Gauddlike

Probably just me being fatalistic about the idea

I honestly don't get why people get so hung up on this game being finished off and the team moving to another game. I enjoy the game and I am really looking forward to what the community coders and modders can do with it but I don't expect a development team to stay on the project long after its release. This is not a subscription based MMO where the team is paid by the subs or a developer churning out DLC after DLC and getting paid by those. People are basically expecting Chris and the other members of Goldhawk to work for free constantly updating a game that is already done and dusted. You get just as many, if not more, complaints about games that are constantly updated or have DLC released. Just have a look at the Payday 2 forums for example and see how many people moan about new updates that change the way the game is played so old strategies are no longer valid or how releasing paid for DLC is ripping people off when it should have been part of the game originally. The way I see it you will never please everyone at the same time so might as well go with what you want to do, in this case Goldhawk are concentrating on new projects. It makes even more sense when you consider that Xenonauts was a first attempt at a game. Why continue to spend huge amounts of time and effort trying to work around the huge limitations inherent in the game, like the engine and the variations in coding styles, when you can start from scratch with something that may prove to be even better and almost certainly easier to work with. For what its worth if Goldhawk continue to fix bugs in the future and follow up on the idea of rolling community coding updates into official ones from time to time I will be more than happy to see development focused on something new.

Guess I just don't like being forced to only do single missions when the wave system appears designed to do the opposite. All it encourages is the airstrike option for me. Either the penalty is going to be large enough to have a negative impact on people who like to run multiple missions or it is meaningless and can safely be ignored in the vast majority of cases. As you say it is rare for you to use more than half the ammunition you take so that would likely naturally limit you to two missions with an optional risky third mission. You could exploit ammunition management in the same way you could exploit any other aspect of inventory management I guess. That depends on how much free space your soldiers have and how much free weight. It could also be difficult to do both at the same time. Do you carry extra ammunition in case you need to do a second or third mission or do you carry that extra rocket launcher or machine gun? Would this degradation in whatever stat is chosen only apply on a single flight or would it carry over between flights? I am not dead set against the idea but I am also not convinced it does much good for the game.

As always some interesting points legit. Also as usual I don't necessarily agree with all of them but well put and thanks for posting them up for people to discuss.

So would fixing the ammunition bug so you didn't get fully reloaded after each mission. I would prefer that over the alternative suggested anyway.

Sounds about right, the spectres are still compressed using the old system so likely to still cause problems even if the tile atlas images didn't.

No worries, hope it is useful to you.

The idea that the game will not be able to read tiles from another tileset comes originally from Chris when he posted about adopting the tile compression system if I recall correctly. That system is not used now though as it caused other problems and was replaced with the tile atlas system. It is possible that using the unpacked tiles hides the problem and that it will only appear for players using the atlas system though.

Typing 'psionics' into the search bar found me this thread: http://www.goldhawkinteractive.com/forums/showthread.php/11291-Any-way-to-turn-off-psi? Your question is answered in post 2.

What is the mission chaining problem?

That difference of opinion is why it is always best to ask first.

The closest you could get to that idea is if you made an interceptor that just looked like 3 drones in formation I reckon. I considered it but it doesn't really add much under the current system. I kind of deflected the thread into a new trajectory sorry Max. I only really posted to say well done so let's just stick to that

The previous generation of displays were better but aliens stole all of the globe displays because they knew we would never be able to stop their invasion if we had to rely on 2D maps.

Well yeah ok there is technically a bug but it is one that is meant to be there and can be squashed at will

I bet if Xenonauts had released with that then people would still complain that they couldn't see what was happening on the other side without having to walk round it

You assume that it is meant to be played like x-com which is not true. It is a similar game and inspired by x-com but it is not, and was never designed to be, identical. Yes if you try to play Xenonauts in exactly the same way as you played the original x-com game then it will respond differently. It is your assumption that you should play both games the same way that is flawed. Adapt to the differences between the games and you will have a much more enjoyable time than ranting about how it doesn't work the way you expect Half the fun for me is developing new ways to try and win, and trying to dig myself out of the situations they get me into. If I could just copy/paste the same tactics I used twenty years ago in x-com then I would feel like I was wasting my time.

If you have never heard any negative comments about the OG economy then you haven't been looking very closely. Every time this discussion starts up again there are people who feel that manufacturing for profit was great but also plenty who feel it detracted from the game and made a core mechanic (the funding nations) irrelevant. Chris was one of those who felt the latter to be true and as it is his game that was reflected in the way it was designed. It is one of those topics that is purely personal preference so always gets quite hotly debated. Fortunately Xenonauts has enough modding options available to satisfy both camps nicely!

I don't mean just putting multiple aircraft in one hangar, I was speaking more about different aircraft taking different amounts of space. Drones are small so could have a single hangar for a full squadron while a full sized high tier interceptor needs a hangar to itself etc etc.

Several of the forum members tried making mockups of how the geoscape would look using the kind of realistic distance variations you would find on a real map of the kind Xenonauts uses and to be truthful it looked bloody awful. You could not tell at a glance what the range of any aircraft was, what the relative speed of aircraft where, how long an intercept could take, what coverage a radar station would have without building it and to me those things far outweigh any gains from a sense of realism. I would have liked to see a 3D globe but I really don't feel the game to be unfinished without it, it is just different. If you feel very strongly about it then apply for the community coder roles, find a community coder who agrees with you, or hire someone with the requisite coding experience to do the job for you. Expecting someone to do the work for free to change the finished game to match your personal preferences is unlikely though so doing it yourself or hiring someone are the most likely to get what you want.

That is not a bug. There is a Reaper on the roof of the building to the right of the Chinook.

The windowed mode problem has been well reported and the solution posted up on the forum for over two years, should be easy enough to find. The industrial tileset framerate issue has been reported a few times and there was a fix being tested over the past few weeks, should go live shortly. When your soldier returns from being wounded it is given your default loadout. Sounds like a bug that if they are retaining their old role title though rather than the one they are currently being equipped with.

Fortunately playing the game is completely optional. If it is not a game that you enjoy then you never need to load it up again! I own quite a few games that I have only played once or twice, for me Xenonauts is not one of them but you really can't please everyone.

It would be nice if you could set how much space an aircraft took in a hangar. Having two drones, or even two plus dropship in a single hangar would be good. Hmm naming isn't my strong point... It could be a good way to bring the Testudo name back into the game if there was only one drone type. The watchdog type names are a bit more easily recognised so would likely work better I reckon. Guardian or Watchman is a bit too close to Sentinel for my liking.

As I said, you don't have to get used to anything, just install where you want the games to be in the first place and don't rely on the default location being good for everyone.

There are plenty of things that would reduce a game down to a simple to understand state, like only being able to stand in certain spots or tiles, but that doesn't mean it is a good game mechanic. Frozen Synapse for example never caused me the kind of confusion you refer to as being solved by a tile based system, plenty of people are confused by how the cover system works in Xenonauts though. No reason to stick to it just because some people might be confused by an alternative. Kind of off the topic though, much prefer to be looking forward to how Chris decides to go about developing his ideas.