Messages

436

Bugs in older version (2.4) / Re: Can't load my previous saved games after updating to 2.4

« on: May 10, 2012, 11:33:01 pm »

Oh, did you go from 2.3 to 2.4 via an update (apt-get, ubuntu update manager or the like)? If so, it's rather likely you should reinstall anyway, I found out myself the hard way that it shouldn't have been updated like that - you should reinstall go from one version to another.

437

Bugs in older version (2.4) / Re: Can't load my previous saved games after updating to 2.4

« on: May 10, 2012, 11:30:17 pm »

afaik savegames are not compatible between releases. If you want to finish your 2.3 games, you probably should reinstall 2.3.

438

Discussion / Re: how smoke nades work?

« on: May 10, 2012, 08:40:21 pm »

Note that the Shevaar aliens supposedly can see in infrared, according to the autopsy report anyway. So, they should be able to see you even through walls, not to mention some measly smoke. I have no idea how the AI handles smoke though. I mean, do the aliens know they can shoot through smoke, and that it's not hard material like walls, even if both block line of sight?

in-game text says it's not just a puff of smoke but a sci-fi version, which blocks ir and whatnot. heck, while at it they could've developed a bulletproof smoke as well

439

Tactics / Re: beach resort map tactics

« on: May 10, 2012, 08:37:59 pm »

Smoke grenades, my dear Watsons.

are pretty much useless, since the enemy is looking and shooting downwards at you. if we could have the troops carry them smoke nades attached to their helmets, it would work better

440

Discussion / Re: Is sniper still useless? [2.5]

« on: May 10, 2012, 04:28:37 pm »

In my personal experience, firing a light machinegun (7.62mm) with any accuracy demands either prone position or some other means of additional support, from a standing position it's somewhat comfortable to shoot but when firing from the hip aim is at least questioonable, and then firing from a crouched position is outright awkward. Of course it's a matter of personal preference and ergonomy of a particular weapon, but anyway, just my 2 cents...

441

Discussion / Re: 3 Things to Change Back... (v2.4 suggestion)

« on: May 10, 2012, 04:00:38 pm »

I especially like the insinuation that Geever eventually will begin work on this 

442

Discussion / Re: 3 Things to Change Back... (v2.4 suggestion)

« on: May 10, 2012, 01:24:44 pm »

Yes. Like anything else in the game, if misused or played poorly, will lead to an unhappy ending for the player's campaign. I don't see a problem with that. Are there currently any side effects from using the autoresolve? I recall there was some talk about it affecting nation happiness, do you know if this is true?

443

Discussion / Re: 3 Things to Change Back... (v2.4 suggestion)

« on: May 10, 2012, 12:44:47 pm »

You're right. On the other hand, getting "penalized" in the ways you just mentioned wouldn't seem like a bad thing either.

444

Discussion / Re: 3 Things to Change Back... (v2.4 suggestion)

« on: May 10, 2012, 11:49:44 am »

There is difference between 'adding a feature' and 'changing the game design' imo.

I'm sorry, I don't quite get the "changing the game design" part. Any change or addition is, in a way, changing the game design, changing how the game is played, no? Also, the feature suggested in that thread would not by any means have been game play-wise a major change - we already have autoplay but not available in all missions, it would just have been a different "front" to it.

I probably sound like I'm whining because not everyone loves the idea, if it doesn't get support it won't get added and that's okay but I'd like to understand the reasoning of those who oppose it because I thought it was actually a good idea.

445

Discussion / Re: 3 Things to Change Back... (v2.4 suggestion)

« on: May 10, 2012, 09:16:40 am »

Developing extra features is not a waste of time. I am quite sure no dev thinks like that. And everybody in the team wants to give the players as much X-Com as possible.

Imo it would be better to make the autoresolve possible as a standard and counter this by rewarding the players that don´t use it.

I recall a recent thread in the feature request forum about exactly this

446

Discussion / Re: Is sniper still useless? [2.5]

« on: May 10, 2012, 09:12:36 am »

+1

+2, that's how I've always viewed it as actual prone position is absent.

447

Feature Requests / Re: idea for automission / forced play

« on: May 10, 2012, 06:50:23 am »

Actually non-programmers also think that replacing a renderer engine is not too much work either... Well, they have hell no idea...

-geever

I'm no programmer but I didn't suggest /that/

Actually, I have written some short programs... twenty years ago in CBM, I'd like to contribute to the game so what would you like me to code? =)

edit - on a more serious note, my suggestion would include the following changes:
- remove autoplay button from enter combat dialogue
- add "request army troops" option to the dialogue that you get when clicking a mission site
 - if that gets clicked, either run autoplay or display "no way text" if autoplay should not be available
  - after autoplay has run, display an alternative mission report with text "army" instead of "phalanx", grant no loot to phalanx and reduce nation's happiness according to result

448

Feature Requests / Re: idea for automission / forced play

« on: May 09, 2012, 11:35:17 pm »

It is probably me who should implement it.

=D

And if we change the design on every little complain, we will never finish the game....

-geever

Um, I didn't see this as reacting on complaints, but rather that some of the complaints would get dealt with while making what I thought would have been an improvement over the current function. But of course if devs say the effort is greater than benefit, then that's all there is to it, like I said I don't write programs so I wouldn't know if making this change would actually be too much work.

449

Feature Requests / Re: idea for automission / forced play

« on: May 09, 2012, 11:18:05 pm »

-10

-geever

elaborate?

450

Feature Requests / idea for automission / forced play

« on: May 09, 2012, 09:11:00 pm »

A couple things talked about pretty much at any time in the forums are why some missions can't be autoplayed, and how tiring it can be playing that umpteenth crash site just when you're anxious to pass a few days to get some new tech, and it's also been talked about how come no one else in the world seems to be fighting the aliens but Phalanx. So, I had this idea...

Replace the option to autoplay with an option to request a national military (of the area) to deal with the alien mission/crash site. There should be a penalty to that nation's happiness, and we could also get a mission report telling how it went, victory having less impact on happiness than defeat. The nation might say "no, we can't fight them, phalanx has to" and this would of course be the equivalent of autoplay being grayed out. Hopefully this would deal with at least some of the talk/questions mentioned in the first paragraph, and I believe the overall sense of realism in the game would be heightened. I can't code myself but I would imagine this would not be an overtly difficult thing to implement, for one who can code.

What do you think?