Sheepy

UTF-8 does not work, as reported above previously. This is the weird part, which means some conversion is going on somewhere. For example the line feed character is ineffective in the launcher (regarded as a space), but would be effective when coded as 
 - as seen above in the beginning of each line. The entities are also incorrectly converted. I discovered this by testing © which should be the copyright symbol "©" but turns out to be "穢", way high up in 穢 | 穢 (UTF-8 E7 A9 A2). It smell like the launcher is not using a real XML parser and multiple conversions happen at different time and output/expect different things when it comes to non-ascii.

@Solver I may be wrong, but the launcher seems to be using wxWidget 2.8 in ansi mode. Some wild guess: The widget library need to be configured and build in unicode mode. Text data may need to switch to unicode form. UTF-8 text need to be converted to wx's wide string, which is UTF-16 on Windows. On the other hand, after some experiment, I discovered that the control can actually display unicode, but the mapping is lost in translation: I know a little bit about unicode, but I can't see any relationship between entities and result. For example: ¡ => 癒 U+7652 ¿ => 聶 U+8076 ɢ => 汃 U+6C43 ɣ => 氿 U+6C3F ɤ => 氻 U+6C3B ɥ => 犮 U+72AE 鱀 => 敼 U+657C It may be easier to find out why all entities beyond  got mapped into incorrect codepoints, and fix the unicode issue there, perhaps without touching the widgets. Alternatively, if the formula is known, it may be possible to create a reverse formula that turns utf-8 into something the mod launcher can display. Any idea? Unicode Test.zip

Ducking behind cover is a good way to make the battlefield feel more alive than having the shot miss. I think XCOM's action cams would feel a lot more static without the enemies or soldiers actively dodging shots. Turning miss chance into dodge chance - where you can see your soldiers hitting the alien's normal position, may also reduce that "are these soldiers blind" feeling...

Ah. I remember the run and turret turn, because I didn't think that'd help the game much for the complexity they'd cost. Totally forgot the strafe proposal. Ninja'ed. XD

3D is nice. Yes. But sometimes it is hard to see the map, where the soldiers can go, where to find covers - or where the aliens can. So, if we can turn the map from this: Into this with a simple click: This clearly show all the walls, covers, doors, characters, items, and other necessary info transparently. It's called the tactical view, and it is really handy when you want to plan tactic instead of admiring the aliens. But I guess... sparing the effort to create an alternative view is out of question?

If you look very, very closely you'll see that the machine gunner and sniper are holding different guns from others. Anything beyond I would expect to be in the realms of soldier customisation.... I assume that 3D portrait is on hold or scrapped, so not very likely in near future? I am thinking we can use a tactic view, like the one in Invisible Inc, which shows everything important including covers, items, characters, and enemy view cones, without all the foliage and decorations. Would be very helpful to X-2...

Yes. Adding even a slight TU cost per tile - as small as 1 TU or 0.5 TU - will make longer moves less TU efficient without preventing it. I see soldiers/swat do that in movies - when they are moving along a wall on high alert. But that should be enough and I don't think further adding elements to the reaction fire would be good; the current system baffles player enough by depending on multiple indirect or hidden parameters. Have seen steam reviews that complain it is random. Fair enough, I know I can't judge the reaction modifier of enemy's weapon just by looking at it. Can't think of any good solution, though. Switch to xcom overwatch and add perks to limit it? Add a reaction fire indicator? Limit reaction fires to end of enemy turn? Hmm. May be I should open a new thread to discuss that.

So... this morning I was thinking maybe we can streamline the turning part of ground combat. Removing tactical depth is certain to attract naysayers, I myself has said no for other ideas too, so here is another option... If we press Alt when we issue the order to move, the soldier will move sideway / backstep as necessary to keep their facing. I won't mind if it cost a little bit of additional TU per tile. I find myself doing this on two soldiers for three turns in a row: Walk to edge of rock wall. Turn to peek, see nothing. Walk one tile out of the wall. Turn to look. May see enemy, may see nothing. Turn back and walk to safety. Turn back again to keep watch. If we have sidestep, it'll be much simpler and efficient, and I hope more intuitive (less stupid) once the player get use to it: Sidestep two tile out to look. If soldier see the enemy when it reach the wall corner with his first step, he will automatically stop. Sidestep two tiles back to safety. Side/back stepping is also useful in many tactical situations, so I think it'll see many use once implemented. It can also make light armours more maneuverable (full sharfe) than heavy armours (forward and backward 45' sharfe) and SHIVs (wheel or tracked). Main cons that popup in my mind is... how about the aliens? The animation and intelligence is going to cost and they may look rather stupid While I am writing this, I suddenly remember the soldiers seeking cover in Apocalypse when they come under enemy fire. If I remember correctly, they would turn back from enemy, run, turn, run, and turn back to face the enemy, all on their own. I already felt it was hilarious at the time.

Android or not, touch is the choice of new gamers, young and old. Touch is, to them, more intuitive than a controller, and keyboard is a very big controller. If it is not obvious on the screen, it is broken design at this age. ("Wait. I can break that window / open door without walk? What? What is a game manual?") I have a convertible PC in my shoulder bag as a tool of trade, before it is replaced by diapers, napkins, changing pads, and other necessaries. It is limited to touch games. I was surprised to learn that even mouse games are not touch compatible; Samorost (and successors) is a point and click example that I can't play with touch. Ended up installing Long Live the Queen and Human Resource Machine. Didn't have Invisible Inc at that time, seems to be touch compatible too. I did have Notepad++. I read (and translate) Xenopedia on a computer that I can't play the computer game with, with on-screen keyboard. lol. So, yeah. Touch screen, small screen, and Intel HD compatibility is pretty high on my list, even on PC. At least we can tell the PO (s)he can play it on a pc pad.

Oh yes I remember that poor cow. XCOM 2012 has (snake)man-in-black. And a lot more, but pop culture is not something I am good at. Despite the lack of futuristic feel which some consider less cool, I also appreciate the fact that X-1 reversed the trend and put it in Cold War (courage!). The difficulty of X-1 is ok for me. The number of soldier seems to me a good balance between 1994 and 2012. It is hard to lost two soldiers on the get go, but does not demand an immediate retreat either. I think XCOM 2 did well in resurrecting the blaster launcher while limiting its number and ammo. I also miss throwing items around (much more efficient than walk and drop), mind probe, proximity mine, footstep sounds, and the ability to grab enemy weapons and make good use of them. On geoscape I miss the 3D globe, although I can see why the new XCOM opt to present it like a board. If we are not limited to 1994, newer xcom is doing better on ground combat evolution. Grapple, Run and Gun, Invisibility, Null Lance, Teleportation... Even Apocalypse had flying armour and self guided missile right off, and personal shield and teleporter later... More tactical options, that gradually opens up and shape your tactic and style, this is something I very want to see.

My sniper, behind full cover and crouched (I think), got sniped by an officier mid way. Otherwise it is pretty good. The best part is when another officer reaction shot dead a drone. Can we playback our recordings? It bugs me that I cannot shot around wall corners, alongside minor details like sometimes my soldier auto stand up but sometimes they don't, but this is the first preview build that make me think more about tactics than bugs. Happy with the sturdy covers. I think I only managed to destroy a piece of short wall. Still think bullets fly too fast. Sometimes when my people reaction shot I can't see what they are hitting instead of the enemy. I like the shiny texture of the battle rifle, want to see it less flat and artificial. I imagined they were matte in X-1. But I think that the characters are meshing with the background and sometimes I have difficulty spoting aliens or our soldiers. recording_1.rec

Version 0.9 This version should fix the predator spirit, and comes with a good selection of 40mm grenades. Due to system limitation, the grenade launcher will be armed with rocket by default, and can be armed with rockets in base. Fortunately, the soldiers are smart enough to replace any wrong loadouts with normal 40mm grenades, so it won't break the game. And after missing the pump from a pump action gun (I didn't know what pump action mean! Now I know.), the next mistake seems to be that the 40mm grenades are all grenade and no cartridge. In the past few days I have been wondering why 40x53mm looks so long and slim, unlike the name. I guess I won't redraw them now, just use some imagination. The original plan of 40mm flare and flashbang has to be bagged, again because of system limitation. For flashbang, suppression seems to be weapon dependent, not ammo. For flare, it simply doesn't work and I'll try to file an issue. During some light test, I find that the 3x3 area is a bit low and cannot reliably destroy cover at mid range. So I slightly increased the radius and accuracy. Reload cost is also slightly decreased since I didn't take into account the belt / backpack cost. Switching ammo is still a pain, and I don't think I want to reduce the reload cost to zero, so it does not turn out to be as versatile as I hoped. But it is still a fun weapon. Let's see how imba (or useless) the instant grenade turns out to be. Edit: Unfortunately, somewhere along the changes, the mod now consistently crashes v1.65 on startup, so it is now X:CE only.

Yes, I saw one or two complains on UI consistency. HUD shows health for interceptor but damage for UFO, weapon stat only visible in one small part of the game (that I also had difficulty finding at first too), bullet size etc. But they are not common. (Unless you count accuracy and LoS/LoF as same consistency problems.) Although a few players think X-1 is not a worthy successor, they are mostly vague. I can't remember any concrete complains on auto upgrade or auto sell. What I mean by dull is lack of variations. For example, "dull graphics" is me summarising comments that the palette is bland, that view angle is static, that battlefield lacks animations, that simplistic air combat display, that flat globe, and of course that 2D is dull. (I count dull enemy design into dull enemies.) And "gameplay is dull" is my summerisation of optimal base placement, optimal strategy, tactic (air and ground) stays the same throughout the game, equipments and their options is boring. Keep in mind that these comments are in comparison with XCOM 2 and as Chris said should be taken with a pinch of salt.

Good idea Solver. I just combed the first few pages of XCOM 2 forum's search result on Steam, and get a slightly different picture. Xenonauts is hardcore, a true successor of the classic x-com. Xenonauts is similiar with new XCOM, but they caters to different market. Most veterans, but not all, praise Xenonauts for its balance and depth. Because of the simplistic strategic layer in XCOM 2, X-1's strategic layer got some good cheers. I don't see them talking about X-1's streamlines much. Or the air combat, perhaps because there's no air combat in XCOM 2. When they do discuss them, they are pretty positive. Xenonauts looked promising. I noticed that in XCOM EU/EW's old discussions, the players were more forgiving of the then unfinished Xenonauts. By the time of XCOM 2, more players are criticising its weaker designs. 2D graphics. Fixed perspective. Air superiority ruins the game. Lack of mods. Bugs. Complicated cover and reflex. (But they like the sturdy covers instead of the flimsy walls in XCOM 2.) It doesn't help Xenonauts that XCOM 2 improved many shortcomings of XCOM EU/EW, which makes it a pretty good game. But many players who have also played Xeno still like the tactical and strategic challenges of X-1. Including freedom of inventory. Xenonauts is dull. Graphic is dull, Mission is dull, Weapon is dull, Enemy is dull, Soldier is dull, Gameplay is dull. If you want to stop the Xeno propaganda, these are some of the best points that fans can't refute, esp. in comparison with XCOM 2. Dull in both breath and depth. X-1 soldiers, for example, not only does not have customisable options, they are also disposable: a new recruit can shot as many bullets as veterans, and is not much more vulnerable when the veterans die from one shot more often than not. 2D graphic is putting players off. Many artists complain about this, but reality is games are for gamers, not for artists or game designers. So... good job in switching to 3D. And I'll skip the usual dramas. Psi or no psi. Inability to hit anything. TU micromanamgement. etc. Here are some of the longer discussions: http://steamcommunity.com/app/268500/discussions/0/412448158142638115/ http://steamcommunity.com/app/268500/discussions/0/523897277916713512/ http://steamcommunity.com/app/268500/discussions/0/523897277911953111/ One of the commenter noted that even XCOM EU had better review % than X-1, so I went to look at the most helpful post release -ve feedbacks... and see another picture. Camping is the biggest cause of negative reviews. As you can expect in negative reviews, many things are being criticised, from story to music. The recurring / strong feeling ones seem to be lack of animations, bland graphic, line of sight / fire (i.e. alien snipe you and you can't shot back), limited sight, low accuracy, grenade, psi attack, cascading morale disaster, boring air combat (funny how this is the opposite of xcom 2 discussions), developer did not listen to feedback, or save / load bugs (that is still hitting me in v1.65). But the single biggest complain is camping. There are many issues that amplify the problem: flimsy soldier, bullet sponge, non-obvious reaction fire formula (more than one commenter think it is random), dread aura etc. Regardless of the number of problems and examples cited, camping is a big frustrating experience that compels some players to write beefy negative comments. Which is pretty interesting because I can't remember seeing this come up in XCOM 2 forum - they pointed out quite a few frustrations, but not camping. This make me suspect that if they like XCOM 2 and they try X-1 and hate it, they don't go very far in the game. In other words, I guess a they think X-1 is dull / repetitive / tedious and give up before they reach the most frustrating part.

Solver has confirmed that this is a limitation of the system, because strings is managed by the engine. Thanks for the time.

Thanks for the answer, @Solver. I'd like to note that translators can safely combine mods that add strings into one package; only mod that replaces strings need to be stand alone.

Tried 800x600 and noticed a glitch immediately (quote clipped off) In addition, some number is lost in downscale (see TU slider), and found a new position that result in can see but cannot shot. A pity that the game seems to crash mid way, when I thought I may win without losing any guy this time with a new strategy. I'm also pleased to report that the pixelated resolution has that old school X-COM feel in it. Would miss it if you decide not to support low resolution.

Yup. Tested no support. But then as of Jan 2017 only 0.69% Steam gamers use ultrawide as their primary, and I won't be surprised if the developer does not have ultrawide to test...

I suspect that no mod has ever done this preciously because it is not possible. Filed a bug report.

According to the Modular Mod Documentation, Excel Spreadsheet XML files can use MODMERGEREPLACE and MODMERGEAPPEND to partially update game text. This is used to good effect in many mods, such as Armoured Assault / Furies, Terror, and Dreadnoughts Oh My: But when it is applied to strings.xml, an Excel Spreadsheet, the replace command does not work. This bug prevents weapon mods to be compatible with each other because they will overwrite each other's weapon description. It also prevents mods from supporting multiple languages, as seen in the screenshot below which attempts to update English and French text in one mod. Attached is a sample mod. mod_bug_rocket_recoil.zip

Thanks @Charon. Yes they take different commands: Non-excel xml files take MODMERGEATTRIBUTE and MODMERGE for xml structure and properties. (ammos.xml, sounds.xml) Excel files take MODMERGEREPLACE and MODMERGEAPPEND for text content. (researches.xml, xenopedia.xml) We just need to look at XCE to see examples of the second sets. The XCE bundled Armoured Assault mod appends vehicle weapons to research: And the XCE bundled Furies, Terror, and Dreadnoughts mod modifies (partially replace) Xenopedia data: strings.xml is an excel file, but it's the only one that does not take any commands. My latest attempt ended like this: (Removing French does not fix it. I can also confirm that multiple replace works in other files, but my data is not fit for human consumption ) So, what I want to ask is... is this a bug or a system limitation?

I am creating a set of mods that tweak ground combat weapons. One of them reduces heavy weapon recoil to 60. Another converts machine guns to three round burst, snap = 3 rounds / burst = 9 rounds. (sfx updated and tested.) They are working, and the set includes other mods like smaller pistol and baton, pistol burst fire, rifle mitigation etc. The idea is that players can (de)activate the tweaks they want instead of being forced to accept everything in one mod. Problem: the recoil mod set recoil (replaces description). The machine gun mod adds a firing mode and adjusts existing mode (replaces description). Conflict. Another problem: The French translation comes with xce. I also have a Chinese translation in a full run test. If I supports them, that is six mods instead of two (or 16 mods instead of 6). I don't like that. My translation supports 9 mods in one package. Individually that'd be 10 mods to manage - as if the French mods does not make the list long enough. If we can MODMERGEREPLACE strings.xml, the mods can result in correct description regardless of order / state, in addition to supporting multiple languages.

I mean, I can add text to strings.xml, or totally replace existing text. But I can't seem to use MODMERGEREPLACE, MODMERGEWITH, or MODMERGEAPPEND in strings.xml. I'm sure the syntax is right, because I can partially update xenopedia and research. Is this a known limitation of the mod system? Being able to replace partial string is very useful, I can have several mods that update different aspects of a gun without text conflict, and I can update multiple languages in one single mod.

Can reproduce the tree shade bug above. Can reproduce the "visible but not targettable enemy at edge of vision cone" at exact same location as ver 0.3.0. Can reproduce "can't fire around wall corner" problem. Crouching does not seem to increase accuracy or save my man. Movement TU estimation seems to be off, now it over report instead of under. A bit busy so didn't have time to find out what is wrong. Damage display is consistent. Like the mission end summary. The officer also somehow made a far, far snipe on my sniper, after the first drone is down and before other drones are in place, which means it shouldn't be able to see him. It then proceed to one shot kill the machine gunner the next turn, so I'm left with the boring rifles and the shotgun. Edit: I mean, losing soldiers is part of X-COM. But consistently losing soldier with a unique weapon means the player don't get to play with them much.

Not bad! This would also explain the low quality of the recruits, why they can't reliably shot a 7 foot tall robot at point blank range.