Actually, these descriptions were right there in the original game! They just weren't displayed. I discovered them around 1998, at my first attempt to localize the game, and was quite surprised. :)
As for multiple holes, I am in favour of them, as long as we don't get them every single time a UFO crashes - it would somewhat detract from the gaming convention, where UFOs tend to crash relatively unscathed (like in the UFO TV series, which almost certainly was an important source of inspiration for X-Com). But some chance for them would be nice, preferably depending on air combat factors.
my table above is a suggestion of in-game mechanics that try to make sense within the game setting. it will have to be playtested, of course. too many holes in UFO walls may be a terrible idea... on the other hand, I think it increases the tactical depth of the game: use overly powerful weapons, and you get less loot. a 3x3 hole in the wall of a medium-sized UFO is perfectly capable of destroying stuff inside the UFO that you want to recover. (the next step would be to tie power source explosions to the power of the shots that hit the UFO... if you want to recover elerium, you better wear it down instead of nuking it).
Yep!
-
For me, ideally there would be an additional tileset that'd replace random UFO walls with damaged versions - burnt, peppered with holes, mangled, etc, but basically staying impassable and usually blocking LOS (with armor reduced to 90, 80, in extreme cases even 50 so you can break through with a HE charge). Actual hull breaches should only happen with the "maximum fuck" weapons (I'd add Avalanche to that category, since Plasma Cannon is an end-game weapon, and nobody is using Fusion Bollocks, so, anything with 100+ damage); maybe a very small chance of a 1x1 breach with the middle-ground weapons (say, 40-99 damage).
-
I totally agree with this idea. ;D
-
Dioxine nailed it, no actual holes (or at least not TOO many) but a damaged UFO nonetheless.
+2
-
Actually, these descriptions were right there in the original game! They just weren't displayed. I discovered them around 1998, at my first attempt to localize the game, and was quite surprised. :)
Oh my God XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD !
I suspect that the descriptions caused so much embarrassment that the writer was immediately fired and they couldn't find anyone who wanted to look at them while correcting the text files so they simply disabled them in code :D .
For me, ideally there would be an additional tileset that'd replace random UFO walls with damaged versions - burnt, peppered with holes, mangled, etc, but basically staying impassable and usually blocking LOS (with armor reduced to 90, 80, in extreme cases even 50 so you can break through with a HE charge). Actual hull breaches should only happen with the "maximum fuck" weapons (I'd add Avalanche to that category, since Plasma Cannon is an end-game weapon, and nobody is using Fusion Bollocks, so, anything with 100+ damage); maybe a very small chance of a 1x1 breach with the middle-ground weapons (say, 40-99 damage).
Fusion balls could be interesting if they'd be remade into "UFO Destroyer" weapons. Something like: you can destroy a Battleship with one hit but there won't be anything left to salvage. Generally, all Elerium explosives are ridiculously under-powered in game especially in relation to their names.
By the way, the highest ranking alien in the UFO could have some Elerium explosive which he would use to destroy the ship if 20 turns pass or something like that.
actually, given the mostly-circular design of UFOs as well as the fact that the air combat window can only be a gross simplification of what's really going on, I'd say that a random damage system is perfectly fine. UFOs use a gravitational propulsion system, they can very well rotate in-flight to fire at you, exposing different sides to incoming fire.
I don't think it's a gross oversimplification. They UFOs simply don't react in any way except by firing back if in range or running away. I'm not sure if they have to rotate - there are no visible weapons on UFOs so the attacks could somehow be generated by the power sources.
my table above is a suggestion of in-game mechanics that try to make sense within the game setting. it will have to be playtested, of course. too many holes in UFO walls may be a terrible idea... on the other hand, I think it increases the tactical depth of the game: use overly powerful weapons, and you get less loot. a 3x3 hole in the wall of a medium-sized UFO is perfectly capable of destroying stuff inside the UFO that you want to recover. (the next step would be to tie power source explosions to the power of the shots that hit the UFO... if you want to recover elerium, you better wear it down instead of nuking it).
Personally, I made power source explosions much more powerful. Capable of often gutting the UFO or in extreme examples obliterating the outer shell in smaller UFOs. So, loot is usually drastically decreased when not waiting for UFO to land.
-
I think we are mixing up several issues here.
for clarification:
1) I think we all agree that geoscape dogfight weapon damage should be in some way visible on the UFO. right?
2) It is possible to create random explosions only on hull tiles, re-utilizing the power source explosion source code.
3) There is some discussion about which weapons or hit damage levels should be able to cause what kind of damage. --> we should leave that to the ruleset
4) Yes, "damaged" UFO wall tiles would be nice. Anybody willing (and able) to create them?
(I'd suggest a system with 3-4 levels of destruction, from "undamaged" to "scratched" to "dented" to "punctured" (holes in the LOF templates, too!) to "breached")
Question @Sturm: If you create smaller explosions with a low strength, do the tiles stay intact or does the code always destroy the tile itself?
-
1) I think we all agree that geoscape dogfight weapon damage should be in some way visible on the UFO. right?
Right! :)
2) It is possible to create random explosions only on hull tiles, re-utilizing the power source explosion source code.
Yep, sounds fine... But wouldn't the blasts damage the terrain near the UFO as well? This shouldn't happen.
3) There is some discussion about which weapons or hit damage levels should be able to cause what kind of damage. --> we should leave that to the ruleset
Fair enough.
4) Yes, "damaged" UFO wall tiles would be nice. Anybody willing (and able) to create them? (I'd suggest a system with 3-4 levels of destruction, from "undamaged" to "scratched" to "dented" to "punctured" (holes in the LOF templates, too!) to "breached")
Making the graphics is fairly trivial, the main problem is the tileset. If you add any new tiles to one, the tile order gets messed up and the entire map would have to be made from scratch. This is unacceptable for many reasons.
While you could add a completely new tileset to each UFO, this would also require soime modification of the maps, even if less externsive. This is still a no-no.
Therefore this would have to be done by hardcoding... But of course it would limit modding possibilities, like adding new wall types.
-
Yep, sounds fine... But wouldn't the blasts damage the terrain near the UFO as well? This shouldn't happen.
Yeah, it''s a serious problem.
It would be the best if it would be possible to deploy the UFO first with all the aliens deployed on spawnpoints inside the UFO. Then battle damage would be applied. Then terrain would be applied. Then aliens would start deploying. Power sources could overload during the deployment. There could be a check of whenever the aliens notice bad state of power sources and evacuate the UFO which could result in everyone trying to get out. Then the power sources would explode. Then if long enough time has passed before Skyranger landing, smoke and fires would be removed. Then the X-Com craft would be put down. Then aliens within visual range would turn towards the X-Com craft.
This way, there could be different situations before landing.
-
That would be really cool. Especially if the aliens could get some advantages from being left alone for too long... better "ambush" positions? Re-distribution of weapons (aliens picking up better weapons from dead comrades)?
But for now I could live with the terrain damage.
Btw, could you use the modified code to create impact damage to the terrain all around the UFO? Low-power explosion on all hull tiles? Or would this remove the hull tiles?
-
That would be really cool. Especially if the aliens could get some advantages from being left alone for too long... better "ambush" positions? Re-distribution of weapons (aliens picking up better weapons from dead comrades)?
But for now I could live with the terrain damage.
Btw, could you use the modified code to create impact damage to the terrain all around the UFO? Low-power explosion on all hull tiles? Or would this remove the hull tiles?
It doesn't remove the hull tiles.
-
Okay, cool... but I guess the southern walls somehow don't count as walls (=containing alien alloys), right? Could you post a screenshot of this UFO with all tiles revealed (debug mode, for example)?
-
Okay, cool... but I guess the southern walls somehow don't count as walls (=containing alien alloys), right? Could you post a screenshot of this UFO with all tiles revealed (debug mode, for example)?
True. I have noticed it.
-
Hmmm, nice effect. Pity it's unlikely to actually damage anything.
-
Okay... so if we use that method to make holes in UFOs, we will never get holes in south and east walls, right? Because this method only finds "objects", I guess.
Can you define an explosion size limit? Or is it only possible to define explosion strength?
-
Using some ugly hack is possible to ignore all no ufo components during explosion, but its not wise approach.
One way I see to handle it is create dummy level where is only ufo, blast it, and after that copy/paste result to landing spot.
-
Okay... so if we use that method to make holes in UFOs, we will never get holes in south and east walls, right? Because this method only finds "objects", I guess.
True. And accidentally only external walls are objects. So, if the method would also search for walls, it would also create explosions on internal walls.
Can you define an explosion size limit? Or is it only possible to define explosion strength?
It is possible to define radius.
-
True. And accidentally only external walls are objects. So, if the method would also search for walls, it would also create explosions on internal walls.
It is possible to define radius.
Yeah, and only north and west walls are objects, because of original engine limitations. So for now, this is only a "hack". Too bad.
A different approach: do you think it would be possible to check for floor tile types? Creating (random) pre-battle explosions on non-UFO-floor tiles of the map segment that contains a UFO?
-
I noticed that on crash recovery screens, UFO has a massive hole in it.