[In combat jumping view]

I concur. If both the xenonaut and the alien are visible onscreen there is no need to move the screen.

[V19: Less 'One More Turn' feeling? Some feedback..]

2)

In research screen:

The summary of a technology (the short line describing it when it isn't researched) now seems to always provide a direct description of "what we will be able to do with it".[/b]

Meaning: what other research it does unlock.

While being practical to the player, the strong accuracy of it makes the choice of a topic to research being even more a "strategic" choice more, than an "ambient" choice or "choice by heart".

A good example of the resulting gameplay comparison would be the following :

In MOO2, when you researched a tech, you did not know which new tech of this item will be available next. It was random. I believed it contributed to the fun of MOO2, with many other things. In other games, you have to explore the whole tech tree, and see/calculate what it unlocks next. While it still makes the game fun, it's a different fun (and guess which ones ended up as cult titles ).

...

You know, if in Civilization you did not have these "black unknown tiles to explore", the game just works differently, but the gameplay isn't the same. Making a step just to target the further one is just never the same thing, gameplay-wise.

Well, I tend to disagree with you on most points.

1. In MOO2 the technology advance is linear. Therefore you can choose your research pattern strategically. (Maybe you are thinking of MOO1. In that respect I believe MOO2 is better).

2. In the Civilization games you can also see the research tree.

Frankly speaking the description of each technology is not that important to me. Either way I would check the internet in order to choose the optimal research path.

Anyways - kudos for a well supported opinion.

[Indestructible interceptors?]

There is one more elegant way of solving the problem: make hangar expensive/slow to build.

As pointed by many so far - early craft should be easily replaceable (frame provided by the funding nations), while later craft are sturdier and easier to keep alive.

This solution will make it hard to amass tons of cheap aircraft while at the same time will make the loss of a single craft less painful.

[Less random bullet trajectories]

That means the deviation must be more than 45 degrees in either direction if you are to be able to miss a target from one square away. If it is less than 45 degrees the miss will turn into a hit.

Actually this sounds quite reasonable to me. Why would anyone miss from one square away.

A better solution would be a correction to the displayed accuracy/hit chance, depending on the distance to the target. This correction would take into account everything you have mentioned.

[The new guy: A.I. Developer #42 & Discussion on A.I.]

I'd be interested in:

• Can the aliens act as a squad?

• You are using a HFSM. How do you ensure that the AI is not predictable, since this seems to be a major flaw of FSMs?

Thanks!

Hm, I have never thought that predictability would actually be seen as a flaw. I would definitely prefer aliens acting logically (i. e. predictably) as opposed to erratically (i.e. unpredictably). This is how you master a game - you learn the acting patterns of the NPCs.