Jump to content

Dagar

Members
  • Content count

    208
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    14

Everything posted by Dagar

  1. Yeah, this is known, but not really published somewhere afaik.
  2. Dagar

    Your Xenonauts 2 wishlist?

    Whatever soulful means. FiraXCOM has its fair share of problems, which were not all adressed form FiraXCOM2, like not being able to lean out from a slightly elevated position (a step up, so to say) or cover destruction being basically the only meaningful tactic in the highest difficulty and Long War, because dashing into the unknown for a flanking manoeuvre leads to coffins full of Assault soldiers. I found FiraXCOMs systems enjoyable at first (it was my entry into the genre after all), but it gets very formulaic fast. In your defense, so does Xenonauts' system. I would call neither "soulful".
  3. Dagar

    Modular Armour System

    Talking about a back slot: If you can opt to not take a backpack, that should also be viable. What always bugged me that it made no sense to not stuff your soldiers to the brim of their carrying capability, i.e. in X1 there is a malus for carrying too much but no bonus for carrying less. Stalker had this as a very neat system of increasing encumbrance, which means you could opt to go in very quiet, fast and light or as a heavy, slow walking ammo and gun locker. Using a similar system it could be really viable to do light pistol scouts with increased TU (so they can move farther and use more items and stuff) and reflexes (so they don't get shot at as much. Extra cool would be if you could drop your backpack to get these bonuses temporarily. On the other end you might have heavy soldiers who cannot even do certain things, akin to how (at least in X-Division) the Predator wearers cannot use medkits. As another suggestion on equipment, how about a backpack that provides a smoke screen when (while) being shot at?
  4. Dagar

    Modular Armour System

    Sounds really good, I like the approach. I could envision both upgrades for all the gear of type X you currently have, if there is a flat-out improvement, e.g. +5 acc for the tactical visor from dissection of Ceasan sniper eyes, but also an alternative piece of gear with other stats (e.g. a heavier visor that has night vision or can see through smoke better, but does not have the acc bonus), which you would have to produce separately. Now how cool would it be if there were not actually new types of armour, but you'd elect a set of new components to be made into a new standard piece of armour? Like say the heavy armour, tactical visor and exoskeleton legs would become a new type of armour you can produce as an alternative to the single components, granting larger bonuses while unaltered (because they are designed as a whole instead of piecemeal) and also cost slightly less material compared to the single components. That would make the set of equipment a quasi-standard for your troops, i.e. what the X1 armours really are.
  5. Dagar

    UFO Roofs Indestructable?

    Okay, so I am going to ask the really important question here: can we also jump UP levels now? Like with the Parkour perk or some exoskeleton tech?
  6. Saying that again, but while we're at it, please let us replay the alien turn or give us some other info like last seen position of actor X.
  7. I am so far disengaged with my first days of Xenonauts and with the Vanilla game that I can't tell personally, but if you watch some first let's Plays, you'll see people be overwhelmed by the system, because all they know is flying straight at the enemy and getting shot down. The game does not do a good job of explaining anything, really, and the fact that you should pause as often as you can, use manual waypoints, manage your evasive rolls with keys that are not explained and that the speed has influence on your turn rate and that you should attack from the side to land missiles against evasive targets, all that is stuff you have to explore to really be successful. try working without all that and you'll likely find the air game frustrating. Can you point me towards people who do not want to have a fun game or who want the game to play itself, please? Because if I read someone wanting that I must have forgotten that by now. The thing is that what is fun to you and what is easy to you does not have to be the same for everyone else. I am obviously talking solely about the air game, not the strategy (world map) part. Maybe I worded that one a bit misleadingly. Obviously you still need to keep up with research on aircraft and their equipment to make it through the game, but not to be good at the manual part of it. The problem with X1s air game is that it arguably is the least important of the three parts of the game, the least "core" part, and the most special with its pausable real time system that needs quick reactions, while at the same time being, along with the other two parts, a component you have to succeed in in order to win, makes it frustrating for some players who already voiced their concerns. I am not one being frustrated with the air game, but I still would like to see a turn-based system instead, because I feel it would fit better into the game's overall mechanisms. That said, I have no idea how to make a good turn-based air game of two widely different opponents, as I also have said multiple times now.
  8. That's not what @Charon wrote. He meant that the air game should start simple and easy to be manageable by all skill levels and then increase in difficulty gradually. As for the difficulty increase losing campaigns: I could envision that stays simple enough so you can finish a campaign pretty much regardless of what you do. You'd lose some engagements, but some are pretty much guaranteed to win, furthering the narrative and your progress. But there would be optional goals to fulfil there to increase difficulty and/or risk as well as rewards. Speaking of the old X1 system, how about not focusing too much damage on one side of the UFO so components do not get destroyed in-air? Or how about you if could try to concentrate fire only on some areas or use weaker weaponry in order to spare more crew who you then have the chance to capture? Or how about while developing new weaponry you could field some prototype that may speed up your development of the weapon, but be worse/less reliable than what you have right now? With pilots being characters more like ground troops, even experience and achievements could be a thing to bring in there.
  9. I don't agree that the old system is a no-go, though I'd like to see a tactical turn-based one or something like FTL as well. As for your suggestion, @Emily_F: much of that idea leaves something to desire. Now I am no expert in that matter, but afaik real air combat is very, very different to real ground combat. No jet fighter is nimble enough to take cover behind anything on the ground. The engagement distances are rarely below 1km, there usually is no dogfight with MGs like with the piston engine planes of WW1 or 2. Combat relies heavily on long range target seeking missiles and counter measures. If there is a close range engagement, it is highly three dimensional and based on split second decisions and reflexes, nothing that is easily portrayed in a 2D abstraction. The height and velocity dynamics of fighter aircraft are pretty unintuitive to pretty much most of us. I don't know how, with that real world basis, you would make a fun, easy to learn and not totally outlandish "mini" game, and apparently, neither do Goldhawk (or Firaxis, for that matter).
  10. I do fully well realize that I am likely the only person obsessing over stuff like this, but can we please get a round earth for Xeno2? I don't necessarily mean in the actual visual representation, but in the mechanisms. It really annoys me somehow that, in X1, a base with a radar dish close to one of the poles covers way less "real" ground than it should, and aircraft and aliens fly slower there than at the equator.
  11. @Emily_F I would like that, too, but I put that hope more on easy to use mod tools and the community now. Which is fine to me. If Goldhawk can give me a solid basis for mods, that is all I really need from them.
  12. @Chris I agree, but at the same point, you could at least store the over-TU-threshold movement for each soldier and have a button that just executes these move orders for single soldiers or everyone in the (new) turn. That would go in the same direction QoL wise and not be hard to implement.
  13. Sure. I get the impression though that Goldhawk do not want to introduce pilots as a separate entity from planes. I'd like to see that, but at the same time, I don't mind too much, that sounds like a very easily implementable concept as a mod (given that GH want to make X2 as moddable as possible).
  14. Have yet to play the beta (though I bought it). But that is also what is my experience with pistols in X1 (X-Division), so how does that compare to X1 in your opinion? To me, it never makes sense to send a soldier with just a pistol. The reflex bonus is too low to risk it, and you don't get more TUs or Reflexes when carrying less than 100% of capacity (which, btw., is something I'd love to see, because then light builds could actually be good). Instead I'd naturally give them shields or longer range/harder hitting weapons like rifles or LMGs.
  15. I got my gog key a couple of hours ago via mail. unlocking in gog was successful, but as I am at work, I did not test downloading and running it, obviously.
  16. Dagar

    saving the game vers 1.00.01 to vers 1.00.10?

    In general it should work, if you are early enough in the game, but you will have to unlock some research manually (e.g. Wolf and Direwolf armour), once you have met the conditions. That is not exactly straight for2ward, but if you want to go this route, I can post the how-to in the next couple of days here. Maybe @Charon can help you more, but he is more or less retired from X-Div now.
  17. I thought about something like this for Xenonauts for the past months as well (I am not sure if I even made a post about that somewhere). I come more from a Darkest Dungeon standpoint, a game where you essentially are a monster of a human being, taking in fresh adventurers, getting most of them killed or firing them after they have so many traumas that they are useless to your mission, only investing in those really worth it in terms of equipment and therapy. I would really like this in the context of Xenonauts as a resistance force against an overwhelming enemy (not in the sense of FiraXCOM 2's popcorn action cinema resistance). If you have the possibilities, you want to put your seasoned soldiers who are not really up for the front lines any more into some white collar position. If not, you'd let them go get killed in some other organization. Or, you know, see to that yourself in some way. So I am talking about the psychologic side of the effect of violence on humans. Your arm got rendered useless by a Xenomorph's acid blood, which is bad for your combat performance, yeah, but also the trauma of the situation got you into a drinking habit mixed with morphine abuse just so you can get some sleep at night. You got violent when your CO demanded you get your head straight, thus demoted. Now you are not the cool, collected rifleman any more, but you are sent in as a high risk scout with only a pistol (can't use that second arm) nobody really cares losing. Now that's the bad side, but you might (perhaps with help from your comrades and superiors) see through that over time, get your rank and merit back, get really proficient at spotting and slaying Xenomorphs before they can come close, and get your fancy robotic arm for two handed use. All could be fine, but then again the operation on your arm got you back on morphine and weird looks from some "purist" comrades... That's more a narrative arc obviously, but your soldiers could develop good and bad habits according to what happened to them, phobias according to traumatic situations (with variety; if you encountered a Caesan in the dark while passing through a door into a building you might develop fear of Ceasans, or the dark, or doors, or being the first to storm a building...) or good perks accordingly. This would also be a more or less random thing you cannot really farm for, especially since you cannot rely on the soldier ever recovering. Some broken things stay broken. It would also be aggravated by lack of rest, strings of hard, bad missions, losing many of your fellows and so on. Going with Darkest Dungeon, you could also have a chance of some heroic perk from a stressful situation instead of the soldier freaking out. I am going to stop here, but I think the psychologic side is a really interesting one to explore, and Xeno1 already laid some foundation with the bravery system.
  18. Dagar

    Question to Chris

    Not yet afaik - there is an NDA.
  19. Finally able to get at this again, but short on time, so here it is: I would have liked a turn-based system better for all the players who cannot or do not want to handle the stress of quick decision making in an essentially turn-based game. Personally, I am fine with the X1 system. As for effects, you should always set your goal to making systems as elegant as possible, i.e. easy to learn, good to use all over the game in certain situations and an option to consider all around. Thinking about the clouds, I feel you should go the step further and allow UFOs and later planes to generate their own clouds, and also to develop weapons that are immune (or at least resistant) to the cloud cover mechanism. This could lead to a nice X-Division style arms race between you and the Xenos. And the same should apply to everything you put into the air combat system. Have autoturrets on ships? Cool, let's also be able to drop them on hovering platforms in style the style of air mines. The enemy behaviour system is giving me headaches: Having the enemy dynamically flee can lead to frustration on the player's side, so you have to be careful what to bring into there. Finally: make pilots separate from planes! They could lose some XP when transitioning to a newer model, so your interesting decision would be preserved. You could also add simulators that could mitigate that to some extent.
  20. Xsolla at its best. I also stopped for a moment when I got the mail. But since I want a gog key anyway, I naturally clicked the button.
  21. I can agree to that. The only thing is that Bravery should be about daring to go through with a prank on the chief scientist developed by the engineers.
  22. Dagar

    A Minor, But Immersive Detail.

    Yeah, reading the Xenopedia in X-Div may be a time consuming matter, but it is worth it in multiple regards.
  23. Dagar

    Unrelated Advert Pop-Ops??

    *bows* at your service...
  24. To me this is the old "game system balance" vs "realism" discussion. Do you want a system that is easily conveyed and functions with quickly learned rules or do you want a system that is harder to wrap your head around but orients more towards actual physics and tactics? There is a reason that in real life assault rifles have a single shot mode and either full auto or burst (or both). As conductiv already said, single shot is for accurate, ammo saving fire when you are not under a lot of pressure, much alike how sniper rifles are usually portrayed. People who do/did not serve in the military or are not members of a gun club might not find this intuitive, but the truth is that with a standard issue assault rifle today you can easily hit targets 200m away every time. I was able to hit 500m static smaller-than-man targets with a not perfectly aligned G36 over 50% of the time. There rarely are scenarios where you need sharp shooters, which is why most military don't have them in their regular troops, because the range where ARs stop being effective is so long that it almost never occurs that you would need a more precise weapon. At the same time, the urge to get yourself out of line of fire is so big that even ARs usually suppress really well at these distances with burst fire. The reason why LMGs are a thing in regular units is that a) they have much more ammunition at the cost of weight, setup time and support needs, so they can suppress for longer times when ARs need to pause for reload regularly and b) since suppressing the enemy more means you get suppressed less in return, making it easier for your riflemen to take accurate, single shots at the enemy, or use the uncontested space to get closer and flank. C) is also their usually higher caliber for better penetration and stopping power, should you need it. That said, LMGs are also fired in short, accurate bursts instead of just spraying bullets over a whole zip code (as @Coffee Potato would say), because some bullets flying really close past you are much more effective at getting you down on your belly than hundreds flying all over the place. Seasoned shooters with both weapon systems know that and use short bursts and single shot fire accordingly. So, let's say you want to go for realism. That would mean that an AR should be really accurate if the shooter is stationary, shoots single rounds and is not under significant fire from the enemy, i.e. he can stick his head out for a second or two without getting shot. At the same time the AR could deliver reasonable suppression, especially when coupled with more bursts from the same or more soldier(s). That does not mean Sniper Rifles are useless. They could be used for the occasional REALLY long shot and for cover penetration thanks to bigger caliber and specialized ammunition. Their downside would be that you could basically only fire them once a round at most. I do not have experience with Sniper Rifles, but the two snap shots do not strike me as likely being sensible. If you shoot that thing, you want to be sure to hit. Getting bullets in the general vicinity is other people's job. The LMG is, in comparison to the AR, a rather stationary setup weapon also delivering short bursts with higher cover penetration and suppression that does not run out of ammo in a considerable time frame. We ditched the mag fed LMG pretty much at the second World War already, and the only time this comes up today is with an AR with slight modifications to make it more LMG-like (like with a bipod and a drum magazine). As for pistols, they should have a niche role for the heavy weapons soldier's sidearms and maybe for frontline NCOs (with the latter needing their whole own system for that to make sense). They are used in a police context for being the minimal option for ranged lethal power projection while also having controlled, single shot fire and a quick drawing time, which is not really a factor if you already expect resistance and have your guns at the ready anway. That said the "sidearm" option also can be fulfilled by having the sniper/LMG gunner carry an additional AR, which is also how military often times do it. Now, after that wall of text, I'd find it much more interesting if you left all the options to all the applicable weapons. There are Marksman Rifles with burst options, a skilled LMG gunner can squeeze out single shots or the weapon directly supports it. At the same time, a rookie with an AR will often times auto fire and burn through his ammo fast needlessly. That is also why the M16 introduced burst mode as a replacement for auto fire, because with triplets you tend to hit and suppress rather well while somewhat limiting your ammo consumption. It would be cool if you would just order your people to shoot single or burst fire, with their experience and stress determining how well they are able to aim for the single shot and how many bullets they send downrange for the burst. More aim and more bullets would consume more time units, obviously...
  25. Dagar

    air support

    I agree to your statement. I think that if CAS is to become a thing, it would have to be well balanced in terms of costs (material and opportunity), precision, effects and use limits. I can only speak from X-Division experience, but in that scenario I would find it okay if I had to equip a fighter plane with a special one-time use air-ground weapon that costs materiel and time to build (binding engineers), send it alongside the troop transport (which means range limits as the fighter usually has less fuel), then have it shoot that stuff on demand, but with a one turn delay, and it likely doing more of a suppression effect than killing due to accuracy limitations and cover. Targets in buildings would not be as effected, even more so in the UFO. Also, you'd risk killing civilians, but that is always a danger present. Basically, it would be a high cost larger radius rocket with high suppression effect. You could make it even harder by having to have a soldier throw out a signal flare or grenade for the CAS to hit its mark. Basically, it should come with costs appropriate to the effect granted.
×