Jump to content

TrashMan

Members
  • Content count

    1,542
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

TrashMan last won the day on September 17

TrashMan had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

67 Excellent

About TrashMan

  • Rank
    Commander

Converted

  • Location
    Croatia
  • Interests
    Modding, anime and stuff
  • Occupation
    DBA
  1. This is the age-old problem of different people and different tastes. You want 1 super-special base? I don't. I don't like that idea at all. Also, the air combat won't be exactly as in X1. Chris did say they are looking for different solutions
  2. "Win At All Costs" is an order I deem useless, since how much risk your craft undertake is easily handeled by more specific orders. And as you point out - your global resources are ALWAYS a consideration. How many aircraft you have will always inform your decisions and the level of risk. for example - let's say that plasma weapons have damage falloff with distance..or worse chance to hit at distance. Then, ordering your aircraft to fight at maximum range even if they don't have long-range missiles isn't pointless. Your own aircraft looses out on firepower (since it tries to keep inside the range of it's longest-range weapon, and thus might not get into cannon range at all, effectively reducing the firepower for increased safety). On the other hand, getting in close and personal means your fighter will get into cannon range, but will expose itself to more danger. Flying high is good for going fast and lobbing missiles, bat bad for visibility (get detected easier) and mobility (thin air provides less force on your control surfaces) Flying low makes it harder for you to get picked up (especially in hilly terrain), and you are more mobile in dense air, but it also gives enemy missiles fired from high altitude more speed (as gravity helps them accelerate) and you cannot go as fast. Just like in ground combat you need to know the strengths and weakneses of the enemies and your troops, the same should go for air combat. Knowing where the enemy craft performs well and where it does not. And the same for yours. Then equipping them to either maximize their strengths or to reduce their weakneses (both are viable). So, knowing that your fighters excel at low-altitude turning fights, you'd go low, into hilly terrain, forcing the enemy to go after you (since it would be difficult for him to aquire a lock, and it would be easier for you to escape the missile). honestly, if the entire fight looked like DCS's Tactical View (google it), it would be great.
  3. Why wouldn't they be useful? Every order would maximize something at the expense of something else, so it would be kinda like rock-paper-scissors, except it wouldn't be an automatic loss/win. The order you suggest are too broad and make little sense - why would you ever choose anything besides Win At All Cost? Let me give you an example: Assault - pilot closes in aggressively at max speed. Reduces evasion, increases speed. Would work best against enemy bombers or craft engaged with another enemy. Makes the aircraft more vulnerable to flanking. Strike - pilot slows down to attack from max range. Good for fighters with a lot of missiles. Less useful for fighters who focus on short-range guns Etc.. you get the idea. The entire system depends on how complex you want it to be. It also depends on what stats the aircraft have. For example, fighters could have 4 stats - HA-HS (High Altitude High Speed perfomance), HA-LS (High Altitude Low Speed), LA-HS and LA-LS HIGH ALTITUDE - enemy missiles have a reduced Time To Live if going after high altitude targets (they are fighting gravity and drag more, expending fuel faster - meaning the missile can fizzle out before it reaches you). Increased fighter speed. Increases your own missile TTL against low altitude targets LOW ALTITUDE - the opposite. Enemies attacking your from high altitude with missiles can do so from longer range and with better accuracy. Flying over flat terrain makes it even worse. Flying over hilly/mountainous terrain gives you defense bonuses. But low altitude gives you better manouverability (in general) Tough I think this is too complex for the goal of simple fight mechanics. Then again, what is complex depends on the person. To me such as system is simple and intuitive because I have a decent understanding of how arial combat works in RL, which is amusingly enough both incredibly complex and really simple at the same time.
  4. Why use bars at all? An auto-pase with fixed duration turns means no reflexes involved at all and minimum fuss. No timing issues. Couples with simple orders: Assault - close in agressively Strike - attack from range Evade - focus on defense (may still take pot shots at the enemy) Flank - try to flank Circle - if turrets are in, this would be useful etc. Each move would have it's advantages depending on craft used and weapons equipped.
  5. Agreed. This is one of the reason I suggested BOTF system. It looks/feels cinematic, allows for more variables, and flows rather fast. But if equipment is 99% of air combat, there's no need to any player input at all, and it can just be auto-calced.
  6. The only case where specialized bases could have an advantage is workshops/production. And even then only for big items. Scientists can easily work in a distributed fashion, cooperating via remote communications. Putting all habitation in one base makes no sense whatsoever (traveling to a different base to work would be grossly inefficient)
  7. a) have the game acknowledge you couldn't get there in time (it's simple to calculate) and not give a penalty b) actually allow more soldiers/dropships/bases, as it should be
  8. I think the best weapon to handle this is to have real-time with FIXED pauses. The game auto-pauses in fixed intervals and you can give/change orders before continuing. This removes split-second managment, but retains the flow of combat. Check out Birth of the Federation combat on YouTube.
  9. Remind me of special honors from the old Chaos Gate gate. Your marines could get special honors/medals for specific feats. Sequential acts of extreme accuracy would give the Marksman Honor. Extreme killing efficiency (a single soldier kills 10 enemies in battle) would grant the Crux Terminatus badge. I can't recall what you had to do to get the Imperial Laurel. I'm not sure if they all had any stat-boosting effect or if they were ssut cosmetic, but the Crux Terminatus DID have one effect - only marines that had earned that honor could equip Terminator Armor.
  10. TrashMan

    Mission Idea

    Seconded. I love having friendly AI on the map. Makes the war seem larger and more involved. Also, gives me a nice secondary goal (save my allies)
  11. TrashMan

    suicide mission

    Saving the earth is not winning? What is? It is the final mission, it's supposed to be hard. What exactly do you want? Having the cake and eating it too?
  12. TrashMan

    suicide mission

    Suicide mission? I recall killing every alien and retreating without any casualties. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8EmBjDl_Pw
  13. Storm clouds - may push the plane in a random direction, may cause missiles to loose lock (if lighting storm cloud). Ground AA - area where UFO will take damage if it flies (or is chased) into Things like mountain terrain, low terran, over sea having different benefits - flying over the mountains/hills reduces speed, but increases evasion. Watching any of the DCS videos by the Grim Reapers is very informative on how dogfighting works
  14. TrashMan

    Shields, A Thought

    There's no reason why it couldn't work in xenonauts. Other tactical squad games tried many approaches. I'll bring up the LEGENDARY Jagged Alliance 2 as a great example.
  15. TrashMan

    Shields, A Thought

    I'm not sure I agree with that sentiment Chris. While there is some luck/change factor, that's generally how armor works. You KNOW what it can usually take. You know modern kevlar will stop handgun rounds (unless you're using a hand cannon). If the armor is hit of course. If you hit in the face, that's a different matter. That is also why I prefer a more proper was of hit detection and shooting. ACTUAL bullet trajectories, actual collision detection, actual cones of fire, actual obstacles. Proper consequences (got hit in the arm? well, the soldier survived, but the armor is thinner there. Arm is unusuable, weapon dropped). But I digress.. What's the point of armor otherwise if the alien with a laser gun can hit in my 1 kill almost as easily as he could if I was naked? All the time and resources spent to make that armor and all that extra weight I'm lugging around. It has to be worth it. 5% more chance to survive a hit definitely isn't.
×