aliens

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - bluberd

Pages: [1] 2 3
1
The X-Com Files / Re: Compact handcuffs
« on: July 21, 2020, 05:11:34 pm »
If not compact 1x1 then rotated! Also, handcuffs do not seem to be reusable, is this ok?

2
The X-Com Files / Re: Light Cannon blocking major game parts
« on: January 26, 2019, 02:14:12 pm »
I also struggled to get the light cannon for a very long time. I also moved by now to the laser weapons, but I never, ever got my hands on heavy cannon or had an ability to research one.
With HWP I was never able to figre out how this thing works (or the drones). I have the medical drone and x-com flying drone in my storage, but I am not able to load it on the transporter.
I researched the tanks and hovertanks, but I still have no idea how to produce it. What is the exact path - do I need any of those AI units? Special building(I have seen some mentions about drone building)?

3
The X-Com Files / Re: Bugs, crashes, typos & bad taste
« on: April 22, 2017, 07:23:07 pm »
No, after this 1h interceptor was refueled and ready to go (also in the interceptor window).
I did second test and there is something in there about rearming as well - I do not have enough ammo to rearm 2 guns, but it still takes 1h each to tell me there is not enough ammo to rearm. So at the beginning it was saying rearming 7h, after 2h it says refuelling 5h, but in equip craft says 3h. After those 3h it is actually refueled.

4
The X-Com Files / Re: Bugs, crashes, typos & bad taste
« on: April 22, 2017, 07:19:06 pm »
"Launch Interception" window shows very long times of refueling. When you open "equip craft" window you can see way shorter time (3h vs 1h).
My interceptor has 95% fuel, Interception window shows 3h, equip craft 1h refuel time.

5
The X-Com Files / Re: Early gun balance
« on: April 08, 2017, 09:45:10 pm »
"Weapons aren't tiered, they are different on many levels."

"Of course it's better, because it's a higher tier weapon."

Also, it is better suited for the kind of combat X-Com does. Remember it's not a wargame, it's a skirmish game, which gives the pistols their role. If it was a wargame, pistols would indeed be sort of useless (due to bigger maps, more troops, bigger vision ranges etc.), but it is not.

Hi Solarius, so are there any tiers or no? Because in the same post you write there are no tiers and 2 lines below there are...
I'm not an expert on firearms, no part of my professional training focused on those, but in RL pistols are crap.
Seriously, if you want to hit something above 20m meters, you need to be good at shooting. Anything around 50m is a roulette.
Moving target makes it way harder since you need to make sure you are moving your arm along with the target and not just your wrist.
Shoulder weapons at 50m are easy, even with minimal training you can hit the target size of a body.
Pistols have 2 advantages - they are small and easy to hide (and comfortable to carry) and you can shoot them with one hand. That is it. They are not faster to shoot and accuracy is just a fraction of what you get with a shoulder weapon. And body armour? Pistols are useless even more with those.
There is a reason you never see SWAT/FBI FRT with pistols in their hands. They always have short AR, SMG or shotguns. When you know you might be actually shooting, you never rely on pistol. Pistols are crappy at shooting, they are good at carrying around and hiding. Even standard FBI agents have a qualification in shoulder weapon. Every single patrol car in US has a shoulder weapon in the trunk or on the dashboard (shotgun or M4).
As for XCOM operations - well, only about <5% of my deployments went without shooting - seriously, only those troubled farmers are the ones you do not shoot. Maybe there are missions, where you need to be covert (like mansions in Piratez) and the pistols would make great sense in there. For CQB SMG's are as good as pistols, but easier to aim and have more power (higher velocity due to longer barrel).
If you just want to make pistols cool and worth of using it's ok with me, but it has nothing to do with RL.
PS: Happy birthday Solarius :)

6
The X-Com Files / Re: Bugs, crashes, typos & bad taste
« on: April 03, 2017, 09:47:26 pm »
You only need one HQ really (or ~20), since it has a low detection chance, something like 5% per half-hour.  It'd cost less to get the same coverage out of large radars in different bases than getting enough HQs to get reliable global detection.  I wouldn't way they replace each other, they have different purposes; large radar is guaranteed detection in its radius, and the HQ radar is best at making sure no UFO can leave your radar screen when it's been detected.
I built second HQ when I was pursuing R&D path (it is extra 5 scientists) and had no lab yet. I know, costy, but hey, you invest when the best you have is crappy shotgun.
Then I just left it as a backup HQ in case the firs one gets raided.
Thanks for letting me know how does the HQ radar work, I guess I need 1 or two more radar stations.
PS: an outpost building with basic storage/living/radar would be nice.

7
The X-Com Files / Re: Bugs, crashes, typos & bad taste
« on: April 03, 2017, 08:58:39 pm »
Do the two bases that don't have the circles have XCOM HQs? Those count as radars with global range. Only the largest circle on a base is drawn, so you only see the HQ's global range.
Yes, those have HQ built in them. So I do not need large radar if I have HQ? Good, I need to start saving :)

And while we are still at the fighter planes: why all of them need to have only 1 crew member? I mean, if you designed Raven, Interceptor, Thunderstorm and Sentinel like that, then it is what it is, but Mig31 has actually 2 seats. Or maybe it is WIP? Because if Raven and Sentinel have 2 as much weapon mounts as Mig31 they could really use WSO in there. Thunderstorm is a wierd one here, because I think it should have just one/two armament points?
I would really like Mig31 for those fast response teams of 2 SOF operators (since the early drop ships are sloooow).
Also, Raven crashes mission if you try to land it, Interceptor works and looks like Skyranger.

8
OXCE Wishlists / Re: Solar's wishlist
« on: April 03, 2017, 11:24:33 am »
hot damn that makes life alot easier, I was wishing for something like that
same here, nice.

9
The X-Com Files / Re: Bugs, crashes, typos & bad taste
« on: April 03, 2017, 10:53:51 am »
I have another issue, not sure if it's a bug.
I have three bases and a large radar in every each of them.
2 finished before 0.62, the third finished after applying 0.62 patch. Also, not sure it this is connected to the patch.
Only the third one shows the range of the radar (this large circle around the base). The other ones do not have this circle.
More importantly I do not see much of the airborne traffic, but maybe it is because it is Jan 99 so there are no UFOs flying?

10
The X-Com Files / Re: Bugs, crashes, typos & bad taste
« on: April 03, 2017, 10:49:07 am »
Interceptor should have a cannon slot and a light rocket slot. Raven should have two cannon slots, a heavy rocket slot and an engine mod slot.
Gauss Cannon is a Cannon, while Laser Cannon is a Beam (which is something else).
Yes, all of this should go in the Ufopaedia... The problem is, half of this is bugged. I just need to finish this up.

Great, thanks for letting me know. Now I can arm my fighters with Gauss instead of trying to fit Laser cannon on anything.
Maybe we could include this info just in Ufopedia by editing text file? I know there are better ways to do it, but this one is Pareto mode - 20% work, 80% of success.
Also, Solarius, maybe you could use some assistance? We all have schools, day jobs, families and I believe developing such mod takes quite a bit of your time.
I really like your mod, less overblown than Piratez. Maybe some chores could be done for you by your fans?

11
The X-Com Files / Re: Bugs, crashes, typos & bad taste
« on: April 01, 2017, 07:08:44 pm »
It... needs more attention. Badly.
Well, what firmoints does interceptor and raven have? What kind of weapon is laser cannon/gauss cannon?

12
The X-Com Files / Re: Bugs, crashes, typos & bad taste
« on: April 01, 2017, 01:47:22 am »
I do not know if it was already pointed out or not, but I have found no way to know which interceptor has what kind of weapon mounts (light/missile/heavy).

13
The X-Com Files / Re: The X-Com Files - 0.6.2 alpha: Cyberweb Wars
« on: March 31, 2017, 12:06:27 pm »
But I think it'd be better to make a completely different mod around that idea. Portals opening in various locations on Earth, incursions of extraplanar beings... This sort of stuff. It would definitely be feasible.
Thank you Solarius, great that you want to stick to the actual X-Files concept and not throw everything into one bucket. This is what discouraged me form playing Piratez and I would hate to see X-Com Files going in that direction :)

14
The X-Com Files / Re: Making money
« on: March 31, 2017, 11:24:29 am »
That's why I designed OXC to not give you trivial missions. Every mission, or most of them, can still be somewhat dangerous if you aren't careful (except monster hunts vs. flying gear, but that's a necessary evil, and flying gear is hard to get while monster hunts are still going on). When you get stronger, simpler missions are usually phased out in favour of more difficult ones. I personally find it satisfying, though obviously I am not a very good candidate for a judge.
Solarius, first off I should tell you that I really like your mod (actually prefer it to the Piratez) and by no means I was criticizing your work, complaining about the chores missions.
I have impression that my agents and organization got strong fast because I was doing every single mission. I also focused strongly on the tactical advantage research (personal armour/lasers).
When you told me that there is a way to get rid of the most of minor missions, that was ok with me. I am not really sure if I want to get rid of spider/zombie missions, since they are a great source of money (500k easy) and training. I know I might be exploiting the system a bit and it is not the way you imagined it, but hey, there are as may ways of playing xcom as many players (and I am the one which always looks to get some advantage, upper hand and better position). It is not a console game like CoD which just drags you through the plot in some interactive cinematic, no reason to try to restrain players into one way of playing. I actually do not like that in new XCom series - too simplistic and restrictive, pushing player through the story.

15
The X-Com Files / Re: Making money
« on: March 30, 2017, 07:18:41 pm »
Man, I am in October 1999 and still no lasers... (Except a few alien laser rifles, but they're crap.)
Anyway, regarding the "need to grind to sustain myself"... I haven't said anything before, because I didn't want to come out as a "you're playing it wrong!" kind of modder, but I honestly do not do all the missions against cults, yet I am doing okay financially. Maybe you overinvested?

Alien Lasers aren't that bad, but fall short in comparison to Blackops Auto-Sniper.

What I really like in the old games is that the devs did not put you in the path of one, correct way of playing the game.
At the very beginning I had 3-4 fire teams responding to every possible event (usually 2-3 at the same time), while investing like crazy in research - I built second base just to have the ability to build second HQ/Biolab/IntelCentre, then going into labs.
Yes, I did invest a lot, but I had a lot of money and great monthly scores.
Right now my monthly maintenance is 8M with nations contribution of 6M.
I am doing great financially (7M to spare), but it is a lot of missions.
Not complaining, from what I see it is just that the dev idea was to stay low profile, with small number of researchers and money.

This is a treason to the human race. ;)

What I see agents, is the alien invasion in 4 months and we need to be ready!
More white coats, more Farms, more lasers.
You have been briefed.

:)

Pages: [1] 2 3