31
Suggestions / Re: Rearming/Refuelling issue
« on: March 06, 2021, 04:32:56 pm »
I'll do that.
Thanks for the replies.
Thanks for the replies.
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email? June 03, 2023, 08:12:41 pm
Did you miss your activation email? June 03, 2023, 08:12:41 pm
News: If you can't login, please contact us with your username and e-mail so we can fix it.
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.
32
Suggestions / Re: Rearming/Refuelling issue
« on: March 06, 2021, 03:20:50 pm »
If that final hour is "rearming" and not "refuelling", are you able to tell me why I lose that final unit of Elerium, even in situations where fuel was 100% to begin with and all I did was switch a weapon?
Aside from that, I understand what you said.
But suppose for a moment that I lift off at the time of this screenshot. What then? Even though I didn't wait for the "rearming" phase to finish, I still have 4 out of 4 perfectly usable missiles in each launcher. Then the craft is rearmed, objectively. "Rearming" is not done, but that is only a label the game happened to slap on an hour of nothing happening.
Aside from making things more intuitive, rewriting this would make things consistent between playing with and without Forced Craft Launch. Here's one simple way:
First phase, during the incomplete hour, is "Maintenance Prep".
Each subsequent hour:
- Work the current phase, e.g. if "Rearming" then reload a clip. ("Prep" has nothing here.)
- if nothing left to do in current phase, switch to next phase.
- display hours rounded up.
The result would be exactly the same as right now, except hitpoints/weapons/fuel would update at the end of the hour, not at the start, which means 1. phases logically label processes that have not yet reached completion, 2. the whole procedure takes just as long with Forced Launch as without:
12:01 - Craft with 1 Avalanche laucher returns with 99% health. 99% fuel and no ammo.
Phase: "Prep"
Display hours left: "1" (59m rounded up)
13:00 Do nothing
Switch to "Repairing"
Display hours left: "1"
14:00 Repair health
Switch to "Rearming"
Display hours left: "3"
15:00 Load an Avalanche
Display hours left: "2"
16:00 Load an Avalanche
Display hours left: "1"
17:00 Load an Avalanche
Switch to "Refuelling"
Display hours left: "1"
18:00 Reload missing fuel
Switch to "Ready".
I hope that makes sense.
Aside from that, I understand what you said.
But suppose for a moment that I lift off at the time of this screenshot. What then? Even though I didn't wait for the "rearming" phase to finish, I still have 4 out of 4 perfectly usable missiles in each launcher. Then the craft is rearmed, objectively. "Rearming" is not done, but that is only a label the game happened to slap on an hour of nothing happening.
Aside from making things more intuitive, rewriting this would make things consistent between playing with and without Forced Craft Launch. Here's one simple way:
First phase, during the incomplete hour, is "Maintenance Prep".
Each subsequent hour:
- Work the current phase, e.g. if "Rearming" then reload a clip. ("Prep" has nothing here.)
- if nothing left to do in current phase, switch to next phase.
- display hours rounded up.
The result would be exactly the same as right now, except hitpoints/weapons/fuel would update at the end of the hour, not at the start, which means 1. phases logically label processes that have not yet reached completion, 2. the whole procedure takes just as long with Forced Launch as without:
12:01 - Craft with 1 Avalanche laucher returns with 99% health. 99% fuel and no ammo.
Phase: "Prep"
Display hours left: "1" (59m rounded up)
13:00 Do nothing
Switch to "Repairing"
Display hours left: "1"
14:00 Repair health
Switch to "Rearming"
Display hours left: "3"
15:00 Load an Avalanche
Display hours left: "2"
16:00 Load an Avalanche
Display hours left: "1"
17:00 Load an Avalanche
Switch to "Refuelling"
Display hours left: "1"
18:00 Reload missing fuel
Switch to "Ready".
I hope that makes sense.
33
Suggestions / Rearming/Refuelling issue
« on: March 06, 2021, 01:24:46 pm »
When your craft finishes rearming and refuelling, the refuelling stage is still marked as "rearming", at least for the first hour of it.
https://i.imgur.com/8Ewpw1O.jpg
And yes, this is a "refuelling" stage, since at the end of the hour fuel goes from 93% to 100%, and the Avenger is "ready".
What's additionally bogus is that if no refuelling needs to be done, this rearming-but-actually-refuelling phase still happens, and consumes a unit of Elerium. To see that, just disarm the craft and then put weapons on it again.
Without having looked at the code myself, the whole thing has a suspicious stench...
https://i.imgur.com/8Ewpw1O.jpg
And yes, this is a "refuelling" stage, since at the end of the hour fuel goes from 93% to 100%, and the Avenger is "ready".
What's additionally bogus is that if no refuelling needs to be done, this rearming-but-actually-refuelling phase still happens, and consumes a unit of Elerium. To see that, just disarm the craft and then put weapons on it again.
Without having looked at the code myself, the whole thing has a suspicious stench...
34
OpenXcom Extended / Re: OXCE (OpenXcom Extended) main thread
« on: March 06, 2021, 05:15:21 am »even this shortened changelog is a reading for days and daysHey, it's more useful than you made it sound. I've already been able to look up various stuff that bothered me thanks to that link (like why I suddenly have 65 storage instead of 50, that freaked me out). So thanks again!
35
Suggestions / Re: Aliens shooting through the front of the Avenger
« on: March 06, 2021, 01:11:04 am »
I see, thanks for explaining.
Hopefully someone who does feel they have the power to change things like this reads this post one day. Or maybe someone can make a mod out of this...
Hopefully someone who does feel they have the power to change things like this reads this post one day. Or maybe someone can make a mod out of this...
36
Suggestions / Re: Aliens shooting through the front of the Avenger
« on: March 05, 2021, 05:38:42 pm »campAs a player of multiplayer shooters, what can I say but
TRIGGERED!
It's not camping I just wanted to exit on turn 2 to avoid running into everyone having max reactions mkay
Quote
From DEV standpoint, it works fineWhat do you mean?
37
Suggestions / Re: Aliens shooting through the front of the Avenger
« on: March 05, 2021, 05:00:16 pm »
Nice. I should have used the debug view myself.
Did this happen in the original game?
So this is a well known problem? Is it unfixed because 1. it's hard to fix 2. deliberately kept as a vanilla "feature" 3. just haven't gotten around to it yet?
Did this happen in the original game?
So this is a well known problem? Is it unfixed because 1. it's hard to fix 2. deliberately kept as a vanilla "feature" 3. just haven't gotten around to it yet?
38
Suggestions / Aliens shooting through the front of the Avenger
« on: March 05, 2021, 01:56:32 pm »
I'm pretty sure this isn't supposed to happen. Also, what joker at X-Com R&D designed the front visor to be one-way transparent in favor of the aliens instead of the troopers inside?
Savegame attached. Just end turn.
Savegame attached. Just end turn.
39
OpenXcom Extended / Re: OXCE (OpenXcom Extended) main thread
« on: March 03, 2021, 11:06:33 am »
I see, then nothing's wrong. Good to know.
40
OpenXcom Extended / Re: OXCE (OpenXcom Extended) main thread
« on: March 03, 2021, 12:09:03 am »
Thanks for the replies.
I found out about it from this post. If you download the savegame from the first post of that thread, you'll see that in OXC moving the soldier one tile forward, to 31,20, gets the soldier killed through lack of mutual surprise, while in OXCE any angle of approach results in mutual surprise. This is true without any mods.
I do not understand, however, why OXC sees my own mod that I add to the "standard" folder, while in OXCE the game only recognizes it if I put it in user/mods. Is this intended? And yes, I did include metadata.yml.
The LOS example (once confirmed) is likely a very early change (from before 2015), when I wasn't involved in OXCE yet, and thus not documented by me.
I'll check what the difference is and document it... but I don't think OXCE has equal LOS, as far as I know smoke does make it unequal also in OXCE, maybe in a slightly different way if you say it works differently than OXC.
I found out about it from this post. If you download the savegame from the first post of that thread, you'll see that in OXC moving the soldier one tile forward, to 31,20, gets the soldier killed through lack of mutual surprise, while in OXCE any angle of approach results in mutual surprise. This is true without any mods.
if you're missing mods, check if they have metadata.ymlNever mind. I somehow unclicked a mod I thought I had clicked. I shouldn't post while ultra tired.
I do not understand, however, why OXC sees my own mod that I add to the "standard" folder, while in OXCE the game only recognizes it if I put it in user/mods. Is this intended? And yes, I did include metadata.yml.
41
Suggestions / Re: Fences and hedges stop smoke grenades for some reason
« on: March 02, 2021, 11:58:27 pm »
Hm, both my posts should have been Suggestions, shouldn't they. Sorry.
42
OpenXcom Extended / Re: OXCE (OpenXcom Extended) main thread
« on: March 02, 2021, 03:33:29 pm »
I just tried out Extended for the first time. Loaded an OXC save...
1. In Battlescape, what's the little number 2 in the lower-right corner of the psi-amp in my soldier's hand?
2. Why would the game tell me I'm missing mods, even though I carefully checked that I have exactly the same mods as in OXC? The same selection of standard mods, as well as this mod that transferred no problem. Should I worry about savegame compatibility from OXC -> OXCE?
3. is there a comprehensive list of differences between OXC and OXCE to be read anywhere? I don't just mean the ruleset referece, but features in general.
For example I see that the unequal LOS that leads to failure of mutual surprise when smoke is involved is solved. This is good, and important - but I do not see how I could know this if it hadn't been mentioned by some forum member in a conversation I was part of elsewhere.
1. In Battlescape, what's the little number 2 in the lower-right corner of the psi-amp in my soldier's hand?
2. Why would the game tell me I'm missing mods, even though I carefully checked that I have exactly the same mods as in OXC? The same selection of standard mods, as well as this mod that transferred no problem. Should I worry about savegame compatibility from OXC -> OXCE?
3. is there a comprehensive list of differences between OXC and OXCE to be read anywhere? I don't just mean the ruleset referece, but features in general.
For example I see that the unequal LOS that leads to failure of mutual surprise when smoke is involved is solved. This is good, and important - but I do not see how I could know this if it hadn't been mentioned by some forum member in a conversation I was part of elsewhere.
43
Suggestions / Suggested feature: Key bindings for Move Unit to Level Above/Below.
« on: March 02, 2021, 02:53:14 am »
I remember enjoying having them in some X-com clone. I think UFO:ET had those.
44
Suggestions / Fences and hedges stop smoke grenades for some reason
« on: February 28, 2021, 11:54:03 pm »
Fences and hedges behave like solid walls in that they stop the smoke grenade's cloud from expanding. This makes no sense, not to mention being inconvenient.
This didn't happen in DOS - I just retested right now, just to be sure I wasn't going crazy.
(I wonder how flares are affected? I never play night missions, aside from Cydonia, and Martians obviously haven't been growing hedges there. But I do wonder.)
This didn't happen in DOS - I just retested right now, just to be sure I wasn't going crazy.
(I wonder how flares are affected? I never play night missions, aside from Cydonia, and Martians obviously haven't been growing hedges there. But I do wonder.)
45
Troubleshooting / Re: Unequal LOS - what's going on here?
« on: February 28, 2021, 11:43:42 pm »
Came back to the game after a few years and I see this problem still exists.
Warboy, last time this conversation got distracted by discussing melee reaction attacks, but have you given any thought to actually fixing asymmetrical LOS/mutual surprise failure in openxcom?
As to whoever said altering vanilla is not the purpose of openxcom, what can I say but:
Warboy, last time this conversation got distracted by discussing melee reaction attacks, but have you given any thought to actually fixing asymmetrical LOS/mutual surprise failure in openxcom?
As to whoever said altering vanilla is not the purpose of openxcom, what can I say but:
Quote
Some things are just good sense. (EDIT: although, to be honest, I did wonder why this one wasn't one of the Advanced options/built in mods, like "Improved Gauss" and such.)Code: [Select]- type: STR_DYE_GRENADE
[...]
# Applying Zombie's patch here, because I happen to agree with him.
power: 60