Bugs & Crash Reports

[Zippicus]

Eh i don't get what all the fuss is about.  If you can beat the guys, beat them.  If you can't beat them, run away.  The  ship you use is irrelevant.  If you want doors, use a Deliverator or a Triton.  I meant I get that is sucks when your ship lands and you're looking down the barrel of multiple tanks and any action you take will get you blasted, in those cases I just lift off and say screw it.  Most of the time it's not really an issue for me.

[Dioxine]

Judging from your comments about campers you don't prefer prudent game style, and because of that personal preference you are forcing everybody to use essentialy zergling rush tactic with high losses. Everybody should play like you, and goal is achieved by designing most of the transporters suitable only to your playstyle.

Don't judge because you will be judged. Like I said, there is a whole world between the 2 extreme cases of all-in camping and all-out charge, so "forcing everyone to play like I do" is simply a silly accusation. Especially since I cannot really play this, as I know too much (which is sad). You're dead wrong; I know much about camping because I know this tactic throughout. I also know that someone not used to offensive tactics will take severe losses until he learns how to fight (or quits), which will be hurtful to ego. [Maybe this sounds like "git gud" but frankly, holding such view is like saying that penalty for passive play in football is railorading into actually running across the field and thus losing the ball.]

Camping is of course the safest solution, but time consuming; in its extreme, it leads to player never leaving their ship and waiting for the enemies to come single-file nearby to kill or capture them. Because, why take any risks at all? (Maybe because of player's self-esteem? Naw, this cannot be counted on). In real situations, this could never have happened as overt camping is obvious to the enemy unless they don't even suspect your presence. But here we have a super dumb enemy and no possibility of bad stuff actually happening, no matter how long a player draws on what is supposed to be a quick raid-and-grab against a superior force. I could have been smug and go the same way the OG did (and many other games on the genre, like JA2) and simply remove most of campable spots. But that'd be boring, wouldn't it... My goal is not to make camping impossible but to put a suitable price on this tactic, to even out the massive advantage it gives to the player, so the decision to camp would be a risk/reward deal, not the default smart choice, and the camping itself should require taking more considerations - in comparison with open fight, camping is currently too predictable and thus, too easy. Camping is valid as tactics, but my career as a mod designer opened my eyes to the phenomenon of compulsive camping I described in the beginning of this paragraph. Since it is supposed to be a combat game, not a feelgood app, I need to take steps to counter such (ab)use. I am not under the delusion that I will end camping, nor do I intend to, I just need to add a price tag to it. Wouldn't want players to become fat and lazy!

And one more question. I just discovered  that I can't send  Thunderhorse to Hell Cruise mission. Is this bug or mistake? And if this is on purpose, what logic is behind this, because I can send there Zeppelin?               

Thunderhorse is too big and clumsy to hover gently enough (or land on water) to allow your troops to deploy on a moving ship.

[Vansi]

OMFG. You really don't get it... Nobody told you? You are so blind and in love in your work, that you can't see it?

CAMPING. IS. YOUR. FAULT.

It is byproduct of all your bad and good design decisions, but mostly bad. It is also price paid for size and complexity. I never camped in original game. But here... Don't get me wrong, Piratez is best and biggest mod for UFO, but... it is also full of glaring flaws, inconsistent design, artificial limitations, absent features that are begging to be added, balance is all over the place... It has also lots of unfullfilled potential.

I could write here list of changes to potentialy reduce camping, but I am convicted that you will simply ignore it. This is free mod, and no one can force you to make any changes. And I am nearly100% sure that you have lost long time ago any objectivity regarding Piratez as you are your own boss. And instead of removing bad design choices that lead to camping, and gently encourage more aggressive plastyle, you will try force players into more aggresion by putting more restrictions and limitations on "campers". You will choose stick over the carrot.     

Thunderhorse is too big and clumsy to hover gently enough (or land on water) to allow your troops to deploy on a moving ship.

             
Let me guess. You have build model and tested it in your backyard. This is exactly this kind of artificial and unnecessary limitation, that is adding nothing to game, but only pisses off people and shows what kind of dev you are.   

[Bloax]

If you're such hot  *CENSORED* with a massive grasp over how to properly pull this game off, then make your own XPiratez+
with blackjack
*CENSORED*

[KZad Bhat]

If you pull off the Blackjack and hookers, I'm on board! Everyone likes Blackjack and hookers.

Admittedly there are a lot of design choices that do encourage a bit of camping. Soldiers being more expensive and precious means you're less able to spend a few on assaults, so you need to treat them much more carefully. The major trick is one that several learned in vanilla X-Com, and several others either never caught on to or never cared because soldiers were cheap. Hold back, keep together, move slow, and depend a lot on reaction fire to take out moving enemies.

However there are already things in place, mostly from vanilla AI, that keep full on camping from working, including that AI enemies do not dependably rove around the board, and can often get themselves into a corner where they're basically camping. The better solution would be better AI, but even the best game AIs built by teams of highly skilled programmers . . . well, let's just say sometimes artificial intelligence looks an awful lot like natural stupidity even now.

Honestly, with some of the mods being developed for OXCE+, I'd love seeing the AI being revamped a bit to be more tactical in the way it handles things, but even there, we can go back to AI development for AAA games using highly skilled programmers paid to do nothing but develop that AI. Those games' AI still needs a lot of information built into the map to really work, at least fairly dependably and with an overhead small enough that a current consumer level computer can handle it. The kind of AI that can look at the maps the way they're designed now and be able to develop anything like decent tactical acumen would require a a pretty high end server level system with multiple Xeons and a full load of 192 gigabytes (or more, I haven't seen specs on a server class motherboard in a while) to be able to handle things without chugging. This means in order to make more advanced tactical AI, mapmakers have to go through and add a bunch of node information to help guide the AI.

Oh, and particularly if you do turn on sneaky AI, they don't all just run by your craft eventually. They tend to stay back out of where they've determined you can see them until they're ready to make attacks. If you're having trouble with them running in and overwhelming you, sneaky AI can make a rough start a bit easier, but makes the later hunt more difficult . . . and surprising. They do seem to do more genuine sneak attacks with that setting on.

Personally, I do a half camping start when I have a lot of gals. I don't want to run them all out and have them all sitting in the open with less than half their TUs left, so I send one or two pairs out each exit, and the others standing inside covering them. On the Menace class craft I even have 2 or 3 I send to the roof with sniper weapons. The snipers will stay there for several rounds, even when the rest are out and roaming around, in order to catch the few who will come out in their line of sight.

And if the enemy is using a nuke, and I'm not well engaged yet . . . I get back on board and get the hell out. Those nukes are not to be played with until you're into late game, and I still haven't gotten there, so maybe not even then. Although, I did get lucky on one last version. Fully engaged when i saw a mercenary with a nuke launcher, but managed to take him down before he could fire a shot.

[Vansi]

Dioxine have biased view of camping. He thinks that I camp in every mission and that I simply wait until all enemies came to my door. It is not the case. Camping is triggered by high threat level from very strong enemies.

Bad AI is one of many problems contributing to camping. Bad AI in order to provide challenge for the player is compensated by high end weapons with 90%+ real hit ratio and power that makes your armor completely irrelevant. Enemies with gauss and plasma weapons start appearing way too soon in campaign, when you are on 20%+ progress of total research.

And you don't need much to improve bad AI in Open Xcom. Right now action of enemy is choosen randomly, it stays in place, move aimlessly, move toward/from target or shoots at target. Cut down staying in place and aimless moves, put more emphasis on shooting. And take away from them super accurate weapons that can kill your elite with best armor in single shot. Because if you know that low level enemy like church neophyte can kill you with one shot, then you camp.                       

[Zippicus]

The difficulty is pretty random for UFO's, it's just a matter of which missions spawn.  The ground missions aren't going to throw you any surprises (well not many), and will generally be consistent with their known (or unknown heh) danger levels.  For example you're not going to run into a ratman village mission and be hit by plasma weapons, likewise if you go poking your head in an enemy base don't expect to be dealing with holdout pistols.  There isn't really a gradual ramping up of difficulty like in vanilla, you can literally run into end game units and tech on your first landed UFO.  You aren't really meant to be able to smash every mission with impunity, sometimes you have to know when to get the hell out of there.

I don't really have much to add on the camping thing.  Sometimes it's an appropriate tactic.  More often though I don't have the patience for that, I'd rather kick in the door and stab everything or lob a few grenades, or light the whole map on fire.

[BBHood217]

In the end, it's Dioxine's mod so he'll make it in his vision.  If you don't like it, play a different mod or make your own mod.

[Vansi]

You aren't really meant to be able to smash every mission with impunity, sometimes you have to know when to get the hell out of there.

I like to try every mission at least once, to see what is there. And sometimes these are very difficult missions and they require camping. Sometimes very hard missions can be beaten by camping, prudence and patience and burning lots of mutant meat. And some very difficult missions I did only once. For example, Heavy Freighter, crew 80+ and 6 tanks. And now I would like to see aggressive player in action against this numbers, like he takes 12 gals screaming and leaping into open field and defeats them.

And there is no impunity. I had to skip many missions because out of my 30 gals in my first base only 3 or 4 were ready for combat, rest was healing. But I am a bad camper and my playstyle must be eradicated.         

In the end, it's Dioxine's mod so he'll make it in his vision. 

Well I hope, that sometimes he will listen what others have to say.

If you don't like it, play a different mod or make your own mod.

Oh, but I like it. I just don't like where it is going. It looks like Dioxine is hellbent to take away freedom of playstyle from players, and this is never a good change. No one likes being forced to play in this or that way.     

[Zippicus]

I like to try every mission at least once, to see what is there. And sometimes these are very difficult missions and they require camping. Sometimes very hard missions can be beaten by camping, prudence and patience and burning lots of mutant meat. And some very difficult missions I did only once. For example, Heavy Freighter, crew 80+ and 6 tanks. And now I would like to see aggressive player in action against this numbers, like he takes 12 gals screaming and leaping into open field and defeats them.

And there is no impunity. I had to skip many missions because out of my 30 gals in my first base only 3 or 4 were ready for combat, rest was healing. But I am a bad camper and my playstyle must be eradicated.

You're kind of missing what I'm getting at.  I'm not saying you shouldn't do certain missions, but you have to know when you're ready to do those missions.  Generally speaking if you feel like the only way to beat a particular mission is by camping, you're probably not quite ready for that mission yet.  And sure some of the bigger UFO's are a challenge, but if you have the tech to shoot them down you should have the tech you'll need to deal with the enemies on the ground as well.  Nobody is saying you should be suicidal or stupid when you attack, but you shouldn't expect to be able to be 100% safe either.  There is a middle ground between reckless charging and lining up outside a UFO and pressing end turn till you win.

[Vansi]

You're kind of missing what I'm getting at.  I'm not saying you shouldn't do certain missions, but you have to know when you're ready to do those missions. 

I am attempting every mission, even when I know it will be hard. Camping help a lot against strong enemies during beginning of mission. But sometimes I retreat. First reason - repeated fire inside transporter that wounds many gals and breaks their morale. Second reason - destroyed doors, it kills your safe harbour inside Turtle. Third reason -  Star Gods. On maybe 10 attempts I defeated them so far only once, in urban enviroment during mutant pogrom. All other cases - shot down enemy ship, I retreated, as even camping is not enough. Simply I don't stand a chance in open area. Yet.         

Generally speaking if you feel like the only way to beat a particular mission is by camping, you're probably not quite ready for that mission yet.

Yes, you have mostly right, but I like to try anyway. There are supply ships, and you can do them only by camping. I did them several times and I stopped. Crew has a lots of big boom sticks, it is boring camping from beginning to almost very end, and there is nothing valuable on the ship.

And sure some of the bigger UFO's are a challenge, but if you have the tech to shoot them down you should have the tech you'll need to deal with the enemies on the ground as well. 

Right now (third year, third month) I can shoot down everything, except corvette and cruiser. I can clear up every ship, even cruiser, if it decides to land. If crew is armed with high end weapons, it requires camping.  But, if crew is Star Gods, even on small ship, well I can try for few turns, test weapons and tactic, but in the end they will force me to escape.         

Nobody is saying you should be suicidal or stupid when you attack, but you shouldn't expect to be able to be 100% safe either.

I don't expect safety on mission. There is always nurse and at least 50 pieces of mutant meat with canteens.       

There is a middle ground between reckless charging and lining up outside a UFO and pressing end turn till you win.

Of course. And I very doubt if you can win mission just by pressing "end turn" button.   

[Solarius Scorch]

Dioxine have biased view of camping.

No.
Dioxine has feedback. Feedback I am also familiar with.
This is an arms race against real campers, who exploit every tiny detail and then walk around boasting about their superior tactics and supremacy. Trust me, you have no idea.

Well I hope, that sometimes he will listen what others have to say.

Well, that's just disgraceful and rude.
You showed up here like, a week ago, and suddenly you are an expert on the history of Dioxine's customer relationship?


Now, regarding the actual topic, which is whether this recent change was good or not... I have no idea, haven't played the game yet. But I highly doubt it's so bad, since this system has been in the game before and it was even worse; it was only removed after Dioxine thought he went too far. So what we have now already is a compromise.

[Dioxine]

OMFG. You really don't get it... Nobody told you? You are so blind and in love in your work, that you can't see it?

CAMPING. IS. YOUR. FAULT.

I already wrote just that, read before replying, will ya? It's tiring when they're not. I already wrote that allowing crafts with doors is the real enabler, but I don't want to remove them yada yada yada.
             

Let me guess. You have build model and tested it in your backyard. This is exactly this kind of artificial and unnecessary limitation, that is adding nothing to game, but only pisses off people and shows what kind of dev you are.   

Build a model? What is it, XXth century? We use computer simulations nowadays. And yeah I am aware players will be pissed off everytime something goes not as planned. Hit me with all that hate, dood. It ain't my first rodeo. Tell me exactly what kind of a dev I am.

Dioxine have biased view of camping. He thinks that I camp in every mission and that I simply wait until all enemies came to my door. It is not the case. Camping is triggered by high threat level from very strong                       

I don't know what you do as a player, and I don't care. For me, you're just a few letters in Firefox window, less real that a character from a visual novel. But you mentioned something, I commented back, then we started discussing the issue of camping. Cut down on that ego of yours, dude. The world doesn't revolve around you.

[Vansi]

This is an arms race against real campers, who exploit every tiny detail and then walk around boasting about their superior tactics and supremacy. Trust me, you have no idea.

This is what really bothers you? Grow some thicker skin and ignore them. If this are your priorities for developing mod, then you are going to kill Piratez, just like Jagged Alliance 2 ver. 1.13 was killed by misguided devs.

Well, that's just disgraceful and rude.
You showed up here like, a week ago, and suddenly you are an expert on the history of Dioxine's customer relationship?

I am pretty sure, that if I cross that red line, Dioxine will tell me without your help. And Internet remembers. Dioxine has a past and history of certain behaviors. This is not only forum, where Piratez are discussed.   

I already wrote that allowing crafts with doors is the real enabler

     

You are wrong.

In original game sometimes in order to leave Skyranger and set boots on the ground 3 or 4 soldiers had to die. Missions where nobody on my side died were exception. Was I reloading, aborting mission? No. I was pressing on. Forward. No matter the losses. Or I could put to Skyranger 3 hover tanks and finish mission in 3 turns. But you have made changes, and this is impossible in Piratez.

You made cost of loosing gal too high. Loose two in single turn, and there is mass panic. Loose one elite officer, mass panic. Morale system in 99J2 is like doomsday device, primitive system, which is ignoring most important thing - answer to question "who is winning". System that is triggering panic when I defeated enemy and I am about to finish mission, nobody even shoots and there is no threat. And you took page from Firaxis jerks - panicked gal runs straight towards nearest enemy or shoots nearest ally.

And there is that absurdal notion that reactions can be trained only on mission, which prevents training combat ready replacements.

And it is very easy to suffers losses. You too soon overcompensated bad AI with powerfull and accurate weapons. And they don't sit in their shot down ships. No, they camp right outside your doors, armed with handheld nukes. Do you really don't see connection between nukes and camping?       

You did introduced artificial limitations like auxiliary slots. Starting ships have too small capacity and loosing few gals means that mission will be 50% or 100% longer or unwinnable.       
 

   
Hit me with all that hate, dood. It ain't my first rodeo. Tell me exactly what kind of a dev I am.

What is wrong with you, dude? Do you really think that I care so much that I have some feelings for you? You're just a few letters in Firefox window. 

   
Cut down on that ego of yours, dude.

That is funny how constatly you are bothered with my ego. I wonder what good, old Freud would say about that. My ego is not a problem, your is.

 

[legionof1]

Okay time to back off, FOR EVERYONE. This is obviously going nowhere but more insults. Keep to reasonable and constructive discussion.