Messages

31

Discussion / Re: Feedback on 2.5-2.6

« on: April 25, 2016, 01:54:58 am »

Hi!

It's possible to change the health increase? I want to freeze the health in a static value. Why? because the health of a human is more or less equal and don't "raise" with the time. It's matter of make the game more "realistic".

32

Linux / Re: UFO AI crash

« on: April 19, 2016, 03:17:23 am »

Leave it without effect. I think it was a problem with the nautilus.

33

Bugs in stable version (2.5) / Re: Assigning weapons to weapon slots on base batteries

« on: April 19, 2016, 02:47:00 am »

This is a bug? I want to increase the missile launchers, but i can only use one. Where i can mod this?

34

Linux / UFO AI crash

« on: April 17, 2016, 06:07:02 am »

Hi.

Recently, i installed UFO:AI from PlayDeb on my ubuntu 14.04. I can launch the game and begin, but for some reason, it freeze without any reason. I save two games but after the freeze i can't load them again.

Some advice? Thanks.

35

Artwork / Re: My SWAT's body model, other uniforms and skins v2.4 and v2.5

« on: October 07, 2014, 03:50:21 am »

Cool!!

36

Linux / Re: UFO AI2.5 deb package

« on: August 13, 2014, 04:14:32 am »

Thanks i will try it.

37

Linux / Re: UFO AI2.5 deb package

« on: August 10, 2014, 11:43:29 pm »

Ok. I followed the compilance guide but i have many questions. I'm new with Linux so, be patient 

1. I downloaded these files: ufoai-2.5-source.tar.bz2 , ufoai-2.5-data.tar and ufoai-2.5-mappack.tar.bz2

2. I unpack these files.

3. I installed all the packages.  http://ufoai.org/wiki/Debian

Where i must begin to do ./configure and make? I do it in the "ufoai-2.5-source" folder and after that the make. But i don't know if it works or not. I don't know how to run the game.

Can someone gives me a more specific procedure to compile the game? Thanks

38

Tactics / Re: Is there really any point in equipping armor?

« on: August 08, 2014, 10:35:47 pm »

They do, at least in 2.6.
Moving through smoke, or ending your turn in smoke will incur a small amount of stun damage, if you don't wear a face-concealing armor.
The amount is very small, but can accumulate if you spend way too much time in smoke.

Ahhm interestng. Im  playing 2.5

39

Tactics / Re: Is there really any point in equipping armor?

« on: August 06, 2014, 01:23:53 am »

If you use smoke grenades a lot, wearing a full-body armor (armor with closed helmet, so any armor except the one you can buy at the beginning) prevents suffocation.

Ehm, no one of my troopers suffocate because the smoke of these grenades. I belive you talk about the alien gas grenade.

40

Linux / UFO AI2.5 deb package

« on: July 28, 2014, 12:05:06 am »

I´m linux user, but i don´t understand how to compile the game. It´s possible to get it in a .deb package?

41

Discussion / Re: Using the alien crafts

« on: July 27, 2014, 07:46:42 pm »

ufo fighters cargo bay is actually ony for 4 soliders. ohter two aliens are pilot and copilot and it doesnt offer much cover either.
besides most of ufos are flying bricks. they use a lot of antimater that humanity cant produce (i dont understand how such unstable thing just wont expolde in crashed ufos... ) so we may not be able to afford ufos becouse of their high consumption of antimatter.
they may have comands that cant be used by humans, and human hybrid aircrafts may serve phalax better than ufos...
those are some reasons why (they can be put in game for better story). but real reson is that game looks more interesting when you use your own aircrafts.

Well... the differences of techs it´s not the problem. In fact, alien detection and alien astrogation is needed for the construction of Dragon and the other alien-based craft. I think that the best approach to the "problem" is the "Independence Day" way. An alien craft modified to be flyable for humans. I prefer to mod the alien craft (using wings, for example) than build a newer one. Do you know how many people, tools and resources are needed for the consruction of an aircraft? Ok, you have an super advanced workshop, maybe with 3D printers, even with that, is not an easy enterprise with a group of 10 technicians for workshop. And that is only manufacture, but, what about the design? An earth-tech craft could take 10 or 20 years to design and test. How many time is needed to research and test an aircraft with alien techs and materials, almost impossible to replicate by humans?

Anyway, it´s a game. But i thing that for any "resistance" (just like Phalanx), the uses of captured material is the first thing that you will do, specially when the enemy is far away from your scientific capacities. I thing that using the captured UFO is the first step for catch up the aliens in air.  The second step, is mod the ufo to use human advanced tech from research of alien techs. For example, the hybrid missile, laser cannons, etc.

Maybe it could be designed a new human-alien craft, maybe the Stingray, from the experience of ufo usage and research.

42

Discussion / Using the alien crafts

« on: July 24, 2014, 11:37:54 pm »

I was thinking about this idea. Mankind is fighting an advanced alien force, right? It´s very difficult to discover all their secrets in one month or one year. How to build an alien aircraft or an alien-like aircraft? yes, i talk about the Dragon, Starchaser, Stingray... i mean, these are awesome designs, but what about using the captured alien crafts? It could be more realistic because the research limits to use the crafts, not build alien-like crafts. This can solve two problems (at least for me): first, the most faster dropship begun to be available later in the game. So, if the UFO Fighter or UFO Scout can land (there are maps with this), it could be nice to take this craft for human use. You have an armed dropship and figther. The research can be directed to "mod" the UFO, for example, putting human weapons. The second one, the realism of the game. Yes, it´s a game, but it´s the best game, so, if we can do the story more realistic, it could be better (at least for me  ).

An UFO Figther can transport six soldiers. This is a very efficient way to transport faster, longer and safe.

If the idea don´t like for the official game, how can i implement? I only need to put the UFO Figther on each map instead the Firebird, right?

The second matter, put the soldiers inside. How can i do this?

Third, the aircraft screen. It need a new graphic file to show it? Or i can use the research model?

43

Artwork / Re: small dropship

« on: July 24, 2014, 11:21:34 pm »

im sorry but that design is very old and inefficient.
1. closer to hull are engines weaker can be wings thus lighter... lighter aircraft less fuel... you know what i mean.
2. its wasteful to have more engine than you need - all engines should work all the time.

i think the best aproach (most efficient) is vectored thrust. 3 (triangle) points for stable aircraft on landing/takeoff. more points more stable but not too many engines if you dont really need them. i hope you see nozzle i made as i vectored thrust. that was my intention.

as efficient design you can see harrier. just one engine. when landing it got thrusters in 4 points and its stable. from start i wanted this to be 1 engine design. than it look a little strange. but my idea was helicopter like design with one engine at top. just faster with longer reach...

there are many other interesting experimental vtol aircrafts that i would like use as idea.

Harrier was not the most efficient VSTOL. The German VJ101 was better in many ways, but british design wins because the needs of the OTAN changed. But this is a little off topic.

The idea is use two wing engines that use vectorial thrust plus two engines in front. If you want put a single engine, ok, it´s your desing and it´s possible, but the craft is too little to fit a realistic fuel tank. But if you want this solution, i suggest to change the exit of the engines and put it like the Harrier but in the "roof" of the aircraft, in one line. Is something like the Harrier engine with the rest of the craft hanging on. The nozzles can be at both sides-up.



I suggest this: remove the frontal nozzles (red) and put it at the side of the intake. The rear nozzle can be the same as the frontal. It´s like the harrier engine design. By that way, the fuel can be stored behind the craft and in the wings.

44

Artwork / Re: small dropship

« on: July 24, 2014, 07:19:32 pm »

Looks fine.

If it not problem, i will give you an idea.

Put the engines at the wings, attached to the fuselage. Remove the upper air intake and transform it in a hump. Why? This is an Osprey type approach. All the fuel can be in that hump and you will have a more realistic aircraft.

Some like this, the Dornier  VSTOL



but, instead to use the vertical take off engines at the tip of the wing, you can use it in the root of the wing.

It´s only an idea.

45

Artwork / Re: small dropship

« on: July 24, 2014, 12:37:26 am »

Well... i solve the problem doing "refueling" on all my bases, i jump base to base to reach all the planet. So, it could be possible to do a small dropship without reach fusion reactors. Fusion reactors can give very high amounts of energy, but transforming electricity to movement is not easy, not for aircraft, because the movement relay on air displacement. There are only two possible solutions; turboprop or electrical propellrs (limited to subsonic speed) or gas acceleration (gas turbines, for example). Another way is the ionic engines, but it could be extremely unfriendly for environment.