sluissa

High explosives did nothing in the original, although xcomutil improved their power and allowed you to blow holes in the outer walls. This was one of the better improvements, I believe. Nobody really used HE otherwise and HE is dangerous enough that it takes a significant amount of time to set up something like that, so it had its trade offs and it's not as if you could just blow a hole and immediately rush in. Usually you had your guys at least a good half turn or turn of movement away from the future hole before it blew. Still it appears we won't be able to destroy the UFO tiles at all in Xenonauts. A shame, and while I don't agree with it, I can somewhat understand it. Additionally, I will say on the subject of two part missions. Even the UFO:After* series, which, in my opinion, did the two part missions correctly, still broke the flow and didn't entirely make sense. And it also used them for every UFO mission. Consequently, I never finished any of those games.

These were the examples I remember.

I wasn't entirely sure about the cruiser you posted earlier... but partially just because I couldn't wrap my head around the layers, but that looks pretty darn good... and it fits nicely on the map.

First paragraph from the edit to the first post in this thread.

Remember, a squadron is as fast as it's slowest plane on the geoscape. If you pair migs and f-17s, they're all going to fly at f-17 speed. To catch up with lone scouts, you're going to need one or more migs that don't have any f-17s holding them back.

I would agree with you except that it was already mentioned they were going to have to throw out the cruiser as it is anyway and it's quite likely all the ships above that size either aren't done or are to be thrown out as well. They're essentially starting from scratch with regards to UFO design, with only a couple of exceptions, is what it seems. If they are doing so, anything goes as far as suggestions are concerned. Of course information direct from the devs is needed to determine specifically what is possible, but until limitations are placed, it's all simply brainstorming. And in a good brainstorming session even the most ridiculous things get written down in the hope they might form the seed of something more practical in the future. Also to note, the proposed changes make EVERY UFO that has an enterable interior a two part mission. This affects everything. The medium sized UFOs could potentially stay as they are, but that's not what was proposed. I'll live with it if need be. I'm even willing to accept that I'm wrong if it turns out to not be that big of a deal. But in my experience, breaking missions up into multiple parts always has severe consequences to the flow of the gameplay and while it can be argued that it's necessary in some situations, using it in every situation is, in my opinion, sure to cause some significant problems.

Anotherdevil: Not everyone is a game designer. Even so... there have been suggestions made, including my own, "Go back to the grey metal boxes if you have to." In any case, making things more modular, even if not all the way back to "a half dozen wall tiles used for the exterior of everything", is a way to fix this. Rather than trying to literally fit a round peg into a square hole with these circular ships, why not just move to something a bit more square. It doesn't need to be nearly as blocky as X-Com was, but a basic set of legos with a few angled pieces can build some amazingly smooth and detailed things. Hell, look at what people do with Minecraft and that even lacks most of the angled pieces you'd want to include.

I sent my soldiers to a particularly nasty Terror mission, all but one got killed, although the after action report said two of them survived, one with heavy wounds. On the way home, the chinook was shot down by fighters. It said 3 survivors were found... I have those three still alive on my list and going on missions. Minor bugs, in the grand scheme, but still notable. Side note, I believe it still counts wounded soldiers who've been taken of duty while they were assigned to the transport as going on missions in that transport. I just appears that way though, can't tell for sure.

This thread got me to register and reply. Personally. I'd prefer to have the UFO interior be seamless with the exterior map. Redesign the UFOs if you need to. Hell, go back to squared off boxes like X-Com had if you need to. I don't have any problem with multi-part missions, as a rule, but I can't see any legitimate excuse as to why you can't have the interior of a UFO be on the same map as the exterior. Cutting it up like that just breaks the immersion and ruins one of the best parts of any UFO mission, the entry. If you're not allowed to choose when and where you enter a UFO(within your abilities), then what's the point? X-Com even had extra holes poked in the UFO if it were particularly badly damaged, giving you natural extra entry points... without special interior maps. If the devs can't at the very least meet the same feature set of a game that's nearly 20 years old, when trying to do a remake of that game, then there's something wrong. Now, I just seriously sat down to play the alpha a few days ago, I gave the kickstarter demo a try and loved it, that's why I invested in the full game just recently. And while I do love a lot of it, and love the feeling it brings back, there are still many cases where I find myself thinking, "Well, X-Com did this better..." It's slowly getting to the point where I might as well just go back and play the old one. I'm just now getting to missions where I have more than 1 or 2 aliens to kill on a map, so I admit, my experience is still lacking compared to many of you on these forums. But just judging from the small and normal scout crashes. They generally feel right. Maps are a bit repetitive at times(Even worse than X-Com, but hopefully that's being worked on). I wouldn't mind seeing a few more holes in the hull of the UFO, but this is generally how an assault on a small, lightly crewed UFO should feel. I'll continue playing and continue waiting and while the current state of the game, at least what I've seen, gives me much hope, these forums put some fear into me that this is heading in a direction I won't like. I also realize, this being my first post, and being critical may come off badly, I don't mean to be that way. I want to be supportive, I wouldn't have paid for the game if I didn't, I love anyone who has this kind of respect for the early X-Com games, even if their vision isn't the same as my own. I'm just putting my own opinion out there, one more voice among the masses that may or may not get listened to. Edit: Missed the size part of the opening post, but if scale is a problem for the larger ships... then perhaps you're thinking a little too big...