Messages

781

Design / Re: weapons_human critique

« on: December 29, 2006, 09:43:04 pm »

I've been posting a lot lately it seems, I'll admit that I am quite impressed with the game and would like to work to make it better. Thats why I want to give a few suggestions on some things that I thougth odd, and something that I thought is missing.

First of all I  thought it a bit curious that a hand gun has the same damage as an assault rifle "20 5", while the sub machine gun has roughly half. Generally sub machine guns are in their class because although they have the same rate of fire as an assualt rifle, they are chambered for hand gun rounds (current NATO standard being 9mm, maybe they will go up by 2084? but even then SMGs and hand guns go up together). Thus the pistol and SMG should have the same damage rating.

I realize this makes the pistol look quite useless. So instead I suggest the pistol be a fully auto variant similar to a glock 19. (make fully auto the secondary fire option)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HE5gokwLfWs

but as it is small give it a much larger (ridiculous) spread, more than the SMG.

Furthermore I like your current categories. I notice you have an RPG which is certainly a heavy weapon, but I notice no suppresive fire weapons. No M60 or M249 equivalent? Currently when I advance my guys in the game I have to use snipers to cover them, but in the military we usually had a guy carrying a heavy bullet hose with a high rate of fire making sure if the other guys stuck their heads up they would get them blown off. I think it would be prudent to include an m60 equivalent as a default human technology. Make it a heavy weapon, give it a "30 5" damage ratting (what I estimate a m60 would be in this gave) or make it the equivalent to the assualt rifle (like a M249)  at "20 5", then give it a slightly higher rate of fire, but higher time. the high time ensures you would have to employ the guy in a defenseive or covering position for other soldiers, thus distinguishing it from an "assault weapon"

I also realize people are full of suggestions but not always full of work. After I am done with the Korean translation, if I (or someone else) were to make the model, skin, and ufo file entry, test it, make sure its balanced and conservative (to reflect its status as an initial human technology), and of course release it as GPL; what chance would it have of being accepted in the game?

Otherwise I would work on a couple maps...

I've actually already modelled a light machine gun ( http://crossedswords.co.nr/downloads/UFOAI/LMG.PNG -- http://crossedswords.co.nr/downloads/UFOAI/LMG2.PNG ) but I lack the skill to texture it. Perhaps you'd be interested?

Either way, the chances of some type of machine gun getting into the game are 100%. Any good, appropriate textured model will be accepted.

Regards,
Winter

PS. As far as weapon damage is concerned, it's completely unbalanced at the moment. Much work need to be done in that area.

782

Discussion / New name for Antareans

« on: December 12, 2006, 12:12:39 am »

PHALANX project started days after the first attack, so the only soldiers in Mumbai battlefield was those of the regular army of Commonwealth.

Correct! Well done.

Regards,
Winter

783

Design / Tachyon-Beam Roket: Variant

« on: December 12, 2006, 12:10:45 am »

I respect if you don't want to discuss this, but... a 'realistic' game involving a multi-race alien invasion from some star at 600 years-light?  :wink:

*sigh* I'm done here.

Regards,
Winter

784

Discussion / New name for Antareans

« on: December 11, 2006, 09:34:46 pm »

Since it's in India, and we're talking about the imagination of soldiers, I could well envision them slanging up a "Two Buddhas spotted, taking aim!" "Greenie to your left!"

I couldn't envision that, myself, because the troops in question are not american; primarily Indian and Australian, actually. There's an extreme amount of difference between US slang and Britslang/Ozslang, let alone Indian, or Afrikaans.

Regards,
Winter

785

Design / Tachyon-Beam Roket: Variant

« on: December 11, 2006, 09:27:56 pm »

I think this shouldn't be a major problem in introducing new technologies. Just think in actual electronic devices: the theory of atoms and electrons (Bohr, Einstein...)  first appeared at the early 1900's, but it remained as conceptual theory a couple of decades. Then, in almost 40 years, everything else was invented and developed (transistors, lasers, computers... we really use the same technology today, the only difference is that now it is cheaper).

The difference? None of those things were impossible to known science, like tachyons are right now. Handwaving explanations for things in a plausible, realistic setting is lazy writing. That's not how we do things here.

Tachyons? No problem. Just say that the Japanesse research with neutrinos in the Superkamiokande allows the born of the theory of tachyons in, lets say, 2020 and the tensions of the second cold war pushed a lot of funds in military research (much like atomic and electronic research in second world war).

It's a neutrino observatory. It's got nothing to do with tachyon research.

The model of the weapon doesn't have to be a problem. Anything we can see in the texture/model can be explained in the storyline.

That line of thinking is much too easy. We're trying to write a realistic game, and that means things that are impossible to known science are not an option. I'm not going into the details again -- I've had this argument before.

Regards,
Winter

786

Design / Tachyon-Beam Roket: Variant

« on: December 11, 2006, 03:38:30 pm »

Ermm... it won't perhaps destroy terrain?

Normal rockets and grenades would leave a mark on the terrain. Do they?

Regards,
Winter

787

Design / Tachyon-Beam Roket: Variant

« on: December 11, 2006, 12:45:25 pm »

We can easily work in a new rocket variant -- mini-nukes, anyone? -- it's just not going to involve tachyons. We're abandoning the whole concept of tachyons altogether and going with particle beam weapons instead. No change in particles or models or anything required, yet 100% supported by known science, unlike tachyons.

Just a note, though, that particle beam weapons don't lend themselves to use as explosives. I think mini-nukes are the way to go. Extremely dangerous, but much fun to use on the battlefield.

Regards,
Winter

788

Discussion / New name for Antareans

« on: December 11, 2006, 11:18:14 am »

I was thinking "Taman" as singular, "Tamans" as plural, because people are just pedestrian enough to name them like that. It's simple and easy to remember and works in any language.

Regards,
Winter

789

Discussion / New name for Antareans

« on: December 09, 2006, 08:27:04 pm »

I've added another entry, "Taman", which is based on the idea of a corrupted Hindi phrase. In this case, the original phrase would be "xuRta AwmA", the Hindi term for 'evil spirit' or 'demon'.

Personally, I like it.

Regards,
Winter

790

Discussion / New name for Antareans

« on: December 08, 2006, 09:38:54 am »

Not a bad idea at all. Because:

1.- We don't understand the aliens' language, so we don't know how they name themselves.
2.- The first word we use to name a new thing, usually became its final name.
3.- The firsts to see/combat/talk about aliens will be the soldiers
4.- We all know the imagination of a soldier in combat (just remember the charlies of Vietnam, or BFG in doom :lol: ).

So, we can get  a name with reminiscences of whatever external attribute of the alien (its color, the shape of its head, etc) and use it. Anyone remember Gill Mans of Terror From The Deep?  :wink:

That's the idea. Got a suggestion, then?

Regards,
Winter

791

Discussion / New name for Antareans

« on: December 07, 2006, 02:54:05 pm »

Hullo, everyone. On behalf of the storyline team, I'd like to give you all a small opportunity to participate in the story design.

In the new storyline (as seen growing on the wiki), research is presented as in-character, and this creates one or two problems with the old material. For one, the name "Antareans" for an alien species is now anachronous; no one would know that the aliens came from Antares. We're going to need a new name to describe the Antareans that isn't linked to any specific star system, and we'd like to get your votes and suggestions.

Please post your suggested names here, and I'll add them to the poll. Thank you.

Regards,
Winter

792

Sounds and Music / Sound\Music

« on: October 27, 2006, 06:46:02 am »

Old5 sounds like it would be an excellent track to play over the game intro

Thanks for your kind comments Winter.

No problem! I call 'em like I see 'em.

As for where to use the tracks in-game, I think that's something we should discuss with anyone on the team that's interested, then i could also produce compositions to 'fill the gaps'
Also, if you mean the main menu for Old5, I think we'd be better off if i composed a track specifically for the main menu, most of the tracks ive posted so far have been a little too minimal for use there, perhaps.

I did not mean the main menu for Old5. I meant the campaign intro, what is currently a long scrolling text that displays upon starting a new game. We're hopefully going to be changing this to a text+image slideshow in the future.

Regards,
Winter

793

Sounds and Music / Sound\Music

« on: October 25, 2006, 02:33:26 pm »

Nice work, Psymong. The tracks are well-constructed, very atmospheric, easy to listen to without drawing attention to themselves. You've significantly improved the old tracks since you last posted them. I fully support using these in the game, provided you're finished with them.

We just have to find proper places to put them. Old5 sounds like it would be an excellent track to play over the game intro; it's subtle, it's got exactly the right note of creepiness, and it's long enough to allow an average player more than enough time to read the whole text before the song is over.

Regards,
Winter

794

Discussion / General Feedback

« on: October 25, 2006, 02:25:38 pm »

I'm not the terminator.. lol So lets not lose sight of the intent. The fact is that you can prop up even the most ungainly of things to grab a grenade to save your tail!  :wink:

Heh, well, you'll be happy to know that one of our brilliant coders has recently made a new feature that lets you put any one-handed item into your off-hand and use it without penalties, but having something in your off-hand slot disables any two-handed weapons you are holding. You also cannot hold two two-handed weapons at the same time.

Regards,
Winter

795

Discussion / Re: General Feedback

« on: October 25, 2006, 08:03:24 am »

All of the "two-handed" weapons in the game so far can be at least held with one hand. I've done it with the OICW rifle, so I know if I can do it, a trained soldier sure can!

You've actually held an OICW in one hand? It looks like it needs at least three to even keep it upright. What a terrible piece of firearms design.

Regards,
Winter