Messages

16

OXCE Support Y-scripts / [question] GeoscapeSoldier.getCommendation and GeoscapeSoldier.getTransformation

« on: January 31, 2024, 12:23:56 pm »

Is there any way to understand with scripts if a player's soldier has a certain commendation of a certain level?
Similarly for transformations: how can a script understand if a soldier has a certain transformation?

17

Brutal AI / Re: Graphs notifications or improvement

« on: January 22, 2024, 05:06:57 pm »

Is this feature (notifications based on activity graphs) available in the regular OpenXCom Extended? Or maybe in regular OpenXCom (unextended)?

Nope. This feature is present only in BOXCE.

18

Brutal AI / Re: Graphs notifications or improvement

« on: January 22, 2024, 04:54:44 pm »

How do I set it all up? Are these UI config settings? Or some config files?

I would like to get a "warm-up" with the vanilla experience (but with the nice convenience features like radar coverage display, easier equipment distribution, etc). When I am "up to speed" again, I would probably go for the "Brutal AI" version  - and then of course share my feedback :-)

So what do I need to enable/disable to get there? :-)

You should probably start by playing (or at least reading the description of) the regular OpenXCom Extended before you go to its more advanced version, which is Brutal-OXCE.
To do this, just download and run OXCE: [2] OXCE v7.11 download & installation guide.
Or, if you are going to play Brutal-OXCE, then disable the main "Brutal AI" setting.

Just to be clear:
OXC (OpenXCom) is a modern implementation of the XCom game with minimal changes and minor fixes.
OXCE (OpenXCom Extended) is a greatly expanded version of OXC, with many new features, bug fixes and user interface tweaks
BOXCE (Brutal OpenXCom Extended or Brutal AI) is an extended version of OXCE, with even more features and functionality added, as well as heavily redesigned and more complex AI behavior in ground battles.

Also, don't forget the huge number of mods (Released Mods) that utilize all (or almost all) of OXCE's new features. In most cases these mods will work with BOXCE as well, but some logic errors or funny situations may occur.

19

OXCE Suggestions DONE / Re: [DONE][Suggestion] Rate of rearmament of air defense systems at the player's base

« on: January 16, 2024, 05:21:26 pm »

Works fine for me.

Please check again you are upgrading correctly, especially file /standard/xcom1/interfaces.rul

It's very strange. A full reinstall of the entire game helped. Maybe the old game used the file "/standard/xcom1/interfaces.rul" from some other place.
Thanks for the help! I'll look into what the problem was.

Edit: found what the problem was: I created archives of "standard" and "common" folders in the game folder a long time ago. Deleting them solved the problem.

Edit2: these archives of "standard" and "common" folders are created automatically when OXCE is updated from the main menu.
Is it possible to forbid the game to read data from these archives? Or change their name?

20

OXCE Suggestions DONE / Re: [DONE][Suggestion] Rate of rearmament of air defense systems at the player's base

« on: January 16, 2024, 03:29:56 pm »

Can you link the mods you're using?

And a save file?

For this save-file: only XCF 3.2 and my submod.

21

OXCE Suggestions DONE / Re: [DONE][Suggestion] Rate of rearmament of air defense systems at the player's base

« on: January 16, 2024, 12:08:43 pm »

I guess you have not upgraded OXCE correctly.

Just downloaded the latest version of the nightly build "Extended-7.11.1-fdcd1a075-2024-01-14-win32.7z" to check - same situation: only white color.
On another computer with 64-bit support I downloaded the January 14 or 13 version a few days ago - same problem there.

22

OXCE Suggestions DONE / Re: [DONE][Suggestion] Rate of rearmament of air defense systems at the player's base

« on: January 16, 2024, 11:25:05 am »

What should I configure so that the displayed ammo count text is multicolored? I have only white color in all variants.

23

OXCE Suggestions DONE / Re: [DONE][Suggestion] Rate of rearmament of air defense systems at the player's base

« on: January 12, 2024, 09:24:09 am »

Done.

Wow! That was really fast!
Thank you so much!

24

OXCE Suggestions DONE / Re: [Suggestion] Rate of rearmament of air defense systems at the player's base

« on: January 11, 2024, 05:02:59 pm »

More micromanagement

Micromanagement will only happen when the mod developer specifies the "ammoItem" parameter. Otherwise, ammo is an abstract non-existent item (similar to conventional fuel for the player's initial aircrafts) and is loaded automatically as the air defense system's ammo is emptied without any player involvement.

25

OXCE Suggestions DONE / [DONE][Suggestion] Rate of rearmament of air defense systems at the player's base

« on: January 11, 2024, 03:02:18 pm »

I would like to propose an upgraded algorithm for the air defense systems at the player's base.
For example, suppose there is a simultaneous attack on the player's base by multiple alien missiles (see this topic for a description of this mechanic) - on the geoscape it will look like many UFOs flying to the player's base, which will arrive at the base almost simultaneously. Since in the real world the amount of ammunition in air defense systems is limited, air defense systems can only fire a limited number of shots. And if the number of targets exceeds the number of ammo in the air defense system, the latter targets are guaranteed not to be shot down.

The current air defense algorithm in the game does not take this feature into account: every time an attack is made on the player's base (when the screen of reflection of the attack on the player's base is shown), each air defense system has a full ammo supply, which is instantly reloaded between attacks. Of course, using the "ammoItem" and "ammoNeeded" parameters (see this topic) brings a bit of realism, but still does not take into account the reload speed of air defense systems.

I suggest adding the following parameters for the base modules (similar to the "craftWeapons" parameters):
ammoMax - the maximum amount of ammo that can be loaded into this air defense system. According to the "ammoNeeded" parameter, this parameter can indicate either the amount of ammunition required to operate the air defense system, or the number of shots. For example, with "ammoNeeded: 5" and "ammoMax: 15", in the first case it will mean that the air defense system will be able to fire 15/5=3 shots until the ammo is fully discharged, or in the second case - 15 shots (each of which requires 5 ammo).
rearmRate - how much ammunition will be loaded into this air defense system per game hour. If possible, it is better to make this parameter to describe the amount of ammunition loaded during a game minute.

In addition to the technical implementation of the new algorithm, I think it will be a big problem to display information about the presence or absence of ammunition for each air defense system on the base. At the moment I think it will be enough to display this information in text form on top of the picture of the air defense module on the base screen.

In the attached image, the text "-/-" means that this air defense module has infinite ammunition and does not require rearming (as it works now).

26

The X-Com Files / Re: [submod] XCom Files Arsenal Additions (ver 0.8.1d Anarchic Anachronism)

« on: January 11, 2024, 09:42:22 am »

Thank you!
I thought new XCF armor somehow interferes with armors provided by this mod.

The problem is that XCF version 3.2 removed the armor that was used in many submods. Because of this, these submods produce these errors.

27

The X-Com Files / Re: [submod] XCom Files Arsenal Additions (ver 0.8.1d Anarchic Anachronism)

« on: January 10, 2024, 03:56:06 pm »

UPD. Installed quickfix into XCFAA 0.8.1d for XCF 3.2, got this error

This errors from "Morozova" submod. Download latest version of that submod.

28

OXCE Suggestions NEW / [Suggestion] "Kamikaze" UFOs

« on: January 10, 2024, 12:08:15 pm »

A small addition to the alien missile attack functionality from this thread.
I propose to add a new parameter to UFOs, indicating that this UFO during dogfight with the player's aircraft will self-destruct and cause the specified damage (from the parameter "power") to the player's aircraft. For example:

ufos:
  - type: STR_SMALL_ROCKET
    isKamikaze: true #default - false

The behavior of this UFO during air combat: it tries to approach the player's aircraft at the highest possible speed (as if it had the parameter "range: 1", or even less than 1 but greater than 0). The "range" parameter itself is ignored because it has no meaning. As soon as the distance between the UFO and the airplane is equal to 0, the UFO is detonated, the player's aircraft is damaged and the air combat ends.
If during the dogfight the player destroys this UFO at a distance greater than 0, the combat ends as if it was just a normal UFO, i.e. without any consequences to the player's aircraft.
If the player destroys a UFO at distance 0, the UFO also self-destructs, causing damage to the player's aircraft.

With this feature, I hope, it is possible to realize a kind of air defense system protecting alien bases from the player's attack.

29

OXCE Suggestions DONE / Re: [DONE][Suggestion] More retaliation variants

« on: January 10, 2024, 11:37:10 am »

EDIT: I was wrong, that only applies to mission generation from dogfights, not for monthly mission scripts

Is this going to be fixed? I mean, will this fix block multiple retaliation missions (generated by the monthly mission scripts) per region per month?

30

OXCE Suggestions DONE / Re: [DONE][Suggestion] More retaliation variants

« on: January 09, 2024, 03:29:41 pm »

b/ the bases are literally marked when the mission starts, in the function called AlienMission::start() https://github.com/MeridianOXC/OpenXcom/blob/oxce-plus/src/Savegame/AlienMission.cpp#L727

...if you want to mark it later than when the mission starts, for example when UFOs or mission sites are spawned, it can be implemented

Yes, it would be nice and more logical to have the player's base marked "retaliationTarget: true" immediately at the moment of generation of the first UFO attacking that base.
Otherwise, for example, if several retaliation missions are active, among which there are both "standard" and missions with the flag "skipScoutingPhase: true", it can lead, in my opinion, to some unpleasant consequences.

Normally, a player has only one base in a given region, so this will happen very rarely.

But yes, I implemented that intentionally.

Okay, I'm fine with that explanation. I don't see much trouble from this decision so far.