Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'base management'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


    • Monthly Development Updates
    • Xenonauts-2 Releases & Patch Notes
    • Xenonauts-2 General Discussion
    • Xenonauts-2 Bug Reports
    • Xenonauts General Discussion
    • Xenonauts: Community Edition
    • Xenonauts Mods / Maps / Translations
    • Xenonauts Bug Reports / Troubleshooting


  • Complete Mods
  • Xenonauts: Community Edition

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



About Me





Found 16 results

  1. I'm back to playing X1 again. Each battle is a frustrating struggle. It would be nice to be able to train your troops in X2 so they can keep up with Xenonauts on the field. In real life, militaries not only have minimum physical requirements, but have minimum intelligence requirements as well. You can't be a tanker in real life if you're bad at math (at least during WW2, I don't know how tank internal stuff has changed) because you have to very quickly make calculations on the fly to hit a target. Xenonauts are not just regular military, they are literally special forces. There is no reason why agents / troops (don't know what the right word is) should be deficient in any way. Also, please try to avoid the "armor is almost useless" trope. It would be great if every tech item developed has a benefit and is not offset completely by problems or simply so little of an upgrade its not worth it. Would be interesting to see something similar to "Alien Infiltration %" like there is in X-Com Apocalypse. Possibly within national governments, or NATO and Warsaw, and so forth. More infiltration might mean less funding. This might not work well with the proposed Cold War system in my other thread though.
  2. Hi, i dont know if it has been stated already but i think some features about base managment miss dearly. - A description of each module you want to build. It would be nice to know how much place for people a living quarter wil bring or how much defense the new turrets i am going to build are going to give. A small text giving notification about each module would be very appreciated. - An ingame notification about how to change the oriantation of the modules we want to creat would be nice. I had to come seach the answer on the forums. New players which do not take the time to search might think that those modules cant be turned. Thinking for example that hangars can only be built vertically. Speaking of orientation i noticed a bug where the image inside of modules dont follow the orientation you gave. If you have a plane in an horizontal hangar you see i all clamped and small. Same for vertical factories.
  3. So, this sad tale involves a mission gone wrong, a ghost tank and the end of my Iron Man dreams. After a ground combat session deriving from a crashed UFO in which all but 1 person of team survived to run away, I went back to base to regroup and draft more soldiers. Thing is: the tank which was destroyed during the mission was there, as if it was never used, but occupying 2 slots in my dropship. Upon trying to remove it from the ship, the game would just ignore my command, leaving it there. So I decided to decomission it, so that I could open space for 2 more soldiers. Just after I confirmed decomissioning, the game crashed. When I tried to reload the savegame, which was an Iron Man one, the game crashed again. And now it's doing it every time. I have no idea of what happened, but here is the save game: http://www.4shared.com/file/1mAceIGP/AutosaveIM2013-07-08_113035.html
  4. A while ago, Jean Luc examined ideas for encouraging bases to be more than radar/interception sites. I'd like to revive his thread but with an important exception. I'd like to look at ideas to encourage bases to be more than radar/interception sites but only by evolving and developing extensions to existing concepts, rather than creating new concepts completely. Encouraging the building of labs across the world At the moment, is there any reason why labs should be built in places other than in the main base and the main base only? I mean, seriously. Each lab holds 50 scientists, so with 100 that should keep projects rolling until mid-to-late game. Projects appear locked to specific bases, so it seems that there is nothing currently existing to promote labs outside of the main base. I would suggest three additions to the existing system Many hands make light work.The proposed research UI allows for the management of multiple labs over a number of sites. Why not permit scientists to be pooled into a single, general pool which can be assigned to projects? By not locking a project to a single base, players would not need to group labs together. A fresh perspective. There are diminishing returns on every scientist that is added to a project, and the exact progression of the project is only vaguely hinted at. Categories of progression are divided into Poor, Average, Good and Excellent. To encourage the idea of a worldwide network of scientists discussing and sharing information, I would propose a special bonus. For every base which has a fully-staffed lab, the commander earns a special category of research progression, where the ratio of diminishing returns is significantly reduced up to the new category. E.G. with two bases, each with a fully-staffed lab, a project could earn, say, “Superb” progression with sufficent scientists assigned to it. A third base with a fully-staffed lab could grant an adequately staffed project “Magnificent” progression, etc. etc. This bonus is entirely optional, and can be expensive to achieve, but worth it when you get there. Cheaper real estate. An idea shanghaied from Eltee, but one that does work. Give a discount on the first lab built in any particular base, but charge full price for any further labs built. If there is a noticeable difference in price between building a lab in base A and building a lab in base B, most people will prefer to build in base B instead. Encouraging the building of engineering bays across the world There are pre-existing reasons why you would build an engineering bay in a new base. Most of them are to do with the fact that alien spacecraft aggressively attempt to maintain air superiority, and will go after slow, lumbering transports if they can. It is less risky to build engineering bays in new bases, but with adequate air support the main base can supply outlying bases. I would make the following proposals. Cheaper real estate. As with labs, give a discount on the first engineering bay built in any particular base, but charge full price for any further bays. This should encourage local production over transportation. It would also encourage increased networking between each base as with more distributed engineering bays, there would be an increased local flow of goods between continental bases, as opposed to intercontinental flow between a factory base and its subsidiaries. Local produce. Reduce the cost for goods transportation under a set distance. If it is cheaper for local bases to supply needs rather than a central factory base, then commanders will be encouraged to spread efforts rather than concentrate them. I would additionally suggest a global discount for transporting staples (i.e. alienium and alien alloys) to allow raw materials to reach the bases that need them. It's too damn crowded in here!. Reduce the maximum number of engineers a bay can support. Now, why do that? Increasing networking between bases is good, but a canny commander will probably quickly work out how best to exploit cheaper bays. That means that the commander may never build more than one bay per base, and spread the work around. Additionally, it also reduces the opportunity for a central factory base to become the most efficient option, without discounting factory bases completely. Encouraging multiple fireteams across the globe Hoo boy. Up until very recently dropships had a limited range, so the only option to meet the alien threat on the ground was to have multiple fireteams spread about the world. But now it looks like dropships will have infinite or near-infinite range, which in turn means that the most suitable option for commanders will be to focus their efforts on one team, because that team can access most threats. Because they can access most threats, they will become stronger with each battle they fight, so the commander should, logically, have that team fight all the battles, so it can become the strongest it can be. That being said.... They're everywhere!. Reduce the time that crash-sites stay on the geoscape, and combine mission types to create tougher choices. For example, have a terror mission fire off at the about the same time that a juicy landing craft is shot down. Like XCOM:EU, make it clear to the commander that you can do the missions that you want to do, but you can't do 'em all with one team. Unlike XCOM:EU, provide a ready solution – be able to establish more fireteams. Life is cheap. Another one of ElTee's suggestions, make the set-up cost of establishing a fireteam in another base relatively cheap. ElTee suggested a discount on inital base structures connected with fireteams. Perhaps instead offer 12 troopers free with the first barracks built in a new base. However it's done, reducing the set-up costs involved with creating a new fireteam makes a favourable environment for more fireteams.
  5. Okay, so in the early game we typically have only one base, without the funds to lay down a second or third one too early. At the same time, we want radar and interceptor coverage over as large an area as possible -- we're tasked with defending the whole world, after all . A possible solution to this dilemma could be the ability to build "mini and micro bases", or Forward Bases and Outposts if you will. FBs and outposts would work like conventional bases, but they'd be smaller in terms of "grid size" and have less maintenance costs. A forward base would be 4x4 tiles or so, while an outpost would be 2x2. So, you build an outpost, which measures only 2x2 tiles and won't ever be able to grow past that (except perhaps if we implement a "Base Expansion" system where you can "upgrade" a base at a high one-time cost). You put a radar down and decide you'll build a second one later on when you can afford to. If you're worried about enemy invasion, maybe you also decide to place a defense system or living quarters and general stores, or you could turn it into a secret science facility/factory by adding living quarters and a workshop or lab. Either way, you now have a cheap, affordable listening post, but on the flip side, you won't ever be able to expand it into a proper large-scale base of operations; if you want a proper stronghold at that site later, you will have to build a second base and/or demolish the outpost. I feel this will fit the "chronically short on cash" approach the game is taking, make the early-game a bit more interesting and fun, and also add some strategic depth by forcing players to decide what kind of bases they want to build at various locations.
  6. #1 Base expansion/building. This is very much related to Chris' "Difficulty Curve" thread but is of general interest as well. The idea is to make the expense of base building more gradual and enable establishing of smaller, specialized bases that can later be expanded depending on need. Each base consists of 49 squares (7x7). For the sake of discussion let's say that establishing a new base costs 980.000$ which is 20k per square. Instead of paying close to a million to make a new base why not pay 80k for a small 2x2 base with command center + 3 squares for whatever you want. Hangar + chinook + living quarters for a deployment base for example. Early game this could work in tandem with Chris' proposal to have crash sites randomly generated by npc air forces as it would allow you to more easily cheaply spread your soldiers across the globe and reach those minor mission sites. In general it would provide a more gradual increase of base building costs and allow for specialized bases without having to pay for space you're never gonna use. Why pay full price and end up with wasted space when all you want is a 2x4 interception base (CC + radar + 3 hangars) for example. Should the demands for space increase one would be able to mark a set of square to be dug into (dungeon keeper style) for 20k per square. See image below. Red square is the "starting area", blue squares can be built in, gray squares can be dug into. Problem with map generation for base defence? There could be 3 pre-set base sizes allowing smaller bases to be converted into larger ones. #2 Air combat - directional rolls. -Nevermind. The idea is simply to allow players to choose the direction in which the interceptor rolls when performing the maneuver. Instead of one roll button have two for the different directions. I've watched quite a few LPs there were many situations where I thought this would be useful. It could make air battles a bit more involved and allow for a bit more "player skill" without making them longer or more tedious. Not sure how the AI would handle it though. Example below. #3 Early game UFOs and map sizes. With the recent announcement that alien fighters will also, almost certainly, generate crash sites but be unenterable (along with light scouts) and the fact that these minor crash sites typically have 2-3 aliens (often just 1 or 2) it might not be a bad idea to reduce map size for these early missions (maybe even up to 50%). - With so few aliens (do higher difficulties have more?) there's really no point in sneaking around and exploring all those buildings. Let these early missions be quick shootouts that introduce players into the game and don't take more time than they really need. - It would make small missions less of a chore and would lessen "player fatigue" later on when larger, more difficult and more time consuming missions start appearing. - A more gradual curve from the smallest of maps/missions to largest.
  7. I propose to add this feature: You can speed up the construction of the module by 50% paying the certain amount, as if hired additional personnel
  8. When increasing the amount of units you want to sell/transfer, it would be much preferable if you could just plot in a number, instead of having to press the little increase/decrease arrows. When you're selling hundreds of units at a time, it's just an annoying wait, even if you hold the arrow down.
  9. I know that I need to keep Alenium to make higher-tier weapons, but what about the Alien weapons, ammo and alloys? Are those things I can sell without worry or are they needed for something else later too?
  10. My first base (in Europe) has space for five vehicles, while the second base I built (in USSR) has only space for three. I notice there is a general increase to three. Maybe the start base has code that says you can fit two vehicles, and now the new garage says three as well?
  11. This happens quite often, and I have not managed to figure out what causes it. I finally remembered to take a screenshot of it this time, which reminded me to post it up. I actually have two bases at this point, with neither showing. Sometimes it shows some bases, and not others.
  12. I had a guy come back from the infirmary. The unassigned list says (0), but he is in the list. See? Just a small thing.
  13. I was in the stores screen, had just made a shiny new laser pistol and battery (first time ever for me to get to laser weapons - yay!) which I wanted to send to my second chinook team. When I selected the items to transfer there was no cost or time to transfer shown, and nothing happened when I pushed the transfer button. Maybe I was just missing something?
  14. Realise not much balancing has been done yet but... Is it possible Technicians and Scientist Wages could be reduced by some amount (perhaps try around 20%)? At the moment you can't really have more than about 20 scientists and 30 technicians over two bases which means your going to struggle to get high level tech mid-game and struggle to produce more than the essential Alenium warheads for more than one location. That or reduce the production time of alenium warheads to a day a piece. At present I had to have 30 guys working over-time just to produce enough to equip my aircraft on a once weekly sortie.
  15. What alien materials are used in construction of human equipment? How many of these do we need to keep? Is there a accessable research tree? What is a recommended base set up? (How many soldiers and fighters per base.) What is a recommended squad set up?
  16. I haven't had the opportunity to try and move 700 ellerium from one base to another just yet (half-joke there). Is it gonna take like 30 seconds just holding the button down on the clicker to get up to make large quantities in the transfers or to allocate 215 mechanics to manufacture a plane? I remember it just BUGGED THE CRAP OUTTA ME to have to just hold it down forever, then you click the wrong fricken button and cancel it then you gotta do it all over. I would hope mistakes wouldn't be so difficult to handle in this new game. lol.
  • Create New...