aliens

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
I have to ask - since we display only a single craft image in base view, why we should add complexity to battlescape map?

This will change at some point, but you don't have to worry about it now.
You can make it under this assumption and I'll take care of the rest when the time comes.
2
I too not against, if code is clear and not unneededly complicated then I would be for inclusion to OXCE.
Only question is how it will be defined in ruleset, how it will handle multiple crafts and how handle crafts that do not have battlesapce mode?

well, obviously, crafts without battlescape data will be ignored. All this feature, IMO, should be locked under ruleset option, as vanilla does not have required date for interceptor and firestorm. Multiple crafts adds a layer of complexity. I personally dislike multiple crafts per hangar, as they even can't be shown in basescape. I know, some mods, like UNEXCOM uses this feature to have tens of crafts in wing formations.
From a game design perspective, if I would like to have many crafts launched in formation from the base I would rather expand the base frame in some way (like infinite base tiles, rejected at some point for both OXC and OXCE). Although, it's an off-topic...

Any way, as I personally don't need to handle many crafts in one hangar, I have to ask - since we display only a single craft image in base view, why we should add complexity to battlescape map? I mean, if the modder will keep new global option false (will be default value, of), they will have current behavior. If they don't care about not having it displayed in base view, why they would care about not shown crafts on battlescape? AFAIK, all mods with many crafts in hangar still use vanilla hangar assets, both basescape and battlescape.

So, I've presented possible solution with rects in message above, but I'd rather gather feedback from the community, if it ever needed. Even if no strong feedback presented, I'd rather make an MVP solution, that would work for 90% cases.
3
I too not against, if code is clear and not unneededly complicated then I would be for inclusion to OXCE.
Only question is how it will be defined in ruleset, how it will handle multiple crafts and how handle crafts that do not have battlesapce mode?
4
Ok, and what do you think @Yankes?
5
Suggestions / Re: Make Shield HP Obvious
« Last post by Finnik on Today at 01:59:22 pm »
I choose to use mana also as a hp value for those psi shields, so you can just look at it. This is, ofc, a very limited solution if you don't use mana pool for something else.
6
Suggestions / Re: Research progress bug?
« Last post by yergnoor on Today at 01:06:12 pm »
There was a similar discussion about how research status is displayed before, though I wouldn't have been able to find it quickly.
As I recall (though I could be wrong) one of the main arguments for the way things work in the game right now was this. Estimating the state of an ongoing study cannot be completely accurate. Scientists can't measure how much of the work they've already done and how much remains to be done. All they have is a rough preliminary estimate. In the game, this is known as the cost of research and is specified in the game or mod code. That's why all further progress estimates are based on it. However, the actual progress of research can be both shortened by an unexpected breakthrough and, conversely, delayed due to unforeseen advance difficulties. This is modeled in the game by the randomization of research costs. But the scientists themselves cannot know about this deviation. Therefore, they are unable to take it into account in their assessment of the study's progress, which they report to management.
Therefore, knowing exactly how much is left until the end of the study, from the point of view of realistic gameplay, is cheating.
Maybe I'm wrong in some details, maybe I put my own understanding of the problem into this explanation, not the same as the others. But the fact is that this issue has already been discussed and most likely more than once.
7
The X-Com Files / Re: The X-Com Files - 2.7: Spectral Entities
« Last post by Mrvex on Today at 12:48:05 pm »
I thought of a really cool story line for this game. i hope I'm not too out of line by suggesting it.
But would be super interesting if some of your soldiers (that were previously killed by cults/aliens) could be turned into zombies (maybe a super hard to kill boss) later in the game.
Like that one soldier you hated losing, his body was recovered by the aliens and fighting you in later missions.

Just a thought. Hope everyone is having a great day.
Still loving this game a lot. Find it really well thought out (the story line).

Impossible because XCOM already retrieves bodies to....
Spoiler:
You can revive dead soldiers via a tech called Proteanism, yes, you can bring them back from the dead as long as their death actually left a corpse behind, so not turned in to ash by plasma weapons or being turned in to monster via Chryssalid incubation or infestor bite
8
40k / Re: [ADDON] ROSIGMA
« Last post by Surrealistik on Today at 12:16:15 pm »
Oh, would definitely add the ability to see friendly shield values.

Apparently X-Chronicles mod displays shield values, and the script from this can be copied over.
9
Suggestions / Re: Make Shield HP Obvious
« Last post by Surrealistik on Today at 12:14:40 pm »
Everything about shields is scripted; meaning that they don't really have much to do with OXCE development, they depend on the modder's skills and decisions.

Scripting is a rare skill, and most modders simply don't have it. But if it can be done on the current OXCE engine (which I am not sure about), then maybe someone else can rise up to the task.

I personally wouldn't do this, because the game doesn't tell you the number of HP lost either. But you can check it with a mind probe. Similarly, using some device to measure shield levels would be okay.

I'm not talking about enemies (barring perhaps it being displayed on the stat sheet when probing them) so much as your own troops; you should know exactly how much shielding they have remaining.
10
Suggestions / Re: Research progress bug?
« Last post by Martenzo on Today at 11:36:46 am »
I would say the place where I got confused was "total". I thought it to mean the post-RNG cost of the project, but both testing and the code (as far as I can tell) bear out that it compares to the base cost. The main thing that prompted me to try and optimise research in this regard was the wild variance in the cost of interrogation projects, which are somewhat urgent due to the frequent influx of more valuable interrogation targets in X-Piratez (as well as the frequent influx of prisoners who are worthless outside their "Get one for free" interrogation products). After trying to find a consistent and intuitive pattern in the status projections, I basically discovered the projections to be largely useless as a basis of strategy, and turned to looking at the data directly in the savefile to ensure fast and efficient turnaround on interrogations. Not to mention how difficult it was to track how much progress I had invested into projects without literally filling a notepad with the information, on account of frequent missions breaking up the flow of geoscape progress.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10