NoirWolf

ACH!! MEIN EYES!!! YOU DESTROYED MEIN GRAMATIK LOVING EYES!!! PS: Do not for the love of god google bleedings eyes or anything along those lines... there's some shit that mortal men aren't supposed to see... thank Christ I am not a mere mortal.

Three problems: 1) You have to launch the satellite on a big rocket (that's gonna be seen); 2) with the decoy corpse asteroid thing you'd need to position a satellite within a dead satellite's debris ring, that's beyond remote operations level of accuracy and you'd still have to find a way to transmit information from it to the ground without detection (once or twice might escape notice but I doubt they wouldn't keep tabs on what going on in orbit); 3) the asteroid idea would just give the aliens something to chuck at a Xenonaut base and kill two birds with one proverbial stone. The detection system wouldn't be the only thing dicking around what with all those scout UFOs making sorties to keep tab on the human forces and the various other kinds of UFOs that go in and out of the atmosphere for various reasons. Space junk cloaking works as an idea... but you still have something most junk doesn't: A low intensity EM field which would be spotted as active electronics even if you only pulse it you'd still need to position the damn thing over where you want pictures to be taken. Stealth in space is pretty much impossible unless the opponent isn't actively looking for you, considering this is a planetary invasion with the view of occupying it (not glassing the fuck out of it) it's pretty safe to assume that anything we'd send up would come right back down, probably with allot of plasma scorch marks.

He would positively boil over with glee before smitin' ze foul grammatik interlopers! ja!

Stealth satellites would work as a concept if the aliens did not have either advanced sensors able to pick up something reflecting solar radiation in a consistent way ( do not talk about absorbing it, you'd fry your satellite to a crisp trying to do it) or gravity well detection systems (which they also do, FTLs, remember?) because anything with mass has a gravity well and your spy satellite would have a consistent signature on those sensors moving in a stable orbit at a stable speed.

Hmmm kept meaning to ask someone this but never found the right group for it: Which game do you guys recommend out of the old series of games for a new guy? Gonna be getting Xeno tomorrow or at latest on Friday but I also saw quite a few UFO/Xcom games on Steam the other day .

Detailed maps for every inch of the world simply did not exist back then and whatever satellites they may have had were likely shot down by the first wave of UFOs (aerial photography would work if, again, you weren't in a conflict zone facing foes with technology far more advanced than your own) but I will give you the point that the maps should be vaguely silhouetted (or more sharply depending on where in the world you are) not black.

Ach... mein grammatik! dis simply will not do!Now hold shtill while I get ze jumper cables to fry ze defective neurons out.

For realism sake we could also say that the choppa cannot fly around the area what with plasma armed aliens tacking potshots at it and the pilot could be flying by radar to avoid getting snipped by horny horny harridans while looking out windows.

That could work too , granted not as satisfying to my inner physicist ( getting lasers to be more deadly even late game ) but still good .

Max can I put in a request for a modified goo launcher? (one that fires, at least, a napalm like substance which can then be ignited by something say like... I donno... lasers? ).

The foul xenos resist our flames? Upgrade time: And before anyone asks: No, I don't particularly like nuns with guns, just that they seem to have some of the better fan art around I can find readily ( still curious how flame weapons worked in Xenonauts that they'd have hypervelocity weapon-like issues and if they fix hypervelocity weapons and put them back in why would flame weapons then still be out ? )

http://api.ning.com/files/K1dDMtcwq9u60Ihp6S3D2qkABMopI7*6jlSJ04NYtUPF2BpqKQFUqRFg3wbIUuxO6P7I7ITZtOp6*v1QUPkIPtaMdhCOiZJR/Wolf_of_Fire_by_yuumei.jpg Not even my final form.

It's probably got something to do with the reason they pulled the flammenwerfer out too (yes I went german there).

Actually a couple of the variants of the Me-262 did have external tanks (though not drop tanks) for various reasons (either more range or, as in the case of the night fighter variant, moving internal fuel tanks outside to make room for more equipment within the plane). http://www.aviation-history.com/messerschmitt/me262.html also notice that the range stated is for the A-1 variant (the first production fighter variant).

Wait, wait, did you just pull a "The Alien AI in this game is so good Alien soldiers act exactly like real life ones do!" ? Because if you just do that you kinda shot yourself in the leg because that implies the AI is actually a bloody AI otherwise your parallel falls apart the moment you consider that the enemy soldiers you are facing in-game are leagues less competent then the worse of the livestock loving russian soldiers of the Red Army in World War 2 to say nothing of the fact that you're not fighting a group that is being directed by a commander level intelligence thus you are in fact facing, in-game, the following situations using your way of difficulty increase: Easy: Small disorganized group attempting to stick together while killing your guys. Medium: Somewhat larger disorganized group attempting to stick together while killing your guys. Hard: Large disorganized group attempting to stick together while killing your guys. As you can see that's pretty much a linear, artificial, difficulty progression. Most people want difficulty to be more organic and unexpected, it's more challenging, less predictable, makes you wanna shut down the computer pissed as fuck and then 15 min later come back eager for revenge (most decent chess players won't get that in a game with linear progression of difficulty).

My math is kinda rusty, how's that: http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/p51_mustang.htm http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=513 http://acepilots.com/planes/p51d_mustang.html Thrice this: http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/messerschmitt_262.htm http://militaryhistory.about.com/od/worldwariiaircraft/p/me262.htm http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=108 http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/me262-specifications.html - this one I find interesting because it specifies "On internal fuel" which could imply the Me-262 could have external tanks (drop or otherwise). ?

It is times like these I wish there was multiplayer... so I can teamspeak with my team and use this line when losing: [video=youtube;-9-Te-DPbSE]

To answer your questions: Yes (barely, same as the Mustang without its external tanks). Yes in theory ( not exactly precise but nor was the P-51's rocket complement ). No clue when the next build will be, likely a month, maybe 2 even (worse case scenario: Christmas present).

Actually the King Tiger wasn't much worse than the Tiger 1 in reliability terms (it didn't have nearly as severe transmission issues as the Panther 1 for example), it's credited with having shitty reliability mostly because the majority of King Tigers destroyed were due to crews destroying their own tanks to prevent their capture but this was in equal parts due to inferior metals used in the construction of the engine and the transmission and lack of fuel, the Panther 1 in exchange had a badly designed transmission that never got fixed (that was one of the goals of the Panther 2 that never saw more than a prototype hull built). As for the Mustang being the best all round fighter...uhmm... the Me-262 has that crown by virtue of actually flying with the crap they had to build its engines out of and the conditions of assembly and the fact that allied fighters could only snipe them while they were landing (credit where credit is due though the armament of the Mustang was superior to the Me-262's at the speeds the 262 flew at ).

You mean where the tortoise proved to the hare that speed isn't a good substitute for armour?

Us Grammar Nazis take particular offence when our name itself is misspoken... many have met a toasty fate in the halls of the Grammatica Fatis.

Mustang wasn't a success until it got the british engine (it was decent but not extraordinary) and the British Battlecruisers ( I assume you're referring in particular to the HMS Hood) were World War 1 designs for the most part retrofitted for World War 2 (the Hood in particular was based on the HMS Tiger and designed for short range exchanges as its armour was angled towards the horizontal not the vertical, it's this flaw which screwed it over when it fought the Bismark). The Tiger 1 also wasn't much to write home about either but the King Tiger (with good grade steel) was a tank that was excellent in almost all respects and which was only really completely surpassed in potency in the early 1950s.

So you suggest artificial difficulty instead of organic difficulty? (IE making the enemies more numerous, thus as a whole more tough, not more intelligent or more capable with increases in difficulty) Remember this is a single player game, balance comes down to fairness and not having any difference between "I will murder you and make you into a hat!" difficulty and "lets just all be friends! yay ! magic!" difficulty being how hard it is to finish the game, not more content, nothing. Having the gas option available for everyone actually only offers one side a option because people who want to have a challenging and deep game will just avoid that option as it cheapens their enjoyment so why not just have the gas option change with the difficulty to reflect the difficulty you're playing at? It isn't changing core mechanics in any significant way and there's nothing to balance anyway.

heresy! *blam*