Messages

46

Discussion / Re: New encumbrance/TU system

« on: January 17, 2013, 06:25:28 pm »

Interesting. I swap out wounded and try to knock down every UFO I can over land. I've done 65 missions and I'm still about two months from even seeing heavily armoured aliens (probably three months from fielding power armour). By the time I get there, I could be nearing twice as many missions as you.

My most active soldier has seen 47 missions at this stage, so nearly 3/4. I've got 7 soldiers at 20-40 missions, another 4 or so around 10-25 missions, and another 7 at 0-10. I've lost probably 15-20 soldiers in the campaign, but maybe only 5 who had real experience. I only save-scummed once, to rescue my favourite sniper.

Hm. Maybe you had higher radar coverage resulting in more UFOs detected and more missions? I started out with main base at Asia Minor, soon added radar covering south Africa, but then nothing for quite a long time as I built dedicated workshop base, and only around september 2084 I added another radar/interceptor base to cover most of Asia and Australia.

47

Discussion / Re: New encumbrance/TU system

« on: January 17, 2013, 05:42:15 pm »

Around 50 missions total. Because my soldiers were often injured, I purposely shot down many UFOs over water to give them time to recuperate. I was running with 12 troops from the start, 4 were backup that was assigned to team when a soldier from main team was too heavily injured to participate in mission that I couldn't avoid.

Still, those 50 missions are quite a load for single soldier. Most of the main team already reached stage where mind stat is limiting their promotion, not kills, and everyone got between 40-50 mind now.

48

Discussion / Re: New encumbrance/TU system

« on: January 17, 2013, 04:56:22 pm »

I'll necro this a bit to continue discussion about the system.

I've reached a point in my campaign where I got access to power armor, and balancing loads has become a nightmare. I did a lot of savescumming to get decent soldiers and kept them alive throughout the campaign, so my team is probably the best you can have at this stage, and even the best soldiers are struggling with decent load with power armor. Throughout my team I have soldiers with 40-49 strength, gained over course of almost 50 missions, and even my best assault soldier can carry at most his assault rifle, single reload, couple of grenades, plasma blade and medikit. I know the armor is supposed to be a choice only for some soldiers, but it's virtually unusable except for elite troops with assault rifle. Any heavier weapon is impossible to carry. Heavy weapon soldiers can't even carry a good loadout with nanocomposite armor at this stage. Fielding a second squad seems impossible for me as the new soldiers won't be able to carry a loadout that would give them a chance in combat against enemies with particle weapons and heavy needlers.

So what's your opinion, should the system be refined, or is this okay?

49

Bugs in stable version (2.5) / Re: Unable to target UFOs

« on: January 17, 2013, 10:18:32 am »

This happened to me too as a consequence of having my fighter shot down while pilot survived.

50

Discussion / Re: Heavy Weapons

« on: January 14, 2013, 10:20:33 am »

My close/assault guys actually tend to survive quite well, because I use flashbangs, IR goggles and plasma grenades a lot. Biggest problem for me is fighting on medium ranges outside of reach of grenades, and those damn speedy shevaars.

I think there is an improved ammo for rocket launcher eventually, after researching alien launcher and missiles.

51

Discussion / Re: Heavy Weapons

« on: January 14, 2013, 07:54:46 am »

Heavy weapons skill gotta be removed. So many times I had excellent recruit show up, with 36+ STR, 20+ speed and accuracy and 30+ mind, but his main weapon skill was heavy :/

Speaking about skills, I get a feeling that assault skill is now kinda overused. Okay, I got only as far as needlers so far in newest game, but when I look at my team...1 has close skill weapon, 2 snipers, 2 explosive, and 7 assault, and these guys have most kills.

52

Tactics / Re: Where/why/how many bases do you build?

« on: January 13, 2013, 10:36:32 pm »

I'll post screenie later, I have yet to rebuild that setup in my game.

Also, I've intentionally compromised areas with low population density, so there are significant gaps. east Siberia, northern part of Canada, Antarctic, Arctic and Greenland are not covered because of that. Also, New Zealand got out of coverage somehow...

But as I said, over 90% of population should be covered.

53

Bugs in stable version (2.5) / Few bugs

« on: January 13, 2013, 08:38:39 pm »

build: January 9th 2013 32bit, system:win7/64bit

First. I had my pilot survive his craft being shot down. This bugged out the interception menu somehow, doubleclicking UFOs didn't do anything. Also in pilot assignment menu his checkbox was greyed out. Unfortunately I accidentally overwrote the save.

Encased plasma ammo has odd production prices. Sniper rifle ammo and machine gun ammo have same cost as normal ones, while assault rifle ammo has cost 1500/piece. Helova expensive fun....

And last, full Herakles vs. crashed harvester on office complex map, always crashes to geoscape on starting. Save included.

54

Discussion / Re: dragging weapons in battlescape?

« on: January 13, 2013, 12:30:31 pm »

There's a problem with that, medikits have only five charges now.

55

Tactics / Re: Where/why/how many bases do you build?

« on: January 13, 2013, 04:39:09 am »

Well, such small gap could be filled by radar tower.

As I wrote before, 3 bases+3 radars are enough to cover around 90% of populated areas, good enough.

56

Feature Requests / Re: Grenade launcher, its ammo and article

« on: January 13, 2013, 04:32:40 am »

if they have better explosives then are the hand grenades also smaller and lighter in ufo:ai?

And fun fact, they aren't. UFO:AI grenades weigh 0.4 kg, same as M67 grenade, currently in general use in US military.

57

Feature Requests / Re: Grenade launcher, its ammo and article

« on: January 10, 2013, 09:31:42 pm »

But the game takes place in 2084....

-geever

That's not the problem, several calibers still in use today like 7.62x54R, 9x19mm parabellum, .45 ACP, .30-06, .303 (last two are only in civilian use AFAIK) are over hundred years old. 70 years from now, most of today's modern calibers will be in general use, jsut upgraded for better powder formula.

Design and performance in game suggest a heavy GL, so 40mm or similar would be in order. After all, in grenades especially, greater volume is really important.

58

Feature Requests / Re: Grenade launcher, its ammo and article

« on: January 10, 2013, 04:20:02 am »

I know, I was reacting to homunculus' post.

59

Feature Requests / Re: Grenade launcher, its ammo and article

« on: January 10, 2013, 02:37:19 am »

particle beam grenades don't make sense.

But UFOpaedia is a mess. Inconsistent naming is one, but there are some factual errors, even with supposed material development, the calibers for example don't make sense. 20mm for a mobile sniper rifle does not make sense, and even of the recoil compensators were so advanced to allow it, the effect would be much greater, and there would be a choice of using explosive munitions...even smaller .50 BMG caliber has today effective HEIAP ammunition available. 25mm for standalone grenade launcher is on the other hand too small caliber, 40mm is most common caliber used nowadays, 25mm is used mostly for long range or automatic grenade launchers.

60

Tactics / Re: advanced combat hovercraft

« on: November 15, 2012, 01:33:16 am »

It would take some skill to do as you essentially have to aim to the highest point in trajectory to get the desired effect. But it's possible to lob nades over obstacles like this.