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 - Bobit

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
1
Work In Progress / Re: [WIP] Chronicles
« on: March 22, 2020, 01:15:00 am »
I do think that bleed buffs are easy to implement and a good idea for the body-upgrade.

Lots of mods have night-vision sure, but putting it together with 1-tile personal light which alerts enemy would be pretty interesting to me. Ultimately it's kinda the same as the XCOMfiles flashlight, and from my experience with that item, I take it back, not actually a great fit.

Really the shaman should probably just have summons if the other classes have it. But what's your summon mechanic? Is it just like having an extra unit, or something more different?

2
Suggestions / Re: Faster Queueing
« on: March 21, 2020, 03:28:02 am »
If you mean for scientists/engineers, just right-click.

3
Released Mods / Re: [OXCE][BETA][MAJOR] Vigilo Confido
« on: March 21, 2020, 03:24:49 am »
This looks potentially really fun as OpenXCOM has a lot better spawning, but, and I'll only say this once, it would be MUCH BETTER with actual cover which nobody will allow me to implement on the engine.

4
Work In Progress / Re: [WIP] Chronicles
« on: March 21, 2020, 02:11:38 am »
 Mostly no scripts design limitation.


Mutologist
Adrenaline: Stam/TU/Morale regen per wound
Ragebolt: Shoots a projectile with small AoE that heals and restores TUs, but causes lots of wounds.

Darkseer
Blinding Shadow: High night vision, but also 1-tile personal light. Melee panic attack.
Opaque Monocle: Fixed reaction-only long-min-range weapon which spawns "illusions", invisible damage dealers with negative HP regen.

5
OpenXcom Extended / Re: [Documentation] Mana
« on: February 29, 2020, 07:50:35 am »
Is there a percentage-based ruleset available for stat strings?

Currently, I want to mod into my X-Com files game stat strings for agents with Readiness (the mana resource in XCF) below 50%?

https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Statstrings

No there is not. Just assume your soldiers have the highest max readiness, then you will only get false negatives.

6
OpenXcom Extended / Re: [Suggestion] New Modscript functionality
« on: February 26, 2020, 06:00:42 pm »
The answer is going to be no, you're asking the scripts to access too many variables like Inventory and Facing. Here are some alternatives with a similar gameplay effect:

Simply increase armor penetration on weapons that require high accuracy to be used effectively. Most games and mods do this.

A pump action weapon, that is a weapon that is easy to reload the first time but hard to reload the sixth, is implemented using a quickdraw slot. Increase inventory movement costs, then make a slot which has very low inventory costs when moving to the hand, but is only 1 row high. Then make all ammo that you want to be easy to reload the first time but hard to reload later 1 row high, and all other ammo 2 rows high. In the popular mods these tend to be weapons like Shurikens which are easy to reload the first few times, while Crossbows have a very difficult time reloading. You're surely already aware of this technique, but it can be further emphasized by increasing costs and making frequent 2-row ammo.

7
Suggestions / Re: Non-random RNG (Seeding)
« on: February 08, 2020, 08:22:41 pm »
In many mods it is optimal to evacuate shortly after leaving the skyranger if the enemies spawned right next to you. It's a good mechanic, not a reason to break ironman.

8
OpenXcom Extended / Re: Light cover fork
« on: February 06, 2020, 05:57:02 am »
I've already said the code is useless. 90% of it is the "artificial" implementation and the remainder you can figure out yourself. I have not been talking about more than a single line of code, for a long time. But you didn't understand when I told you that, and didn't want it clarified.

Just letting modders set the global variable on line 416, and even all the maintenance needed for it, is far, far less work than you've already done in responding to me.

I'm not responding anymore. This topic needs to die. At this point it is purely about "saving face".

9
OpenXcom Extended / Re: Light cover fork
« on: February 05, 2020, 11:09:06 pm »
One line out of tens of thousands, but okay... ty for consideration...

10
Offtopic / Re: XCOM Inspired Fantasy Game
« on: February 05, 2020, 08:29:07 am »
Yeah I clearly jumped into a conversation without reading the context lol

11
OpenXcom Extended / Re: Light cover fork
« on: February 05, 2020, 01:59:43 am »
Just let modders control the global variable on line 416. No extra formulas, they can just give a flat value for the integer. That's sufficient.

12
OpenXcom Extended / Re: Light cover fork
« on: February 04, 2020, 09:27:59 pm »
The helper function is 90% of what I want.

I suggest using the helper function in setupEscape() (AI prefers to escape to partially obscured positions), in findFirePoint() (AI prefers not to shoot at enemies which are partially obscured), and player UFOextender accuracy prediction. But you can probably figure that out yourself, so ignore this paragraph if you don't understand it.

However, I suspect that the helper function will tell you that partial cover is awkward in vanilla. This is because of the code in src/Battlescape/Projectile/applyAccuracy(), the way in which accuracy is converted to deviation on lines 411-416, means that only the cover in the very small 10 deviation cone when you roll a hit has any impact.  The few times that the 10 deviation cone is partially obscured, it's likely to obscure it by something like 50%.

This is why I suggest allowing modders control over the formula used in lines 411-422. The modders could do things like:

  • Make rolled misses always miss (no 100% hit chance with a sniper rifle point blank range), by changing lines 420-422 to have 40 guaranteed deviation when missing, rather than possibly having 0 deviation.
  • Make rolled hits always hit (and partial cover is totally ignored) by decreasing hit deviation on line 416 to 0.
  • Make partial cover more relevant and less binary by setting hit deviation on line 416 to 20, or to 10-50 depending on how high your roll was.

Also, a helper function which shows hit chance considering cover is good. But a helper function which shows hit chance considering cover, the fact that rolled misses sometimes hit in close range, and the fact that rolled hits sometimes miss because the target is so small or the shooter so far away, would be the best. But probably too hard to code.

If you still don't understand what I'm saying, and still want to, we could schedule a live text chat.

13
OpenXcom Extended / Re: Light cover fork
« on: February 04, 2020, 02:58:53 am »
Ignore the artificial thing then. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem interested in adding the approximation function, which is good for vanilla. If you do that, "subverting the functions" would be as simple as letting modders change the (accuracyRoll->deviation) formula, so not much reason not to do it.

14
OpenXcom Extended / Re: Light cover fork
« on: February 03, 2020, 01:34:24 am »
Rubber, I agree in general. I did implement two things to counteract some of your concerns: certain weapons like grenades cause the AI to ignore cover, and cover is only considered when escaping into cover or firing at enemies in cover. It could be a complex problem, idk because I don't know the math, or we can just simulate it 1000 times every time the want to shoot if that somehow doesn't lag. It is a LOT simpler if using the "artificial" method I already implemented, but that method won't get much support among the project leads.

15
OpenXcom Extended / Re: [question] Is multifoor basescape possible?
« on: February 02, 2020, 10:46:20 pm »
It would be easy to implement using an engine modification. But it seems almost mechanically identical to just having more bases, just a thematic difference.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7