[Answered] Reputation counter for faction is it possible?

[wcho035]

Hi, this is not asking for a new feature but to satisfy a curiosity of mine.

This is a question of engine supporting features.

Mr Meridian, could OXCE support a reputation counter for factions? The counter is to count the reputation of a Faction, which it can have favorable and unfavorable attitude toward you, if you shot down ufo or craft belonging to certain factions?

Thanks

[Meridian]

Hi, this is not asking for a new feature but to satisfy a curiosity of mine.
This is a question of engine supporting features.

Then maybe ask using "can", not "could"

Mr Meridian, could OXCE support a reputation counter for factions? The counter is to count the reputation of a Faction, which it can have favorable and unfavorable attitude toward you, if you shot down ufo or craft belonging to certain factions?

It can't, but it could.

[wcho035]

Interesting.. well it is up to you. I am not asking for a feature like this at this stage. I have my current requests on hangers and others more urgent to me.

One day, maybe in a few years when time permits. Perhaps you can experiment on this? This counter could lead to other possibilities.

-Item available to certain factions base on faction liking or hating you.
-Factions willing to trade with you.

This is as far as I go with my imagination. If the feature is there, perhaps others will expand from there. In case I am too ambitious.

Thanks for the answer as always Meridian.

[krautbernd]

Is this really something that's needed for OXCE? Wouldn't this be case of "use/wait for OpenApoc" instead?

[wcho035]

OpenApoc is not ufo. Two different game with two totally different features.

Apoc does not have ocean terrains.

Apoc does not allow landing of craft and use HWP in battles.

Apoc has limited modding resources unlike UFO, in terms of aliens and weapons available.

APOC is limited to a certain number of ufo you can do battle in battlescape.

APOC has real time battle and ufo does not. That APOC plus side.

APOC has less features than UFO 1

You need me to continue?

[krautbernd]

OpenApoc is not ufo. Two different game with two totally different features.

Let's take a look at that, shall we?

Apoc does not have ocean terrains.

Neither does Enemy Unknown. Those are down to terrain definitions.

Apoc does not allow landing of craft and use HWP in battles.

Apoc/Openapoc has large battlefield units (multiworm, megaspawn) - this would be down to unit definitions. Not sure if craft landings can be implemented currently, probably not. Point taken.

Apoc has limited modding resources unlike UFO, in terms of aliens and weapons available.

Currently modding openapoc isn't quite as straight-forward as it is for openxcom, but from what I'Ve been able to dig up and by looking at the definitions I'd wager adding units and modifying items is totally possible, there's even an item mod posted on the openapoc forums.

APOC is limited to a certain number of ufo you can do battle in battlescape.

I'm not sure how high that limit actually is, but that does actually matter when compared to openxcom?

APOC has real time battle and ufo does not. That APOC plus side.

Apoc also has turn-based battles if you want.

APOC has less features than UFO 1

Care to actually do a feature comparison?

You need me to continue?

Please do.

[wcho035]

    Apoc does not have ocean terrains.

"Neither does Enemy Unknown. Those are down to terrain definitions."

Wrong, Mine does.

 "APOC is limited to a certain number of ufo you can do battle in battlescape."

"I'm not sure how high that limit actually is, but that does actually matter when compared to openxcom?"

How many ufo maps does the ufo maps has? From the other mods? How many does apoc has? Count them for me. Can you add extra ufo in any APOC Mod yet? How many years away from apoc?

"Apoc has limited modding resources unlike UFO, in terms of aliens and weapons available."

"Currently modding openapoc isn't quite as straight-forward as it is for openxcom, but from what I'Ve been able to dig up and by looking at the definitions I'd wager adding units and modifying items is totally possible, there's even an item mod posted on the openapoc forums."

And how many years are you going to wait for that to happen? There is a lot more resources available for ufo than APOC right now.

"APOC has less features than UFO 1"

Care to actually do a feature comparison?

Do you have the time to list all of them? By all means.. you do it. I rather spend all my time modding my game.. then to stretch out in a forum comparison. Unfortunately my time is rather limited.

I love APOC too, I have spend endless hours playing it. However, in UFO, I have more ufos which I can add into my mod. Infinite weapons I can add, HWPS.. and crafts. IS that enough to win me over to play UFO again?  Yes. Currently. I don't have the time to wait for APOC or enough resources for it to be available one day like we have now in UFO.

That's a good enough reason for me. There are infinite features a modder like myself can make it more interesting and Meridian, bless him, enable us to have the luxury at making it happen. If such features can be implement why not? Why stop it? I want it and a few other does.  However, these creative features are only there, is because there's no restriction to prevent of one's imagination from flowing or stopped by one's lack of imagination because of cynicism.

If you are keen on APOC, you should stick to APOC modding one day.

As you want me to continue..

-You can't pick up Alien Bodies.
-Megaspawn and other aliens can be added to ufo  with modding, Not limited to APOC alone.
-Terrain battle for UFO are just the same map. No variety at all.

Now I need to get back to my modding. Got a heap of underwater weapons to add tonight. It seems like I have to defend myself for all the topics I put out tonight. Well, if I am hampered by unimaginative cynicism then one could only imagine of how dull a mod is, from those who made them.

[krautbernd]

Wrong, Mine does.

Because they are modded in. What part of "those are down to terrain definitons" is too hard to understand for you?

How many ufo maps does the ufo maps has? From the other mods? How many does apoc has? Count them for me. Can you add extra ufo in any APOC Mod yet? How many years away from apoc?

UFO maps? Do you mean tile sets? I might have misunderstood what you ment. Can you clarify what this is about?

And how many years are you going to wait for that to happen? There is a lot more resources available for ufo than APOC right now.

I have no interest in openapoc tbh, so I won't have to wait for anything. The ruleset definitions openapoc uses aren't going to change, so that's kind of a pointless question. The modability exist - how those mods are accessed/enabled is kind of secondary.

I'd wager that it's simpler to convert the resources and tilesets than to implement advanced reputation/diplomacy features into OXCE, but since I haven't done any modding on openapoc you're probably better off asking somebody who's actually working on that project.

Do you have the time to list all of them? By all means.. you do it. I rather spend all my time modding my game.. then to stretch out in a forum comparison. Unfortunately my time is rather limited.

I'm not the one making that claim - as far as I can tell it's something you simply assert to be so without listing any evidence. It's not my argument - it's yours, and apparently you can't support it.

If you are keen on APOC, you should stick to APOC modding one day.

Excuse me, but what? I'm not the the one requesting features that are native to apoc.

-You can't pick up Alien Bodies.

I honestly can't tell you how easy/difficult this would be to implement.

-Megaspawn and other aliens can be added to ufo  with modding, Not limited to APOC alone.

What is that even about? I never said they were exclusive or unique to apoc. I listed them as examples for 'large' units since you listed missing HWPs. Seeing how openapoc supports large units it stands to reason that HWPs can be implemented.

-Terrain battle for UFO are just the same map. No variety at all.

So Dimension X doesn't exist? Are you saying it's impossible to implement other maps or tilesets?

Now I need to get back to my modding. Got a heap of underwater weapons to add tonight. It seems like I have to defend myself for all the topics I put out tonight. Well, if I am hampered by unimaginative cynicism then one could only imagine of how dull a mod is, from those who made them.

wat

[wcho035]

It seems like we are deviating off topic with this thread. This thread is about UFO1 having a counter for faction reputation. If you want a drawn out comparison on APOC. Start another topic and get someone to compare with you. I don't have the time or the interest. I have read your post history. It seems like you are into this kind of comparison and criticism. There are those who enjoy a good comparison with you. I just don't have the time. Thank you.

[krautbernd]

It seems like we are deviating off topic with this thread. This is feature to do with UFO having a counter for faction reputation. If you want a drawn out comparison on APOC. Start another topic and get someone to compare with you.

Fair enough, but as far as I can tell most requests (mine included) are in-line or at least routed in the base-game mechanics. What you are asking for is feature request for a feature request, i.e. a feature for a faction system which itself isn't currently implemented. Your initial post stated that this is not understood to be feature request, but simply "to satisfy your curiosity". In your follow-up you're asking for your "totally not a feature request" to be considered down the line and be "experimented with". It's kind of obvious that openxcom isn't really the kind of game you're looking for - it's more of an amalgamation of xcom and apoc. This is why I was asking you if it wouldn't make more sense to wait for openapoc to get more mod friendly. You know, instead of having to wait "many years" for this to be implemented in oxce.

I don't have the time or the interest. I have read your post history. It seems like you are into this kind of comparison and criticism. There are those who enjoy a good comparison with you. I just don't have the time. Thank you.

That's kind of a low blow, considering the contributions and the support I've put in to XCF for example.

In return I'd ask you to actually take a look at the ruleset reference and game mechanics before making requests and to be less dishonest in your posts.

[wcho035]

"That's kind of a low blow, considering the contributions and the support I've put in to XCF for example."

If you haven't been utterly aggressive in trying to suffocate the original intend of what I had posted. I wouldn't have been this aggressive in countering what you had posted.

You know the old saying, Karma. I do recognized of your contribution. Your soldier transformation coding is brilliant, I simply love it, but there is something about your aggression which is something else. Sorry to be blunt.. but hey.. honesty tells the story as they say.

As for APOC, do not assume please. I simply like UFO1 because I grew up playing it. There are features in APOC I like that are missing from UFO and vice versa. So why not have the best of both world if I can? UFO1 is the closet candidate. The feature I like most in APOC is the real time battle, at the same time I miss the craft landing and you have soldier coming out from your craft. The latest game, Phoenix Point.. I don't even know where to start of what is missing.

[krautbernd]

If you haven't been utterly aggressive in trying to suffocate the original intend of what I had posted. I wouldn't have been this aggressive in countering what you had posted.

Well, if you hand't been so dishonest about your feature request I wouldn't have pointed you to OpenApoc.

You know the old saying, Karma. I do recognized of your contribution. Your soldier transformation coding is brilliant, I simply love it, but there is something about your aggression which is something else. Sorry to be blunt.. but hey.. honesty tells the story as they say.

Oh wow, the irony.

I have no idea what you're referring to in regards to "[my] soldier transformation coding". There's really nothing brilliant about citing the ruleset reference, and that isn't even remotely related to what I was talking about. Was that supposed to be a backhanded compliment? Because you kind of lost me with that one.

[wcho035]

I thought you were the one whom had contributed to the Soldier Transformation coding in one of the post? If not, hey, I am human and I made mistakes with my reading from the other treads.

Then, I have absolutely no idea by what you mean by  "contributions and the support I've put in to XCF "

You mean helping others in this forum. Well, you can do more, in reducing of your posting then.

As for your "hand't been so dishonest about your feature request"

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

It seems like you are into more of the criticism and comparison. Well, you are entitle to what you post, then about making yourself likable to others.. hey that is a totally different side of the coin.

[krautbernd]

I thought you were the one whom had contributed to the Soldier Transformation coding in one of the post? If not, hey, I am human and I made mistakes with my reading from the other treads.

Then, I have absolutely no idea by what you mean by  "contributions and the support I've put in to XCF "

You mean helping others in this forum. Well, you can do more, in reducing of your posting then.

As for your "hand't been so dishonest about your feature request"

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

It seems like you are into more of the criticism and comparison. Well, you are entitle to what you post, then about making yourself likable to others.. hey that is a totally different side of the coin.

So you haven't actually looked at my post history, or read my posts. Wow. That's disappointing, but not really surprising. Let me help you out on the dishonest part:

Fair enough, but as far as I can tell most requests (mine included) are in-line or at least routed in the base-game mechanics. What you are asking for is feature request for a feature request, i.e. a feature for a faction system which itself isn't currently implemented. Your initial post stated that this is not understood to be feature request, but simply "to satisfy your curiosity". In your follow-up you're asking for your "totally not a feature request" to be considered down the line and be "experimented with". It's kind of obvious that openxcom isn't really the kind of game you're looking for - it's more of an amalgamation of xcom and apoc. This is why I was asking you if it wouldn't make more sense to wait for openapoc to get more mod friendly. You know, instead of having to wait "many years" for this to be implemented in oxce.

It's kind of knack of yours, judging by your post history. "Yeah, no biggie, I'm not actually requesting this. I'm humble. But maybe...think about it. Have a try. Experiment (Yeah, right, without actually implementing the feature). Maybe there are others who're interested in something like that. It just needs to gather momentum etc."

I'm not interested. I don't think it needs to gather momentum. I think you should either be honest about what you actually want and realize you're piling on feature request after feature request without actually thinking about what might be implementable using existing mechanics.

Sorry, but your behaviour just really rubs me the wrong way, especially when you're (as in the other thread) asking for something to be implemented that you can't even clearly define. Let's leave it at that.

[wcho035]

"So you haven't actually looked at my post history, or read my posts. Wow. That's disappointing, but not really surprising. Let me help you out on the dishonest part"

Ah the usual assumption. You over posting on unnecessary things, over thinking and then get confused in the process. Over complicating on unnecessary things. Thinking it is something that it is not.

"It's kind of knack of yours, judging by your post history. "Yeah, no biggie, I'm not actually requesting this. I'm humble. But maybe...think about it. Have a try. Experiment (Yeah, right, without actually implementing the feature). Maybe there are others who're interested in something like that. It just needs to gather momentum etc." "

The interesting part is, you believe you won something. Well, I let you believe that you did.

I ask in this topic from Meridian what can be done and what can't. This dishonesty, is something you believe and assume is there.  Something your imagination come up with, which is something I don't really care about.  You over complicated the whole matter. It was a simple request.. can a faction reputation counter be done. Just like in the other topic, you over complicated for something so simple.

"Sorry, but your behaviour just really rubs me the wrong way, especially when you're (as in the other thread) asking for something to be implemented that you can't even clearly define. Let's leave it at that."

Nope, it is you are aggressive and you assume something. Then again, anything in writing can be confused  for something. Having an emotional mind and wanting to win, can blind people at best.

Relax, have a good night sleep. Next time, let others have the freedom to propose their ideas before you try to push it aside. We are entitled the freedom to propose ideas. Its the freedom of speech.