Re: The X-Com Files - 3.5: Whispers In The Dark

[Fiskun1]

I recently started running The X-Com Files on version 0.9.9d again.
Can I upgrade to 0.9.9e and continue my game?

I do not understand where the items go after I make the right click on them in the menu "Purchase / Hire ..."
They just disappear from the list of available goods and I can no longer buy them!
This applies to everything except people (Agent, Scientist, Engineer).

And further...
It would be good in the Funding menu to designate changes in funding in different colors, for clarity.
For example, a decrease in monthly financing should be highlighted in red, an increase in green, and the absence of changes in white.
Thanks for the mod, it's very interesting to play!

[krautbernd]

I do not understand where the items go after I make the right click on them in the menu "Purchase / Hire ..."
They just disappear from the list of available goods and I can no longer buy them!
This applies to everything except people (Agent, Scientist, Engineer).

Have you checked the filters? One of them should read 'Hidden'.

[Fiskun1]

I checked the Hidden filter. Thanks, this is it!

[Solarius Scorch]

Tremorsense in games (originating from DnD) is the ability to locate other units without using sight, typically by being sensitive to vibrations.
In terms of mechanics, they got a psi vision of 6 or so.

[krautbernd]

Tremorsense in games (originating from DnD) is the ability to locate other units without using sight, typically by being sensitive to vibrations.
In terms of mechanics, they got a psi vision of 6 or so.

And here i was imagining a whole new game mechanic - akin to the motion scanner, but for the AI. Essentially blind, but they sense you via your movements.

[Solarius Scorch]

And here i was imagining a whole new game mechanic - akin to the motion scanner, but for the AI. Essentially blind, but they sense you via your movements.

Unfortunately not, this is not possible - at least not now.

And I released a fixed version 0.9.9e2. The one from yesterday kinda exploded under certain circumstances.

[Covenant]

Though the term does throw up an obvious suggestion for an addition to the hunts (a few more types to lessen the number of beetle/rat/scorpion ones can never hurt) - Graboids!

I mean, obviously, good luck to the poor guy who has to sprite those things, but it'd certainly be awesome to see those start popping up in desert environments.

[Mr. Mister]

For a moment there I thought you had fixed handjob indexing.

[justaround]

Hey, Solarius. I like the effect of damaged UFOs upon base defence, but could similar effect be expanded to other missions (in situation where the UFO is attacked, destroys the attacking aircraft and then continues with its objective) or would it not apply? Also, what about loot? It'd be nice if such damaged UFO also had a chance of providing some corpses or "loose" equipment as remains of dead attackers, so it wouldn't be decreasing loot as a penalty for damaging the UFO.

[Solarius Scorch]

For a moment there I thought you had fixed handjob indexing.

Understandable. But I'm curious about what it would mean exactly.

Hey, Solarius. I like the effect of damaged UFOs upon base defence, but could similar effect be expanded to other missions (in situation where the UFO is attacked, destroys the attacking aircraft and then continues with its objective) or would it not apply? Also, what about loot? It'd be nice if such damaged UFO also had a chance of providing some corpses or "loose" equipment as remains of dead attackers, so it wouldn't be decreasing loot as a penalty for damaging the UFO.

I don't know if this affects UFOs in general, or just on base defense. But the name as well as the ruleset reference point to the latter. Also, crashing a UFO usually kills some crew members anyway.

[krautbernd]

Hey, Solarius. I like the effect of damaged UFOs upon base defence, but could similar effect be expanded to other missions (in situation where the UFO is attacked, destroys the attacking aircraft and then continues with its objective) or would it not apply? Also, what about loot? It'd be nice if such damaged UFO also had a chance of providing some corpses or "loose" equipment as remains of dead attackers, so it wouldn't be decreasing loot as a penalty for damaging the UFO.

You might have better luck asking that question in the OXCE discussion thread, i'm not sure that the loot aspect can be implemented with the current mechanics.

How would that even be handled? Spawning in alien corpses on base defence missions? What, do the aliens carry their dead brethren out of the invading UFO into your hangar bays? An after-action report detailing bodies recovered from the landed UFO? Doesn't the UFO take off, seeing how we don't get any UFO materials from base defence missions?

Why shouldn't there be a 'penalty'? You're fighting less aliens to begin with.

[justaround]

How would that even be handled? Spawning in alien corpses on base defence missions? What, do the aliens carry their dead brethren out of the invading UFO into your hangar bays? An after-action report detailing bodies recovered from the landed UFO? Doesn't the UFO take off, seeing how we don't get any UFO materials from base defence missions?

A big part of this line was in regards to damaged UFOs in general, not merely base defense ones. Though I do think that shooting down/taking over an UFO that dropped the invading troops would be nifty, but out of scope of the post.

Why shouldn't there be a 'penalty'? You're fighting less aliens to begin with.

Yes, but you fight less aliens not as an arbitrarily chosen option with its own price to pay, but due to partially succesful defensive measures. With less loot, the game basically punishes the player for having some air defenses that damaged the UFO over having none.

Anyway, thanks for the answers, folks, and the suggestion.

[HT]

What's the name of the modified doom song with the sounds of battle being part of the music itself?

[krautbernd]

Yes, but you fight less aliens not as an arbitrarily chosen option with its own price to pay, but due to partially succesful defensive measures. With less loot, the game basically punishes the player for having some air defenses that damaged the UFO over having none.

Going by that logic you should get all the loot when you destroy an invading UFO, because otherwise you would get 'punished' for having built enough air defense to avoid the base defense. You could make the same argument in regards to shot down UFOs: You should be able to recover all of the components, otherwise you're being punished because you were able to shoot it down in the first place. Logic much?

The whole point of a base defense mission is not the loot, and you're not getting 'punished' by having to fight less aliens. The point of a base defense missions is to not lose the base. Your reward is that you keep the base, and having to fight less aliens makes that easier (or for a shorter base defense mission, anyway).

[mercy]

Beach / Swimsuit mission: no escape  (Superhuman/ironman)

What is the purpose of this mission?  Four of my agents are allowed in swimsuits. There were at least 8 gang members with automatic weapons and they moved down my squad.  I had dart rifles and managed to tranquilize two of them.