UFOs & Being Horrible

[anotherdevil]

Agreed J-L.

Also it depends how it it implemented. If the first room to breach is kept (with aliens taking defensive positions) in the first map, then you still get that initial tension. I imagine that is what will happen.

Also if the map is ready (or loading as you play the first half), then the second could start quickly, maintaining the momentum and not breaking the immersion.

Saying that this is going to break the game isn't so helpful. It's fine to think that, but perhaps try and think of ways to minimise any problems. Air your thoughts, but give the developers something to work with other than "you're making the wrong decision" or "doing this will suck"

=]

[zzz1010]

Another picture mostly made just for my personal fun without practical purpose, but also some proofs of\and concepts. It's 40x30x2 "quarter map" cruiser and there enougt place on farm map . I think is possible to make it 35X30

[sluissa]

Anotherdevil:

Agreed J-L.

Also it depends how it it implemented. If the first room to breach is kept (with aliens taking defensive positions) in the first map, then you still get that initial tension. I imagine that is what will happen.

Also if the map is ready (or loading as you play the first half), then the second could start quickly, maintaining the momentum and not breaking the immersion.

Saying that this is going to break the game isn't so helpful. It's fine to think that, but perhaps try and think of ways to minimise any problems. Air your thoughts, but give the developers something to work with other than "you're making the wrong decision" or "doing this will suck"

=]

Not everyone is a game designer. Even so... there have been suggestions made, including my own, "Go back to the grey metal boxes if you have to."

In any case, making things more modular, even if not all the way back to "a half dozen wall tiles used for the exterior of everything", is a way to fix this. Rather than trying to literally fit a round peg into a square hole with these circular ships, why not just move to something a bit more square. It doesn't need to be nearly as blocky as X-Com was, but a basic set of legos with a few angled pieces can build some amazingly smooth and detailed things. Hell, look at what people do with Minecraft and that even lacks most of the angled pieces you'd want to include.

[Gauddlike]

Assuming Goldhawk can change their ship designs at this stage.

I would imagine if they had to go and pay another artist to design new ships and get those designs into the game, including all of the overpainting that is done on the tiles and so on, something else would need to be cut to ensure the money was available.

We aren't talking about Valve here who can throw money at a problem until it goes away if they choose to.

The change is not one I am overly fond of.

I can live with it as it only really affects a few ships anyway.

The current ships and the medium sized ones can still work as they do.

The big ships were always planned to be done as levels in their own right, in the same way bases were handled in the original.

All that has really changed is those ships that fall between those two points.

I am not saying I will give up on trying to think of a way to get around the limitations Chris outlined.

However only he has access to all of the information behind his decisions.

When he gets back I imagine we will hear more about this, hopefully including more details on the problems and limitations encountered.

[sluissa]

Assuming Goldhawk can change their ship designs at this stage.

I would imagine if they had to go and pay another artist to design new ships and get those designs into the game, including all of the overpainting that is done on the tiles and so on, something else would need to be cut to ensure the money was available.

We aren't talking about Valve here who can throw money at a problem until it goes away if they choose to.

The change is not one I am overly fond of.

I can live with it as it only really affects a few ships anyway.

The current ships and the medium sized ones can still work as they do.

The big ships were always planned to be done as levels in their own right, in the same way bases were handled in the original.

All that has really changed is those ships that fall between those two points.

I am not saying I will give up on trying to think of a way to get around the limitations Chris outlined.

However only he has access to all of the information behind his decisions.

When he gets back I imagine we will hear more about this, hopefully including more details on the problems and limitations encountered.

I would agree with you except that it was already mentioned they were going to have to throw out the cruiser as it is anyway and it's quite likely all the ships above that size either aren't done or are to be thrown out as well. They're essentially starting from scratch with regards to UFO design, with only a couple of exceptions, is what it seems. If they are doing so, anything goes as far as suggestions are concerned. Of course information direct from the devs is needed to determine specifically what is possible, but until limitations are placed, it's all simply brainstorming. And in a good brainstorming session even the most ridiculous things get written down in the hope they might form the seed of something more practical in the future.

Also to note, the proposed changes make EVERY UFO that has an enterable interior a two part mission. This affects everything. The medium sized UFOs could potentially stay as they are, but that's not what was proposed.

I'll live with it if need be. I'm even willing to accept that I'm wrong if it turns out to not be that big of a deal. But in my experience, breaking missions up into multiple parts always has severe consequences to the flow of the gameplay and while it can be argued that it's necessary in some situations, using it in every situation is, in my opinion, sure to cause some significant problems.

[anotherdevil]

I think that small-medium sized UFOs will probably stay as is. As for re-doing their entire selection of large UFOs... I imagine they will try and make changes rather than create all new thing for precisely the reasons Gauddlike said.

Not everyone is a game designer. Even so... there have been suggestions made, including my own, "Go back to the grey metal boxes if you have to."

Sorry if I came off a little harsh, I didn't intend to (hence the smiley face). But what's the point of re-imagining a game if you're just going to do everything the same way as the old one?

Also not everyone is a game designer, I totally agree. And that is exactly the point. Fresh takes on problems which someone with a narrow focus may not see. Sure they may not go with the idea wholesale, but it may spark another idea or train of thought that they may not otherwise have thought of =]

[ThreeJumps]

I apologise for making a sweeping generalisation. Sorry guys

[anotherdevil]

Ha ha no worries =]

I too am a little bit miffed by this decision, but it is a decision that Chris appears to have made, and so I'll do what I do every time this happens, try and minimise any negative effects!

Edited October 1, 2012 by anotherdevil
Muton stole the rest of the post. I just tracked him down. Damn barns!

[XenoMask]

I guess I don't really mind it because I like diversity itself and I didn't mind it in UFO: Aftermath either.

Makes me feel like minority since I have nothing against Two Parters.

[Dix]

Chris has done enough with Xenonauts (far better than I could have done!) that if he feels two-part missions are the best choice, then so be it, and I'll happily accede. (Given it is Chris's game, I'd need to do so anyway ).

But if it's possible within the bounds of the engine/good game design to avoid that, even if only for smaller UFO's? Please, pretty please, yes. Immersion, atmosphere & flow of the game all benefit from avoiding a mid-mission intermission.

I think that small-medium sized UFOs will probably stay as is.

Has this been verified? In the first post, Chris specifically lists small-medium UFO's as being non-enterable scenery, with a second internal map.

Finally, just a thought: If two part missions will be in regardless - the Chinook could sometimes land on top of the largest UFO's, and you can then fight your way across it to an entry point. I realise it's probably not feasible at this point, due to the likely requirements for extra tilesets, etc, but it would be fun to see.

[Gauddlike]

I would agree with you except that it was already mentioned they were going to have to throw out the cruiser as it is anyway and it's quite likely all the ships above that size either aren't done or are to be thrown out as well.

I must have missed the part about the cruiser being thrown out, could you link that post for me?

Also Chris stated they were working on the landing ship which is one of the larger ships.

They're essentially starting from scratch with regards to UFO design, with only a couple of exceptions, is what it seems.

Not exactly.

From the posts it appears the the only work that would not be used would be the current implementation of the ground art.

The air combat art, air combat external art, and xenopedia art for example would remain the same.

The current ground art could probably also be kept as it would be used to form the external borders on the maps as proposed by Chris.

Replacing the ships now would involve reworking all of that.

Can't say it wasn't one of my first thoughts when I saw the thread though!

Also to note, the proposed changes make EVERY UFO that has an enterable interior a two part mission. This affects everything. The medium sized UFOs could potentially stay as they are, but that's not what was proposed.

True but the only reason for that is consistency between those and the bigger ships.

I was probably just being hopeful when I said the mediums would stay as they are

I also agree that maybe the ships could be scaled back if they are just too massive to fit on levels.

Bigger levels aren't always more fun.

I hated the cruise ship missions on TFTD for example.

The levels were too big to be easily filled with enemies without making them incredibly difficult in places and boring in others when you had a ten minute hike to find the next enemy.

[sluissa]

EDIT: My reply from page 4 is below:

As has been mentioned above, the larger UFOs are massive. We've even got a cruiser model done up, ready to be painted over, that we're not going to use now and the thing is about 50x50 tiles. In order to fit the dropship in the map, along with some terrain that isn't just the cruiser you're looking at something like a 70x70 or 80x80 map. If you think that's a good thing, I suggest you create an 80x80 map in the level editor and see how long it takes to walk across it. Plus, the cruiser is the smallest of the alien capital ships.

First paragraph from the edit to the first post in this thread.

[Gauddlike]

Ah I thought you meant they were having to throw out the whole thing rather than just the ground combat model, that would have been a pity as I quite like the cruiser model.

The already created model could still be used if you convert it to a solid scenery piece rather than using it as a level in its own right.

Fits in nicely with a few of the suggestions already posted.

[erutan]

I like the idea of keeping small/medium as is. To kind of justify the change in functionality for large UFOs there could be something that would have to researched (new explosive, teleportation, jammer, whatever) to get inside... so the first time you shoot one down you might not be able to go inside. Might make it more exciting when you can, plus it seems like a logical progression.

Landing on top of the entire UFO in a skyranger then rappelling down the sides sounds awesome, but I can understand keeping a part of the large UFOs near the edge of the screen. I imagine the super giant ones won't be popping up all the time too, so that might help keep huge level fatigue down.

[pvtbones]

I'm worried that separating it into two missions will make the outside mission pointless as in "why even bother with the outside map, why not just start us inside the ufo?"

*EDIT*

I think the key is making it so both phases are important equally. and not punish the player for only achieving one section.

[anotherdevil]

Well failing to kill all of the aliens outside would give you lower mission scores, and presumably any aliens you didn't kill would go around killing people until local law enforcement/militaries managed to kill them, so might actually give you a bit of a negative

[VJim]

I'd prefer to have the UFO interior be seamless with the exterior map. Redesign the UFOs if you need to. Hell, go back to squared off boxes like X-Com had if you need to.

What sluissa said.

I didn't feel the need to voice my opinion recently because everything in this game was either an improvement, a faithfull adaptation of the original, or IMO an acceptable ommission (blaster bombs, human psionics, ...).

This is a regression I would rather not have.

For me, the ability to attack an ufo from multiple vectors is a very important tactical feature.

Even more so if it suffered damage and part of the hull is destroyed, as you can see here :

If this is changed from a dynamic and destructible part of the map to a handfull of fixed entry points leading to a base-like secondary map, it will feel like an outstanding gameplay feature sacrificed for eye-candy.

So yes, if possible, please make the design of the ufo work with the interior layout, not the other way around.

[Betuor]

What sluissa said.

I didn't feel the need to voice my opinion recently because everything in this game was either an improvement, a faithfull adaptation of the original, or IMO an acceptable ommission (blaster bombs, human psionics, ...).

This is a regression I would rather not have.

For me, the ability to attack an ufo from multiple vectors is a very important tactical feature.

Even more so if it suffered damage and part of the hull is destroyed, as you can see here :

If this is changed from a dynamic and destructible part of the map to a handfull of fixed entry points leading to a base-like secondary map, it will feel like an outstanding gameplay feature sacrificed for eye-candy.

So yes, if possible, please make the design of the ufo work with the interior layout, not the other way around.

Note, that ship in your pic is like 1 3rd the size of the crusier which is one of the smaller one of the larger ships. There's even a bigger and more updated version of the crusier (minor spoiler) which is called the strikecrusier. Also, isn't it logical that a ufo that needs more then one of the 4th level teir rockets (minor spoiler, maybe) of fusion or implosion torpedos that you couldn't shoot it open with a handheld weapon?

[gnarly]

Also, isn't it logical that a ufo that needs more then one of the 4th level teir rockets (minor spoiler, maybe) of fusion or implosion torpedos that you couldn't shoot it open with a handheld weapon?

No, because as I think as has been mentioned before, whilst flying, you'd assume there are some kind of exterior defense systems in action (force fields, close-in-protection systems, some kind of energy absorption (thermal sponges) or reflection system for say lasers, etc)' which which our weaponry is trying to either penetrate or overload. Naval ships certainly already have CIWS systems, and I'm sure other types of countermeasures, if not stealth 'shields'.

Underneath this, I wouldn't necessarily expect a heavily armoured skin (if armoured at all) (awful lot of mass to cart across the universe, though I fear the physicists here will now proceed to correct that comment!).

Once a UFO is crashed, these exterior 'shield' systems 'off' or non-fucnctional.

So penetrating the exterior with hand-held weaponry is perfectly valid IMO.

I have been thinking about this thread for awile, and I feel for Chris when he returns to this discussion from his holidays. I firmly with Vjay et al. on this; I thoroughly enjoyed opening the OG UFO cans of worms how I liked, and even at times moving troops safely from one area of the ufo to another externally (where it was guaranteed safe). Having the UFO's as seamless extensions of of ground map allows a myriad of tactical options, whereas having them as separate maps with predetermined entry points (only) removes that.

But I don't pretend to understand the programatical/design limitations that this imposes/restricts on Chris and his team.

Edited October 2, 2012 by gnarly

[Mathalor]

What do you think of having the first floor of really big UFOs capture-able on the first map, and the upper levels in a 2nd map? As far as I know, we're not getting flying soldiers anyway, so there's little tactical reason to map out the upper levels on the original map.

Edited October 2, 2012 by Mathalor

[ThreeJumps]

What sluissa said.

I didn't feel the need to voice my opinion recently because everything in this game was either an improvement, a faithfull adaptation of the original, or IMO an acceptable ommission (blaster bombs, human psionics, ...).

This is a regression I would rather not have.

For me, the ability to attack an ufo from multiple vectors is a very important tactical feature.

Even more so if it suffered damage and part of the hull is destroyed, as you can see here :

If this is changed from a dynamic and destructible part of the map to a handfull of fixed entry points leading to a base-like secondary map, it will feel like an outstanding gameplay feature sacrificed for eye-candy.

So yes, if possible, please make the design of the ufo work with the interior layout, not the other way around.

This. I can understand the issues with cruiser-sized stuff, but this.

Edited October 2, 2012 by ThreeJumps

[Dix]

Underneath this, I wouldn't necessarily expect a heavily armoured skin (if armoured at all)

.

Modern fighting aircraft are sometimes armoured to the point that small arms are ineffective against large portions of their body, admittedly with tradeoffs in other aspects. (Eurocopter Tiger: "The Tiger's armour can withstand 23 mm autocannon fire".)

Given the aliens are capable of building flying ships of massive size, and given their tech and materials advantages, it's not unreasonable to expect that even light alien ship armour is going to pose a severe challenge to anything man-portable, at least until we get much more powerful weapons.

In regards to having just the first floor visible, I'd almost rather keep oversized ufo's as a two part mission, to reduce the disconnect between the two phases. (As ever, while agitating for anything smaller to be kept map accessible as normal, if it's not feasible to keep it all map accessible.)

[zzz1010]

Another one () with lazy modelled but walkable roof

What point to make things bigger? Classical battleship was (by interior) ~ x0.70 smaller then this and has ~30 aliens on board and I don't think it feels too small

Edited October 2, 2012 by zzz1010

[sluissa]

Another one () with lazy modelled but walkable roof

What point to make things bigger? Classical battleship was (by interior) ~ x0.70 smaller then this and has ~30 aliens on board and I don't think it feels too small

I wasn't entirely sure about the cruiser you posted earlier... but partially just because I couldn't wrap my head around the layers, but that looks pretty darn good... and it fits nicely on the map.

[XenoMask]

Thats rather flat .-. What did cruiser art look like again?