Messages

16

Suggestions / Re: In-game manufacturing profitability view

« on: March 31, 2015, 11:08:44 pm »

I think your thinking is a bit one dimensional   

You may think as you want. You also may pervert OpenXcom as you like, by forking and changing it the way your imagination wants.
"Autoselling" button is making life easier already, but making whole new stat screen, with number of consumed resources in a month (including money), is too much.

I would insist on keeping this screen clear from additional data, because adding A, as consequence would need of adding B, and so on. You are free to add all you want in your own version.

And moreover, I would insist on removing manufacture categories from the "add" screen. Not just because it's "not vanilla", but because it clutters the screen, lessen the height of the scrollbox, and needed by rare players with modded game.

17

Suggestions / Re: In-game manufacturing profitability view

« on: March 31, 2015, 05:48:02 am »

And who sais that?

Vanilla says that. There's no automatic selling, nor cheating "profitability".

If you dont manage your income you cannot progress.

If you can't progress, it's your problem and your failure. Game shouldn't help you to win. It's easy enough already. Most of people were completing this game without manufacturing-selling, just by selling the loot. If I remember correctly, Meridian doesn't do that.
"Autoselling" is cheating enough thing already.

18

Suggestions / Re: In-game manufacturing profitability view

« on: March 27, 2015, 10:15:28 am »

It may not be what you feel vanilla xcom is "about", but that is definitely the way it was intended to play.

Nope. It's not INTENDED to be played like that, but still it CAN be a helper. But paying too much of attention on "profit" would heavily bias the main purpose of the game.
There are dozens of game completion tactics, and that' why THIS one shouldn't be accented like "please use this". There shouldn't be helpers on that.

P.S.  Are you the same Volutar who created MCDedit?  If so, I praise you!  You made my Tactical Lightning mod possible.

Yes it's me. I was just rebuilt Kobalt's MCDView to be runnable under win64, and went slightly further.

19

Suggestions / Re: In-game manufacturing profitability view

« on: March 27, 2015, 09:12:11 am »

Manufacturing items for sale is not what vanilla xcom about. Literally, it's just side effect of the "selling" feature of the game. AFAIK xcom2012 doen't have that at all. Hell, it's the game about fighting alien invasion, not getting billionaire.

20

Programming / Re: AI and explosives

« on: March 26, 2015, 03:46:18 pm »

They already can target and hit "remembered" troops, standing out of view, depending on "intellegence" value, of course.

21

Programming / Re: AI and explosives

« on: March 25, 2015, 08:46:48 pm »

Having a fix for only the alien grenade and blaster launcher leaves all modded weapons hanging.

It seems you misunderstood the logic of update. It should make this temporary usage taboo value a part of item description, when it needed, with 0 as default. And will be set for just two items (i.e. blaster launcher =3, alien grenade =3) in xcom1 ruleset. If you want to make different values for your modded weapon - no problem. It's just the way of unhardcoding, and making this feature game/supermod specific.
For more challenging play someone could make a mod setting these explosive weapon to 0.

22

Programming / Re: AI and explosives

« on: March 25, 2015, 07:48:01 am »

Reasoning behind this "wait for N turns to use explosives":
1. Aliens are turned towards the craft since first moments of battlescape (all 100% of them for superhuman)
2. 2/3 vanilla crafts (i.e. most of them) of XCOM1 have wide opened access during AI turn, and they simply can blast whole team. Lightning craft doesn't suffer from this issue, and technically if you're using it, you won't suffer much from AI being using grenades from the beginning.

TFTD crafts don't have widely opened doors (all crafts have auto doors), and this "wait for N turns" becomes obsolete at least, and really gameplay altering at most.

The weapon list, which can cause this "storm of whine" because of vanished team in 1st turn, is much shorter than list of "issue safe" weapon. Logicaly, it'd be much easier and better to make this variable exactly for the alien grenade and blaster launcher. There's no other weapon causing initial issue, and no need to touch anything else. And by default all kind of weapon is usable from the beginning.

And since TFTD is in development, this change is in "todo". And really, there's no need to bump this thread endlessly.

23

Suggestions / Re: Options>Advanced has turned into TLDR

« on: March 21, 2015, 07:26:11 am »

The reasoning behind the collapsible list would help more advanced users digest the options and navigate quicker to the options they want to tweak.

Advanced users don't have problems with finding things, they are already experienced and can find whatever they want pretty quickly. The main focus here should stay close to noobies, to allow THEM find needed options without reading and searching through this maze with lots of clicks.

Unwanted thing there, is that some of options are spreaded between battlescape/geoscape, and some are in advanced, without logical reason (just because they couldn't fit into battle/geo parts).
They are initially wasn't sorted out perfectly, and some of options was added later.

It's obviously, that at some moments advanced options and options screen at all should be rearranged, to make these options systematized and found easier.

But honestly, if even TAB key between X:Y dimensions doesn't work, there's no real point to demand something more.

24

Suggestions / Re: Options>Advanced has turned into TLDR

« on: March 20, 2015, 08:55:37 pm »

Hiding options into sections is not a great way of making something more usable. How it gonna help to make list shorter? You still would need to read and check each line, but you'll also need to open each section in addition.

Unfortunately vanilla's resolution 320x200 is still the "standard" for OXC, so we can't fit more things. I think we may try to fit another "section" button at the left (shrink some space between buttons, make buttons 14 pixels tall, instead of 16), and add there "Interface" section, for example. And make all buttons smaller, to allow fitting of more controls. Try to make shorter descriptions, also make dropdown list having descriptions for each line, instead of enumirating all options. I.e. totally rearrange options screen.

Frankly, some of options in "advanced" are meant to be in mods, because they are game-related (like tftd building rules, or damage formula, you name it). Only engine options should stay there. And most of these game-specific mods should be applied without restarting the game, and having proper multilanguage description.

But it gonna be quite an overhaul. And I hardly imagine devs dare doing that

25

Suggestions / Re: Define the kind of Music that plays in each menu?

« on: March 18, 2015, 03:21:10 pm »

Not yet.

26

Programming / Re: Plans for migration to C++11?

« on: March 18, 2015, 08:23:40 am »

What's the point of bothering with "migrating" to C++11? Is C++ not good enough? It doesn't allow implementing some good features, or perhaps C++11 allows for better logging/backtracing/debugging?

I see SOME points of migrating to SDL2, despite all troubles like problems with shading/lighting and FPS. It will allow better input support (for touch devices), better OpenGL integration (which is long-way achievable and desirable target).

But what's the point of migrating to C++11? How exactly it gonna make OXC better?

27

Open Feedback / Re: how to assign scientist/engineers faster?

« on: March 18, 2015, 06:11:30 am »

you dont have to click each time. just hold button.
you also can instantly max value by clicking right mouse button.

28

Programming / Re: Plans for migration to C++11?

« on: March 18, 2015, 05:34:20 am »

The answer is: no it doesn't worth it, and obviously will increase problems, not just because of auto.
Just look at the list of platforms: https://openxcom.org/downloads-milestones/
Are you sure all of them are supporting C++11 nicely?

29

Programming / Re: Plans for migration to C++11?

« on: March 18, 2015, 04:42:01 am »

Will it instantly make oxc even better, less buggy, and more multiplatform?
I see no point of doing that.
Because it won't make it anyhow better, less buggy or more multiplatform. On opposite, it will cause more bugs (due to auto ambiguousness) attract unexperienced c# programmers, and lessen porting capabilities. If someone can't help project will C++, he won't help either way.

30

Playthroughs / Re: Base defense. All aliens (sectoids) seem to be killed, but that doesn't end.

« on: March 16, 2015, 01:50:59 pm »

aliens can't be baited by the definition, if there will be single if "don't have attacking weapon".
weaponless aliens either was MCed, or panicked.. further baiting them doesn't make their pathetic state even more pathetic it simply gonna let them out from toilets and make some actions instead.