Seriously they need to bring up the latest version so that we can download. It has been about 2 years! Come on!
If people want this to come out sooner, do more than just play it.Very true :)
Very true :)
But to get 2.3 out, we need some *particular people* to do some particular things.
It's always hard in open source projects to get those last 2%...
Seriously they need to bring up the latest version so that we can download. It has been about 2 years! Come on!
Seriously they need to bring up the latest version so that we can download. It has been about 2 years! Come on!
Rather than only waiting, it often is better to point out which things can be improved. Even if these are only little things.
Have you considered doing a beta/preview release? Or, if the word beta is a bit strong, just call it a release candidate. Will help get some early feedback on the any immediate problems, alleviate pressure from people who want a new release, as well as make the final release a bit better by helping focus on the issues that will affect players the most.
Have you considered doing a beta/preview release? Or, if the word beta is a bit strong, just call it a release candidate. Will help get some early feedback on the any immediate problems, alleviate pressure from people who want a new release, as well as make the final release a bit better by helping focus on the issues that will affect players the most.
It'll also help generate more publicity. Multiple releases make more noise than a single release. ;)
Our stable releases are beta releases the final one will be far ahead in time. Release candidate would mean we don't change anything but polishing. Anyway we have those builds you're asking for - by contributors -see the sticky topic in win forum.You're being ideological. Making minor changes to a -rc is fine, as is adding a bit more (i.e. the -rc being slightly incomplete). I mean, the most famous open source project, Linux, that uses -rc to shape the final release, not to just polish it. (Usually each 2.6.X release goes through 7-9 rc releases.)
-geever
You know, this is just me coming from a psychological standpoint, but what if it was easier to download & compile whatever the current dev version is, play through it & submit bug reports? I mean I'm not saying it's physically hard to do as it is now, but I know I had to do some digging to figure out everything (and I'm still not 100% sure how to do it).
I could see how you would want to keep the general public away from a ridiculously-buggy, nigh-unplayable early alpha or beta, but as we get closer & closer to release for 2.3, it's pretty stable & polished, and again, from a psychological standpoint, I'd be more motivated to find ways to contribute if it were easier for me to set up & run new versions as they came out. (And coupled w/ BTAxis's kickass contribution sticky & MCR's awesome follow up on how to contribute, I think this might kick contributions into high gear.)
Again, I'm still working on figuring out how to dl/install dev versions, but--
- Would it involve a ton of extra time & effort to write a UFO:AI frontend with options to launch the current installed version, download the newest version, and maybe a button to take you to the bug reporting forums?
- What about reserving some space right on the front page for getting people set up w/ the latest dev version, instructions on how to contribute material, report bugs, etc.?
- Maybe it might also be helpful if everybody already contributing were to record demos while they work? i.e. while you're building a map in UFOradiant, flipping on a recording program & making a little video to get new people up to speed on the UI, program features, etc.
What about reserving some space right on the front page for getting people set up w/ the latest dev version, instructions on how to contribute material, report bugs, etc.?I fully support that.
Maybe it might also be helpful if everybody already contributing were to record demos while they work? i.e. while you're building a map in UFOradiant, flipping on a recording program & making a little video to get new people up to speed on the UI, program features, etc.NOT a brilliant idea imho. A tutorial video has other requirements than just watching an experienced mapper doing his thing.
The prob with campaign is that (besides some remaining nasty bugs)
- we are lacking *content*, especially for the endgame
in the team selection menu should be a button for switching to ugv already.
We have quite much plans for 2.4 already and we also want shorter release cycle.
Q1: how do I get it on board of a dropship ?
Q2: how will I control it in battlescape ? Is it the 9th soldier (UI work) or does it replace the 9th soldier ?
However, in base defence missions this might be even more.The most logical thing for basedefend should be that ALL available soldiers should fight, but we could make a upper limit of 15 soldiers fighting @ the same time there & add reinforcements automatically if soldiers die & additional soldiers are still available...
The most logical thing for basedefend should be that ALL available soldiers should fight, but we could make a upper limit of 15 soldiers fighting @ the same time there & add reinforcements automatically if soldiers die & additional soldiers are still available...
Several reasons, I'd suspect. Game balance for one thing, GUI as another. System resources, turn length, etc.You're right on the money with that list. However, there are plans to increase the number of actors to control.
Several reasons, I'd suspect. Game balance for one thing, GUI as another. System resources, turn length, etc.
Given that my main method of selecting units is currently pressing 1-8 on the keyboard, I don't think I'll ever take more than 10 units into battle myself.
Microing 16+ units would get dull very quickly. It'd stop being squad based combat and start being platoon based combat.
Mostly WMG here though.
Number of seats in the dropship maybe ?A logical explanation for the missions & there the number of soldiers should be limited to the space available in the dropship, as this should also be additional motivation for the player to get new dropships with more seats...
But how does this influence the number of soldiers fighting in the base ?Only 8 soldiers are on duty at a time. The others are sleeping, taking a shower or in hospital etc., far away from their combat equipment. So they are *ordered* not to participate in the combat and hide instead.
Only 8 soldiers are on duty at a time. The others are sleeping, taking a shower or in hospital etc., far away from their combat equipment. So they are *ordered* not to participate in the combat and hide instead.
Only 8 soldiers are on duty at a time. The others are sleeping, taking a shower or in hospital etc., far away from their combat equipment. So they are *ordered* not to participate in the combat and hide instead.
As we already have more than 8 actors on the alien and civ teams, there shouuld be no prob with the general code. Afaik it's mostly a GUI thing (and some GUI-related code maybe).
AND a matter of game balance of course.
Do you think it will be much work or difficult to overcome this limit ?
As least this tells me that we should have the ability to test with *9* soldiers asap.
We can try this in 2.4 but we should not include any new features in 2.3 IMHO. The release is delayed quite much already and I'm also not aware all the problems it can cause so can't predict the amount of work with it.
-geever
Let`s wait merging save_break branch? And after that (and bughunting) we can make two thing: create branch 2_3_stable, and start play with trunk?
Now, more seriously: is there any way to play the developing version? How?