minispace

A simple sticky thread at the Steam forum titled "Link to official forums" would suffice, with no backlash or hurt feelings. Don't emphasize that you'll be ignoring the Steam communty. Do emphasize that this here forum is the best place for bug reports / Xenonauts discussion / baking tips / whatever.

Thanks for the heads up! I might pick up extra copies of Civ 5 for some friends for multiplayer. I already own Company of Heroes but haven't had a chance to play them. Are they worth checking out?

A WWII era Xenonauts would be hilariously awesome. Very Turtledove's Worldwar: In the Balance, but it would be a license to print money. Someone has to make it

Omigosh that is too cute--it looks like a Chibi-X-COM! The gameplay looks really similar to x-com--how does it compare?

Apologies in advance if I've misread this, but are you advocating piracy? There are plenty of free-to-play games out there, or better yet, inexpensive indie games to purchase, to show solidarity to the indie scene!

Cool I just installed X3: Terran Conflict, which I picked up from the holiday Steam sale. Any advice for a rookie pilot?

I had laser cannons researched by mid-February and then lost interest in the experiment. The US was pleased with my performance! What I would like to see in the next X-Com (and, of course, Xenonauts) is a living economy that forces the player to adapt to shifts in world and regional demand, just like we have to adapt to new alien weapons and tactics. It should be difficult to exploit the system, and every decision should have a cost and risk of failure. Complacency should be punished in both the battlefield and the marketplace, but smart players should be able to survive in both arenas. Good luck designing that, Game Designers! I think 'cash bases' and 'cash factories' are cheesy, yes. I never said they were super-easy (I would never call X-Com easy!) or that the build strategy was game-breaking. You have posted some interesting reasons why you think they are balanced vs the opportunity cost of following other pursuits. I just think in the end it's easy money--too sure a thing. But that's just me. Different people will have different opinions on what strategies are smart, and which are exploitative. So far I grok the design changes that Goldhawk has made with Xenonauts. I'm looking forward to seeing where the Firaxis developers draw that same line. In the end we'll play either game and use the available tools as we see fit.

Thanks! It looks like I should definitely check it out.

Huh. I might not have explained myself very well because that doesn't describe my stance on this. These games (Xenonauts, X-Com, or whatever) should allows savvy players to turn a profit by manufacturing high-demand items. Selling salvaged goods on the world market must be a viable way to supplement your income, and players should be able to use surplus resources to manufacture advanced technology to essentially convert mission salvage to cash. I think we agree on this much. My apologies in advance if I am mistaken--I don't want to speak for you so please correct me if I'm off base. Now here is my thing, and where we probably differ: It would be nice if we had a rich economic system that took into account supply and demand that added consequences to flooding the market with manufactured goods or mission salvage. How many alien corpses does the world want to buy, anyway? A more direct way to limit the supply of easy cash would be to require that every manufactured item use some kind of resource to build, and your ability to produced massive amounts of finished goods will inevitably outstrip your ability to acquire the materials needed. That would mean that players will have to continuously raid the aliens just to acquire raw materials if they want to pursue a manufacturing-focused strategy. Having said that, these games are not economic simulators, as much as I would like them to incorporate these principles. If none of them is going to include a dynamic economy (but I really wish they would), then Xenonaut's system cuts down on the cheesy gameplay mechanic to print free money. I wonder how Firaxis will approach the issue, or if it's even an issue at all?

Having to switch production and recalculate profitability is better than flooding the market with laser cannons The advanced economy sim is just an idle wish on my part. I doubt any of the games will cover that in-depth. If they won't properly model supply & demand, then Xenonaut's 'always sell at a loss' approach is the best solution. I can't say whether or not the new X-Com will hurt or help the success of Xenonauts. I hope the game doesn't steal the spotlight, but instead increases interest in similar titles. Mostly I'm just excited that we'll be getting a bunch of games based on XCOM. Goldhawk already has my $upport, and I'm getting excited about the Firaxis product as well. Heck, I'm probably even going to buy the FPS, pending good reviews. In short it's a good time to be a gamer!

I like that the new X-COM will give you new and different ways to keep funding nations happy. It should add more depth to strategic part of the game. It would be neat if different nations can give you different types of rewards other than increased funding. I would also like to see more recruits and resources come from the countries that are happiest with your performance. As for the manufacturing/selling exploit/mechanic, there is an easy fix (or maybe I just play too many economic simulations): With each type of item that you sell on the market, demand for that item should decrease, and the selling price should drop to reflect decreased demand. Likewise the more of an item that you buy (or personnel you hire), the price should go up. Different events and achievements should affect supply and demand to simulate a living world economy. Hopefully the new mechanics added to the game will enrich the strategic/geoscape portion of the game, but not at the expense of the core gameplay--tactical squad-based battle. We'll find out later this year.

How does UFO: Extraterrestrials compare to X-COM? It's been on my Steam wishlist for awhile, but I've yet to commit to purchase it. I would love to read people's impressions of it. Should I pick it up, or stick to Terror from the Deep?

He was in a Dominix fit for running a mission, and I was in a pvp Drake fit to destroy him. I could see his drones, and the wrecks he was leaving on my scanner results, so I could tell what type of damage he was dealing, and also tanked for. I made sure to equip my ship accordingly. When the battle was on, I made sure to test his armor resistance by using a spread of missile types, and switching to the ones that did the most damage. This is all standard stuff when you fly Caldari. This was by no means the most impressive feat ever accomplished in EvE. Compared to most roaming alliance fleets in 0.0 my kill stats were pretty pathetic, but for the next couple weeks after that fight I felt like I had won the game

My favorite thing to do in EvE was low-sec solo hunting. If you keep a positive security rating, players are a little less cautious around you, which I used to my advantage. I usually targeted mission runners and other juicy prey. I wasn't too interested in unarmed ships, unless I knew their cargo was worth the security hit, because the penalty is way too high if they don't shoot back. Basically I went for anyone with expensive fittings who wasn't prepared to fight. I already had loads of isk, so I was more interested in scoring high on my corps kill board than any actual ransom, and salvaged loot was just a bonus. The most awesome kill I ever had was when I caught a pretty famous forum warrior and pirate (his alt, at least) running a lvl 4 in his t2 rigged, mission-fit Dominix. I really respected him because he was definitely a better player than me. He really knew pvp and even helped train my corp years earlier when we were first starting out. It didn't stop me from collecting that sweet sweet kill mail, though! I haven't really played the game in years and all told, I was pretty much a half-assed pirate, but I had some fun.

re: the side cutaway base view. I'm just speculating here, but might it be more expensive to build the deeper you go? That could lead to interesting strategic choices. Do you invest in increasingly pricey upgrades for your main base, or do you build multiple, smaller, cheaper bases? Of course you'll want to provide garrisons for those new bases, so each one could end up increasing your total operating costs. At the same time, more countries may like you more if you have bases spread around the globe. I'm just trying to think of the reason why they moved away from the top-down view. I guess it's way too early to tell!

I think they're playing Xenonauts on that screen.

The amount of fun you have in EvE is directly related to who you are playing with. Join, or start, a corporation with other players, set goals for yourself and your group, and you will have a blast. If you treat the game like it's single player, you'll eventually be bored out of your skull. The hardest thing about EvE is finding out what is most fun for you. Not everyone has the patience for that, and that's OK

I'm also use Steam quite a bit, and Xenonauts got me to install Desura for the first time--I'm really liking all of the indie games that they have. Goldhawk made a great choice! Not that I don't want a Steam key once Xenonauts is released