Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Chris

Geoscape Strategic War

Recommended Posts

With the successful test of the Orbital Bombardment and Signal Uplink mechanics (which you can read about here), I've spent some more time thinking about what else is required to "finish" the Geoscape in terms of new mechanics.

The two main objectives are:

  • Make the Geoscape something that the player gradually has to take control over (in a way that gives the player more strategic choices to make)
  • Make it feel like there is a proper war going on between the aliens and the humans beyond the battles that the player sees

I'm going to outline below the remaining systems I'm planning to implement. Together, they will hopefully create a nice arc to the game where the aliens are decisively winning the war at the start of the game (even if the player wins all their ground and air battles), but as the game progresses the player will be able to stabilise the situation and take full control of the Geoscape. How the player divides their resources between the wider war and their own military struggle against the aliens should provide some additional interesting choices for the player.

1) Panic & Funding Levels:
Panic replaces Relations and works exactly the same except it counts up towards 100 (at which point the region is lost) rather than down towards 0. The funding provided by a region is static but is reduced once a region hits certain Panic levels; once the region is over 50 Panic the funding is reduced by 25% and once the region is at 75 Panic the funding is reduced to 50%.

This simply generates occasional interesting moments where a few points of Relations are disproportionately valuable. Getting North America down below 50 Panic before the end of the month might gain you an extra $250,000, which might encourage you to tactically use something like an Agent at a time that you otherwise might not.

2) Aerial Terror Sites:
Aerial terror sites in X2 now only target Signal Uplinks that the player has constructed (or is in the process of constructing) on the Geoscape. An air combat mission is spawned over the Uplink and if the player is not able to destroy the UFO attacking the Uplink before the timer runs out than that Signal Uplink is permanently destroyed and the region suffers a significant rise in Panic.

In these battles you are assisted by a squadron of friendly interceptors from the local region (these friendlies become more advanced as the game goes on due to Proliferation, which is explained below). In general these misions shouldn't be too hard to win, provided that you're not constructing Signal Uplinks in regions that your interceptors cannot reach!

3) Geoscape Agents:
Geoscape Agents will be a new strategic resource that can be used to lower Panic in a region. You get one new Agent at fixed intervals (perhaps every 25 days), and can gain additional Agents through other means such as capturing rather than killing the VIP on a VIP Assassination mission.

We will add an extra button to the topbar up by the Build New Base button called Deploy Agent, and this will let you target the region in which you want to lower Panic. A simple system, but it gives the player a targeted way to improve the Panic level of a specific region.

4) Research Sharing & Technology Proliferation:
The main method of keeping Panic in check is through your research efforts - in the X2 universe, the cornerstone of the Xenonaut planetary defence initiative is that the Xenonauts are continually sharing their research with all the funding regions. The continual stream of new information and technological advancement is what encourages the rest of the world to believe that the war against the aliens can be won (despite the ongoing Orbital Bombardment and War Events).

Every research project therefore grants the player a global Panic reduction. Simple projects like autopsies only reduce Panic by a small amount, whereas larger projects or those with a direct military effect (like new weapons or aircraft) would grant a larger Panic reduction. We'll display the Panic reduction value for each project on the Research screen so it can be factored into the player's research choices.

Additionally, when the player researches new weapons and armour, this technology is proliferated to the rest of the world and 30 days later the local forces soldiers on terror missions and VIP Assassination missions will be equipped with the new weapons and armour. The same thing happens with new aircraft; 30 days after you research a new interceptor the local forces aircraft fighting alongside you in aerial terror sites will be upgraded to the new type of aircraft.

5) VIP Assassination Missions:
At the start of the game, certain Signal Uplinks will be in the "blocked" state because a local VIP is opposing the local region joining the Xenonaut global defence initiative. This VIP must be killed or captured before the Signal Uplink can be built - which means the player must fight and win a ground combat mission against the local forces protecting the VIP. Killing the VIP wins the mission and frees up the Uplink, but capturing the VIP alive frees up the Uplink and also grants you an Agent (as the Xenonauts can then brainwash him).

The first complication is that local forces soldiers are hostile on the mission, but each one you kill will cause +1 Panic in the local region. Knocking them out with non-lethal weapons will not raise Panic, which encourages you to wait until you've researched some decent ranged stun weapons (we'll probably put some Electroshock Rifles etc in the game for this purpse).

The second complication is that the local forces benefit from proliferation; which means the optimal time to run these missions is after you've researched new technology but it's not yet been proliferated to the local regions. Otherwise you'll find yourself fighting (and trying not to kill) local soldiers carrying all the advanced technology you've just given them!

6) War Events & Strategic Research:
As well as launching waves of UFO attacks and ground missions, the aliens are also raising Panic in more sinister ways. Infiltrators are raising tensions between rival powers, UFOs are disguising themselves as human aircraft and attacking other countries, or extraterrestrial forces are just launching lightning raids that nobody can respond to quickly enough to prevent. These events periodically spawn in the funding regions where they increase Panic, and take the form of non-interactive pop-ups telling you about the event.

However, as the game progresses research will be unlocked that can reduce or entirely prevent the harm from these events. Perhaps researching a scanner capable of identifying infiltrators would allow local regions to reduce the harm inflicted by infiltration missions, or researching improvements to radar technology will allow local regions to spot UFOs masquerading as human craft. The player therefore gets to choose whether they want to prioritise research that stabilises the steadily rising Panic on the Geoscape, or research that directly improves the capabilities of their soldiers / aircraft etc.

Overall Conclusions:
I'm still thinking these systems over and therefore they may change in the future, but I'm thinking this will be enough new gameplay systems for us to call the Geoscape part of the strategy layer complete in gameplay terms (in conjuction with the new systems we've already added). There's more choices for the player to make and more of a "world" for you to interact with; I think it'll be cool for the player to slowly take control of the entire map by building bases and claiming Signal Uplinks and I think the chance to read about the nefarious things the aliens are doing "off camera" in the strategic research projects would be cool too.

If you've got any thoughts or see any problems with the systems outlined above, feel free to post your thoughts up - you might save us a lot of time and effort if you spot something we've missed! :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are these going to replace Strategic Operations? It would seem that anything that StratOps can do, these features can as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Max_Caine said:

Are these going to replace Strategic Operations? It would seem that anything that StratOps can do, these features can as well.

Yeah. The code will remain in the game so we can add strategic operations back in if we find a compelling reason to do so, but these systems represent us splitting off most of the components that make up strategic operations and forming larger and more interesting systems with them. That means there's not really much reason to include them any more.

A lot of the development of this game has been moving various strategic jigsaw puzzle pieces around to find the best way to fit all the different ideas tgoether. I think the combination listed above is the best I've come up with so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A quick question on the Aerial Terror Mission. Is a special kind of UFO going to spawn, or is it going to be more of a steambirds-esque grand melee with several classes of UFO swirling around? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Max_Caine said:

A quick question on the Aerial Terror Mission. Is a special kind of UFO going to spawn, or is it going to be more of a steambirds-esque grand melee with several classes of UFO swirling around? 

It's just a standard UFO squadron, but it doesn't create a crash site. Given the number of human craft involved, it'll likely see bigger UFOs appearing before they normally appear along with a fighter escort (in the early game that'll be a Destroyer).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty "standard" stuff as I see it, but the concepts are better balanced. For example 1994 XCOM has research give "score", a bit like research proliferation, but score sucks in that game.

Deploy Agent seems a little too simple to add depth to the game. You will just deploy when it's at 49%. I would probably prefer if it reduced panic after a delay, or maybe reduced panic from UFO air activity for the next month. But even your way it could add some depth if there were many non-automatic ways to get an agent.

Non-lethal missions yay.

Hopefully the "war events" have an actual pattern and are not just "random panic until you research x". Something like reducing panic in regions with an alien base would be a more interesting tech. Anyhow it's a good feature for modding as OpenXCOM has shown, and it can't take away from the game so long as there's a hotkey to close the event, unless it's just too much unfair RNG.

Aerial Terror Sites make a lot of sense. Basically "base defense" for the air.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there's more that could be done with Agents, especially with reference to War Events. One could spend an Agent to mitigate (not neutralise, just mitigate) a War Event, and then you don't have that Agent to improve Panic in a region later. 

 

EDIT: Context sensitive flowery text would also go a long way to making the agent button more engaging. You're not just pressing a button, you're "deploying to co-ordinate local relief efforts", or "hosting a summit on known infiltration techniques" or perhaps more sinisterly "silencing a vocal critic permanently".

 

EDIT 2: Heck, thinking about it, you could have two flavours of Panic reduction. "Positive" Panic reduction which is plain vanilla as described in the OP, which simulates things like PR, working with leaders, etc. etc., and "Negative" Panic reduction, which provides a bigger Panic drop but permanently reduces the max Panic score. That simulates the darker side of the coin which includes things like smearing or assassinating vocal critics, suppressing information, clearing black sites, etc. etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/10/2020 at 2:42 PM, Chris said:

The two main objectives are:

  • Make the Geoscape something that the player gradually has to take control over (in a way that gives the player more strategic choices to make)
  • Make it feel like there is a proper war going on between the aliens and the humans beyond the battles that the player sees

Big thanks for this. Is what I've been hoping for, well, for many years now. 

I've got a question as to how the first point is realised. From what I gather, the idea is that you have the aliens 'decisively winning' at the outset of the game, and that as the player progresses they expand by collecting uplink sites. So at the beginning, most of the territory is neutral in that it is not a protectorate of the Xenonauts, nor has it descended into chaotic panic as per the aliens' plan. My gut feeling is that the feel of a war is only going to come about if it looks like the aliens are expanding too. But if all you see of them is the regular instalments of UFO and some war-event popups, it might feel a lot like you're playing a ticker-driven simulation rather than interacting with opposing force.

The question is: apart from the nations that fall into panic, is there any way to see the alien expansion across the world? I'm thinking maybe have them create their own bases or even satellites (not necessarily geostationary) as an answer to your uplinks. With semi-permanent enemy pieces on the board, the geoscape looks a bit more like the table you'd see in a war room, as opposed to a choropleth.

Sure, enemy bases were a thing in X1 but I recall that they didn't occur frequently if you were smashing it on the air game, and besides which, those bases caused hefty-enough penalties that there was little-to-no reason not to take them out asap (and when there is no choice there is no strategy). My suggestion would be that the aliens have some markers on the board that you can't remove in the short term. You've got to watch as they creep across the globe. Kind of like in chess, you can't take out every enemy piece as soon as it marches across the board. The fundamental point of your strategy is to wait for a particular enemy move, then outmanoeuvre them in turn. I guess my point here is that xcom generally has a very flat feel to the strategy layer: you're only ever reacting to alien incursion and the only reaction you ever have is a seek-and-destroy mission. In the scheme I'm putting forward, you might choose not to destroy an enemy site if the region already has a very low panic level. Instead, you let the aliens overstretch, diverting resources from another site that is near the cusp for reducing funding. In that example, inaction becomes a choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The War of the Worlds strategy/hybrid RTS have the kind of sensation that you want to invoke, Ninothree. Scotland and the North are hammered in the first few strategic turns by Martian landings. The human defenders don't have the manpower or industrial base to fight back, so you have surrender the North and draw a defensive line in the Midlands, bunkering down and fending off Martian forays until you've built up a sizable industrial and technical base and can lead an invasion into Martian held lands. This is quite cleverly done - when playing as the Martians, the Martian landings ensure that you grab a good sized portion of the map immediately, but your units land without any kind of support infrastructure AT ALL, so you can make a few quick grabs in the first 2 or 3 turns, but by then you have so many units without support you spend all your time nursing sick units until the infrastructure to support them is there. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Giving up territory to the aliens is a tricky thing to balance, especially if we don't have a pre-set starting location for the player and the aliens like appears to happen in War of the Worlds. The feeling of losing the war will come more from watching the Panic rapidly rising in all of the world regions and having to find a way to keep it down; you expanding your organisation across the world is really a reaction to having to stablise the Panic in the various regions rather than the aliens actually having permanent forces in the region (it's probably best not to think of the warfare as massed-army warfare with fronts).

@Ninothree the key thing really is that the entire world is still your protectorate at the start of the game, you've just initially got no way of protecting it. The signal towers you can build in each region don't so much take control of the region as grant you access to the full resources of that region (and help reduce Panic a bit).

I think you guys might be right that Agents could be made more interesting, though - the current design does mean there's no reason to delay using an Agent once a region goes above 49 Relations (assuming you've got some other agents in reserve in case a similar thing happens to a more important region before the end of the month). I think perhaps it would be better if Agents simply reduced Panic by a certain percentage.

If we use 10% Panic reduction as an example, the player can then choose to use the Agent once a region hits 100 Panic to achieve maximum Panic efficiency, or they can use them earlier to ensure Panic stays below the 50 / 75 Panic thresholds that reduce your funding in that region. That's less Panic-efficient but does a better job of protecting your income.

@Max_Caine your ideas about having certain actions that reduce maximum Panic in a region are interesting. Not sure if it works that well by itself, though - isn't it always better to go to 49/90 instead of 60/100 unless there's something in the game that completely resets Panic in a region? Currently we don't have anything like that, so all that matters is how much net Panic reduction occurs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Chris said:

 

@Max_Caine your ideas about having certain actions that reduce maximum Panic in a region are interesting. Not sure if it works that well by itself, though - isn't it always better to go to 49/90 instead of 60/100 unless there's something in the game that completely resets Panic in a region? Currently we don't have anything like that, so all that matters is how much net Panic reduction occurs.

Well, that would depend upon the psychological feel you want to give to the game. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I get the impression that you want to give the player the sensation that at the start of the game, for every fire s/he stomps on, two more spring up. If there's a real sense of urgency, then that 49/90 could go to 49/80, or 49/70 very quickly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/16/2020 at 3:28 PM, Max_Caine said:

Well, that would depend upon the psychological feel you want to give to the game. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I get the impression that you want to give the player the sensation that at the start of the game, for every fire s/he stomps on, two more spring up. If there's a real sense of urgency, then that 49/90 could go to 49/80, or 49/70 very quickly. 

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you, but my question was more more how 49/90 would be any different from 59/100 in practice? In either case you're 41 points away from losing that region, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me rephrase myself, and let's work through your example. 

Let us say that one starts with a maximum Panic score of 100 per region. Let us say that when deploying an agent you have two choices. Choice A is twice as effective as Choice B but when using Choice A, you reduce capacity by 10. So, if a particular region has a score of 59/100 and you have the choice for that to be reduced to either 39/90, or 49/100 (a drop of 20/10 or 10/0 respectively), equilibrium would be maintained, both being 51 points away. The impact of Choice A is to see the panic bar maximum drop for that region in contrast to all other regions and to permanently have less capacity in that region in comparison to all other regions. Ergo, there's no short term benefit and the long term effect is damaging due to a reduction of capacity, which would always be clear as you can compare both current panic and maximum panic capacity for all regions at a glance from the main screen. Therefore, using your example, Choice A is worse than Choice B, so Choice A should never be chosen and my suggestion is terrible. 

 

To make my suggestion work, Choice A would have to be a much more significant drop that Choice B. If Choice A were three times more effective than Choice B then, using the prior example, 59/100 is 29/90 and 49/100, 61 and 51 points away respectively.  To really make Choice A work, I would say that it would have to be four times as effective, so 59/100 becomes 19/90 and 49/100, 71 and 51 points respectively. It would seem that Choice A would then be an automatic choice, but the reduction in capacity can creep up very quickly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Max_Caine said:

To make my suggestion work, Choice A would have to be a much more significant drop that Choice B. If Choice A were three times more effective than Choice B then, using the prior example, 59/100 is 29/90 and 49/100, 61 and 51 points away respectively.  To really make Choice A work, I would say that it would have to be four times as effective, so 59/100 becomes 19/90 and 49/100, 71 and 51 points respectively. It would seem that Choice A would then be an automatic choice, but the reduction in capacity can creep up very quickly. 

I still don't get how that's a meaningful choice though - it's always preferable to take whichever number moves you the furthest away from losing the region, isn't it? If I'm on 50/100 Panic and you offer me:

  • a straight reduction of -10 Panic, to 40/100, or
  • -21 Panic and -10 Max Panic, down to 29/90

The second option is always better, no? Because you're 61 points away from losing instead of just 60. It doesn't matter if the reduction is creeping up on you or not, you're still further away from losing the region than you would be if you'd taken the straightforward reduction and therefore the second option is always better and should always be chosen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really like the ideas in this post. Also I want to mention in relation to taking control of the planet, UFO: Aftermath did a really good job with this with their biomass idea. I don't know if you played that game but I think that part of it was excellent. Aftershock(their second game) also had an interesting resource system that kinda worked as a take control of the planet type thing. Both were cool, just in different ways.

If this game also has an interesting geoscape that would be really cool.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious, could some of those Geoscape events be made interactive down the line? One of the things I most liked about the original design concept of Xenonauts 2 was trying to utilize the idea of an alien invasion occuring during a Cold War better, like the initial DEFCON system. Something like being forced to take a side between the rival powers for some incidents until you can come up with a better solution, influencing who's panicking as a result, seems like a useful way to still make better use of the Cold War setting while still keeping to the intent of the relations/panic system.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Exposure said:

I'm curious, could some of those Geoscape events be made interactive down the line? One of the things I most liked about the original design concept of Xenonauts 2 was trying to utilize the idea of an alien invasion occuring during a Cold War better, like the initial DEFCON system. Something like being forced to take a side between the rival powers for some incidents until you can come up with a better solution, influencing who's panicking as a result, seems like a useful way to still make better use of the Cold War setting while still keeping to the intent of the relations/panic system.

Yeah, I think that's  a potential area of expansion for the system. Not sure how many scenarios I'd be able to think of but as an example you might have the opportunity to frame a different region for an attack on a region, rather than admitting aliens caused the damage - which would cause a larger Panic gain, but you'd get to choose the region where it happened rather than having to suffer the Panic in the region where the attack occurred.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that´s what the Game need to get a good playtime for it. The already implemented Geoscape-Things like the Signal Uplinks and extra Buildungs for them to control more are great.

That´s exactly what I mean in the March-Update from the promised things to lash the predecessor Xenonauts 1.

And don´t forget the cool Stuff in Basebuildung like the transfer from the Mechanics from Workshop to Hangar, Training Center etc. / Scientists to Sick Bay (Hospital) and such Base-Buildings they needed.

Such things will give the Waiters a Reason to buy the Game and esp. in Early Access Mode to bring in more Money for Development.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Exposure I actually loved the introduction of the DEFCON system in the early stage of crowdfunding and one of the first thing that got me hooked to the idea of a sequel to the game instead of keep playing X-Division. 

The first two deal breakers that is getting solved for me is the air combat (which I’m glad to see has changed into an expansion of the old one rather than the old x-com system) and the hilarious boxy ship design. So I’m hoping an in-depth Cold War system could be kept.:p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/18/2020 at 10:35 PM, Chris said:

I still don't get how that's a meaningful choice though - it's always preferable to take whichever number moves you the furthest away from losing the region, isn't it? If I'm on 50/100 Panic and you offer me:

  • a straight reduction of -10 Panic, to 40/100, or
  • -21 Panic and -10 Max Panic, down to 29/90

The second option is always better, no? Because you're 61 points away from losing instead of just 60. It doesn't matter if the reduction is creeping up on you or not, you're still further away from losing the region than you would be if you'd taken the straightforward reduction and therefore the second option is always better and should always be chosen.

I wanted to get some real data before resuming this argument unfortunately my job (I'm a key worker in the transport industry) and the game (crashing mid Feb) makes it diffcult to present the consequence of reducing capacity over time. So I'll work with what I've got. The argument as presented is that it is immaterial if the total capacity for panic of a region goes down. So long as panic drops by even 1 point better then it is always better to choose the option that reduces the most panic even if it drops capacity. 

 

For the purposes of this argument I'm going to assume that I get 1 agent at the start of the game and that without capturing a VIP or some other method, I only get 1 agent at the start of the month. Furthermore, I'm going to assume that the agent only had the ability as presented in the orginal post - reducing panic. Therefore, the most opportune time to use an agent will 99% of the time be just before I get paid because at that moment I cannot gain any more panic that will harm funding. The other time that I would use an agent outside of that is just before a region is about to be lost to panic, that represents a last ditch attempt to keep the region. As an aside, unless you come up with more reasons to use agent, there's really no point in making agents interactive witha button and everything. You may as well just have the option to assign an agent before funding is calculated or as an option when a region is about to be lost. 

 

At the start of January my panic is: 30 / 20 / 30 / 20 / 20 / 20

At the end of January my panic is: 34 / 41 / 33 / 44 / 33 / 14  or : +4 / +21 / +3 / +24 / +13 / -6

 

I would draw your attenton to 2 regions which have seen a significant upswing in panic. At the moment, the panic is manageable - the use of an agent would drop 1 region of the two most paniced down to 31 or 34 respectively. If, however, two regions continue to see the same upswing every month or worse the question of reduced capacity is more significant. If two regions see an upswing of +20 Panic every month, then (frorm starting panic) it takes 4 months for a region to reach maximum Panic. If capacity is reduced even by 10, if a region sees an upswing of +20 every month it reaches maximum panic (from starting panic) in 3-4 months. In the most immediate terms, yes, it is always preferable to select the option that drops Panic by the largest amount, but in the context of a campaign, chouces with a permanent effect make resonate down the line. In short, it is possible to make the game harder by the choices you make earlier on. What I think would be helpful for you would be to have somone knock up a Panic simulator, with eveyrthing autoresolved so you can see the progression of Panic in regions. Once this interceptor bug is fixed, I'll be able to assemble a lot more data to show Panic progression over a set of months, so I can show you what reduced capacity means. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Double post because I think this deserves its own post.

Further to my comment about the interactivity of agents, I think there are possibly options you might give to agents to encourage using agents during the month as opposed to just a start-of-month/end-of-month choice. These are just some of my thoughts on the matter: 

 

Freezing Panic: An Agent might freeze the Panic score in a Region for X number of days, (say, 10 days_. However, once Panic is unfrozen any Panic gained for an equal number of days is subject to a score multiplier (say, 1.5x, rounding up). This would encourage use of an agent during critical moments in a month, perhaps at the start of a wave, or just before another orbital bombardment. 

Assignable Research Panic multipliers: Playing off the previous idea, a Agent might instead assign score multipliers to a set number of Regions with some negative, some positive for the Panic reduction that Research gives. for example, you might have 0.2x, 0.5x, 1.2x and 2x. For X number of research items, Regions have Research Panic adjusted by the score mutiplier. Perhaps X also governs the spread of the multipliers, with more research items giving fewer positive mutipliers and more negative multipliers. As it is known in advance how long it will take for any particular research item to be researched, a player can judge how quickly they can stack up scores using the multiplier. If there's a suffient disparity in time verses score of a research item and he desirability of the research item (weapon/armour upgrades should in this instance have the highest scores but be the longest to research) then you can have in-depth discussion about research Panic "builds".

Reduction in proliferation time of a Technology: Something that would affect Ground Combat directly, one might direct an Agent to reduce proliferation time, perhaps from say 30 days to perhaps 20 or even 15. This would be done at the point of end of research, so could happen at any time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That the Founding Countrys get new Equipment 1 Month later is good. The Reasons lay on the Hand, I don´t have to repeat them. Chris sayed them already. Only that it makes no sense to give the new Equipment to the Founding Countrys to fast. 1 Month is a good timeline and a very fair Deal. You get your Founds and the Governments get the new Technology-Plans (like Acclerated Ammo or the Warden Vest) to upgrade the Police, Military etc.

Do you think you will get every new Technology asap if the Governemts have R & D some. No you won´t. The Governments, Military etc. were stuipid to give it to normal people. They will give it only after years and then we get the rejected older Versions. Best example is the I-Net we are using. Internaly they are some years ahead from normal People like we are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×