RikazeMA

WOOT! I'm so stoked! Knew it was time to stop lurking, and just grazing over the threads and actually read some posts. I know you can't say when you'll be releasing for sure, but I hope you miraculously swing a summer release somehow. It'd be a perfect way to spend my free-time over the summer, since the semester will be over and all. =D EDIT: And seeing as how it's 1 AM and I've been doing homework all night, I forgot to mention that at least the Beta will make a kick-ass late birthday present that I bought myself... What, a year ago now? Two? Whatever, it'll be kick-ass, that's for sure!

Finally got some time to play 17.1. It's already been established, but the patch is pretty dang stable. Wasn't able to do Terror Missions because I suck at the game, but no crashing. The game stopped for all the right reasons. Those being, eaten by aliens. Very excited that I got to play for something like 90 straight minutes with ZERO problems. Well, maybe not zero problems, but zero major, or relevant, problems. I can see a real game in there now. I'm really enthusiastic for Beta and eventually Release. Keep up the good work guys!

V17 was already really stable for me, maybe this'll be even better. Thanks a ton Chris! I'll get back to you with problem reports once I've had a chance to get my hands on it.

My only gripe with the weapon balance of the ballistics is the high AP cost on the LMG. Most soldiers can't move and shoot using the LMG in the same turn. Even if they were only able to move 1-3 tiles, it would make a huge difference, at least to my particular play style where I use them in a supporting role. Bumping the AP cost down to even just 40 would solve a lot of issues I have in that regard. Other than that, the weapons actually feel really good to me. Shotgunners are great breach-men, Snipers rules the open field, and Riflemen fill the gaps, hold the lines, and do respectably well in most mid-range engagements. With the prohibitive AP cost of the LMG though, their only efficient use atm would be against larger targets, the likes of which I've not encountered yet, and by the time you'd be likely to face them in the course of a real game, you would probably already have something to replace the LMG.

Ran into same Alien Base thing as Gribbstar. Not a biggy for me, I'd never even been able to play long enough to see one before this patch. Only one CTD so far, tried to decommission an F-17 and then short hang (3-5 seconds) followed by the crash. Other than those, no major problems, just minor gripes that are of the "They'll certainly fix that later, it's not important right now" variety. Edit: And plenty of farm-maps with invisi-civvies vaulting over junk that didn't trip CTD's.

I know you didn't want to have to resort to this Chris, but seriously, thank you. XCOM:EU wasn't scratching the itch for Turn-Based Tactical Alien Shooting that I've had for a while now, and I just don't have the time anymore to acclimate to the graphics and clunky controls of X-Com:UFOD. Hopefully this release will finally be stable for me and I can do something to get my fill from Xenonauts.

Is the invisi-civvies vault crash caused by the map specifically, or the game making a call for a non-existent asset? I feel like if that could be pinned down, then at least a temporary work-around could be found to afford those of us who've never been able to play for more than 15-20 minutes without a crash a better chance at a prolonged game. But then again, I could just be way off the mark because I haven't a single effin' clue what I'm talking about.

Since the Roles got added I've actually been using the crap out of them, though I pretty heavily modify all the basic ones first. I keep the squad comp the same that it starts you out with by default, but mod the kits so they're a little more specialized. Commando (x1) - Pistol + Clips x 3, Smoke, Flashbang, Frag, C4 Assault (x2) - Shotgun + Clips x 3, Flashbang x 3, Frag x 3 Rifleman (x2) - M16 + Clips x 2, Pistol + Clip, Smoke and Frags x 2 Heavy Gunner (x1) - LMG + Clips x 3, Smoke x 3 Field Medic (x1) - M16 + Clips x 2, Medkit, Smoke x 2 Rocketeer (x0, x1 later on when Hunter loses effectiveness) - Launcher + Rockets x 4 (Assorted based on preference/current needs), Smoke x 2 Sniper - Sniper + Clips x 2, Medkit, Smoke x 2 I don't use the Rocketeer's until further in when I need more firepower. I use the Hunter early on to fill that role instead. Medics and Rifleman are interchangeable as needed. Heavy Gunner for just laying down various types of fire support and suppression. Assault gunners are strictly for Breach and Clear, generally kept out of the way or used for flanking maneuvers on the open field. Commando's used as scouting elements and secondary breaching element, hence the C4. Snipers are Snipers except when they're secondary medical elements or support elements. General strategy here is built around the expectation of lots of open ground or having small amounts of cover, and using smoke to make up for that shortcoming, as well as provide cover for moving up. Tactical retreat is a bigger priority than a assault with this mindset. Tactically, it's less about making sure the opponents die and more about making sure my guys live and take as little fire as possible in the process, hence the over-abundance of smoke grenades. People seem to feel shotguns are worthless, but at least early on, the high damage output makes them great, and for Breach and Clear, range isn't really an issue, so Shotguns tend to be ideal. The LMG may be slow moving, but being able to pepper an area and cover a retreat makes them worth lugging around when using these tactics. And then when it's time for the Heavy Gunner to pull back, the Sniper can cover him, and ideally pick off a couple targets in the process, making the next push that much more likely to succeed.

CTD on my second Farmland map attempt. Not actually sure it was from the invisi-civvies jumping something or not though, couldn't tell, stuff was going by way too quickly. It actually kinda seemed like it had more to do with my guys getting shot at than anything else, from the context of what was happening at the moment of crash. (I.E., the sounds of being shot at.) Also, it seems like the tank just will not move on the first mission no matter what, but after that it's completely fine. Not sure if it's only for the first mission, or for the first mission where you decide to bring a Hunter with. Regardless, it seems like the map doesn't matter, just that the tank refuses to get off the stupid chopper, but only for the one mission. Currently, I'm rationalizing it as some idiot forgot to put the gasoline in before the first op.

Confirmed invisi-civvies on multiple tilesets. Arctic, Middle East, and what looked like a supply depot type place, though I couldn't tell because the buildings didn't render. I kinda assume there were supposed to be buildings, the way the ground looked, but they did not, and I was able to walk through the non-existent walls. Seeing a lot of rendering issues, actually, like roofs on the military-base map not rendering no matter how many levels up I go, buildings not rendering, lots of stuff in general not rendering.

The atmosphere makes this game great, just like it did with X-Com. I'll echo the sentiments here, hearing incoming fire in X-Com always made me cringe, but rarely jump, despite how tense the atmosphere was. Xenonauts has taken it one step further, to the point where I can't help but jump whenever a shot comes from the darkness. It's still in Alpha and already it's great, I can't imagine how much better it will be once the Aliens can actually choose to shoot at us.

I really think story designers and writers are underrated heavily in the video game industry, but what you say is true, story designers/writers are practically a dime a dozen... But good ones are like Diamonds, to keep with your analogy. Look at a highly story-driven game like Mass Effect, or look at the success of ToR, or any BioWare game that isn't Dragon Age 2. I think a lot of folks actually in the video game industry kind of miss a very simple thing that movies captured long ago; that some games are meant to be played, and some are meant to be experienced. What I mean is, the difference between a heavily story-driven experience like Mass Effect, where you actually want to know about the characters and the universe you're in, versus a game like Halo or CoD, where it's about the action, usually in Multiplayer. Xenonauts fits into the later category, a game that uses 'not-story' as the body, and uses some story-based elements as some extra bits. Or, to put it in movie terms, Shoot 'Em Up or Smokin' Aces as opposed to, say, Aliens; Smokin' Aces is all about the action, there's no depth to it what-so-ever, but it's still a fun movie. Aliens has that character and story depth that make it what it is though, despite also having a lot of action. Both forms are not only equally viable, but can provide equally as many hours of awesome, everything else being equal, and the problem arises when games hedge on one or the other, thinking they can incorporate both when they can't. The CoD games are a great example of this, with weak single player content and even weaker story-lines; they hedge on the single player aspect in order to try and get some folks to buy it because they want a good story attached to an FPS experience, and fail to deliver. Here's how I feel about story designers and writers, and their place in the games industry; If you want to make a game centered around your story, don't bother pitching it to the big-time publishers, they won't take the risk. (2K -might,- but it's still very unlikely.) Instead, put together an indie crew and turn it into a labor of love, make something from your own blood, sweat, tears, and money. If you're good enough, and just a little lucky, getting noticed will be the smallest of your fortunes. Just don't fall into the trap of that hedged bet, make your game around one or the other, either mechanics to support story, or story to support mechanics.... Or get -really- lucky and make a game that can do both.

For any rebellion, you need Propaganda. That could be the mechanic that 'replaces' the politics of X-Com/Xenonauts. Don't have all the humans come to you, instead be waging a war behind the war; a war of propaganda, for recruits. Also, there needs to be something in place at some point to make the game about offense rather than defense, preferably from the very start. Rebellion's always start small and take the initiative, that's the whole point of a rebellion, particularly against Alien Overlords. So how do you make it about the offensive rather than a zero-sum game of 'Defend, Recruit, Rinse, Repeat'?

I second AD's interest. Not only that, but Betuor seems to have a lot of the same interest in making video games that I do, so I'm really interested to hear the responses for his questions.

Quick side-note, that's insane btw, heard about that just last night, and they were at 800,000$-ish at the time the video I watched got posted. I agree with Gorlom and AD, I think you're misunderstanding the point, as well as the function, of the thermometer, and they've said most everything I would have on the matter, except... Look at Minecraft, that started as an Alpha Kick-starter project very similar to how Xenonauts is doing. Without that early funding, Minecraft may never have gotten off the ground to become the massively popular game it is today. The difference between MC and Xenonauts is that Xenonauts is catering to a niche market, X-Com fans and hardcore TBS gamers who're looking for something with some life and challenge in it. This makes the idea of Xenonauts becoming insanely popular the way Minecraft did less likely, and some extra cash to feed back into the machine certainly wouldn't hurt Goldhawk. Also, Gamers are a motivated and generous breed, we're willing to put time, effort, money, blood, sweat, and tears into something we feel is a worthy cause, and I'm sure most everyone here will agree, a true spiritual successor to X-Com is a worthy cause, at least to us. I'm sure there are some who would go out of their way to figure out how to send Chris donations for the project regardless of whether or not he was 'asking' for them. Which he isn't. He's offering the option, subtly; not directly asking but making his request known. As has been stated, it's not like you have to donate, the game will probably get finished regardless of whether or not you do, and a donation thermometer isn't meant to make you feel bad, it's only there to offer the option should you feel strongly enough about the game.