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 - stevenjackson

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6
Feature Requests / Re: New missions proposals
« on: June 10, 2008, 03:53:33 pm »

It would be good to have abit of variation on the old kill all the aliens.

I like the "get specific item back to the dropship".  you could have a few variations on that one.


FAQ / Re: How to relax the civilian death limit
« on: June 10, 2008, 03:49:57 pm »

2.2.1 doesn't have a civilian death limit, so it should rectify your issue.  Civilian deaths now affect the satisfaction of the region and you have to keep above the percentage otherwise you loose.


Coding / Re: Offsite Installation development
« on: June 08, 2008, 12:13:52 pm »

with regard to alien bases it depends on how we are going to handle them.

If they  will be fairly simple then this struct could possibly cater for them.  In which case it may need the employee array of structs added (or however we handle aliens).

If we need to keep track of buildings and much it may be better to use a version of the base struct?

Is there any doco around on what we want for alien bases?


Discussion / Re: Applying patches from the tracker?
« on: June 07, 2008, 11:46:24 pm »

My main computer is a mac.  I found it much easier to get compiling working on the mac than in windows.

Other than 2.2 as there is a problem with library conflicts in leopard.

If you get fink its fairly straight forward.


Discussion / Re: Applying patches from the tracker?
« on: June 06, 2008, 11:58:34 am »

It sounds more like you want a more recent copy of ufo than actually needing to apply patches.

There are several options:

1) get the latest source from subversion for the 2.2 branch and compile.

This will give you basically 2.2.1 plus any other bug fixes and such.

2) download one of the prebuilt trunk releases.  This will be buggy but will give you some of the latest features

3) get the latest source from subversion for trunk and compile.

This will give you the cutting edge changes (including all accepted patches) but wont always work and will sometimes be broken.


Discussion / Re: Greater control over interceptors?
« on: June 06, 2008, 09:35:38 am »

But its not a first person air shooter.  That would we a significant deviation from the current game design.

I must admit i had the feeling of randomness in the air to air encounters despite the fact that there is actually non random stuff going on.

Without some kind of feedback on how your craft went other than success or failure it can be dificult to know whats going on.  It would be good to eventually have some feedback from air to air combat, perhaps something similar to the original xom (but not the same) with some minor control over the battle.  More like attack, hold, withdraw type stuff.


Coding / Offsite Installation development
« on: June 06, 2008, 09:26:24 am »
Hi All

I'm thinking of developing this todo item, seems like it would be interesting.  So i was thinking about what would be involved and as a start came up with this basic (very rough) struct of offsite installations in general.

Just wanted to see what peoples thoughts were.

This will hold the data for any type of installation.  The presumed planned ones that i have included are Sam sites, ufo yard and radar facility.

Code: [Select]
/** @brief A installation with all it's data */
typedef struct installation_s {
int idx; /**< Self link. Index in the global installation-list. */
char name[MAX_VAR]; /**< Name of the installation */

installationType_t installationType; /** type of installation.  Radar, Sam Site or UFO Yard **/

qboolean founded; /**< already founded? */
vec3_t pos; /**< pos on geoscape */

/** All ufo aircraft in this installation.  This used for UFO Yards. **/
aircraft_t aircraft[MAX_AIRCRAFT];
int numAircraftInBase; /**< How many aircraft are in this installation. */

capacities_t aircraftCapacitiy; /**< Capacity of UFO Yard. */

installationStatus_t installationStatus; /**< the current installation status */

float alienInterest; /**< How much aliens know this installation (and may attack it) */

radar_t radar;

baseWeapon_t batteries[MAX_INSTALLATION_BATTERIES]; /**< Missile/Laser batteries assigned to this installation.  For Sam Sites Only.  */
int numBatteries;

int installationDamage; /**< Hit points of base */

} installation_t;


Discussion / Re: Do we need variability in ininital soldier stats?
« on: June 05, 2008, 01:03:44 pm »

I understand that, i just dont agree with it :)


Discussion / Re: Do we need variability in ininital soldier stats?
« on: June 05, 2008, 12:34:32 pm »

The suggested system seems fine to me.  I'm just talking about what stats your soldiers initially get.  Generally they are mediocre which is fine.

I'm just sugesting say each soldier starts with all round mediocre skills and you use the above system you mentioned to improve him.

So for instance say you gen a randomly generaed soldier with:

str: 18 sp: 23 acc: 20 mind: 30 close: 21 hw: 15 ass-weap: 23 sniper: 15 expl: 19

so all those skills added up is 184

So you just divide that eveny instead and thats what each soldier gets for instance :

str: 20 sp: 20 acc: 20 mind: 20 close: 20 hw: 20 ass-weap: 20 sniper: 20 expl: 20

So you end up with this for all soldiers that start out.

Obviously my calcs above are simplistic and wouldn't exactly reflect the reality.  More likely you just give each stat the same experience in the new system.

The improvement system stays the same its just the initial stats.



Discussion / Do we need variability in ininital soldier stats?
« on: June 05, 2008, 01:33:37 am »

I sometimes find the initial stats for soldiers is abit useless.  So that the team i start with isn't quite what i wanted.

Do we need to have variability in soldiers initial stats? maybe they could all start with the same basic stats and we could mould them through combat as we wished.

My reasoning is that since this is a elite alien fighting organisation we would be given people with all round skills sent by other nations.


Artwork / Re: Need a modeler?
« on: June 05, 2008, 01:28:59 am »

I think its only the human weapons winter mentioned not needing more of.

I think we could do with a few new alien weapons? :)


Discussion / Re: Should pilots exist in the game
« on: June 04, 2008, 11:19:18 pm »

Sorry, you didn't cause any confusion.
You were clear in saying it was tactical combat.

I just misread your post.


Discussion / Re: Should pilots exist in the game
« on: June 04, 2008, 01:51:43 pm »

Are we thinking pilots are always deployed with soliders in all tac missions?

I would suggest pilots only come out to play in tac missions when the ship is damaged.


Discussion / Re: Should pilots exist in the game
« on: June 04, 2008, 11:39:44 am »

Sorry guys.

Now that i have actually reread the posts properly...

The pilots main effect should be in air combat.

I dont think they really should participate in tactical combat at all, but having hard coded stats for tactical combat (low stats) is probably a decent idea.


Discussion / Re: Should pilots exist in the game
« on: June 04, 2008, 10:58:59 am »

Heh, i think i misunderstood.

By combat i meant of the air to air type :)


Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6