[Question About the game]

Technically I think it is but Chris wants (or at least wanted) the game to ramp up after the final mission becomes available so the longer you take the harder it gets and eventually it overwhelms you... so a kind of built in survival mode I guess.

[Self-Destructing Weaponry]

One question: why would non-combatants have specific weapons assigned to them along with various safeties such as a heart/lifesign monitor that destroys a designated weapon?

Does it make sense that wepons aren't interchangable if one malfunctions?

Would it really not make more sense to have some kind of weapon locker or armoury on their ships that anyone can pick a gun from if they need to defend themselves?

[Anyone modding combat sprites?]

Is it possible for one to create new characters, without certain animations? Like If I created a set of sprites for some heavy powerarmor, one that didnt run, vault, or crouch, just walked, shoots and dies - sorta like the panzerkleins from silent storm?

[video=youtube;-Shg1eGvYyU]

Whenever your soldier performs an action you don't have sprites for he would either revert back to some standard sprite available or become invisible depending on how you set it up. It will most likely be very jarring either way.

[Edit in new types of Weapon Hardpoints for planes?]

Curious.. Why didnt you guys use Unity 3D? From what I understand the engine your using is significantly limited in terms of functionality, as if its some throwback from 2003 (although the game dose look nice). Unity would be absolutely perfect for this game. Im rather intrigued as to why such engines as the one Xenonauts is built on are still used when you have things like Unity easily available.

First coder hired picked the engine. When he left Goldhawk decided to stick with the engine instead of throwing away everything they had done up to that point. Why he picked the diner dash engine? Noone knows, but according to Chris he wasn't any good.

[Terror on the other hemisphere — how to save Charlie?]

Do bases without living quarters or without any garrison of soldiers, or any base other than your starter, ever get attacked?

Yes. but atm the deck is rigged in such a way that your older bases get attacked first/has the biggest chance to get attacked.

It's to prevent the aliens from attacking a base still under construction as that would be punishing the player for random events outside of his control.

[[v20.5] Accuracy formula in ground combat [2]]

Looks like he's aiming at the fence and the drone is blocking, and seems if there is (big?)cover directly in the way of the target, the higher the chance to hit means the leaser the spread of the shot, hence more chance to hit the cover in this case... make any sense?

To me it looks like he is targeting the left most square of a 2x2 drone, and the bottom sqquare is blocking.

The game is purely 2D so I'm surprised that the game considers more of the blocking object to be in the way the less spread/ the better your aim is. Isn't that just governed by algorithms? So is that the intended behaviour to have the block raise faster than the hit?

[Self-Destructing Weaponry]

Guess there is no right or wrong at all

[Self-Destructing Weaponry]

I have to admit, giving the increasingly stretching, desperate quality of some of these criticisms, you seem to be less concerned about the quality of the idea and more concerned about being 'right'.

I don't know what you mean by that... I merely don't like the idea. It is to me unappealing (as in it doesnt make sense to me) lorewise and horrible and annoying gameplay wise. I've stated that pretty early and have accepted that we will be disagreeing about this issue. From that I have moved on to discussing the points we each bring forth.

We disagree on very fundamental premises. I'm surprised that isn't clear by now. I'm also surprised that I did not manage to convey that I thought there is no "right" in this discussion until the developer comes in and decides upon what is right.

I'll try one last time: You consider the aliens destroying their own tech (in an automatic system upon death) to be a very intelligent move. I assume you consider this to be selfevident.

I consider it to be ridiculously stupid, and am unable to convey this to you because you seem to consider the opposite to be so selfevident that it simply can't be possible to have any other view.

I'm not trying to win any discussion. I'm just trying to say I have an oposite position regarding your idea.

[how exactly does radar work.]

I think I saw an update fairly recently that said they changed it so that additional radar facilities increased ranged rather than detection chance.

[Propaganda]

Is the mechanic filling a demand you feel is left out or neglected? Or is it a cool idea you found a way to interject smoothly into the game as a whole?

[v.19 How do I mount a laser gatling on a plane?]

AFAIK the steam client does not need to be running.

[Self-Destructing Weaponry]

You have yet to justify why it is implausible. Are the Ceasians disposable? Sure. Is human interference with their operations desirable? Definitely not. Are the Xenonauts a nuisance the aliens wish to destroy, negate or otherwise marginalize? Absolutely. The aliens clearly do not want their activities resisted or impeded. This is why taking such steps to prevent or at least impede reverse engineering is definitely a reasonable idea and makes all the sense in the world, and is worth the surely small modicum of resources those efforts would entail given the alien tech level; plasma equipped Xenonauts clad in heavy armour are an unwelcome pain in the arst if not a legitimate threat.

I have explained that I do not find that level of almost prophetic foresight plausable. Because you already know the course of events that precaution is something you have come up with in hindsight imo. You do not agree with my point of view, and we will ahve to accept that we do not agree. I will never be able to "justify" it to you in the same way that you will not be able to convince me unless you rewrite the whole story and gamemechanic untill the game becomes a sorry mess that is essentially unplayable.

It's all up to the developer anyway regardless of what my opinion may be. So my opinion carries no weight.

But if you want to continue the discussion:

To accept the premise that system is needed and do not hinder normal course of operations when you are arrogant enough to send noncombatants and slowly escalating tech progressive UFOs and enemies. You have explained that you consider it too stupid to not have the system, the aliens has already shown that and an even greater level of stupid arrogance imo.

See, you've got me wrong; I'm actually down with biometric imprinting too which locks out unauthorized users for the sake of versimilitude/believably and consistency, but I figure this violates the balance between realism and gameplay. In otherwords, you want to reward taking the added risk of stunning an alien by allowing the humans to use the weapons looted from one.

I think it is kind of pointless if you are for it but conceed that it would be bad for the gameplay. If the argument is that it doesn't make sense that it has one but not the other saying that you are for the other part that cannot be included as well does not invalidate the argument.

I'm having a bit of trouble expressing myself here but... your stance really doesnt make the halfassed implemention make sense.

#1: Some players may be annoyed that they don't get to keep the weapons for killing aliens just like some players are annoyed by psionics or friendly fire. They are things that will appeal to some and not appeal to others; in your case they don't appeal.

There are already a few that complains about this every now and then. It would be poor design to not convey to the player that they are meant to be used in an emergency and not as a preference. I'm merrely trying to consider this from a designers point of view. Personally I don't care if I get to keep them or not since I know the lore.

#2: Actually, as repeatedly stated and demonstrated, the existence of such self-destruction mechanisms make vastly more sense than their absence. You have yet to forward an argument to the contrary that is logical in a narrative sense.

I think you read my second point too fast or something. It's closer to the first point than you seem to reflect in your response.

#3: Emphasized stunning is by no means a 'forced playstyle', it is a playstyle with tradeoffs; advantages and disadvantages. That is entirely the point. Killing the aliens outright is much easier, faster and safer but affords less loot, and denies usage of alien weaponry. In practice, most players will opt for the former most of the time unless their financial situation dictates otherwise, or they have a specific need to capture alien tech.

It is more restrictive than the current system, and as long as the alien weapons are better than the player weapons it would essentially be the optimal strategy. The tradeoff "advantage and disadvantage" is rather unbalanced allways makeing the stunning the better gameplay choice.

(It would aslo screw up the money and resource balance requiring a new solution to that)

#4: I have yet to come close to running out of ammo, and in the unlikely event that seems to be a pending issue, you obviously attempt to stun _before_ you run dry. Foresight doesn't become less important in tactical combat.

That was not the essential part of the argument. Are you stunning every alien? What if the alien you stunned is over half the map away and you have to backtrack to get to it... with 4-5 aliens less then a turn away.

[Wallet Rape, Dec. 2013 edition]

Where do you find your discounts Cane?

[Self-Destructing Weaponry]

But you have it exactly backwards; even if they don't expect to be defeated, it only makes sense to take that precaution in order to minimize casualties and impediment from the natives in the conduct of their activities. The only way not using such scuttling technology would begin to make sense is if human adoption of alien technology is specifically intended and integral to the plot per ventuswing's spoiler (and if so, that's fine); anything less is unbelievable hubris to the point of outright stupidity, a complete and utter failure in risk/damage control and assessment. Seeing as the invasion is lead by an advanced and presumably vastly more intelligent species, this strikes me as being incredibly unlikely.

Further, in the unlikely event such an intelligent species did note Xenonaut reverse engineering, guarding against it would be about necessitated, not 'possibly plausible' because not even moronic arrogance remains as an excuse then. I do agree that there is a gamist argument to not changing things part way into the game, but that's in part why I think it's preferable to be consistent and start out with the self-destruct mechanic.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. I do not find it plausable, I find it contrived and plain bad storytelling..

Socially it sends the message to the soldiers that they are expendable (which, while true due to cloning of the Ceasians, still shouldnt be so bluntly shoved down their throats or it will affect moral.) and is quite frankly a waste of resources.

It is also completley illogical that they have a system in place which destroys the weapons upon dteath, but does not acctually prevent humans from using the weapons if they capture one?

So the devs specifically want to make field looting less powerful while retaining it as a viable option? Great, because that's exactly what my solution permits since you can stun some aliens and take their stuff. You get rewarded for taking the extra risk (and really, it's not that hard between smoke crawling, ballistic shields, stun batons and flashbangs) with extra reward (powerful alien weapons that don't have an aim penalty).

You seem to be advocating a reduction in availability to compensate a desired buff to the weapons? So it's not technically the destruction of the weapons you want but the removal of the aiming penalty?

I don't see how reducing the availability makes the act of field looting "less powerful", if anything it makes it "more powerful". If you do what you say it's more desirable to have the enemy weapons which will

1) make players more annoyed that they don't get to keep the weapons

2) make the reasons for not allowing you to keep the alien weapons make slightly less sense, further increasing the player annoyance

3) make the priority tactics to stun an alien to loot his weapon effectivly forcing a certain playstyle. Which is BAD in an X-com like game.

4) make it difficult/less available/more annoying to pick up the backup... what is supposed to be backup weapons when the Xenonaut runs out of ammo.

[This tiny UFO teasing me! :)]

patrol landed aircrafts with fighter aircrafts?

[20.5 - after departure from alien base mission a stable CTD]

Elaborate on the topic and savegame will help the devs to recreate and identify the bug.

[Wallet Rape, Dec. 2013 edition]

It was a bit short though. I was expecting it to be longer. Berlin is comming out soon though so I'm hoping that rectifies it a bit.

(I havent tried out any player made run yet.. I should probably do that)

[Buddhist Civilians]

Being hungry builds character.

And I've noticed that your somewhat heretical post seems to have corresponded with post #666...

Tell me Gorlom...do you feel a little...hot under the collar right now...?

You know a goat or something with wings did appear in a cload of burning sulphur when I posted that.

Then I ate it, ate it like a pie. Because you know... numbers. Numbers and irrational assosiations.

mmmm Sulphur flavoured goatbat pi(e).

[Wallet Rape, Dec. 2013 edition]

Nothing yet but my nostalgia is debating with my reason after I found some sega classics on sale.

I had forgotten all about "alien storm". I have some very fond memories of that game ^^

I wonder how reality would stand up to my memories of it.

[Buddhist Civilians]

Your stern disciplinary shouting at those that does not follow the godemperor is an underpowered heat ray Commisar. I suggest you start shouting at the bread and marshmnallows instead of turning them into ashes with your sidearm.

Maybe then Jeeves could have some breakfast for once.

[Self-Destructing Weaponry]

@Gorlom: really.. that was included to have a solution for not bringing enough ammo?

Not sure. I assumed it was part of the reason. Haven't seen official word on it though.

Why isn't it plausible for advanced alien technology that has an ultra-advanced understanding of genetic manipulation, nanomaterials and plasma physics more than a century ahead of our own to create self-scuttling smart guns when firearm integrated biometric controls are already attainable?

Because it only makes sense in hindsight. It's not a precaution an invading alien race would not do unless they expect to be defeated... in which case they wouldn't invade. At least not by leading with small scouts and what not. And changing this mechanic in the game after the player starts to reverse engineering stuff would possibly be plausible but by then it would just be confusing and silly to the player and horrible gameplay design.

Oh I get the reasoning, but if we need to find a way to make field looted alien weapons less potent, mine works pretty well.

I don't think your solution acomplishes what the dev wants though. It is a pretty severe change to break the intended mechanic completley and there are far easier ways to make field looting "less potent". Like tweaking the numbers.

[Self-Destructing Weaponry]

In no way does this imply reading 'too much science fiction or comic books' as you've so derisively stated.

You're right, I take that back I was probably projecting what I've done onto you. my bad. I retract my statement.

(Although I do not agree that "gun scutteling" or whatever you might want to call it seems plausable. Plus to me it seems like a hinderance to the gameplay.)

I also find it at least a little cognitively dissonant that you can criticize the relative plausibility of self-scuttling guns on one hand while simultaneously and uncritically accepting the plentiful soft-scifi in this game on another.

Oh the reason for that is simple. I don't find this game to be trying to be realistic, nor do I advocate verisimilitude. Gameplay all the way baby! (note my signature ^^)

It's simple. In V19, that humans could use field salvage alien weapons and use them against the aliens to great effect was presumably considered to be a gameplay issue, hence the kludge of imposing an accuracy penalty in V20. I propose solving this perceived issue with self-destructing weaponry (or alternately personalized/operator locked weaponry at a minimum) instead, which has the added advantage of adding to the game's realism and believability.

The penalty has been a part of using alien weapons since I started playing in Version 8. If it was not included in version 19 then it was most likely the result of a bug or an oversight/mistake.

I'm fairly sure the xenopedia is supposed to be saying something about difficulties to handeling the alien weapons hinting at the aiming penalty.

[Self-Destructing Weaponry]

I found that mechanic to be rather annoying while playing XCOM2012. Also it's quite stupid to have such volitile saftey measures. Who would realistically want to carry an armed explosive that goes off if something malfuntions with the user identifier?

Your example link seems to still be in the concept stages? and only about allowing a user to fire the weapon while preventing unauthorized users, it says nothing about destroying the weapon. (To me it sounds as if you've read too much sciencefiction or comic books)

I would say that the main reason aliens don't bother to protect their tech is overconfidence. They can not imagine that Humans can reverse engineer anything in any reasonable timeframe.

this would also nicely address the gameplay 'issue' of soldiers EZ moding tactical combats by retrieving and utilizing alien weaponry instead of applying an aim penalty as was proposed for newer versions.

I'm not sure what you are talking about here. Allowing the xenonauts to pick up alien weapons in combat is a solution to the issue born from not getting to bring any extra ammo on the floor in the transport. In Xenonauts you can technically run out of ammo, being allowed to use the alien firearms with an aiming penalty as a last resort solves that problem nicely.

If you think that is still overpowered then it is a balance issue and you can allways play around with the numbers.

[Ground Combat Freeze (AI?) on Terror Mission]

Have you tried enableing the option "disable stat tracking"? that might help with freezes.

[more aliens onboard larger UFO's]

I'm still trying to figure out why there are even 7 or 8 aliens in a light scout, there's only 2 pieces of equipment in those ships. and no seats.

The Caesians are the equivilent of circ du solei acrobats. They don't have any tractor beams on those small ships so when they want to abduct someone they need to make a hu... Caesian chain/ladder out the window of the UFO to grab people they are hovering over...