Jump to content

Bobit

Members
  • Content count

    52
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Bobit last won the day on June 30

Bobit had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

About Bobit

  • Rank
    Squaddie
  1. @Coffee Potato In The Last Hundred Yards (WW2 token wargame), instead of Berserk, they have the Heroic status effect, where the squad gets a large defensive boost, then charges straight towards the enemy. In cover-based games that's a little more awkward, but in that game it's just brilliant at creating sudden massive surges in the fighting line.
  2. Bobit

    K9s!

    Honestly most of this (running, strafing, dogs, training, mutants) exists in OpenXCOM/FMP, and some other things (hard science abilities + attachments) in UFO:AL. I quite like dogs in XFiles. They are fast, deal lots of damage, highly expendable, good day vision, and the best part - can "bark" at enemies as a reaction that lowers their TUs, preventing them from acting. Hold the alien down while the squad closes in!
  3. Bobit

    AI "cheats"

    @Chris Keep in mind the player cheats too! The respective equivalents are: 1) Once players spot an enemy, they will send their 100% TUs allies to attack them, making for a much more rapid response. They are also capable of guessing where the enemy is. 2) Players fight 8v4 due to shared vision (they can pick off enemies) 3) Players can (in most games) fire from squadsight, and in all games share vision @Coffee Potato This is a very popular feature in OpenXCOM. Essentially a soldier can either be seen by the enemy or cannot. However all units do get halved accuracy when firing past LoS. Hit and run can be done but you have to hide all of your units.
  4. Oooh there are multiple alien types now? This was just my second mission, it lags too much for me to play much. Can't remember much, but I got an error after almost every move.
  5. @Trashman I'm talking about fighter radar range being a geoscape-level attribute. It exists in UFO defense where air combat is autoresolved. That's my point. It's true I cherrypicked the parts you emphasized that were geoscape level, but I don't consider weapon range to be much more interesting in manual resolution than automatic. It's an interesting attribute in UFO defense too. That's my point. Also... programming a game is not very difficult unless it's very simulation-based. In any case PhDs are barely relevant to game design (or many things really).
  6. Game had already given me a lot of errors every time after I move a soldier. http://www.mediafire.com/file/iu86tr1xmo6x7sh/2019-06-28_100320.rar/file
  7. There are three ways that OpenX and Xenonauts 1 allow the AI to not be picked off one by one 1) Vision through walls - psi / scent 2) More vision than humans 3) Firing on things not in their LoS Which of these do you think are currently implemented? I think none. Which do you think ought to be implemented? I think all.
  8. @TrashMan If ground combat only rotated between ten different map+ alien combinations, would you play it? It would become tedious with an optimal solution for all the ten setups. The game would be solved sufficiently in hours. Ground combat has inherent variability to it because the setups are different. In air combat, they are not. In your following point you emphasize detection and range. Those are geoscape-level air combat attributes. Making the actual fight between aircraft more or less automatic as it is in UFO defense does not remove those, in fact it emphasizes them. From my point of view, the geoscape part of air combat is the actually interesting part, the actual combat itself becomes quickly solvable. As to your snobby sentence everyone is referencing: in general, thinking of a game design system is not so hard. Implementing it is not nearly as hard as it seems so long as you're willing to completely cut graphics and other such things required to make it marketable. Making it work well with every other system is damn near impossible and the reason both of us haven't made a game. Unless of course you just copy an old game. So you're not entirely wrong. But mostly.
  9. Alien goods are worth a hell of a lot more than some experimental engineer making guns... in xPiratez the "sell for profit" makes quite a bit of sense, but not in any other game.
  10. You would do it because you get paid for saving the world. This exists in the original UFO defense game. Modders in OpenX disagree on whether it is a good mechanic. It allows for "interest" and "investments" which is interesting, but does tend to reduce diversity because rushing a significant profit-maker is just so much better than other tech. Imo if we have selling for profit at all, why bother forcing people to check the price of everything when you can just manufacture a $ item?
  11. @Crallux Evading was basically used to get right behind a UFO then spam attack it. You would basically develop an optimal algorithm for every UFO vs craft combination, then spend two minutes repeating that algorithm for every fight. It didn't actually add depth once you knew what you were doing. Charon managed to make the airgame a tiny bit more varied in X-Division, but even he said air combat would be better if it was just autoresolved. Yes, the current air combat is absolutely terrible. But that's like saying ground combat would be terrible without terrain + items. We really have no idea what they plan to add, maybe they will allow multiple ships with various active abilities. My only real concern is that it looks extremely slow right now, and they've said they plan to make it shorter, but really air combat should take under 1 min imo. About the base-building, they will likely go back to the old system after community backlash. But their reasons for "scrapping" it were the same as the air game: it really didn't work in X1, so they chose to simplify it so they can focus on other geoscape stuff like strategic ops. @DREADNAUGHT OpenXCOM mods have the piloting mechanic where soldier stats affect craft stats. It doesn't add a whole lot, but it's neat. In Xenonauts they try to give you more control over air combat. In the original XCOM you mostly just send your craft and wait for the battle to end, but the bright side is that you didn't have to micromanage something that has next to no strategy. I would definitely have auto-resolved combat if I ever made an XCOM-like. Maybe they just wanted complex air combat because it sells better.
  12. @TrashMan 1) Allowing multiple dropships. Firstly, this is more difficult to balance than simply having different dropship size; usually if one dropship can reach the enemy, 5 can. But if a 2-man motorcycle can reach the enemy, that doesn't mean a 12-man APC can. But yes, it definitely is possible to balance, just takes a lot of other mechanics. Secondly, I do like the idea of wildly varying squad sizes, it works very well in XFiles. Thirdly, you might want to try the 40k OpenX mod, it has squad sizes up to 50, which I find tedious, but you would probably enjoy that and OpenX in general. Fourthly 40K allows you to send flying HWPs alongside a dropship, and has dropships that are also interceptors, similar to ideas you've talked about. 2)Once again Charon never meant a literal teleporter. The thematic explanation should be something else, or nothing at all. 3) Dropships are different from teleporters when the escort metagame is interesting. But it's kinda not imo. Mostly you just retreat and send interceptors once you see enemy fighters. Actual escorts aren't strong enough to defeat fighters 2v3, at least in X-division. 4) Air bombardment is a modding feature in OpenX. I don't know of mods that have actually used it (most just ignore the air game), but people generally agree it's a cool idea.
  13. To summarise, TrashMan cares a lot about theme. See his opinions on Wraiths. In fairness, Charon/Chris's approaches make little thematic sense, tho tbh idc. There are interesting elements of splitting the barracks of different bases. For example having two teams with non-interchangeable crew is interesting, though cheap transfer makes it less so. It also lets you configure defense teams, if base defense is common. And there's the question of how many barracks bases are optimal. But yeah it's probably better to put the depth somewhere that results in more REPLAYABLE micromanagement. Base-building is not too replayable atm, you basically always take the same approach. What is replayable is losing your research base, or rushing research, or slowing research because you're about to run out of things to research. So charon's idea of making barracks and inventory but NOT facility layout global makes a lot of sense mechanically.
  14. To clarify - by "a multi-base approach" I didn't mean what we have currently in X2. Having mini-bases which are basically just interceptors + radars makes a lot of sense to me. But having the full base-building mechanics "multi-base approach" of X1 without actually making multi-dropship viable doesn't.
  15. Imo, a multi-base approach makes sense if an only if it's actually viable to have multiple bases with soldiers. It was not in X1. So I chose the third option. Global stores makes quite a bit of sense, since transfer costs are pretty low anyways, in most games non-global stores just mean you have to put all manufacturing in your main base.
×