Author Topic: [DONE] [Feedback] [Documentation] Hunter-killer  (Read 26292 times)

Offline Meridian

  • Global Moderator
  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 5950
  • Aaand we're back!
    • View Profile
    • My Wiki
Re: Hunter-killer
« Reply #15 on: September 23, 2017, 10:13:45 am »
Can you make it allow multiple attack modes? For instance:

UFO attacks, and you have standard and aggressive attack modes available. It defaults to standard, wherein it gives the UFO the weapons priority and automatically engages at the UFO's weapon range. If that's too far away for you, you can select aggressive and get in closer.

I allowed only aggressive so that you cannot "cheat" using superior weapon range.
If the UFO was able to attack you in the first place, it's quicker than you and is able to get to you no matter what "you want"... the battle goes as "they want".

If it helps, I could make them come only into their maximum weapon range to make it even harder for xcom...

* UFO escape timer begins when UFO enters X-Com weapons range. If it's faster than your ship you can't flee, but you might be able to scare it off.

There is no escape timer.. hunter killer attacks you, not vice versa.

Hunter killer starts escaping only if it is badly hurt (compared to you).
If it is badly hurt, but you are also badly hurt, it will risk it and try to kill you anyway.
Some hunter killers can even be marked as kamikaze and will never retreat from battle (they will also not be shot down at 50% of health, they will just go down to 0% same as xcom and be destroyed).

Also, once again, if the UFO was able to attack you, it's faster than you.

* All UFOs (except any that have no weapon) can attack X-Com craft but will be slow to respond, mostly they attack patrolling ships and anything spending too much time near them.

Currently it's 10 minutes response time... I think that's not too slow and not too quick either.

* When you engage a UFO it begins its escape timer, but sometimes when the timer ends it opts to engage aggressively instead of escape. If it does this, it may run closer to your interceptor and put it in danger.

There is no escape timer. Kamikaze mode will be available.

* You always have full control of the battle when your ship is faster. When yours and their ship are the same speed, neither party can flee unless the other is also trying to flee. If the UFO's run timer ends and it chooses to flee, it will silently remain in flee mode until combat ends or you opt to disengage. Once it begins trying to flee, you can no longer close to a shorter range with it than where you already are.

When your ship is faster, you don't get attacked.
Maybe only if you patrol/are stationary... but even if I allowed disengage then, the UFO would just attack again one milliseconds later... so no point doing that.

* Maybe this is getting too complicated but I think it would be fun to use yours and the opponent's speeds together to determine how fast the craft approach each other. When your craft and the UFO are in mutual agreement to close each other, you might find yourself getting up close very rapidly. On the other hand, if you engage a UFO going almost as fast as your interceptor and the UFO is in travel mode (not engaging or fleeing), then you'll close the gap very slowly, possibly buying more time for its timer to finish and give it control of the battle.

In OXCE+ approach speed is determined by acceleration stat (which is unused in vanilla).

One idea I had related to this is to add a new flag to the ufos in the waves field for each alienMission entry, called "intercept" or something. If set to true then this UFO will attack XCom craft upon detection. That way, you could determine some UFOs to act as escorts while the other ones carry their mission.

Yes, makes sense.
Will be added.

Default will be true and you can set it to false.
Default true is better than false in my opinion, since the UFO has to pass a percentage test first anyway, so it's still backwards-compatible with vanilla and (probably) will be less ruleset to write for the modder.

This brings another issue which is how many UFOs/XCom craft will be allowed in multi-craft engagements because of the UI but I think Stoddard had already come up with something on his work

In my version, when the aliens are attacking, it's limited to one on one only (minimize button is not allowed... and geoscape timer is stopped during dogfights, so other UFOs can't get to you).
It would be probably possible to make UFOs "smarter" and allow them to minimize dogfights until their colleagues arrive... but I think one on one is already tough enough, no?

Just to clarify, it will not be possible to wait and attack one UFO with multiple interceptors... it's UFOs that are attacking you, not vice versa, so you don't get to say what's gonna happen.

Summary:
- most likely 1:1
- 1 xcom vs multiple UFO would be doable I guess (not easy)
- multiple xcom vs 1 UFO.... no (unless we somehow will be able to "synch" craft to fly in fixed formation = occupy exactly the same spot on the geoscape)
- multiple xcom vs multiple UFO... nope
« Last Edit: September 23, 2017, 10:56:18 am by Meridian »

Offline Solarius Scorch

  • Global Moderator
  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 9304
  • WE MUST DISSENT
    • View Profile
    • Nocturmal Productions modding studio website
Re: Hunter-killer
« Reply #16 on: September 23, 2017, 01:56:06 pm »
Also, I think it may be a good idea to add an option of X-Com vessels escorting each other. The already mentioned multiple launch from one base (with all ships matching the slowest craft's speed) is one thing, but I would also like to be able to make formations with crafts from different bases.

Basically, it would mean adding other X-Com planes as valid flight destinations (reach and follow).

Offline BTAxis

  • Colonel
  • ****
  • Posts: 130
    • View Profile
Re: Hunter-killer
« Reply #17 on: September 23, 2017, 02:35:27 pm »
When your ship is faster, you don't get attacked.
Maybe only if you patrol/are stationary... but even if I allowed disengage then, the UFO would just attack again one milliseconds later... so no point doing that.

Not if, upon fleeing, the X-COM craft is automatically set to return to base. Possibly with no option to redirect until it gets there, as per post-mission return-to-base. The UFO shouldn't be able to re-engage then.

Offline The Reaver of Darkness

  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 1313
    • View Profile
Re: Hunter-killer
« Reply #18 on: September 23, 2017, 03:22:47 pm »
Not if, upon fleeing, the X-COM craft is automatically set to return to base.
That's what I was thinking.


Possibly with no option to redirect until it gets there, as per post-mission return-to-base. The UFO shouldn't be able to re-engage then.
No, you should be able to turn it around immediately. You're the faster craft. If you patrol it again and it gets caught immediately, that's your own fault.

Offline Meridian

  • Global Moderator
  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 5950
  • Aaand we're back!
    • View Profile
    • My Wiki
Re: Hunter-killer
« Reply #19 on: September 23, 2017, 03:29:40 pm »
UFOs move before xcom moves in openxcom... they would reengage before xcom makes a first step towards the base.

Offline Nord

  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 1098
  • The Gate will open... someday.
    • View Profile
Re: Hunter-killer
« Reply #20 on: September 23, 2017, 03:42:21 pm »
Ok, of all people giving suggestions, so here is mine:
1. Flee is not an option if UFO is really hunter-killer (and their speed is better). Because it is too easy. :) I mean, common UFO will not engage any airplane (and your crafts is mostly airplanes). So, if it hunts strightly XCOM, it will not release their prey. As i see it - if you launched your unprotected ranger - it is your fault (here maybe needed to be added attractivity parameter of different crafts, so hunter will attack not ranger, but interceptor, if see both in range.)
2. Maybe allow cautious/normal attack and retreat buttons if your craft is faster. (Can be intercepted on patrol or on countercourse, as we do with ufos). Also dont forget that ufo can be slowed by tractor beam from PirateZ.
3. Most complicate - crashed craft tactical mission: hunter knocks you down, then land near to finish your crew. Maybe not any hunter. And maybe not knock down, but force to land.
4. Or maybe not just force to land, but even an option to get landed (as a button).
Upd.:
5. maybe land to lose the craft but save the crew.
« Last Edit: September 23, 2017, 03:44:20 pm by Nord »

Offline Solarius Scorch

  • Global Moderator
  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 9304
  • WE MUST DISSENT
    • View Profile
    • Nocturmal Productions modding studio website
Re: Hunter-killer
« Reply #21 on: September 23, 2017, 04:14:12 pm »
3. Most complicate - crashed craft tactical mission: hunter knocks you down, then land near to finish your crew. Maybe not any hunter. And maybe not knock down, but force to land.
4. Or maybe not just force to land, but even an option to get landed (as a button).
Upd.:
5. maybe land to lose the craft but save the crew.

This part is quite interesting, but I doubt it would be considered doable... Too complex.

Offline Meridian

  • Global Moderator
  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 5950
  • Aaand we're back!
    • View Profile
    • My Wiki
Re: Hunter-killer
« Reply #22 on: September 23, 2017, 04:31:58 pm »
This part is quite interesting, but I doubt it would be considered doable... Too complex.

It's doable, but I don't want that... the hunter-killers should be a problem for you... not a benefit... that's why I also added option that they fight until they are destroyed and don't crash.
Any ground mission is always a benefit for xcom... you could just endlessly farm any alien base like this...

Offline Solarius Scorch

  • Global Moderator
  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 9304
  • WE MUST DISSENT
    • View Profile
    • Nocturmal Productions modding studio website
Re: Hunter-killer
« Reply #23 on: September 23, 2017, 04:48:53 pm »
It's doable, but I don't want that... the hunter-killers should be a problem for you... not a benefit... that's why I also added option that they fight until they are destroyed and don't crash.
Any ground mission is always a benefit for xcom... you could just endlessly farm any alien base like this...

Yeah, you are right - I forgot to mention I wouldn't want a ground battle, but losing a craft to save your crew would be OK.

Offline Meridian

  • Global Moderator
  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 5950
  • Aaand we're back!
    • View Profile
    • My Wiki
Re: Hunter-killer
« Reply #24 on: September 23, 2017, 05:11:53 pm »
Saving the crew somehow is a fair point... many people play xcom as RPG and we don't want to kill their favourite characters, do we... it's not how I play, but I do understand the argument.

If anyone has a good idea how to save the crew that doesn't involve "free bounty" (e.g. ground mission) and involves at least some penalty (e.g. lost craft and cargo? crew travelling 2 days back to base by public transport? :) ), I am listening... a combination of "most realistic" and "least rewarding" solution may get implemented.
« Last Edit: September 23, 2017, 05:13:28 pm by Meridian »

Offline Solarius Scorch

  • Global Moderator
  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 9304
  • WE MUST DISSENT
    • View Profile
    • Nocturmal Productions modding studio website
Re: Hunter-killer
« Reply #25 on: September 23, 2017, 05:55:35 pm »
Saving the crew somehow is a fair point... many people play xcom as RPG and we don't want to kill their favourite characters, do we... it's not how I play, but I do understand the argument.

Losing people in battle is one thing. Losing a whole ship at random, with nothing to do about it, is just really bad design.

It has noting to do with RP-ing. Fuelling such paranoia will only lead to two possible outcomes: either the player will get desensitized to such setbacks (and eventually to the game as such), or they will become increasingly fearful of leaving the base. Neither leads to an enjoyable game.

One could say that you should accept such events, as it's war and you should be adult about it. Yeah, but also it's a game, not real life. It means the choices are limited. You can't call the president to ask for escorts. You only have the tools that the game game gives you. And if these tools become unreliable, you're out of options.

I understand all this can be taken as an argument against the entire idea, but it's not; I'm as interested in it as your next person. But I think it can use some additional safety measures.

If anyone has a good idea how to save the crew that doesn't involve "free bounty" (e.g. ground mission) and involves at least some penalty (e.g. lost craft and cargo? crew travelling 2 days back to base by public transport? :) ), I am listening... a combination of "most realistic" and "least rewarding" solution may get implemented.

I guess a combination of the following would be a good solution, or at least a good start:

  • Percentage chance of injuries and/or death.
  • Delay in return. Bonus points if the "transfer" time is hidden, so you never know if the person was saved or not.
  • Percentage chance of losing each item on board.

Ideally all these should be settable by craft - a Lightning should be safer to crash-land than an Interceptor.

Offline Meridian

  • Global Moderator
  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 5950
  • Aaand we're back!
    • View Profile
    • My Wiki
Re: Hunter-killer
« Reply #26 on: September 23, 2017, 06:16:55 pm »
Losing people in battle is one thing. Losing a whole ship at random, with nothing to do about it, is just really bad design.

But hunter-killers are clearly identifiable (by radar circle around them), same for alien bases which can launch them... so you CAN do something about it... avoid them.
Or, if you can't avoid them for some reason, accompany each transport with an interceptor... a good modder will balance it so these CAN be shot down, unless the theme of the mod is about explicitly avoiding them (e.g. Terminator mod or Matrix mod).

I don't know about other people's plans, but if I was to add this feature in my mod, maybe 5-10% of all UFOs would be hunter killers and 50% of alien bases (maybe even since a certain game month).
I definitely wouldn't want all UFOs to attack...

With that in mind, losing a full complement of my best soldiers is totally acceptable for me.

But as I said, I understand that people don't want any losses (just look at that guy from few days ago who recruited 424 soldiers, had zero losses and only 1 hour of infirmary time in September)... I'm not going to go against the flow... but I can at least try to make it so that the game doesn't become easier with this feature implemented... I'd rather not implement it at all.

I guess a combination of the following would be a good solution, or at least a good start:

  • Percentage chance of injuries and/or death.
  • Delay in return. Bonus points if the "transfer" time is hidden, so you never know if the person was saved or not.
  • Percentage chance of losing each item on board.

Ideally all these should be settable by craft - a Lightning should be safer to crash-land than an Interceptor.

Sounds plausible, jet fighters can eject and soldiers (probably) have parachutes under the seat or something.

Not sure why transfer time should be hidden, makes zero sense to me... everyone has a cell phone, radio, built-in beeper in the parachute or just anything else that can confirm the person is still alive.

Percentage chance of items being destroyed seems unnecessary, even if it doesn't end up at the bottom of the ocean (or melted during land explosion)... buying new stuff is certainly more economically viable than recovering a couple of knives and rifles half way across the globe.
« Last Edit: September 23, 2017, 06:41:25 pm by Meridian »

Offline Solarius Scorch

  • Global Moderator
  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 9304
  • WE MUST DISSENT
    • View Profile
    • Nocturmal Productions modding studio website
Re: Hunter-killer
« Reply #27 on: September 23, 2017, 07:07:13 pm »
But hunter-killers are clearly identifiable (by radar circle around them), same for alien bases which can launch them... so you CAN do something about it... avoid them.
Or, if you can't avoid them for some reason, accompany each transport with an interceptor... a good modder will balance it so these CAN be shot down, unless the theme of the mod is about explicitly avoiding them (e.g. Terminator mod or Matrix mod).

I don't know about other people's plans, but if I was to add this feature in my mod, maybe 5-10% of all UFOs would be hunter killers and 50% of alien bases (maybe even since a certain game month).
I definitely wouldn't want all UFOs to attack...

With that in mind, losing a full complement of my best soldiers is totally acceptable for me.

These are exactly the safety measures I mentioned. I don't know how it's going to work, what safety measures you have already planned, etc. It could be that this particular issue. But considering it will be used by modders in a variety of ways, I think it's better to give them more tools for balancing.

But as I said, I understand that people don't want any losses (just look at that guy from few days ago who recruited 424 soldiers, had zero losses and only 1 hour of infirmary time in September)... I'm not going to go against the flow... but I can at least try to make it so that the game doesn't become easier with this feature implemented... I'd rather not implement it at all.

Again, this is not a role-playing issue, or at least not more than other features. It's about preventing the game from being a dick.

Sounds plausible, jet fighters can eject and soldiers (probably) have parachutes under the seat or something.

Yeah, not the best example. Then make it a helicopter. ;) One way or another, I think it should vary between transports.

Not sure why transfer time should be hidden, makes zero sense to me... everyone has a cell phone, radio, built-in beeper in the parachute or just anything else that can confirm the person is still alive.

Purely suspense reasons. I absolutely loved this feature in another game. But it's just a cosmetic thing.

Percentage chance of items being destroyed seems unnecessary, even if it doesn't end up at the bottom of the ocean (or melted during land explosion)... buying new stuff is certainly more economically viable than recovering a couple of knives and rifles half way across the globe.

Good point, though kinda harsh. :D

Offline mumble

  • Colonel
  • ****
  • Posts: 335
    • View Profile
Re: Hunter-killer
« Reply #28 on: September 23, 2017, 07:50:31 pm »
I honestly think bigger crafts, particularly like the iron fist, would be interesting to have as an immediate mission in fighting off the attackers. Sure, it might of been shot down, but you could kill the aliens and have survivors, assuming there ARE any.

Possibly even get the iron fist back with an escort, to repair it. Just so a ship being shot down isn't TOO hard a kick in the nuts.

I suppose it could come down to a few factors if a "vehicle defense" happened.

1-size. Really small ships obviously would just end up destroyed
2-crew size. I kinda doubt a single man craft could survive a crash at all. Maybe some of the later fighters, but also, a single man against a crew of mutons is most likely going to be a hopeless endevor. Then again, for piratez, maybe a jetbike could be shot down and a single pirate could fight off a few people...
3- damage scaling. Obviously a helicopter hit with a plasma cannon would not land safely.
4- how many people died in the blast. Roll this against the weapon, the hull armor, and armors of people inside.

I know this would be quiet a chunk of work, but I could see this being an interesting effect for say, attacking an alien base, if you got shot down, and had to retreat before reaching it. Might even bring in new encounter opportunities...

Offline Stoddard

  • Colonel
  • ****
  • Posts: 478
  • in a fey mood
    • View Profile
    • Linux builds & stuff
Re: Hunter-killer
« Reply #29 on: September 24, 2017, 12:10:56 am »
Meridian, this is great.

I pity I wasn't able to code this myself.

Please keep up.