Solar's wishlist

[Solarius Scorch]

Sure, I updated the list and the file:

1. GLOBAL DAMAGE ALTER PER TYPE
Priority: very low
Justification: While it would be helpful, I have accepted that this would be difficult/controversial to implement. Since we can do the same with individual weapons, and the bulk of my work there has already been done, I don't really care much any more.
A more general system for inheriting parts of item definition would be awesome though.

1. MORE THAN 1 DAMAGE TYPE PER BULLET
Priority: low
Justification: With the new definable damage types, the need for multiple damage types per attack has significantly diminished. For example instead of making an AP bullet which also deals electric damage, I can simply create a new damage type and match armours accordingly. Again, this is much more work for me, but it is doable.

2. TERRAIN DESTRUCTION BY MELEE
Priority: high
Justification: Lack of this feature has been a pain since melee weapons were added, and nothing has changed here. Half-assed solutions like 1-tile "ranged" weapons are not really satisfactory, and impossibility of using a machete to damage a bush is frustrating.

3. TERRAIN TRAMPLING BY AI UNITS
Priority: medium
Justification: Reaper rampaging through walls would be a fun feature to have, and it would make the AI more unpredictable. Small features like this one, when aggregated, make for a better, more complex and enjoyable experience. Still, it's a small addition, which in itself wouldn't impact the game all that much. Desireable, but not a high priority.

4. ALTERNATE ANIMATION FOR OVERKILL
Priority: medium
Justification: A purely aesthetic thing, but adding it would really enhance the experience. Ludicrous Gibs are a trope for a reason, and some weapons just aren't the same without it. Plus it seems (to a layman like me) to be relatively easy to add.

5. MULTIPLE UFOS/CRAFTS
Priority: low
Justification: You can circumvent this problem by using UFOs with the same tilesets, which makes this feature a little less urgent. I'd probably place it at medium priority, but I already learned to live without it without much loss.

6. X-COM CRAFT CRASH SITES
Priority: very low
Justification: I don't even know how I would want to use this feature. Would have probably removed it long ago, but some other modders expressed interest in it, so I'm keeping it for now.

7. RESEARCH: FALSE FOR UFOPAEDIA ARTICLES
Priority: medium
Justification: Lack of this option causes confusion with some Piratez players and there's no other way of clearing it up easily (without sacrificing some gameplay).

8. FACILITIES: REQUIRED STAFF (SOLDIERS)
Priority: low
Justification: I think we have all accepted that this wouldn't happen anytime soon. Anyway, it's not my request and I have never really been interested in it personally, so it's hard for me to evaluate its value.

9. (not on the list but requested elsewhere) MID-BATTLE REINFORCEMENTS FOR THE AI
Priority: very high
Justification: I literally have several missions already designed (and some of it even made!) around this concept. Definitely a must have for almost any tactical game which is supposed to cover various scenarios, and OXCE+ as a whole moves X-Com in that area.

[wcho035]

I see 6 is the most exciting among the list. The other are interesting enough but more cosmetic in reasons. I once propose having the crash site of xcom craft treated as a temp Base. Alien can attack again and again until the survivors can be “transferred” out by a rescuing craft.


But it is a nebulous idea as some had suggested.

EDIT: (Meridian) Continuation here: https://openxcom.org/forum/index.php/topic,7490.0.html

[Meridian]

DEV update:

0. GLOBAL DAMAGE ALTER PER TYPE
Priority: very low
Justification: While it would be helpful, I have accepted that this would be difficult/controversial to implement. Since we can do the same with individual weapons, and the bulk of my work there has already been done, I don't really care much any more.
A more general system for inheriting parts of item definition would be awesome though.

Changing default values technically requires either:
1. not changing them at all, store both modded value and modded default value and decide real-time, which one to use... which is inefficient, prone to errors and cannot be generalized... it's used on a few places, but it's an extreme PITA and cannot be used on larger scale
2. creating a completely new secondary mod system that is processed before the current mod system... just to have the default values prepared before any of the primary mod stuff is processed... that's a huge amount of work, for very questionable benefit

You can basically consider this request as rejected.

A workaround/compromise I can offer is to create a few templates and use refNode attribute to inherit from templates when creating new items, armors, etc.

1. MORE THAN 1 DAMAGE TYPE PER BULLET
Priority: low
Justification: With the new definable damage types, the need for multiple damage types per attack has significantly diminished. For example instead of making an AP bullet which also deals electric damage, I can simply create a new damage type and match armours accordingly. Again, this is much more work for me, but it is doable.

No.
I don't see any good way how to implement a mechanic so different from everything else... without breaking everything else.

If you want, you can override the heck out of everything using Yankes-scripts... but the result is your responsibility.

2. TERRAIN DESTRUCTION BY MELEE
Priority: high
Justification: Lack of this feature has been a pain since melee weapons were added, and nothing has changed here. Half-assed solutions like 1-tile "ranged" weapons are not really satisfactory, and impossibility of using a machete to damage a bush is frustrating.

This is hard to do (both design and implementation), but it is todolisted and will eventually come, one way or another.

3. TERRAIN TRAMPLING BY AI UNITS
Priority: medium
Justification: Reaper rampaging through walls would be a fun feature to have, and it would make the AI more unpredictable. Small features like this one, when aggregated, make for a better, more complex and enjoyable experience. Still, it's a small addition, which in itself wouldn't impact the game all that much. Desireable, but not a high priority.

(IMO) not worth the effort.
It is a small feature gameplay-wise, but a very large feature (IMO) technically.

Not saying complete no, but it's on the very bottom of things I'd consider doing.

4. ALTERNATE ANIMATION FOR OVERKILL
Priority: medium
Justification: A purely aesthetic thing, but adding it would really enhance the experience. Ludicrous Gibs are a trope for a reason, and some weapons just aren't the same without it. Plus it seems (to a layman like me) to be relatively easy to add.

This one is for Yankes, I can't comment much.

It might already be possible using Y-scripts, or they could be extended to support this.

5. MULTIPLE UFOS/CRAFTS
Priority: low
Justification: You can circumvent this problem by using UFOs with the same tilesets, which makes this feature a little less urgent. I'd probably place it at medium priority, but I already learned to live without it without much loss.

No.
UFO crash/landing sites are limited to one UFO and one xcom craft.

Visually, you can create a craft that looks like two or more craft... see 40k.
Visually, you can create a UFO, which looks like multiple UFOs...
But in the background, there will always be just one of each.

6. X-COM CRAFT CRASH SITES
Priority: very low
Justification: I don't even know how I would want to use this feature. Would have probably removed it long ago, but some other modders expressed interest in it, so I'm keeping it for now.

No.

All discussions so far led to a conclusion this makes no sense... it's just an idea that pops up in people's minds... but after thinking a bit about it, most quickly reject it as "nonsense".

7. RESEARCH: FALSE FOR UFOPAEDIA ARTICLES
Priority: medium
Justification: Lack of this option causes confusion with some Piratez players and there's no other way of clearing it up easily (without sacrificing some gameplay).

What is this?

8. FACILITIES: REQUIRED STAFF (SOLDIERS)
Priority: low
Justification: I think we have all accepted that this wouldn't happen anytime soon. Anyway, it's not my request and I have never really been interested in it personally, so it's hard for me to evaluate its value.

Then don't put it on your list?

Anyway, Soldier Transformations now support transforming soldiers into items... so you can make a project that transforms your senior psi operative(s) into resource(s) required to build some advanced Psi facility for example... as requested by Nord.

9. (not on the list but requested elsewhere) MID-BATTLE REINFORCEMENTS FOR THE AI
Priority: very high
Justification: I literally have several missions already designed (and some of it even made!) around this concept. Definitely a must have for almost any tactical game which is supposed to cover various scenarios, and OXCE+ as a whole moves X-Com in that area.

On the todolist, should happen before or with OXCE 7.0.
EDIT: done in OXCE 6.7.4

[wcho035]

MID-BATTLE REINFORCEMENTS FOR THE AI

Just curiosity. How would this be implemented? This for XCom or Alien? T

Thanks.

[Meridian]

MID-BATTLE REINFORCEMENTS FOR THE AI

Just curiosity. How would this be implemented?

It's not designed yet.
Feedback/suggestions welcome.

This for XCom or Alien? T

Thanks.

AI = Aliens.

[wcho035]

Depend on what kind of reinforcement you are looking at. Alien soldiers? Terror weapons?

In my mod, I have a combo of undeployed egg type organic turrets, Head huggers that turn Soldiers into zombies and then Terror weapons. Terror weapon can also spawn more head huggers and the cycle repeats. Yet to include are Egg laying Terror weapons that laid turrets eggs. 

That's how it is done on mine.

You can't have another ufo landing in the middle of the battlescape mission. Or, you can have teleporters like in APOC. 

This is going to be extremely complicated coding Meridian. I will be honest. Might be as much as that rejected XCom crash site idea. I am not writing this was because I am resentful of that feature drop. Again, just being honest.

[wcho035]

For 8. FACILITIES: REQUIRED STAFF (SOLDIERS)

Like you can put turrets on craft. You can spawn soldiers in Maps of xcom facilities?

One idea of mine is to convert a facility into a Turrets Bottleneck thing. Multiple turrets in a facility, act as a bottle neck and choke points in a base. Like in APOC. This you can do without any extra coding.

Then again, I am not 100% in understanding what this feature is for. Until I do, I reserved myself from making more input.

[Meridian]

For 8. FACILITIES: REQUIRED STAFF (SOLDIERS)
Like you can put turrets on craft. You can spawn soldiers in Maps of xcom facilities?
One idea of mine is to convert a facility into a Turrets Bottleneck thing. Multiple turrets in a facility, act as a bottle neck and choke points in a base. Like in APOC. This you can do without any extra coding.
Then again, I am not 100% in understanding what this feature is for. Until I do, I reserved myself from making more input.

No, it's about having staff for base facilities.
Same like you need scientists to do research... you would need extra people to operate a radar, clean up living quarters, organize storage rooms, etc.
Pure geoscape thing.

[wcho035]

No, it's about having staff for base facilities.
Same like you need scientists to do research... you would need extra people to operate a radar, clean up living quarters, organize storage rooms, etc.
Pure geoscape thing.

Oh I see, this is not for battlescape in a base defense mission. My apologies for the misunderstanding.  Probably you might want to occupy them like you have pilot in crafts. This might boost the bonuses of certain facility and its capabilities..

[krautbernd]

It's not designed yet.
Feedback/suggestions welcome.

Would it be practical for reinforcements re-use existing spawn points or would these need to have separate zones/tiles? Solarius mentioned having missions/mission ideas in mind for this - are there any actual requests how/where the reinforcement should spawn? Just trying to get an overview of what is actually being proposed here.

[Meridian]

I have this from someone:

Code: [Select]

========= CURRENT DEPLOYMENT =========

  - type: STR_CROP_CIRCLES
    width: 40
    length: 40
    height: 4
    alert: STR_ALERT_CROP_CIRCLES
    alertBackground: BACK03.SCR
    briefing:
      palette: 2
      music: AS_2_INTRO
      showTarget: false
    music:
      - ZIZZ_STUDIO_SPOOKY_SCAPE
    markerName: STR_CROP_CIRCLES
    duration: [80, 104]
    despawnPenalty: 50
    turnLimit: 10
    chronoTrigger: 1
    terrains:
      - CULTA_CROP_CIRCLES
    data:
      - alienRank: 5
        lowQty: 1
        highQty: 3
        dQty: 0
        percentageOutsideUfo: 100
        itemSets:
          -
            []
          -
            []
          -
            []
          -
            - STR_AXE
          -
            - STR_PUMP_ACTION
            - STR_PUMP_ACTION_SHELLS
            - STR_PUMP_ACTION_SHELLS


Code: [Select]

========= PROPOSED DEPLOYMENT =========

  - type: STR_CROP_CIRCLES
    width: 40
    length: 40
    height: 4
    alert: STR_ALERT_CROP_CIRCLES
    alertBackground: BACK03.SCR
    briefing:
      palette: 2
      music: AS_2_INTRO
      showTarget: false
    music:
      - ZIZZ_STUDIO_SPOOKY_SCAPE
    markerName: STR_CROP_CIRCLES
    duration: [80, 104]
    despawnPenalty: 50
    terrains:
      - CULTA_CROP_CIRCLES
    data:
      - alienRank: 5
        lowQty: 1
        highQty: 3
        dQty: 0
        percentageOutsideUfo: 100
        itemSets:
          -
            []
          -
            []
          -
            []
          -
            - STR_AXE
          -
            - STR_PUMP_ACTION
            - STR_PUMP_ACTION_SHELLS
            - STR_PUMP_ACTION_SHELLS
    reinforcements:
      turn: 10 # when reinforcements arrive
      direction: [N, W, S, E] # they appear near any map border; newly spawned units have full TUs and can move right away
      - STR_MIB_SOLDIER # unit that appears; works like alienRank
        lowQty: 7
        highQty: 15
        dQty: 0
        itemSets:
          -
            - STR_SMG
            - STR_SMG_CLIP
            - STR_SMG_CLIP
            - STR_SMG_CLIP
          -
            - STR_SMG
            - STR_SMG_AA_CLIP
            - STR_SMG_AA_CLIP
            - STR_SMG_AA_CLIP
          -
            - STR_BLACKOPS_SMARTPISTOL
            - STR_PISTOL_AA_CLIP
            - STR_PISTOL_AA_CLIP
          -
            - STR_LASER_PISTOL_MIB
            - STR_LASER_PISTOL_MIB_CLIP
            - STR_LASER_PISTOL_MIB_CLIP
          -
            - STR_GAUSS_PISTOL
            - STR_GAUSS_PISTOL_CLIP
            - STR_GAUSS_PISTOL_CLIP
      - STR_MIB_NAVIGATOR
        lowQty: 3
        highQty: 4
        dQty: 0
        itemSets:
          (...)


Code: [Select]

========= VARIANTS =========
(omitting repeatable elements)


    reinforcements:
      turn: 2-17 # random (probably needs different format, but you get the idea)
      direction: [N, W] # they appear either at north or west border of the map; if not specified, any border (like in the previous example)
      - STR_MIB_SOLDIER
        lowQty: 7
        highQty: 15
        dQty: 0
        itemSets:
          (...)

    reinforcements:
      turnChance: 10 # 10% chance each turn
      repeats: 2 # if happened twice, no more checks; default 0 - is never disabled
      direction: random # appear randomly on the battlefield, like paratroopers or teleporters
      - STR_MIB_SOLDIER
        lowQty: 7
        highQty: 15
        dQty: 0
        itemSets:
          (...)

    reinforcements:
      turn: 0 # is present on the map since beginning (a way to override alienRace limitations)
      direction: random
      - STR_MIB_SOLDIER
        lowQty: 7
        highQty: 15
        dQty: 0
        itemSets:
          (...)


[krautbernd]

Interesting, thanks.

Wouldn't this run the risk of having units spawn in unreachable/blocked locations, given the random nature of map generation? Would it be possible (or rather practical) to define spawn points manually, akin to how base storage tiles or spawned items (in terrains) are defined?

[Meridian]

I don't know, I didn't request this feature. I don't know how they want to use it.

Whoever wants it needs to give me enough information (and examples) so that I do what they want... or be potentially disappointed by my interpretation.

[Yankes]

This one is for Yankes, I can't comment much.

Yes, different overkill animations should be possible as you can change any frame of unit graphic.
Probably only problem is overwriting "burn" effect that fade to back unit sprite.

[Solarius Scorch]

Thanks for the response, Meridian. I have cleaned the list, here is the revised version:

1. TERRAIN DESTRUCTION BY MELEE
Priority: high
Justification: Lack of this feature has been a pain since melee weapons were added, and nothing has changed here. Half-assed solutions like 1-tile "ranged" weapons are not really satisfactory, and impossibility of using a machete to damage a bush is frustrating.

2. ALTERNATE ANIMATION FOR OVERKILL
Priority: medium
Justification: A purely aesthetic thing, but adding it would really enhance the experience. Ludicrous Gibs are a trope for a reason, and some weapons just aren't the same without it. Plus it seems (to a layman like me) to be relatively easy to add.

3. RESEARCH: FALSE FOR UFOPAEDIA ARTICLES
Priority: low
Justification: Lack of this option causes confusion with some Piratez players and there's no other way of clearing it up easily (without sacrificing some gameplay).
Clarifications: It's an inversion of "requires". With this, the only article displays when you do not have a given research. It would have to be compatible with requires. For example:
* You find a Plasma Pistol. You can immediately research it regardless of any research prerequisites. It will display an article saying "we think it's an alien weapon, blah blah"
* Later you collect enough knowledge to examine the item in full, which gives you full info, and the old article disappears.
So essentially there are two different articles, which never appear at the same time.
One problem I'm not sure how to approach is writing such rulesets for items. Continuing the plasma pistol example, the "early" research/article could not be STR_PLASMA_PISTOL, because it would conflict with the later article, which would also need to be STR_PLASMA_PISTOL, else the article wouldn't work properly. But it can't be some other string, because then the needItem command wouldn't work. I don't have a good solution at the moment.

4. FACILITIES: REQUIRED STAFF (SOLDIERS)
Priority: low
Justification: I think we have all accepted that this wouldn't happen anytime soon. Anyway, it's not my request and I have never really been interested in it personally, so it's hard for me to evaluate its value.

5. (not on the list but requested elsewhere) MID-BATTLE REINFORCEMENTS FOR THE AI
Priority: very high
Justification: I literally have several missions already designed (and some of it even made!) around this concept. Definitely a must have for almost any tactical game which is supposed to cover various scenarios, and OXCE+ as a whole moves X-Com in that area.

6. SUICIDE BOMBERS (new)
Priority: medium
Justification: Enemy units running towards the player and then blowing up is a common thing in games, and it keeps coming up in the OXC community. I consider it useful.


A few comments/clarifications:

(IMO) not worth the effort.
It is a small feature gameplay-wise, but a very large feature (IMO) technically.

I agree. But at this point I consider it a part of the general movement option pack, discussed with Otto. Not the most important part.

I removed this request, because it would be better to keep it separately, in the "special moves" category.

UFO crash/landing sites are limited to one UFO and one xcom craft.

Visually, you can create a craft that looks like two or more craft... see 40k.
Visually, you can create a UFO, which looks like multiple UFOs...
But in the background, there will always be just one of each.

Well, what I really intended is to have multiple buildings per map, spawned with addUFO. But nowadays we can use the Otto's advanced terrain generation instead, with acceptable compromises.

What is this?

I've added more details to the request, based on our recent Discord conversation.

Then don't put it on your list?

I have a soft heart

Anyway, Soldier Transformations now support transforming soldiers into items... so you can make a project that transforms your senior psi operative(s) into resource(s) required to build some advanced Psi facility for example... as requested by Nord.

The initial request from Dioxine was a bit different: soldiers wouldn't be used for construction, but for operation. For example you need to assign someone to a radar (same as assigning scientists to research), else it won't function.
If this is silly, I'll remove it.

I have this from someone:

Not sure if you're trying to protect my privacy, in which case sorry for ruining it... But if you really don't know, then I admit it's mine.

Interesting, thanks.

Wouldn't this run the risk of having units spawn in unreachable/blocked locations, given the random nature of map generation? Would it be possible (or rather practical) to define spawn points manually, akin to how base storage tiles or spawned items (in terrains) are defined?

If you screw up, then it's possible. It's a modder's job to ensure this doesn't happen. On most maps it shouldn't be a problem, as they're open.