Ishantil

I was just thinking about this, too. 40mm grenades would have a much better flight characteristic than a standard thrown grenade, but they would have a smaller bang. Notably, the M-203 40mm grenade launcher was introduced in 1968. Although I have no idea if the game has any code for variable fire modes. Seems like all you would need to do is add another mode onto the end when you right-click through the various modes, just add one that's grenade launcher.

When you attempt to re-name (change callsign of your aircraft, you cannot use anything but alpha and numbers in your aircraft names. Since the aircraft start with dashes in their names, it would be nice to be able to use dashes and such. I would like to be able to name my plane Condor EU-1.

So when you first get to a turn, or any time there is an event (reaction fire, etc.) the game state "resets". At this point, you cannot scroll the screen with the arrow keys until you scroll it with the mouse first.

Disclaimer: I just started testing with V19B4, so if stuff has been said before, I apologize in advance. Version 19, Build 5 Bugs, or Errors: 1. The hidden movement thing is always on all the time for me. I tried to use a fix mentioned to turn it off, but it was not successful. Is there an official way to turn it off? 2. I cannot scroll the combat screen with the arrow keys on a new turn until I use the mouse to scroll first. 3. You cannot use anything but alpha and numbers in your aircraft names. Would be nice to be able to use a dash, so I can name my planes Condor EU-1. 4. The sound timing is often off, causing the alien scream to happen before the shot, or shock baton hits. 5. Animation timing is off. The firing animation starts first, then shots and shot sound starts Version 19, Build 5 Observations (balance and comments): 1. I'm thinking that grenades need one more tile. Either that, or make flares 3 more. 2. How much damage does a stun grenade do over time? Because it takes like 120 damage to bring down a lizard guy, and my stun grenade did 15. So that means either he's gotta sit in that for 8 turns, or I need 8 grenades. I'm guessing I'm supposed to shoot him twice then hit him with a grenade? UPDATE: I now realize that hitting the guy directly with the grenade does lots more stun damage. 3. I haven't had much luck with the missiles in the base game. I'm guessing I'm supposed to shoot one, then have it roll, then shoot the other. Almost all my kills are with the vulcan cannons on the Condors. Right now, I'd much rather have three guns. Update: I think I've figured this out more. Still would like the option to have different things in hard points. 4. I think the heavy hardpoints on the Foxtrot should either hold two Sidewinders or an Avalanche torpedo. 5. Fighting at night is scary, which is awesome. 6. The new base maintenance cost structure seems better balanced than Build 4 7. With the changes to the sniper rifle, I find myself using it less and less. To the point that I'm considering taking them out of my squads. A good compromise might be to increase the range back a bit, but keep the very high TU cost, or maybe tone it down by 5. 8. Shotgun accuracy is too low in my opinion. I have to be practically in the tile next to the target to hit anything. 9. The M-79 40mm grenade launcher would be a nice compromise between the missile launcher and the machine gun. 10. I like the music. 11. Shock batons are awesome. UI Suggestions: 1. Soldier Results Screen: Please include all the stats at the bottom, and show arrows for improvements. Also listing who killed what here would be great. 2. Combat: When you mouse over the units, it would be nice if you could see the role of the person (sniper, etc). Random Thought: I'm not sure how feasible it would be, but being able to choose what stat points go up would make the soldiers a lot more individualized. You could tune a soldier to a role a lot more effectively. WTF: Why is the UFO door so hard to shoot inside? It's like there's some space magic that makes me walk into it in order to shoot through the door.

I tip my hat to your puns, sir. Good show! I'm pretty sure I've seen 11 hours for refueling. And notably, loading missiles onto a plane doesn't take long. Running the shells into the vulcan cannon is done by machine and doesn't take that long either. And you can refuel while you're doing it. Four hours is closer to what I was thinking. This is life and death, being able to shoot down UFOs is one of humanity's top priorities. I will take a look for the "turnaround" thread you mentioned.

For those of you thinking that I am complaining because I don't know how to take down a UFO, fear not. I'm not complaining about the gameplay, which I find but fun and interesting. By 1979, the F/A-18 Hornet (not to be confused with the Super Hornet, or E/F versions) was just entering service. The -14, -15. and -16s had all been in service by the time the game starts. Neither the Su-27, the MiG-29, nor the MiG-31 had entered service until the 1980s. The only Soviet aircraft was the MiG-25. My point is that a single shot is both silly for the realism its based on (the Avalanche is based on the AIM-54 Phoenix missile, which the F-14 could carry up to six, four on the fuselage and two under each wing) as well as fun, because I shoot two missiles and my Foxtrot fighter is now worthless. I can't even use it as a decoy, because the UFOs ignore it once it's shot its staggering payload of two missiles. The Avalanche missile isn't worth it, it's not powerful enough to justify bringing along. In X-COM, the Avalanche missile was probably too good, so I understand toning it down some. The main modification the planes would have received would not be armor upgrades, but rather range. The game implies that the Condor is bought "off the shelf" rather than needing to be modified by the Xenonaughts. So my observations are thus: 1. Not having a cannon on a fighter aircraft is frankly dumb. Please allow me to select the role for my aircraft instead of pigeon-holing it into a missile truck, which frankly, are of questionable use. 2. The weapon compliment for the planes is too small and reloading takes too long. It doesn't take 12 hours to refuel a plane. You can refuel a plane in the air. You can get a full compliment of fuel. So the turnaround times for the fighters on the ground is too long. 3. Because of points 1 and 2, I very rarely can engage in two fights if two (or several) UFOs appear. Either because it takes 11 hours to fuel and rearm a plane (which I assure you, it does not). 4. The Air Combat mini-game is a lot of fun and I like it, but the least fun is not being able to play.

Okay, so I shoot down ships with guns. Missiles don't seem to be that useful. They get dodged, and they rarely actually kill anything. Basically all the UFOs I've shot down have been with guns. So...that brings me to the main point. Why are the payloads for the interceptors so small? Two AIM-54s? The F-14 Tomcat, F-15 Eagle, and F-18 Hornet were all introduced in the 1970s. The F-18 would have been in combat trials and such in the beginning of the game, 1979. All of which have far greater payloads than depicted in the game, even with drop tanks or FAST packs installed. In the original X-COM game, Avalanche launchers have three shots. Stingray launchers have six. Why do my planes suck so bad?

You know, they could all be part of a interstellar mining corporation. Perhaps the aliens simply want our metal. But they have a bottom line to meet, so they don't have the massive resources of an entire intergalactic space army, but rather something more akin to an exploretory force. So they came for our mineral wealth, but eventually realized that they could exploit the biosphere for profit as well, so they decided to start mining us too. "And from planet #945785-III, we have semi-intelligent hominids..." That's right, space zoos.

The F-17 Condor they have here is definitely closer in visual style to the F-16 Fighting Falcon. And the MiG-32 being a modified -25 or -31 is indeed the way they were going. As if they immediately started modifying what they thought was the best approach to take down UFOs. The Americans were given the task of modifying the F-16 to suit the needs of downing enemy escorts, and the USSR was given the task of making something that could carry missiles large enough to punch holes in a UFO. Notably, the MiG-31 didn't enter operational service until 1982, so the -31 is newer than the timeline implies. Being based on the earlier MiG-25 makes sense, though. The two opposing powers developing aircraft cooperatively also speaks not only to the grave situation, but shows that even the Russians and the Americans can work together if given a common enemy threatening all of mankind.

I find the references to the F-17 interceptor interesting, as it was never put into production and only 2 were made. It would imply that in this alternate timeline, the F-16 never made it into existence (the two planes were competition aircraft for the contract). The F-17 "Cobra" aircraft was later enlarged into what became the F-18 "Hornet". Nevertheless, diverging timelines are cool.