ThunderGr

Seriously? I have never insulted anyone for their opinion. I have always used acceptable phrasing being sharp at times but never insulting. Since when my complains have become a problem of behavior? There are members that have been outright insulting and never got a warning and, here it is, I got a threat by a developer and an insult by you. If you want everyone to be like "the rest of you"(I do not know who is "the rest of you"), clone yourself. Now, I am sure you all have better things to do that trying to judge me as a person for saying my opinion. I have not insulted anyone(except, maybe, the one that threatened me and personally judged me) and I have kept all my posts within context. I have not broken any forum rules, and the threats and judgements from Aaron are unacceptable.

It hasn't come to my intention that I said anything about polishing and minor bug bashing. If you want to threaten me for voicing my opinion, go ahead. Make your threats. If you are so confident in your ability of judging others and you want to classify me as a trouble maker, suit yourself. You only show what kind of person you are and how well you treat your customers. Looks like the labeling as trouble makers for those that say their opinion loud(and it is not the one the authorities like to hear) is not confined to the governments, but to game discussion forums as well...No wonder why everything is going to hell. EDIT: Hell, I really was not expecting that. This was an outrage, really. Damn people, you should have thought before posting that. You pompous brat.

"- Camera during AI turn should no longer focus the "hidden movement" screen on the location of the "hidden" movement" Well, maybe not? I took it that they fixed it along with that. Now that I read it again, it is not so clear...

Hmm, You did not read the changelog for build 4, it seems. It is listed as fixed.

UFO: Aftermath had them, Hadrian. I know. I have finished it dozens of times. I also have Aftershock and Afterlight, which did not have random maps. It was a slip of tongue and I apologized.

Checked it out. Then did a web search. Most of the more reasonable comments http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/08/29/ufo-2-extraterrestrials-due-march-2012/#comments here show what a difficult job Xenonaughts and the new UFO 2:ET have. Naval missions. Now, this is something I have been waiting for ages! And I wonder about the air combat implementation. I hope it will be more involved than their last game. Scheduled for Q4 2013, delayed a couple of years, sounds like the story of the first UFO: ET, repeating. I hope the released game is good, this time and will not have to wait for a decent mod to come out and make someone famous, again.

+1

I was just replying to the member that was wondering about it. I also specified that I do not agree that there is a problem with the air-combat significance and that players will have to improve their skills with it, so that they do not suffer too much. I know pretty well that this is an opinion only a couple of the other members agree with and I have already stated that I will be happy if I have the chance to mod it out, happier if it make it to the higher difficulties. As you can see, I am not so unreasonable, am I? As a side note, it hits everyone as unrealistic. Many have proposed indestructible interceptors for anything above a foxtrot and unlimited or cheap enough condors and foxtrots. Both sound like they solve the problems people think they have with balancing aircraft losses. It also solves the problem with balancing auto-resolve. Still, please, I would appreciate it if you made it tied to difficulty level.

I thought it was obvious I was being sarcastic ...Perhaps I should include sarcasm alerts next time . Cheer up mate! Not everything is to be taken seriously .

Not my intention. I have played enough tile-based in my life to know you can have perfectly playable random maps. The level of "convincingness" depends on the tile-blocks you use. In fact, there are a few posts over the net that provide basic information on how to make a random map generator for tile-based games. here is an example. Besides, I have already said, "you have nearly done it", so, why disregard this piece of positive appreciation of your work? I took that part of your post as a more general reference to the game development, this is why I phrased it like that. Still, I do not think that avoiding to solve a problem is a better solution. Why give up on it when you are so close? If you make the edges uni-blend for each tileset, you will avoid all blending problems that come from the fact the graphics are more detailed. One of the major problems, as pointed out by Max, is that the UFO/Dropship tiles can be overwritten. Your position is a difficult position since you always have to be the target of frustrating comments and unsatisfied players. It needs a lot of strength to do it and I do not underestimate that. I, for one, understand you perfectly. Still, as a player, I do not wish this game to have the fate of UFO: ET, nor this company to have the fate of the company that created said title. You are deeply involved in the development problems and you try to make it to release by minimizing said problems. At the same time, the solutions you pick can make a huge difference in game experience and people will complain about it. Managing to handle the compromise without failing to keep your fan base is the challenge you have to meet. A hell of a job, for certain but this is how things are, the way I see it. Now, since I am not part of the development team, I cannot know the details for the specific issue. Still, I cannot but point out that the random maps were given as a feature in the advertized game. And this is what the whole fuss is about. @Max Yes, you are absolutely right. Only UFO: Aftermath had the random maps(no, not the part about you being a pain....). It was an unjustified generalization from my part, I am sorry. They had the map-validation step where they were checking for path continuity and adjusting procedure if there were deadends. As for the X-COM validation, it is obvious that, since we never got deadends or unplayable maps, there was a validation step. Never occurred to me a map that had my dropship at the top of trees or in a building. Nor the UFO ever spawned at a similar invalid location. Apart from all of that, I want to point out that the dropship/UFO relative locations were completely unknown. It could be that you landed directly next to it or at the other side of the map or anywhere in-between. That is awesome. That made the shroud count .

...and that. But I thought it was common knowledge...

I am only being negative when you do things that simplify the game and make it less challenging and less interesting. Is it my fault that this is what you have been doing lately? OK, If the UFO Series does not cover you, how about the Civilization IV and V? The use tile movement. They have random maps. I understand the problems but, from what Max has said about random maps, you only need to improve the validation step in the random map generation process. Meaning, you are almost there, why not finish it? BTW, the O.G. addressed the buildings problem by providing a fixed set of buildings that were used during the map generation. People do not mind that, because it is common sense that building architecture is similar. They are still incorrect choices. Sorry. Avoiding the problem is hardly ever a solution.

Of course this is understandable, however, the way you respond to people stating extreme frustration about the removal or the inclusion of things in the development that were/were not advertised in the game's features at the time they bought the game, matters to them and the rest of us. In my point of view, you are not just deviating from your planned development path but you, also, state, in a very rude way "this is how I am going to do it, I do not give a shit if you are frustrated or not". I am certain that showing more understanding and having more...diplomatic types of responses...to those people will help the company much more in the long-run. Besides, apologizing for not being able to bring advertised features into the implementation, makes more sense than just making statements showing indifference about what is, in most people's minds, tricking people into buying a game by advertizing features that are not, and will not be on release, there. All of the above, IMHO, of course. @Simmo There are some people that have accepted the idea as an acceptable solution to the interceptor value problem. It has to be noted that the majority of the people(not me) have been recognizing the problem and the need for a solution but most of them did not accept the indestructible interceptors as an acceptable solution and have provided plenty of alternatives.

As I said the UFO Series (Aftermath, Aftershock, Afterlight) had random maps and you could select landing locations. So, nice try, Chris, but modern games have already done it.

As illustrated here. I do not expect you to agree anyway. This is the actual definition of beta, which seems to have lost its meaning nowadays. Of course, not everyone has forgotten about it.

Maybe you noticed that I started with "Misvoted, darn!! Move a vote from 1 to 3, please.". So, do you read the posts before you ask someone if he reads the posts? Obviously, no. I first posted, then read the posts . It is a poll, not a discussion. Rank names and rank caps are connected, anyway. How is it different having 30 majors in a total soldier count of 30 soldiers in all bases than having 30 commanders in a total soldier count of 30 in all bases? If your poll refers to just the names of the ranks then you can move my vote from 1 to 2.

Yes, but you are not responsible for that kind of damage .

@Daringunicorn The advertised game was promising, this is why I bought it. In order to support the development. The steps taken recently have started to point out to a failed game. I am not so sure, anymore, it is going to be worthy. It has removed many things. No elevated terrain, no random maps, iffy territory distribution, buggy and restrictive engine that will lead to permanent bugs in the final release. A promising air combat is getting more automated, unrealistic promotion system. We are at this stage of development and there are LOS and LOF issues. Unrealistic grenade trajectories(I hope they can fix that last one or they will be forced to remove grenades) etc. I don't know. I hope for the best but, realistically, I think it will turn out to be another failed attempt.

So, you can see the only validation the developers needed for their maps to be playable. The fact that it remapped modules, it means it validated the map to see if a remap was required. The validation process can be part of the generator or you can create a separate module. This is an implementation detail. The complexity of the validation process depends on the complexity of the generation parameters and the constrains.

No need to apologize. It is advertised as a beta, anyway. The developers had said and announced many things that did not do and, afterwards, stated they will not do. The description of the game is now inaccurate in the advertising posts they have, since many features(like random maps) are no longer included. I really want to support independent developers but I expect them to give to their customers the respect they should, something that, unfortunately, Chris is not very good at doing, since, in several posts, he has colored and judged his customers as well as behaved in such a way that made clear he does not care if his customers are satisfied or not. Poor decisions that will cost to the company, IMHO. EDIT: No, you were not blasting Chris...I guess my latest posts do, though.

Nope, Simmo, he was not accusing you, he was accusing me . And, Darin, it is still an alpha, but the developers have stated that some things will not change "...that late in the development."

Only, this is still an alpha, advertised as beta but, hell, only a bunch of people knows the difference, right?

No, of course not. I am addressing those that have made such(condescending and insulting) comments, of course. The reference to your post stopped at the "FYI" paragraph . All this trouble you are having with random maps have the root, as I have already said, to the poor implementation of the random-map creation code. All the restrains you refer to had to be included there. EDIT: To be a bit more technical, all random-mag creators have to include a "map validation" step. At that point, the generated map is checked against constrains that have to be applied in order for it to be playable. If the constrains are not met, the creator will have to choose between (1)Reject the map and try another one or (2)Modify the generated map in order to comply with the constrains. Remember, the UFO series had random maps. As a sidenote, Who says that tanks can go everywhere? Ask anyone in the military. There are areas that are inaccessible to vehicles on Earth.

Yeap. It appears that the developers have a completely different idea about what works in contrast with the players. I wonder if 1) They have actually played and finished all 3 original games in the series and their attempted remakes 2) Give any of the feedback and opinions about specific aspects of the game(except for bug reports) any actual consideration But, well, I guess it is just me...Being a hardcore, short-minded, loud person and all...

Just because they have failed to program an effective random map creator, does not mean it cannot be done. You are confined to using what they have programmed for. They are not. They can change the code in order to make an efficient random-map creator. They are not going to do it, as they have stated. So, no random maps on release. Just FYI. As for some posters mocking people when they say "A 1994 game had random maps but Xenonauts in 2013 does not" feeling obliged to defend the developers and replying in a range from "You are stupid and have no idea what you are talking about" to "different engine = Different rules", I have to say the argument is sound. The developers picked their engine. If they cannot do it with said engine, it is their fault(Bad development decision). Back then there were no game engines. The programers were making the game from scratch, meaning they had to program the game engine, first, continue with the rest of the game, then. Modern developers only have to program the game itself. So, who is the "stupid one" and "has no idea what he is talking about"? Some people need to take special courses in social behavior before they start posting on a forum.