Defenses

[Hertzila]

"With enough abuse." I think this means that it takes time to set enough explosives to detonate the ammunition in a way that damages the other base (they are shielded with solid rock and if the player is doing anything they should not have that time) and most defianetly not that it can be detonated with particle beams. They are not really explosive or hot and only pierce the object. Think of it as shooting at a cars gas tank, normal rounds don't do anything. And naturally against properly equipped Bombers you should only use fighters.

I actually remember them having five each.

Battery is not the same as launcher. Battery usually consists of multiple launchers that are used together.

The change you talked about removes the trade-off aspect. Right now you can alter between no defences through medium (2) defences to max defences with each step removing a little bit of room. With your change we would only have no defences and max defences.

PS. Every type of non-explosive round using a single explosive for thrusting the bullet out of the barrel is relatively harmless (compared to shooting it) when detonating it outside of the chamber/barrel. This is because when outside, most of the energy is going to go to the cartridge instead of the bullet.
Also a SAM is not all just fuel and explosive. As it said in ufopedia it is packed with huge amounts of electronics inside that also take a lot of space.

[Destructavator]

I know enough that many warheads and such are actually designed to survive abuse and damage without an explosion or catastrophe of some kind, to prevent nasty accidents.  Many such warheads and explosives of the type used in such a way in real life can be dropped, thrown around, and in some cases even set on fire without exploding.  We have real-life technology to make explosives safe so that they only detonate with a specific trigger - I know of some explosives and bombs that can be burned in a fire, or melt, without blowing up.  Warheads of missiles and rockets are also designed to survive accidental and/or unintentional abuse.

Many years ago, yes, there was a time when explosives were very dangerous, back before we had modern technology to make them safer.  Yes, there was a time when they had to be handled very carefully - but since then things have changed.  I'm not an expert, but I've heard that the chemicals in modern stuff are mixed with other chemicals to stabilize them so that they only blow up under just the right trigger/condition, done by the proper detonators.

[White_Cat]

I know enough that many warheads and such are actually designed to survive abuse and damage without an explosion or catastrophe of some kind, to prevent nasty accidents.  Many such warheads and explosives of the type used in such a way in real life can be dropped, thrown around, and in some cases even set on fire without exploding.  We have real-life technology to make explosives safe so that they only detonate with a specific trigger - I know of some explosives and bombs that can be burned in a fire, or melt, without blowing up.  Warheads of missiles and rockets are also designed to survive accidental and/or unintentional abuse.

Many years ago, yes, there was a time when explosives were very dangerous, back before we had modern technology to make them safer.  Yes, there was a time when they had to be handled very carefully - but since then things have changed.  I'm not an expert, but I've heard that the chemicals in modern stuff are mixed with other chemicals to stabilize them so that they only blow up under just the right trigger/condition, done by the proper detonators.

Like I said a particle beam from an alien spacecraft that intends to destroy the base would make a mess... All the precautions you mentioned are indeed intended to make ammunition safer to store.

For example 200 years ago they'd store gunpowder in barrels or bags. A little spark (or an enemy cannon ball) could blow up the entire armory. A little spark doesn't have that kind of effect today. If you take note of incidents like the 1967 USS Forrestal fire which started because a safety feature malfunctioned... Despite the safety measures, "with enough punishment" ordinances started to ignite left and right (or at least the fuel). Indeed the ship didn't sink because of the very safety measures... No safety measure today is 100% safe. We can assume the safety measures will improve in the next 70 years... All is fine.

But how do you develop safety measures against particle beam weapons that basically shoot near light speed particles. Enough to take out the most advanced aircraft of that era with a few shots...

All I am saying is it would be unwise to keep high-explosives in a manner that would pose a great risk to the base should the safety measures fail... It would be unwise to build the HQ next to the armory...

[criusmac]

I wonder why Aliens don't have to research us. I mean, if I were an alien.. Err, maybe that's the wrong way to think of it..

If I were a human commander invading an alien world, one of the first things I'd be doing is researching their defenses, and trying to see if I can do something to cause their defenses to work against them. Exploding munitions would be great if I could design some way to trigger them.

In today's world, sure, we have safety precautions against accidental triggers and stuff, but what if I were making a device that would intentionally trigger these things? It's something I sure would try to do if I were human.

[Gunner]

I wonder why Aliens don't have to research us. I mean, if I were an alien.. Err, maybe that's the wrong way to think of it..

If I were a human commander invading an alien world, one of the first things I'd be doing is researching their defenses, and trying to see if I can do something to cause their defenses to work against them. Exploding munitions would be great if I could design some way to trigger them.

In today's world, sure, we have safety precautions against accidental triggers and stuff, but what if I were making a device that would intentionally trigger these things? It's something I sure would try to do if I were human.

well that out be kinda like training the US cavalry to train bears to kill Indians. sure you can do it but why bother a rifle bullet makes them just as dead with much less effirt

actually thats a fairly good comparison for the entire game, the human race is the natives and the aliens are the invading whites.

[Destructavator]

It would be far easier to simply build a device that explodes with enough force to take out a base in one shot - We have such an invention of course, the bomb.  Just load it onto a bomber (aircraft), and drop it on the base.

Besides, the "safety precautions" are more than just shielding or how it is stored, but the whole design of munitions and such.  It isn't like you could take ammunition out of a storage case and expect it to suddenly become sensitive and dangerous just because it isn't in a case anymore.  Such a device you're talking about really wouldn't be very possible, I would think (no offense).

[Gunner]

there are 2 sort of explosive these days High and Low, low explosives (ignoring nuclear) don't explode they burn fast. so if you don't contain them they just burn and don't explode and high that will always explode if triggered.

black powder and nitroglycerin are high explosives, where as modern gun powder is low
modern explosives like C4 require so much energy to explode that only another explosive can trigger them

bullets use low explosives as there propellant as it is easier on the barrels and much safe to store mecause as was mentioned above with out the barrel to contain them they just burn so it is much saver to store the detonator with the explosive. it is the same with missiles. the fuel is a low explosive so usually burns rather than exploding (especially as to get it to burn or explode you need to introduce the oxygen that completes the reaction into the mix, which means that the containment it broken) so is unlikely to trigger the high explosive warhead. and the detonators for the warhead are either removed or mechanically separated from the explosives and need arming before they can explode.

so evening if you did find a way of sypathetically detonating the detonators all that would happen is that you need to insert a new detonator before they work

[criusmac]

Aye, perhaps it just wouldn't work right, even with all the technology the aliens have.. It's just easier to build things that simply blow up bases rather than build things that take away effective means of defense or offense. It just would have been interesting to see in the late stages of the game, the most commonly used offenses or defenses be rendered unusable, and would cause the player to need to use different strategies nearer the end.. But, maybe that's a bit off topic. It is pretty crazy to create a way to counter the way the players keep using. It makes much more sense for humans to create ways to counter what the aliens are doing, since they're the ones with the more advanced technologies.

My suggestion originally was, given enough time, if the humans only used one way to attack or defend, to 'remove this one way, but leave other ways open. This would require the humans to change strategies eventually to keep defending and attacking as time went on, and this would be different for each player.

In other words, if one player favoured using sniper rifles all the time, to remove that.
If a different player used explosives mainly, to remove that.
If another ... oh wait... there aren't many other ways to effectively stop aliens.

Mmm, I guess it's a bad idea. There really aren't many different ways to attack the aliens to remove near the end of the game, and encourage a different tactic. Ah well. Weird thoughts while they lasted I guess. I guess it's a bad idea to research alien ways to stop specific attacks based on what certain humans might come up with, to encourage players to come up with completely different ways to fighting in the end. I guess we encourage one straight forward way of fighting..

Aka: X-Force

Sorry, X-force way of thinking. I've been playing that game too much lately, and my thoughts have obviously gone that way.

[Gunner]

Aye, perhaps it just wouldn't work right, even with all the technology the aliens have.. It's just easier to build things that simply blow up bases rather than build things that take away effective means of defense or offense. It just would have been interesting to see in the late stages of the game, the most commonly used offenses or defenses be rendered unusable, and would cause the player to need to use different strategies nearer the end.. But, maybe that's a bit off topic. It is pretty crazy to create a way to counter the way the players keep using. It makes much more sense for humans to create ways to counter what the aliens are doing, since they're the ones with the more advanced technologies.

My suggestion originally was, given enough time, if the humans only used one way to attack or defend, to 'remove this one way, but leave other ways open. This would require the humans to change strategies eventually to keep defending and attacking as time went on, and this would be different for each player.

In other words, if one player favoured using sniper rifles all the time, to remove that.
If a different player used explosives mainly, to remove that.
If another ... oh wait... there aren't many other ways to effectively stop aliens.

Mmm, I guess it's a bad idea. There really aren't many different ways to attack the aliens to remove near the end of the game, and encourage a different tactic. Ah well. Weird thoughts while they lasted I guess. I guess it's a bad idea to research alien ways to stop specific attacks based on what certain humans might come up with, to encourage players to come up with completely different ways to fighting in the end. I guess we encourage one straight forward way of fighting..

the best way to do that would be to tweak the AI, so the aliens use different tactics depending on the your pasted actions, but that is quiet alot of work to change

[criusmac]

Aye. If we exclude the fact it's a bad idea since it's completely ripped off from X-Force, the idea I had is very easy to implement... But that's about the only thing really going for it.

No AI changes needed.
A simple way to keep track of what is killing aliens the most.
At a certain time, suddenly some new technology the aliens get prevents you from doing damage via the way you've been killing them so far.
And that's about it. Perhaps some of your own research telling you what the aliens are immune to now, but not much else.

But, if we include the fact it's stolen from X-Force, well... Sorta stolen. They didn't actually do this anywhere, in any way actually... But the idea feels more X-Forcish.

[shevegen]

But improving the AI really would be the best solution here criusmac

If I am an alien who regularly walks into his own death because of a stupid AI, I dont come over as a very smart alien... but lateron I manage to completely neutralize the strategy which killed most aliens (i.e. by disabling snipers)? Hmmm