Max_Caine

That's a good point Grunker. Thankfully the first ground mission you do is a full team verses 1 alien so there's room to make mistakes without getting spanked, but I can see that the other parts of the game - the geoscape, the various base screens, solider management... those bits could use a helping hand. What did you have the most difficulty with? Where would you feel a tutorial would be most helpful?

Alright next question. How would it be represented on-screen? Since Xenonauts can't deliberately shoot civilians, there's no harm in clicking on a civvie (unless you're armed with a grenade). Would a right-click function with either a word like "move" or "stay" appearing next to it be adequate?

Ah, I haven't made myself clear. I agree that the civvies should have a small amount of AP, but what AP should it cost the Xenonaut to issue the order?

What kind of an AP cost would be fair and suitible for directing civvies? 20 AP (about a third of a corp.'s AP)? Less? And would it be fair to say that the order's success should be based on a stat test (say, bravery as a subsitute for leadership) to reflect the difficulty a Xenonaut would have in getting through to a civillian's fear-maddened brain.

Gorlom, when a person lives a life among murderers, that person expects everyone he meets to carry a knife. windex doesn't like what I've written and I believe windex feels my preceeding post is a cheap appeal to emotion, rather than a sincere statement of what I feel. It is true that because you can't see the face of a person who writes something, the facial cues that confirm the person is sincere are abscent. Thus you take sincerity based upon how much you trust the person to be sincere. Through windex's first post where he felt "nauseated" after reading what I wrote, I conclude that windex trusts me as far as he can throw me. Hence, my post is a cheap appeal to emotion. windex, please cease these little displays that present you in a less than favourable light. Show me through reasoned argument and supplied proof that me suggesting that there is another way to approach making suggestions is wrong. thothkins did so, without resorting to ad hominem attacks and pointless straw men, and I responded to him, conceding the points he made. And please do so with more than "the current way is just fine". Why is the current way "just fine"? I suggest a refined approach to making suggestions to Xenonauts. You don't accept either the premise or the suggestions. Show why, without (and this is important) all the attendant emotion that marbles your posts. If you can't do any of that then butt out, and let someone else write a response who can.

The idea of invasion by culture rather than force is awesome and highly original. I think you could do this in a completely straight-faced way. Killing missionaries? Would that be an idea? Killing humans building landmarks of how awesome human culture is? So you totes could do muesums, because the invading humans would perhaps be making museums of how super awesome their culture is and everything they have done?

I've not played Sots 1 or 2. Seeing as I can get them on Steam for dead cheap, would you reccomend I play 1 first, then 2? Is there a narrative continuity from the first game to the second?

The ability Jean-Luc mentions is in one of the videos - you see it briefly in the tour of the anthill. It's called "double tap". There is a precondition for it, but I can't read what it is.

We all have great ideas. And the threads on this board (like the 2 suppression threads - I read all of both of them) show that, big time. But I feel that people will make more headway with their ideas if they reign them in to more align with the vision and direction that Chris wants to take Xenonauts. Oktober hits it right on the head when he says I suggest ideas of refinement instead of alloftheideas. Does that make me a cheerleader? That I would like more peoples ideas to succeede, like dorphin's did? Then pass me my pom-poms and multicoloured chainsaw.

If you want to throw mud at a wall all your life windex, and hope that something sticks then by all means, go ahead! No-one (least of all I) is preventing your sovereign right to present your ideas in whatever format you please. I, on the other hand would prefer that people examine the wall, look at the spots where mud is most likely to stick and focus most of their efforts there, reserving some for the ideas that we know are pure diamond. But hey, windex knows best, right? You've certainly presented your arguments in an authoritative and informative manner. I'm especially impressed at the straw man you threw into the second paragraph, having run out of actual arguments at “it works fine”.

You are right, thothkins, my thoughts and extrapolations are mostly negative in aspect, and they are a brake on the wheel of creativity. In my defence, I would say that the very incomplete framework I present guides rather than hampers. Grand ideas can spark off the most incredible things, but small ideas link up with other ideas to form a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts.

The forumites on this board are a creative and inventive lot. The suggestions forum alone has 25 pages of suggestions, quite a bit of which loops, but all the same people are always thinking new ways which the game experience for them might be improved. However, many ideas are left at the side of the road, for one reason or another. I think when coming up with ideas, we need to put ourselves in the headspace of the lead developer and come up with some What Would Chris Do? rules to help shape the creative process. Having observed his behaviour on the boards, I have come up with some simple rules. 1) Will it cost money? The more artwork, the more props, the more coding that has to go into a suggestion, the more it will cost, and the less likely it will be put in. 2) Will it be a bugger to balance? A lot of ideas look great on the surface, but if there are ways to exploit the idea that will imbalance the game without a lot of hard work fixing it, then it isn’t so attractive. 3) Was it in the original X-Com? Xenonauts is billed as a “spiritual successor” to X-Com. When the harpies descend on Xenonauts at release, they will pick over every bone and squawk when something that was in X-Com doesn’t appear in Xenonauts. 4) Will it take a long time to implement? This game has been Chris’ life for a long time now. If a suggestion will take forever to implement, then it’d have to be pretty spectacular to do! 5) Will it detract from existing game elements? A good example of this is the idea for long-range SAM batteries. If SAM batteries were implemented, it reduces the need for interceptors, which are an integral part of the game.

raziel1981, while several of us forumites have critiqued your ideas, please don't stop the ideas from flowing! Creativity isn't like a slot machine, you don't go broke pumping out thoughts. Come out with more ideas! That being said, the ideas I have seen Chris pay most attention to are UI or gameplay improvements and anything that is a simple but effective improvement on an Xcom mechanic.

EDIT: this is in response to the original post. It took me ages. and I was ninja'd! 1) As it has been explained to me, at each weapon "tier", there is the functional equivalent of a pistol, a close-range carbine-like weapon, a general-purpose assault rifle-like weapon, and a sniper-like weapon. Because the tiers are arranged so that the next tier up does everything better than the last tier (but is more expensive than the previous tier in terms of materials, money and manpower), there will be no gun porn. No superheavy ballistic weapons. There is no point in doing so, when the next tier up offers an advantage in every aspect. UFO Aftershock did exactly what you suggested, and the consequence of that was a muddled research tree in which you were better off with earlier weapons that had been modified, than later higher-tech weaponry. As for the question of a spotter working in tandem with the sniper, the problem with that is the game style it encourages. If snipers were super accurate without having to invest considerable AP by parking someone next to them, then I could set up a killing zone and kite aliens into it. Boring. Or I would have my sniper and spotter toddle about, exploiting the accuracy boost I get from a spotter, edging in at maximum range and going pop, pop, pop. Also boring. How would you prevent players from exploiting a sniper/spotter combo? As to the final point about alien snipers? Wait for the beta. 2) The weapon tiers have already been finalised. It is unlikely that Chris will include any new weapon tiers. He's already spent the money to have the artwork and the props done, and it has all been figured into the existing game. He'd need a really solid reason to include something new that would mean paying quite a few people to include it in the game. 3) I remember EM weapons from Afterlight. A fat lot of good they were in that game. EM is a concept that is very likely to be understood and protected from by a higher tech society. 4) There's a good reason you don't see mines in X-Com-a-likes - the play style doesn't permit it. Consider that in the current alpha, you have to go out and seek the enemy. They might spawn throughout the map, but they don't come after you - you come after them! Any defensive layer of mines you put down you'd most likely have to walk over to get to the next alien. Also consider that all the time you're faffing about putting down mines, the aliens are killing civillians, which will tank your score and make you look bad to your backers. Xenonauts encourages a blizkreig style of of warfare - in, out and shake it all about. The only time I've used mines were in base defences in X-Com, when the aliens were coming to me. For 5) see 4) and 2). It's a good idea, but unless you can kite aliens into range/LOS, it's pointless. You have to consider the game not from an army point of view, but from a game point of view. Aliens spawn throughout the map. So, when you see an alien, do you unpack then? And spend a turn faffing about while the alien zaps away. Or unpack before you see an alien, and then have to repack because the aliens have moved away and are killing civvies while you muck about? Possibly if it helps, consider an alien crash site or terror site as an unscripted terrorist attack. The aim of the aliens is to kill everything that moves. They aren't interested in holding ground. They aren't interested in taking buildings. If things get too hot, they'll just move away and keep on killing. You can loose a crash site mission if you take too long and let the aliens either escape or kill to many civvies. 6) Another good idea - I thnk I've seen this one already when people were putting mission types and subtypes, but a good idea nonetheless. It would depend on how willing Chris would be to include new mission types and pay for the work to be done.

I can see where Gauddlike is coming from both mechanically and thematically. Mechanically, the alien fleet has at least 7 different alien types. If squads developed and grew in the same way that Xenonauts did, then the player is more likely to stay with squads they have developed rather than try out new aliens, as new aliens interrupt character development. Furthermore, players would want the same squad in every mission (to encourage squad growth). Alien tryouts would then be limited to either new squad creation, or loss replacement. Depending on how effective Xenonaut interceptors are against small craft (and you’ve seen yourself how effective they are!) losses amongst aliens troops could be quite high! Thematically, the Xenos aren’t the last, best hope for alienkind. They are a legion, millions-strong. By emphasising a class-based system, it reflects the impersonal nature of the alien hordes. You are Genghis Khan, directing your millions in a military venture that Alexander would weep if he could see it in it's complexity and scope.

Chris, I think you should make it a weekend release. If the "this game is unplayable" complaints were anything to go by last time, better to wait for Matthew to give it a go first.

I’ve been considering a narrative that would fit “Xeno Invasion” and I think I have something that fits given earlier comments by Oktober and thothkins. But to make it work you’d really need to commit to making a full-on game of it. There is a radical shift in design paradigm and narrative to consider if you want to have a Xeno Invasion. We know that alien fleet is at least 3000 strong with room for more – far more. Someone needs to be in charge of all that – a Grand Admiral or suchlike. Now, even if that Grand Admiral is Mother Brain, it will still need other flag staff to effectively co-ordinate such a massive undertaking. Admirals. Vice-Admirals. Squadron Commanders. Etc. Etc. So that this “makes sense”, let us say there is a Grand Admiral and one Vice-Grand Admiral for every major race in the alien fleet. Even if the aliens are cloned on a production line, they will all want representation within the higher structure, and if they don’t get it there will be considerable grumbling. You won’t want a situation like the Covenant, where the Elites were paramount, but the Brutes were able to enact a coup and push the Elites from most-favoured status. The player takes the role of the most junior of flag staff, attached to a Vice-Grand Admiral. You’re in charge of not very much, there’s a greater plan to adhere to, but you’re flag staff. You can act independently. This covers several points. 1) Start weak, grow strong. An key expectation of a Xcom-a-like game, but the Aliens are strong already. How do you simulate that, without making it look too artificial? By putting the player in the junior role, the progression to bigger and better things is natural, rather than forced. 2) Independence of action. Another key element of X-Com-a-like games. The player needs the freedom to screw up. Making the player flag rank means that the goals set can be much vaguer (“cause a country to turn to us”), setting the destination rather than the journey which should belong to the player. 3) Growth of your enemy. The aliens in Xenonauts can grow as the Xenonauts do, by bringing in larger ships, with higher classes of solider, armed with better weapons. But if the alien player is 100% effective in-game, how would the Xenonauts grow? Where would they get the tech from? If you make the player one of several commanders then the tech the Xenonauts acquires can be attributed to other, less competent commanders.

The way they did alien research and resource management in UFO: The Two Sides (before it was taken down) was that the aliens had a main base on earth as well. Your “research” went into researching new kinds of aliens – you started off with Sectoids and had to work up from there. Cydonia would occasionally throw you a bung of resources, but almost everything had to be taken in missions.

When developing these titles, don’t forget bragging rights. You can’t tell me when Xenonauts is finally released and more people start doing Let’s Play videos, these same people won’t want to show off their Level 50 GnarlyBadAssDude who was with the team right from the start and has personally seen more horror than Colonel Kurtz a dozen times over. Make the end titles grand. Something to show off!

Last night, I had a civillian run back and forth beween two patches of fire until she died. In the same mission, another civillian, clearly a member of the Committee for the Liberation and Integration of Terrifying Organisms and their Rehabilitation Into Society kept running in front of an alien I wanted to shoot. Only that was in Xcom: UD. So that's alright then, is it?

Gazz, be a love and could you FAQ: - Underwater missions - Rotate ground combat screen These appear a lot, and the answers always come up the same.

In the abscence of Sathra, I'll point you to previous discussion on this. long-range static missile bases come up every so often.

Gorlom is right, Chris doesn't have the source code to the engine. It's the reason he cites for having to have a WINE wrapper for the Linux version.

I'm sorry Hiraga, this question does appear a lot and looking at the threads it appears in, the answer is the same each time it's asked: can't be done. Try searching "rotate screen" for a sample.

This idea appears quite often: here's a similar discussion lead by ChAnKoEr. I think people would like to see some kind of semi-control over the blithering meatshields. The most effective way I found to control civvies in Xcom was the small launcher. Aliens don't attack stunned civvies!