Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 03/01/2020 in all areas

  1. 4 points
    Closed Beta Build V12 has now been released on Steam and GOG. Note that this build is only available on our Experimental branch so you'll need to switch over to get this update (instructions on how to do that here). This build expands on the new MARS vehicle, and formalises the Orbital Bombardment and Signal Uplink mechanics we added in the last build into proper systems. Annoyingly, several new bits of content were close to being complete but didn't quite make it into the build - aerial terror sites, the new armour / penetration mechanics, and a new early-game escort UFO. Instead, they'll be coming in the next build. After this release and the various hotfixes we'll need to put out for it, we're going to take a bit of time to fix some backend stuff that's been causing us problems for a while, and perhaps also add the final Geoscape mechanics still required before we can call the Geoscape feature complete. This is quite a bit of stuff to get through, so it might be a month or so until the next update - but I think it's going to be a cool one, as there's also some new art incoming too. More about that in a proper developer update though! Key Changes: Relations becomes Panic: to make things easier to understand, each region now has a Panic score instead of a Relations score. This changes very little except a region is lost when Panic reaches 100, so any effects that reduced Relations (e.g. Orbital Bombardment and UFO activity) now increase Panic instead. Orbital Bombardment Notification: you now get a notification when the aliens destroy a city from orbit. Setting this system up also involved adding cities to the Geoscape and giving them all a population (and priority score for how likely the aliens are to blow them up). Signal Uplinks: these are now proper Geoscape objects rather than hacked-together Strategic Operations. You no longer need to assign a soldier to them to complete the mission, and the costs and effects are shown more clearly. You have an Uplink Capacity which controls how many uplinks you can have operational at once; there is a new base building called the Comms Room which increases this. In the next major build aliens will be able to attack and destroy these signal uplinks, so it's a bad idea to construct them in areas that your interceptors cannot cover! MARS / ARES tech tree: the MARS support vehicle we added in V11 has undergone some changes and now has a tech tree associated with it. Note that most of these changes are experimental so they're not yet reflected in the artwork of the game - it's all still pretty placeholder! The ARES becomes available in the mid-game. This is a small hovertank (currently represented by the X1 Hyperion) that is slightly less tough than the MARS, but has better Accuracy and more TUs. The MARS and ARES now recieve armour upgrades whenever your aircraft get armour upgrades, meaning they get tougher as the game goes on. Both the MARS and ARES have an optional armour module that fits extra armour plating, boosting their HP but reducing their TU (this is independent from the researchable armour upgrades). You can therefore choose whether you want your vehicle to act more like a scout or a tank. Vehicles now have a Primary and a Secondary slot, but no Belt. Vehicles can no longer equip infantry weapons, and must choose a Primary and Secondary from the following list: Primary: HMG: this is a stronger version of the infantry LMG. Cannon: a powerful weapon with a small blast area and decent ammo capacity. Rocket Launcher: fires powerful rockets with a large blast area, but has limited ammo capacity. Secondary: SMG: this is a 100-round version of the infantry SMG, designed to be a backup weapon if the primary runs out of ammo or is inappropriate for the situation. Smoke Launcher: this is a 4-shot grenade launcher that can only fire defensive smoke rounds. Rangefinder: this is not a weapon that can be used in combat, but it boosts the Accuracy of the vehicle by +10. You are now limited to one vehicle in the starting dropship, and the advanced dropship can carry two. Strategy: Bases now have a "radar tracking" value, which is larger than the "radar detection" value. What this means is that a detected UFO can be tracked for some distance beyond detection range, preventing the detection alert spam that could occur when a UFO was flying in and out of a base's detection range. You can now get your hands on the Tactical Visor armour module by completing the Alien Electronics research. Added proper map co-ordinates to the bottom right of the Geoscape screen. The "pop-up" text on the Geoscape (e.g. region names, "construct new base" text, etc) now appears in a set location at the bottom of the map. The cost of building a new base is now displayed when the construct new base mode is active. Tooltips can no longer get stuck to your mouse cursor. Repeatedly clicking the Funding Report button no longer queues up lots of copies of the same pop-up panel. Exosuit now has some armour modules, although there's no art for them yet because we're still painting up the final Exosuit design. Kickstarter soldiers should now be fully set up and any soldier generated by the game has a 10% chance of being picked from the custom soldier pool. Soldier hair should now work properly with helmets (this turned out to be a lot more work than you'd expect!) The names of save games should be slightly easier to read now, and ground combat save files now print the turn number in their file name. There's been quite a few performance improvements on the strategy layer. The Exosuit now boosts your soldiers TU by 12. Equipping the heavy variant removes this bonus, but provides extra armour and boosts your soldiers' Strength to 100 instead. Countries now start at 20 or 30 Panic, rather than at 50. Ground Combat: The MARS should now be able to crush vaultable objects; previously the vault logic was taking precedence (and as vehicles can't vault, it was preventing the MARS from driving through fences). In an alien base, if you clear the Command Room of aliens and have one of your own units present, all remaining aliens on the map will be revealed at the end of the turn. As always, please let us know if you encounter any issues with the build by posting in our bug reporting sub-forums and we'll do our best to patch the issues out!
  2. 3 points
    Sorry, yeah. I guess I'll finally comment on that thread given you've asked me about four times now! Yeah, it sort of depends what you want to achieve with those missions; most of them would work rather well in XCOM where it's a sequence of missions that really bear no relation to the actual strategic situation or the in-game world but they don't necessarily logically fit within the structures of Xenonauts 2 so well. In fact, XCOM2 has a much better setup from a lore perspective because the aliens represent an occupying police state so it makes sense that XCOM are rescuing prisoners and all that. To give an example of what I mean, the ideas "capture alien leader", "assassinate alien leader", "clear command post of all aliens" are basically all descriptions of an alien base assault mission, right? Whether you're choosing to capture or kill the alien leadership is something that is down to the player's strategic situation - something that I'd consider a strength of the game in that you get to choose how to handle a mission rather than having to jump through specific hoops. If I look at the list from a mechanical point of view, the ideas fundamentally boil down to: Defend something ("Defend a landmark" / "Defend supplies") Protect VIP ("Escort VIP to exfiltration area" / "Rescue downed pilot" / "Free prisoners" / "Rescue local soldiers under attack by aliens" / "Rescue hostage") Destroy / reach something ("Destroy alien transmission beacon" / "Activate missile site via panel in control room" / "Retrieve information local agents have compiled about aliens" / "Destroy alien mind-control device causing humans to fight you") I guess the tricky thing is to think of ways that many of these things can get into the game. The defence missions seem the easiest candidates; adding some form of non-base defence mission is an idea I've been kicking around for a while and may well make it into X2 before release. As you say, it doesn't really require new mechanics or assets to add them in. But if you take a mission like "destroy alien transmission beacon", you've got to ask yourself how it would be meaningfully different from any other kind of mission. In practice, isn't it going to involve the player just marching through a map and killing all the aliens like they would a standard terror site? It only really becomes something new and interesting if, for example, the aliens have unlimited reinforcements and the player is actively encouraged to focus on the objectives rather than just wiping out the aliens. But then where do those unlimited alien reinforcements come from, and why don't they appear in other missions, etc? It'd be difficult to explain within the context of the game lore. So there's potentially a few ideas there but the key thing is to focus on how the missions would play differently, otherwise the different types of mission wouldn't feel much more different in gameplay terms than fighting a Terror Mission on a American Town map is compared to fighting a Terror Mission on a Soviet Town map. It'd just be the same mechanics with a slightly different flavour on top.
  3. 3 points
    You're entitled to your opinion, but the data that I have and you don't (i.e. Steam wishlists) suggests that the game isn't actually about to die despite the lack of promotion the game is getting beyond our forums and our Kickstarter, whatever the Steam forums and videos might tell you. The focus at the moment is figuring out exactly what the final shape of the game is going to be. We already unveiled one vision for the game during our Kickstarter and had to walk it all back over the past 18 months because it didn't work anywhere near as well as we planned; I'm not going to do that a second time. It's much easier to sell people on a game when there's a clear set of features and a roadmap to release, and to have we need to finish testing our ideas. Sure, non beta-testers might be annoyed at the lack of communication right now but I'd be very surprised if those people are going to tune out when we start showing off all our new features and artwork just because we've gone a bit quiet since our Kickstarter a little under two years ago. We're a small team and it doesn't make sense for us to waste time on marketing when there's nothing for people to buy; we'll start pushing things on the marketing front once we announce our Early Access launch. Until then our time is best spent on the game itself.
  4. 2 points
    On V11.3 (and all the other builds): I have gotten really tired of having to open everyone's backpack during a battle because I forgot who has the explosive or the Alien Taser. Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but if not, would it be possible to be able to cycle through all the backpacks? Currently, using TAB leaves only the first backpack opened, visible on the screen, while the player cycles through the troops.
  5. 2 points
    I never got to see your post due to the good work of our resident moderator, but I understand that it wasn't very polite. If that happens again I'll just ban your account and delete all your posts. To be clear, during the development of Xenonauts 1 you demanded in the name of realism that we made a game where transport aircraft did not have global range (and thus for much of the game players were entirely unable to respond to terror sites or other ground missions that did not occur near your initial base) and where interceptor aircraft were both very expensive and were not replaced if shot down (which meant losing a single advanced interceptor could end an entire campaign). Basically, you wanted me to utterly destroy the game balance in the name of realism. When you didn't get what you wanted you spent several months complaining bitterly on our forums and personally insulting me about it, wrote an extremely negative steam review for the game on release where you deliberately lied about what features were / were not in the game to try and destroy our launch sales, came back on our forums again to tell me not to make a sequel and insult me some more ... and then you turn up and once again start complaining about the exact same thing and then throw a massive tantrum when I don't take you seriously? To be completely honest I sort of understand why the first Xenonauts annoyed you so much (even if the scale of your reaction was ridiculous), because you bought the game expecting one thing and it turned out to be something else. I don't regret my choices, but I do empathise with your situation and if I were to do things again I'd probably have offered you a refund on the game once you decided you didn't want it any more. That said, it's probably best for both of us if you don't make the same mistake a second time. This clearly isn't a game you're ever going to enjoy, and me listening to the views of someone who wants the game to be something it was never intended to be doesn't make any sense either, so I don't see how either of us gain anything from you posting here.
  6. 2 points
    A good game spreads more by word of mouth really. Not many knew about xen1 when it came out, but it must have done well enough by definition for chris and the team to produce a sequel, otherwise why bother? It's still a great game to play, and always will be, just as the original UFO: Enemy Unknown from Microprose was. Heck, I still even play Rebelstar on a Spectrum Emulator from time-to-time. Or even Lazer Squad. Classics of the past. One bolt from the blue I remember (because it nearly wrecked the 3rd year of my degree) was the Nintendo 64's Goldeneye, which I always say was better than the film. Compared to 1st person shooters from today it's very choppy, but it was dripping with atmosphere and quality. It just came out of nowhere to be one of the top games on the N64. Finally, remember that this game is really a labour of love. Chris personally loves this type of game and loved UFO (which is why Xen was produced). It's in his interest to make sure its a great game because he will probably be playing it himself! Programmers of Big companies cannot put this kind of love into the kind of corporate games they make simply because they aren't really 'engaged' as much in what they are producing. The goal for most of them is just a paycheck at the end of the day. Turn-based strategy is not really catered for these days in comparison to other types of games, yet there is definitely a market for them - as shown by xen1. This is why xen2 is so important.
  7. 2 points
    Yeah, that was the problem. It'll be fixed in the hotfix we're pushing out on Monday.
  8. 1 point
    I think we can both see what he's getting at Chris. That's a very well thought out (and practical) response though.
  9. 1 point
    The War of the Worlds strategy/hybrid RTS have the kind of sensation that you want to invoke, Ninothree. Scotland and the North are hammered in the first few strategic turns by Martian landings. The human defenders don't have the manpower or industrial base to fight back, so you have surrender the North and draw a defensive line in the Midlands, bunkering down and fending off Martian forays until you've built up a sizable industrial and technical base and can lead an invasion into Martian held lands. This is quite cleverly done - when playing as the Martians, the Martian landings ensure that you grab a good sized portion of the map immediately, but your units land without any kind of support infrastructure AT ALL, so you can make a few quick grabs in the first 2 or 3 turns, but by then you have so many units without support you spend all your time nursing sick units until the infrastructure to support them is there.
  10. 1 point
    So much to my annoyance I wrote a long answer in this thread yesterday and then lost it all when my PC decided to restart. Thanks for the replies all, we'll hopefully be bringing in some changes to the grenades for V13. I won't bother writing them all out again but some useful thoughts and suggestions in this post. I'm going to try and make some changes to the HEVY for the hotfix build due on Tuesday as well - making it direct fire, increasing the accuracy and decreasing the blast radius.
  11. 1 point
    Thanks. That purple guy is the missing model error placeholder so I'll just need to check the setup of the MARS to get this fixed up!
  12. 1 point
    It does also hide visible (LOS) actions (movement, shooting) and is quite annoying
  13. 1 point
    Little Kids, which can´t wait. That´s the Reason why the World is going down, because they wan´t everything at once. I don´t know. I´m using 1 Base and the others are Interceptor-Bases.
  14. 1 point
    Ahem... from wikipedia "The word Panzer is a German word that means "armour" or specifically "tank". It derives through the French word pancier, "breastplate", from Latin pantex, "belly". The word is used in English and some other languages as a loanword in the context of the German military"
  15. 1 point
    So...the release date on GOG is somewhat less than accurate?
  16. 1 point
    This is hopefully the final hotfix for Beta Build V11, currently only available on the Experimental Branch. Unless we've accidentally added some new critical bugs into the game we'll be pushing this out onto the Stable branch and making it the default build for all users later this week. So it'd be great if you guys could give it a little test! Changelog: Armour modules should no longer unequip after every ground mission. Fixed a random crash at the start of mission caused by the game trying to save while the field of view calculations were still being processed. Fixed a lockup that could occur in a ground combat mission when a human or alien plasma grenade was used. Soldiers equipped with "extra armour" now use the heavy armour model in the ground combat missions. Custom soldiers now display their faces correctly. The Exosuit armour is no longer invisible on the Soldier Equip screen. Fixed a bug that could crash the game if you dragged an item back into the stores on the Soldier Equip screen, rather than using the RMB unequip or drag+drop replace functionality. Gameplay / Balance Changes: The Pegasus advanced dropship has been disabled (we've got a bit of a problem we need to address in the map editor before we can export enough maps with the new dropship in it, so we'll hopefully be re-enabling it when the new maps arrive in V12 or V13). Extra Armour now weighs 20 instead of 5. Please continue to report any bugs you encounter in V11 on our dedicated bug report forums, and please give any thoughts on the game balance in this thread.
  17. 1 point
    I don’t mind the ‘dud’ percentage at all, it’s the catastrophic cockups of either firing at the gunners feet or directly into your own troops. Seriously ..........fire, clunk, bugger is a lot more acceptable than fire, bang, new squad needed!
  18. 1 point
    A sort of escort mission? Reminds me of Chaos Gate. You had a few mission where you had to escort a techmarine to a terminal/generator or an apothacary to a specific individual (in this case, you broke into the enemy base to rescue your captured and wounded battlebrother)
  19. 1 point
  20. 1 point
    That is precisely what creators of new XCOM series thought, and failed at. There were no worthy clones of old UFO games until Xenonauts. Everybody who wanted to remake UFO with so called "modern standards" have achieved simple and boring products. X1 on the other hand was exactly what was so much needed - to cut thing short, a repainted original UFO. As an old fan of the original UFO games I was so disappointed in every attempt to recreate UFO Enemy Unknown including the latest XCOM series. I thought it's maybe the age, that makes me unable to get that level of immersion as in the old days, but then I've found Xenonauts, and it was like I have returned to the times when I was a teenager, so good was X1. I seriously wish that X2 was almost exactly as X1 but with a new paint.
  21. 1 point
    How is that not a special base? It's only one that actually matters I never liked, nor ever will like that "all eggs into one basket" concept. It makes no sense and there's no real risk involved. Research should be globalized (all science labs can work on the same project, regardless of which base they are in. The magic of internet and data sharing.) Production should be localized, so you would have production bases, with a practical limit as to how many people can work on something (simply throwing more people on something only works up to a point, especially when working on smaller things, like a rifle) Resources should be shared between bases with the logistics abstracted. Could be as simple as a connection/line between bases that simulates supply lines. Aliens could attack those lines damaging your supply lines, which would impart temporary maluses to the base (increased production time, staff morale penalty). Would make SAM sites more valuable and give your interceptors more to do - like chasing off enemy craft. Could even generate convoy defense missions.
  22. 1 point
    I can only speak for myself but I am pretty happy to see that Xenonauts 2's core gameplay mechanics are returning to a Xenonauts 1/Classic XCom base. While X2 was promising to deliver radically changed gameplay, it was also starting to look much too similar to X-Com 2012 so either way it would have felt, at least to me, a rehash if an existing game. Personally, as I prefer the additional complexity and micromanagement of the more traditional XCom style game, I've put in more hours into X1 than I have into X-Com 2. What I am hoping for with X2 is a game that stays true to the vision of X1 with improvements on some of the issues that stood out in the originals, such as janky combat mechanics on the tactical layer due to the choice of game engine, and perhaps more depth in the choice of viable weapons in the end game, rather than a straight and bland Tier 1 > Tier 2 >Tier 3 progression that seems to plague all XCom-like games.
  23. 1 point
    Dagar, yes we know that the Airfight isn´t easy to manage. But it has to be one that can be handeld. And the old one can´t be handeld or you have broken fingers. That´s why an other system has to be implemented or that system has to be changed. I like the X-Com Fighter-System or that one from UFO: ET. There you have to watch for your Pilots / Planes and say what Weapons they have to use as well as what Attack-Mode they have to fly. Then they can use the old one system. But not a Arcarde-Shooter-Thing. That´s one Point why the Predecessor isn´t played again from me and some others.
  24. 1 point
    To be honest, I suspect both I and a lot of people in the community would be disappointed if we don't deliver a game that improves on the gameplay of X1 as well as the graphics. We'll also be doing our best to include features that mean a lot to small groups of people - e.g. good mod tools for the modding community, large font mode for people with bad eyesight / small monitors, etc - but we're also going to be improving the core gameplay experience too. The majority of players just play the vanilla experience so we can't rely on tuning the more specialist things.
  25. 1 point
    I have to say this shows why Goldhawk is an amazing studio. There's a real willingness to try new ideas, but without necessarily committing to them - you can admit when something simply doesn't work. And offering refunds to people who specifically wanted now-changed features is very admirable and honest. On the gameplay front, while I liked the bold ideas behind the "shadow war" on the Geoscape and all that, I'm also really pleased with where the game is headed now. X1 is one of my favourite games, and I'm definitely in the camp that will be pretty happy with an improved X1. While the strategy layer is currently an almost exact copy of X1, I'm very happy about the improved tactical layer. There's a bunch of really small improvements but it adds up, and the boxy destructible UFOs are my favourite feature.