Messages

1

OXCE Suggestions NEW / Re: Pedia article type for soldiers

« on: March 04, 2025, 06:53:47 am »

Well, first, I don't think only for myself, but also thought it could be good for the community 
Second - I will merge with OXCE at some point, its just too massive because of rapid yaml. I want to fix all bugs and release new version first.

2

OXCE Suggestions NEW / [Suggestion] Pedia article type for soldierTypes

« on: March 02, 2025, 12:43:37 pm »

Not sure if it was already discussed, tho I thought could be worth asking - how about making new pedia article type to show discovered soldier types? In OF there was no need for that, as there is only one soldier type for the whole game.
But today many mods use ability to define different soldier types, and they could be very different in stats (max, min, caps) and available armors. There could be a place to describe some lore too, as modded soldier types could appear as even non-human beings.
Many mods workaround not having specific article type by making just a regular text peda article. But it is not really handy - lack of structure and it can't use values from rulers directly, this you have to change translations with your balance changes. Stat for nerds could be a nice for that article, showing  all information in great details. What would you think?

3

OXCE Suggestions Archive / Re: [Suggestion] Suggest starting a new project only after the last report

« on: February 24, 2025, 07:30:18 am »

I would rather suggest to keep existing behavior, it is already very complex...

4

OXCE Suggestions OK / Re: [Suggestion] Improved geoscape craft combat

« on: February 23, 2025, 01:05:07 pm »

I was really curious about redoing dogfight minigame, as it is feels to me way too arcade for such a massive strategy game. I have implemented a bunch of mechanics for FTA dogfight. I can agree with Meridian, that the code for dogfight is very different from other parts of the game and is not friendly to a massive improvement like this. My features did not change the core gameplay of this state, and could feel like a minor features. But it took me o lot of effort to implement (and test all cases) for it.

I also can't see what the gameplay would be around your new screens. Ok, I see some craft systems could be damaged separately. Now what?
How can the player know what to target on alien vessel if he or she encounter it for the first time?
What will we do with megamods, that implement very-very different flying stuff as UFO. That makes me think we should not hardcode any of the new mechanics so it could be moddable.
How it would be backwards capable? And will it? There can be just a megamod setting `useNewDogfight: false` to completely change vanilla one for brand new.

Very important aspect - it is real time arcade in a turn based game. People with low reaction enjoy xcom, and for some of my ideas for this clicker-like minigame I received poor feedback. Thus, it made me think if adding some complex minigame, it has to be turn-based.

Anyway, to motivate changes like this, I think a complex game design required at the first with detail description - literally like when making a new arcade game. But I personally would not put such effort in a venture without commitment that it will be implemented in source code...

5

OXCE Suggestions OK / Re: [Suggestion] Improved geoscape craft combat

« on: February 22, 2025, 08:29:01 pm »

I think the only way to solve it is to allow a mastermod to define the minimal geoscape/battlescape resolution for the mastermod =)
Although, I have no idea how to manipulate states above 320x200 limits...

6

More Forks / Re: [Documentation] [Feedback] Map Editor

« on: February 09, 2025, 04:28:28 pm »

I'll look into making which numbers are shown on the nodes a user option; I think my original decision was to match the information shown in the MapView program.

This would be the best solution. Can you also unhardcode ranks? In `alienRace` ruleset I can define as many ranks as I want, but I can't define placing for extra ranks. Probably, a yaml setting file with map of number to name values to define this dropdown with custom ranks could be done?

The globe editor was mostly just a proof-of-concept/academic exercise, don't know if I'll actually pick it up again.

This is very sad to hear. I played a bit with it and I can say there is no better way to define globe setting that with in-game globe. What about making some MVP?

7

From the Ashes / Re: FtA installation guide

« on: January 29, 2025, 02:00:06 pm »

It is, although I hope somebody would help me with it at some point. For now I think I need to get all English strings done. As they are prone to be changed at this development stage, I don't think it is a good time to make any localization. Although, I know people who would not ever try FTA without localization

8

From the Ashes / Re: FtA game engine

« on: January 08, 2025, 02:51:06 pm »

There are also some special features implemented there, like cameras, disappearing spots, etc.

I like the idea of camera mechanic to gather intel. It is done pretty well in Phantom Doctrine (xcom-like strategy in CIA vs KGB Cold War setting) - player soldier interaction with mission objectives from adjusted tile.
I've seen Bureau 11 implementation, can't say I totally like it - making it with special damage type is all what mod can do, but it is not my way.
In new release I have a special mechanic to gather samples, other interactions like that can be done rather easily with engine change.
But for gathering intel, I think I will have to make something different...

9

XPiratez / Re: Tribute song

« on: November 18, 2024, 06:52:27 pm »

Wow, the music was generated with AI, great!

10

More Forks / Re: OXCE Lua/Vulkan

« on: November 12, 2024, 05:31:20 pm »

That's a theory, but how as a modder (read - game designer) that would help me? There should be super smart logic for procedural generation, if we do not use map blocks to generate battlescape map. I can't imagine any modder develop such a model, no matter if it would be Lua, C++, Pascal or whatever.
The only way I can imagine mapbgeneration can be fundamentally improved is what was done for XCOM 2 map generation with plots and parcels. I imagine, some sort of map block relation could be potentially implemented. Say, currently setting up something like road with parking attached to it is not trivial - you have to make complicated mapscrit with check, remove and then add commands to change original road tile to connect it with parking. I imagine there could be a more handy map generation process, but I can't see how Lua can help here, sorry. Am I wrong?

11

More Forks / Re: OXCE Lua/Vulkan

« on: November 11, 2024, 02:00:56 pm »

Procedural Terrain Generation: Modders can define their own terrain elements and structures, potentially enabling procedural terrain for dynamic mission environments.

How?

12

From the Ashes / Re: FtA game engine

« on: November 04, 2024, 12:54:29 pm »

Making a change here: https://github.com/723Studio/OpenXcom_FTA/blob/fta/src/Engine/Options.cpp#L563
(and maybe here?: https://github.com/723Studio/OpenXcom_FTA/blob/fta/src/Engine/Options.cpp#L903)
should be enough.

Thanks for the hint. I made a quite simple and brutal change, as I do not expect any other FTA-compatible master mods to appear any soon =)

13

From the Ashes / Re: FtA game engine

« on: November 03, 2024, 11:28:32 pm »

Thank you so much for your kind words!
My primary goal is to make a sequel to the original game in a way I see it (not in the form of TFTD, that is basically a reskin) with fresh gameplay experience and new mechanics. At this point, I don't see any other goal or priorities.

Remember to disable loading of OXCE mods (using reporting of engine types).

Oh, yes! I also tried to make so that FtA mastermod would load by default instead of vanilla or the last active mod. But I had not figured out how to do that =(

14

From the Ashes / Re: FtA game engine

« on: November 03, 2024, 04:30:21 pm »

Eh, after much deliberation, I've come to the point where I've given up on backwards compatibility with OXCE. Before version 1.3.8, almost all exclusive features were hidden behind the `ftaGame: true` mod property. By turning it off, you could play an OXCE mod (and vanilla) and expect generally similar behavior to OXCE except for just a couple of things. However, some interesting features are available with the property turned off, as they are minimally invasive and in general could even be part of OXCE. Turning the property on opens Pandora's box, normal mods won't work without adaptation. Of course, the FtA mod itself has this property enabled.
However, supporting backwards compatibility costs a lot from an engine development perspective - some simple features become much more complicated if I need to maintain the original logic. I've never positioned my engine as a universal platform (like OXCE or BOXCE), as my priority is to develop my game. Considering that over the years of development my fork has not received any interest from the modding community (most likely - quite deservedly so), I decided to completely abandon backwards compatibility. This way, the FtA engine will work correctly with FtA mods and potencial FtA-oriented sub-mods. I don't think anyone will have a problem with this. However, if you have a different opinion - I will be as always glad to get feedback. I'm especially interested in the opinion of representatives of OXC and its forks development community and your point of view on my solution, taking into account your background.

15

OpenXcom Extended (OXCE) / Re: OXCE (OpenXcom Extended) main thread

« on: October 06, 2024, 11:11:07 pm »

Don't you know what can push items in the inventory on battlescape start other than void InventoryState::onAutoequip(Action *)? I disabled it, but somehow from time to time the game decides to push some items into soldier UI by its own will