Personal tools

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - UFOtonic

Pages: [1]
Bugs in stable version (2.5) / Batteries for base defense
« on: December 04, 2012, 11:12:57 pm »
Yesterday I downloaded and installed v2.5; I found what I think it is an issue.

I started a new game. First I researched "Continuous Wave Laser Operation" and "Base Defence Laser Turrent". Secondly, I manufactured a Base Defence Laser Turrent. Last, I built the corresponding building (Laser Battery) and tried to install the laser turrent in it. However, I was not allowed to do that. It was only possible after having buildt the first Missile Battery (for SAMs) in the game. It seems that it "unlocks" the installation of Laser Turrents.

If a player is not interested in SAM batteries inside bases, why must he/she build at least one of them, in order to have working Laser Turrent? In my opinion, these are independent facilities and the limitation does not make sense.


Feature Requests / Battlescape: Are you in need of a weapon?
« on: October 09, 2012, 03:59:00 pm »
In the battlescape, currently actors can only take objets that have been (intentionally or not) dropped. Does soldier A need a weapon? In that case, soldier B must drop a weapon, and soldier A must retrieve it from the ground. Isn't weird?

I miss an option to give a weapon, a weapon magazine or any other item your active soldier hold in one hand (or both hands) to another actor that is next to him/her (as far as the second actor has one/two empty hands). Examples: imagine a disarmed soldier, a soldier that has run out of anmunition, or even a military who is supposed to oppose as far as possible to any alien threat.

The action of giving the item itself should have a minimal TU cost, lets say 1TU for one-hand items and 2 TUs for two-hand items. If the item is not in carried in hand, you would previously need to place it there (from backup, holster, etc) with the corresponding TU cost.

I can't evaluate this proposal from a "coding point of view", so I simply mention this idea here, in case that you consider that it is worth being implemented. At least, it makes sense...  ;)

FAQ / Re: Flashbangs - Working or not?
« on: July 15, 2012, 12:52:16 am »
Regarding flashbangs:
Are they suposed to work on "robotic aliens" also? (blood spiders, hovernets...)

Thanks for commenting it.I just played this map in v2.5 and did not know what to do, so I did it as "automatic mission" with the last save...  I found this topic while wondering if posting it as a bug (if not already commented).

 Really, I would not have expected such a thing as "solving a puzzle" to allow a mission in the battlescape. In any case, it add interest to the game mechanics.

After a long time, I'm trying v2.5 and I find it VERY exciting. Congratulations to the developers.  ;D


Version: UFO AI 2.4-dev IA-32 3 Sep 2011 Win32 DEBUG

I started a campaign and fought against 2 taman + 2 spiders in my first mission. When I returned home, I noticed that I had 4 breathing apparatus available.

It seems an unnoticed bug. According to the blood spider authopsy, "the creature is a complex robot without any organic components". Being fully mechanical, it does not require a Breathing Apparatus to store "a gas mixture compressed into a liquid state" to survive in our "unbreathable atmosphere".

I'm sure that UFO AI coders are already aware that currently in v2.4, when clicking on an UFO Yard, the window that appears only provides the Destroy button. I miss some things that would improve player's decisions making & entertainment.

- First, the UFO Yard window should display its "Stored UFOs/Total Capacity" ratio, in the same way that it can be seen each time a mission is successfully completed and you have at least one available UFO yard (I'm reffering to the "UFO Storing/UFO Selling" window).

- It should also reflect the number of UFOs of each type that are stored in it, or maybe even the content that can be recovered by dissassembling each one. In both cases, it would provide an overview of your UFO recovery/dissassembly situation. And you could also wisely decide which UFO Yard do you prefer to destroy, in case you need to do that for strategy needs (for example, when needing another type of installation while having reached the limit - 3 per base).

- Further, imagine that you WANT to recover one specific UFO, but you have no free space on any of your operative UFO yards. Let's be realistic. Have you really to wait until you have money/time to inaugurate a brand new UFO Yard? Can't you throw one stored UFO away (even "not having time to sell it") to get some free space? Why not implementing the possibility of selecting&rejecting any not-really-valuable stored UFO to get the free space you want/expect to use very soon... Currently, if you store a UFO, you are condemned to disassemble if to get rid of it. For this reason, I find the UFO Yard's storage system excessively inflexible.

- Last, the UFO Yard window could also include a button to consecutively jump from one UFO Yard to the others, exactly in the same way you browse from consecutively from the main screen of any Base to the main screen to the others.


Feature Requests / Re: Indication of the difficulty level
« on: August 14, 2011, 03:07:36 pm »
Thanks, jerikojerk. I did not notice that.

FAQ / Re: A question about Snapshots (Nighty Builds)
« on: August 14, 2011, 03:05:35 pm »
it's safer to uninstall it, but it's not really needed though. the only things that might conflict are the settings stored in your home dir - but those are not included in the installer

Thank you for your answer, Mattn.

FAQ / A question about Snapshots (Nighty Builds)
« on: August 13, 2011, 05:29:26 pm »
Regarding the buils available at

Could anyone tell me if it is advisable to uninstall an outdated Nighty Build prior to the installation of a updated one, or if there is no problem on installing it directly, in a similar way to the "Win32 Development Binary Installer Links" that Mutton builds from time to time?

Thanks in advance.

Despite the "Center objects of the maps" button is helpful to locate points of interest around the globe, its use becames unnecesarily uncomfortable as soon as there are a good number of spotted/landed/crashed UFOs and/or built installations.

It would be very nice to add some more specific buttons (just in the same area of the geoscape panel) to exclusively center: 1) UFOs (spotted/landed/crashed), 2) Bases, and 3)  other installations (radars, SAM sites, UFO yards). Regarding 3), I'm not so sure if it would really worth including one button for each installation type.

I think the buttons I propose would provide a quite more versatile navegation around the geoscape screen.


FAQ / Re: Soldiers Stats_How do they work?
« on: August 01, 2011, 06:13:03 pm »
Weapon skill stats and accuracy contribute to weapon accuracy. I can't find the page with the relevant equations on, but rather than calculating a "to hit percentage", the game calculates a Gaussian distribution, and places the shots according to that. One of the bits of the equation is (weapon_skill + accuracy)/200, so a "perfect" shot requires a total of 200 points between the two

There are a buch of weapon tables here:

I wonder if the "Precision table" is still valid (last revision: "Correct at 2.2_Jan_11_2008"). Anyway, it can help you to compare weapons.

Check also the last one: "comprehensive weapon table of the development version". There, I assume that the columns "spread" and "crouch" refer to the accuracy when the soldier is standing up and crouching, respectively.

Discussion / Re: Autoresolve ideas
« on: July 27, 2011, 08:43:32 pm »
speaking of which - making alien fighters smarter might make sense too - so they don't fly into sams so easily, but then they'll be way too strong...

Well, they are not so dumb in 2.4... If you place two SAM sites that are very near one to each other, but not near enough to supperimpose their field of action, Fighters (not sure now if only also other UFOs) that approach to your base having the SAM sites in the middle, are clever enough to go through that "hole" of your defense line... Just considering the possibility of having smarter fighters patrolling the sky by pairs made me feel a bit worried...  ;)

In 2.4, I have also noticed that at least some UFOs tend to change their direction more often, so they are not as predictable as in previous builds. It's a nice improvement.

Bugs prior to release 2.4 / Bug: the (new) mission icon shifts
« on: July 22, 2011, 08:46:39 pm »
Reproducible bug.
Windows 7 Home Premium, 64-bit (Service Pack 1), NVIDIA GeForce GT 230M   
UFO: Alien Invasion 2.4-dev IA-32 jul 10 2011 Win32 DEBUG Build 1310245344

I attach a savegame with my dropship leaving the phalanx base to do its first mission that appeared in the game, a "landed OVNI" one located in the Asian Republic. You should keep a slow geoscape speed to not miss a detail. While the dropship is approaching, the "Landed OVNI" location changes (the icon shifts). Note that if the new location is remote ehough, it seems that the alert has disappeared, but the alert message remaing (top left corner of the geoscape screen).

In my first try  the icon shifted to USA. Anyway, the dropship continued its original path, reached the original location and I could start the mission. However, in the middle of playing the map, I suddenly returned to the geoscape screen (second bug). The second try I was able to complete the mission, despite even in Difficult Level fighting 5 aliens with plasma pistols just in the first mission seems a bit anomalous.

I reloaded the game very times. Sometimes the alert disapears (=the landed ovni leaves) before you reach it, sometimes you are able to reach it. The mission location always shifts but the mission icon (mission type) never changes.

Hope this info is enough.
I think it would be useful to edit the page "Where can I find the savegames, screenshots, config.cfg and ufoconsole.log?" ( It does not mention that Windows 7 places the savegames in C:\Users\<username>\AppData\Roaming\UFOAI/2.4-dev/base/save/

Feature Requests / Behaviour of the IR Googles
« on: July 22, 2011, 02:19:15 pm »
After thinking about this topic for a long time, I decided to write this post. This way, at least I’ll share my opinion with you.

I really like glass windows being broken by direct impacts (shots) and shock waves (explosions). However, it is quite odd that using IR goggles crashes the nearby window glasses. To be honest, I even find that non-intentional and unexpected shrill noise a bit annoying. Most important, it does not make sense at all, as infrared goggles and night-vision goggles does not emit but receive electromagnetic waves, so they absolutely can't damage anything. Apart from that, those low-energy waves can’t damage things (they could not go through thin walls also, indeed, but let’s consider that a compulsory “poetic license”).

However, while I’d vote to remove that google’s effect, I’d suggest to allow the intentional manual breakage of adjacent window glasses at the cost of 1-2 TUs each one (not being a coder, I just assume it could be coded in a similar way to opening doors).

What would contribute it to the game?
- It is realistic. Imagine a real combat: a soldier may break a window glass with the weapon butt/handle to clear the firing path (it is a nuisance, after all). Wouldn’t you want to emulate this real behaviour from time to time?
- Similarly to opening/closing doors, it wouldn’t require specific actor’s animations. The glass just breaks (image, sound) and that’s all.
- It is a tactical advantage. It seems that reaction fire does not work through any obstacle (walls, glazed windows, etc), which is fine. So to allow reaction fire through glazed windows, you should first destroy the glass. As an example, imagine a snipper wasting 12 TUs plus one bullet just to do that… I prefer creeping beside the window, break it with my weapon and wait to welcome any alien that happens to show up. As I already said, I don’t think IR googles should do that (I think it provides IR googles too much benefits, also).
- Last but not least: as any intentional interaction with maps, it would be quite amusing.

Feature Requests / Indication of the difficulty level
« on: July 22, 2011, 12:56:08 pm »
(Sorry if I am wrong) As far as I know, there is no way to check what difficulty level you are playing, neither in-game nor in saved games list. For example, I like to play various games "at the same time" (different difficulties, different strategies); sometimes I consider to continue playing an old savegame, but it is not so obvious to deduce what the difficulty was.

Maybe this info detail can be included somewhere: at the top of the "statistics page" that is accesible from the geoscape screen, on the top right corner of the geoscape screen, on the list of savegames... Just an idea. Difficulty level is an important information, isn't it?  ;)

V2.4 is becoming really attractive with the last releases. Good work!

Pages: [1]