Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


TrashMan last won the day on October 25

TrashMan had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

75 Excellent

About TrashMan

  • Rank


  • Location
  • Interests
    Modding, anime and stuff
  • Occupation
  1. TrashMan

    Your Xenonauts 2 wishlist?

    I personally don't like having super-accurate data. I'd rather have rough visual cues (bleeding, enemy damage model/decals or posture/animation change) or as Jagged Alliance 2 did it, general description (Healthy, Injured, Near Death, etc..)
  2. TrashMan

    Your Xenonauts 2 wishlist?

    As good as JA2 was (and it was one of the best games ever made, period) , getting back to pixels is a lot of work and a lot of detail is lost. If you have a 3d engine, you can make full use of it to make things easier.
  3. Why not add a "dig" function, as in prepare the area for building. It would cost a little, but you can designate as many "blocks/squares" as you want and they would be prepared fast. Once prepared you can build whatever you want. Basically, you can clear the area for all 3 hangars as you finish the lift, for a small time and cash fee. The only question is - should the adjecent squares be auto-cleared/prepared when you build an access lift?
  4. TrashMan

    Your Xenonauts 2 wishlist?

    XCOM (NUCOM) has terrible shooting implementation. The bullets are not tracked, they do not exist as physical objects. The entire burst is treated as one "hit" (either all bullets hit or all miss) and accuracy calculations are all over the place. Cover is a simple flat reduction that is as soulless as it is nonsensical. This often ends up a problem with these seemingly simple systems - they end up being not so simple requireing tons of patches and updates for special cases, and even then behave wonky. Remember Xenonuts1, all the issue with cover, corner shooting and elevation shooting? How many times it needed updating?
  5. TrashMan

    Modular Armour System

    You've given me another idea - integrated stimulant/med dispenser. A weak, limited auto-heal module? Or combat stims that boosts starts temporarily when wounded?
  6. TrashMan

    Modular Armour System

    When I make suggestions I do try to think of implementation difficulties (simple implementations) and resource costs too, so I would say I do think of the consequences. I am sorry if I come across negatively, it's just my enthusiasm for this game gets the better of me sometimes. And I've seen a lot of good project ruined by going after the mythical wider audience, so there's always that alarm in the back of my head. I have great faith in you and your team, please do not doubt that.
  7. TrashMan

    Modular Armour System

    Addition - one thing that should be part of the armor is the BACK SLOT. Why? Because if you have a jetpack, then you can't have a backpack. Ergo, a unit equipped with a jetpack would have the backpack grayed out and unusable, limited to a belt/chest harness. Soldiers with power armor should also have to specialize - such armor would have big power and cooling requirements, which ideally is placed on the back and doesn't leave much room for a regular backpack. So something line an mmmo pack (think Predator and Jesse Ventura with the minigun and the ammo on the back), stablilizer, extra power module? EDIT: Looking at the current UI, you do seem to have more than enough free space that a separate drop-down menus might not even be necessary. Since equipment and attachments are already visually represented, perhaps clutter could be reduced by having auto-hide (the selection of armor upgrades dissapear unless you hover over them)? But even that might not be necessary, though I can't say for sure due to different resolutions affecting the UI. I'm not in the position to test it anyway, and you do know your stuff, so I trust your judgment on this.
  8. TrashMan

    Modular Armour System

    A drop-down is complicated? It's quite literally the standard windows menu even old grannies know how to use. I'm beginning to question who does the UI testing there.... It doesn't even take more clicks, you simply hold and release. From a usability standpoint, the amount of things you can show on screen at one time is limited if you don't want to overwhelm the player and make this too cluttered. Obviously, you can have an icon/button for each item, but if modders add more items, what then? The limited UI space works against that. An alternate solution would be a separate window that list all possible attacchments/modification for all equipment, but I'm not too fond of that. Opening and closing a separate window is something to avoid. A THIRD solution is to tie it to actual equipment. Click on the armor on the solider and you get a dropdown menu with all possible armor attachments (including none, to remove). Click on the helmet would get you all helmet attachments. Since the attachment would be visible on the model, there is no need for an attachment icon in the lower corner of paperdol (though you could have that too). Removing armor? Hovering over it would make a big red X appear on the upper right corner for taking it off. Hm..perhaps I could wip up a mockup
  9. TrashMan

    Your Xenonauts 2 wishlist?

    A good approach might be the Master of Orion or BOTF one? You can research multiple things at once (which makes sense, because omnidisciplinary scientiests really aren't a thing. That astrophsycists is going to be useless if you put him on xenobilogy research). you wouldn't have a singular lab, but SPECIFIC labs. Astrophysics lab. Biology lab. High-energy lab. Materials lab. Each lab would allow you to research a different branch: For simplicity sake, each lab would be automatically filled with proper scientists (they would be abstracted?)
  10. TrashMan

    Modular Armour System

    Why an extra UI? Why not simply have the button be a DROP DOWN MENU? Click on it and hold and 2 items appear - tactical and setinel visor. Pick one to equip. That takes no more space on the UI and allows dozens of items under one button. Heck, have one bottun for BACK slot (jetpack, ammo backpack for the big guns, etc..), one for CHEST (armor plating, refelctive coating, grenade harness, etc..), FACE (rebreather mask), EYES (visors...or you put both under HEAD)
  11. TrashMan

    Your Xenonauts 2 wishlist?

    If you're talking about UI layout, that might have some merit. But again, the game you're referring to is a TWITCH-based game with a single fighter, and the UI reflects that. It just doesn't work well for an entire squadron. And visually? Too cluttered, too colorful. A bad match for Xenonauts, which is more realistic
  12. TrashMan

    Your Xenonauts 2 wishlist?

    That's a literal top-down shooter. I don't think that translates well to a more tactical game where you control MULTIPLE fighters that aren't insanely overpowered as such shooter fighters ship always are, taking on entire alien armadas by themselves and what not. I get that you like the game, but it's mechanically a very, very bad fit for Xenonauts. Aside from the equipment slots thing, but that is confirmed to already be in X2.
  13. As the name implies. What would you like to see in Xenonauts 2 the most? Be detailed. 1. Multiple bases and base logistics. To quote myself: 2. Actual use of 3D for hit detection and accuracy Basically, each weapon has a fire cone - deviation from the straight barrel line. The final maximum deviation is affected on top of that by equipment (scope, power armor stabilizers), solider accuracy and battlefield conditions (stance, smoke, etc..). A bullet is fired with a random deviation within that cone. Recoil basically increases the deviation of the next bullet in a burst, at a certain pace (depending on recoil strength), up to a maximum. An example: a rifle with a 3° fire cone, with a soldier having power armor that reduces that by 10% (2.70°), shot by a high accuracy soldier that basically halves the cone (1.35°). Crouching might reduce it by another 0.1 degree. The game just picks a random angle and applies deviation, then traces that projectile from the weapon barrel to the end point. Easy to check if the projectile hit cover or the enemy. But how would hit percentage be calculated? Answer: you don't need it. Something Phoenix Point did is switching to weapon barrel view so you can see exactly from 1st person perspective how vulnerable the enemy is. This gives more than enough information to the player for a good guess. If you REALLY must have some magical hand-holding, you can use the approximate system - instead of giving a percentage, just give a rating depending on the visible (from the guns point of view) enemy surface area. And this entire system leads to: 3. Localized damage and targeting - arms, legs, chest, stomach, head. Front and back. Makes battles more interesting and armor more interesting. Since you could have a breaching armor that's extra strong from the front, but weak from the back. Different parts of the armor having different armor values (arms and legs being weakest). Leg wound? Xenonauts slowed depending on injury severity. Or he may collapse, requiring spending TU's to get back up. Arm hit? Accuracy penalty. Or weapon dropped. Have a one-handed backup might be handy. Chest hit? Breathing difficulty, loss of TU's, chance of being knocked out temporarily. Gut shot? Good old fashioned pain. Headshot? Assuming you survived - confusion, disorientation, blurry vision. And since armor degrading would also be localized it again makes thing more interesting and dynamic. And body part targeting? It's a simple as pointing the gun at the center of the body part - the fire cone and natural size of body parts does the rest, without the need for special accuracy tables or bonuses/penalties for shooting at a specific body part.
  14. Sad to hear, but at least the project can move forward faster now. That said, there were some interesting ideas in this thread, so you should probably read it and take a few notes for later. Ignore the last page though. My suggestion would be to copy Birth of the Federation combat model.
  15. I don't actually see a problem with that. What is wrong with mix and matching and rewarding different skillsets?