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 - H-Hour

Pages: 1 ... 23 24 [25] 26 27 ... 129
Discussion / Re: UFO: AI nominated for IndieDB's game of the year
« on: December 18, 2012, 12:24:35 am »
This is another reminder for anyone who may have missed it. THere are only three days left to vote for UFO: Alien Invasion in IndieDB's Indie of the Year competition. To vote, check out the Top 100. You'll find us under Turn Based Strategy with a big VOTE link to click on.

I've not had much time to promote this so spread the word if you can.

Discussion / Re: Again on reaction fire
« on: December 18, 2012, 12:11:26 am »
Two ideas.

1. I know from my tests before that any weapon will do 1 damage even if an alien resistance is more than the damage. So perhaps it's just hitting those very tiny thresholds of 1-2 stun damage.

2. When aliens are "hurt" at the start of the map, are they given any stun damage?

Discussion / Re: UFO:AI needs you. Yes, you.
« on: December 15, 2012, 01:19:26 pm »
Have you tried the nightly builds for 2.5 with the Radiant installer on our download page? Check under the "Development (latest)" section.

Bugs in stable version (2.5) / Re: Smoke grenades rape framerate
« on: December 14, 2012, 04:05:44 pm »
Hehe, ok. Well I'm on a "slow machine", and some people don't seem to have the problems, so I just assumed. I've extended the TODO item for 2.5 to be clear that there are multiple issues that need to be addressed.

Bugs prior to release 2.4 / Re: Crashing to desktop
« on: December 14, 2012, 11:20:42 am »
How to make useful bug reports.

Bugs in stable version (2.5) / Re: Smoke grenades rape framerate
« on: December 13, 2012, 11:41:41 pm »
It's a known issue but only effects slower machines (mine included). There are other issues with that particle, not just the physics one, so it will have to be looked at and tweaked before 2.5 goes out. The one-word change is good for performance, but there are advantages to having the smoke particle use physics. For that reason, another solution might be found. The file is just a temporary measure you can use until a fix is made.

Bugs in stable version (2.5) / Re: Smoke grenades rape framerate
« on: December 13, 2012, 08:27:59 pm »
There is a fix attached to this post.

Discussion / Re: Feedback and impressions after 1 campaign
« on: December 13, 2012, 05:11:32 pm »
I love to build Radar-towers on small islands or outer edges of land masses. Is there any possibility to show me in a red/green highlighted way where I can build and where I can't? Or at least make it so that if you choose "build structure" that does not become unselected until you actually build it or press "Esc". That way I could at least fast click on an area to see if I can build there. right now I have to select Build structure, choose the structure and try out a place and if it fails do it all again.

I'm not sure, but the nations outline may help here.

Is the accuracy shown for a shot the actual probability used by the game?

No, it's just an estimate and is often wrong. The game actually sends the projectiles downrange and sees what hits, I believe.

Bugs in stable version (2.5) / Re: Map Fails to Load
« on: December 13, 2012, 10:52:33 am »
I believe this was a bug that was introduced and fixed over the last 24 hours. Try downloading a new nightly.

Artwork / Re: Alien bestiary
« on: December 13, 2012, 12:18:45 am »
@maackey: the main reason we have the damage weights (spray, light, medium, heavy, etc.) is to be able to model armour. The SMG, for instance, uses normal_light, and can be effective on Tamans early in the game. But as soon as armour is introduced it becomes pretty obsolete, because armour's protection against normal_light drastically reduces the damage potential. Having separate damage weights allows us to model the effectiveness of armour differently for different weapons. Assault rifles (normal_medium) get a lot weaker against armour, but the sniper rifle (normal_heavy) still packs a powerful punch. If we tried to do this just with higher damage values, we'd end up under-powering or over-powering weapons in the distribution.

As I said, I'm not entirely happy with the damage weights system, but I'm not in any position to change it at this time. I've also just finished a pretty comprehensive rebalancing of the weapons. I'm interested in riding the system we've got for a while and seeing how it plays out.

Personally I like the idea of modelling more abstract weapon parameters which define the interaction with armour and the wounding process, but I'm only half-way through my campaign with the new weapon balance and I'm really happy with the weapon balance we've got (pre-Needler, though, this could get rough!). Maybe the system does work, even if it doesn't appear as elegant under the hood, and I'm not going to beg a coder to rewrite a system that works unless I'm really convinced the benefits will be worth taking their time away from other features.

Design / Re: What is the general "2084 life on earth" model under UFOAI?
« on: December 12, 2012, 03:55:05 pm »
The wiki is no longer used for translation and texts may be out of date. To find current texts in the game, you should look in /base/ufos/msgids/.

Artwork / Re: Alien bestiary
« on: December 12, 2012, 11:23:25 am »
It's not as difficult to properly balance the existing weapons as it appears at first. Once you dive into it, you will realise that a lot of damage weights have only one or two weapons associated with them, so you can have pretty fine control. Adding new weapon concepts is difficult, though, without adding new damage weights (this was done for the Encased Plasma Ammo).

I have toyed with the idea of a new damage model as well. But I'm not yet convinced that it is actually simpler for the player -- what seems simpler from a conceptual point of view (ie - the developer) is not necessarily simpler for the player. If I have to calculate damage by analysing an armour penetration rating, mass, velocity or other elements, that may just be more ambiguous than a simple damage number. I'm not yet sure about this, though, and my primary concern was to expand the ability to better model a weapon's interaction with armour.

The real problem we face with the current implementation is that the player is not given information on the real damage weights protection/resistance for armour and aliens. So he's unable to make a simple addition/subtraction comparison with a weapon. Including this information as the result of an autopsy would be a nice incentive for completing autopsy research, and the same information should be made available upon researching alien armour.

Bugs in stable version (2.5) / Re: Soldier stuck in map...
« on: December 11, 2012, 09:54:43 pm »
I'm not sure if RF will check both hands, so if you're holding a gun in the other it might not get activated.

Discussion / Re: UFO: AI nominated for IndieDB's game of the year
« on: December 11, 2012, 11:49:43 am »
In case some people don't read the news on the front page, we made it into the Top 100. We'll now face the other 99 in a finals round for the top spots. Thanks to those who have voted. Please go and vote again in the finals.

Mapping / Re: Solar plant RMA map 2.0
« on: December 10, 2012, 09:33:59 pm »
Are there light stripes visible between the tiles for you?

I think I did notice that. Need some lightclips?

Pages: 1 ... 23 24 [25] 26 27 ... 129