Messages

811

Artwork / ka dropzone of artworks

« on: October 19, 2006, 01:21:01 am »

The models are quite nice, just keep in mind that we won't be featuring any magical hovering technology, so no floating castles or flying saucers. We really have to keep away from the 'flying saucer' UFO design, as it doesn't fit the models we already have or the storyline description of UFO propulsion.

Regards,
Winter

812

Artwork / hovernet temporary model 01?

« on: October 19, 2006, 01:10:46 am »

EDIT: I think when Winter wrote he likes the first mdoel better he just referred to this problem, not the overall shape. At least i think he does

That's correct, though I really don't like the overall shape of the new one either. It's too thin to put any useful electronics in the body, and the thing hanging under it -- I presume it's a gun -- is both comically oversized and out of place.

One thing we don't want to do is to use things just because they 'look cool', ignoring the fact that they're badly designed for their supposed purpose or that they couldn't even work according to the laws of physics. The new model resembles a piece of architecture more than a war machine. If it's going to be in combat, it has to look like it would actually work and survive in combat; it should be sleek and nasty and rugged. The new model is anything but.

Hell. It looks like a Segway.

Regards,
Winter

813

Feature Requests / Hire new soldiers/scientists/engineers

« on: October 18, 2006, 10:41:17 pm »

I feel "Proficient" isn't much of a step up from "Very Good", though. I would rename "Competent", "Good" and "Very Good" to "Average", "Above Average" and "Good", but I realize there are other concerns here.

Right now we're considering switching places for "Proficient" and "Very Good", so "Proficient" would come before "Very Good". I'm starting to think it would be an improvement.

Regards,
Winter

814

Artwork / hovernet temporary model 01?

« on: October 18, 2006, 10:37:59 pm »

so, that is ok,
first model to settle alien styles.
hovernet drones.
forget the old one.
ka

The old one was better. This new one appears to use some kind of magic antigravity to stay afloat, which we will not be writing into the story. Any hovering enemies will need the fan blades as on the old model.

Regards,
Winter

815

Feature Requests / Hire new soldiers/scientists/engineers

« on: October 17, 2006, 11:51:24 pm »

The skill levels will be renamed. We've already decided on the new naming system, and tried to keep it as similar to the old as possible to ease the translation burden.

Here it is:

Poor
Mediocre
Competent
Good
Very Good
Proficient
Highly Proficient
Excellent
Outstanding
Superhuman

Regards,
Winter

816

Design / Skills Proposal

« on: October 15, 2006, 09:57:36 pm »

ok, i see, you wont be convinced in anyway, that there is not the intention behind this, to keep things most realistic, but the intention, that weapons should be sorted in metaphorical skill categories. and, as metaphors go, a shotgun and a pistol fit together, but not a knife. anyway.

so i disagree, you would NOT spilt thing further, just because of first divisions, and in fact, they are splitted and categorized well before, arnt they? and well, sorry, this is not an argument what you are proposing.

I'm sorry, but you've totally lost me. I have no idea what any of that really means.

ok, with my thoughts before, you dont have to add things. but, ok, let me ask a question: how many sniper weapons are planned so far? - just to get a figure in mind for me, how important this sniper skill is in fact finally.

Splitting Close Combat up into firearms and a separate melee skill would require adding a new skill. That's adding.

The current number of sniper weapons planned in my storyline is 1. Which is a good point. We may have to change the sniper skill into something else later and reassess the rest of the skills, but it's too early to do so now.

there are sharp shooters, who work with heavy pistols, too, and that professions all have some similarities to the sniper handling.

Military snipers don't use pistols to make their shots, and for several good reasons. Don't confuse civilian target shooting with anything military.

anyway, i dont thing it is good either, but my point persists:
putting meele weapons and small arms in one skill group isnt a good soultion.

Maybe you don't know this, but 'small arms' comprises the entire range of infantry weapons smaller than grenade/rocket launchers. But that aside, we will reassess the skill list when the time comes. Right now we've got too many other things to finish first.

Regards,
Winter

817

Design / Skills Proposal

« on: October 15, 2006, 07:05:26 pm »

yeah, but close combat and firearms are simply two different kind of things. its not about getting more complex, it is a thing about letting the player know instantly, what he / she is on to.

But then you'd have to split things further. Handgun skill, SMG skill, assault rifle skill . . . Unless you say you're fine with shotguns and pistols going in the same skill, but not knives as well. Shotguns and pistols are two very different things, after all.

Adding more skills would require a good deal of extra code and a lot of interface adjustments. In my opinion it would only be feasible during an interface redesign.

Sniper skill should definitely stay. There's a big difference between firing just any rifle (usually bursts or full-auto for assault or battle rifles) and a marksman taking single, highly difficult long-range shots.

Regards,
Winter

818

Artwork / Re: hovernet temporary model 01?

« on: October 15, 2006, 06:03:07 pm »

take a look,
i have modified the hover cameras from c. corperations, perhaps those will fit as temporary models for the hovernet drones..

greetings
ka
www.ninc.at

Is it recognisable as a modified model (I.E. would we get in trouble for using it), and why would we use it only temporarily? It's a good model, we could definitely find a place for it.

For feedback: The gun is a bit dodgy, it looks like an old cannon more than a high-tech weapon. Aiming the gun downward is a bit questionable, the vehicle won't hover that far up, especially if it's a ground-effect vehicle.

Other than that, it's great.

Regards,
Winter

819

Design / Skills Proposal

« on: October 15, 2006, 05:50:32 pm »

The way I see it, adding even more skills would needlessly increase complexity for no other reason than to increase complexity. We could make separate skills for every single weapon, because they all handle differently -- but it would make for sucky gameplay.

Also, scientists and engineers are in the game because they're specialist non-combat personnel doing specialist non-combat jobs. Soldiers don't do high-energy physics. Merging them into the soldier class would make no sense and would invalidate the research and production system.

This is not Fallout, and Fallout -- while great fun -- was not realistic.

The 'medic' class will most likely be changed into the 'pilot' class later on.

Regards,
Winter

820

Artwork / plasma grenades

« on: October 11, 2006, 10:01:58 pm »

The plasma grenade looks nice, but it's designed like a sci-fi gadget rather than a military weapon. The trigger (the button, I presume) is located in a place where any number of things could accidentally set the grenade off. It's also a very inconvenient place to reach and a non-standard place for grenade triggers to be. Soldiers would have to think about where to find the trigger before they could even start thinking about using it.

If you want to continue this model, I recommend putting the trigger mechanism on top, with some form of safety covering like all grenades have. Also a more easily-throwable shape might be better.

By the way, I love your shotgun model. If we could replace the one we have in-game with yours, I'd be all for it. It is generally nicer and has a much more high-tech look to it.

Regards,
Winter

821

Design / Re: Ufopedia design/layout

« on: October 09, 2006, 02:15:55 pm »

1) Navigation:
I suggest that each chapter has a seperate table of contents.

This is in the plans.

2) Layout of item description:
The item descriptions as shown in the wiki are quite long, lots of text to read. So first of all, we will need a scrollable text view.

Also in the plans.

To present more text at the first glance, I suggest to use the full vertical screen size for the text and move the stats and requirements subwindows to the right, just below the item picture. The requirements need far less space than they have now.

Every one of the interface screens wastes tons of space, I hope we can get some more sensible design in there sometime.

3) Usability:

These concerns would all be addressed by a readily-available table of contents, perhaps even one that stays accessible while you view an item.

Regards,
Winter

822

Sounds and Music / Sound\Music

« on: October 04, 2006, 09:21:47 pm »

I'm no expert on music, but here's a bit of advice for Track 1 -- don't start off immediately with the vibratey sound, crank it up later, and crank it down again during any quiet moments. Also, try to make the vibration less monotonous. Right now it's just distracting.

Regards,
Winter

823

Design / Skills Advancement

« on: September 23, 2006, 04:05:52 pm »

This sounds certainly worth a try to me.

Regards,
Winter

824

Sounds and Music / Voice acting?

« on: September 21, 2006, 03:31:22 am »

btw: we would need localized voices then wouldnt we?

Not need as such, though I'm sure some people might want it. Personally I'm only interested in doing (and hearing) voices in English.

Regards,
Winter

825

Sounds and Music / Voice acting?

« on: September 20, 2006, 01:23:07 am »

Lately I've been wondering about voice acting. Do we want it? If so, when do we want it, how much of it do we want, and exactly what should it entail (voiceovers, soldier voices (we should specify exactly which lines would be required here), maybe an audio UFOpaedia?)?

I'd be happy to contribute some voices if it might be useful.

Regards,
Winter