Messages

1

Tactics / Re: SAM sites and radar: my eyes and my arms

« on: June 01, 2010, 01:02:29 am »

i did not realise you could only have a total of 3 'external' buildings

e.g. 3 sams, 3 radar, 1 sam 1 radar  1 ufo store space,

i can understand the admin not wanting you to be able to place 10 sams around the area but this seems a little bit restrictive

3 sams sounds like a nice limit per base
 but i would like to be able to have 3 sams and at least 1 radar

since you need at least 2 ufo storage  this limits you to 1 sam or radar
you pretty much have to have a ufo research base

It is a little restrictive, but I get around the problem by just building basic bases that contain nothing but radar and missile defenses. If they get attacked and destroyed, I just rebuild them. In the meatime, I'm able to use the extra three installations to build SAMs and ufoyards around my main bases. And, unlike geever, I don't build that many ufoyards - maybe one or two in total. I'd rather sell the UFOs and get the credits, especially when you consider how unrealistic the disassembly times are. If I had a workshop in real life that took that long, I'd fire their lazy asses!

2

Tactics / Re: SAM sites and radar: my eyes and my arms

« on: May 30, 2010, 07:08:03 pm »

5 sam sites that would give even a harvester a run for its money add to that what your aircraft are shooting

are they close to your main base or spread around a bit

They surround my bases, but are not too close, as I prefer to have enemy craft shot down before they reach my base. The trick is to have just slightly over-lapping coverage from the SAMs and the base itself. I also have 2 or 3 missile defenses built right in to the base itself.

3

Tactics / Re: SAM sites and radar: my eyes and my arms

« on: May 29, 2010, 04:14:12 pm »

couple of quick questions

how close to your bases are you radar sites

where do you put your sam sites in relations to your radar site, how close together

Do you use 1,2 or more sam sites clustered together

bit confused do the same sites require you to equip them with missiles or is it all automatic , i'm getting conflicting posts

I rarely use radar sites (go only for filling in gaps between my bases), but I do like to surround my main bases with SAM sites (usually 5 of them). It's rare for the aliens to slip through that many and attack my main bases. Yes, you do have to equip your SAM sites after building is completed. It takes another two days.

4

Design / Re: Proposed storyline.

« on: May 22, 2010, 08:16:39 pm »

Fair enough, the last statement was comcicly over the top and hostile. My bad.

But you can't deny that he comes off as roughly like that.

After reading all of these postings (which are unfortunately heading into flame war territory), I decided to go back and look at the genesis of this thread. Did you know, Trashman, that you've been arguing with Winter about the plot for almost two years now? And that at no point in that period, has anything changed from Destructavator's original comment (almost three years ago) that the plot is basically set and there are no plans to change it?

I'm not interested in defending either side, but after two years of arguing, there's usually no way to go other than personal attacks, and that does no one any good.

So, is the plot perfect? I'm not going to give an opinion, since my opinion doesn't matter. All I can say is that it is damned better than I could write. But more to the point, it's their game and their plot. A wise man once taught me that "you can always have your say, but you won't always get your way". I think it's time to move on.

5

Discussion / Re: UFO:AI Release cycle

« on: April 20, 2010, 03:02:53 am »

Actually, now that I think about it... Your right. I cant seem to find any set milestones or targets for this project myself, But then again, most of the Updates I'v seen while I'v been here are random, Spontaneous user submitted affairs. 

Still, The games completely changed since 2.2, here you can find downloadable pre-built 2.3 Dev installers for windows but I'm assuming that you use windows.

From there, make suggestions and... Well, I'm not really sure what else I can do for you.

Here is the link for the roadmap for version 2.3:

http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/ufoai/roadmap

6

Bugs prior to release 2.3 / Re: Possible design flaw in base building (and couple other minor errors)

« on: April 20, 2010, 02:57:13 am »

Don't be so demanding with(?) yourself. If the UI can mislead a user, there is a 70% chance that the UI can be improved.
I understand that moving the word 'Asia' a little bit might have prevented your wrong perception.
So plz tell us where you'd like the word Asia to be placed OR even better, figure out how to change it and send a patch

Long periods of beta testing for companies like 3DRealms and Software Creations taught me the importance of being thorough and accurate - but that was a few years ago so I must be out of practice! 

Anyway, I think the Asia tag just needs to be moved slightly to the right (I'd say five characters) and upward (maybe 3 times the height of the character?). I'm sorry - I don't know how to be more exact, since everyone's screen size is going to be different. I've attached a screenshot with an arrow added to indicate the approximate positioning that I think would work. I wish I could figure out how to change it myself, but unfortunately I have absolutely no programming ability (and all the admiration in the world for those that do).

7

Bugs prior to release 2.3 / Re: Possible design flaw in base building (and couple other minor errors)

« on: April 19, 2010, 11:41:50 pm »

> 2. I placed a base in Asia, but the text is a little strange. If you look at the attached screenshot, it says "A new base has been built: Base Asia (nation: The Commenwealth of Oceania). However, the base is clearly nowhere near Oceania.
Can you please attach your save file (both, xml and lint)?

Never mind, it's my mistake - I'll have to do better next time. I made the fatal assumption that the world in UFO:AI matches the real world, which in hindsight was a stupid assumption to make. 

When I turned on boundaries on the map, I could see that in 2084, India is part of Oceania.

8

Bugs prior to release 2.3 / Re: Possible design flaw in base building (and couple other minor errors)

« on: April 19, 2010, 11:38:12 pm »

If you turn on the "Highlight Nation Borders" option you'll see that India and Madagascar and South Africa have joined Oceania to form the Commonwealth of Oceania.  Your base looks to be in India, just south of The Asian Republic.

You're right - it is within the borders of the Commonwealth of Oceania (but just barely). What confused me initially was that the base is just slightly below the phrase "The Asian Republic" that denotes the region. I guess I assumed that the name of the region would be more or less in the centre of the region. However, in this case, it's at the bottom of the region (and almost right on the border). However, in the end, there is no bug here, and I should have been more thorough in my checking. I'll have to do better next time.

9

Bugs prior to release 2.3 / Possible design flaw in base building (and couple other minor errors)

« on: April 18, 2010, 11:14:18 pm »

Hello all,

I've been playing Destructavator's latest build for Windows (r29356) and noticed a problem with base building that I've been meaning to mention for a while. If you add a building to your base by mistake (for example you placed a laser battery when you meant to place a missile battery), and immediately go to correct your mistake, your only choice is to destroy the building, which means that you have lost all the credits. I can understand losing the credits when you destroy a fully built building, but when no time has even elapsed, I think there should be a more elegant way to correct your mistake that does not cost any credits. Maybe a remove button for a building that has no construction completed? Or maybe even a formula that refunds credits based on percentage of completion? Zero completion would equal full refund, and 100% completion would equal no refund, with a sliding scale for refunds in between?

Also, couple minor things:

1. When loading the +forest map, the loading screen displays the picture with the text "Little bungalo in the forest". That should be "Little bungalow in the forest".

2. I placed a base in Asia, but the text is a little strange. If you look at the attached screenshot, it says "A new base has been built: Base Asia (nation: The Commenwealth of Oceania). However, the base is clearly nowhere near Oceania.

Neither of these are big problems, but I thought I should mention them now for when you have more time to fix the small things. 

10

Feature Requests / Re: MultiStory Bases

« on: March 27, 2010, 04:16:02 pm »

"Story" can mean "level" when it comes to buildings, so it was perfectly correct use of the term.

Actually (and just to be fussy), the correct spelling for a floor in a building is "storey", not "story", and according to the dictionary, the adjective is "storeyed", as in "multi-storeyed".

11

Discussion / Re: Game over

« on: August 10, 2009, 05:20:15 am »

I played the game and when the first XVI missions goes, no more UFOs appears, and the game finish. Is this because the game is not fully operational (thech tree) or i lose the game?

It's possible to use an alien astrogation on a new aircraft? The 2.2.1 has a tank? How i can research it?

The games not over, it just that you've reached the limit of development for that version. UFO:AI is still being developed, and 2.2.1 is incomplete. Same thing with the tank. If I remember correctly (been a while since I played that version), you can't do anything with the tank.

You could switch to version 2.3 and try that version out (but it's in heavy development and tends to be very buggy). Odie posts new compiled versions frequently, which you can download and try.

12

Discussion / Re: Some ideas

« on: July 07, 2009, 04:44:58 am »

We all have a choice here. If we think development is taking too long, we can get involved and help speed up development by contributing to the project, or we can shut the heck up.

another important point is that its taking way too much time for new releaces to come out...the latest stable version is already 1 year old!...the developer team is packing way too much improvements before next releasse...

13

Discussion / Re: What Alien Invasion needs in order to replace XCOM1 as the best game

« on: July 07, 2009, 04:38:18 am »

It is unfortunate that those who want to complain tend to post, while those of us that actually support the project tend to sit back quietly letting the team get on with its work, and happily and patiently waiting for the next release, for this tends to give the impression that the whole community is "unappreciative". For myself, and I suspect many others, the original poster does not represent my view of the project or the efforts of the team. I think UFO:AI is a great project, and I have been fascinated to monitor its progress. It's amazing to me that so many people would give freely of their time to create a special game free for all to play. Please ignore the naysayers - they are the minority.

It's that exact same attitude which has ensured they don't make original games or movies anymore, just shit with ever-increasing numbers on the end, because apparently trying or learning anything new takes people out of their precious comfort zone. It has really, genuinely amazed me that any community could be so unappreciative of a project's goals or the efforts of its team.

Regards,
Winter

14

Windows / Re: Win32 Development Binary Installer Links

« on: January 28, 2009, 02:15:58 am »

I only found one bug, with the scroll wheel on the mouse causing strange messages to appear on the battlescape when zooming in and out.  If this bug hasn't already been fixed in SVN, I'll try next time to make a note of the messages and use the bug tracker.  The bug doesn't crash the game or anything though, its just strange and slightly irritating.

I think that this is a problem that has already been reported. The fix is to delete one of your .cfg files (I think keys.cfg). An earlier revision caused the problem with the existing .cfg file.

Ken

15

Feature Requests / Re: My feedback

« on: January 22, 2009, 04:29:10 pm »

I have a couple of comments on some of your list, but these are just my opinion, FWIW:

3 & 4. The interface is a work in progress. These are good ideas - hopefully it's something that will find its way into the game someday.

5. You will not be able to save in missions. Not going to happen. Been discussed (to death) - please don't get BTAxis started again. 

6. I think the mails will appeal differently to different people. Myself, I don't bother reading them, but I know others that really get into that kind of stuff. To each his own, I guess.

7. I've had aliens shoot at me often. Try a different difficulty level, or play enough missions, and you'll run in to it.

11. Medikits work perfectly fine, to provide battlefield healing in the middle of mission. I'm not sure what problem you're having with them. If a soldier gets wounded, another soldier can "use" the medikit to partially heal the wounded soldier. A wounded soldier cannot use it on themselves, AFAIK.

12. Seemed clear enough to me. The only thing I don't like is that they only work on one thing at a time, and in the sequence you have in your production list. I'd prefer the option to schedule multiple production runs (which would each take longer, but that's an acceptable trade-off).

13. Pretty sure you can turn this off. Isn't this one of the message options that you can set when you're in the geoscape?

Ken