legit1337

I did some testing on my own. I came to the same conclusion as the OP. Vision seems to be calculated as starting at one tile in front of the soldier instead of in the square the soldier is actually standing in. Look at the first picture. The soldier facing northeast misses the psion because his vision cone is calculated as starting one square in front of him, and the opposite side of the UFO door blocks his vision of the one square. When the soldier turns to look inside the UFO, the game is actually calculating his visible squares as if he is standing one square closer to the UFO, which would place him right next to the UFO wall and would block everything except his peripheral vision. In the second picture, the soldier is able to see more around the corner when he turns because the game is calculating his vision cone as if he were actually standing at the corner, instead of one square back and having the corner block his view. EDIT: This is weird, sometimes this doesn't seem to be the case. In certain situations vision seems to be calculated correctly. I have no idea what is going on.

Agreed, both with DAOWAce and Professor Sparks. To be fair to llunak though, from what I understand this is not a CE problem, it is a vanilla issue that even Chris had problems trying to fix. TBH I don't see picture number 2 as a problem. Depending on how you want to look at it, the soldier leaning out from the corner could have a much wider view then it would normally seem. Picture number 1 however is definitely a problem that needs to be fixed if at all possible.

I can vouch for number 1. Especially noticeable with xenonaut LMGs.

Delete this thread. I was an idiot and missed this in the balance changes of the mod description.

Hey, just got out of school for the semester and decided to try out xenonauts community addition for the bugfixes and balance tweaks. My first mission I had a wounded soldier who got shot and received two bleeding wounds on the alien turn, then received 10 more HP of damage at the beginning of my turn from bleeding. I thought wounds were fixed in v1.5 of the vanilla game to apply at the end of the player turn to prevent soldiers from instantly bleeding out. What version of the game is the community version built upon?

Perhaps not only reaction fire, but that is where I am noticing it.

I am noticing more and more that xenonaut reaction fire seems to be not ignoring adjacent cover. Many times I've had a machinegunner put half of his rounds into the rock in the square directly next to him, or worse, into the soldier standing in front of him. Isn't adjacent cover (including friendly soldiers) supposed to be ignored in squares adjacent to the shooter?

Occasionally yes. I saved right after Donald hit Viktor in the back, you can see that he turned around and had taken some damage, the cover in front of him being destroyed. Not sure what caused it, and I like you have not been able to reproduce it. But some really weird shot behavior keeps happening, I'll post more saves in this thread if I find anything else.

I think I finally got a save of it. [ATTACH]6118[/ATTACH] Just hit end turn. The caesan at the corner will open up on the xenonauts emerging from the charlie, appearing to shoot through an entire building doing so. EDIT: Spoke too soon, it turns out it was just corner shenanigans making it look like the alien was shooting through a wall... But this is a good save to test out the miss deviation behavior on. Undiscovered.sav Undiscovered.sav

I thought I remember it working at some point. Perhaps it was the broken implementation I was remembering.

No it isn't like they are shooting at an enemy and missing, hitting friendlies... They are literally magdumping into the back of a friendly standing in the square directly in front of them.

Bump on this anyone? It keeps happening in the latest stable version. I have to spin my guys around to exhaust their TUs before ending turn in a hallway.

Not really, the aliens mind controlling said soldier probably want to keep him alive for as long as possible to maximize the chaos and confusion. It is not a very effective tactic if he instantly gets shot and doesn't serve to distract the xenonauts or cause any damage.

Yes actually Chris, every shot I seem to recall doing something weird has been a miss shot... One time, I had one of my soldiers miss and hit a friendly standing right beside him lol. Like, directly in the square left of him, perpendicular to the angle of fire, it was kind of bizarre. I'll be playing again today, if I can get a savegame of any odd behavior of miss bullets I will post it here. EDIT: Here we go, I just had a machinegunner hit a man crouching in front of him. Check the save, Donald just hit Viktor in the back with a bullet, even though Viktor was crouched in front of him. [ATTACH]6099[/ATTACH] I know it isn't a shot going through a wall, but it's behavior that shouldn't be happening correct? Is this indicative of a bug in the miss calculation system? Deviation.sav Deviation.sav

I am noticing this pretty frequently. Aliens shots seem to be doing funky things sometimes. One instance sticks out clearly in my mind, I had an alien shoot a plasma rifle at a soldier taking cover on a corner. The shot missed him but deviated, seeming to phase through two walls and kill the soldier standing behind him, even though the angle would be impossible. Afterward I checked with two of my remaining soldiers in the correct positions and it said 100% shot blocked. Unfortunately I didn't get a savegame of it. Anyone else noticing things like this?

I thought there was code in place to prevent soldiers from reaction firing at aliens if there was a substantial %chance to hit a friendly. I just had a machinegunner unload an entire magazine into the back of the poor guy standing directly in the square in front of him because a couple of aliens decided to move around a bit on the edges of his vision.

Yes, latest experimental, running no mods. Steps to reproduce: 1. Start a new game 2. Unload everyone from chinook and go to loadout menu 3. Modify one of the base classes pictures and title (it works on sniper for me 100%) 4. Change that class loadout to something different and set as default for that class 5. Change a soldier to that class 6. Mouse over the icon near "equip default loadout", it should go blank. Clicking on it sometimes causes CTD Here is a savegame... [ATTACH]6053[/ATTACH] You can see this behavior by loading that save, going immediately to loadout and clicking on my sergeant. Try mousing over his class icon, I modified the sniper base class. Loadout_bug.sav Loadout_bug.sav

Hate to bump my own thread but I just ran across this again in my most recent game, I can replicate it pretty easy too. Is anyone else getting this?

Sure if you want to get technical, it's a "cover system" limitation... I tend to lump the "cover system" under the umbrella term "game engine", considering that the "cover system" is part of how xenonauts is hardcoded to work. If that is technically incorrect, I don't care, everyone knows what I meant. Feels good to be back on the forums . I missed everyone. The game is coming along nicely, I'm glad chris integrated elements of CE into the base game.

Many people have reported this already, myself included. It isn't a bug, it's an engine limitation and it isn't going to be fixed according to the devs. I share your sentiments however.

First off, if you are playing xenonauts and expecting to win the campaign without losing a single soldier. You're going to have a bad time. Even on the easiest difficulty s**t happens, grenades are fumbled, friendlies get in the way of incoming fire, rockets miss, aliens get a lucky shot with a plasma pistol. The game that xenonauts was based off of was famous for it's meatgrinder battles where rookies would die by the dozens, and only the best or the luckiest would survive and turn into veterans, who were one man army rambos that could take on an entire battleship by themselves and win. If however, you are trying to minimize casualties while assaulting a fortified choke point (a very reasonable desire), there are multiple pieces of advice I can give you. 1. Don't stack on the door, 1 grenade and it's all over. 2. If you suspect aliens might be directly behind the door, use explosives. This kills the alien and opens the door for you so you don't have to risk a trooper. 3. Blast the door open with guns (see above tip). 4. Once the door is open use smoke grenades and suppressive fire to give cover to any breachers moving in. If you just run your men into the enemies waiting guns they are just going to get slaughtered. 5. Don't be afraid to be aggressive. Moving directly adjacent to a piece of cover an alien is using will negate his cover bonus. Put a point blank shot into its skull and now you have a piece of cover against his alien buddies further into the ship. 6. Flashbangs are good for suppressing clumped together aliens hiding behind cover.

Default role, I was customizing the sniper default class to be an "officer" one.

After editing a class (symbol and name) in the loadout screen, mousing over the symbol for that class causes it to go blank. Attempting to click on it causes CTD. Running latest experimental, no mods, clean install.

Agreed. Honestly I don't feel too chuffed pirating games. If I have the money I buy it as the case with xenonauts, if I don't and I want to try out the game, I pirate it. That simple. The developer doesn't lose my revenue because if I could not pirate it, I just wouldn't play. They aren't losing a potential customer, and they are gaining someone who will spread good info about the game if he enjoyed it. I bought Distant Worlds: Universe on steam earlier this month for full price because I had so much fun with the pirated version. @LordJulian You have cogent points. As I acknowledged in my earlier posts, developers deserve to be paid for the work they do developing software. It is difficult to have a society where half is governed by supply/demand, and the other half is totally post scarcity. It is hard to market something when it's supply is theoretically infinite, and it's demand is a set amount. However, as I said before I believe the current state of copy-write laws and the the idea of "digital property" is bewilderingly farcical. The only system I can think of that would alleviate these issues is something similar to what Max_Caine was proposing. 1. Artists/programmers produce digital media. 2. Third parties pay the artists/programmers a lump sum, or a royalty for the "rights" to host the data. 3. Consumers download the data for free. 4. Third parties make money (profit sums) off of ad-revenue generated by site traffic. Everybody wins. Developers get paid, site owners make profit, consumers get free media. Piracy rendered irrelevant because all digital media is free anyway. It may not work but that is the best I can come up with... I honestly wouldn't mind watching 10 minutes of commercials if I got a free video game out of it. It is hard NOT to devalue something that can be copied millions of times at the press of a button, all for less than a penny. Artificial limitation of goods is an immoral business practice that is decried as illegal and unethical by the U.S government. Digital Rights Management and current copy-write laws fit the definition. The only reason it flies right now is the fact that a lot of powerful people would go broke if they stopped being able to make money off of digital media by artificially limiting access. Imagine if we had the technology to make food replicators from star trek. Infinite amounts of food could be generated for almost no cost and world hunger could end in a day. But nope, those farmers need to be paid for growing the original fruits and vegetables used as patterns for a copy, so everyone has to pay 10,000$ each or they don't eat. Not a problem for some, but half the world ends up starving because the farmers got greedy.

I have to jump in with a personal anecdote... A lot of games in my steam library are there because I played a pirated version of it and liked it, and decided to get the legitimate version. Games I would have never bought otherwise... I cannot speak to the morality or the effect on business revenue of piracy as a whole, but for me piracy has caused me to inject more money into the games industry then I probably should have. Look... nobody says "Hey, I'm ready to drop 60$ on a game, but I'd rather just play a pirated version." Most pirates have no intention of paying for a game in the first place, and thus when they pirate, no revenue is lost. They will either pirate it or simply not play. On the other hand, I bet a lot of pirates end up buying games they normally wouldn't have because they got hooked. The entire concept of data copy-write is retarded anyway. Cyberspace is literally a post-scarcity society, where copying large amounts of information costs fractions of a penny. Imagine if you could copy a car, or a computer, or any other object from someone else at next to no cost, with no harm done to the original and no degradation... The entire concept of free market supply and demand would collapse over night. We are there right now when it comes to digital information, and there are still people trying to make money off of artificial limitation of data. I understand that our entire infrastructure isn't out of scarcity, and that production of data has some very real costs... but there has got to be a better way to go about it then the current system of copy-write protection. A system that is technically illegal according to U.S business laws. (Artificial Limitation of Goods to drive up prices) For instance I buy a car... and I spend the next 6 months building a new one out of spare parts that looks, handles, and feels exactly like the original. For some reason I decide to give it away to some random dude for free. Who would say that is morally wrong? Nobody in their right mind. But according to copy-write laws, if I do it with data it suddenly is. The fact that computers make it so fast, easy, and cheap is irrelevant, and is in fact a good thing IMO considering the influx of luxury (software) goods getting to (and improving the lives of) people who wouldn't normally get them. But I'm beginning to rant so I'll shut up.