project-navigation
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.


Topics - Rodmar

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
16
Bugs in stable version (2.5) / Range of Bloodspider's melee weapon
« on: October 26, 2015, 02:38:54 am »
Hello,
I don't know if this is a bug or a normal (or unavoidable) feature.
Twice so far at least, I've experienced spiders that successfully deliver damage whereas they are not adjacent to their target. They are on the next square as illustrated by the screenshot.

Is this okay because all the attacks are dealt at (Range+1) anyways?

However, I'm pretty sure that other attacks (such as those against civilians) are dealt at point blank.

17
Discussion / New national name lists
« on: October 20, 2015, 12:19:29 pm »
Hello,
I read on some TODO list that the team wishes to change the current name list into several nation-themed lists.
Could you explain what is the idea behind, and how to proceed?

As for me, on one hand, what seduced me in UFO:AI _is_ this diversity, this quasi-randomness in the "firstname-surname-face model" mix. I read this as the proof that the world has changed for real by the 2080s.

On the other hand, it's obviously too much sci-fi for 2084 (given it's only one generation from now, and the inertia of large populations). Perhaps for the 2180s?

So, please, inside of the new scheduled national-themed lists, keep a little of this diversity.
For instance, keep the firstname-surname randomness (e.g. mix a nepali firstname with a mandchu surname for an Asian Republic national).


I understand that this "firstname-surname-face model" mix determination would not be as simple as currently (i.e. generate three random numbers and read three entries), but some games have managed somewhat to implement some randomness through scripts.
See for instance the Warlords & Warlords Battlecry series (I can post a file as soon as I'm back to home).

The idea would be firstly to arbitrarily choose the percentile of "cross-nationals" in each nation.
Those percentiles would take into consideration the current situation, plus whatever population movement the war would have induced by the 2080s. They could also translate any xenophobic or isolationist national mindset, and the forseen social evolutions as well.

Example:

Nation1's actor name:
10% Nation1 Nation2
30% Nation1 Nation3
...
100% Nation1 Nation1

Nation1:
current list of firstnames (filtered to match "current" Nation1)
current list of surnames (filtered to match "current" Nation1)

etc.

This script would be read by the program as:
There's a 10% chance that human gets a firstname from Nation1 and a surname from Nation2, or the reverse.
Of the remainding 90%, there's 30% chance that human gets a firstname from Nation1 and a surname from Nation3, or the reverse.
Of the remaining 70%, there's 100% that human gets a firstname and a surname from Nation1.

If Nation1 is the Asian Republic,
Nation2 could be the Alliance, Nation3 could be the Commonwealth, and we could even get marginal Nation4 Russia and Nation5 North America, because of economic emigration.


The actors' faces could be assigned the same way

I think it would be a little work only. The name lists, if not already existing, would be written given current knowledge of the countries belonging to the future supernations.
The most difficult work would be to produce those percentiles so that the output looks both internally logical, and doesn't angry any player (well, if they depict a probable, even if sci-fi situation, they should be accepted; after all New Dehli was bombed and nobody said it was unlikely to happen).

18
Hello,

If/when all the maps are made 2084-style&technology compliant, there should be a few never-to-use-again models left aside.
In such distant days, I doubt that even in the most poor land, a 20th century truck may still be operational.

However, one of the backwaters area map could become an "old tech" conservation site, and even feature an eco-museum about 20th century. It would be like a tribute to all the modelers who contributed the game maps.
It could feature a house, a outdoor park for rusty machines, and a cluttered wreckage nearby.


19
Coding / What may the AI see?
« on: October 10, 2015, 12:28:27 am »
Hello,

I read some .lua files, and it looks like the actors (aliens, PHALANX, civilians, soldiers) only see each other, and think according to this shared (?) vision.

The syntax seems to be always:     ai.see("all", nameOfTeam)

May the AI see other items than team members?
May it see static, hand placed invisible actors? I'm thinking about the rescue zone, the exit of a transport or that of an UFO.
May it see dynamic items such as smoke/fire field, or a rendez-vous flare?
May it see (or rather, remember) past actions? Corpses, last seen enemies location, last wounded/shot locations, etc?

Also, by what value could the parameter "all" be replaced? ("self"?)

20
Feature Requests / [model]IR Googles look odd when dropped on the ground
« on: October 09, 2015, 10:54:34 pm »
IR Googles are displayed from the side, and are barely visible, as thin as they are. Moreover, it's not a very realistic orientation (they should fall flat).
They are displayed in the same orientation as in the UFOpaedia, and there isn't much room for another orientation.

21
Discussion / Feedback on Alien Bestiary and Alien Teams
« on: October 09, 2015, 10:04:21 pm »
Hello, I'm playing v2.5.

I read http://ufoai.org/wiki/Proposals/Alien_Bestiary, as well as the .ufo files about alien missions and alien teams.

Here's a feedback.

Teams are not damaged by a crash, and we fight in a ground mission the original team that was "intended" at alien mission launch. So we can discuss on original teams now.
Team in a given category (say, fighters) are random. For example, you may encounter a nearly full robotic team, and you may question what for a UFO crew is.
To speak about alien teams' consistency is to speak about alien bestiary role and diversity.
It's also to speak about what is an UFO's crew.

I mean:
Why Harvest missions with 10 robotic units?
Why a landed Corrupter with 4 or less units inside such a valuable asset in hostile territory?
Why a XVI mission with mostly mass killers?

Mixing what is written in the UFOpaedia and in the Alien Bestiary section with some feedback, I end with:

  • The various subsystems and roles aboard an UFO seem to be:
    piloting, navigation, engine & energy, weapons & targeting, plus ground mission related roles.
    Perhaps, a psi-communication with the fleet, but we don't know, if the com is collective or not.
  • Ortnoks are like brutes. They don't appear to have any specialist role. I read this as: Ortnok can only be fighters, and heavy handlers. The fact they can man a craft's ordinance is even questionable.
    As crewmen: they shouldn't be in a craft not scheduled to land, or only as gunners (if they are skilled enough for that, possibly when the crew is important enough).
  • Shevaars are fast and coordinated, and they are able to be specialists. As fighters, they are used as scouts, snipers, and "ninjas".
    As crewmen, they can be at any post. It's only said that, in presence of Tamans, a Taman would be in command of the craft.
  • Tamans are frail and smarter (even in a few number): it's probable that they are navigators, commanders, scientists, and pilots, when other species are also present.
  • Bloodspiders (BS) are robotic biomass gatherers, as explained. They are not very suited for combat, and the general tactic is to have fighters that neutralize or kill humans in order for the spiders to collect their biomaterial. They look also small on the Containment screen and in the Battlescape. As small as dogs. That means that they would mostly "bite" at the legs, and that they take little room in a large UFO.
    - If possible with the Battlescape engine, BS would deal injuries only to the legs (after all, a non Combat model would try and wound foots and legs so that a human would fall down and become an easy prey).
    - If the AI allow to discriminate between alien unit types, civilians would be priority targets for BS (currently, it's PHALANX), and they would shun the soldiers.
  • Combat Bloodspiders (CBS) are said to be upgraded spiders, in a recent attempt to counter the PHALANX rising opposition. They are like makeshift close combat robots with added plating.
    Now, there are two ways to see this makeshift upgrade: either
    -- the Combat version replace the original version in all the missions (at a given Alien Interest score), as it seems the case currently, or
    -- the Combat version is only a way to deploy clumsy robotic CQ fighters when the situation demands it.
    I'd be for the latter, because the spider form is in no way the better form to move and be sturdy enough. The joints are likely to be twisted at first blast, etc.
    As a consequence, BS should stay the main biomass gatherer all through the campaign. CBS should be deployed only when CQ defense is needed, i.e. inside or around crashed/landed craft.
    Perhaps, to be more clear, CBS should be more protected, more heavy, and slower. They should be made quite unfit for biomass gathering anymore. Also, they would have new sensors and aggressive (rushing) tactics.

    - Also, it seems that currently, a CBS only have one attack mode, a bite. It can bite twice if near to its target (?). It could have a Frenzy attack mode too, taking nearly all its TUs away, and resulting in a massive gore against a non armored target (like a frenzy war dog). Not be closed by a CBS would become more a necessity.
    - A second enhancement could be that the CBS have a chance to be trapped with a Plasma grenade. It could suicide attack, especially if close to a group of humans (if the AI may understand this), or simply explode upon death: another obvious reason to deal with it from afar.
  • Hovernets (HN) are scouts, as said. They are the eyes and the ears (and beyond) of the Aliens. They should be present in any mission. Should they really hunt the civilians for the spiders? Their plasma weapon could be as powerful as a plasma pistol, they would have 360° sectoral vision, night vision and see through smoke (like the firemen with IR scopes). They should be more cautious and less aggressive in most situations (looking after a cover/to be hidden at the end of their turn).
  • Combat Hovernets (CHN) are combat units, and could be totally different from the Hovernets, as it's said. For now, they look like Hovernets. I'd think that, the same way Combat Bloodspiders shouldn't replace all the Bloodspiders in all the late-game missions, Combat Hovernet shouldn't replace all the Hovernets. The former are scouts, while the other are fighters. Where the CBS is merely an (hastily made) upgrade, CHN only copies the locomotion system, and the general frame/shape of their cousin, but it's intended from scratch as being  a fast, low cost, front line hunter-killer, or an open field suppressor.
    CHNs would be less able as scouts, and possibly slower too. They would be (they are) more lethal. They start being deployed at a given Alien Interest score, when the Aliens are fed up to register such losses in biological units.
More on the robotic units: they are small, and that mean easily stored in a UFO.
If the normal version are made a little less dangerous, it'll be of little consequence to add more of them on the Battlescape.

Now on the missions:

  • Scout UFO:
    Mission : Aerial (high altitude) recon, Ground (low alitude) recon

    - It's no meant to land: no fighters aboard.
    - For some missions (Ground recon), it may deploy and retrieve scout Hovernets that remotely scout a given area under crew's supervision.
    At a given Alien Interest, a "crash life-buoy" may be added in form of one or two CHN, stored just in case.

    Crew: 1 pilot, 1 nav, 1 tech for detection & power/engines, possibly 2 techs more for robot management and remote control.
    Life-buoy: 1 HN + 1 CHN.
    Ground scouting: 2-4 additional HNs.

    UFO crashed: the scouts are deployed on the map, the Combat Hovernet, the pilot and the nav are near the wreck or inside some building nearby, the techs are more exposed.

Do you see where I come?

  • Fighter UFO:
    Mission: same as Scout UFO, plus Escort/Air Patrol
    Though I once retrieved a 100% healthy fighter (not crashed) because it attacked a PHALANX base! Did it land?

    Also, the fighter could deploy and retrieve CHNs for early-game Terror missions. It would be a Hovernet-only Battlescape mission, with scout and fighter robots altogether, and no UFO as a prize (it'd remain hidden all the time).

    Crew: same as scout, plus 1 gunner.
    Life-buoy: could be more important: 2 CHNs+ 1 HN.
    "Ground" team: HNs & CHNs

  • Harvester UFO:
    The first UFO deemed to land.
    Missions: (possibly) Ground recon, Harvest, Terror, Base Attack
    Bloodspiders should be reserved to Harvest and Terror Attack.
    At a given Alien Interest, CBSs would be also deployed.

    Crew: 2 pilots, 1 nav: most of the time still on board. 1 gunner + 1-2 tech
    CQ Defense Team: No "life-buoy" here, as the craft is deemed to land, but a CQ defense team made of:
    1 fighter (Taman/Shevaar/Ortnok), 1 HN and 1 CBS in the first floor, 1 CBS in the second floor.
    Harvest team: (deployed on the map) 2-4 HN, 2-6 BS, 1-2 fighters and later, some CHN and CBS more.
    Terror & Base Attack teams: less or no BS, more fighters, and more CHN. The Harvester would be more like an armed transport.
  • and so one with the Corrupter, the Gunboat, etc.
So, the crew would become bigger (much bigger) than they currently are.
Remember that the more realistic setting would rather correspond the Difficult setting.
Also, robot units take no room inside an UFO. Adding more of them is just a question of difficulty balance, of fun (slug fest), and of thrill (they are everywhere).

TL;DR

Currently alien teams aboard UFO are only "scouts", "workers", and "fighters".
Secondly, for each such category, the teams appear to be totally random (for a given "Taman_HeavyShevaar...." setting), except that for some Alien Interest, some species are not allowed yet.
I propose to reflect on the real purpose and layout of a given UFO, together with its current mission.
I think it would be best if the current team object is replaced by a team_crew/team_defence/team_mission structure, i.e. who's necessary to actually man and fly the UFO, who may be useful in case of landing and/or crash, and who's needed for the current mission to be carried over: Scouting, Aerial Interception, Harvest, Terror, XVI, Base Attack.

Given that:
- Ortnoks shouldn't be specialists, i.e. normal crewmen.
- Hovernets should remain the only (real) robotic scouts all throughout the game.
- Bloodspiders should remain the only biomass harvesters all throughout the game, seconded by Ortnoks heavy handlers (to handle full bodies).
- Combat BS would be CQ last ditch defenders, and terrorist units.
- Combat HN would be the main robotic front line, as for now, a role normal Hovernets would fulfill only in last resort.

22
Perhaps, all of this is vain because Alien Base missions can't be handled differently from the usual ground missions, but still...
(Also don't read this if you never played an Alien Base mission, when a PHALANX squad assault an Alien ground base on the Earth)

Current state (v2.5):

Pre-mission text:
Mission text says that our squad must secure the base so that our scientist may come and study it.

Post-mision text:
We are informed by a memo that a PSI apparatus was found and collected, and shall be researched asap.
Let's recall that this apparatus is the size of a X-ray installation in nowadays hospital.

Outcome:
The usual gear carried by the dead aliens. Let's hope there aren't robotic units too many.
On subsequent Alien base mission, nothing more (I didn't search the PSI, though).

Criticism / Ideas (v2.5):

  • The mission organization is not clearly explained, especially the time factor:
    • it starts as a normal mission (one transport), then we learn that our scientists are hidding somewhere, or are they 4 of them still on the surface in the transport?
    • after the base is secure, it seems that the scientists (helped by the squad?) have time enough to visit the base, uninstall the apparatus and haul it back to the transport, or to the second transport?
    • then, it would remain nothing more valuable in the base, whereas we dismantle UFOs for materials and components (thus money), or is it that the base must be destroyed in fear of a retaliation mission by the Aliens?
  • An Alien base this size should be like a treasure room:
    • as said in 1/, there should be more to spoil, the Supply ship, at least. I mean, the value of several Supply ships' cargo!
    • I understand however that one such base could severely affect the game's economy. But shouldn't a taken base be the jackpot of the month?
    • why the PSI apparatus alone? There are many sections in an Alien base that seem worth a study: power plant, labs, ... Even if we don't get the opportunity to dismantle a new apparatus on each subsequent base mission, we could receive memo that would materialize the fact our scientists returned to an Alien base.
  • Intellectual frustration!
    • on behalf on 2/, the map is so beautiful that I can't help being frustrated by not knowing what are all those Alien base installations. I'm eager for "tons" of memos (or merely addenda to the current memos/research reports) and some more research.
      I believe there is much to write for the writers.
  • There's an opportunity for more challenge: Immediate retaliation!
    • there are already retaliation missions, merely aerial patrols and PHALANX base attacks.
    • on a random basis, or on every few missions, a surprise mission could be started at once before the squad (and scientists) get a chance to exit the Alien base.
    • that would mean a chance for more outcome (spoiled gear and an UFO).
    • this mission's setting could be: same map, PHALANX survivors in the main hall, the PSI room and the Hangar, or whatsoever, a civilian scientist team in the PSI room and around (i.e. not endangered at first, but could they breath in there?),
      all the retaliation team in the entry shaft and the two adjacent spaces (i.e. the Entrance).
    • the UFO would be an armed shuttle, I mean a Harvester, or a Corrupter, full with a soldier team (on top of the current Alien missions).

Suggestions:

Time factor

Either it should be more clear that we are very pressed on by the time: we have 30 minutes or so to have a look and bring the wounded up back to the transport.
"The pilot informs us that a heavy UFO is on its way. We MUST evacuate at once." OR
"Something got wrong, the base is likely to blow up SOON." (no, it can't: it would mean a nuclear blast)
On each subsequent base mission, we could have the opportunity to gain another memo/tech.

Or, we may take several days to retrieve the UFO (or to dismantle it on site), to understand the functioning of the base facilities (we know how to produce alien weapons by the way), to bring more employees on site, etc.

General storage room
  • a memo about the statistics of sampled cargo.
  • a new tech research to enlarge the capacity of our own Storage building (e.g. 10000 -> 15000 units?).
    That could mean for some bases, one Storage less, and one more Defence room or Hangar.

Labs
  • a memo to confirm what we discovered aboard the Harvesters and the Corrupters, and also to validate some autopsy researches (we see clearly an Alien breathing apparatus).
  • a new tech research to enhance our own implant tech (efficiency) or hospital healing rate.
  • a new research to discover that the Alien are working on a new anti-human gas.

Air conditioning (?) system
  • a memo on the purpose of those fans, and the exact analysis of the various exo-atmospheres.
  • a new tech research to upgrade our gas grenades.

Power plant

  • a memo about how the Alien store antimatter when not used as a fuel.
  • a new tech research to enlarge the capacity of our own AM Storage.
I assume that the PP is the "green storage" room, which is odd because AM takes no room!

Tanks room
  • a memo! (what's this? Biomass, food, XIV?)


Main hall

  • a memo about what are all these stations (flight/landing controllers?).

General
  • a memo about the general purpose of such a base.
  • a memo about the difference between alien on-board detection/nav/CEM and all these in-base equipment.
  • a new research on the origins: do we find more information, orbital positions, stellar maps, etc?


So... there's maybe a lot to write and a lot to discuss before!

The screenshots recall some of the places of interest the different base layouts may host.

23
Bugs in stable version (2.5) / [model] Corrupter, landed: missing textures
« on: September 30, 2015, 08:34:03 pm »
v2.5
map: Snow
mission: Corrupter landed / XIV

Hello,

At night, on map level 2, we can see that some external wall textures are lacking, so that we see inside of the UFO.
They are laking all around the wing-like lateral frames save for the inner, side wall (nearest to the central hull), seemingly the shape of  narrow rectangles.


First screenshot is a rear view of a single wing.
Second screenshot is a side, outer view of a single wing.
Third screenshot is a front view with both wings.

24
Discussion / Do agonizing aliens count on the kill stats?
« on: September 25, 2015, 12:12:16 am »
Hello,

I was wondering if any alien who die from wounds is counted as a kill in the stats and experience gain of the soldier who wounded him?
This question raised several more.

  • When an alien get wounded and die at the beginning of the next or subsequent turns, does it count? Should it count?
  • When an alien get several wounds by several soldiers, who should be credited the kill?
  • When an alien die from walking in a lethal field (IC as for now), or from wounds suffered in such a field, is the soldier who set the field credited the kill? Should he be?
  • When an alien is (instantly, not through bleeding) stunned does it count as a kill? Should it count, if we consider that a neutralized alien is a good one too?

Hence the suggestion, if possible:
  • To attach a soldier Id to any sustained wound (wounds would get an "owner").
  • Then if the alien dies from this wound, the soldier gets credited.
  • If several wounds are sustained, the most serious one is deemed to be the fatal one, and the corresponding soldier gets credited.
  • To attach a soldier Id to any damage field (and then a wound caused by this field).
    In case fields are not cumulative or the owner can't be tracked when several IC are set on the same squares, the last soldier to put on a field is the "owner".





This suggestions keep with the current rule that the last one to shoot is the killer (even if the target was largely softened by other soldiers).


About question 4, is it fair to be credited a kill when a soldier spends 3 full turns and unload a laser pistol on a stunned Ortnok? That this "target practice" does rise the Close Combat skill like any successful hit (even if at point blank...) is a thing, but the extra experience from the kill? (Given that he who stunned the alien only got one successful hit)

  • Let's credit a stunning hit as a killing hit (as far as experience gain and promotion is concerned).
  • Also, killing a stunned alien doesn't count as a kill anymore (only as a hit).

The fact that a stunned alien could awake or be awaken shouldn't alter the proposal: if killed or stunned thereafter, it would count a second time, etc. Or, are the chances that a player would abuse this system for real?

25
Feature Requests / [Base map] A few suggestions
« on: September 22, 2015, 07:03:20 pm »
Hello,
After a few base defence missions, I've ended in spotting some little potential upgrades.

1/ Transport Hangar:

The tower safety cam is really, really in the mid of thin air. Although the other safety cams too are attached to nothing, this one could be perhaps moved toward the building a bit?

2/ Workshops:

Is there a mean to move this crate furniture, so that the three squares right to it (or at least the nearest one) are made walkable (or rather crouch-able), without loosing the corner square on the other side?

3/ Hospital:

The thin wall causes the beds to encroach on free squares, resulting in not necessary added UT cost. Any solution?


 

26
Feature Requests / [UFO model] A Corrupter UFO with landing pods?
« on: September 22, 2015, 06:48:28 pm »
v2.5

If the Corrupter UFO would have small landing pods, they could be barely seen on the Battlescape, and only there so that the UFO hull is risen a bit above the ground.

As a result, soldiers could crouch next to the hull to have a little more cover when they approach the entrance from the bow. It would be as handy as with the Harvester on one special map (suburbs?) when it's on a heigh, and the PHALANX approach it from "below".

27
Bugs in stable version (2.5) / [battlescape] Fire fields in the air
« on: September 22, 2015, 06:40:57 pm »
v2.5
Hydroelectric Dam

An IC rocket fired at the building on the dam generates some fire fields in "the air".

If flying objects could well be taken in the IC blast, and burnt, those fire fields shouldn't remain on the next turns, of course.

Is there any way to solve this very minor problem?

To check the "no ground" status of every square in the blast radius?
Or is this map-dependent?

28
Hello,
I post here because this is not a feature request, and is more about small localization "errors".
I don't know if those are still true in v2.6.

1/ Excellent resolution & Excellent soldier:

Context:
It seems that the same reference is used to qualify a soldier's attribute in the 70+, and the highest texture resolution.
More precisely, the Advanced Video Options uses the references #1807 "Low" to #1812 "Extreme" to select the resolution.
The soldier's stats windows use the references #2852 "Poor" to #2861 "Superhuman" to qualify soldier's attributes and skills.
What happens is that between #2858 "Highly Proficient" (60s) and #2859 "Outstanding" (80s?), the same #1811 "Excellent" reference is used for the attributes and skills in the 70s.

Concern:
In some languages (e.g. in French), the resolution settings (poor, ..., excellent, extreme) are made agree with the noun "resolution" which is a feminine, whereas the attributes' qualifiers remain in the masculine.

Suggestion:
- create a new reference (duplicate the #1811 "Excellent") to use with the skills in the 70s, should they need this.

29
Bugs in stable version (2.5) / Some game corruptions or non ascertained bugs
« on: September 20, 2015, 09:06:48 pm »
Hello,
Here are some examples of what happens on my system. I report them in case some of the devs, or any skilled forum user could spot on a flaw in a given ufo:ai sub-system.
Alas, I couldn't reproduce them so far, or I miss one of the conditions that trigger the "corruption". It's why I don't report them as ascertained bugs.

It's true that I save and reload "a lot" inside the same game session, but each time, saving the game, closing and restarting the program, and reloading the saved game cancels the corruption, so I'd think it's not a matter of a corrupted saved game. Perhaps some kind of overflow?

1/ The rocket "bugs":

Sometimes, when starting a mission with some soldiers overloaded (weight in yellow), it looks like dropping a rocket or a grenade (for GL) from the hand is not the same as dropping it from the belt/holster/backpack. This results in having two stacks of the same item on the ground. I experienced this with HE and IC rockets, and HE grenades.
Sometimes, dropping a rocket stored horizontally in the belt would result in this rocket crossing items already on the ground. This horizontal rocket is stackable. If you take it again and drag it around, you may have it vertical.

Taking them back and dropping them again is doesn't change anything. Those items are still functional.

30
Discussion / [Alien Base] Odd sound when walking on a tile
« on: September 20, 2015, 07:58:21 pm »
Hello,
Is it wanted that walking on some glass-like tiles in Alien Map, that originate from a peculiar device in the main hall (e.g.), generates an odd, "aqueous" sound?

Is it a kind of alarm system?

 (v2.5)

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4