Max_Caine

Administrators
  • Content count

    4,752
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

19 Good

1 Follower

About Max_Caine

  • Rank
    Forum Moderator

Converted

  • Biography
    Hello and welcome to the Goldhawk forums. If you need help or information, please PM me and I'll do my best to help. If you're here the spam adverts, go elsewhere.
  • Location
    Europa
  • Interests
    Completing videa games
  1. If memory serves correctly from previous discussions, the grenade launcher has always been intended as a direct fire weapon. I can understand why - you may as well call the grenade launcher an unguided blaster bomb launcher and be done with it if it were authentically represented, but I believe this decision is going to draw considerable ire. I personally believe the grenade launcher should be replaced with something more suitable. A recoilless rifle would, I believe, be very suitable in terms of era, gameplay and authenticity as a successor to the rocket launcher.
  2. Couple of issues When the grenade launcher misses the grenade doesn't go bang somewhere else. Throwing hand grenades behind cover is now a bad idea. If the throw misses, the grenade seems to stop on the cover then detonates, killing the soldier.
  3. I think that grenades have too random a distribution when they miss. When I first tried throwing grenades, the grenades would detonate to the right-hand side of the soldier who threw it. At first, I thought the grenades were bugged, but it was after throwing other grenades that I realized just how wild the distribution is when a soldier misses with a grenade. Could something be done to make a missed grenade throw less wacky?
  4. Tabletop wargames, with particular reference to miniature-based wargames have to be able to model cover that is both reasonable and authentic, but without making the model too complex as the more rules that apply to cover, the more time both players spend on the cover rules. Xenonauts could benefit from taking such a tabletop approach to modelling cover, as it would provide a means of more accurately presenting cover without heavy use of modelling. Some tabletop games do what kroyln suggests - cover is defined as both being able to obscure a shot, and prevent a shot from striking a target. However, cover is usually defined as one or either, so cover is "soft", when it can obscure a target and grants a minus to-hit, or "hard" when it can physically block a shot and grants a saving throw. Some games roll both soft and hard into one mechanic, such as W40K which grants a saving throw when a target is in coverbut that saving throw cannot be reduced except through certain special rules. Infinity grants a negative to-hit, and a bonus to the armour stat. Bolt action treats hard/soft cover as different attack modifiers. Something like Inifnity or 40k's ruleset may be beneficial to Xenonauts. If cover granted a bonus to armour (or granted armour at all!) or granted a easy to understand saving throw then both concealment (in terms of cover making a shot miss) and protection (in terms of cover blocking a shot) could be modelled.
  5. Hi Pave, I've done some fiddling with the inside-UFO AI and you might find following AI file is more interesting. Haven't worked out yet how to balance the Reaper melee yet, so they will camp to door ATM. defend.json
  6. Given the latest thread is about a hotfix, I thought it would he useful to comment here rather than in the hotfix thread about the current build. As other have done sterling work in commenting on the bugs, I thought I might talk a a little about other elements. I really don't like the death animation for the Sebillian. The way both arms stretch out at 90 degrees as if it's been crucified and the way the whole body goes rigid prior to falling over gives a comical air to a beast that's by no means comical. Is there something that could be done with the arms to give them a more natural seeming pose? There's a great youtube video with shows a lot of GTA death animations that I think some of which might be applicable to the Sebillian I've noticed that that the AI seems to follow the same kind of weighting mechanism for scoring tiles as it did in X-1. While I'm not as technically competent as Sheepy, I could work out what most of the weights meant so I had a fiddle with the aggressive AI as it didn't seem aggressive enough. I've attached the changes I've made along with a few other changes that I made to some of the weapons,especially the baton as it's very difficult to get in range of using a baton and the payoff for using it seems to be quite small. I also notice there doesn't seem to be an armour value for armour - is that something yet to come? MaxChanges.zip
  7. Could a bonus for point-blank shots be added? This was a bone of contention in X1 as it felt "unrealistic" for a soldier to be in either the adjacent tile or a few tiles away and have a low chance to hit.
  8. So, out of curiosity, I clicked on the Input tab in the launcher for the first time ever. Chris, I think you need to take a look at it, because there are keybinds for actions like "jump", "fire 1",, "fire 2", etc. etc. I'm going to try pressing some of these buttons in-game to see what happens, but those keybinds should be removed and replaced with Xenonaut specific keybindings. EDIT: Pressing the keybindings from the input tab didn't do anything so that's useful to know. Some comments on the animations re. the Psyon grunt (or minion or whatever - the lows rung in the totem pole, you know what I mean). the shoot animation does a double-take when processing - he lifts his arms, then it snaps down again and then lifts again. Could that be fixed up? Also the shoot animations for the alines in general seem fairly rough in comparison to X1. That is to say, they seem to be lifting their arm and the bullet comes out without the arm(s) seeming to aim, as if their weapon is misfiring in the process of being lifted.Also, could you reintroduce the point blank bonus to-hit that was in X1? It seems silly that both myself and an alien can stand right next to each other and miss! EDIT 2: Have now discovered the .json files and am pleased to report that itinerant modders fiddling with the stats doesn't cause any issues. Personally would have preferred a greater degree of separation of the data from the code, but you takes what you gets.
  9. Been a few builds since I last tried it,so some opinions. 1) Movement actions feel as if they should be faster than they are. The general poise and gait of both the Psyons and the humans suggest they are running from spot to spot, but the speed which they do that doesn't suggest a running pace, more a jogging pace 2) Dead aliens and humans can ragdoll a bit which makes death humorous, when the arm of a dead human spazzes out. Is it possible to make them slump without spazzing? I bet it isn't. 3) Human feel a little "floaty" when running, that is to say the impression is given that their feet don't seem to quite touch the ground. This is especially obvious when they are running in profile to the observer/player 4) It's hard to tell who still has AP and who doesn't without clicking through each solider, as this isn't updated on the UI on the left hand side. 5) Much easier by sight to work out where I can get a solider to stand. 6) No crashes throughout the run-through. Will try for a TPK and see if that causes any problems.
  10. Thix, I'd suggest reading the initial feedback thread. I had problems with the wealth of detail, and I wasn't the only one!
  11. It's not accessible from the gog website. It's only accessible from gog galaxy.
  12. The boxed version was a Kickstarter exclusive. As in, it was never going to be produced OUTSIDE of Kickstarter because digital delivery is hella cheaper than making and producing box version (that's what publishers are for). I strongly doubt there will be a boxed version outside of any Kickstarter that Goldhawk intends to run and it really depends on what the cost and how easy it was to do for Goldhawk last time as to whether they do a boxed version this time.
  13. 1 comment has been moved to the correct thread for giving feedback. Please make sure you give feedback in the appropriate thread, the thread is linked in the above post.
  14. I would disagree. I had originally set it to "Fastest" and it was a muddy blur throughout (menu screen, loading screen and combat). Giving it a higher setting made it sharper.
  15. Had a chance to try it this morning, and I whacked the graphics quality up to Beautiful, see if that did anything. Well, if anything it ran smoother than last time! @Chris, when I was referring to the yellow in the last build I found that the left-hand team UI turned yellow for the selected trooper it masked the AP bar. Doesn't do that for this build.