Jump to content

Charon

Members
  • Content count

    2,300
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    79

Charon last won the day on October 23

Charon had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

248 Excellent

7 Followers

About Charon

Recent Profile Visitors

8,674 profile views
  1. Charon

    Process Sharing

    Did you know that there is only a single industrial battleship map ? -> This could be fixed. Collapsile system for UFO submaps dont work. They dont even work when you put a valid collapsible building below a UFO submap -> guess the whole collapsible system has been disabled if a UFO layout touches it. ? Solution Most of the work on the Xenonauts Fix Pack mod gets overwritten by X-Division content -> maps can get overtaken, everything else (non-maps) can get deleted ... or overwritten ? No good way to delete existing data ... hm. The vanilla floors outside of the battleship never show, and nobody noticed it.
  2. Charon

    Process Sharing

    Usually when i am in a process and stuck on a problem i find it tremendously helpful to write out what kind of problem i am stuck on or to share the problem with another person. Since there arent really many people who are modding Xenonauts anymore this is the Process Sharing thread, where i will write out problems im currently working on as if i would talk to another person, sharing the process with other people. This thread is only for 2 types of posts. To share a Xenonaut (modding) process you are currently working on. To reflect upon a post of the above type of post. To give positive feedback on such post. To give constructive criticism on such post. Only if you dare to be vulnerable you can fix your weaknesses.
  3. This is only an idea but is there any chance that you're going to work in an X-division 2 for the new Xenonauts

  4. Isnt the whole point that XCE isnt available for linux ? If you want to run steam on linux you have to run it on WINE or a similar program which simulates a windows environment. Is this information still up to date ?
  5. Charon

    Tutorial - how to add a new weapon.

    @Rainbowtrout117
  6. From a programming point of view i think it would be good to implement something that can set the selling prices for items after the fact. While i mostly think that this would be useful for modding purposes, the broader idea is that you could stimulate an economy which based on [events]. For instance you could introduce an alloy scarcity worldwide and let alloys become insanely valuable to sell. Additionally you could attach a % chance to such [events] ( like researches ) and bundle such researches thematically together. You could either have each individidual [event] have an individual chance to trigger an [effect] or have bundled [events] share an [effect], which altogether have a 100% chance to trigger. Mix and match for best results. This should mean minimal programming work ( although save games will have to save that information ) while increasing replayability and dynamic elements in the game. While this thread is not about it, this could also be the beginning of a dynamic black market concept for the game. I want to stress that this thread is not about including a black market element in the game, i just want to point out that such element would be easy to expand on as a follow up of this technical suggestion.
  7. Charon

    Xenonauts 2: Ground Combat

    Seems like a good update. I dont really see why the randomised damage has to be abandonded with this system. As a suggestion you could randomise body part damage too. torso: 75% - 125% head: 125% - 175% limb: 50% - 100% For the AI thing it sounds super exploitable to just stand still and overwatch until all aliens ran into your fly trap.
  8. Charon

    New forums online!

    Wanted to inform people that http no longer works as a link. Example: http://www.xenonauts.com/modfiles/X-Division 1.00.01 Update.zip will produce an error, but https://www.xenonauts.com/modfiles/X-Division 1.00.01 Update.zip works. This might mean a lot of old links could be dead.
  9. @MaskI would ask you to stop inquiring on this topic any further. We know when Chris is dead-set on to trying out something new, any further arguing will only put him into a more and more defensive position - and that when people dont even have a testversion to give him feedback on. The thing that you have to understand that a game is not only the property of the community, it is also the creative property of the creator. And as the creative creator of something you enjoy making never before seen content, and enjoy taking responsibility for its outcome - in the same way a child enjoys building a jenga tower, and then drive an matchbox automobile through it. They just wanna see what happens, its an important core step of "learning" something. Nobody can tell a child about how the world works - it has to see that for itself. All we can do is to be on standby when it asks for help. For this reason Goldenhawk Interactive sometimes appears to not listen to the forum, but that is not the case. The discrepancy comes from the time frame in which a suggestion is made, and a working build is released. Sometimes that can literally take months, or half a year, where literally nothing seems to move, but the main thing is it just that it takes time to build a game. I do understand that most people dont live on this forum, and therefore dont know "when" the best time to give feedback on something is. In this case i would ask to keep the arguments on this topic, and write them out after a reasonable amount of time after a version with these features is released. That is usually the best time to give feedback on. Another word on the initial post on this topic and why it only got 8 replies. It didnt go over the head of the more experienced users of this forum. But the proposed changes were so bad that they were literally beyond discussion. 80% of the feedback on this system received negative and sparsly worded feedback, but we all know when Goldenhawk Interactive is dead set on trying something out, and we keep our feedback for when the time is right. At least thats my oppinion and read on the situation.
  10. Ok ok, i think everbody is getting a bit heated here. Lets relax all a bit and take a deep breath. Well, reality doesnt care about tech level. And that a weapon like a shotgun which works like a big sledgehammer on targets is only effective against soft targets is intended behaviour. If you look at ballistic warfare from a physical side you want to transfer as much kinetic energy as possible into the targets body. Im sure you are aware that water stops kinetic bullets quite effectiviely. The reason for that is that water molecules have a big cohesion factor, and therefore take in a lot of the bullets kinetic energy very quickly. You can experience that effect when you hit water with your hand - the faster ( more kinetic energy ) your hand is, the more you feel like hitting a hard surface. The least resistance you will feel when you gently put your hand into a body of water. The first advice when you potentially will get into a firefight is "Empty your bladder". If a bullet hits your bladder in a firefight and it happens to contain a lot of fluid it will take in an excessive amount of kinetic energy, and then disperse it through your body. You basically build a grenade in your body, with a bullet as the trigger. If such thing should happen you are unsafeable dead. On the other hand if a bullet just shoots through your body ( little amount of transfered kinetic energy ) especially with a small caliber you have a high chance to make it, it could literally just be a scratch. Why am i writing this out ? Well, i want you to put your focus on the fact that Weapons having little effect isnt a Xenonauts only problem - most of militaristic research focuses on how to effectively transfer energy, not restricted to kinetic, into the target body. Lets first get the defensive definitions out of the way. Target Body - This is the body you want to transfer energy into. Transfer enough energy and the material of the body will cease to function and transform. This is your goal. Armour - A protective measure usually in the form of material in close proximity to the targets body. The key to understanding armour is to understand that the function of armour is to disperse the energy intended for the target body over a maximum amount of area. An assault vest doesnt negate bullets - all it does is increasing the area of effect for the impact, transforming a deadly amount of energy for an area into a withstandable amount of energy for the area. The function of ceramic plates against a plasma bolt is to be a material which has very bad thermal energy transfering properties. Shield - A measure to stop the energy intended for the target body to even reach the armour. Common examples of this are riot shields, missiles which target other missiles, and recently i have also been informed that the german military has implemented lasers which cut and trigger missiles intended for vehicles right before the missile hits the vehicle. Because of this 3 definitions we usually split the offensive measures into 3 categories. Anti-Personel Ammunition - The problem of your average bullet could be that it passes through the target body transfering very little energy into it, still having most of its energy after exiting. This kind of ammuniton focuses on transfering as much energy as possible into the target body at all costs. Take a look at the following example: >>> For slightly worse aerodynamic this bullet increases its impact area in the moment enough resistance is encountered, transfering most if not all of its energy into the target body. On soft targets this usually leaves behind a fistbig hole. The drawbacks of this kind of ammunition are usually that they have a shorter range than better aerodynamic models. Also the lethality of this ammunition could be a drawback if you want to do anything else than kill. If this kind of ammunition encounters enough resistance to trigger the impact area widening effect on the target body lethality is mostly guaranteed. This kind of ammunition is also ineffective against armour because it basically does what the armour should be doing in the first place, helping the armour in its use. Normal Ammunition - Your standard bullet, not very lethal, not very far range, but cheap and your first choice if you want to pierce medium grade armour. Depending on the caliber and the weapon range you get what you pay for. AP, Armour Piercing Ammunition - The answer to better normal bullets is better armour, and the answer to better armour is armourpiercing bullets. Did you ever hit a wall with your fists, and it hurt ? From the physical side it doesnt really matter if you hit hit a wall, or the wall hits you. If two objects collide and an impact occurs what matters is the relative kinetic energy to each other. You take all of the relative energy and ask "Which object is softer ?", and then transfer most energy on the softer target. The reason why your hand hurts when hitting a wall is usually becaise the wall is a lot harder than your hand, thuse more energy gets transfered into your hand. If you can make your fist hard enough you can hit walls and the walls would get damaged instead. Armour Piercing rounds focus on decreasing resistance and impact area, in order to transfer as little energy as possible into the armour, so that some remaining energy reaches the target body. The armour piercing rounds make a full circle of where we started, which was trying to get as much energy as possible into the target body, while armour piercing rounds try to decrease resistance and energy transfer into armour in order to increase the chance of armour not stopping all the energy intended for the target body. The downside of armour piercing is that it is less effective against soft targets, and that it usually carries a higher production cost. The upside is that the impact philosophy usually means it can afford a good aerodynamic, and with it a better range. Now ofcourse how you transfer such a system into a game is another question. If we try to simulate it as close as possible than "damage" for its possible energy transfer into the target body, and "mitigation" for its penetration properties is propably as close as it can get. Mitigation only negating armour and not increasing damage is realistic, since you cant decrease the lost energy to armour to less than zero. Mitigation also negates shred, because shred only applies if armour absrobs damage, which it doesnt if armour gets mitigated. Shred is also a completely valid battlefield factor. Try to roll up a piece of paper. When you are rolling up a piece of paper you induce energy into it. Afterwards it will try to assume its original state, but depending on the amount of energy you induced it cant quite get back to its original form. Now, in order to get the piece of paper 'almsot' back into its original form you have to induce the same energy - by rolling it up the other way. As far as i am aware armour is only supposed to get punched from one side, and with it will inevitably get closer to a failure as more energy is induced into it. Not quite as much as 10%, but maybe more in the direction of 2% - 3%. "Damage" "Mitigation" and "Shred" are propably the most realistic concepts put into a military simulation game. Now you mentioned a problem with Shotguns not being effective against heavily armoured units - well thats the point, or is it ? The realistic approach to a similar problem in the real world would be to design ammunition for each purpose. If we take an andron with 30 armour as a "haevily" armoured unit as our example. Anti Personal Ammunition: 30 damage. In total zero damage. Normal Pellets: 25 damage 10 mitigation. In total 5 damage. Piercing Rounds: 20 damage and 25 mitigation. 15 total damage (per bullet) As far as i can see it all you need to have is proper mitigation values balanced against proper armour values. In the above example you can also see that Piercing Rounds against targets with no armour are worse than Anti-Personel Ammunition. Ofcourse this would be if somebody would want to flesh out a diverse ammunition system. If you confine weapon viability to weapons alone ... than you will always end up with a weapon either being a very good anti-personal, normal or piercing weapon. But if you think of weapons as delivery platforms instead of damage platforms, you could make very interesting weapon-ammunition combinations. This would mean that certain delivery platforms could have certain advantages, but also being able to be used in different scenarios, with less efficiency. Hm ... --- I agree. Isnt the definition of at least being somewhat useful that you just need more rounds to achieve the same goal ? less damage and more mitigation would have done wonders in that case. The less damage it has the less armour it can shred. Props shouldnt be affected by shred, including UFO walls. more mitigation, less damage. So what you are saying is that "this means that literally any unit can be destroyed by any weapon if you shoot it enough times". Wink just joking. (Clears throat) Anyway. We all support you in the journey you want to make <3.
  11. So it doesnt matter if it is the Xenonauts ending, FiraComs ending, or X-Coms ending, i dislike them all their final mission design. You successfully or unsuccessfully do the final mission and then the game tells you "Game`s over. Cya til next next time. Now leave !" It doesnt let you take a last look at your soldiers. Inbase or in a mission. It doesnt let your savor the people who survived the last mission. It doesnt let you do some more missions if you wish so. It doesnt let you do some more aircombat, if you wish so. It has a lot of this 1990-style games when at a certain point in your game you will get a "Game Over" screen and then the credits roll. But since we are already some decades past that and i feel like the "Edngame" missions are purely held onto for legacy reasons i would like to suggest the following. [] Transform the final mission from a do or die mission into a challenge mission players can attempt multiple times, and fail-until-they-succeed in it. This suggestion obviously means you cant stop time as you did in X1. [] Let the player normally continue the game, justifying it by "strangler UFOs and independent alien activity" after the final mission. This way players can savor the game for some additional gameplay if they wish to go onto a few more missions. Mechanically nothing would change after the final mission, unless you want to implement some post Endgame changes like a stopped timer, or removing relatiomnnhip damage from alien activity. But the basic idea is to continue the game after the final mission as it would be without it. Releasing the player into an unrestrained adventure and showing off some more of the game.
  12. Charon

    Xenonauts-2 April Update

    Congrats.
  13. I think we can all agree that when we are in a subtab we want: To have information about ALL available equipment. To be able to equipt ALL avilable equipment, eg. all equipment that is not used in the current subtab. If a grenade is stored in the storage room or "on" a soldier is irrelevant. Im not against option 3 per se, but i fear the implementation looks ugly. I would want to have a visual distinction between a "template soldier" and a soldier carrying "real" equipment. The go-to solution would be less transparency for template items, which looks less good than a simple "storage" on soldiers. I have a different problem that i frequently run into. I look at my rooster, trying out some new builds and combinations, changing up loads and equipment on individual soldiers ... once everything is done i realise that for that loadout a different class name would be more fitting, so i change the class. Guess what happens when you change the class, the default equipment for that class gets equipted ... all my carefully, and individually equipted loadout is gone ... . Because of this workflow i suggest that changing class doesnt automatically equipt soldier loadout, but that it only occurs when pressing the corresponding button. Usually you experiment with loadouts before you know what kinda class category that fits into, and this prevents having to reset your loadouts over and over again, just because you want to change the class name and icon.
  14. Charon

    Idea: Conceal Mechanic

    Thx to everybody for sharing their oppinion.
  15. One of the things which X1 had that it was almost always better to have LOS cover, eg. if the aliens cant see you, they cant shoot you. This gave snipers a hard time, since any good position to shoot from, was also a good position to get shoot at. So how about adding a concealment mechanic to the game ? The proposed mechanic is pretty simple. some armor can have an active ability which makes them able to conceal themself in the surrounding environment. This means an enemy unit will have to get 25% closer in able to see the unit wearing camouflage armour. The unit with the active ability needs to have environmental props near it to activate said ability, and moving breaks the concelment ofcourse. This would give snipers and soldiers in stationary positions better protection. Maybe it fits into the guerrilla warfare style of things ? Units can only go camouflage when the environmental props allow it. With this new gameplay mechanic you could also add countermeasures, like infrarot vision sensors, maybe some anti-camouflage equipment for the droid, sensory grenades etc ... . Different armour can camouflage differently well, always cutting a % of the sight of other units until they are discovered.
×