Voeter

Don't know what is causing it exactly. But I get a 100% repeatable crash when I move my soldier that is standing on a teleporter (Valeria something something she is called). Here's the save. Prior to this a sebillian used that teleported to come down, shoot and go back up so that might have something to do with it? Had to zip the save b/c it was too big. BREACH.zip BREACH.zip

Don't know if it ties into all the other "ceiling bugs" reported, but if not here is a save and screenshot to illustrate. I've breached a corvette and there is one specific spot I can stand on @ the lower interior from which I get vision on the entire second floor... Note the arrow of my xenonaut selected on the lower floor and the vision he provides. Looking glass.sav Looking glass.sav

Or you could try http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_vista-files/how-can-i-recover-deleted-files-with-shift-del/13b1eaad-d41a-4e77-91c5-f0bc9590de7d or http://pcsupport.about.com/od/filerecovery/tp/free-file-recovery-programs.htm

As the title says. I teleported into my own popped stun gas grenade in a landing ship, went unconscious and the game froze. The same is reproducable and also happens if my dude does -not- go unconscious. Screenie added to illustrate and savegame where you can reproduce in the same turn. [edit] by "froze" I don't mean a lockup. I just cannot do anything, but the game is still responsive in the sense that I can easily shut it down via windows/alt+f4 and the process is still running [/edit] [ATTACH]4077[/ATTACH] Voeter in combat 2.sav Voeter in combat 2.sav

Just wanted to report I had the same issue. I also tried to reproduce but with no success. As soon as I notice any armor or weapons missing (and manage to reproduce the bug) I'll report back in. By the way, my rifleman layout has jackal armor set.

I don't' date=' because the average damage you do will already go up simply because of higher chance to score a hit. I know my last post was really long, but at least check out the two damage tables. Here you see that if you want the average damage per shot to remain the same, the only way to increase damage done on a hit is to [i']lower accuracy[/i]. You -could- of course also lower average damage of the weapon to compensate for your idea, but that would simply mean that aimed shots become more and more cost-effective in -any- situation, eventually making snap shots and normal fire virtually useless at -any- range. Currently using an aimed shot is only cost effective (in damage per TU used) at (near) maximum range of the weapon used. If you increase the (average) damage on aimed shots, keep it the same on normal shots and lower it on snap shots it very quickly. If you up the damage on aimed shots by only 10% (and lower it by 10% for snapshots) it's almost as damaging to use aimed shots as it is using normal or snapshots. Skew the damage by 20% and it'll always be best to use aimed shots. It's mathematically possible to change the system to incorporate your idea, but that would mean changing the basics of the entire system right now. [EDIT]By the way, it might be important to note that I did not simple increase variance in my calculations as you mentioned, but I skewed it in favor of aimed shots (and against snap shots, with normal shots remaining the same as it is now). Simply increasing variance would also mean you have a chance to score a lot LOWER damage hits on aimed shots and that did not seem the intent of your idea.[/EDIT]

You might consider writing it in your native Russian and find someone fluent in both Russian and English to translate it for you? I think the premise is good, but as EchoFourDelta stated in pretty bad English... Maybe there's someone on the board here willing to help?

Might be I don't know because I'm fairly new to the board, but is there a particular reason the wiki isn't (properly) maintained by (a goldhawk-hand-picked) group of fans?

Fun discussion. Can't resist putting in my 2 cents TL;DR: Add a range modifier to weapons to keep the overall system intact, but add a bit of realism and make the game "feel" better I feel like we're discussing whether you prefer playing a game like chess over a game of poker. In chess 100% of what you do makes 100% of the difference in the outcome of your game/battle. In poker it's a lower percentage because part of it is caused by the sheer randomness of chance. IMHO the latter suits and simulates a "real" battle a -lot- more. Why? Because it accounts for a lot of "real" variables not directly accounted for in the calculations the game makes itself: a strong NNE wind blowing right as you fire your shot, angling it away a degree, a quick jerk-like reaction from the intended target, causing the bullet/laser/plasma bolt to end up 2 inches away from the intended target, etc. etc. That said, I really love a good amount of randomness in the damage you cause with your shots, simulating (in essence) the part of the body you hit. This randomness in -no way- diminishes the tactics needed to be successful, considering both you -and- the enemy gets the same (dis)advantage from this system. It only causes the need for you to adapt your strategy to be successful and (of course) that it is more difficult to get through every mission with all your xenonauts alive. In fact, if there is -one- thing I really love about the x-com(like) games it's the fact that even though you might have a really good chance to be on top in any given situation it could all go to hell and you lose Rambo "Predator" Terminator you lovingly crafted into the badass he is today. I honestly feel like there's a lot more emotion and thus fun in going all-in with a pair of aces with a chance of losing against someone than knowing that the next move with your queen will net you the checkmate 1000/1000 times. It might give you the satisfaction of the win, but -not- the thrill of knowing you could actually lose that queen and have to rethink your strategies. If you do -not- like the first option, there's always the option to save and load. Now I feel most, if not all of you agree that at least a certain randomness in the game is wanted and the main gripe I picked up over the last 10 pages is the fact that some situations don't "feel right". (actually I mostly have this with the grenades in xenonauts, but I guess it happens I think there's a fairly simple solution that works well to compensate any mentioned gripe, and that is to add either to hit modifiers per weapon for short, medium and long engagement ranges or both to hit and damage modifiers. The latter option might seem the better choice for some (a shotgun or rifle does more damage at point blank range than it does at 15 yards, right?) but actually it will only lower your chance to hit if you don't want your average damage done to become insane (ie. a shotgun almost always hitting AND instagibbing an alien). Here's a small table explaining both situations, where the average damage done per hit is still the same as is current per the wiki (ie. 25 dmg for the ballistic rifle and 35 for both shotty and sniper rifle): The important parts are the hit chance and the damage done per shot. I hope most of the table is self-explanatory but here is a breakdown for the shotgun why this "feels" right and/or is realistic: At small range the shotgun is outfitted best to hit and do it's awesome damage potential. This is explained by the highest dmg/shot on that range for any weapon AND the fact that it does the most damage/shot (= absolute damage) along with the sniper rifle. A sniper rifle might do the same damage per hit, but of course it's much harder to hit at this range with the weapon and optics designed for medium to long range engagements. These numbers are of course arbitrary and you can fiddle around with the to hit % and absolute damage a bit if wanted/needed. I'd say keep the current to hit chances for the medium range and adjust for short and long ranges per weapon so the damage/shot changes appropriately. Good idea or not? @ Aaron & Chris: is this something you guys would be willing to consider implementing or should we drop thinking along these lines? [edit] a couple of typo's and such.[/edit]

With the neww randomness in damage you do a minimum of 12,5 (does it get rounded down or up??) Damage with the ballistic rifle. If the seb was armoured in any way you could do even less. Took that into account? I remember hitting one of 'em 7 times with a ballistic rifle before it went down on the steam stable build, and there you do a minimum of 20 dmg per shot. The bugger probably had armour tho

TL;DR Laser research is much better than the extra damage research I wholeheartedly agree on this point. Researching this tech needs to cause you to kill aliens faster. I tried to calculate the actual use of researching either the 10% damage bonus or the laser weapons. I was mostly interested in the amount of hits needed to kill an alien. For these purposes I calculated the difference between for Caesans and Sebillians only, because those are the aliens you will mostly find in the beginning of the game: I used average hp found in the wiki for both the Caesans and Sebillians (ie. 45 and 60 respectively). Please note also that I did -not- account for the higher armour penetration of the laser rifle, so in fact the above numbers are skewed even a bit more in favour of the laser rifle. So, in short the +10% damage research give you ZERO chance extra to one-shot a Caesan or Sebillian, around 10% extra to 2-shot and 6% extra to 3-shot. This opposed to the laser rifle which gives a whopping 21% more to 1-shot a caesan (in fact, it gives you -a- chance to one-shot an average caesan) and none vs sebillians, around 30% more to 2-shot and about 15% to 3-shot, not to mention a guarantee to kill an average caesan. Fun fact is that the increasing of the randomness of damage actually caused the extra damage research to become -less- effective vs the laser weapon in this case, as you can see in the kill potential: As far as I can tell the laser research is at least 3x as effective as the extra damage. Considering you can actually 1-shot some aliens with the laser tech and the added TU gain -and- massive extra survivability chance I say the + damage research should become easier to do and/or more effective. Especially considering you need to research multiple topics to get the bonus damage instead of the flat out extra damage potential with the laser research in 1 go. [EDIT] Ignore the extra attachment to the message. This was added on accident [/EDIT]

A stunned alien actually isn't dead. In the current stable steam build (v18) civvies tend to shoot at stunned aliens too, and I in fact had one killed because of it...

I can confirm this is the same for the current stable (v18) steam build

I had a similar fun experience, on my iron man game, in my main base... I was chasing the last 2 remaining aliens, one of them being a wraith. Considering this was the 2nd wraith I ever encountered (I shot the first during a terror mission without even noticing it had teleport powers) I didn't give the teleporting it's due consideration... I ran up all my soldiers towards the two remaining aliens. One of them was hiding behind some crates, waiting for me to blow them up or snipe him. The wraith was teleporting back and forth between 2 rooms the last 5 turns. After killing the first alien, the wraith decided to teleport not to it's usual 1 of 2 rooms, but RIGHT INTO MY COMMAND CENTER! I had only 1 soldier still nearby. I ran everybody back as fast as I could, but didn't manage to kill it in 3 turns, since only my crappily ballistic rifle-equipped soldier could shoot at it. I was already crying that this would cost me the game, since it would hold my command center for 3 turns. But what did the brilliant AI decide? To TELEPORT AWAY ON TURN 3! Even better was that it teleported just out of sight range of 3-4 of my soldiers and it got killed the turn after. So, for everybody doing a base defense: always keep 1 guy in the command center since the wraith doesn't seem to want to teleport into visual range of any of your soldiers