GizmoGomez

HWP, I thought that SAW (Squad Automatic Weapon) was a designation one assigned to an LMG. Like, LMG is the class (for lack of a better word) of firearm, and SAW is how it's deployed. Similar to a DMR (Designated Marksman Rifle), that's not the class of the weapon, simply it's title. So for example, the actual firearm is, say, the M249, it's an LMG, deployed in the position of SAW. Another example, the M39, it's a battle rifle, deployed in the position of DMR. See what I'm getting at? Also, I've never heard of LMG implying a two man crew. If there were two people, the second would be used mainly in a support role, carrying ammunition, extra barrels (you're going to need them), etc. He's not absolutely necessary, though, as LMGs are designed to be able to be operated by one man, hence the term Light. They're also more mobile and easier to fire accurately, due to the smaller cartridges used, such as the 5.56mm NATO. LMGs are even classified as small arms, technically. MMGs (Medium Machine Gun), or GPMGs (General Purpose Machine Gun) as they've been recently designated, do require more than one operator to be used effectively. These are the ones you would set up on a tripod, or lie down with a bipod, and use mainly in a stationary position. This is due to the greater weight of the weapon, and the power (and thus, recoil) of using full-power rifle cartridges, such as the 7.62mm NATO round. An example of this would be the M240, or the older M60. These, and larger guns, things like mortars, etc, are crew-served weapons and require, basically as a rule, more than one person to be used correctly and efficiently. These can also be mounted on vehicles, which unless I'm mistaken we will have some MMGs on vehicles in game. Sorry for the long post. The explanation of the acronyms were for those who didn't know them; I'm not trying to coddle anyone if it comes off that way.

Yeah, I can see why that wouldn't work. Plus PETA would be all up in your face.

Well I'll be darned. A handgun with a bipod. Although, I never said it wasn't possible, just that it would look ridiculous. Try running around with that and a riot shield while trying to assault an enemy position.

Yeah, I don't see why an LMG (light machine gun is the correct term by the way, not assault machine gun) would be getting close to the enemy when you could be using a shotgun or a pistol/stun rod paired with a shield. I think the LMG should be more for suppressing enemies at a distance so the close quarters guys can move up for the kill relatively easily (as no one's shooting at them). With that in mind, propping the LMG against a fence and having a bipod to steady it (basically standard issue when dealing with LMGs) seems like it could be a good idea. In fact, the artwork for the LMG looks like it has a bipod on it already. Aim stabilization from propping weapons could be beneficial to sniper rifles as well, which themselves often have bipods attached. As far as what actually could happen in game: The soldier walks and stands adjacent to a low wall (or whatever), crouches, and uses a few TUs to deploy the bipod and rest it on the cover. Then, when standing upright again, add some more TUs for the soldier to fold the bipod back into position. It'd work the same way for LMGs and sniper rifles. If implemented, it would offer an accuracy bonus (which would probably be pretty significant in real life, but for the game it might have to be nerved somewhat so everyone isn't hunkering down with bipod-equipped sniper rifles and LMGs.) Also, I think that it should only be for those two weapons if at all, mainly because a bipod on a handgun would look ridiculous.

If that happened I'd seriously consider reloading from whatever my last save was. No joke, that'd suck. Sniper's a good idea, considering she'd probably be trained by Miss Sniper herself.

I'd think that most people would get really annoyed and exasperated if their crack team of soldiers got wiped by an alien grenade thrown into the ship. If your hypothetical soccer team randomly all got kneecapped by micro-meteors mid game, would play continue? That's more akin to a save at the start of a mission, the reloading every failed goal would be more like saving before and after every turn, which nokim already said he didn't do. He also basically said that he didn't keep the same squad through the entire game, he lost men here and there, one to three per mission. I fail to see the reason for insulting him and telling him to GTFO because his style of gameplay "ruins the fun". Isn't fun in the eye of the gamer? But that's just me.

Hi Raptor, welcome! As far as commanding locals, there are a few suggestions floating around about soldiers issuing commands to NPCs, you can look at mine on the suggestions forum. Someone, I forget who, was very helpful and posted links in a post on my thread to many other threads about issuing commands, so you can read up on all those ideas. EDIT: It was thothkins, he was the one that posted them. It's post #4, or thereabouts.

I dunno what people could have made, since things are still changing somewhat. I haven't heard of anyone making guides, though to be frank I've not looked into it.

Of course there'll be an attachment! She's fighting to *SPOILER (Chris)*. BTW, Mikhail's a boss. Just saying. EDIT: Oops, sorry, forgot about spoilers. Drat. Thanks for catching that.

I really enjoyed it, it really gave you a more personal connection to the agency and, more importantly in my opinion, the men and women you'll be commanding. It also means that it was, in some form, formed by a famous WWII Soviet sniper lady, which is pretty sweet. Plus, I now know to aim for the neck.

Just read it. To put it lightly, fraking awesome. It really helps create a bond between you and the game, a bond that didn't really exist as much in the original. It's more personal, you understand some of the crazy that the guys on the ground might be feeling. Dunno if that makes sense.

So, like, a built in mod system? Like, click on the mod button in-game, and choose the file off your hard disk? That'd be legit!

I love the ambiguity in the OP: "These are the available mods" and "if the mods like it maybe it'll be stickied." Awesome list, by the way. How would one mod the game, by the way? Would the mods work on the Mac client?

Alright then, no worries.

Was that going to be "Japanese" you crossed out?

I always used the "view UFO" button to see what I was up against. So, if it was a dinky little scout then I had nothing to worry about, but if it were larger then I knew to prepare myself for a more rigorous land battle.

That is true, the nationalities could be an issue. I was saying if I, that is, me personally, saw aliens attacking, I'd go towards the humans. I'd like to think that I would be able to recognize a human, even if he were wearing power armor. I wasn't speaking for all of humanity. I was thinking it could be used for an escort-ish mission. Like, aliens attack some country's capital, and the friendly neighborhood Xenonauts come to save the day. You can either a) escort the most important government members (like, the prime minister and his cabinet or something) to the chinook and leave to "win" the mission (get positive points), or b) you can just kill all the aliens as per usual. If you fail, the country could have a massive drop in support, or even go over to the aliens side (since the entire upper levels of the government would be wiped out), meaning that it might be more of a mid game mission, when the aliens are getting more bold or something. I just thought it would be an interesting game mode/mission type to have, and so I designed my system based on that.

That is true, the armed NPCs do make a difference. I suppose I was mainly thinking of my experiences with UFO:EU, where the civilians really didn't matter too much, as far as where they were went. I suppose leaving out the second option would be best then, either you hear everyone or it goes past all of the hidden hidden movement, only showing the not-so-hidden hidden movement.

Thanks, interesting reads. Do you know if Chris or another dev has commented on any of these?

It wouldn't be simply turning off the sound, it'd be basically skipping the real time movement of the civilians, because you don't really need to know where they're at. Knowing where the ETs are is more important, so leaving them with real time movement would be more useful. That way you could still have the info provided by the hidden movement sounds, and the time elapsed between them, and you also would not have to wait for every civilian to move around aimlessly. Best of both worlds, as it were.

I know that, that's why there's a chance they won't do what you say. Although, if I were freaking out and aliens were attacking, if a guy in power armor leading a group of heavily armed ET exterminators, I'd do what he said. At any rate, do you think it'd be useful?

I seem to remember this was an issue in UFO:EU as well. Rather annoying when your planes missed them and lost the tracking lock. Hopefully whatever it is gets fixed, whether it be only a few situations or what.

I've been going for at least six months, but it's been a while since I played so I'm not sure. I believe it was October or November. I do remember I was fighting in Siberia, though. Cold.....

Is differently able seriously a new term? Some kind of politically correct stuff? Huh. Good counter-argument by the way, I enjoyed the description of intelligence in posts. Very funny (although too often true.) ... ZEENONOTS RULZ!!!!!!!1!

Yeah, I got it right! Woohoo! I do agree with Joced, now that I know that I was correct in deducing his opinion. If an intercepter is going head on, he shouldn't have to run around to the back to fight.