Sheepy

Members
  • Content count

    132
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

23 Excellent

About Sheepy

  • Rank
    Rookie
  1. No travel time would explain why Xeno arrives faster than any local forces - even right in a military camp - and can intercept the aliens before they assassinate that VIP. "It gives us an excuse to add unique mission conditions" - PO "Potentially it could also be used to travel to alien planets" - PO "We can make a translocator much better at transporting biological matter than metal (for) a much tighter limit on equipment loads relative to (body weights)." - Jan 26 The turn based geoscape may not make it through and X-2 may fallback to a realtime globe, and adding dropship complicate things. Translocator works equally well in either system Loot recovery can be done by a clean up team (more chance for the operation division to shine). If we are using translocator this should be pretty minor. Baby wakes up, have to stop here. You think any of the EM Drive theories is holding water? I don't, really. The thrust is true, though. Independently verified by multiple countries, which is pretty good science nowadays when the norm is unverifiable. I guess I wasn't very clear with my last post. When I throw EM grenade that shocks organic units, again and again (and see them give off pretty blue lights!), why should I care that some theory does not hold water? Oh and beware of that ufo reactor, soldiers and pilots. It puts off 9 times as many energy (assuming 100% conversion) as required to lift a UFO and make it fly at fighter speed, in form of deadly radiation. I won't guess why teleportation seem to put you off much more than violation of known physics. We have different scales, and I accept it as a gut reaction and something that should be considered for the system.
  2. Version 0.9 This version should fix the predator spirit, and comes with a good selection of 40mm grenades. Due to system limitation, the grenade launcher will be armed with rocket by default, and can be armed with rockets in base. Fortunately, the soldiers are smart enough to replace any wrong loadouts with normal 40mm grenades, so it won't break the game. And after missing the pump from a pump action gun (I didn't know what pump action mean! Now I know.), the next mistake seems to be that the 40mm grenades are all grenade and no cartridge. In the past few days I have been wondering why 40x53mm looks so long and slim, unlike the name. I guess I won't redraw them now, just use some imagination. The original plan of 40mm flare and flashbang has to be bagged, again because of system limitation. For flashbang, suppression seems to be weapon dependent, not ammo. For flare, it simply doesn't work and I'll try to file an issue. During some light test, I find that the 3x3 area is a bit low and cannot reliably destroy cover at mid range. So I slightly increased the radius and accuracy. Reload cost is also slightly decreased since I didn't take into account the belt / backpack cost. Switching ammo is still a pain, and I don't think I want to reduce the reload cost to zero, so it does not turn out to be as versatile as I hoped. But it is still a fun weapon. Let's see how imba (or useless) the instant grenade turns out to be.
  3. Realtime with pause is not a form of turn based. It gives you time to think, like turn based, but this is where the similarity ends. Not saying TB is bad by itself. e.g. Micromanaged is common in either system, with different foci. But switching side is a big and rare change - see Apocalypse, Interceptor, and Enforcer. Are they good game? Not bad on their own, if you ask me, but fans hate them and they failed to attract new fans. (Interceptor is noteworthy because it keeps all the "essential elements" of X-COM - build base, research loot, make guns, p0wn enemy, get fund, repeat - at a time when space fighter sim is the trend, but fans still left en masse.) @Dranak Yes, I considered (and wrote down) that as an option. A single R&D queue with no team penalty seems to fit the streamline idea better as explained.
  4. Yes electric discharge can stun or even kill people. No EMP blast is not electric discharge. Even the massive EMP from a nuclear blast will not stun you (the blast wave and the radiation may) the way a taser, socket, or lightning does. Yes graviton if exist should carry some kind of very very very weak forces - the weakest of all four forces and not by a few order of magnitude. No it is a force carrier not a force manipulator/container. No we don't use gravity (graviton) to contain hot plasma. And no graviton won't shield the plasma from the atmosphere. "Plasma is short-range stuff" indeed. Imagine repeating these chain of thoughts (simplified) on every three sentences (by my gut feeling) of each article in the xenopedia. Yes there is a scale. Your scale and mine seem to be based on considerably different resolutions of the fundamental law of physics. Which I accept. I think your reaction on the translocator is valuable, as it is my opinion that yours reflects the gut feelings of the average players much more accurately, and their money is worth a lot more than my individual money. Just explaining, by invitation, my scale and why I settled to binary in this regards.
  5. Yes, I saw one or two complains on UI consistency. HUD shows health for interceptor but damage for UFO, weapon stat only visible in one small part of the game (that I also had difficulty finding at first too), bullet size etc. But they are not common. (Unless you count accuracy and LoS/LoF as same consistency problems.) Although a few players think X-1 is not a worthy successor, they are mostly vague. I can't remember any concrete complains on auto upgrade or auto sell. What I mean by dull is lack of variations. For example, "dull graphics" is me summarising comments that the palette is bland, that view angle is static, that battlefield lacks animations, that simplistic air combat display, that flat globe, and of course that 2D is dull. (I count dull enemy design into dull enemies.) And "gameplay is dull" is my summerisation of optimal base placement, optimal strategy, tactic (air and ground) stays the same throughout the game, equipments and their options is boring. Keep in mind that these comments are in comparison with XCOM 2 and as Chris said should be taken with a pinch of salt.
  6. If I worry about alien tech breaking physical laws I'd have given up X-1 when I was translating its xenopedia. Rotating barrels cause recoil? Graviton is the silver bullet of plasma gun? That chemical bond battery we put in guns actually pumps out gamma rays and capturing that would increase efficiency by an order of magnitude? An EM grenade that stun organics? I don't know. May be Xenonauts solders are actually cybrogs. That would explain the stun damage. For the health of me, my computer, and my baby boy, yes I just accept alien tech and deviations as magic and I judge them by their game mechanisms.
  7. Good idea Solver. I just combed the first few pages of XCOM 2 forum's search result on Steam, and get a slightly different picture. Xenonauts is hardcore, a true successor of the classic x-com. Xenonauts is similiar with new XCOM, but they caters to different market. Most veterans, but not all, praise Xenonauts for its balance and depth. Because of the simplistic strategic layer in XCOM 2, X-1's strategic layer got some good cheers. I don't see them talking about X-1's streamlines much. Or the air combat, perhaps because there's no air combat in XCOM 2. When they do discuss them, they are pretty positive. Xenonauts looked promising. I noticed that in XCOM EU/EW's old discussions, the players were more forgiving of the then unfinished Xenonauts. By the time of XCOM 2, more players are criticising its weaker designs. 2D graphics. Fixed perspective. Air superiority ruins the game. Lack of mods. Bugs. Complicated cover and reflex. (But they like the sturdy covers instead of the flimsy walls in XCOM 2.) It doesn't help Xenonauts that XCOM 2 improved many shortcomings of XCOM EU/EW, which makes it a pretty good game. But many players who have also played Xeno still like the tactical and strategic challenges of X-1. Including freedom of inventory. Xenonauts is dull. Graphic is dull, Mission is dull, Weapon is dull, Enemy is dull, Soldier is dull, Gameplay is dull. If you want to stop the Xeno propaganda, these are some of the best points that fans can't refute, esp. in comparison with XCOM 2. Dull in both breath and depth. X-1 soldiers, for example, not only does not have customisable options, they are also disposable: a new recruit can shot as many bullets as veterans, and is not much more vulnerable when the veterans die from one shot more often than not. 2D graphic is putting players off. Many artists complain about this, but reality is games are for gamers, not for artists or game designers. So... good job in switching to 3D. And I'll skip the usual dramas. Psi or no psi. Inability to hit anything. TU micromanamgement. etc. Here are some of the longer discussions: http://steamcommunity.com/app/268500/discussions/0/412448158142638115/ http://steamcommunity.com/app/268500/discussions/0/523897277916713512/ http://steamcommunity.com/app/268500/discussions/0/523897277911953111/ One of the commenter noted that even XCOM EU had better review % than X-1, so I went to look at the most helpful post release -ve feedbacks... and see another picture. Camping is the biggest cause of negative reviews. As you can expect in negative reviews, many things are being criticised, from story to music. The recurring / strong feeling ones seem to be lack of animations, bland graphic, line of sight / fire (i.e. alien snipe you and you can't shot back), limited sight, low accuracy, grenade, psi attack, cascading morale disaster, boring air combat (funny how this is the opposite of xcom 2 discussions), developer did not listen to feedback, or save / load bugs (that is still hitting me in v1.65). But the single biggest complain is camping. There are many issues that amplify the problem: flimsy soldier, bullet sponge, non-obvious reaction fire formula (more than one commenter think it is random), dread aura etc. Regardless of the number of problems and examples cited, camping is a big frustrating experience that compels some players to write beefy negative comments. Which is pretty interesting because I can't remember seeing this come up in XCOM 2 forum - they pointed out quite a few frustrations, but not camping. This make me suspect that if they like XCOM 2 and they try X-1 and hate it, they don't go very far in the game. In other words, I guess a they think X-1 is dull / repetitive / tedious and give up before they reach the most frustrating part.
  8. Don't worry. X-2 seems to be trying very hard to avoid indirect damage weapons. Chris has mentioned on multiple occasions that he wants to avoid weapon that does not put soldier in direct risk, including the exclusion of arcing grenade because they can go over walls. Blaster launcher is totally out of question.
  9. I initially think the "handle events in the order you click them" is a good option for a turn based geoscape, by creating sub-turns that can partially simulate real time. But the devil is in the details. The more I imagine how it can work the more problems I see, so yeah I still think it is best to keep the TB globe simple. And I realised a new problem of a turn based geosacpe: the number of scientists does not matter as much as in a real time globe. In a real time globe, you can add a staff to a team of 10, and boost research/production time by roughly 10%. A 60 hours job becomes roughly 54 hours. But in a turn based globe, you lost granularity. The task won't finish a turn earlier (<= 48 hours) unless you add 3 staff. Less is a waste, More is a waste. It can be solved by carrying the excess over to next turn, which may result in a research or production that can be immediately finished with the excess. Or, if no carry over, this creates a civilization like micromanagement where you'll want to monitor and adjust the staff assignments on a turn by turn bias. Or we remove the penalty caused by multiple staff on same project and have a single R&D queue. Not a deal breaker, but it seems to be another complications and cons against turn based globe.
  10. Human did have a March 20 transport in cold war - the Saturn V rocket. I still think an alien translocator is not much more unbelievable than an alien dropship, and many of its lore benefits and gameplay possibilities are otherwise hard to accomplish. Like other proposals, guess we'll need to try it and see how it turns out.
  11. Solver has confirmed that this is a limitation of the system, because strings is managed by the engine. Thanks for the time.
  12. Thanks for the answer, @Solver. I'd like to note that translators can safely combine mods that add strings into one package; only mod that replaces strings need to be stand alone.
  13. This is the tank thread. I want to mean that lore benefit is some of the intentions - the four Lore Benefits outlined by Chris. You can disagree about the vision, but it's best left for the translocator thread.
  14. Please have multiple endings. Let me help. Even if we don't have multiple end game, we can have multiple endings.
  15. Yes. The alien may realise that laser and plasma is not as effective on Earth as in space, and arm themselves with M1919 and RPG instead which make them more dangerous. Love that. I don't think any x-com clones tried this delightful twist. After human upgrades to toxic bullets type C, the alien found a big stockpile of nerve agent in a certain country, which they are immune to. Endgame: Operation Fresh Air!