Messages

16

Discussion / Re: Money again: Impossible to pay for 3 bases on hard difficulty?

« on: January 10, 2010, 03:47:35 am »

Hello Viento and all...

in response to the ruinious funding mechanism recently implemented few months ago... I am currently "fudging" along... in easy mode, trying to out think the base construction costs.

in old revisions (ver 2.3) that I played, I was able to build 6 bases,  using this scheme.

1 or 2 base is "maximum" operations  that is, handle 50 scientists, 30 workers, between 8 to 20 soldiers, alien containment, missle defense, hangars, etcetera... all lumped and shared together (in two bases).

the other 4 bases serves as "minimum" operations. each contains one of those building ... storage, command, radar, powerplant, defenses, maybe a single hangar, living quarter (necessary to defend against cleverly !@#$ass aliens). I don't place dropships in minimum operating bases. Of the soldiers, I rotate soldiers and should not contain more than six soldier in one minimum bases.

This schema allows me to establish optimum radar coverage, transporting injured (result of alien attacking) or rotating soldiers to the maximum using transport screen.

So compounding to this is the dev's surprises in their WIP's. Example the laser defenses. The appearance of new base building might restrict choices (based on fundings) between upgrading your bases and deploying new bases trying to cover the globe with radars.

So I feel that in a way dev's are not finished with the surprises and predict balance or mod's to occurr on funding mechanisms.

I had wondered on making a singular building variant; a combined 'half' of command & 'half' of living-quarter mod. For sake of this post, calling this building temporarily "subcommand".

This is at 2/3 cost of total (command and living-quarter) cost. Somehow restrict "subcommand" support capacity to four command-required buildings (I would pick radar, one defense, power unit and one extra). And perhaps make this building researchable after alien computer technology is researched.

Is always easier to fantasize than do the hardwork.

Roy

17

Discussion / Re: Coilgun best weapon in Close Quarter Combat - human cqc weapon?

« on: December 31, 2009, 12:50:29 am »

Hello,

I believe that is the purpose of modding, and is what I was trying to do (experimenting with adding a new grenade launcher ammo) and I had partial success that resulted in [what i call] 'not working ammo'. This experimentation exposed modding attempt to be complex. 

I initated a post in forum in modding section asking for information, because I could not find information nor locate any shared tidbits on the wiki or other forums in relation to modding the scripts.

Later I killed the post promptly, because the replies is starting to become insulting. 

Apparently Dev's are busy and focus is still on the development of 2.3. 

Toodles.

Roy

18

Design / Re: CURRENT STORYLINE -- SPOILERS!

« on: December 19, 2009, 08:03:47 pm »

...  regardless of IF,  that commentary was a joke. 

Roy

19

Discussion / Re: Applying patches from the tracker?

« on: December 19, 2009, 01:25:00 am »

Hello,

Mystery solved.  Smart SVN version 6.0  does not have the function.  however version 6.5 does, and function is deliberately disabled in foundation version (which is the free version). You gotta have to pay and upgrade to professional version.

Because of this, I am uninstalling the Smart SVN and going on with Tortoise SVN.

Alerting future readers know of this issue.

Roy

20

Design / Re: CURRENT STORYLINE -- SPOILERS!

« on: December 19, 2009, 01:01:26 am »

if we are going to have a gravity gun in ufo-ai, the ammunition problem would not arise though. certainly the preferred human ammunition for such guns should be apples, because this is how humans discovered gravity. and an apple accelerated to a high speed can be extremely dangerous.

What, we got grav guns!!!  where is it??? We need start growing apple trees.. think alien don't care if they lobbed at with crabapples. 

Oh gosh, am ROFL'ing at my commentary...

Roy

21

Tactics / Re: Bases placement and type

« on: December 19, 2009, 12:57:34 am »

most of what i produce in the game has 'made in hong kong' label on it,

   my russian base is barely close to asian republic border. If you used the political overlay in geoscape, and see the North-eastern hump, (east of the lake) That is where I placed my second base.

However did appreciate the hong kong comment(humor)... Is always finding "asian made" products in America, oddly off  of the American technology. I am consulting the map and find the geographical location and experiment a test base there! Wait a minute, realized first base (heavy research) is in United America... and  mfg base in asian/russia area... hmm. 

thinking along this lines...
General: 'dang, we are following the 1990-2000 economic history...  those base builders contractors should be told we are in the 2080's!!'

Roy

22

Discussion / Re: Applying patches from the tracker?

« on: December 18, 2009, 10:09:37 am »

Hello Kildor,

actually I was asking on how to apply patch ... not matter If if it was mine or from somewhere else.   But like I learned, is part of SVN software.  So...  will be working on this "mystery" this weekend.

Roy

23

Bugs prior to release 2.3 / Re: Reaction fire - a question because I don't understand it

« on: December 18, 2009, 02:21:17 am »

Hello,

not want to nitpick. but

#1, still bit confused but did you say....  If i had actor do a 10 TU for walking.  then at end of 10th TU, opponent reaction fire occurrs. Was that the plan?

then #2.  I would go by "War practices" how does soldiers set the weapon saftey upon entering the mission?  I suspect saftey is off, thus the round is already in. Personally, I dont care which modus operandi but would be nice to know, thus allow battlefield stragety planning.

Roy

24

Discussion / Re: Applying patches from the tracker?

« on: December 18, 2009, 02:09:35 am »

Hello

Ah patching function is part of SVN software.  I will look twice as you suggested. 

Thanks.

Roy

25

Discussion / Re: Release early, release often

« on: December 17, 2009, 11:39:52 pm »

Hello,

I wonder what wrong with playing with their revision versions, or helping them develop? 

Consider playing revisions as compared to "watching" & "seeking bugs" like seeing the development progress.

At least you would know when stable version is coming out. 

Roy

26

Discussion / Re: Applying patches from the tracker?

« on: December 17, 2009, 11:33:57 pm »

otherwise your patch might get lost in the nirvana of the board

Hello Mattn. 

I am asking how to "apply the" patch.  Kildor said depends on what kind of patch and asked to see the patches.

So in response to your concern, I do not care if my patch "gets lost".

Roy

27

Discussion / Re: Applying patches from the tracker?

« on: December 17, 2009, 09:56:20 am »

Hello,

not sure how to provide the file (generated my patch).  Trying this as attachment. If I need to do this different, give me a yell!


using Window XP, with 2.3 dev rev 27496. This .diff file is generated through SmartSvn 6.  The other I have been attempting is the wound-medic patch file that i thought might be a good read.

If this was all wrong.. then i still need to read document somewhere and learn your patching system.

Roy


edit: here is the forum section i referred to (the medikits.diff) http://ufoai.ninex.info/forum/index.php?topic=4282.msg32678#msg32678

28

Discussion / Re: Applying patches from the tracker?

« on: December 17, 2009, 02:54:35 am »

Hello,

Not mac subject, but window...  I downloaded the patch from SVN  and looked up (using search patch and .diff) found instructions, something about making patch, but am stumped on "how to apply existing patch."

Here is what i thought ... download patch, run the SVN program (using SmartSVN program),  select button-submenu, enter the patch.

Apparently I am wrong!!! cause can not find something about that... 

Is there a page explaining how to apply patch to my current SVN?

Rynait

29

Design / Re: CURRENT STORYLINE -- SPOILERS!

« on: December 16, 2009, 02:44:16 am »

Ugh - This is getting worse than the "destructible terrain" thing.

Why do so many newcomers want to come along and ask us to throw out years of work and re-vamp everything?

on the game development point of view; I totally agree with destructavator. 

I see those new stories as synonymous to UFO:AI citizen's alternate-stories (they surely have to write too).   

I would encourage alternate-stories BUT without revamping the game!  That way when game is wrapped u, developer might find gaps and can borrow the stories generated here.

BE PROUD... creative minds don't stop!

Rynait

30

Tactics / Re: Bases placement and type

« on: December 08, 2009, 12:30:07 am »

Hello

done several experiment on base placement, in respect to radar coverage (not counting advanced radar)...

I started with three (new revision made that difficult) placing in canada region, Russia and europe (near carpathian mountain region) in that order. This gave me nice coverage on northern hemisphere (two gaps closed off with radar towers).

Later added (having difficulty with stragetic location on south hemisphere), Africa, Australia (I think Selwyn Mountain gives good range covering most of Oceania mass), center of South america and South pole (Selecting Ross-Palmer area means need 1 radar tower south of Australia.

I suspect there is better location with fewer bases and use of radar towers.  Pining for advanced radar towers.

BTW I put first bases... leaving alone default contents, adding on heavily research. At time put in second base focusing on workshop (of course with aircraft support.) But with current releases, becomes prohibitively expensive... so rethinking location stragety now.

Roy