https://www.ufopaedia.org/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=Lobster+Dan&feedformat=atomUFOpaedia - User contributions [en]2024-03-29T09:46:36ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.35.4https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Making_the_Game_Harder&diff=32868Making the Game Harder2011-01-28T21:37:36Z<p>Lobster Dan: /* Large Squads */</p>
<hr />
<div>This page is intended for players who finish the game frequently on the highest difficulty and would like to keep the challenge alive. <br />
<br />
Naturally it is quite easy to handicap yourself while playing the game: using only conventional weaponry, no armor, fighting only on night missions, etc. Some of these situations are detailed here, in addition to exploits/cheats/tactics that make the game easier, which you might want to refrain from using. <br />
<br />
Feel free to try any of these ideas (or all of them!). Some may make the game very hard or even impossible to win. <br />
<br />
==No Psionics==<br />
<br />
Psionics and [[Psi-Amp]]s can completely imbalance the game in favor of the human player. Even one Psi-Amp is bad news for aliens, and with training and screening, a squad full of psionic troops can eventually mind-control all the aliens during the first turn (even [[Cyberdisc]]s and [[Sectopod]]s). This turns combat into a cakewalk, which is not nearly as much fun as sweating your way around every single corner. Therefore, one of the most important things you can do to make the game more challenging is to avoid using Psi-Amps.<br />
<br />
Significantly less unbalancing is the use of [[Psionic Laboratory|Psi Labs]] to screen troops (and perhaps also increase their [[Psionics#Psionic_Formulas|Psionic Defense]]). However, for an even greater challenge, you can avoid using Psi Labs altogether, which forces you to rely on combat trauma to find out which of your troops are psi weaklings.<br />
<br />
===No Mind Probes===<br />
<br />
Much less powerful than Psionics is the advantage from using [[Mind Probe]]s since those devices can be used to screen aliens for their rank (for capture or to identify the threat they pose), or to check if they are able to reaction fire. Mind control can also provide most of this information, so restricting use of Mind Probes is most significant when combined with a ban on Psi-Amps.<br />
<br />
==Don't Use Game Exploits==<br />
Plenty of [[Exploits]] have been identified for UFO: Enemy Unknown. Their influence on [[Battlescape]]/[[Geoscape]] varies, here's a list of those that you should particularly avoid and their consequences. <br />
<br />
===Alien Inventory Screen===<br />
<br />
Although you are not supposed to be able to access an alien's inventory screen when you mind control it, there is a [[ExploitsB#Access_the_Alien_Inventory_Screen|way]] to do so. This allows for nasty things like priming grenades and dropping them at the feet of the alien. <br />
Another thing to consider is to stop using [[Psionics]] all together (see above). <br />
<br />
===Faulty Collision Detection===<br />
<br />
A full description can be found [[Exploiting_Collison_Detection|here]]. These exploits allow you to attack through walls or other solid objects, and bypass map chokepoints (such as UFO doors) which can be used by the aliens to ambush your soldiers.<br />
<br />
===Free Wages/Manufacturing/Fuel===<br />
<br />
These exploits are commonly used to prevent your finances from going negative at the end of the month or to keep your planes flying for free. The [[ExploitsA#Free_Wages|Free Wages]] avoids having to pay your scientists/engineers/soldiers' salaries. Most of your monthly expenses are made of those, so having to pay for your 250 scientists makes financial matters more hard to deal with. If you have never played the game without using these exploits, you've never really played the strategic game - it is MUCH harder to succeed when you have to pay your way. <br />
<br />
===UFO Redux===<br />
<br />
Increases your loot, income, score and experience up to two or even three times normal, and in turn boosts your technology progress. If you haven't been using this [[ExploitsA#UFO Redux|exploit]], don't start now!<br />
<br />
===Scared Of The Dark?===<br />
<br />
If you regularly avoid all night missions using [[ExploitsD|these exploits]], shame on you! Grab the flares and IC rounds, and be afraid, be '''very''' afraid!<br />
<br />
==Don't Use Beneficial XComUtil Options==<br />
<br />
Many XComUtil options (or similar options from other 'game enhancers' or variant games) make the game easier to win. As XComUtil was designed to make the game harder, it's a shame that the options that make the game easier are not flagged up more conspicuously.<br />
<br />
=== Improved Starting Base ===<br />
<br />
This actually hands you $4.5 million on a plate. In fact, it's far better than $4.5 million in cash, because the stuff you would buy with the $4.5 million is already built and/or in situ in your base. This option gives you a 1-2 month head start on the aliens, who don't get any advantages. So while the intent is to alleviate boring and repetitive play for experienced players, the net effect is to reduce the challenge. <br />
<br />
=== Alternate Starting Base ===<br />
<br />
This option is much less of a boon, but it still in effect hands you the $800K it would cost to reorganise your normal (badly layed out) starting base. And you get to do useful things with your base instead, during the month it would've take to reorganise it. Still, this is only a minor buff, and not a big deal compared to the Improved Starting Base. And the initial base layout ''is'' infuriating.<br />
<br />
=== Improved Tanks ===<br />
<br />
Players often forget that they routinely take this option to give human-technology tank chassis the same armour level as the hybrid, alien-alloy-armoured tank chassis. This has a big difference on the viability of the starting tanks (Cannon Tank, Rocket Tank, Laser Tank). Scott Jones believed that these HWPs were not viable without this mod. Perhaps he was right. Nonetheless, if you use this option, you are making the early game significantly easier. Assuming you believe an HWP is better than 4 soldiers - and if you don't believe that, you shouldn't care about using this option anyway.<br />
<br />
=== Improved Weapons ===<br />
<br />
This option improves the Pistol, Heavy Laser, and High Explosive. The Heavy Laser mod is fairly subtle and is intended to make "an otherwise useless item, useful". It does not create an uber-weapon. The Pistol improvement is [[Talk:XcomUtil#Improved_Pistol_Modification|arguably unnecessary]] as the Pistol is [[Rifle vs Pistol|arguably already]] the most powerful starting weapon, something that was not appreciated when XComUtil was written. The High Explosive buff is downright unbalancing since it allows UFO outer hulls to be penetrated at the very start of the game, totally changing the tactics of the Battlescape in a way that the Alien AI is not prepared for, and can't respond to. If you do select this option, use it only for the Heavy Laser mod, and refrain from using Pistol autofire, and definitely refrain from using HE as an entry charge to blast holes in UFOs.<br />
<br />
In TFTD this option gives Gauss weapons unlimited ammunition. There is still a running argument about whether Gauss weapons are worth bothering with ([[Skipping Gauss Weapons]]). So using this option might be justified. But clearly it still gives an advantage to XCom, at least until weapons better than Gauss are available. So if you want the game to be harder, don't use it.<br />
<br />
=== Other Options To Avoid ===<br />
<br />
<br />
* Automatically Screen for Psi Ability<br />
* Fight All Battles In Daylight<br />
* Fighter aircraft can carry troops / HWPs<br />
* Skyranger can mount air to air weapons<br />
* Troops have all-round visibility from inside transports<br />
<br />
Actually these last three aren't even options, prior to XComUtil 9.6, they are defaults. Turning them off is hard - just don't use weapons on transports or troops/HWPs on fighters. The all round visibility is not such a big deal, but if you turn it off, you will make the game harder again.<br />
<br />
==Firepower Adjustment==<br />
<br />
Despites what it feels like in the early game, X-COM eventually gets access to extremely powerful weaponry that make both ground and air battles too easy. <br />
<br />
===Avoid Heavy Plasmas===<br />
<br />
Don't equip the majority of your squad with [[Heavy Plasma|Heavy Plasmas]]. If that sounds too easy, then don't use alien weapons at all.<br />
<br />
===Advanced Human Craft (Firestorm/Lightning/Avenger)===<br />
<br />
The [[Avenger]] is an awesome craft but it is very overpowered. So build only ONE, and only when you are going to Cydonia. Battleships suddenly become very tough if faced with Firestorms...<br />
<br />
Or, to fully experience the helplessness of seeing alien Battleships flying unopposed through Earth's atmosphere, don't build any [[Firestorm|Firestorms]] or [[Lightning|Lightnings]].<br />
<br />
===Avoid Blaster Launchers===<br />
<br />
To put it simply: the weapons are too powerful and thus the temptation to overuse them too great. Completely destroying a map is fun at start but butchering the aliens gets boring after a while. Either do not use the weapons or only bring 1 on each mission. <br />
<br />
===Rank-based equipment===<br />
<br />
Only give the best stuff to officers. For example Squaddies have to use personal armors and laser rifles; rookies don't get armor at all. Advancing in ranks earns the privilege to use newest equipment. So Sergeants can use Power Suit, but not Flying Suit. Even better, only give Flying suit to your Commander. Of course, you never want to commit your most experienced troops to hazardous front line duties, so this creates extra challenge. <br />
<br />
===Tech levels===<br />
Limit yourself to certain "tech levels". Here's an example:<br />
*Level 1: Coverall, genuine Earth equipment<br />
*Level 2: Personal Armor, Laser weapons<br />
*Level 3: Power Suit, light alien weaponry<br />
*Level 4: Flying Suit, heavy alien weaponry<br />
How does it work? Simply limit yourself to stopping at a certain level. Or limit yourself in the speed of advancement, i.e. one level per a half year, etc. The latter example would mean you won't get to use the best equipment for two years!!!<br />
<br />
Alternatively, allow yourself access to only a few high-power research topics, under the grounds that they're so complex that understanding them fully takes years. (Exceptions are made for end-game requirements, of course). Research topics that are high-power (AKA game-breaking) would include anything associated with Psionics, Plasma Rifle, Heavy Plasma, Blaster Bomb, the advanced aircraft (in particular the Avenger), the Plasma Beam/FBL, Hovertanks, and the Power and Flying Suits.<br />
<br />
===Use Unfamiliar Weapons===<br />
<br />
Use weapons that you are not generally fond of using or are not comfortable using. Use them in greater quantities or outfit your entire team with them. This has the potential to not only make the game harder, but it may get you accustomed to how these weapons are best handled. Combine it with restrictions on plasma weapons for best results. <br />
<br />
One excellent example is the standard [[Heavy Laser]] - not the XCOMUtil variant. It's a weapon that is often branded "useless" because it's not an ammo-less parallel of the Heavy Plasma. <br />
<br />
Other examples include [[Heavy Cannon]]s and tanks. In particular, unmodified tanks. <br />
<br />
===Ranged Base Accuracy===<br />
<br />
If you are using the Collectors Edition of the game, consider making use of Seb76's loader and activate the ranged base accuracy settings. This adds new rules to shooting so that weapons will only work as advertised under a certain range, depending on the class of the weapon. Beyond these ranges, the shots start to get wilder. So while they can still hit, the odds of them hitting are reduced. <br />
<br />
For those with other editions and can not make use of the loader, you can artificially set the ranges yourself and pick the type of shots based on the distance between you and the target. <br />
<br />
===Extreme Weapon Scenarios===<br />
<br />
Test your machismo by going to ridiculous lengths and see how far you can get before combat is no longer viable with a uniform weapon set whereby you limit yourself to only one type or class of weapon. In addition to making the game harder, it you may find yourself appreciating the benefits and understanding the limitations of these weapons. <br />
<br />
Some ideas to get you started: [[Heavy Cannon]], [[Autocannon]] or a combination of both. Basic [[Rifle]]s only. Pistol sized weapons only. [[Rocket Launcher]]s only. Grenade type weapons only (note, may need an emergency ranged weapons for flyers). Consider also a pistol and grenade scenario. <br />
<br />
A Rocket Launcher or Grenade campaign for example will have several effects. While it does make defeating enemies easy, it introduces several management twists to combat that you would not normally subject yourself to in great frequency. Like collateral damage management will be needed for each and every shot taken. Ammunition has to be strictly managed, from the item limit to its actual expenditure and portage. Loot recovery is more difficult. Some blast zone management is required to prevent loot destruction. Mind control and reaction fire become extremely hazardous. <br />
<br />
If combined with several other challenges such as no-psi and no alien weapons, you may even have to abandon some battle if all ammunition is depleted. Even if it was going entirely in your favour. <br />
<br />
If you plan to play through to the final mission, allow yourself the use of stun weapons for capture of all the necessary aliens.<br />
<br />
== Squad Management == <br />
<br />
===Avoid Large Squads===<br />
<br />
Restrict your squad regarding soldiers and tanks. Never use more than 14 plane slots to bring units into a battlefield (the capacity of a Skyranger).<br />
The logic behind this is that you can easily outnumber the aliens, especially if you are facing small UFOs thus assuring victory. <br />
Also, smaller squads allow for quicker play (you don't have to move 26 units each turn) and they make your soldiers more memorable, since you'll remember more their heroic achievements (or stupid deaths).<br />
<br />
===Load up your Skyrangers with maximum HWPs===<br />
<br />
A variant of the preceding scenario, not quite so hard. Instead of bringing 14 units into a battle you'll get just 5 (3 HWPs + 2 Soldiers) or 8 (2 HWPs + 6 soldiers).<br />
<br />
===Commando Missions===<br />
<br />
Use as few men to complete ground missions as possible-without HWPs, of course. Stealth, patience, care and caution become the priority. Even two or three-man teams can be effective if used properly. The logic behind this is that either way, aliens are probably too busy carrying out their mission or repairing the UFO to notice the dropship approaching (as evidenced by the fact that if you go against psionic aliens, you are safe from psionic attacks as long as none of them sees you, adding an extra difficulty: you have to kill every alien from behind and with one shot so they won't turn around and see you). Plus, micromanaging a three-man team is easier than managing a fully loaded Avenger. You have the advantage of surprise, use it! Just make sure you try to get at least most of the aliens before Turn 20 comes around (when they automatically spot you).<br />
<br />
<br />
===Solo Missions===<br />
; Iron Man<br />
If you are confident in yourself, use only one soldier. Knowing when to retreat and switch weapons at the dropship is essential, but try not to get wounded. Without friends with medkits around, fatal wounds are truly fatal. Get your popcorn out people and enjoy the show!<br />
<br />
;Chuck Norris<br />
Your best man, a rocket launcher, grenades, and an automatic rifle. Nothing invented before about 1970. A stun rod to simulate the devastating karate attack - watch out Aliens!<br />
<br />
;Bruce Lee<br />
One man, one stun rod. (You might want to cheat and max out your stats first.) They won't stand a chance!<br />
<br />
;Bozo the Clown<br />
One man, no weapons. And pray that either some aliens died during the crash or that they are stupid enough to hit one another with their weapons.<br />
<br />
===Large Squads===<br />
<br />
For those that are content with small squads between 4 - 8 soldiers, break the habit and take the opposite approach. Start using large squads. Hire a large quantity of soldiers and fill the all available spaces on the transport. Rotate the entire team regularly so that there are no outstanding individuals or superstars amongst the tea. <br />
<br />
<br />
During the battle, keep the slogan ''"There's no I in Team"'' in mind all the time. Make every effort to send out the whole squad into the battlefield and that everyone gets some piece of the action. No more than 1 rear commanders if at all possible. <br />
<br />
<br />
The difficulties introduced here include longer turns due to the increased coordination of the larger squad. Larger squads make bigger targets and increases the danger of friendly fire. When things do go wrong, the level of severity tends to be great, with the possibility of mass hysteria. Weapon by stat assignment may also be a problem with so many troops to handle and if you are in the regular habit of rotating the team. <br />
<br />
If you find that this makes it too easy, consider dropping your weapon technology down a few notches.<br />
<br />
==Limited Miltary==<br />
<br />
Limit X-COM to a set number of soldiers per game. Not at one time, per game. So every soldier killed or sacked is an irreplaceable resource. The easiest version of this could be 250 soldiers, maybe rolling down to as few as fifty, depends on the masochism of the player. Optionally, to help a bit, start with maximum hires by editing the starting base, or allow those who want to can increase the physical stats of soldiers up to their caps in SOLDIER.DAT if wanted and can start with maximum hires. (Leave Psi alone!) This game is winnable, but increasingly hard as you decrease troops as every man lost is a critical resource you never get back.<br />
<br />
The hard version of this is to try and complete the game with just the 8 soldiers you start with. It is possible to complete the game with just one soldier if you really want to make the game harder. You better hope that he has good Psi skills as you will not find out of the a few months. At least you'll have room for a 3 tanks on your skyranger.<br />
<br />
==Battlescape Time Limits==<br />
<br />
If you are used to playing the 'waiting game', pick up the pace. The Aliens aren't stupid. After 20 Turns in a UFO Ground Assault, they will take off again, leaving you empty handed (simulate this with a march back to the Transport, and Abort). After 20 Turns in a UFO Crash Recovery, the Engineers blow the reactor and destroy everything. Simulate this with a forced Abort on Turn 20, regardless of where everyone is at the time. Those who don't get airborne in the Transport are all missing or dead. Anything not hauled back to the Transport is lost. <br />
<br />
==Harder Economics==<br />
<br />
First of all, don't use any of the economics-related Exploits (see above). That really is cheating. For greater challenge in the strategic aspect of the game, try these scenarios:<br />
<br />
===Funding Council Income===<br />
<br />
Rely entirely on the Funding Nations to run your war. Details [[User:Tequilachef#Rules|here]].<br />
<br />
Do not sell any alien equipment, corpses or UFO components. Do not sell manufactured items. Only genuine starting Earth technology (like Rifles or Avalanche Launchers) or researched aircraft (since they don't bring in money) may be sold. This makes it significantly harder. In February for example you have around $6,000,000 to cover base maintenance, wages, crafts, manufacturing and losses on the battlefield. This leaves not very much! Building new bases, hiring more engineers or just building a second laboratory is almost impossible. But it is definitely more fun than having worldwide radar coverage and 16 interceptors by the end of march.<br />
<br />
===No Commercial Manufacturing===<br />
<br />
Slightly less strict than Funding Council Income Only: don't manufacture anything for profit, as it's too easy to become largely independent of both the Funding Nations and the need to capture alien loot for cash. If you have any surplus manufactured material you don't want laying around, you have to build a warehouse for it somewhere. <br />
<br />
===No Laser Cannon Sales===<br />
<br />
An easier option than the previous scenario, but still quite a challenge if you are used to relying on Laser Cannon income. This will cut your income signficantly. Alternatively, play the XComUtil variant (see below) that makes Laser Cannons unprofitable (then you don't have to resist the temptation to cheat).<br />
<br />
===Limited Elerium===<br />
<br />
Elerium is incredibly valuable, probably the most important strategic material ever encountered by mankind. Much too valuable for the CFN to leave it in the hands of those crazy commandos who run X-Com! The CFN governments insist on keeping most or all of the Elerium for their own use. You goet to see what it's like defending civilisation without it. <br />
<br />
''50 Elerium Limit''<br />
<br />
You are limited to only 50 units of Elerium for the whole game. Any surplus must be "sold" - i.e. returned to the CFN for a fraction of its real value. Keep in mind you need at least 12 units to build your Avenger, otherwise you can't win the game. <br />
<br />
''Avenger Elerium Only''<br />
<br />
You are only allowed to keep enough Elerium to fuel one mission of your Avenger (12 units). Everything else must be handed back to the CFN. This means you can't build anything that requires Elerium. It also means you must scavenge all the parts for your Avenger from UFOs.<br />
<br />
''Mandatory Recycling''<br />
<br />
As above, plus you are required to immediately hand over to the CFN ("sell") any captured items containing Elerium (except for the specific parts you need to build your ''one'' Avenger). This is so the CFN can send them to a top-secret Elerium Reprocessing plant for extraction of the precious Elerium. You are allowed to start Research projects on them when you first return them to Base, but then you must immediately hand them over to the CFN. You are not allowed to use these items (except during the actual Battlescape mission when you capture them - and even then your troops have to lie about the ammo counts and pretend the aliens fired them). <br />
<br />
This means you can never hold any Plasma or Fusion/Blaster weapons or tanks, no Psi Amps or Mind Probes, no Stun bombs, alien grenades, Power/Flying suits. You can build a Firestorm or Lightning, but there's no point, since you can't operate it (since that expends Elerium). You can't arm your craft with Plasma Beams or Fusion Balls. Lasers are your best weapons: in the air, on your tanks, and in the hands of your troops. <br />
<br />
As a quirk, you can still build Plasma or Fusion defences for your Bases, since those don't appear to require any Elerium. As mentioned elsewhere, perhaps these are powered by a regular power station instead of Elerium. <br />
<br />
(If playing TFTD, you are allowed to hold one copy of an item in Stores, if it is needed to be present for a Technology advancement, but then you must sell it as soon as it is no longer needed, and you must never use it in combat.)<br />
<br />
==Base Limitations==<br />
<br />
===Base Defense===<br />
<br />
Don't play base defense missions. If your Base Defence weapons can't stop the Battleship, you have to abandon the base. This is because, actually, Base Defence is too easy and just an excuse to take lots of valuables off the Aliens, and maybe capture yourself a high ranking Alien to interrogate. <br />
<br />
===One Base===<br />
<br />
Build only a single base. This severely limits your efficiency, as you can only build a maximum of 35 base modules. Aircraft and radar coverage will be quite limited. Particularly challenging if combined with the scenario above!<br />
<br />
====For a real challenge...====<br />
<br />
Build that single base in Hawaii. See below under Scott Jones' scenarios.<br />
<br />
===Limit Base Size===<br />
<br />
You can build as many bases as you like but each base can only be 4x4 (or for the hard version 3x3, yes it is do able just very hard) instead of the normal 6x6. This version you will have to start a game and then edit you save game to make you first base smaller. Feel free to refund the cost of any modules and crafts you don’t have room for also if you don’t have room for a lab or workshop you might want to remove your Scientist or Engineer and refund there cost as well.<br />
<br />
3x3 notes: No using XcomUtil to let you place troops in an intercepter, just because you dont have room for 2 hangers in any one base is no reson for making it easyer, This is ment to be hard if you want 2 crafts make 2 bases you start with more money then normal you should be able to build a second base right a way only 25 days till your hanger is built.<br />
<br />
===Earth Tech Modules Only===<br />
<br />
Don't build modules requiring alien tech, ie. Psi Lab, Hyperwave Decoder, Plasma/Fusion Defence, Grav Shield, Mind Shield. Laser Defence is OK.<br />
<br />
===Starting from Scratch - the No-Base Start===<br />
<br />
This scenario starts you off with no base, but with an ample amount of starting funds to get a minimal intercept/recovery base up and running. The goal is to obviously get the organization up and running from scratch with your starting funds and then attaining self sufficiency through selling captured equipment until you're back to playing to what you may consider to be a normal game. <br />
<br />
To create this scenario, start a brand new game and sell everything, sack all staff and remove all base modules right down to the access lift. This will [[Starting Base (EU)#Sale Value of Starting Base|net only $300K - $350K]] . You will no longer have a base on the Geoscape, but the game will not think you've lost. From here, save the game. You will then need to edit your funds accordingly to how difficult you would like to make the scenario.<br />
<br />
The initial starting base, inclusive of all facilities, personnel and equipment, has a [[Starting Base (EU)#Replacement Cost of Starting Base|replacement cost of $7.345 to $7.795 million]], typically $7.795 million. In addition, starting cash is typically around $4 million. So anything less than $12 million in starting cash will make for a tougher than normal game.<br />
<br />
For a player looking to play this type of scenario, a starting kitty of $5 million, or even less, should be sufficient to build XCom up from nothing. It won't be easy but it's possible. You could even play with just the roughly $4.4 million in funds that are left after fully dismantling the starting base.<br />
<br />
Assuming you want a bigger kitty, once you've edited your funds, the scenario is ready to play. Before you start playing, consider making a backup of the save so that you can start a new no-base scenario again in the future. Or you can download this Superhuman savegame with $4.45M starting funds: [[Image:NoBaseSuperH.zip]].<br />
<br />
The only slight downside to the No Base scenario is that your ''first'' Skyranger and Interceptor will be numbered 2 and 3 respectively. <br />
<br />
As an added challenge, you can also chose to combine this with the no-funding-country scenario by editing all the countries so that they've all withdrawn from funding X-COM. With this, you'll truly have to live off the spoils of war to survive.<br />
<br />
==One Mission X-COM==<br />
<br />
A more hardline version of Funding Council Income Only, detailed [[User_talk:Arrow_Quivershaft#1_Mission_X-COM|here]]. In short, one Battleship mission, properly executed, can provide all the research needed to complete the game. The focus is on intercepting that Battleship and completing the game with only the spoils from that mission.<br />
<br />
==No Detection==<br />
<br />
Similar in concept to 1 Mission X-COM. No detection, and therefore no interception, of UFOs. Radar, airborne and hyperwave detection are ruled out. Almost as if the UFOs had some kind of ''stealth'' technology. This means no UFO Assault or UFO Crash Recovery missions. You are restricted to responding to Terror missions, Alien Base Assaults (when Alien Bases are detected by Agents only), and (possibly) Base Defence missions. This is quite hard as you get very little combat experience, artefacts or loot (and therefore very little cash). The Aliens also get a high score so many countries will defect. In fact, you cannot win this game, as there is no way to get UFO Navigations to build the Avenger. (Seb76's loader has 2 patches that do permit you to win: the "Roswell" UFO crashes option and an option where Base Control Tables don't explode.) More information here: [[Talk:UFO_Detection#Playing_With_No_Detection]]<br />
<br />
==Use XComUtil Features==<br />
<br />
[[XcomUtil]] is a game enhancer that was actually designed to make the game harder, although many of its features can be used the other way around. <br />
<br />
===XcuSetup configuration===<br />
<br />
When you run XcuSetup to install XComUtil a number of queries will be asked regarding which features you'll want to implement. The responses to the prompts given below will make the game harder. <br />
<br />
*''Do you want to use the improved starting base?'' (No)<br />
<br />
With the improved starting base you start with an [[Alien Containment]] already built, your radar is upgraded and you'll start with additional scientists and engineers. It will also be designed to maximize defense. Mainly this is just to avoid boredom and frustration, but it is also an advantage. <br />
<br />
*''Do you want to use the alternate starting base?'' (No)<br />
<br />
This retains the optimal defensive layout but doesn't add the extra facilities/personnel. Again, mainly to avoid frustration but if you say No you reduce your advantage and increase the challenge. At the very least you have the headache and expense of reorganising your base layout through construction and demolition. <br />
<br />
*''Do you want to use the improved Tanks/Weapons?'' (No to both)<br />
<br />
You forgo having tracked tanks with the armour levels of advanced hover tanks, and slightly improved Pistols and Heavy Lasers. You also forgo a crucial advantage which is the ability to crack open UFO external hulls with High Explosive - you definitely don't want that if you are looking for a harder game!<br />
<br />
*''Do you want to use the new laser weapons?'' (Yes)<br />
<br />
With this option chosen your lasers will require Elerium to be built (supposedly to act as power cells). This also prevents you from building plasma weapons (but not clips), thus preventing you from selling [[Plasma Pistol|Plasma Pistols]] and [[Plasma Rifle|Plasma Rifles]] since the aliens will stop using those. <br />
It also makes [[Laser Cannon|Laser Cannons]] and [[Fusion Ball Launcher|Fusion Launchers]] a lot less attractive to sell because of the time required to build them and the [[Elerium-115|Elerium]]/[[Alien Alloys]] necessary for their construction. Be prepared for the blow on your finances...<br />
<br />
*''Do you want research help from captured aliens?'' (Yes! Yes! Yes!)<br />
<br />
To make the game REALLY hard try this feature. <br />
First, it will increase the research times of most items tenfold or more, especially regarding the alien technologies. Instead of having to wait days or a week for a certain technology the time will increase to months. With a little bad luck you will be stuck to lasers and no armor when the [[Muton|Mutons]] and [[Ethereal|Ethereals]] start showing up. <br />
Second, the only way to speed research (other than having 250 scientists on all bases) is to capture live aliens, forcing you to bring a few [[Stun Rod|Stun Rods]] for all missions. It is not required to have an Alien Containment present to receive the research help but remember it only reduces the time of the research being done at your starting base.<br />
<br />
<br />
==Scott Jones' Scenarios==<br />
Scott T Jones, the original maker of XcomUtil, placed some interesting scenarios on the XcomUtil site. You do not need XcomUtil to follow these scenarios, you just need self-discipline to stick to the rules. Here they are:<br />
<br />
===Xenophobe===<br />
Don't try to capture or interrogate any aliens, and sell all alien artifacts immediately. Don't build Alien Containment. You can not win this scenario in the normal sense, since you can never discover how go to Mars (or even that you need to go there). You simply play it until you don't want to play it any more.<br />
<br />
===Bean Counter===<br />
This scenario takes its name from the beaurocratic "bean counters" who drive us crazy with their constant cost cutting measures. You are not allowed to destroy anything, since that wastes profits. You are not allowed to shoot down any UFOs, since that destroys valuable artifacts that can be sold. You cannot use any explosives or any weapon that uses a clip or ammunition, since those would have to be replaced. You are only allowed to use reusable items, like lasers, flares, stun rods, and psi-amps.<br />
<br />
===Explosive===<br />
Limit yourself to only explosive weapons. This scenario forces you to learn tactics that protect you from your own weapons. It is virtually the opposite of the Bean Counter scenario.<br />
<br />
===Photophobe===<br />
You must not fight any battle in full daylight. If you land at a battle and an aura of light isn't visible around your soldiers, you must leave immediately. This scenario is very interesting and teaches you how to fight at night. It is much harder to win, but it can still be won because it is dark on Mars.<br />
<br />
===Technophobe===<br />
Sack all of your scientists and engineers at the start of the game. You must sell all alien artifacts immediately. If you cannot buy the item, you cannot use it.<br />
<br />
This scenario forces you to learn how to use conventional weapons against the aliens. You can not win this scenario in the normal sense, since you can never go to Mars. You simply play it until you don't want to play it any more.<br />
<br />
===Neo-Pacifist===<br />
You are a Pacifist and cannot directly take the life of any living thing, even an alien. You cannot shoot down any UFO, because aliens might be killed. You cannot use any weapon that can kill an alien, even via reaction fire. Aliens who die during interrogation or because of lack of space in the alien containment facility are someone else's problem, so your conscience is clear.<br />
<br />
The only lethal weapons that you can use are grenades, but you must still give the aliens a chance to escape. In this way, the alien causes its own death. For example, an alien next to an armed explosive with a long fuse can save it self by moving away, while an alien next to an armed Proximity Grenade can save itself by not moving away.<br />
<br />
Even with these restrictions, the game can still be won by mind controlling an alien on Mars and having him stand next to an armed Proximity Grenade which was placed next to the master brain. Once this is ready, you release your control and wait for the alien to move, ending the game.<br />
<br />
===Single-Base Hawaiian===<br />
Games where you only have one base are not that different from normal games, unless that base is located in Hawaii. This scenario is very difficult and requires a different strategy. The challenge is that you have almost no radar coverage over any significant land mass. You must keep Skyrangers constantly on patrol over areas that are likely to have alien activity. Since combat is rare, you can not afford to skip any battles. This scenario teaches you [[UFO_Detection#UFO_Activity_Graph|how to use the graphs]] to gather information about areas in which you have no radar.<br />
<br />
===No Skyrangers===<br />
This scenario takes away your large, long range troop carrier, the Skyranger. Ideally, you should also eliminate the Lightning and the Avenger (except for the assault on Mars). Ground operations are conducted only with the small numbers of Soldiers that XComUtil allows you to place on board Interceptors (6 troops or 1 HWP + 2 troops) or Firestorms (10 troops or 1 HWP + 6 troops). This is quite difficult because you do not have enough men to allow for mistakes and the short range of your ships forces you to miss some terror sites. (This requires at least version 6.0 of XcomUtil.)<br />
<br />
===Shootdown===<br />
This scenario is an even harder variation of the No Skyrangers scenario. It not only takes away your large, long range troop carrier, but it also demands that you shoot down every ship you assault. This is extremely difficult, because you almost never capture any Elerium from ships that have been shot down.<br />
<br />
==Aliens Own Earth==<br />
In this [[Aliens Own Earth|scenario]] you start the game as normal, but the Aliens are in a very dominant position with over 20 bases already established on Earth. Survival is extremely difficult! This scenario takes a bit of work to setup before you can play, but definitely poses a serious challenge.<br />
<br />
==Speed Run==<br />
See how fast you can complete the game! For a very strict challenge, the clock starts when you choose a difficulty, and ends when you shoot the Brain on Cydonia.<br />
<br />
The current record seems to be 62:21 minutes, not including save/load time, by tbgox. Yes, that's JUST over an hour of playing. He's got the videos up on youtube showing how he did it too. Good lord. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wo71zOr5aU<br />
<br />
==Limited save/Reload==<br />
Depending on how strict you want to be with yourself, you can ban in-battle saves, save only when you want to quit the game and get on with real life, or for the really hard core, no save/reload at all: finish the game in one sitting, possibly combining this with a [[#Speed Run|Speed Run]]. For a smaller challenge, try to keep a tally of how many times you save and reload, and see if you can minimise this number.</div>Lobster Danhttps://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Making_the_Game_Harder&diff=32866Making the Game Harder2011-01-28T21:31:52Z<p>Lobster Dan: /* Firepower Adjustment */</p>
<hr />
<div>This page is intended for players who finish the game frequently on the highest difficulty and would like to keep the challenge alive. <br />
<br />
Naturally it is quite easy to handicap yourself while playing the game: using only conventional weaponry, no armor, fighting only on night missions, etc. Some of these situations are detailed here, in addition to exploits/cheats/tactics that make the game easier, which you might want to refrain from using. <br />
<br />
Feel free to try any of these ideas (or all of them!). Some may make the game very hard or even impossible to win. <br />
<br />
==No Psionics==<br />
<br />
Psionics and [[Psi-Amp]]s can completely imbalance the game in favor of the human player. Even one Psi-Amp is bad news for aliens, and with training and screening, a squad full of psionic troops can eventually mind-control all the aliens during the first turn (even [[Cyberdisc]]s and [[Sectopod]]s). This turns combat into a cakewalk, which is not nearly as much fun as sweating your way around every single corner. Therefore, one of the most important things you can do to make the game more challenging is to avoid using Psi-Amps.<br />
<br />
Significantly less unbalancing is the use of [[Psionic Laboratory|Psi Labs]] to screen troops (and perhaps also increase their [[Psionics#Psionic_Formulas|Psionic Defense]]). However, for an even greater challenge, you can avoid using Psi Labs altogether, which forces you to rely on combat trauma to find out which of your troops are psi weaklings.<br />
<br />
===No Mind Probes===<br />
<br />
Much less powerful than Psionics is the advantage from using [[Mind Probe]]s since those devices can be used to screen aliens for their rank (for capture or to identify the threat they pose), or to check if they are able to reaction fire. Mind control can also provide most of this information, so restricting use of Mind Probes is most significant when combined with a ban on Psi-Amps.<br />
<br />
==Don't Use Game Exploits==<br />
Plenty of [[Exploits]] have been identified for UFO: Enemy Unknown. Their influence on [[Battlescape]]/[[Geoscape]] varies, here's a list of those that you should particularly avoid and their consequences. <br />
<br />
===Alien Inventory Screen===<br />
<br />
Although you are not supposed to be able to access an alien's inventory screen when you mind control it, there is a [[ExploitsB#Access_the_Alien_Inventory_Screen|way]] to do so. This allows for nasty things like priming grenades and dropping them at the feet of the alien. <br />
Another thing to consider is to stop using [[Psionics]] all together (see above). <br />
<br />
===Faulty Collision Detection===<br />
<br />
A full description can be found [[Exploiting_Collison_Detection|here]]. These exploits allow you to attack through walls or other solid objects, and bypass map chokepoints (such as UFO doors) which can be used by the aliens to ambush your soldiers.<br />
<br />
===Free Wages/Manufacturing/Fuel===<br />
<br />
These exploits are commonly used to prevent your finances from going negative at the end of the month or to keep your planes flying for free. The [[ExploitsA#Free_Wages|Free Wages]] avoids having to pay your scientists/engineers/soldiers' salaries. Most of your monthly expenses are made of those, so having to pay for your 250 scientists makes financial matters more hard to deal with. If you have never played the game without using these exploits, you've never really played the strategic game - it is MUCH harder to succeed when you have to pay your way. <br />
<br />
===UFO Redux===<br />
<br />
Increases your loot, income, score and experience up to two or even three times normal, and in turn boosts your technology progress. If you haven't been using this [[ExploitsA#UFO Redux|exploit]], don't start now!<br />
<br />
===Scared Of The Dark?===<br />
<br />
If you regularly avoid all night missions using [[ExploitsD|these exploits]], shame on you! Grab the flares and IC rounds, and be afraid, be '''very''' afraid!<br />
<br />
==Don't Use Beneficial XComUtil Options==<br />
<br />
Many XComUtil options (or similar options from other 'game enhancers' or variant games) make the game easier to win. As XComUtil was designed to make the game harder, it's a shame that the options that make the game easier are not flagged up more conspicuously.<br />
<br />
=== Improved Starting Base ===<br />
<br />
This actually hands you $4.5 million on a plate. In fact, it's far better than $4.5 million in cash, because the stuff you would buy with the $4.5 million is already built and/or in situ in your base. This option gives you a 1-2 month head start on the aliens, who don't get any advantages. So while the intent is to alleviate boring and repetitive play for experienced players, the net effect is to reduce the challenge. <br />
<br />
=== Alternate Starting Base ===<br />
<br />
This option is much less of a boon, but it still in effect hands you the $800K it would cost to reorganise your normal (badly layed out) starting base. And you get to do useful things with your base instead, during the month it would've take to reorganise it. Still, this is only a minor buff, and not a big deal compared to the Improved Starting Base. And the initial base layout ''is'' infuriating.<br />
<br />
=== Improved Tanks ===<br />
<br />
Players often forget that they routinely take this option to give human-technology tank chassis the same armour level as the hybrid, alien-alloy-armoured tank chassis. This has a big difference on the viability of the starting tanks (Cannon Tank, Rocket Tank, Laser Tank). Scott Jones believed that these HWPs were not viable without this mod. Perhaps he was right. Nonetheless, if you use this option, you are making the early game significantly easier. Assuming you believe an HWP is better than 4 soldiers - and if you don't believe that, you shouldn't care about using this option anyway.<br />
<br />
=== Improved Weapons ===<br />
<br />
This option improves the Pistol, Heavy Laser, and High Explosive. The Heavy Laser mod is fairly subtle and is intended to make "an otherwise useless item, useful". It does not create an uber-weapon. The Pistol improvement is [[Talk:XcomUtil#Improved_Pistol_Modification|arguably unnecessary]] as the Pistol is [[Rifle vs Pistol|arguably already]] the most powerful starting weapon, something that was not appreciated when XComUtil was written. The High Explosive buff is downright unbalancing since it allows UFO outer hulls to be penetrated at the very start of the game, totally changing the tactics of the Battlescape in a way that the Alien AI is not prepared for, and can't respond to. If you do select this option, use it only for the Heavy Laser mod, and refrain from using Pistol autofire, and definitely refrain from using HE as an entry charge to blast holes in UFOs.<br />
<br />
In TFTD this option gives Gauss weapons unlimited ammunition. There is still a running argument about whether Gauss weapons are worth bothering with ([[Skipping Gauss Weapons]]). So using this option might be justified. But clearly it still gives an advantage to XCom, at least until weapons better than Gauss are available. So if you want the game to be harder, don't use it.<br />
<br />
=== Other Options To Avoid ===<br />
<br />
<br />
* Automatically Screen for Psi Ability<br />
* Fight All Battles In Daylight<br />
* Fighter aircraft can carry troops / HWPs<br />
* Skyranger can mount air to air weapons<br />
* Troops have all-round visibility from inside transports<br />
<br />
Actually these last three aren't even options, prior to XComUtil 9.6, they are defaults. Turning them off is hard - just don't use weapons on transports or troops/HWPs on fighters. The all round visibility is not such a big deal, but if you turn it off, you will make the game harder again.<br />
<br />
==Firepower Adjustment==<br />
<br />
Despites what it feels like in the early game, X-COM eventually gets access to extremely powerful weaponry that make both ground and air battles too easy. <br />
<br />
===Avoid Heavy Plasmas===<br />
<br />
Don't equip the majority of your squad with [[Heavy Plasma|Heavy Plasmas]]. If that sounds too easy, then don't use alien weapons at all.<br />
<br />
===Advanced Human Craft (Firestorm/Lightning/Avenger)===<br />
<br />
The [[Avenger]] is an awesome craft but it is very overpowered. So build only ONE, and only when you are going to Cydonia. Battleships suddenly become very tough if faced with Firestorms...<br />
<br />
Or, to fully experience the helplessness of seeing alien Battleships flying unopposed through Earth's atmosphere, don't build any [[Firestorm|Firestorms]] or [[Lightning|Lightnings]].<br />
<br />
===Avoid Blaster Launchers===<br />
<br />
To put it simply: the weapons are too powerful and thus the temptation to overuse them too great. Completely destroying a map is fun at start but butchering the aliens gets boring after a while. Either do not use the weapons or only bring 1 on each mission. <br />
<br />
===Rank-based equipment===<br />
<br />
Only give the best stuff to officers. For example Squaddies have to use personal armors and laser rifles; rookies don't get armor at all. Advancing in ranks earns the privilege to use newest equipment. So Sergeants can use Power Suit, but not Flying Suit. Even better, only give Flying suit to your Commander. Of course, you never want to commit your most experienced troops to hazardous front line duties, so this creates extra challenge. <br />
<br />
===Tech levels===<br />
Limit yourself to certain "tech levels". Here's an example:<br />
*Level 1: Coverall, genuine Earth equipment<br />
*Level 2: Personal Armor, Laser weapons<br />
*Level 3: Power Suit, light alien weaponry<br />
*Level 4: Flying Suit, heavy alien weaponry<br />
How does it work? Simply limit yourself to stopping at a certain level. Or limit yourself in the speed of advancement, i.e. one level per a half year, etc. The latter example would mean you won't get to use the best equipment for two years!!!<br />
<br />
Alternatively, allow yourself access to only a few high-power research topics, under the grounds that they're so complex that understanding them fully takes years. (Exceptions are made for end-game requirements, of course). Research topics that are high-power (AKA game-breaking) would include anything associated with Psionics, Plasma Rifle, Heavy Plasma, Blaster Bomb, the advanced aircraft (in particular the Avenger), the Plasma Beam/FBL, Hovertanks, and the Power and Flying Suits.<br />
<br />
===Use Unfamiliar Weapons===<br />
<br />
Use weapons that you are not generally fond of using or are not comfortable using. Use them in greater quantities or outfit your entire team with them. This has the potential to not only make the game harder, but it may get you accustomed to how these weapons are best handled. Combine it with restrictions on plasma weapons for best results. <br />
<br />
One excellent example is the standard [[Heavy Laser]] - not the XCOMUtil variant. It's a weapon that is often branded "useless" because it's not an ammo-less parallel of the Heavy Plasma. <br />
<br />
Other examples include [[Heavy Cannon]]s and tanks. In particular, unmodified tanks. <br />
<br />
===Ranged Base Accuracy===<br />
<br />
If you are using the Collectors Edition of the game, consider making use of Seb76's loader and activate the ranged base accuracy settings. This adds new rules to shooting so that weapons will only work as advertised under a certain range, depending on the class of the weapon. Beyond these ranges, the shots start to get wilder. So while they can still hit, the odds of them hitting are reduced. <br />
<br />
For those with other editions and can not make use of the loader, you can artificially set the ranges yourself and pick the type of shots based on the distance between you and the target. <br />
<br />
===Extreme Weapon Scenarios===<br />
<br />
Test your machismo by going to ridiculous lengths and see how far you can get before combat is no longer viable with a uniform weapon set whereby you limit yourself to only one type or class of weapon. In addition to making the game harder, it you may find yourself appreciating the benefits and understanding the limitations of these weapons. <br />
<br />
Some ideas to get you started: [[Heavy Cannon]], [[Autocannon]] or a combination of both. Basic [[Rifle]]s only. Pistol sized weapons only. [[Rocket Launcher]]s only. Grenade type weapons only (note, may need an emergency ranged weapons for flyers). Consider also a pistol and grenade scenario. <br />
<br />
A Rocket Launcher or Grenade campaign for example will have several effects. While it does make defeating enemies easy, it introduces several management twists to combat that you would not normally subject yourself to in great frequency. Like collateral damage management will be needed for each and every shot taken. Ammunition has to be strictly managed, from the item limit to its actual expenditure and portage. Loot recovery is more difficult. Some blast zone management is required to prevent loot destruction. Mind control and reaction fire become extremely hazardous. <br />
<br />
If combined with several other challenges such as no-psi and no alien weapons, you may even have to abandon some battle if all ammunition is depleted. Even if it was going entirely in your favour. <br />
<br />
If you plan to play through to the final mission, allow yourself the use of stun weapons for capture of all the necessary aliens.<br />
<br />
== Squad Management == <br />
<br />
===Avoid Large Squads===<br />
<br />
Restrict your squad regarding soldiers and tanks. Never use more than 14 plane slots to bring units into a battlefield (the capacity of a Skyranger).<br />
The logic behind this is that you can easily outnumber the aliens, especially if you are facing small UFOs thus assuring victory. <br />
Also, smaller squads allow for quicker play (you don't have to move 26 units each turn) and they make your soldiers more memorable, since you'll remember more their heroic achievements (or stupid deaths).<br />
<br />
===Load up your Skyrangers with maximum HWPs===<br />
<br />
A variant of the preceding scenario, not quite so hard. Instead of bringing 14 units into a battle you'll get just 5 (3 HWPs + 2 Soldiers) or 8 (2 HWPs + 6 soldiers).<br />
<br />
===Commando Missions===<br />
<br />
Use as few men to complete ground missions as possible-without HWPs, of course. Stealth, patience, care and caution become the priority. Even two or three-man teams can be effective if used properly. The logic behind this is that either way, aliens are probably too busy carrying out their mission or repairing the UFO to notice the dropship approaching (as evidenced by the fact that if you go against psionic aliens, you are safe from psionic attacks as long as none of them sees you, adding an extra difficulty: you have to kill every alien from behind and with one shot so they won't turn around and see you). Plus, micromanaging a three-man team is easier than managing a fully loaded Avenger. You have the advantage of surprise, use it! Just make sure you try to get at least most of the aliens before Turn 20 comes around (when they automatically spot you).<br />
<br />
<br />
===Solo Missions===<br />
; Iron Man<br />
If you are confident in yourself, use only one soldier. Knowing when to retreat and switch weapons at the dropship is essential, but try not to get wounded. Without friends with medkits around, fatal wounds are truly fatal. Get your popcorn out people and enjoy the show!<br />
<br />
;Chuck Norris<br />
Your best man, a rocket launcher, grenades, and an automatic rifle. Nothing invented before about 1970. A stun rod to simulate the devastating karate attack - watch out Aliens!<br />
<br />
;Bruce Lee<br />
One man, one stun rod. (You might want to cheat and max out your stats first.) They won't stand a chance!<br />
<br />
;Bozo the Clown<br />
One man, no weapons. And pray that either some aliens died during the crash or that they are stupid enough to hit one another with their weapons.<br />
<br />
===Large Squads===<br />
<br />
For those that are content with small squads between 4 - 8 soldiers, break the habit and take the opposite approach. Start using large squads. Hire a large qauntity of soldiers and fill the all available spaces on the transport. Rotate the entire team regularly so that there are no outstanding idividuals or superstars amongst the tea. <br />
<br />
<br />
During the battle, keep the slogan ''"There's no I in Team"'' in mind all the time. Make every effort to send out the whole squad into the battlefield and that everyone gets some piece of the action. No more than 1 rear commanders if at all possible. <br />
<br />
<br />
The difficulties introduced here include longer turns due to the increased coordination of the larger squad. Larger squads make bigger targets and increases the danger of friendly fire. When things do go wrong, the level of severity tends to be great, with the possibility of mass hysteria. Weapon by stat assignment may also be a problem with so many troops to handle and if you are in the regular habit of rotating the team. <br />
<br />
If you find that this makes it too easy, consider dropping your weapon technology down a few notches.<br />
<br />
==Limited Miltary==<br />
<br />
Limit X-COM to a set number of soldiers per game. Not at one time, per game. So every soldier killed or sacked is an irreplaceable resource. The easiest version of this could be 250 soldiers, maybe rolling down to as few as fifty, depends on the masochism of the player. Optionally, to help a bit, start with maximum hires by editing the starting base, or allow those who want to can increase the physical stats of soldiers up to their caps in SOLDIER.DAT if wanted and can start with maximum hires. (Leave Psi alone!) This game is winnable, but increasingly hard as you decrease troops as every man lost is a critical resource you never get back.<br />
<br />
The hard version of this is to try and complete the game with just the 8 soldiers you start with. It is possible to complete the game with just one soldier if you really want to make the game harder. You better hope that he has good Psi skills as you will not find out of the a few months. At least you'll have room for a 3 tanks on your skyranger.<br />
<br />
==Battlescape Time Limits==<br />
<br />
If you are used to playing the 'waiting game', pick up the pace. The Aliens aren't stupid. After 20 Turns in a UFO Ground Assault, they will take off again, leaving you empty handed (simulate this with a march back to the Transport, and Abort). After 20 Turns in a UFO Crash Recovery, the Engineers blow the reactor and destroy everything. Simulate this with a forced Abort on Turn 20, regardless of where everyone is at the time. Those who don't get airborne in the Transport are all missing or dead. Anything not hauled back to the Transport is lost. <br />
<br />
==Harder Economics==<br />
<br />
First of all, don't use any of the economics-related Exploits (see above). That really is cheating. For greater challenge in the strategic aspect of the game, try these scenarios:<br />
<br />
===Funding Council Income===<br />
<br />
Rely entirely on the Funding Nations to run your war. Details [[User:Tequilachef#Rules|here]].<br />
<br />
Do not sell any alien equipment, corpses or UFO components. Do not sell manufactured items. Only genuine starting Earth technology (like Rifles or Avalanche Launchers) or researched aircraft (since they don't bring in money) may be sold. This makes it significantly harder. In February for example you have around $6,000,000 to cover base maintenance, wages, crafts, manufacturing and losses on the battlefield. This leaves not very much! Building new bases, hiring more engineers or just building a second laboratory is almost impossible. But it is definitely more fun than having worldwide radar coverage and 16 interceptors by the end of march.<br />
<br />
===No Commercial Manufacturing===<br />
<br />
Slightly less strict than Funding Council Income Only: don't manufacture anything for profit, as it's too easy to become largely independent of both the Funding Nations and the need to capture alien loot for cash. If you have any surplus manufactured material you don't want laying around, you have to build a warehouse for it somewhere. <br />
<br />
===No Laser Cannon Sales===<br />
<br />
An easier option than the previous scenario, but still quite a challenge if you are used to relying on Laser Cannon income. This will cut your income signficantly. Alternatively, play the XComUtil variant (see below) that makes Laser Cannons unprofitable (then you don't have to resist the temptation to cheat).<br />
<br />
===Limited Elerium===<br />
<br />
Elerium is incredibly valuable, probably the most important strategic material ever encountered by mankind. Much too valuable for the CFN to leave it in the hands of those crazy commandos who run X-Com! The CFN governments insist on keeping most or all of the Elerium for their own use. You goet to see what it's like defending civilisation without it. <br />
<br />
''50 Elerium Limit''<br />
<br />
You are limited to only 50 units of Elerium for the whole game. Any surplus must be "sold" - i.e. returned to the CFN for a fraction of its real value. Keep in mind you need at least 12 units to build your Avenger, otherwise you can't win the game. <br />
<br />
''Avenger Elerium Only''<br />
<br />
You are only allowed to keep enough Elerium to fuel one mission of your Avenger (12 units). Everything else must be handed back to the CFN. This means you can't build anything that requires Elerium. It also means you must scavenge all the parts for your Avenger from UFOs.<br />
<br />
''Mandatory Recycling''<br />
<br />
As above, plus you are required to immediately hand over to the CFN ("sell") any captured items containing Elerium (except for the specific parts you need to build your ''one'' Avenger). This is so the CFN can send them to a top-secret Elerium Reprocessing plant for extraction of the precious Elerium. You are allowed to start Research projects on them when you first return them to Base, but then you must immediately hand them over to the CFN. You are not allowed to use these items (except during the actual Battlescape mission when you capture them - and even then your troops have to lie about the ammo counts and pretend the aliens fired them). <br />
<br />
This means you can never hold any Plasma or Fusion/Blaster weapons or tanks, no Psi Amps or Mind Probes, no Stun bombs, alien grenades, Power/Flying suits. You can build a Firestorm or Lightning, but there's no point, since you can't operate it (since that expends Elerium). You can't arm your craft with Plasma Beams or Fusion Balls. Lasers are your best weapons: in the air, on your tanks, and in the hands of your troops. <br />
<br />
As a quirk, you can still build Plasma or Fusion defences for your Bases, since those don't appear to require any Elerium. As mentioned elsewhere, perhaps these are powered by a regular power station instead of Elerium. <br />
<br />
(If playing TFTD, you are allowed to hold one copy of an item in Stores, if it is needed to be present for a Technology advancement, but then you must sell it as soon as it is no longer needed, and you must never use it in combat.)<br />
<br />
==Base Limitations==<br />
<br />
===Base Defense===<br />
<br />
Don't play base defense missions. If your Base Defence weapons can't stop the Battleship, you have to abandon the base. This is because, actually, Base Defence is too easy and just an excuse to take lots of valuables off the Aliens, and maybe capture yourself a high ranking Alien to interrogate. <br />
<br />
===One Base===<br />
<br />
Build only a single base. This severely limits your efficiency, as you can only build a maximum of 35 base modules. Aircraft and radar coverage will be quite limited. Particularly challenging if combined with the scenario above!<br />
<br />
====For a real challenge...====<br />
<br />
Build that single base in Hawaii. See below under Scott Jones' scenarios.<br />
<br />
===Limit Base Size===<br />
<br />
You can build as many bases as you like but each base can only be 4x4 (or for the hard version 3x3, yes it is do able just very hard) instead of the normal 6x6. This version you will have to start a game and then edit you save game to make you first base smaller. Feel free to refund the cost of any modules and crafts you don’t have room for also if you don’t have room for a lab or workshop you might want to remove your Scientist or Engineer and refund there cost as well.<br />
<br />
3x3 notes: No using XcomUtil to let you place troops in an intercepter, just because you dont have room for 2 hangers in any one base is no reson for making it easyer, This is ment to be hard if you want 2 crafts make 2 bases you start with more money then normal you should be able to build a second base right a way only 25 days till your hanger is built.<br />
<br />
===Earth Tech Modules Only===<br />
<br />
Don't build modules requiring alien tech, ie. Psi Lab, Hyperwave Decoder, Plasma/Fusion Defence, Grav Shield, Mind Shield. Laser Defence is OK.<br />
<br />
===Starting from Scratch - the No-Base Start===<br />
<br />
This scenario starts you off with no base, but with an ample amount of starting funds to get a minimal intercept/recovery base up and running. The goal is to obviously get the organization up and running from scratch with your starting funds and then attaining self sufficiency through selling captured equipment until you're back to playing to what you may consider to be a normal game. <br />
<br />
To create this scenario, start a brand new game and sell everything, sack all staff and remove all base modules right down to the access lift. This will [[Starting Base (EU)#Sale Value of Starting Base|net only $300K - $350K]] . You will no longer have a base on the Geoscape, but the game will not think you've lost. From here, save the game. You will then need to edit your funds accordingly to how difficult you would like to make the scenario.<br />
<br />
The initial starting base, inclusive of all facilities, personnel and equipment, has a [[Starting Base (EU)#Replacement Cost of Starting Base|replacement cost of $7.345 to $7.795 million]], typically $7.795 million. In addition, starting cash is typically around $4 million. So anything less than $12 million in starting cash will make for a tougher than normal game.<br />
<br />
For a player looking to play this type of scenario, a starting kitty of $5 million, or even less, should be sufficient to build XCom up from nothing. It won't be easy but it's possible. You could even play with just the roughly $4.4 million in funds that are left after fully dismantling the starting base.<br />
<br />
Assuming you want a bigger kitty, once you've edited your funds, the scenario is ready to play. Before you start playing, consider making a backup of the save so that you can start a new no-base scenario again in the future. Or you can download this Superhuman savegame with $4.45M starting funds: [[Image:NoBaseSuperH.zip]].<br />
<br />
The only slight downside to the No Base scenario is that your ''first'' Skyranger and Interceptor will be numbered 2 and 3 respectively. <br />
<br />
As an added challenge, you can also chose to combine this with the no-funding-country scenario by editing all the countries so that they've all withdrawn from funding X-COM. With this, you'll truly have to live off the spoils of war to survive.<br />
<br />
==One Mission X-COM==<br />
<br />
A more hardline version of Funding Council Income Only, detailed [[User_talk:Arrow_Quivershaft#1_Mission_X-COM|here]]. In short, one Battleship mission, properly executed, can provide all the research needed to complete the game. The focus is on intercepting that Battleship and completing the game with only the spoils from that mission.<br />
<br />
==No Detection==<br />
<br />
Similar in concept to 1 Mission X-COM. No detection, and therefore no interception, of UFOs. Radar, airborne and hyperwave detection are ruled out. Almost as if the UFOs had some kind of ''stealth'' technology. This means no UFO Assault or UFO Crash Recovery missions. You are restricted to responding to Terror missions, Alien Base Assaults (when Alien Bases are detected by Agents only), and (possibly) Base Defence missions. This is quite hard as you get very little combat experience, artefacts or loot (and therefore very little cash). The Aliens also get a high score so many countries will defect. In fact, you cannot win this game, as there is no way to get UFO Navigations to build the Avenger. (Seb76's loader has 2 patches that do permit you to win: the "Roswell" UFO crashes option and an option where Base Control Tables don't explode.) More information here: [[Talk:UFO_Detection#Playing_With_No_Detection]]<br />
<br />
==Use XComUtil Features==<br />
<br />
[[XcomUtil]] is a game enhancer that was actually designed to make the game harder, although many of its features can be used the other way around. <br />
<br />
===XcuSetup configuration===<br />
<br />
When you run XcuSetup to install XComUtil a number of queries will be asked regarding which features you'll want to implement. The responses to the prompts given below will make the game harder. <br />
<br />
*''Do you want to use the improved starting base?'' (No)<br />
<br />
With the improved starting base you start with an [[Alien Containment]] already built, your radar is upgraded and you'll start with additional scientists and engineers. It will also be designed to maximize defense. Mainly this is just to avoid boredom and frustration, but it is also an advantage. <br />
<br />
*''Do you want to use the alternate starting base?'' (No)<br />
<br />
This retains the optimal defensive layout but doesn't add the extra facilities/personnel. Again, mainly to avoid frustration but if you say No you reduce your advantage and increase the challenge. At the very least you have the headache and expense of reorganising your base layout through construction and demolition. <br />
<br />
*''Do you want to use the improved Tanks/Weapons?'' (No to both)<br />
<br />
You forgo having tracked tanks with the armour levels of advanced hover tanks, and slightly improved Pistols and Heavy Lasers. You also forgo a crucial advantage which is the ability to crack open UFO external hulls with High Explosive - you definitely don't want that if you are looking for a harder game!<br />
<br />
*''Do you want to use the new laser weapons?'' (Yes)<br />
<br />
With this option chosen your lasers will require Elerium to be built (supposedly to act as power cells). This also prevents you from building plasma weapons (but not clips), thus preventing you from selling [[Plasma Pistol|Plasma Pistols]] and [[Plasma Rifle|Plasma Rifles]] since the aliens will stop using those. <br />
It also makes [[Laser Cannon|Laser Cannons]] and [[Fusion Ball Launcher|Fusion Launchers]] a lot less attractive to sell because of the time required to build them and the [[Elerium-115|Elerium]]/[[Alien Alloys]] necessary for their construction. Be prepared for the blow on your finances...<br />
<br />
*''Do you want research help from captured aliens?'' (Yes! Yes! Yes!)<br />
<br />
To make the game REALLY hard try this feature. <br />
First, it will increase the research times of most items tenfold or more, especially regarding the alien technologies. Instead of having to wait days or a week for a certain technology the time will increase to months. With a little bad luck you will be stuck to lasers and no armor when the [[Muton|Mutons]] and [[Ethereal|Ethereals]] start showing up. <br />
Second, the only way to speed research (other than having 250 scientists on all bases) is to capture live aliens, forcing you to bring a few [[Stun Rod|Stun Rods]] for all missions. It is not required to have an Alien Containment present to receive the research help but remember it only reduces the time of the research being done at your starting base.<br />
<br />
<br />
==Scott Jones' Scenarios==<br />
Scott T Jones, the original maker of XcomUtil, placed some interesting scenarios on the XcomUtil site. You do not need XcomUtil to follow these scenarios, you just need self-discipline to stick to the rules. Here they are:<br />
<br />
===Xenophobe===<br />
Don't try to capture or interrogate any aliens, and sell all alien artifacts immediately. Don't build Alien Containment. You can not win this scenario in the normal sense, since you can never discover how go to Mars (or even that you need to go there). You simply play it until you don't want to play it any more.<br />
<br />
===Bean Counter===<br />
This scenario takes its name from the beaurocratic "bean counters" who drive us crazy with their constant cost cutting measures. You are not allowed to destroy anything, since that wastes profits. You are not allowed to shoot down any UFOs, since that destroys valuable artifacts that can be sold. You cannot use any explosives or any weapon that uses a clip or ammunition, since those would have to be replaced. You are only allowed to use reusable items, like lasers, flares, stun rods, and psi-amps.<br />
<br />
===Explosive===<br />
Limit yourself to only explosive weapons. This scenario forces you to learn tactics that protect you from your own weapons. It is virtually the opposite of the Bean Counter scenario.<br />
<br />
===Photophobe===<br />
You must not fight any battle in full daylight. If you land at a battle and an aura of light isn't visible around your soldiers, you must leave immediately. This scenario is very interesting and teaches you how to fight at night. It is much harder to win, but it can still be won because it is dark on Mars.<br />
<br />
===Technophobe===<br />
Sack all of your scientists and engineers at the start of the game. You must sell all alien artifacts immediately. If you cannot buy the item, you cannot use it.<br />
<br />
This scenario forces you to learn how to use conventional weapons against the aliens. You can not win this scenario in the normal sense, since you can never go to Mars. You simply play it until you don't want to play it any more.<br />
<br />
===Neo-Pacifist===<br />
You are a Pacifist and cannot directly take the life of any living thing, even an alien. You cannot shoot down any UFO, because aliens might be killed. You cannot use any weapon that can kill an alien, even via reaction fire. Aliens who die during interrogation or because of lack of space in the alien containment facility are someone else's problem, so your conscience is clear.<br />
<br />
The only lethal weapons that you can use are grenades, but you must still give the aliens a chance to escape. In this way, the alien causes its own death. For example, an alien next to an armed explosive with a long fuse can save it self by moving away, while an alien next to an armed Proximity Grenade can save itself by not moving away.<br />
<br />
Even with these restrictions, the game can still be won by mind controlling an alien on Mars and having him stand next to an armed Proximity Grenade which was placed next to the master brain. Once this is ready, you release your control and wait for the alien to move, ending the game.<br />
<br />
===Single-Base Hawaiian===<br />
Games where you only have one base are not that different from normal games, unless that base is located in Hawaii. This scenario is very difficult and requires a different strategy. The challenge is that you have almost no radar coverage over any significant land mass. You must keep Skyrangers constantly on patrol over areas that are likely to have alien activity. Since combat is rare, you can not afford to skip any battles. This scenario teaches you [[UFO_Detection#UFO_Activity_Graph|how to use the graphs]] to gather information about areas in which you have no radar.<br />
<br />
===No Skyrangers===<br />
This scenario takes away your large, long range troop carrier, the Skyranger. Ideally, you should also eliminate the Lightning and the Avenger (except for the assault on Mars). Ground operations are conducted only with the small numbers of Soldiers that XComUtil allows you to place on board Interceptors (6 troops or 1 HWP + 2 troops) or Firestorms (10 troops or 1 HWP + 6 troops). This is quite difficult because you do not have enough men to allow for mistakes and the short range of your ships forces you to miss some terror sites. (This requires at least version 6.0 of XcomUtil.)<br />
<br />
===Shootdown===<br />
This scenario is an even harder variation of the No Skyrangers scenario. It not only takes away your large, long range troop carrier, but it also demands that you shoot down every ship you assault. This is extremely difficult, because you almost never capture any Elerium from ships that have been shot down.<br />
<br />
==Aliens Own Earth==<br />
In this [[Aliens Own Earth|scenario]] you start the game as normal, but the Aliens are in a very dominant position with over 20 bases already established on Earth. Survival is extremely difficult! This scenario takes a bit of work to setup before you can play, but definitely poses a serious challenge.<br />
<br />
==Speed Run==<br />
See how fast you can complete the game! For a very strict challenge, the clock starts when you choose a difficulty, and ends when you shoot the Brain on Cydonia.<br />
<br />
The current record seems to be 62:21 minutes, not including save/load time, by tbgox. Yes, that's JUST over an hour of playing. He's got the videos up on youtube showing how he did it too. Good lord. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wo71zOr5aU<br />
<br />
==Limited save/Reload==<br />
Depending on how strict you want to be with yourself, you can ban in-battle saves, save only when you want to quit the game and get on with real life, or for the really hard core, no save/reload at all: finish the game in one sitting, possibly combining this with a [[#Speed Run|Speed Run]]. For a smaller challenge, try to keep a tally of how many times you save and reload, and see if you can minimise this number.</div>Lobster Danhttps://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Arctic_Terrain&diff=32865Arctic Terrain2011-01-28T20:21:40Z<p>Lobster Dan: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[image:terrain-polar.gif|right|Arctic Terrain]]<br />
Aliens will land in the polar regions more often than you would suspect. They prefer flat, open snowfields. From the Geoscape, artic terrain looks snow-white.<br />
<br />
The chief terrain features here will be low snowdrifts (usually lower than head height) and cracks in the icecap, where frigid water peeks through the surface. To avoid hypothermia, ground units should not attempt to cross standing water. Failsafes in both alien and X-Com hardware prevent flying units from crossing such water at ground level, for fear of being speared by angry narwhals. Be sure to rise at least a story above the surface to cross<br />
<br />
There is little cover for alien or trooper. Enemies can be sighted from long distances, and sharpshooters can often place a shot clear across the battlefield. The effects of darkness seem to decrease somewhat here, due to the brightness of light reflected off snow and ice.<br />
<br />
<br clear="all"><br />
==Battle Notes==<br />
*Because it is so open, many commanders prefer to arctic terrain for 'training' missions. It is relatively easy to shoot down a UFO over the broad expanses of the icecaps, and then let the rookies hunt aliens out in the open.<br />
*The shortage of cover means that a "two step forwards, one step back" strategy can be very effective. This means that scouts should move forward until they sight the enemy, then let second-line shooters take those enemies down. Once the enemy is taken out, the scouts should fall back a short distance, forcing any other enemies to move forward on their own turn, burning up the enemy's time units and reducing their opportunities to fire.<br />
*The open space will allow long-distance grenade tosses.<br />
*Because they are both so wide open, arctic and [[Desert Terrain]] are tactically very similar.<br />
*Depending on module placement, you may find yourself completely cut off from the UFO by water. It is advised to equip your soldiers with Flying Suits so that the mission can be properly completed.<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
[[Desert Terrain]]<br />
[[Category:Terrain]]</div>Lobster Danhttps://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=UFO_Detection&diff=32834UFO Detection2011-01-26T21:06:11Z<p>Lobster Dan: /* Detection Facilities */</p>
<hr />
<div>Alien craft regularly enter and leave the Earth's atmosphere (in [[X-COM|UFO]]) or traverse in and out of the deeper reaches of the ocean (in [[TFTD]]). In order to prevent them from carrying out their missions, you [[UFO Interception|shoot them down]] or [[UFO Ground Assault|assault them while grounded]]. However, in order to perform either of these tasks, you must first spot them, which requires some types of '''UFO Detection''' equipment, either in your bases or using your [[craft]]/[[Subs|sub]] radar.<br />
<br />
==Detection Facilities==<br />
<br />
Three types of UFO/USO detectors can be built on your bases:<br />
<br />
*[[Small Radar System]]s/[[Standard Sonar]] have a range of 300 nautical miles (nm) according to the [[UFOpaedia]]. However, this figure is too short by a factor of five. The Official Strategy Guide gives the figure as 1500 nm, which matches game files and what has been observed in-game. <br />
*[[Large Radar System]]s/[[Wide Array Sonar]] have a detection range of 450 nm according to the UFOpaedia; their actual range is 2250 nm. Large radars cover 225% the total area of small radars (1.5x radius translates into 2.25x area). <br />
*[[Hyper-wave Decoder]]s/[[Transmission Resolver]]s do not have a detection range listed in the UFOpaedia, but the OSG, observation and game files show that they have a range of 2400 nm, slightly larger than that of a Large Radar.<br />
<br />
Additionally, all X-COM Craft ([[craft|aerial]] or [[subs|submersible]]) have a detection range of 600 nm. They can be used to search areas remote from your bases, or as a stop-gap while radar is being built.<br />
<br />
Your first base starts out with a Small Radar/Sonar; you can choose to add a Large version as well, which will take 25 days to build. Both types can also be added to any other base you establish. Due to a [[Known_Bugs#Radar_Stacking|bug]] in the game, additional Radars/Sonars at the same base (beyond 1 Small plus 1 Large) have no additional effect on detection.<br />
<br />
Hyper-Wave Decoders/Transmission Resolvers can only be built after you have done the proper [[research]] in each game; in EU, you must interrogate a captured navigator. In TFTD, you need to research Magnetic Navigation first. After it is researched, you can build these enhanced facilities at any of your bases. <br />
<br />
===Detection Ranges===<br />
<br />
The following graphic shows the range of each type of radar system:<br />
<br />
[[Image:Detection and tracking ranges.png]]<br />
*Yellow = Detection range of X-COM craft (showing 1500nm diameter but the correct value is 1200nm diameter)<br />
*Green = Detection range of a Small Radar/Sonar (3000nm diameter), also maximum "base detection" range for craft<br />
*Blue = Detection range of a Large Radar/Sonar (4500nm diameter)<br />
*Red = Detection range of a Hyper-Wave Decoder/Transmission Resolver (4800nm diameter)<br />
<br />
In practice, alien craft will often travel well within the listed detection ranges before being spotted. Detection "checks" are only performed twice an hour by the game, so fast-moving UFOs/USOs may travel quite a distance before the next check is performed; the Small and Large Radars/Sonars have only a 10-20% chance of detecting enemy ships in-range; and alien vessels are not seen until they enter the Earth's atmosphere or surface from the deeper levels of the ocean, which can potentially occur right near a base. X-COM Craft, like the Hyper-Wave Decoder/Transmission Resolver, appear to have a 100% chance of detecting UFOs/USOs that are within their detection range. <br />
<br />
Once detected, UFOs/USOs remain visible until they leave the Earth's atmosphere or travel outside the detection radius of all available radars. The half-hour check for detection applies to tracking as well, so aliens may travel far outside your radar coverage before disappearing from the screen. This is especially true for fast-moving ships, which can travel as much as 2500 nm between updates. However, a UFO that leaves the atmosphere (or USO that attempts to dive too deep) will disappear immediately.<br />
<br />
Alien Bases can only be detected by traveling/patrolling X-COM aircraft (or sometimes by X-COM agent reports at the end of each month). The maximum detection range is 1500nm from the aircraft and the chance of detection appears to decrease with distance. The longer a craft is left patrolling in one area, the more likely it will be to discover all bases nearby.<br />
<br />
====Radar Range Overlay====<br />
<br />
The following graphic can be used to help decide where you would like to site your bases (and therefore, your radars/sonars). Ensure you have centred the globe on where you are considering placing a base, then export a screenshot from within the game (using the F12 key) and copy this image over its center to see which areas are included within each facility's detection radius. (This graphic is calibrated for screenshots which are doubled in size (640x400)):<br />
<br />
[[Image:Range overlays.png]]<br />
<br />
== How Radars Function ==<br />
<br />
Each radar/sonar type has a chance to detect any UFO/USO within its range. Detections are performed in the game every 30 minutes exactly on the half hour. (If you are advancing the game an hour or day at a time, you may find the clock jumps forward to exactly a half hour interval whenever it spots a new enemy ship.)<br />
<br />
Small Radars/Sonars have a 10% chance of detecting UFOs within their range, and Large versions have a 20% chance. If you have both Small and Large Radars/Sonars built at the same base, their abilities are added together: you will have a 30% chance of detecting aliens within 1500 nm and a 20% chance of detecting them from 1500 nm to 2250 nm. <br />
<br />
Despite the "Short Range" and "Long Range" detection bars displayed on each base's Information screen, only one radar/sonar of each type will be used at each base; building additional modules will have no effect.<br />
<br />
Hyper-Wave Decoders/Transmission Resolvers have a 100% chance of detecting any enemy ships within their range. Given their superior range and detection abilities, these make the other detection types unnecessary. If you have Small or Large Radars/Sonars in a base which also has a decoder/resolver, you can dismantle them. <br />
<br />
"Normal" radars/sonars reveal the approximate size, altitude, heading, and speed of aliens within range. Hyper-Wave Decoders/Transmission Resolvers also display the exact craft type, the alien race onboard, what type of mission the craft is on, and where the mission is to be performed.<br />
<br />
<gallery widths="200px" heights="150px"><br />
Image:Radar_Detection.png|Radar Detection Screen<br />
Image:Hyperwave_Detection.png|Hyperwave Detection Screen<br />
</gallery><br />
<br />
== Craft-based UFO Detection ==<br />
<br />
All traveling X-COM craft, whether en route or patrolling, can also detect UFOs/USOs within a small range, 600nm. Within this range, craft can detect enemies 100% of the time. However, given the half-hour detection update intervals and craft speed, aliens can often pass within range of an X-COM craft without being spotted. All types of X-COM craft, whether [[Skyranger]]s or [[Avenger]]s, have the same UFO detection chance and the same detection radius, whether moving or patrolling. <br />
<br />
Faster craft may sometimes appear to have a shorter detection radius, as they can travel great distances between detection updates, so they often only detect alien ships when right on top of them, or even having passed them already. The effective detection range can also appear shorter or longer, depending if the UFO/USO is moving closer or moving away at the moment of detection.<br />
<br />
If an alien vessel moves out of range of your base-based detection systems, you may be able to resume tracking by sending one of your ships to where you believe the enemy to be (based on its speed and direction). <br />
<br />
Similarly, by launching an immediate Interception aircraft mission, it may be possible to maintain tracking of a UFO/USO long after it has moved outside range of ground-based detection - provided the aircraft can keep within 600nm of the target.<br />
<br />
=== Alien Base Detection ===<br />
<br />
All X-COM craft are also capable of detecting [[Alien Base|alien base]]s. In fact, this is the only way to discover them: they will not show up on any base radar, including Hyper-Wave Decoders. (However, "X-COM agents" will sometimes report the discovery of a base during X-COM's Monthly Report; see [[Alien Base#Locating an Alien Base|Locating an Alien Base]].) In order to discover an alien base, an X-COM craft must patrol within 1500 nm of the base's location. The nearer the craft, the sooner the base will be discovered. Patrolling immediately above a base will reveal it almost immediately; patrolling 1500 nm away, the base may take one hour to discover, or several hours.<br />
<br />
Bases can only be discovered by ''patrolling'' craft. An X-COM craft could fly over an alien base repeatedly and never discover it until it began patrolling in the area.<br />
<br />
It is frequently possible to deduce where an alien base is by the pattern of UFO traffic. The primary mission of [[Supply ship|Supply Ships]]/[[Fleet Supply Cruiser]]s is to supply alien bases; wherever they land, a base is likely to be found. When a base is first being built, four UFOs/USOs (a scout, two supply ships, and a battleship/dreadnought) will converge upon the same area and mill around for a while. (UFOs engaged in an [[Alien Missions#Alien Infiltration|Infiltration]] mission will display similar behavior involving five ships.) In [[X-COM|UFO]], the alien race found at a base will always be of the same type as the race found on the initial ships (or the supply ships which subsequently show up at regular intervals), while in [[TFTD]] ''all'' bases are manned by the same species.<br />
<br />
==UFO Activity Graph==<br />
<br />
Finally, the UFO/USO activity graphs, accessed from the Geoscape, can act as a sort of "MUFON" (''M''utual ''UFO N''etwork: a civilian group dedicated to the observation of UFOs/USOs), allowing you to see activity that your radars/sonars cannot. <br />
<br />
Turn on all the specific areas/seas and countries/zones and check them periodically. If one of the lines for the current month has changed, that means alien activity is occurring there. The country/zone graph usually provides more useful info than the area graph, though you should check both periodically. On occasion the area graph reports activity that is not reflected on the country graph -- in that case, keep an eye on it since more activity is likely to folllow.<br />
<br />
The graphs are updated every half hour. Although tedious, checking them every 3-6 hours can give you enough time to detect and intercept a UFO/USO while it is still on Earth. Using this method, it's possible to play the game with no radars/sonars, at least for the first few months. After that, UFO/USO activity becomes too intense and the graphs lose their resolution, but by that time you should have decoders/resolvers already built, or on the way.<br />
<br />
Be sure to only look at the current month's activity when trying to track current UFO activity. To make it easier to spot changes, you can write down the activity figures for each area and compare them with the current figures any time you think they've changed.<br />
<br />
Checking the graphs less often will not allow you to do realtime interceptions, but it will tell you where to expect trouble, as scout activity always precedes larger craft on a related mission. The graphs are especially useful for discovering where [[Alien Base]]s have been built, as they generate frequent [[Supply Ship]] activity. Knowing where the aliens have been focusing their attention also gives you a good indication of where to build additional [[X-COM Bases]].<br />
<br />
Note that these graphs are actually showing the [[Scoring#Alien_Scoring|aliens' score]]; this is why even later in the game it will be possible to see where the aliens are being able to complete missions, even if individual UFO/USO flight plans will be swamped.<br />
<br />
No matter how wide or powerful your detection network eventually becomes, if you ever find yourself going through any quiet lengths of time where little to no alien activity is picked up, you should make a habit of checking the graphs. Though they will not provide you with exact locations, you will still get a good indication of the region that needs to be patrolled.</div>Lobster Danhttps://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Wish_List_(EU)&diff=32825Wish List (EU)2011-01-25T18:18:14Z<p>Lobster Dan: </p>
<hr />
<div>X-Com is a great game and as evidence just look to the fact this wiki exists even though the game pre-dates the internet. In all it's greatness X-Com has some elements and behaviors players wish they could change. This is a repository of those desires. Some day a fan mod may make your wish come true...<br />
<br />
= I Wish... =<br />
State what you want AND what X-com does normally. Sign your name if you think "Oh man! That would be great!"<br />
<br />
== Geoscape and Strategic ==<br />
<br />
=== Smarter Aircraft Movement Around Globe ===<br />
I wish all craft understood the shortest distance between two points on a globe is a curved path towards the poles. Normally a craft goes in the opposite direction than it should (towards the equator). Pain in the ass when the base in the UK sends a craft to Siberia.<br />
--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]]<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Smart Interception ===<br />
<br />
Aircraft intercepting a UFO just head straight toward the UFOs current position at all times. Unless the UFO is already on a head-on course, this results in the interceptor travelling through a closing parabolic spiral path, and often missing the UFO and ending up in a tail-chase, and then just falling further behind unless the UFO stops or reverses course. This is pretty basic stuff, fighter pilots have known how to do this better for nearly a hundred years. It is particularly important if the aircraft you are trying to intercept is moving faster than you (eg if you are flying an Interceptor). <br />
<br />
What is needed is to plot the UFO's current course and speed (which X-Com has from radar data), and plot an intercept course. The maths for this is pretty easy (the intersection of 2 vectors) and can be implemented in a few lines of code, if we can find out where the current interception algorithm is, and patch it. <br />
<br />
Actually the radar bearing shown on screen is only accurate to within 45 degrees. I presume that X-Com does actually know the UFO's bearing, since it can clearly track the UFO's movements. Finding where that variable is located might be different. <br />
<br />
While we're at it, it would be nice if the UFO detection information displayed the actual bearing in degrees, rather than just the compass direction (North East, South, etc). <br />
<br />
Even if the improved intercept algorithm only used a bearing accurate to within 45 degrees, that would still be better for remote UFOs. You might need to switch to "head straight for it" once you get to very close range. [[User:Spike|Spike]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
===Score for retaliation Battleships===<br />
<br />
When a Battleship on retaliation attacks your base and is shot down, you get no score for it. This is completely illogical and it discourages any use of base defences. You should get normal 700 (or even 1400) points for it.<br />
--[[User:Kyrub|Kyrub]] 14:05, 30 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
: I'm not sure about this. Yes it's illogical, but it could also be a licence to get a huge score if you have a strong enough base. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:16, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:: The impenetrable base setup would turn into a cheat. As the aliens will keep hammering the base with a battleship until one breaks through, you'll have a steady supply of points without having to really do anything. Some balancing, such as paying to rearm your defence modules, ought to be thrown in to balance things out. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 23:13, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
::: A better fix would be to remove the retaliation flag when a battleship is destroyed. If someone can post a savegame with a never-ending flow of base attacks, I may have a look at the fix. [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 01:05, 15 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:::: Ummm, it seems the best solution (I, for one, can't think of any better), but wouldn't it assume that only the BattleShip really locates the player's base? All those scouts for nothing? [Still the best solution, though] [[User:N|n]] 15:01, 16 August 2010 (GMT+1)<br />
<br />
=== All Aircraft Weapons Useful ===<br />
<br />
In a balanced game, all weapons should have their uses, or at least a niche, but sadly this is not so:<br />
<br />
The Cannon is only useful for shooting down Small Scouts, and even that is practically impossible, due to the difficulty in closing to 10km range with any UFO, particularly the fast-accelerating Small Scout.<br />
<br />
The Stingray is not even useful for shooting down Small Scouts (destroys them 57% of the time) and the Avalanche is better in every meaningful way. It also takes twice as long to rearm, making it operationally much worse than the Avalanche.<br />
<br />
The Laser Cannon is inferior to the Avalanche for everything. It does have a higher payload but this is hardly relevant. If attacking a UFO that you would struggle to kill with Avalanches, you are unlikely to own an aircraft that will survive long enough to inflict more damage than an Avalanche if it mounted Laser Cannon. <br />
<br />
The Fusion Ball Launcher has a [[Talk:Craft_Armaments#Fusion_Balls_better_than_Plasma_Beams.3F¦possible niche]] in fighting Battleships when mounted on Interceptors. Even then, it is difficult and expensive to have aircraft configured to fight only one enemy. <br />
<br />
Unfortunately, the optimum path for craft weapon development is all-Avalanche followed by all-Plasma Beam. This is a shame. <br />
<br />
Suggestions to 'tune up' the other weapons:<br />
<br />
*Cannon - Increase the damage to 15 and 50% hit. So at least there is a pay-off if you manage to get in close. <br />
*Stingray - Raise Stingray accuracy to 80% but drop Avalanche to 60%. Double the rearm rate so it can be reloaded as fast as an Avalanche launcher.<br />
*Laser Cannon - increase accuracy to 50% and damage to 100. <br />
*FBL - increase the ammo from 2 to 3. <br />
<br />
It might be worth considering 'tune down' the Plasma Beam as well, particularly its stand-off range. It seems odd that humans copy alien plasma weapons and right away improve the range.<br />
<br />
[[User:Spike|Spike]] 06:59, 14 February 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
An alternative to tweaking the stats, is to tweak the costs. Realistic costs such as $386K for an Avalanche and $125K for a Stingray will even things up quickly.<br />
<br />
See also: [[User:Spike#Balancing_Aircraft_Weapons]]<br />
<br />
=== Tougher UFOs ===<br />
<br />
==== The Problem ====<br />
<br />
So let me get this straight. The first hybrid airborne weapon that humans ever build, and it immediately outclasses every weapon the aliens ever built, including their Battleship weapon? After all the Aliens have only been building plasma weapons for a few million years, us humans have been doing it for ''months''!<br />
<br />
More to the point, once you get Plasma Beams, downing UFOs is like shooting fish in a barrel. Even Battleships aren't that exciting if you show up with enough ships. <br />
<br />
What is needed is to push up the range, damage, and rate of fire of all the UFO weapons, particularly the UFOs you will be fighting by the time you have plasma beams. At a minimum, the weapon on a Battleship should be at least as powerful as, say, 2 Plasma Beams (as found on the XCom craft it is fighting)? Instead of slightly less than half as powerful? Compared to a single Plasma Beam, only the Battleship weapon has better range. It has double the accuracy, slightly higher damage, but half the fire rate. Net 5.7% more firepower than one Plasma Beam, but no match for 2. And the Battleship weapon of course is the most powerful in the alien arsenal. <br />
<br />
Possible tune ups for UFOs:<br />
<br />
*Battleship - increase to 255 weapon power, improve reload rate to 12 (from 24). Now roughly equivalent to 4 Plasma Beams in total firepower (on Beginner difficulty). Increase range to 69km, so that the Battleship commences fire as soon as an XCom craft begins its attack run. Or better, increase range to 70+km, the limit of the interception window, so that the Battleship starts firing immediately the XCom craft enters air combat range. This would disrupt XCom aircrafts' ability to form up into a flight of 4, prior to commencing their attack. Overall, this would make it much harder to down Battleships. Increasing weapon range to 70+km would also make it much harder to tail a Battleship - manual control in the Geoscape would be needed to hold off outside of combat range. Really, the Battleship should not sit there like a sitting duck. Does it think XCom are friendly?<br />
*Terror Ship - increase range to 52 (or decrease Plasma Beam range to 42), so stand-off kills are not possible with Plasma Beams?<br />
*Actually maybe all the larger UFOs should have weapon range 69-70+km, so they behave very aggressively toward XCom craft. <br />
<br />
NB: Strange effects occur if weapon range goes over 70km so it's probably best to leave it at 70km rather than 75km.<br />
<br />
NB: Also, changes to rate of fire need to be looked at carefully though because Difficulty Level also reduces reload rate for UFOs. Between Beginner (Difficulty 0) and Superhuman (Difficulty 4), rate of fire (and thus firepower) for Battleships, Terror Ships and Supply Ships increases by 24/(24-4x2=16) or 50%. But if the base reload rate for these weapons was reduced to 12, the transition from Beginner to Advanced would increase firepower '''three''' times for these 3 UFOs (less so for the smaller UFOs). It is less risky to increase the weapon power. Unfortunately there are only 2 firepower variables to play with - damage and reload rate - so there are not a lot of options, especially for the Battleship which already has weapon strength 148 out of a probable maximum of 255.<br />
<br />
:More detail on this. For Medium Scout, Large Scout and Abductor, with nominal reload rate 48gs, the rate of fire improves +20% between Beginner and Superhuman. For Harvester (32gs) it improves one third. For Large UFOs (Terror Ship, Supply Ship, Battleship - 24gs) the improvement is +50%. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 20:28, 14 February 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
I think we should assume that the Battleship, which is bigger than the entire XCom base, is engaging XCom craft with its secondary weapons rather than its main armament, which could probably destroy Manhattan with a glancing hit. <br />
<br />
I would really like to see the hypothetical Mega-Battleship go up against XCom's finest - a flight of 4 Avengers armed with dual Plasma Cannon or dual Fusion Ball Launchers. With the Battleship having 70+km range, 255 weapon power, and an effective fire rate on Superhuman triple that of the PB, it would have the firepower of 11 Plasma Beams - 36% more firepower than the whole attacking XCom force combined. To be honest I think that would be carnage, not sure XCom could win. So that would be tuning the Battleship up too much. The 3-fold increase in rate of fire when on Superhuman is just too much. Maybe just max out the damage to 255 and range to 75. This gives a 72% increase in firepower, and a challenging tactical problem for XCom (forming up and approaching under fire).<br />
<br />
The smaller UFOs can probably stay as they are. It is not until later in the game that XCom advances so that even large UFOs are easy pickings. What is the crossover point? Maybe the medium UFOs. So it might be good to reduce the reload times of the medium UFOs from 48 / 32 to 24, a good increase in firepower. <br />
<br />
In general I think all UFOs energy weapons should have at least as good range as the XCom energy weapons, even the Medium Scout. Again, they have been using these weapons for millions of years and we only just figured out how to copy them from the aliens, how could our weapons be better than the aliens? How did our first plasma weapon out-range and out-perform all but the hugest UFO plasma beam? And on an airframe the size of a Small Scout we mount ''two'' such weapons? On the battlefield we only are able to replicate alien weapons; how is it that in the air we are able to improve on them ''masssively''?<br />
<br />
Perhaps there should never be a stand-off advantage, except possibly with missiles -which should be less accurate with longer range. The XCom stand off advantage is really unfair because as far as I have seen the UFOs never attempt to close to effective range, even when they are getting killed. They don't break off much, either, though I think I have seen that happen on occasion. <br />
<br />
==== Specific Proposals ==== <br />
<br />
===== No Standoff Beam Attacks =====<br />
<br />
Increase ''all'' UFO plasma weapon ranges to at least 55km (compared to 52km for the XCom plasma weapon). Now only launched XCom weapons (Avalanche and Fusion Ball) have standoff advantage. Probably also reduce the accuracy of the Avalanche to 60% and buff Stingray accuracy to 80%, providing both weapons with a useful niche role.<br />
<br />
===== No Standoff Attacks =====<br />
<br />
Increase ''all'' UFO plasma weapon ranges to 66km (compared to 52km for the XCom plasma weapon). Now ''no'' XCom weapon has standoff advantage. (The benefit of a longer range weapon is simply spending less time being fired on by the UFO.)<br />
<br />
===== Twitchy Aliens =====<br />
<br />
Increase all UFO ranges to 69km. They will attack as soon as XCom aircraft commence any attack run.<br />
<br />
===== Hostile Aliens =====<br />
<br />
Increase all UFO ranges to 70km. They will attack as soon as XCom aircraft enter intercept range. UFOs now fire first, and tailing them unchallenged is impossible. <br />
<br />
===== Improved Medium UFOs =====<br />
<br />
Reduce (improve) the nominal reload time of Medium UFOs, Abductors and Harvesters, from 48gs and 32gs to 24gs. This increases the challenge in the early-mid game, when XCom might first be deploying advanced weapons.<br />
<br />
===== Improved Battleships =====<br />
<br />
Increase damage to 255. They're firing (bigger) Fusion Balls! A Battleship now has the same firepower as one XCom Craft with dual Plasma Beams (gosh wow!). It's a start, but what if we...<br />
<br />
===== Super Battleships =====<br />
<br />
... also reduce nominal reload time to 18gs. Giving a further one-third extra firepower on Beginner, 60% more on Superhuman.<br />
<br />
===== Mega Battleships =====<br />
<br />
... or for a real challenge, reduce reload time to 12gs. A further doubling of the firepower on Beginner - a further ''four'' times increase on Superhuman. Now Superhuman Battleships out-gun the biggest fleet XCom can throw at them!<br />
<br />
[[User:Spike|Spike]] 00:25, 19 February 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
: the flip side of this is weakening Xcom craft - apart from firepower issues there is also the issue of range: the ranges of the transport craft are such that really no more than 1 manned base is necessary to cover the globe for terror site defense. Setting e.g. the fuel capacity of the Skyranger to 500 results in roughly 1 base per continent required. This has interesting strategic consequences: need for more bases makes the ecomics more challenging (and thus slows down research). [[User:Emphyrio|Emphyrio]] 08:43, 9 August 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
===Enforced Variant Games===<br />
<br />
Various people like to play various variant games, such as No Alien Technology, or No Detection, or No Lethal Weapons - see for example Scott Jones' notes to XComUtil. It would be nice to have options on the game executable to enforce these scenarios. Self restraint is hard! [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
Some of these variant scenarios have been implemented by [[User:Seb76#Mods|Seb76]].<br />
<br />
<br />
===Recruit Certain Alien Types===<br />
<br />
Consider that not all aliens are loyal to their master (most TFTD alien has a device lodged to its brain), it would be interesting (or at least cool) if we could recuit such aliens to the XCOM cause. Maybe we can remove the controling devices from captive aliens after research on that species. Or convince the head of the Snakemen that it would be far more benefit to his race to help us instead of the Ethereals [[User:L-Zwei|L-Zwei]] 23:25, 12 September 2008 (PDT).<br />
<br />
Only certain alien types should be recruitable. Ones that should NOT be include Mutons (as they are directly controlled by Ethereals), Chrysallids (unbalancing), etc. It would be nice to be able to reverse-engineer Cyberdiscs or Sectopods, or make it that a Cyberdisc must be researched to build hovertanks/etc.<br />
[[User:MagicJuggler|MagicJuggler]] 13:32, 18 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
: It's pretty obvious which ones should be recruitable: non-robotic terror units that are captured alive. Chryssalids should simply do melee damage instead of impregnating (as the resulting spawn would not be mind-controlled and therefore XCOM wouldn't do it). Silacoids would be pretty ineffectual, and reapers slightly less so, but both would be disposable scouts. Celatids might actually have some use (eating through hulls with acid, and arcing over walls) but are fragile. All of these would require capturing a terror alien alive after researching Psi Amp. The two robotic units should require a live alien Engineer researched as well as UFO Construction, and the materials for building one would be one corpse of the appropriate type, Alien alloys and Elerium (to repair and refuel the husk). The Sectopod should probably be nerfed somewhat, so that it isn't quite so invincible to Heavy Plasma shots - after all, it was probably a twisted and melted modern art piece by the time it finally went down). [[User:Stubbs|Stubbs]]<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Game option: sell only researched items ===<br />
<br />
The fact that you may sell the alien items for the best price once you get them, without any research, is illogical. Such staff would never get on the market, being top secret and potentially dangerous to the humanity.<br />
<br />
Selling without proper research does not help the replay value of the game either: once you know the "right path" to get the best items, you simply sell anything else immediately and ignore the unnecessary research. Too easy.<br />
<br />
Therefore I wish for this game option: unknown items are sold for 0 (including the alien corpses), the known ones for their full price. This makes the sustainable economics much harder to develop and it gives sense to the "useless" research. Last but not least, it adds a lot of depth to the gameplay: will you choose research of a new weapon you need on the field, or of a mind probe that will earn you millions in sales? --[[User:Kyrub|Kyrub]] 15:55, 6 April 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: I really like this option, it's a great idea. Makes the game harder and makes it more interesting, more varied. Gives extra value to the otherwise "useless" research paths. Good thinking! [[User:Spike|Spike]] 15:06, 24 August 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: I'd prefer that unresearched artifacts/corpses sold for a fraction of their original value (no more than 25%). It makes no sense that nobody would pay to research them for themselves. Additionally, Laser Cannon sell price needs to be nerfed. [[User:Stubbs|Stubbs]]<br />
<br />
: This would have the added benefit that you would know if it was 'safe' or not to sell an item research wise. Coloring the un-researched items differently on the Sell/Sack screen would be good too ~ [[User:Renegrade|Renegrade]] 13:30, 19 August 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
=== New Research Mechanics ===<br />
<br />
The above comments spurred some ideas to make the research more realistic and the path to victory less obvious. <br />
<br />
For flavor reasons, give research options vague names instead of exact names. This already exists in some research topics, such as "New Fighter Craft" instead of "Firestorm". So, research topics might read "Alien Hovertank Wreck" instead of "Cyberdisc Corpse", "Grey Alien Corpse" instead of "Sectoid Corpse" or "Alien Pistol" instead of "Plasma Pistol". The names would be revealed in the UFOpaedia entry, and certain items would then be renamed as per common sense.<br />
<br />
Hide the ranks of aliens in captivity until they are researched (so you'd see Live Grey Alien #1, Live Grey Alien #2 if you had two Sectoids available for research). However, if you happened to have two Soldier ranks in containment, you'd only see one topic. The same rank/race combination would never appear again, but you might have to research several specimens of the same species to get the useful one you want. The alternative would be to have researched Mind Probe, which would tell you exactly what you had in containment (just as it does on the battlefield).<br />
<br />
Once an alien or its corpse is researched, then all other instances of that alien or its body are renamed appropriately. For example, research a live Muton and Muton corpses become obvious, and vice versa. "Live Green Humanoid Alien" is also renamed to "Live Muton".<br />
<br />
Finally, there should be a few more prerequisites in place to make less useful research more necessary. As someone else has mentioned, you should need a Cyberdisc Corpse to research Hovertanks. I'd also suggest that Psi Amp and Mind Shield require the research of Mind Probe (seeing as both entail scanning for minds as a logical first step), and that Flying Suits require Floater Corpse, Cyberdisc Corpse or a live Floater researched as an additional prerequisite (not Ethereals, as they fly with the power of their huge brains). [[User:Stubbs|Stubbs]]<br />
<br />
:These are all good suggestions and make a lot of sense. An alternative explanation of the names (seen in some fan fiction) is that these names are not the real names, but are made up by XCom troops based on some limited battlefield experience of them. But revealing the "real" alien race names through Research is a fun idea. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 08:44, 1 September 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Keyboard shortcuts at bases ===<br />
<br />
I wish we had (customised, maybe?) keyboard shortcuts at the base screen. Numbers (at the "base information" screen as well) would switch bases, R for research, E for equip craft, T for transfer, M for manufacture, S for soldiers, B for build new base, P for purchase+recruit (or "B" for "buy" - let people double-bind if they need it), I for base information. The doubles (soldiers/sell+sack) could be solved by using the key under the primary one (x for sell+sack). - n (16:26, 16 Aug 2010 (GMT+1))<br />
<br />
=== Inventory management ===<br />
<br />
I only want to keep 1 (or 0) sectoid corpse. If I have any more, sell them immediately and automatically. Sometimes having to sell all the stuff you've captured is just a chore.<br />
<br />
Also, let me automatically repurchase goods when my stores get too low.[[User:Lobster Dan|Lobster Dan]] 13:18, 25 January 2011 (EST)<br />
<br />
=== Soldier table ===<br />
<br />
Soldiers should be listed in a sortable table, so I can sort them based on rank, ship order, firing accuracy, psi skills, in psi training, etc. If I want to find out my best shooters, it should be a very fast operation.<br />
<br />
At a more advanced level: do it across bases; have filter options; sort based on formula (so I can find the soldiers with the best reaction+firing, or the best psi strength + psi skill).[[User:Lobster Dan|Lobster Dan]] 13:18, 25 January 2011 (EST)<br />
<br />
=== Monthly maintenance fees ===<br />
<br />
Later in the game, when you are way beyond what the sponsor nations are paying you and are instead selling captured/manufactured items to fund your operation, the end of the month can be a real PITA, because you need to build up a reserve of cash to avoid being shut down for financial problems. (This was worse with the misreported funding bug.) At the least, show us in one place exactly how much we need to raise at that time.<br />
<br />
Or make payments be done on a weekly/daily/hourly/continuously basis. This also means that I don't have to pay a same salary to someone who I hire on the 2nd or I hire on the 27th.<br />
<br />
Oh, and the cheat of "soldiers/scientists/engineers in flight don't need to be paid" needs to be squashed while we're at it. (But watch out fixing this one without making salary payments continuous; my current strategy is to hire most people just before the end of the month, which I would need to modify to hiring just after the start of the month.)[[User:Lobster Dan|Lobster Dan]] 13:18, 25 January 2011 (EST)<br />
<br />
== Battlescape and Tactical ==<br />
<br />
===Equipment Management===<br />
<br />
All wishes are currently implemented!<br />
<br />
===Fog of War Improvements===<br />
<br />
I'm sure most of these would be an absolute PAIN to implement, but I figured I'd toss the ideas out here.<br />
<br />
====Prior Recon of Battlefield====<br />
One thing that has always irked me is X-COM has no terrain knowledge when it lands, despite having probably circled the place two or three times before landing and thus they should know at least some of the area. This would be nice, but isn't too important. Probably would be a pain to implement so X-COM would have all knowledge of external features but no knowledge of building interiors, anyways. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 22:38, 7 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:Yes at the very least, when you splash the UFO, it could tell you (via some miracle technology such as "satellite reconnaisance") what the terrain type is of the landing zone area. Then you could adjust equipment accordingly. And adjust your uniform camouflage (if using one of the uniform mods). [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:16, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:: Geoscape: center on the site, then maximum zoom. Aside from having to disambiguate forest from jungle, this works fine for knowing the exact terrain you're getting into. -- [[User:Zaimoni|Zaimoni]] 10:17, 4 Sept 2008 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::This is already present in the game. To center the Geoscape on a specific location, right-click on the target spot. To do maximum zoom in, right click on the Zoom-In button(and the same works for Zoom-Out). Also, Jungle and Forest use the same display algorithm, but are easy to differentiate; Forest occurs NORTH of the equator, and Jungle occurs SOUTH. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 13:23, 4 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:Returning to AQ's original suggestion, it wouldn't be too hard would it for the dropship to "radar map" the target, and then have the basic map show up on your scanner on Turn 1? [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
====Dynamic Fog====<br />
<br />
The Fog of War in X-COM is clumsily implemented, compared to modern expectations. Everything starts out black, but after exploring, is shown...and it's kept in the same showing, regardless of whether you actually have LoS to that area anymore. It would be nice if when you no longer had Line of Sight to a particular map area, it would be cloaked in a way so that you knew the terrain, but not the units there. Since I've sometimes spent over half an hour trying to hunt down that last alien hiding in area I'd already explored. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 22:38, 7 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
====Deactivate Object Radar====<br />
<br />
Currently, in X-COM, any objects dropped in a given square show on your Battlescape, regardless of whether you have Line of Sight to the square or not. In regards to dropped weapons/grenades/equipment/dead soldiers/dead aliens, this doesn't make a large difference. But in the case of STUNNED aliens, a quick scan across the Battlescape can tell you whether the alien you stunned 10 turns ago is still down, or stood back up(the stunned alien object will disappear from the stack). Of course, since aliens which have revived from stun are almost always disarmed(and the ones that aren't probably should've been killed instead), the usefulness of this 'exploit' is reduced mainly to finding out that the last alien you're looking for is just wandering aimlessly and unarmed. Perhaps leave stacks showing the same until you regain LoS to that area? [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 22:38, 7 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
====Crushed Buildings====<br />
<br />
Why don't we see any crushed or destroyed buildings? Does a UFO always fall like a rock, perpendicular to the ground? No marks on the ground? Such impact would do massive damage to the land (a small meteor can do much if it has a high speed...). (Also, at the [debatedly] "real" UFO crash zones UFO parts were scattered over miles)<br />
<br />
I'd like to see chopped buildings, entering UFO's through a barns; entering an abductor from a immediate house's roof if I have plasma and no flying suits yet. - [[User:N|n]] 15:01, 16 August 2010 (GMT+1)<br />
<br />
: The Pocket PC remake of the game did this, though it seems the site it concern has vanished off the face of the net. Could probably find a copy if you're interested.<br />
<br />
: By the way, you can generate a time/date stamped signature by typing four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 23:04, 16 August 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:: Amazingly enough (is it Truman Show of me or just a coincidence :)?), my GF found a low-tech palmtop (with/in a case)... on the pavement. With no personal data and means to find the owner; when I laid my hands on it, I actually found and installed Ufo:EU there, but it wouldn't run :(. [And thanks! again for the 4 tildes name/timestamp trick] - [[User:N|n]] 19:18, 18 August 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
===Restore Game from Battlescape===<br />
<br />
It would be nice to be able to reload a saved game directly from the Battlescape "?" screen, rather than having to go through the process of Abandoning to the Geoscape. Would you need to check it was a Battlescape save and not a Geoscape save? Maybe, maybe not. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
===Warm Grenades===<br />
<br />
Currently when you set the timer on a grenade (or HE pack), the timer runs down every turn regardless of whether the grenade is worn, held, or dropped. Then, when the timer runs out, it explodes unless it is held or worn. There is no real grenade or explosive that works this way. Once the timer (fuse) starts running, they explode regardless. However for most hand grenades, the timer (fuse) doesn't start until after you throw/drop the grenade. It would be nice to have both of these real world behaviours, and lose the game's default behaviour. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
: Technically the way the game implements grenades, they don't have a timer. At least, not as such. When you set a grenade, the game just assigns it a turn to blow up on. Once the turn has passed, the game checks to see that it's on the ground and blows it up if it is, otherwise it doesn't. I believe Seb76 has already addressed this in his patches where there's an option to make grenade blow up regardless whether they are in inventory or otherwise the moment the timer is set. X-Com Apocalypse does a good job of this. The moment the grenade is so much as moved after the timer is set, it counts down. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 23:01, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:: To simulate an actual timer, you would need to do something like: Every turn that a primed grenade is being held by a unit during the "explode" check, increment by +1 the turn when that grenade is going to explode. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:10, 14 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
:::I think I would change quantity2 ([[OBPOS.DAT]]) to a countdown instead of a turn, and use quantity3 as a flag indicating if the count has started. This flag is set any time a turn ends and the grenade has no owner. Taking it back in your hand once the timer has started won't help and the thing must be thrown... quantity2 is decreased if quantity3 is set, and the grenade blows up as usual. [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 01:35, 15 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
: That would be great. It would be exactly consistent with a 'spoon' type hand grenade. The timer only starts when you release the grenade, but after that it explodes at a definite time regardless of whether you pick it up or not. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
===Stun Grenades===<br />
<br />
I want flashbangs.--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 22:59, 11 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
:Instead of stunning, I'd see more effect if it would remove some TUs to units having line of sight (to be fare it should affect xcom units too). It would help against reaction fire (which is the point of flashbangs). Given that grenades detonate at the end turns, it would require a good coordination to have the grenade detonate exactly at the end of the alien turn, and just before your attack. Being able to open doors à la xcom2 would also help to throw flashbangs just before a craft assault... [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 22:03, 12 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
::That would be good. Hard to program, potentially extremely unbalancing, but good. I considered a "debuff" kind of ability (as you suggest) for flashbangs, vs the more obvious substitution of [[stun]] for [[Explosions|HE]] damage. In the end, I picked "I want flashbangs."--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 03:32, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
: Maybe flashbangs dont' work on Aliens - otherwise, XCom would use them, right? :) But seriously, I too would like flashbangs, and stun grenades / concussion grenades. Both of these would make the game easier, though. With flashbangs, you might have to compensate by just giving the aliens more TUs. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 13:33, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
::More options for the player is going to make it easier for any kind of game. Particularly of games like XCOM where the computer can't take advantage of the changes. However I don't believe a weak stun grenade (like 44 stun damage, comparable to AC-HE) would change the game much because the 80 item limit remains.--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 22:21, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
===Night Vision===<br />
<br />
I '''don't''' want to add night vision equipment to the game. I assume that either (1) all XCom units already have night vision gear as standard, but it's not as good as alien night vision, and the visibility that XCom units have at night is based on their standard-issue night vision gear, or (2) night vision gear does not work on Aliens. Either they do not appear on night vision, or maybe worse - maybe the aliens can manipulate night vision equipment, causing worse than normal vision, or hallucinations, and even tricking XCom units into firing on each other. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 13:33, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:Wouldn't it be nice though if it had gradients other than "day: 20 squares" "night: 9 squares" ? Like.. "early morning/late evening: 10-19 squares" ? I find the cut off from full daylight to full night kinda disturbing. ~ [[User:Renegrade|Renegrade]] 10:41, 19 August 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:: I originally thought of this when dreaming of a Stargate-themed patch for X-COM -- but what about enemies that are invisible unless you are facing them while wielding a certain weapon designed to spot them? (Stargate fans: I'm thinking of the TERs.) [[User:Lobster Dan|Lobster Dan]] 13:18, 25 January 2011 (EST)<br />
<br />
===Throwing over stuff===<br />
'''(Moved to Talk, as this is not a bug and so does not need fixing.)'''<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
===Assault Time Limit===<br />
<br />
One of the cool things about UFO Defence is there are no time limits on the scenarios. This is great as it allows for a totally different kind of tactics and much more flexibility. <br />
It's more of a "thinking man's game" as a result. But... arguably this is not very realistic for UFO Assault missions. If the Aliens are getting creamed, they should try to make a getaway if they can (just like XCom would). A simple way to implement this would be a hard time limit (say 20 turns?) on a UFO Assault. Another way would be to base it on Alien Morale. At a certain Morale level the aliens decide to dust off. Give the player say 3 turns warning while they rev up the engines. Then if there is still a Navigator or Engineer in the Control Room alive, the ship takes off. Any XCom troops still aboard are MIA. <br />
<br />
You might run into problems if the UFO took off but then landed again or was shot down, generating another ground mission with potentially '''more''' Aliens than were still alive at the end of the Assault. (Still, maybe they hatch some more clones if they get time to....) [[User:Spike|Spike]] 09:51, 4 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
: It strikes me as justified they don't do that. Troops loose in the vessel could be seriously bad. It would be nice if they dusted off on the condition that their morale was low enough or 3 X-com soldiers had the door in their sights without aliens alive outside in the latter case and no X-com soldiers on board in either case. also, if the UFO has a hole in either the command or engine room, it would have to set down before leaving the atmosphere. [[User:(name here)|(name here)]]<br />
<br />
Taking off with troops onboard would be perfectly safe (for the aliens) and justifiable if one assumes that alien ships in flight are inherently inhospitable for humans. This is easily done by saying that they undergo accelerations that humans can't withstand (splat), can't withstand for any length of time (pass out), or that they intentionally make rapid accelerations in different directions, either normally or just if they're trying to bash some intruders around. Naturally, the aliens themselves would either be immune to these (tough physique / their built-in antigrav devices?), or be in acceleration chairs, safe from all this.<br />
<br />
Alternatively, when you get the warning that the UFO is going to take off, you've got a certain amount of time to either get everyone '''off''' the UFO, or to get everyone '''on''' it (or as many as you can). There could be a follow-up mission that takes place in "sky" terrain, where the outdoors is either impassable (the easy way) or else instantly withdraws units from combat (flying suits / parachutes). The soldiers' goals would be to either take out the aliens and presumably safely land and salvage the UFO, or take out the UFO's means of flying (power cores / navigator?). In the latter case, they might have a certain number of turns to withdraw or be caught in the crash, with possible casualties just like the aliens, mitigated to some degree by their armour and maybe where inside the UFO they are.<br />
<br />
In the case of a crash, there could be a final mission to finish off the surviving aliens, using the X-COM soldiers that survive the crash, and no landing craft (it's still back at the old landing site). Alternatively, you could say that there '''is''' an X-COM landing craft parked outside (with all remaining members of the original landing party), since the in-flight time / distance was presumably low and the original X-COM craft quickly packed up and flew to the new landing site. &mdash; [[User:Wisq|Wisq]] 17:11, 18 April 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Either side could try bringing in reinforcements -- if I can bring two interceptors to a fight in the sky, why can't I bring two troop transports? This starts to get complicated, but it's come up in discussion of making X-COM into an onlime multiplayer game... :) [[User:Lobster Dan|Lobster Dan]] 13:18, 25 January 2011 (EST)<br />
<br />
===Alien AI===<br />
<br />
====Attempts to rearm====<br />
Aliens cannot pick up items, but I wish they would. If an alien has no useful weapons in inventory they should either head for cover or head for a plasma weapon. Panicked aliens drop their weapons but never seem to pick them up when they managed to pull themselves together. It would be nice if they tried to arm themselves again. --[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 13:55, 19 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:Even if it's too hard to make aliens head towards weapons (is it safe?, could it be used to trap them, not to mention the complexities of route finding) - it would still be good if an unarmed alien checked for usable weapons in every square it moved through, and at least picked up one loaded weapon or grenade per turn. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
Fixing the AI for this could be really hard. Apart from all the possible exploits by XCom, the AI is probably a really hard part of the game to reverse engineer. You could say that an unarmed alien is no threat anyway (we are only concerned about aliens without psi or built in weapons). So nothing is lost even with an exploitable method of re-arming. By exploitable I mean the XCom player can manipulate re-arming, e.g. by leaving weapons out in the open as bait for traps. <br />
<br />
Maybe the simplest modification would be to ''not'' drop weapons when the alien panics? This does not require delving in to the AI, just intercepting the panic effects. Dont make aliens drop any weapons when they panic. It would be reasonable to return the weapon in hand to inventory, so there is a TU cost for the alien to bring the weapon back into play again. <br />
<br />
This would not work for aliens who were stunned and wake up, or who were mind controlled by XCom and made to drop their weapons. But it would probably catch 80% of cases. <br />
<br />
Another cheat, short of fixing the AI, is just to pick up weapons that the alien walks over. It could also pick up "spare" weapons from adjacent aliens (cheating on TUs - basically just teleporting the items to the unarmed alien). Spare alien weapons are almost invariably grenades. I have not had a lot of success in getting unarmed aliens to use grenades, so more research is needed here. Maybe only certain types of aliens use grenades, or only in certain circumstances?<br />
<br />
Really, really cheating would be to teleport any weapon laying around the battlefield into the alien's inventory. But I think it is more fair just to say panicked aliens dont drop their equipment. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 16:13, 13 February 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
==== End Psi Bullying and Psi Baiting ====<br />
When the aliens use psi attacks they always go for your guys with the most chance of failing the attack and going nuts. Is it possible to make those pesky aliens attack random soldiers, regardless of their psi skill/strength? <br />
<br />
: Not a bad idea to randomise this a bit, because while initially this tactic helps the aliens, it becomes so predictable that it can be used against them by deploying unarmed "Psi Bait" soldiers to draw off all the attacks. (Or make aliens avoid controlling/panicking soldiers who have no loaded weapons. But then folks would just give them pea shooters and wear armour.) [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
=== 80 Item Limit on Base Defense Mission ===<br />
: Well you get the 80 item limit on every mission, but it hurts more on a Base Defence as you have more limited ability, or sometimes no ability, to manage what goes into those 80 items. I was thinking about a couple of (theoretical) ways to fix this and I hit on a new one (new for me anyway): Why not take the 80 items from the Transport(s), first Transport then second Transport until you run out of items or hit 80. This has a few benefits:<br />
:* Ready made interface to manage the 80-item limit, the Stores <> Craft (Equip Craft) Screen.<br />
:* If you have no warning at all, the 80 items will probably make good tactical sense in general terms, even if they are are not totally optimised for Base Defence (no proximity mines, etc).<br />
: I think that copying the Transport inventory into the Battlescape inventory would be relatively to implement (though what do I know?). As a simplification, you could move only the inventory in the ''first available'' Transport that is present in the Base, into the Battlescape, and not bother looking in more than one place (other Transports, Base Stores) to get up to 80. It would then be a bit of a drag if your Transports are all out on a mission when your Base gets attacked though. Or perhaps inspect the inventory of Transport 1 (wherever it is in the world), and then attempt to copy its inventory, using equipment present in the Base?<br />
: Another way of doing it which has been mentioned elsewhere is to try to reverse the order of the items in the Stores list. This has the effect of putting the more advanced weapons first, rather than the more basic weapons. There could be all kinds of unwanted side effects of this, depending on various programming issues.<br />
: Actually there is already a fix for the 80-item limit in XComUtil. XComUtil records a standard assign weapon set for each of your troops, and then teleports those weapons to the Battlescape from your Base Stores, regardless of the 80-item limit (but still subject to the Battlescape's 170-item limit). Not 100% sure if this works for Base Defence missions though. <br />
:[[User:Spike|Spike]] 13:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
=== Collision Detection Bugs ===<br />
I have noticed that sometimes you can shoot through hard objects, for example, recently I had a soldier up on the roof of a house overlooking a large scout craft. When a Sectiod moved through one of the inner doors of the UFO, my man shot him straight through the intact ufo roof! <br />
<br />
=== Base Defence Systems Cause Alien Casualties ===<br />
<br />
I don’t know if this is already implemented in the game? When the aliens attack your base and you defend it with base defense measures does the following occur and if not a mod maybe? When you hit the battleship with your weapons but it still gets through (e.g. you hit the battleship with some missiles before it lands) can the number of attackers be reduced accordingly. For example if you hit it with some missiles then maybe they could have a couple less soldiers attacking (could be random small amount) or when you hit with loads of stuff like plenty of fusion balls and the battleship just makes it then their attack could be reduced to a few aliens (all others got killed in the defense). As I say not sure if this is already there to some degree (not played in a long time and I’m not at that stage yet this time round). <br />
<br />
: The general view is probably that Base Defence missions are a boon to XCOM already, so why make them any easier. At very least there would need to be more damage to the loot than there was to the Alien's combat effectiveness, otherwise this unbalances the game in favour of XCOM. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
=== Alien vs Alien ===<br />
This one is way out there. Alien v Alien battles out with main game, just random battlescape maps. Sectoid and their terrorists against Floaters and theirs etc. One side human controlled the other computer. Choice of ships involved etc. <br />
<br />
:I actually love this idea. It might just about be possible using XComUtil, if someone is a total XComUtil guru.<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
There was a utility to do this from Devisraad. it has long since been removed from his site, but someone may still have it. The basics was you renamed unit and it automatically replaced graphics flag to swap out the units. Didn't work on the Large Aliens but still was a fun mod --[[User:BladeFireLight|BladeFireLight]] 02:20, 6 January 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
=== Aircraft in Base Defence Battlescape ===<br />
<br />
New graphics for the Interceptor and Firestorm on the battlescape. All your ships could remain in their hangers when the aliens attack your base. Don’t understand why Mythos did not do this originally.<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Simply for one reason: the limit on the size of the battlescape. UFO maps are usually limited to 10000 tiles (50x50x4), on Bases you have 9600 (60x60x3), the last level one being dirt. You need 3 levels to display X-COM craft. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 14:28, 23 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Could you not do it but clip off the top level of the craft - leaving the ground level and 'deck' level? It would be a cool terrain area to fight in. I like the fact that in TFTD you can still see your subs during a base defence. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
It is possible to edit the map files to include the Skyranger, but you'll have to use Xcomutil to play with that terrain and I think it would never launch during base defense missions (but I'm not sure on that - never tried editing the X-COM base terrain). [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 19:25, 4 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
This could be done by creating new "hangar" map modules, each containing one of the five possible X-COM craft. Bung the modules into [[GEODATA.DAT]] at index 0C, and you're done. The catch is you can't have all craft or the MCD array will overflow. The base terrain uses ~160 tiles as it is (out of the max of 256), while the craft use about 60 each (on average). Putting them all in would take the table above 300 entries (that is to say, the game'd crash).<br />
<br />
'Cause XcomUtil already provides us with an Intercepter design made up of SkyRanger parts, I suppose the way to go would be to only implement those two craft. If you have any alien technology ships, they could either be left out ("they were fast enough to escape") or rendered as SkyRangers.<br />
<br />
It should also be noted that bases are made up of two levels, not three. Luckily, all the craft are only three levels high, so cutting out the landing gear still works. - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 19:56, 4 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Very true about the MCD limit, that's why I only mentioned the Skyranger but the Interceptor could be added as well (and would not make much sense to have your first defense mission with a nice Avenger parked on the hangar while your Interceptors are being blow to bits by Battleships). The bases are 3 levels but you can only modify two of them. The game engine automatically adds a layer of 'dirt modules' either at top or bottom. Hmmm, this just gave me an idea for the wish list... [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 20:29, 4 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Both alien and X-Com bases ''are'' only two levels. There must be something screwy in your game; XcomUtil maybe?<br />
<br />
It occurs to me that removing landing gear and stuff might make it ''just'' possible to jam in the Lightning tiles as well (as the MCD requirements would also shrink slightly). That'd make it possible to add the Firestorm, too. Seems a shame to get that far then leave out the Avenger, though...<br />
<br />
- [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 21:30, 4 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Nevermind, I completely misread your previous post. Yes, they are two levels only, could be Xcomutil that adds the 3rd level.<br />
<br />
- [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 22:30, 4 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
You may be able to get 3 levels in an X-Com Base but not 4. EU has a smaller amount of memory alocated. I dont know the limit but 60x60x4 will crash EU. TFTD has no problem --[[User:BladeFireLight|BladeFireLight]] 02:25, 6 January 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
I got partway through this and then decided to change my methods entirely and start from scratch. So I thought I might as well post my progress anyways, as it's already about on par with the crude TFTD implementation: You always have the same craft appear in your hanger regardless of what is (or isn't!) there.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Skyranger In Hanger.rar]]<br />
<br />
- [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 05:40, 17 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Hey BB, a while ago I have modded the plane terrain files so that the Skyranger appears facing east instead of south. If you want to use that one (to make it a little different) let me know. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 08:23, 17 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Thanks, but don't worry about it for now: it'll make the MCD arrays larger still, so I'll consider it when I get all the other stuff done. <br />
<br />
- [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 17:01, 19 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
The completed mod is now included in my toolpack. As usual, I've only done cursory testing on it, but I'm pretty sure it's stable enough. <br />
<br />
- [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 06:40, 20 January 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
=== Fixed firing TUs ===<br />
<br />
Something that always bugged me was how the weapons used percentages for firing TUs. It doesn't make sense that the faster a soldier got, the longer it would take to fire a weapon.<br />
: This is because you can't fire an automatic weapon any faster than it will shoot. However, it otherwise makes minimal sense, as you point out. I suggest two alternative solutions. Firstly, that only automatic fire modes use a fixed percentage of a soldier's time units, and other modes use a fixed number of TUs. This would entail the newer soldiers spraying and your most elite taking fast, selective single shots. The alternative is that each firing mode for each weapon entails its own formula (revealed in the UFOpaedia but essentially hidden during the battlescape) along the lines of "X% of TUs + Y TUs". Snap fire would be a low % of total plus a low fixed cost, Aimed would be a low % of total with a high fixed cost, and Auto would be a high % of total with a low fixed cost. While this is somewhat complex, in-game you wouldn't have to worry, and it accounts for what can be reduced (i.e. aiming speed) and what can never be improved by a soldier (i.e. cyclic rate of fire or time for a missile to lock). [[User:Stubbs|Stubbs]]<br />
:: These observations are very sensible. However we also need to consider the impact on game balance. If you implement this in an even-handed way, alien rates of fire will increase as they have high TUs. Or, if you fudge it so that alien rates of fire remain the same, then X-Com's advantage will increase as the game progresses. Neither of these are desirable. It would be extremely hard to implement this and still maintain game balance. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 08:41, 1 September 2009 (EDT)<br />
:::Each turn has the exact same duration, but is divided into TUs separately for each soldier. That's a simplification that works well in a turn-based game and reflects the fact that a soldier is fast or slow. However, weapons need to be aimed and will not fire faster than normal, thus they require a fixed percentage of the turn duration. In other words, soldiers gain movement speed, but fire at the same rate. This is both desirable and logical, just not self-explanatory. Thus, I would definitely stick to how TUs consumption is solved currently. [[User:mingos|mingos]]<br />
<br />
=== In-flight Interception ===<br />
<br />
Yes, I know that this idea is nigh-impossible, but I was thinking, wouldn't it be awesome to infiltrate a battleship, kill the aliens inside and escape, with the geoscape being shown zooming past underneath? Also, in a similar vein to the "aliens dust off after 3 turns" idea, after killing the aliens ( or blowing up the power cores, maybe?)you would have to get as many troops as possible to the drop ship in 3 turns(in retrospect I guess that you could only do this with the Lightning because of the doors) or the ship crashes and all troops not in the dropship are missing in action. Yes, this idea is impractical and would be really hard to program, but the idea of blowing a UFO up from the inside just seems epic to me. [[User:WolfenMage|WolfenMage]]<br />
<br />
=== Impose cost to using Psionic attacks===<br />
<br />
I think everyone agrees Psi attacks are too powerful. I would propose to impose a cost to using Psionic attacks. This could take the form of decreasing the physical stats after using a PSi attack (after all all: the psionic races are physically weak). This could for example lead to a soldier becoming a weakling or even fainting or dying from using psi-attack. Another possibility is to decrease mental stats (in this case the ratio would be that humans are not really being adapted to psi: you could be expected to go crazy playing mind games) leading to a decrease in psionic powers or maybe panicking or beserking the soldier using psi. Together with limiting psi attacks of MCed units proposed elsewhere this would rebalance the later game somewhat... [[User:Emphyrio|Emphyrio]] 07:22, 9 August 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
=== Make losing a base less costly ===<br />
<br />
My friends would often quit and reload after losing a base because it was so costly. It should definitely be a kick in the teeth, but even the game text suggests some ways you can recover:<br />
1. Scientists and engineers have already been evacuated -- on a defense loss, let me transfer them to bases with open living quarters.<br />
2. Likewise, move any ships at that location to another open hangar. (Maybe doing this requires that I have gotten advanced warning of the attack.)<br />
<br />
=== Have captured aliens be present in base defense ===<br />
<br />
The alien containment unit could have all my captured aliens present in jail cells. But this requires other things to happen first.<br />
<br />
On one hand, I think it would be cool if the attackers can rescue their friends and bring them into battle. So aliens would need to be able to pick up weapons. Psi powers would suck -- it would seem nuts if a captured ethereal suddenly started brainwashing my crew right away. Maybe they all start with -50 stun, or maybe (can we do this?) psi-powered enemies have it disabled if they start the game captured.<br />
<br />
Another issue is that each containment supposedly holds 10 aliens according to the game text, but there is no real limit in the game. Maybe we fix that 10-limit bug (which would mean that we would need to be able to kill overflow aliens), maybe we only take the first 10. And it definitely runs into tile issues.<br />
<br />
Would the enemies in containment need to be killed/re-stunned to end the mission? Maybe being in a locked jail cell automatically counts as captured.<br />
<br />
== Miscellaneous ==<br />
<br />
===Fix All Bugs===<br />
<br />
Oh no [[User:Seb76#Bug Fixes|Seb76]] already did this! :) [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
= I Wished (And My Wish Came True)... =<br />
<br />
== Geoscape and Strategic ==<br />
<br />
=== Fuel Ready always ===<br />
[[User:Seb76#Mods|Implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
I wish that I could send out craft at any fuel or ammo level. Normally craft can only leave a base if fully "ready". Craft is only "ready" at 100% fuel (or 0% fuel using an exploit) but there's no logical reason why a full tank and full ammo is required. Fully repaired... that's fine. I can live with pilots refusing to fly a plane missing a wing even if it means England is lost to aliens. 15 hours to fill a tank? Retarded but I can live with that too if I can send out a craft at 20% fuel.<br />
--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]]<br />
<br />
:Actually, many modern aircraft '''do''' require the fuel tanks to be full on takeoff, and fairly empty on landing. The weight of the fuel is figured into the takeoff aerodynamics, and the tank being full prevents fuel 'sloshing' in the tanks and not actually making it to the engine. (Conversely, many aircraft need to have dispensed of much of that fuel weight before landing.) This holds for most runway-takeoff craft, but may not apply to anything with VTOL capacity; I'm unsure there.<br />
<br />
:I do agree that non-full weapons aren't as critical, though. But from a logical standpoint, most modern aircraft should not be launched on an empty fuel tank. I also should noted that an Elerium-fueled craft with [[Known_Bugs#Elerium-fueled_Craft_Bug|50% fuel or less remaining]] will automatically return to base, regardless of distance from base. Of course, given that such craft fuel up quickly, its less of an issue there. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 22:05, 7 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:Hum, maybe you can try [[User:Seb76#Mods|this]]? [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 13:01, 8 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
::Thanks! But I can't try it. I've not been able to get my copy of Xcom to run properly except on a Win98 install. VC2008 requires a more modern OS. I'm sure I could ''eventually'' figure out a way to get it running, but I tried once and wasted too much time before giving up.--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 14:45, 8 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
:AFAIK VC2008 binaries should run OK on Win98 as long as the runtime is deployed. Anyway, the loader uses CreateRemoteThread API which is not available in Win98 so don't even bother. '''However''', you can manually patch the binary if you want ;-) Data to patch (all in hexadecimal):<br />
offset 0x41752: 2A0075 -> 18207C<br />
:HTH. [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 14:56, 8 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
===Base Build Stacking===<br />
[[User:Seb76#Base Building Stacking|Implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
At the moment you are only allowed to build next to a finished module, and you aren't allowed to plan ahead in your base construction. It would be nice to at least be able to plan more than one phase of construction in advance. This would be pretty easy to implement. There is no need to code any new "queuing system". Just place the new module next to an existing under-construction module, but increment the build time to the normal build time + the time remaining on the under-construction module (the lowest time remaining that would make the square you are building in, a legal square to build in). As a premium for build stacking, you have to pay the costs up-front. As with normal construction, all costs are non-refundable if you change your mind. (There would probably need to be some on-screen feedback for how long the module would take to build, before you were committed to building it.) [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
See also: Discussion on [[Talk:Wish List|Talk page]].<br />
<br />
<br />
== Battlescape and Tactical ==<br />
<br />
=== Equipment Management ===<br />
<br />
==== Soldiers remembers THEIR equipment ====<br />
[[XcomUtil|Implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
I wish soldiers remembered what equipment they LAST used and start with that gear when they land. Normally soldiers grab various gear and put lots of crap on their belt. I put most things on the shoulder slots, and keep many things spare things on the ship just in case I need them. (I only want IN rounds if it's night. Stop picking them up before I shoot you in the back!) Takes forever to sort out the gear so the weakling isn't carrying all the rockets etc.<br />
--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]]<br />
<br />
:This is already available in [[XcomUtil]]. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 22:07, 7 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
====Access to Stats screens during equipment allocation====<br />
[[User:Seb76#Equipment Screen|Mostly implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
In Battlescape you can get to Stats screens by right clicking on one of the unit's status bars. However you can't do this in the Equipment screen. Things like Statstrings and (even more so) [[User:Seb76|Seb76]]'s modified Equipment screen with actual/max weight help. But it would be nice to be able to see exact stats. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
===Decrease Accuracy for targets out of sight===<br />
[[User:Seb76#Range_Based_Accuracy|Brilliantly implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
How come you can easily shoot on something you do not see?<br />
I find the over-used scout-sniper tactic is a cheap exploit of the X-COM. The tactical game should describe a combat, not a cowardly shooting practice. It would turn into a nice feature, if there would be a penalty of (let us say) -20% to the accuracy of anybody who is firing on a target out of his current sight. This can greatly enhance the tactical depth of the game. (Seb around? ;-) --[[User:Kyrub|Kyrub]] 14:20, 30 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
...discussed [http://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Talk:Wish_list here]<br />
<br />
===Enough Smoke===<br />
[[User:Seb76#Mods|Implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
It would be nice to increase the current limit on smoke/fire hexes. This is due to their locations being stored in a small, fixed length array. In effect you can only get about 3-4 smoke grenades worth of smoke or fire on the map at the same time. Being able to use smoke liberally would really open up new tactics. At the moment all you can really do is cover the LZ in smoke when you exit the transport, and maybe cover one advance over open ground. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
:I did something for that on my loader. Heavy testing is required because it is hard to be make sure smoke still works as before (testing is the hardest part actually). [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 14:09, 18 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Alien AI ===<br />
<br />
====Aliens better with explosions====<br />
Partly implemented [[User:Seb76#Bug Fixes|here (waypoint bug fix)]] and [[User:Seb76#Mods|here (Blaster drift)]]. ''(Possibly move this to talk, as notwithstanding these 2 bugs, apparently the Aliens are fairly safe with lethal explosives.)''<br />
<br />
<br />
I wish that aliens using grenades or blaster bombs or stun bombs (anything that goes boom) would use more sense. They should not want to use items that go boom when they are guaranteed to be caught in the blast radius. The alien can use grenades and blaster bombs by going out of line of sight before the explosion goes off. That may not save them if the explosion blows out the walls. At least it would be less stupid then firing a point blank blaster bomb vs taking 5 steps and setting up another waypoint. Units with morale above 100 or mind controlled should still be suicidal as normal.--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 13:55, 19 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
: Actually, the aliens are quite careful with their explosives, they just seem to be prone to the occasional accident. They're not likely to fire off a blaster or grenade too close to them - as evident by the strategy where if you see an alien with a BB but can't shoot back, the safest place is to stand next to it. The blaster bomb vertical waypoint fix in the loader also eliminates the 'oops' moments where they plot a vertical right angle too close to themselves and there just happens to be a wall to the south. However, they do need more care with stun bombs as you often get to see an alien fire a stun bomb point blank into a HWP parked next to it. But I guess we are talking about three different weapon types here, so they may not be as careful with a standard firearm as they are with grenades and the BB. Wish the Apocalypse aliens at least had as much sense as the UFO/TFTD aliens. In that game, they're utterly psychotic with explosives and ignore nearby allies. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 14:34, 19 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Mind Controlled then Hostile ===<br />
If you mind control a human (civilians) in a terror mission, they become enemies when you lose control (meaning you have to kill the poor idiots to finish the mission). Any chance that they could revert to friendlies/non enemies again when you lose control.<br />
: Now fixed by the Seb76 loader [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:13, 11 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
=== Mind Controlled then MIA ===<br />
Men who are under alien control when you win become MIA, any chance they could be saved (you will have killed all the aliens after all).<br />
: I believe XComUtil fixes this MIA issue. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
:: XcomUtil 9.6 also restores all DOA if you win to. Not what was intended. This feature has been removed as of 9.7 until I can fix it. --[[User:BladeFireLight|BladeFireLight]] 02:27, 6 January 2010 (EST)<br />
: Now also fixed by the Seb76 loader [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:13, 11 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
=== Open Doors But Don't Enter/Exit ===<br />
<br />
Open doors like they do in TFTD (I know this is mentioned above with the good stun grenades idea).<br />
: Now fixed by the Seb76 loader [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:13, 11 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
<br />
= Category =<br />
The page needs to be listed in various categories, which ones I don't know. Also links on other pages to this one would aid people finding it.<br />
<br />
: OK how about this one: [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:21, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Oddities and bugs]]</div>Lobster Danhttps://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Wish_List_(EU)&diff=32824Wish List (EU)2011-01-25T18:07:43Z<p>Lobster Dan: /* Inventory management */</p>
<hr />
<div>X-Com is a great game and as evidence just look to the fact this wiki exists even though the game pre-dates the internet. In all it's greatness X-Com has some elements and behaviors players wish they could change. This is a repository of those desires. Some day a fan mod may make your wish come true...<br />
<br />
= I Wish... =<br />
State what you want AND what X-com does normally. Sign your name if you think "Oh man! That would be great!"<br />
<br />
== Geoscape and Strategic ==<br />
<br />
=== Smarter Aircraft Movement Around Globe ===<br />
I wish all craft understood the shortest distance between two points on a globe is a curved path towards the poles. Normally a craft goes in the opposite direction than it should (towards the equator). Pain in the ass when the base in the UK sends a craft to Siberia.<br />
--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]]<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Smart Interception ===<br />
<br />
Aircraft intercepting a UFO just head straight toward the UFOs current position at all times. Unless the UFO is already on a head-on course, this results in the interceptor travelling through a closing parabolic spiral path, and often missing the UFO and ending up in a tail-chase, and then just falling further behind unless the UFO stops or reverses course. This is pretty basic stuff, fighter pilots have known how to do this better for nearly a hundred years. It is particularly important if the aircraft you are trying to intercept is moving faster than you (eg if you are flying an Interceptor). <br />
<br />
What is needed is to plot the UFO's current course and speed (which X-Com has from radar data), and plot an intercept course. The maths for this is pretty easy (the intersection of 2 vectors) and can be implemented in a few lines of code, if we can find out where the current interception algorithm is, and patch it. <br />
<br />
Actually the radar bearing shown on screen is only accurate to within 45 degrees. I presume that X-Com does actually know the UFO's bearing, since it can clearly track the UFO's movements. Finding where that variable is located might be different. <br />
<br />
While we're at it, it would be nice if the UFO detection information displayed the actual bearing in degrees, rather than just the compass direction (North East, South, etc). <br />
<br />
Even if the improved intercept algorithm only used a bearing accurate to within 45 degrees, that would still be better for remote UFOs. You might need to switch to "head straight for it" once you get to very close range. [[User:Spike|Spike]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
===Score for retaliation Battleships===<br />
<br />
When a Battleship on retaliation attacks your base and is shot down, you get no score for it. This is completely illogical and it discourages any use of base defences. You should get normal 700 (or even 1400) points for it.<br />
--[[User:Kyrub|Kyrub]] 14:05, 30 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
: I'm not sure about this. Yes it's illogical, but it could also be a licence to get a huge score if you have a strong enough base. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:16, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:: The impenetrable base setup would turn into a cheat. As the aliens will keep hammering the base with a battleship until one breaks through, you'll have a steady supply of points without having to really do anything. Some balancing, such as paying to rearm your defence modules, ought to be thrown in to balance things out. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 23:13, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
::: A better fix would be to remove the retaliation flag when a battleship is destroyed. If someone can post a savegame with a never-ending flow of base attacks, I may have a look at the fix. [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 01:05, 15 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:::: Ummm, it seems the best solution (I, for one, can't think of any better), but wouldn't it assume that only the BattleShip really locates the player's base? All those scouts for nothing? [Still the best solution, though] [[User:N|n]] 15:01, 16 August 2010 (GMT+1)<br />
<br />
=== All Aircraft Weapons Useful ===<br />
<br />
In a balanced game, all weapons should have their uses, or at least a niche, but sadly this is not so:<br />
<br />
The Cannon is only useful for shooting down Small Scouts, and even that is practically impossible, due to the difficulty in closing to 10km range with any UFO, particularly the fast-accelerating Small Scout.<br />
<br />
The Stingray is not even useful for shooting down Small Scouts (destroys them 57% of the time) and the Avalanche is better in every meaningful way. It also takes twice as long to rearm, making it operationally much worse than the Avalanche.<br />
<br />
The Laser Cannon is inferior to the Avalanche for everything. It does have a higher payload but this is hardly relevant. If attacking a UFO that you would struggle to kill with Avalanches, you are unlikely to own an aircraft that will survive long enough to inflict more damage than an Avalanche if it mounted Laser Cannon. <br />
<br />
The Fusion Ball Launcher has a [[Talk:Craft_Armaments#Fusion_Balls_better_than_Plasma_Beams.3F¦possible niche]] in fighting Battleships when mounted on Interceptors. Even then, it is difficult and expensive to have aircraft configured to fight only one enemy. <br />
<br />
Unfortunately, the optimum path for craft weapon development is all-Avalanche followed by all-Plasma Beam. This is a shame. <br />
<br />
Suggestions to 'tune up' the other weapons:<br />
<br />
*Cannon - Increase the damage to 15 and 50% hit. So at least there is a pay-off if you manage to get in close. <br />
*Stingray - Raise Stingray accuracy to 80% but drop Avalanche to 60%. Double the rearm rate so it can be reloaded as fast as an Avalanche launcher.<br />
*Laser Cannon - increase accuracy to 50% and damage to 100. <br />
*FBL - increase the ammo from 2 to 3. <br />
<br />
It might be worth considering 'tune down' the Plasma Beam as well, particularly its stand-off range. It seems odd that humans copy alien plasma weapons and right away improve the range.<br />
<br />
[[User:Spike|Spike]] 06:59, 14 February 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
An alternative to tweaking the stats, is to tweak the costs. Realistic costs such as $386K for an Avalanche and $125K for a Stingray will even things up quickly.<br />
<br />
See also: [[User:Spike#Balancing_Aircraft_Weapons]]<br />
<br />
=== Tougher UFOs ===<br />
<br />
==== The Problem ====<br />
<br />
So let me get this straight. The first hybrid airborne weapon that humans ever build, and it immediately outclasses every weapon the aliens ever built, including their Battleship weapon? After all the Aliens have only been building plasma weapons for a few million years, us humans have been doing it for ''months''!<br />
<br />
More to the point, once you get Plasma Beams, downing UFOs is like shooting fish in a barrel. Even Battleships aren't that exciting if you show up with enough ships. <br />
<br />
What is needed is to push up the range, damage, and rate of fire of all the UFO weapons, particularly the UFOs you will be fighting by the time you have plasma beams. At a minimum, the weapon on a Battleship should be at least as powerful as, say, 2 Plasma Beams (as found on the XCom craft it is fighting)? Instead of slightly less than half as powerful? Compared to a single Plasma Beam, only the Battleship weapon has better range. It has double the accuracy, slightly higher damage, but half the fire rate. Net 5.7% more firepower than one Plasma Beam, but no match for 2. And the Battleship weapon of course is the most powerful in the alien arsenal. <br />
<br />
Possible tune ups for UFOs:<br />
<br />
*Battleship - increase to 255 weapon power, improve reload rate to 12 (from 24). Now roughly equivalent to 4 Plasma Beams in total firepower (on Beginner difficulty). Increase range to 69km, so that the Battleship commences fire as soon as an XCom craft begins its attack run. Or better, increase range to 70+km, the limit of the interception window, so that the Battleship starts firing immediately the XCom craft enters air combat range. This would disrupt XCom aircrafts' ability to form up into a flight of 4, prior to commencing their attack. Overall, this would make it much harder to down Battleships. Increasing weapon range to 70+km would also make it much harder to tail a Battleship - manual control in the Geoscape would be needed to hold off outside of combat range. Really, the Battleship should not sit there like a sitting duck. Does it think XCom are friendly?<br />
*Terror Ship - increase range to 52 (or decrease Plasma Beam range to 42), so stand-off kills are not possible with Plasma Beams?<br />
*Actually maybe all the larger UFOs should have weapon range 69-70+km, so they behave very aggressively toward XCom craft. <br />
<br />
NB: Strange effects occur if weapon range goes over 70km so it's probably best to leave it at 70km rather than 75km.<br />
<br />
NB: Also, changes to rate of fire need to be looked at carefully though because Difficulty Level also reduces reload rate for UFOs. Between Beginner (Difficulty 0) and Superhuman (Difficulty 4), rate of fire (and thus firepower) for Battleships, Terror Ships and Supply Ships increases by 24/(24-4x2=16) or 50%. But if the base reload rate for these weapons was reduced to 12, the transition from Beginner to Advanced would increase firepower '''three''' times for these 3 UFOs (less so for the smaller UFOs). It is less risky to increase the weapon power. Unfortunately there are only 2 firepower variables to play with - damage and reload rate - so there are not a lot of options, especially for the Battleship which already has weapon strength 148 out of a probable maximum of 255.<br />
<br />
:More detail on this. For Medium Scout, Large Scout and Abductor, with nominal reload rate 48gs, the rate of fire improves +20% between Beginner and Superhuman. For Harvester (32gs) it improves one third. For Large UFOs (Terror Ship, Supply Ship, Battleship - 24gs) the improvement is +50%. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 20:28, 14 February 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
I think we should assume that the Battleship, which is bigger than the entire XCom base, is engaging XCom craft with its secondary weapons rather than its main armament, which could probably destroy Manhattan with a glancing hit. <br />
<br />
I would really like to see the hypothetical Mega-Battleship go up against XCom's finest - a flight of 4 Avengers armed with dual Plasma Cannon or dual Fusion Ball Launchers. With the Battleship having 70+km range, 255 weapon power, and an effective fire rate on Superhuman triple that of the PB, it would have the firepower of 11 Plasma Beams - 36% more firepower than the whole attacking XCom force combined. To be honest I think that would be carnage, not sure XCom could win. So that would be tuning the Battleship up too much. The 3-fold increase in rate of fire when on Superhuman is just too much. Maybe just max out the damage to 255 and range to 75. This gives a 72% increase in firepower, and a challenging tactical problem for XCom (forming up and approaching under fire).<br />
<br />
The smaller UFOs can probably stay as they are. It is not until later in the game that XCom advances so that even large UFOs are easy pickings. What is the crossover point? Maybe the medium UFOs. So it might be good to reduce the reload times of the medium UFOs from 48 / 32 to 24, a good increase in firepower. <br />
<br />
In general I think all UFOs energy weapons should have at least as good range as the XCom energy weapons, even the Medium Scout. Again, they have been using these weapons for millions of years and we only just figured out how to copy them from the aliens, how could our weapons be better than the aliens? How did our first plasma weapon out-range and out-perform all but the hugest UFO plasma beam? And on an airframe the size of a Small Scout we mount ''two'' such weapons? On the battlefield we only are able to replicate alien weapons; how is it that in the air we are able to improve on them ''masssively''?<br />
<br />
Perhaps there should never be a stand-off advantage, except possibly with missiles -which should be less accurate with longer range. The XCom stand off advantage is really unfair because as far as I have seen the UFOs never attempt to close to effective range, even when they are getting killed. They don't break off much, either, though I think I have seen that happen on occasion. <br />
<br />
==== Specific Proposals ==== <br />
<br />
===== No Standoff Beam Attacks =====<br />
<br />
Increase ''all'' UFO plasma weapon ranges to at least 55km (compared to 52km for the XCom plasma weapon). Now only launched XCom weapons (Avalanche and Fusion Ball) have standoff advantage. Probably also reduce the accuracy of the Avalanche to 60% and buff Stingray accuracy to 80%, providing both weapons with a useful niche role.<br />
<br />
===== No Standoff Attacks =====<br />
<br />
Increase ''all'' UFO plasma weapon ranges to 66km (compared to 52km for the XCom plasma weapon). Now ''no'' XCom weapon has standoff advantage. (The benefit of a longer range weapon is simply spending less time being fired on by the UFO.)<br />
<br />
===== Twitchy Aliens =====<br />
<br />
Increase all UFO ranges to 69km. They will attack as soon as XCom aircraft commence any attack run.<br />
<br />
===== Hostile Aliens =====<br />
<br />
Increase all UFO ranges to 70km. They will attack as soon as XCom aircraft enter intercept range. UFOs now fire first, and tailing them unchallenged is impossible. <br />
<br />
===== Improved Medium UFOs =====<br />
<br />
Reduce (improve) the nominal reload time of Medium UFOs, Abductors and Harvesters, from 48gs and 32gs to 24gs. This increases the challenge in the early-mid game, when XCom might first be deploying advanced weapons.<br />
<br />
===== Improved Battleships =====<br />
<br />
Increase damage to 255. They're firing (bigger) Fusion Balls! A Battleship now has the same firepower as one XCom Craft with dual Plasma Beams (gosh wow!). It's a start, but what if we...<br />
<br />
===== Super Battleships =====<br />
<br />
... also reduce nominal reload time to 18gs. Giving a further one-third extra firepower on Beginner, 60% more on Superhuman.<br />
<br />
===== Mega Battleships =====<br />
<br />
... or for a real challenge, reduce reload time to 12gs. A further doubling of the firepower on Beginner - a further ''four'' times increase on Superhuman. Now Superhuman Battleships out-gun the biggest fleet XCom can throw at them!<br />
<br />
[[User:Spike|Spike]] 00:25, 19 February 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
: the flip side of this is weakening Xcom craft - apart from firepower issues there is also the issue of range: the ranges of the transport craft are such that really no more than 1 manned base is necessary to cover the globe for terror site defense. Setting e.g. the fuel capacity of the Skyranger to 500 results in roughly 1 base per continent required. This has interesting strategic consequences: need for more bases makes the ecomics more challenging (and thus slows down research). [[User:Emphyrio|Emphyrio]] 08:43, 9 August 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
===Enforced Variant Games===<br />
<br />
Various people like to play various variant games, such as No Alien Technology, or No Detection, or No Lethal Weapons - see for example Scott Jones' notes to XComUtil. It would be nice to have options on the game executable to enforce these scenarios. Self restraint is hard! [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
Some of these variant scenarios have been implemented by [[User:Seb76#Mods|Seb76]].<br />
<br />
<br />
===Recruit Certain Alien Types===<br />
<br />
Consider that not all aliens are loyal to their master (most TFTD alien has a device lodged to its brain), it would be interesting (or at least cool) if we could recuit such aliens to the XCOM cause. Maybe we can remove the controling devices from captive aliens after research on that species. Or convince the head of the Snakemen that it would be far more benefit to his race to help us instead of the Ethereals [[User:L-Zwei|L-Zwei]] 23:25, 12 September 2008 (PDT).<br />
<br />
Only certain alien types should be recruitable. Ones that should NOT be include Mutons (as they are directly controlled by Ethereals), Chrysallids (unbalancing), etc. It would be nice to be able to reverse-engineer Cyberdiscs or Sectopods, or make it that a Cyberdisc must be researched to build hovertanks/etc.<br />
[[User:MagicJuggler|MagicJuggler]] 13:32, 18 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
: It's pretty obvious which ones should be recruitable: non-robotic terror units that are captured alive. Chryssalids should simply do melee damage instead of impregnating (as the resulting spawn would not be mind-controlled and therefore XCOM wouldn't do it). Silacoids would be pretty ineffectual, and reapers slightly less so, but both would be disposable scouts. Celatids might actually have some use (eating through hulls with acid, and arcing over walls) but are fragile. All of these would require capturing a terror alien alive after researching Psi Amp. The two robotic units should require a live alien Engineer researched as well as UFO Construction, and the materials for building one would be one corpse of the appropriate type, Alien alloys and Elerium (to repair and refuel the husk). The Sectopod should probably be nerfed somewhat, so that it isn't quite so invincible to Heavy Plasma shots - after all, it was probably a twisted and melted modern art piece by the time it finally went down). [[User:Stubbs|Stubbs]]<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Game option: sell only researched items ===<br />
<br />
The fact that you may sell the alien items for the best price once you get them, without any research, is illogical. Such staff would never get on the market, being top secret and potentially dangerous to the humanity.<br />
<br />
Selling without proper research does not help the replay value of the game either: once you know the "right path" to get the best items, you simply sell anything else immediately and ignore the unnecessary research. Too easy.<br />
<br />
Therefore I wish for this game option: unknown items are sold for 0 (including the alien corpses), the known ones for their full price. This makes the sustainable economics much harder to develop and it gives sense to the "useless" research. Last but not least, it adds a lot of depth to the gameplay: will you choose research of a new weapon you need on the field, or of a mind probe that will earn you millions in sales? --[[User:Kyrub|Kyrub]] 15:55, 6 April 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: I really like this option, it's a great idea. Makes the game harder and makes it more interesting, more varied. Gives extra value to the otherwise "useless" research paths. Good thinking! [[User:Spike|Spike]] 15:06, 24 August 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: I'd prefer that unresearched artifacts/corpses sold for a fraction of their original value (no more than 25%). It makes no sense that nobody would pay to research them for themselves. Additionally, Laser Cannon sell price needs to be nerfed. [[User:Stubbs|Stubbs]]<br />
<br />
: This would have the added benefit that you would know if it was 'safe' or not to sell an item research wise. Coloring the un-researched items differently on the Sell/Sack screen would be good too ~ [[User:Renegrade|Renegrade]] 13:30, 19 August 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
=== New Research Mechanics ===<br />
<br />
The above comments spurred some ideas to make the research more realistic and the path to victory less obvious. <br />
<br />
For flavor reasons, give research options vague names instead of exact names. This already exists in some research topics, such as "New Fighter Craft" instead of "Firestorm". So, research topics might read "Alien Hovertank Wreck" instead of "Cyberdisc Corpse", "Grey Alien Corpse" instead of "Sectoid Corpse" or "Alien Pistol" instead of "Plasma Pistol". The names would be revealed in the UFOpaedia entry, and certain items would then be renamed as per common sense.<br />
<br />
Hide the ranks of aliens in captivity until they are researched (so you'd see Live Grey Alien #1, Live Grey Alien #2 if you had two Sectoids available for research). However, if you happened to have two Soldier ranks in containment, you'd only see one topic. The same rank/race combination would never appear again, but you might have to research several specimens of the same species to get the useful one you want. The alternative would be to have researched Mind Probe, which would tell you exactly what you had in containment (just as it does on the battlefield).<br />
<br />
Once an alien or its corpse is researched, then all other instances of that alien or its body are renamed appropriately. For example, research a live Muton and Muton corpses become obvious, and vice versa. "Live Green Humanoid Alien" is also renamed to "Live Muton".<br />
<br />
Finally, there should be a few more prerequisites in place to make less useful research more necessary. As someone else has mentioned, you should need a Cyberdisc Corpse to research Hovertanks. I'd also suggest that Psi Amp and Mind Shield require the research of Mind Probe (seeing as both entail scanning for minds as a logical first step), and that Flying Suits require Floater Corpse, Cyberdisc Corpse or a live Floater researched as an additional prerequisite (not Ethereals, as they fly with the power of their huge brains). [[User:Stubbs|Stubbs]]<br />
<br />
:These are all good suggestions and make a lot of sense. An alternative explanation of the names (seen in some fan fiction) is that these names are not the real names, but are made up by XCom troops based on some limited battlefield experience of them. But revealing the "real" alien race names through Research is a fun idea. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 08:44, 1 September 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Keyboard shortcuts at bases ===<br />
<br />
I wish we had (customised, maybe?) keyboard shortcuts at the base screen. Numbers (at the "base information" screen as well) would switch bases, R for research, E for equip craft, T for transfer, M for manufacture, S for soldiers, B for build new base, P for purchase+recruit (or "B" for "buy" - let people double-bind if they need it), I for base information. The doubles (soldiers/sell+sack) could be solved by using the key under the primary one (x for sell+sack). - n (16:26, 16 Aug 2010 (GMT+1))<br />
<br />
=== Inventory management ===<br />
<br />
I only want to keep 1 (or 0) sectoid corpse. If I have any more, sell them immediately and automatically. Sometimes having to sell all the stuff you've captured is just a chore.<br />
<br />
Also, let me automatically repurchase goods when my stores get too low.<br />
<br />
=== Soldier table ===<br />
<br />
Soldiers should be listed in a sortable table, so I can sort them based on rank, ship order, firing accuracy, psi skills, in psi training, etc. If I want to find out my best shooters, it should be a very fast operation.<br />
<br />
At a more advanced level: do it across bases; have filter options; sort based on formula (so I can find the soldiers with the best reaction+firing, or the best psi strength + psi skill).<br />
<br />
=== Monthly maintenance fees ===<br />
<br />
Later in the game, when you are way beyond what the sponsor nations are paying you and are instead selling captured/manufactured items to fund your operation, the end of the month can be a real PITA, because you need to build up a reserve of cash to avoid being shut down for financial problems. (This was worse with the misreported funding bug.) At the least, show us in one place exactly how much we need to raise at that time.<br />
<br />
Or make payments be done on a weekly/daily/hourly/continuously basis. This also means that I don't have to pay a same salary to someone who I hire on the 2nd or I hire on the 27th.<br />
<br />
Oh, and the cheat of "soldiers/scientists/engineers in flight don't need to be paid" needs to be squashed while we're at it. (But watch out fixing this one without making salary payments continuous; my current strategy is to hire most people just before the end of the month, which I would need to modify to hiring just after the start of the month.)<br />
<br />
== Battlescape and Tactical ==<br />
<br />
===Equipment Management===<br />
<br />
All wishes are currently implemented!<br />
<br />
===Fog of War Improvements===<br />
<br />
I'm sure most of these would be an absolute PAIN to implement, but I figured I'd toss the ideas out here.<br />
<br />
====Prior Recon of Battlefield====<br />
One thing that has always irked me is X-COM has no terrain knowledge when it lands, despite having probably circled the place two or three times before landing and thus they should know at least some of the area. This would be nice, but isn't too important. Probably would be a pain to implement so X-COM would have all knowledge of external features but no knowledge of building interiors, anyways. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 22:38, 7 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:Yes at the very least, when you splash the UFO, it could tell you (via some miracle technology such as "satellite reconnaisance") what the terrain type is of the landing zone area. Then you could adjust equipment accordingly. And adjust your uniform camouflage (if using one of the uniform mods). [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:16, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:: Geoscape: center on the site, then maximum zoom. Aside from having to disambiguate forest from jungle, this works fine for knowing the exact terrain you're getting into. -- [[User:Zaimoni|Zaimoni]] 10:17, 4 Sept 2008 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::This is already present in the game. To center the Geoscape on a specific location, right-click on the target spot. To do maximum zoom in, right click on the Zoom-In button(and the same works for Zoom-Out). Also, Jungle and Forest use the same display algorithm, but are easy to differentiate; Forest occurs NORTH of the equator, and Jungle occurs SOUTH. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 13:23, 4 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:Returning to AQ's original suggestion, it wouldn't be too hard would it for the dropship to "radar map" the target, and then have the basic map show up on your scanner on Turn 1? [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
====Dynamic Fog====<br />
<br />
The Fog of War in X-COM is clumsily implemented, compared to modern expectations. Everything starts out black, but after exploring, is shown...and it's kept in the same showing, regardless of whether you actually have LoS to that area anymore. It would be nice if when you no longer had Line of Sight to a particular map area, it would be cloaked in a way so that you knew the terrain, but not the units there. Since I've sometimes spent over half an hour trying to hunt down that last alien hiding in area I'd already explored. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 22:38, 7 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
====Deactivate Object Radar====<br />
<br />
Currently, in X-COM, any objects dropped in a given square show on your Battlescape, regardless of whether you have Line of Sight to the square or not. In regards to dropped weapons/grenades/equipment/dead soldiers/dead aliens, this doesn't make a large difference. But in the case of STUNNED aliens, a quick scan across the Battlescape can tell you whether the alien you stunned 10 turns ago is still down, or stood back up(the stunned alien object will disappear from the stack). Of course, since aliens which have revived from stun are almost always disarmed(and the ones that aren't probably should've been killed instead), the usefulness of this 'exploit' is reduced mainly to finding out that the last alien you're looking for is just wandering aimlessly and unarmed. Perhaps leave stacks showing the same until you regain LoS to that area? [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 22:38, 7 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
====Crushed Buildings====<br />
<br />
Why don't we see any crushed or destroyed buildings? Does a UFO always fall like a rock, perpendicular to the ground? No marks on the ground? Such impact would do massive damage to the land (a small meteor can do much if it has a high speed...). (Also, at the [debatedly] "real" UFO crash zones UFO parts were scattered over miles)<br />
<br />
I'd like to see chopped buildings, entering UFO's through a barns; entering an abductor from a immediate house's roof if I have plasma and no flying suits yet. - [[User:N|n]] 15:01, 16 August 2010 (GMT+1)<br />
<br />
: The Pocket PC remake of the game did this, though it seems the site it concern has vanished off the face of the net. Could probably find a copy if you're interested.<br />
<br />
: By the way, you can generate a time/date stamped signature by typing four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 23:04, 16 August 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:: Amazingly enough (is it Truman Show of me or just a coincidence :)?), my GF found a low-tech palmtop (with/in a case)... on the pavement. With no personal data and means to find the owner; when I laid my hands on it, I actually found and installed Ufo:EU there, but it wouldn't run :(. [And thanks! again for the 4 tildes name/timestamp trick] - [[User:N|n]] 19:18, 18 August 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
===Restore Game from Battlescape===<br />
<br />
It would be nice to be able to reload a saved game directly from the Battlescape "?" screen, rather than having to go through the process of Abandoning to the Geoscape. Would you need to check it was a Battlescape save and not a Geoscape save? Maybe, maybe not. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
===Warm Grenades===<br />
<br />
Currently when you set the timer on a grenade (or HE pack), the timer runs down every turn regardless of whether the grenade is worn, held, or dropped. Then, when the timer runs out, it explodes unless it is held or worn. There is no real grenade or explosive that works this way. Once the timer (fuse) starts running, they explode regardless. However for most hand grenades, the timer (fuse) doesn't start until after you throw/drop the grenade. It would be nice to have both of these real world behaviours, and lose the game's default behaviour. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
: Technically the way the game implements grenades, they don't have a timer. At least, not as such. When you set a grenade, the game just assigns it a turn to blow up on. Once the turn has passed, the game checks to see that it's on the ground and blows it up if it is, otherwise it doesn't. I believe Seb76 has already addressed this in his patches where there's an option to make grenade blow up regardless whether they are in inventory or otherwise the moment the timer is set. X-Com Apocalypse does a good job of this. The moment the grenade is so much as moved after the timer is set, it counts down. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 23:01, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:: To simulate an actual timer, you would need to do something like: Every turn that a primed grenade is being held by a unit during the "explode" check, increment by +1 the turn when that grenade is going to explode. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:10, 14 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
:::I think I would change quantity2 ([[OBPOS.DAT]]) to a countdown instead of a turn, and use quantity3 as a flag indicating if the count has started. This flag is set any time a turn ends and the grenade has no owner. Taking it back in your hand once the timer has started won't help and the thing must be thrown... quantity2 is decreased if quantity3 is set, and the grenade blows up as usual. [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 01:35, 15 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
: That would be great. It would be exactly consistent with a 'spoon' type hand grenade. The timer only starts when you release the grenade, but after that it explodes at a definite time regardless of whether you pick it up or not. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
===Stun Grenades===<br />
<br />
I want flashbangs.--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 22:59, 11 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
:Instead of stunning, I'd see more effect if it would remove some TUs to units having line of sight (to be fare it should affect xcom units too). It would help against reaction fire (which is the point of flashbangs). Given that grenades detonate at the end turns, it would require a good coordination to have the grenade detonate exactly at the end of the alien turn, and just before your attack. Being able to open doors à la xcom2 would also help to throw flashbangs just before a craft assault... [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 22:03, 12 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
::That would be good. Hard to program, potentially extremely unbalancing, but good. I considered a "debuff" kind of ability (as you suggest) for flashbangs, vs the more obvious substitution of [[stun]] for [[Explosions|HE]] damage. In the end, I picked "I want flashbangs."--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 03:32, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
: Maybe flashbangs dont' work on Aliens - otherwise, XCom would use them, right? :) But seriously, I too would like flashbangs, and stun grenades / concussion grenades. Both of these would make the game easier, though. With flashbangs, you might have to compensate by just giving the aliens more TUs. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 13:33, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
::More options for the player is going to make it easier for any kind of game. Particularly of games like XCOM where the computer can't take advantage of the changes. However I don't believe a weak stun grenade (like 44 stun damage, comparable to AC-HE) would change the game much because the 80 item limit remains.--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 22:21, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
===Night Vision===<br />
<br />
I '''don't''' want to add night vision equipment to the game. I assume that either (1) all XCom units already have night vision gear as standard, but it's not as good as alien night vision, and the visibility that XCom units have at night is based on their standard-issue night vision gear, or (2) night vision gear does not work on Aliens. Either they do not appear on night vision, or maybe worse - maybe the aliens can manipulate night vision equipment, causing worse than normal vision, or hallucinations, and even tricking XCom units into firing on each other. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 13:33, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:Wouldn't it be nice though if it had gradients other than "day: 20 squares" "night: 9 squares" ? Like.. "early morning/late evening: 10-19 squares" ? I find the cut off from full daylight to full night kinda disturbing. ~ [[User:Renegrade|Renegrade]] 10:41, 19 August 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
===Throwing over stuff===<br />
'''(Moved to Talk, as this is not a bug and so does not need fixing.)'''<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
===Assault Time Limit===<br />
<br />
One of the cool things about UFO Defence is there are no time limits on the scenarios. This is great as it allows for a totally different kind of tactics and much more flexibility. <br />
It's more of a "thinking man's game" as a result. But... arguably this is not very realistic for UFO Assault missions. If the Aliens are getting creamed, they should try to make a getaway if they can (just like XCom would). A simple way to implement this would be a hard time limit (say 20 turns?) on a UFO Assault. Another way would be to base it on Alien Morale. At a certain Morale level the aliens decide to dust off. Give the player say 3 turns warning while they rev up the engines. Then if there is still a Navigator or Engineer in the Control Room alive, the ship takes off. Any XCom troops still aboard are MIA. <br />
<br />
You might run into problems if the UFO took off but then landed again or was shot down, generating another ground mission with potentially '''more''' Aliens than were still alive at the end of the Assault. (Still, maybe they hatch some more clones if they get time to....) [[User:Spike|Spike]] 09:51, 4 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
: It strikes me as justified they don't do that. Troops loose in the vessel could be seriously bad. It would be nice if they dusted off on the condition that their morale was low enough or 3 X-com soldiers had the door in their sights without aliens alive outside in the latter case and no X-com soldiers on board in either case. also, if the UFO has a hole in either the command or engine room, it would have to set down before leaving the atmosphere. [[User:(name here)|(name here)]]<br />
<br />
Taking off with troops onboard would be perfectly safe (for the aliens) and justifiable if one assumes that alien ships in flight are inherently inhospitable for humans. This is easily done by saying that they undergo accelerations that humans can't withstand (splat), can't withstand for any length of time (pass out), or that they intentionally make rapid accelerations in different directions, either normally or just if they're trying to bash some intruders around. Naturally, the aliens themselves would either be immune to these (tough physique / their built-in antigrav devices?), or be in acceleration chairs, safe from all this.<br />
<br />
Alternatively, when you get the warning that the UFO is going to take off, you've got a certain amount of time to either get everyone '''off''' the UFO, or to get everyone '''on''' it (or as many as you can). There could be a follow-up mission that takes place in "sky" terrain, where the outdoors is either impassable (the easy way) or else instantly withdraws units from combat (flying suits / parachutes). The soldiers' goals would be to either take out the aliens and presumably safely land and salvage the UFO, or take out the UFO's means of flying (power cores / navigator?). In the latter case, they might have a certain number of turns to withdraw or be caught in the crash, with possible casualties just like the aliens, mitigated to some degree by their armour and maybe where inside the UFO they are.<br />
<br />
In the case of a crash, there could be a final mission to finish off the surviving aliens, using the X-COM soldiers that survive the crash, and no landing craft (it's still back at the old landing site). Alternatively, you could say that there '''is''' an X-COM landing craft parked outside (with all remaining members of the original landing party), since the in-flight time / distance was presumably low and the original X-COM craft quickly packed up and flew to the new landing site. &mdash; [[User:Wisq|Wisq]] 17:11, 18 April 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
===Alien AI===<br />
<br />
====Attempts to rearm====<br />
Aliens cannot pick up items, but I wish they would. If an alien has no useful weapons in inventory they should either head for cover or head for a plasma weapon. Panicked aliens drop their weapons but never seem to pick them up when they managed to pull themselves together. It would be nice if they tried to arm themselves again. --[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 13:55, 19 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:Even if it's too hard to make aliens head towards weapons (is it safe?, could it be used to trap them, not to mention the complexities of route finding) - it would still be good if an unarmed alien checked for usable weapons in every square it moved through, and at least picked up one loaded weapon or grenade per turn. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
Fixing the AI for this could be really hard. Apart from all the possible exploits by XCom, the AI is probably a really hard part of the game to reverse engineer. You could say that an unarmed alien is no threat anyway (we are only concerned about aliens without psi or built in weapons). So nothing is lost even with an exploitable method of re-arming. By exploitable I mean the XCom player can manipulate re-arming, e.g. by leaving weapons out in the open as bait for traps. <br />
<br />
Maybe the simplest modification would be to ''not'' drop weapons when the alien panics? This does not require delving in to the AI, just intercepting the panic effects. Dont make aliens drop any weapons when they panic. It would be reasonable to return the weapon in hand to inventory, so there is a TU cost for the alien to bring the weapon back into play again. <br />
<br />
This would not work for aliens who were stunned and wake up, or who were mind controlled by XCom and made to drop their weapons. But it would probably catch 80% of cases. <br />
<br />
Another cheat, short of fixing the AI, is just to pick up weapons that the alien walks over. It could also pick up "spare" weapons from adjacent aliens (cheating on TUs - basically just teleporting the items to the unarmed alien). Spare alien weapons are almost invariably grenades. I have not had a lot of success in getting unarmed aliens to use grenades, so more research is needed here. Maybe only certain types of aliens use grenades, or only in certain circumstances?<br />
<br />
Really, really cheating would be to teleport any weapon laying around the battlefield into the alien's inventory. But I think it is more fair just to say panicked aliens dont drop their equipment. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 16:13, 13 February 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
==== End Psi Bullying and Psi Baiting ====<br />
When the aliens use psi attacks they always go for your guys with the most chance of failing the attack and going nuts. Is it possible to make those pesky aliens attack random soldiers, regardless of their psi skill/strength? <br />
<br />
: Not a bad idea to randomise this a bit, because while initially this tactic helps the aliens, it becomes so predictable that it can be used against them by deploying unarmed "Psi Bait" soldiers to draw off all the attacks. (Or make aliens avoid controlling/panicking soldiers who have no loaded weapons. But then folks would just give them pea shooters and wear armour.) [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
=== 80 Item Limit on Base Defense Mission ===<br />
: Well you get the 80 item limit on every mission, but it hurts more on a Base Defence as you have more limited ability, or sometimes no ability, to manage what goes into those 80 items. I was thinking about a couple of (theoretical) ways to fix this and I hit on a new one (new for me anyway): Why not take the 80 items from the Transport(s), first Transport then second Transport until you run out of items or hit 80. This has a few benefits:<br />
:* Ready made interface to manage the 80-item limit, the Stores <> Craft (Equip Craft) Screen.<br />
:* If you have no warning at all, the 80 items will probably make good tactical sense in general terms, even if they are are not totally optimised for Base Defence (no proximity mines, etc).<br />
: I think that copying the Transport inventory into the Battlescape inventory would be relatively to implement (though what do I know?). As a simplification, you could move only the inventory in the ''first available'' Transport that is present in the Base, into the Battlescape, and not bother looking in more than one place (other Transports, Base Stores) to get up to 80. It would then be a bit of a drag if your Transports are all out on a mission when your Base gets attacked though. Or perhaps inspect the inventory of Transport 1 (wherever it is in the world), and then attempt to copy its inventory, using equipment present in the Base?<br />
: Another way of doing it which has been mentioned elsewhere is to try to reverse the order of the items in the Stores list. This has the effect of putting the more advanced weapons first, rather than the more basic weapons. There could be all kinds of unwanted side effects of this, depending on various programming issues.<br />
: Actually there is already a fix for the 80-item limit in XComUtil. XComUtil records a standard assign weapon set for each of your troops, and then teleports those weapons to the Battlescape from your Base Stores, regardless of the 80-item limit (but still subject to the Battlescape's 170-item limit). Not 100% sure if this works for Base Defence missions though. <br />
:[[User:Spike|Spike]] 13:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
=== Collision Detection Bugs ===<br />
I have noticed that sometimes you can shoot through hard objects, for example, recently I had a soldier up on the roof of a house overlooking a large scout craft. When a Sectiod moved through one of the inner doors of the UFO, my man shot him straight through the intact ufo roof! <br />
<br />
=== Base Defence Systems Cause Alien Casualties ===<br />
<br />
I don’t know if this is already implemented in the game? When the aliens attack your base and you defend it with base defense measures does the following occur and if not a mod maybe? When you hit the battleship with your weapons but it still gets through (e.g. you hit the battleship with some missiles before it lands) can the number of attackers be reduced accordingly. For example if you hit it with some missiles then maybe they could have a couple less soldiers attacking (could be random small amount) or when you hit with loads of stuff like plenty of fusion balls and the battleship just makes it then their attack could be reduced to a few aliens (all others got killed in the defense). As I say not sure if this is already there to some degree (not played in a long time and I’m not at that stage yet this time round). <br />
<br />
: The general view is probably that Base Defence missions are a boon to XCOM already, so why make them any easier. At very least there would need to be more damage to the loot than there was to the Alien's combat effectiveness, otherwise this unbalances the game in favour of XCOM. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
=== Alien vs Alien ===<br />
This one is way out there. Alien v Alien battles out with main game, just random battlescape maps. Sectoid and their terrorists against Floaters and theirs etc. One side human controlled the other computer. Choice of ships involved etc. <br />
<br />
:I actually love this idea. It might just about be possible using XComUtil, if someone is a total XComUtil guru.<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
There was a utility to do this from Devisraad. it has long since been removed from his site, but someone may still have it. The basics was you renamed unit and it automatically replaced graphics flag to swap out the units. Didn't work on the Large Aliens but still was a fun mod --[[User:BladeFireLight|BladeFireLight]] 02:20, 6 January 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
=== Aircraft in Base Defence Battlescape ===<br />
<br />
New graphics for the Interceptor and Firestorm on the battlescape. All your ships could remain in their hangers when the aliens attack your base. Don’t understand why Mythos did not do this originally.<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Simply for one reason: the limit on the size of the battlescape. UFO maps are usually limited to 10000 tiles (50x50x4), on Bases you have 9600 (60x60x3), the last level one being dirt. You need 3 levels to display X-COM craft. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 14:28, 23 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Could you not do it but clip off the top level of the craft - leaving the ground level and 'deck' level? It would be a cool terrain area to fight in. I like the fact that in TFTD you can still see your subs during a base defence. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
It is possible to edit the map files to include the Skyranger, but you'll have to use Xcomutil to play with that terrain and I think it would never launch during base defense missions (but I'm not sure on that - never tried editing the X-COM base terrain). [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 19:25, 4 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
This could be done by creating new "hangar" map modules, each containing one of the five possible X-COM craft. Bung the modules into [[GEODATA.DAT]] at index 0C, and you're done. The catch is you can't have all craft or the MCD array will overflow. The base terrain uses ~160 tiles as it is (out of the max of 256), while the craft use about 60 each (on average). Putting them all in would take the table above 300 entries (that is to say, the game'd crash).<br />
<br />
'Cause XcomUtil already provides us with an Intercepter design made up of SkyRanger parts, I suppose the way to go would be to only implement those two craft. If you have any alien technology ships, they could either be left out ("they were fast enough to escape") or rendered as SkyRangers.<br />
<br />
It should also be noted that bases are made up of two levels, not three. Luckily, all the craft are only three levels high, so cutting out the landing gear still works. - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 19:56, 4 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Very true about the MCD limit, that's why I only mentioned the Skyranger but the Interceptor could be added as well (and would not make much sense to have your first defense mission with a nice Avenger parked on the hangar while your Interceptors are being blow to bits by Battleships). The bases are 3 levels but you can only modify two of them. The game engine automatically adds a layer of 'dirt modules' either at top or bottom. Hmmm, this just gave me an idea for the wish list... [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 20:29, 4 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Both alien and X-Com bases ''are'' only two levels. There must be something screwy in your game; XcomUtil maybe?<br />
<br />
It occurs to me that removing landing gear and stuff might make it ''just'' possible to jam in the Lightning tiles as well (as the MCD requirements would also shrink slightly). That'd make it possible to add the Firestorm, too. Seems a shame to get that far then leave out the Avenger, though...<br />
<br />
- [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 21:30, 4 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Nevermind, I completely misread your previous post. Yes, they are two levels only, could be Xcomutil that adds the 3rd level.<br />
<br />
- [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 22:30, 4 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
You may be able to get 3 levels in an X-Com Base but not 4. EU has a smaller amount of memory alocated. I dont know the limit but 60x60x4 will crash EU. TFTD has no problem --[[User:BladeFireLight|BladeFireLight]] 02:25, 6 January 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
I got partway through this and then decided to change my methods entirely and start from scratch. So I thought I might as well post my progress anyways, as it's already about on par with the crude TFTD implementation: You always have the same craft appear in your hanger regardless of what is (or isn't!) there.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Skyranger In Hanger.rar]]<br />
<br />
- [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 05:40, 17 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Hey BB, a while ago I have modded the plane terrain files so that the Skyranger appears facing east instead of south. If you want to use that one (to make it a little different) let me know. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 08:23, 17 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Thanks, but don't worry about it for now: it'll make the MCD arrays larger still, so I'll consider it when I get all the other stuff done. <br />
<br />
- [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 17:01, 19 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
The completed mod is now included in my toolpack. As usual, I've only done cursory testing on it, but I'm pretty sure it's stable enough. <br />
<br />
- [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 06:40, 20 January 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
=== Fixed firing TUs ===<br />
<br />
Something that always bugged me was how the weapons used percentages for firing TUs. It doesn't make sense that the faster a soldier got, the longer it would take to fire a weapon.<br />
: This is because you can't fire an automatic weapon any faster than it will shoot. However, it otherwise makes minimal sense, as you point out. I suggest two alternative solutions. Firstly, that only automatic fire modes use a fixed percentage of a soldier's time units, and other modes use a fixed number of TUs. This would entail the newer soldiers spraying and your most elite taking fast, selective single shots. The alternative is that each firing mode for each weapon entails its own formula (revealed in the UFOpaedia but essentially hidden during the battlescape) along the lines of "X% of TUs + Y TUs". Snap fire would be a low % of total plus a low fixed cost, Aimed would be a low % of total with a high fixed cost, and Auto would be a high % of total with a low fixed cost. While this is somewhat complex, in-game you wouldn't have to worry, and it accounts for what can be reduced (i.e. aiming speed) and what can never be improved by a soldier (i.e. cyclic rate of fire or time for a missile to lock). [[User:Stubbs|Stubbs]]<br />
:: These observations are very sensible. However we also need to consider the impact on game balance. If you implement this in an even-handed way, alien rates of fire will increase as they have high TUs. Or, if you fudge it so that alien rates of fire remain the same, then X-Com's advantage will increase as the game progresses. Neither of these are desirable. It would be extremely hard to implement this and still maintain game balance. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 08:41, 1 September 2009 (EDT)<br />
:::Each turn has the exact same duration, but is divided into TUs separately for each soldier. That's a simplification that works well in a turn-based game and reflects the fact that a soldier is fast or slow. However, weapons need to be aimed and will not fire faster than normal, thus they require a fixed percentage of the turn duration. In other words, soldiers gain movement speed, but fire at the same rate. This is both desirable and logical, just not self-explanatory. Thus, I would definitely stick to how TUs consumption is solved currently. [[User:mingos|mingos]]<br />
<br />
=== In-flight Interception ===<br />
<br />
Yes, I know that this idea is nigh-impossible, but I was thinking, wouldn't it be awesome to infiltrate a battleship, kill the aliens inside and escape, with the geoscape being shown zooming past underneath? Also, in a similar vein to the "aliens dust off after 3 turns" idea, after killing the aliens ( or blowing up the power cores, maybe?)you would have to get as many troops as possible to the drop ship in 3 turns(in retrospect I guess that you could only do this with the Lightning because of the doors) or the ship crashes and all troops not in the dropship are missing in action. Yes, this idea is impractical and would be really hard to program, but the idea of blowing a UFO up from the inside just seems epic to me. [[User:WolfenMage|WolfenMage]]<br />
<br />
=== Impose cost to using Psionic attacks===<br />
<br />
I think everyone agrees Psi attacks are too powerful. I would propose to impose a cost to using Psionic attacks. This could take the form of decreasing the physical stats after using a PSi attack (after all all: the psionic races are physically weak). This could for example lead to a soldier becoming a weakling or even fainting or dying from using psi-attack. Another possibility is to decrease mental stats (in this case the ratio would be that humans are not really being adapted to psi: you could be expected to go crazy playing mind games) leading to a decrease in psionic powers or maybe panicking or beserking the soldier using psi. Together with limiting psi attacks of MCed units proposed elsewhere this would rebalance the later game somewhat... [[User:Emphyrio|Emphyrio]] 07:22, 9 August 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
=== Make losing a base less costly ===<br />
<br />
My friends would often quit and reload after losing a base because it was so costly. It should definitely be a kick in the teeth, but even the game text suggests some ways you can recover:<br />
1. Scientists and engineers have already been evacuated -- on a defense loss, let me transfer them to bases with open living quarters.<br />
2. Likewise, move any ships at that location to another open hangar. (Maybe doing this requires that I have gotten advanced warning of the attack.)<br />
<br />
=== Have captured aliens be present in base defense ===<br />
<br />
The alien containment unit could have all my captured aliens present in jail cells. But this requires other things to happen first.<br />
<br />
On one hand, I think it would be cool if the attackers can rescue their friends and bring them into battle. So aliens would need to be able to pick up weapons. Psi powers would suck -- it would seem nuts if a captured ethereal suddenly started brainwashing my crew right away. Maybe they all start with -50 stun, or maybe (can we do this?) psi-powered enemies have it disabled if they start the game captured.<br />
<br />
Another issue is that each containment supposedly holds 10 aliens according to the game text, but there is no real limit in the game. Maybe we fix that 10-limit bug (which would mean that we would need to be able to kill overflow aliens), maybe we only take the first 10. And it definitely runs into tile issues.<br />
<br />
Would the enemies in containment need to be killed/re-stunned to end the mission? Maybe being in a locked jail cell automatically counts as captured.<br />
<br />
== Miscellaneous ==<br />
<br />
===Fix All Bugs===<br />
<br />
Oh no [[User:Seb76#Bug Fixes|Seb76]] already did this! :) [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
= I Wished (And My Wish Came True)... =<br />
<br />
== Geoscape and Strategic ==<br />
<br />
=== Fuel Ready always ===<br />
[[User:Seb76#Mods|Implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
I wish that I could send out craft at any fuel or ammo level. Normally craft can only leave a base if fully "ready". Craft is only "ready" at 100% fuel (or 0% fuel using an exploit) but there's no logical reason why a full tank and full ammo is required. Fully repaired... that's fine. I can live with pilots refusing to fly a plane missing a wing even if it means England is lost to aliens. 15 hours to fill a tank? Retarded but I can live with that too if I can send out a craft at 20% fuel.<br />
--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]]<br />
<br />
:Actually, many modern aircraft '''do''' require the fuel tanks to be full on takeoff, and fairly empty on landing. The weight of the fuel is figured into the takeoff aerodynamics, and the tank being full prevents fuel 'sloshing' in the tanks and not actually making it to the engine. (Conversely, many aircraft need to have dispensed of much of that fuel weight before landing.) This holds for most runway-takeoff craft, but may not apply to anything with VTOL capacity; I'm unsure there.<br />
<br />
:I do agree that non-full weapons aren't as critical, though. But from a logical standpoint, most modern aircraft should not be launched on an empty fuel tank. I also should noted that an Elerium-fueled craft with [[Known_Bugs#Elerium-fueled_Craft_Bug|50% fuel or less remaining]] will automatically return to base, regardless of distance from base. Of course, given that such craft fuel up quickly, its less of an issue there. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 22:05, 7 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:Hum, maybe you can try [[User:Seb76#Mods|this]]? [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 13:01, 8 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
::Thanks! But I can't try it. I've not been able to get my copy of Xcom to run properly except on a Win98 install. VC2008 requires a more modern OS. I'm sure I could ''eventually'' figure out a way to get it running, but I tried once and wasted too much time before giving up.--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 14:45, 8 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
:AFAIK VC2008 binaries should run OK on Win98 as long as the runtime is deployed. Anyway, the loader uses CreateRemoteThread API which is not available in Win98 so don't even bother. '''However''', you can manually patch the binary if you want ;-) Data to patch (all in hexadecimal):<br />
offset 0x41752: 2A0075 -> 18207C<br />
:HTH. [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 14:56, 8 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
===Base Build Stacking===<br />
[[User:Seb76#Base Building Stacking|Implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
At the moment you are only allowed to build next to a finished module, and you aren't allowed to plan ahead in your base construction. It would be nice to at least be able to plan more than one phase of construction in advance. This would be pretty easy to implement. There is no need to code any new "queuing system". Just place the new module next to an existing under-construction module, but increment the build time to the normal build time + the time remaining on the under-construction module (the lowest time remaining that would make the square you are building in, a legal square to build in). As a premium for build stacking, you have to pay the costs up-front. As with normal construction, all costs are non-refundable if you change your mind. (There would probably need to be some on-screen feedback for how long the module would take to build, before you were committed to building it.) [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
See also: Discussion on [[Talk:Wish List|Talk page]].<br />
<br />
<br />
== Battlescape and Tactical ==<br />
<br />
=== Equipment Management ===<br />
<br />
==== Soldiers remembers THEIR equipment ====<br />
[[XcomUtil|Implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
I wish soldiers remembered what equipment they LAST used and start with that gear when they land. Normally soldiers grab various gear and put lots of crap on their belt. I put most things on the shoulder slots, and keep many things spare things on the ship just in case I need them. (I only want IN rounds if it's night. Stop picking them up before I shoot you in the back!) Takes forever to sort out the gear so the weakling isn't carrying all the rockets etc.<br />
--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]]<br />
<br />
:This is already available in [[XcomUtil]]. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 22:07, 7 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
====Access to Stats screens during equipment allocation====<br />
[[User:Seb76#Equipment Screen|Mostly implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
In Battlescape you can get to Stats screens by right clicking on one of the unit's status bars. However you can't do this in the Equipment screen. Things like Statstrings and (even more so) [[User:Seb76|Seb76]]'s modified Equipment screen with actual/max weight help. But it would be nice to be able to see exact stats. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
===Decrease Accuracy for targets out of sight===<br />
[[User:Seb76#Range_Based_Accuracy|Brilliantly implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
How come you can easily shoot on something you do not see?<br />
I find the over-used scout-sniper tactic is a cheap exploit of the X-COM. The tactical game should describe a combat, not a cowardly shooting practice. It would turn into a nice feature, if there would be a penalty of (let us say) -20% to the accuracy of anybody who is firing on a target out of his current sight. This can greatly enhance the tactical depth of the game. (Seb around? ;-) --[[User:Kyrub|Kyrub]] 14:20, 30 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
...discussed [http://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Talk:Wish_list here]<br />
<br />
===Enough Smoke===<br />
[[User:Seb76#Mods|Implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
It would be nice to increase the current limit on smoke/fire hexes. This is due to their locations being stored in a small, fixed length array. In effect you can only get about 3-4 smoke grenades worth of smoke or fire on the map at the same time. Being able to use smoke liberally would really open up new tactics. At the moment all you can really do is cover the LZ in smoke when you exit the transport, and maybe cover one advance over open ground. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
:I did something for that on my loader. Heavy testing is required because it is hard to be make sure smoke still works as before (testing is the hardest part actually). [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 14:09, 18 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Alien AI ===<br />
<br />
====Aliens better with explosions====<br />
Partly implemented [[User:Seb76#Bug Fixes|here (waypoint bug fix)]] and [[User:Seb76#Mods|here (Blaster drift)]]. ''(Possibly move this to talk, as notwithstanding these 2 bugs, apparently the Aliens are fairly safe with lethal explosives.)''<br />
<br />
<br />
I wish that aliens using grenades or blaster bombs or stun bombs (anything that goes boom) would use more sense. They should not want to use items that go boom when they are guaranteed to be caught in the blast radius. The alien can use grenades and blaster bombs by going out of line of sight before the explosion goes off. That may not save them if the explosion blows out the walls. At least it would be less stupid then firing a point blank blaster bomb vs taking 5 steps and setting up another waypoint. Units with morale above 100 or mind controlled should still be suicidal as normal.--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 13:55, 19 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
: Actually, the aliens are quite careful with their explosives, they just seem to be prone to the occasional accident. They're not likely to fire off a blaster or grenade too close to them - as evident by the strategy where if you see an alien with a BB but can't shoot back, the safest place is to stand next to it. The blaster bomb vertical waypoint fix in the loader also eliminates the 'oops' moments where they plot a vertical right angle too close to themselves and there just happens to be a wall to the south. However, they do need more care with stun bombs as you often get to see an alien fire a stun bomb point blank into a HWP parked next to it. But I guess we are talking about three different weapon types here, so they may not be as careful with a standard firearm as they are with grenades and the BB. Wish the Apocalypse aliens at least had as much sense as the UFO/TFTD aliens. In that game, they're utterly psychotic with explosives and ignore nearby allies. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 14:34, 19 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Mind Controlled then Hostile ===<br />
If you mind control a human (civilians) in a terror mission, they become enemies when you lose control (meaning you have to kill the poor idiots to finish the mission). Any chance that they could revert to friendlies/non enemies again when you lose control.<br />
: Now fixed by the Seb76 loader [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:13, 11 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
=== Mind Controlled then MIA ===<br />
Men who are under alien control when you win become MIA, any chance they could be saved (you will have killed all the aliens after all).<br />
: I believe XComUtil fixes this MIA issue. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
:: XcomUtil 9.6 also restores all DOA if you win to. Not what was intended. This feature has been removed as of 9.7 until I can fix it. --[[User:BladeFireLight|BladeFireLight]] 02:27, 6 January 2010 (EST)<br />
: Now also fixed by the Seb76 loader [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:13, 11 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
=== Open Doors But Don't Enter/Exit ===<br />
<br />
Open doors like they do in TFTD (I know this is mentioned above with the good stun grenades idea).<br />
: Now fixed by the Seb76 loader [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:13, 11 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
<br />
= Category =<br />
The page needs to be listed in various categories, which ones I don't know. Also links on other pages to this one would aid people finding it.<br />
<br />
: OK how about this one: [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:21, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Oddities and bugs]]</div>Lobster Danhttps://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Wish_List_(EU)&diff=32823Wish List (EU)2011-01-25T18:05:03Z<p>Lobster Dan: /* Battlescape and Tactical */</p>
<hr />
<div>X-Com is a great game and as evidence just look to the fact this wiki exists even though the game pre-dates the internet. In all it's greatness X-Com has some elements and behaviors players wish they could change. This is a repository of those desires. Some day a fan mod may make your wish come true...<br />
<br />
= I Wish... =<br />
State what you want AND what X-com does normally. Sign your name if you think "Oh man! That would be great!"<br />
<br />
== Geoscape and Strategic ==<br />
<br />
=== Smarter Aircraft Movement Around Globe ===<br />
I wish all craft understood the shortest distance between two points on a globe is a curved path towards the poles. Normally a craft goes in the opposite direction than it should (towards the equator). Pain in the ass when the base in the UK sends a craft to Siberia.<br />
--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]]<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Smart Interception ===<br />
<br />
Aircraft intercepting a UFO just head straight toward the UFOs current position at all times. Unless the UFO is already on a head-on course, this results in the interceptor travelling through a closing parabolic spiral path, and often missing the UFO and ending up in a tail-chase, and then just falling further behind unless the UFO stops or reverses course. This is pretty basic stuff, fighter pilots have known how to do this better for nearly a hundred years. It is particularly important if the aircraft you are trying to intercept is moving faster than you (eg if you are flying an Interceptor). <br />
<br />
What is needed is to plot the UFO's current course and speed (which X-Com has from radar data), and plot an intercept course. The maths for this is pretty easy (the intersection of 2 vectors) and can be implemented in a few lines of code, if we can find out where the current interception algorithm is, and patch it. <br />
<br />
Actually the radar bearing shown on screen is only accurate to within 45 degrees. I presume that X-Com does actually know the UFO's bearing, since it can clearly track the UFO's movements. Finding where that variable is located might be different. <br />
<br />
While we're at it, it would be nice if the UFO detection information displayed the actual bearing in degrees, rather than just the compass direction (North East, South, etc). <br />
<br />
Even if the improved intercept algorithm only used a bearing accurate to within 45 degrees, that would still be better for remote UFOs. You might need to switch to "head straight for it" once you get to very close range. [[User:Spike|Spike]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
===Score for retaliation Battleships===<br />
<br />
When a Battleship on retaliation attacks your base and is shot down, you get no score for it. This is completely illogical and it discourages any use of base defences. You should get normal 700 (or even 1400) points for it.<br />
--[[User:Kyrub|Kyrub]] 14:05, 30 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
: I'm not sure about this. Yes it's illogical, but it could also be a licence to get a huge score if you have a strong enough base. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:16, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:: The impenetrable base setup would turn into a cheat. As the aliens will keep hammering the base with a battleship until one breaks through, you'll have a steady supply of points without having to really do anything. Some balancing, such as paying to rearm your defence modules, ought to be thrown in to balance things out. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 23:13, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
::: A better fix would be to remove the retaliation flag when a battleship is destroyed. If someone can post a savegame with a never-ending flow of base attacks, I may have a look at the fix. [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 01:05, 15 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:::: Ummm, it seems the best solution (I, for one, can't think of any better), but wouldn't it assume that only the BattleShip really locates the player's base? All those scouts for nothing? [Still the best solution, though] [[User:N|n]] 15:01, 16 August 2010 (GMT+1)<br />
<br />
=== All Aircraft Weapons Useful ===<br />
<br />
In a balanced game, all weapons should have their uses, or at least a niche, but sadly this is not so:<br />
<br />
The Cannon is only useful for shooting down Small Scouts, and even that is practically impossible, due to the difficulty in closing to 10km range with any UFO, particularly the fast-accelerating Small Scout.<br />
<br />
The Stingray is not even useful for shooting down Small Scouts (destroys them 57% of the time) and the Avalanche is better in every meaningful way. It also takes twice as long to rearm, making it operationally much worse than the Avalanche.<br />
<br />
The Laser Cannon is inferior to the Avalanche for everything. It does have a higher payload but this is hardly relevant. If attacking a UFO that you would struggle to kill with Avalanches, you are unlikely to own an aircraft that will survive long enough to inflict more damage than an Avalanche if it mounted Laser Cannon. <br />
<br />
The Fusion Ball Launcher has a [[Talk:Craft_Armaments#Fusion_Balls_better_than_Plasma_Beams.3F¦possible niche]] in fighting Battleships when mounted on Interceptors. Even then, it is difficult and expensive to have aircraft configured to fight only one enemy. <br />
<br />
Unfortunately, the optimum path for craft weapon development is all-Avalanche followed by all-Plasma Beam. This is a shame. <br />
<br />
Suggestions to 'tune up' the other weapons:<br />
<br />
*Cannon - Increase the damage to 15 and 50% hit. So at least there is a pay-off if you manage to get in close. <br />
*Stingray - Raise Stingray accuracy to 80% but drop Avalanche to 60%. Double the rearm rate so it can be reloaded as fast as an Avalanche launcher.<br />
*Laser Cannon - increase accuracy to 50% and damage to 100. <br />
*FBL - increase the ammo from 2 to 3. <br />
<br />
It might be worth considering 'tune down' the Plasma Beam as well, particularly its stand-off range. It seems odd that humans copy alien plasma weapons and right away improve the range.<br />
<br />
[[User:Spike|Spike]] 06:59, 14 February 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
An alternative to tweaking the stats, is to tweak the costs. Realistic costs such as $386K for an Avalanche and $125K for a Stingray will even things up quickly.<br />
<br />
See also: [[User:Spike#Balancing_Aircraft_Weapons]]<br />
<br />
=== Tougher UFOs ===<br />
<br />
==== The Problem ====<br />
<br />
So let me get this straight. The first hybrid airborne weapon that humans ever build, and it immediately outclasses every weapon the aliens ever built, including their Battleship weapon? After all the Aliens have only been building plasma weapons for a few million years, us humans have been doing it for ''months''!<br />
<br />
More to the point, once you get Plasma Beams, downing UFOs is like shooting fish in a barrel. Even Battleships aren't that exciting if you show up with enough ships. <br />
<br />
What is needed is to push up the range, damage, and rate of fire of all the UFO weapons, particularly the UFOs you will be fighting by the time you have plasma beams. At a minimum, the weapon on a Battleship should be at least as powerful as, say, 2 Plasma Beams (as found on the XCom craft it is fighting)? Instead of slightly less than half as powerful? Compared to a single Plasma Beam, only the Battleship weapon has better range. It has double the accuracy, slightly higher damage, but half the fire rate. Net 5.7% more firepower than one Plasma Beam, but no match for 2. And the Battleship weapon of course is the most powerful in the alien arsenal. <br />
<br />
Possible tune ups for UFOs:<br />
<br />
*Battleship - increase to 255 weapon power, improve reload rate to 12 (from 24). Now roughly equivalent to 4 Plasma Beams in total firepower (on Beginner difficulty). Increase range to 69km, so that the Battleship commences fire as soon as an XCom craft begins its attack run. Or better, increase range to 70+km, the limit of the interception window, so that the Battleship starts firing immediately the XCom craft enters air combat range. This would disrupt XCom aircrafts' ability to form up into a flight of 4, prior to commencing their attack. Overall, this would make it much harder to down Battleships. Increasing weapon range to 70+km would also make it much harder to tail a Battleship - manual control in the Geoscape would be needed to hold off outside of combat range. Really, the Battleship should not sit there like a sitting duck. Does it think XCom are friendly?<br />
*Terror Ship - increase range to 52 (or decrease Plasma Beam range to 42), so stand-off kills are not possible with Plasma Beams?<br />
*Actually maybe all the larger UFOs should have weapon range 69-70+km, so they behave very aggressively toward XCom craft. <br />
<br />
NB: Strange effects occur if weapon range goes over 70km so it's probably best to leave it at 70km rather than 75km.<br />
<br />
NB: Also, changes to rate of fire need to be looked at carefully though because Difficulty Level also reduces reload rate for UFOs. Between Beginner (Difficulty 0) and Superhuman (Difficulty 4), rate of fire (and thus firepower) for Battleships, Terror Ships and Supply Ships increases by 24/(24-4x2=16) or 50%. But if the base reload rate for these weapons was reduced to 12, the transition from Beginner to Advanced would increase firepower '''three''' times for these 3 UFOs (less so for the smaller UFOs). It is less risky to increase the weapon power. Unfortunately there are only 2 firepower variables to play with - damage and reload rate - so there are not a lot of options, especially for the Battleship which already has weapon strength 148 out of a probable maximum of 255.<br />
<br />
:More detail on this. For Medium Scout, Large Scout and Abductor, with nominal reload rate 48gs, the rate of fire improves +20% between Beginner and Superhuman. For Harvester (32gs) it improves one third. For Large UFOs (Terror Ship, Supply Ship, Battleship - 24gs) the improvement is +50%. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 20:28, 14 February 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
I think we should assume that the Battleship, which is bigger than the entire XCom base, is engaging XCom craft with its secondary weapons rather than its main armament, which could probably destroy Manhattan with a glancing hit. <br />
<br />
I would really like to see the hypothetical Mega-Battleship go up against XCom's finest - a flight of 4 Avengers armed with dual Plasma Cannon or dual Fusion Ball Launchers. With the Battleship having 70+km range, 255 weapon power, and an effective fire rate on Superhuman triple that of the PB, it would have the firepower of 11 Plasma Beams - 36% more firepower than the whole attacking XCom force combined. To be honest I think that would be carnage, not sure XCom could win. So that would be tuning the Battleship up too much. The 3-fold increase in rate of fire when on Superhuman is just too much. Maybe just max out the damage to 255 and range to 75. This gives a 72% increase in firepower, and a challenging tactical problem for XCom (forming up and approaching under fire).<br />
<br />
The smaller UFOs can probably stay as they are. It is not until later in the game that XCom advances so that even large UFOs are easy pickings. What is the crossover point? Maybe the medium UFOs. So it might be good to reduce the reload times of the medium UFOs from 48 / 32 to 24, a good increase in firepower. <br />
<br />
In general I think all UFOs energy weapons should have at least as good range as the XCom energy weapons, even the Medium Scout. Again, they have been using these weapons for millions of years and we only just figured out how to copy them from the aliens, how could our weapons be better than the aliens? How did our first plasma weapon out-range and out-perform all but the hugest UFO plasma beam? And on an airframe the size of a Small Scout we mount ''two'' such weapons? On the battlefield we only are able to replicate alien weapons; how is it that in the air we are able to improve on them ''masssively''?<br />
<br />
Perhaps there should never be a stand-off advantage, except possibly with missiles -which should be less accurate with longer range. The XCom stand off advantage is really unfair because as far as I have seen the UFOs never attempt to close to effective range, even when they are getting killed. They don't break off much, either, though I think I have seen that happen on occasion. <br />
<br />
==== Specific Proposals ==== <br />
<br />
===== No Standoff Beam Attacks =====<br />
<br />
Increase ''all'' UFO plasma weapon ranges to at least 55km (compared to 52km for the XCom plasma weapon). Now only launched XCom weapons (Avalanche and Fusion Ball) have standoff advantage. Probably also reduce the accuracy of the Avalanche to 60% and buff Stingray accuracy to 80%, providing both weapons with a useful niche role.<br />
<br />
===== No Standoff Attacks =====<br />
<br />
Increase ''all'' UFO plasma weapon ranges to 66km (compared to 52km for the XCom plasma weapon). Now ''no'' XCom weapon has standoff advantage. (The benefit of a longer range weapon is simply spending less time being fired on by the UFO.)<br />
<br />
===== Twitchy Aliens =====<br />
<br />
Increase all UFO ranges to 69km. They will attack as soon as XCom aircraft commence any attack run.<br />
<br />
===== Hostile Aliens =====<br />
<br />
Increase all UFO ranges to 70km. They will attack as soon as XCom aircraft enter intercept range. UFOs now fire first, and tailing them unchallenged is impossible. <br />
<br />
===== Improved Medium UFOs =====<br />
<br />
Reduce (improve) the nominal reload time of Medium UFOs, Abductors and Harvesters, from 48gs and 32gs to 24gs. This increases the challenge in the early-mid game, when XCom might first be deploying advanced weapons.<br />
<br />
===== Improved Battleships =====<br />
<br />
Increase damage to 255. They're firing (bigger) Fusion Balls! A Battleship now has the same firepower as one XCom Craft with dual Plasma Beams (gosh wow!). It's a start, but what if we...<br />
<br />
===== Super Battleships =====<br />
<br />
... also reduce nominal reload time to 18gs. Giving a further one-third extra firepower on Beginner, 60% more on Superhuman.<br />
<br />
===== Mega Battleships =====<br />
<br />
... or for a real challenge, reduce reload time to 12gs. A further doubling of the firepower on Beginner - a further ''four'' times increase on Superhuman. Now Superhuman Battleships out-gun the biggest fleet XCom can throw at them!<br />
<br />
[[User:Spike|Spike]] 00:25, 19 February 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
: the flip side of this is weakening Xcom craft - apart from firepower issues there is also the issue of range: the ranges of the transport craft are such that really no more than 1 manned base is necessary to cover the globe for terror site defense. Setting e.g. the fuel capacity of the Skyranger to 500 results in roughly 1 base per continent required. This has interesting strategic consequences: need for more bases makes the ecomics more challenging (and thus slows down research). [[User:Emphyrio|Emphyrio]] 08:43, 9 August 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
===Enforced Variant Games===<br />
<br />
Various people like to play various variant games, such as No Alien Technology, or No Detection, or No Lethal Weapons - see for example Scott Jones' notes to XComUtil. It would be nice to have options on the game executable to enforce these scenarios. Self restraint is hard! [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
Some of these variant scenarios have been implemented by [[User:Seb76#Mods|Seb76]].<br />
<br />
<br />
===Recruit Certain Alien Types===<br />
<br />
Consider that not all aliens are loyal to their master (most TFTD alien has a device lodged to its brain), it would be interesting (or at least cool) if we could recuit such aliens to the XCOM cause. Maybe we can remove the controling devices from captive aliens after research on that species. Or convince the head of the Snakemen that it would be far more benefit to his race to help us instead of the Ethereals [[User:L-Zwei|L-Zwei]] 23:25, 12 September 2008 (PDT).<br />
<br />
Only certain alien types should be recruitable. Ones that should NOT be include Mutons (as they are directly controlled by Ethereals), Chrysallids (unbalancing), etc. It would be nice to be able to reverse-engineer Cyberdiscs or Sectopods, or make it that a Cyberdisc must be researched to build hovertanks/etc.<br />
[[User:MagicJuggler|MagicJuggler]] 13:32, 18 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
: It's pretty obvious which ones should be recruitable: non-robotic terror units that are captured alive. Chryssalids should simply do melee damage instead of impregnating (as the resulting spawn would not be mind-controlled and therefore XCOM wouldn't do it). Silacoids would be pretty ineffectual, and reapers slightly less so, but both would be disposable scouts. Celatids might actually have some use (eating through hulls with acid, and arcing over walls) but are fragile. All of these would require capturing a terror alien alive after researching Psi Amp. The two robotic units should require a live alien Engineer researched as well as UFO Construction, and the materials for building one would be one corpse of the appropriate type, Alien alloys and Elerium (to repair and refuel the husk). The Sectopod should probably be nerfed somewhat, so that it isn't quite so invincible to Heavy Plasma shots - after all, it was probably a twisted and melted modern art piece by the time it finally went down). [[User:Stubbs|Stubbs]]<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Game option: sell only researched items ===<br />
<br />
The fact that you may sell the alien items for the best price once you get them, without any research, is illogical. Such staff would never get on the market, being top secret and potentially dangerous to the humanity.<br />
<br />
Selling without proper research does not help the replay value of the game either: once you know the "right path" to get the best items, you simply sell anything else immediately and ignore the unnecessary research. Too easy.<br />
<br />
Therefore I wish for this game option: unknown items are sold for 0 (including the alien corpses), the known ones for their full price. This makes the sustainable economics much harder to develop and it gives sense to the "useless" research. Last but not least, it adds a lot of depth to the gameplay: will you choose research of a new weapon you need on the field, or of a mind probe that will earn you millions in sales? --[[User:Kyrub|Kyrub]] 15:55, 6 April 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: I really like this option, it's a great idea. Makes the game harder and makes it more interesting, more varied. Gives extra value to the otherwise "useless" research paths. Good thinking! [[User:Spike|Spike]] 15:06, 24 August 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: I'd prefer that unresearched artifacts/corpses sold for a fraction of their original value (no more than 25%). It makes no sense that nobody would pay to research them for themselves. Additionally, Laser Cannon sell price needs to be nerfed. [[User:Stubbs|Stubbs]]<br />
<br />
: This would have the added benefit that you would know if it was 'safe' or not to sell an item research wise. Coloring the un-researched items differently on the Sell/Sack screen would be good too ~ [[User:Renegrade|Renegrade]] 13:30, 19 August 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
=== New Research Mechanics ===<br />
<br />
The above comments spurred some ideas to make the research more realistic and the path to victory less obvious. <br />
<br />
For flavor reasons, give research options vague names instead of exact names. This already exists in some research topics, such as "New Fighter Craft" instead of "Firestorm". So, research topics might read "Alien Hovertank Wreck" instead of "Cyberdisc Corpse", "Grey Alien Corpse" instead of "Sectoid Corpse" or "Alien Pistol" instead of "Plasma Pistol". The names would be revealed in the UFOpaedia entry, and certain items would then be renamed as per common sense.<br />
<br />
Hide the ranks of aliens in captivity until they are researched (so you'd see Live Grey Alien #1, Live Grey Alien #2 if you had two Sectoids available for research). However, if you happened to have two Soldier ranks in containment, you'd only see one topic. The same rank/race combination would never appear again, but you might have to research several specimens of the same species to get the useful one you want. The alternative would be to have researched Mind Probe, which would tell you exactly what you had in containment (just as it does on the battlefield).<br />
<br />
Once an alien or its corpse is researched, then all other instances of that alien or its body are renamed appropriately. For example, research a live Muton and Muton corpses become obvious, and vice versa. "Live Green Humanoid Alien" is also renamed to "Live Muton".<br />
<br />
Finally, there should be a few more prerequisites in place to make less useful research more necessary. As someone else has mentioned, you should need a Cyberdisc Corpse to research Hovertanks. I'd also suggest that Psi Amp and Mind Shield require the research of Mind Probe (seeing as both entail scanning for minds as a logical first step), and that Flying Suits require Floater Corpse, Cyberdisc Corpse or a live Floater researched as an additional prerequisite (not Ethereals, as they fly with the power of their huge brains). [[User:Stubbs|Stubbs]]<br />
<br />
:These are all good suggestions and make a lot of sense. An alternative explanation of the names (seen in some fan fiction) is that these names are not the real names, but are made up by XCom troops based on some limited battlefield experience of them. But revealing the "real" alien race names through Research is a fun idea. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 08:44, 1 September 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Keyboard shortcuts at bases ===<br />
<br />
I wish we had (customised, maybe?) keyboard shortcuts at the base screen. Numbers (at the "base information" screen as well) would switch bases, R for research, E for equip craft, T for transfer, M for manufacture, S for soldiers, B for build new base, P for purchase+recruit (or "B" for "buy" - let people double-bind if they need it), I for base information. The doubles (soldiers/sell+sack) could be solved by using the key under the primary one (x for sell+sack). - n (16:26, 16 Aug 2010 (GMT+1))<br />
<br />
=== Inventory management ===<br />
<br />
I only want to keep 1 (or 0) sectoid corpse. If I have any more, sell them immediately and automatically. Sometimes having to sell all the stuff you've captured is just a chore.<br />
<br />
=== Soldier table ===<br />
<br />
Soldiers should be listed in a sortable table, so I can sort them based on rank, ship order, firing accuracy, psi skills, in psi training, etc. If I want to find out my best shooters, it should be a very fast operation.<br />
<br />
At a more advanced level: do it across bases; have filter options; sort based on formula (so I can find the soldiers with the best reaction+firing, or the best psi strength + psi skill).<br />
<br />
=== Monthly maintenance fees ===<br />
<br />
Later in the game, when you are way beyond what the sponsor nations are paying you and are instead selling captured/manufactured items to fund your operation, the end of the month can be a real PITA, because you need to build up a reserve of cash to avoid being shut down for financial problems. (This was worse with the misreported funding bug.) At the least, show us in one place exactly how much we need to raise at that time.<br />
<br />
Or make payments be done on a weekly/daily/hourly/continuously basis. This also means that I don't have to pay a same salary to someone who I hire on the 2nd or I hire on the 27th.<br />
<br />
Oh, and the cheat of "soldiers/scientists/engineers in flight don't need to be paid" needs to be squashed while we're at it. (But watch out fixing this one without making salary payments continuous; my current strategy is to hire most people just before the end of the month, which I would need to modify to hiring just after the start of the month.)<br />
<br />
== Battlescape and Tactical ==<br />
<br />
===Equipment Management===<br />
<br />
All wishes are currently implemented!<br />
<br />
===Fog of War Improvements===<br />
<br />
I'm sure most of these would be an absolute PAIN to implement, but I figured I'd toss the ideas out here.<br />
<br />
====Prior Recon of Battlefield====<br />
One thing that has always irked me is X-COM has no terrain knowledge when it lands, despite having probably circled the place two or three times before landing and thus they should know at least some of the area. This would be nice, but isn't too important. Probably would be a pain to implement so X-COM would have all knowledge of external features but no knowledge of building interiors, anyways. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 22:38, 7 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:Yes at the very least, when you splash the UFO, it could tell you (via some miracle technology such as "satellite reconnaisance") what the terrain type is of the landing zone area. Then you could adjust equipment accordingly. And adjust your uniform camouflage (if using one of the uniform mods). [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:16, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:: Geoscape: center on the site, then maximum zoom. Aside from having to disambiguate forest from jungle, this works fine for knowing the exact terrain you're getting into. -- [[User:Zaimoni|Zaimoni]] 10:17, 4 Sept 2008 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::This is already present in the game. To center the Geoscape on a specific location, right-click on the target spot. To do maximum zoom in, right click on the Zoom-In button(and the same works for Zoom-Out). Also, Jungle and Forest use the same display algorithm, but are easy to differentiate; Forest occurs NORTH of the equator, and Jungle occurs SOUTH. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 13:23, 4 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:Returning to AQ's original suggestion, it wouldn't be too hard would it for the dropship to "radar map" the target, and then have the basic map show up on your scanner on Turn 1? [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
====Dynamic Fog====<br />
<br />
The Fog of War in X-COM is clumsily implemented, compared to modern expectations. Everything starts out black, but after exploring, is shown...and it's kept in the same showing, regardless of whether you actually have LoS to that area anymore. It would be nice if when you no longer had Line of Sight to a particular map area, it would be cloaked in a way so that you knew the terrain, but not the units there. Since I've sometimes spent over half an hour trying to hunt down that last alien hiding in area I'd already explored. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 22:38, 7 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
====Deactivate Object Radar====<br />
<br />
Currently, in X-COM, any objects dropped in a given square show on your Battlescape, regardless of whether you have Line of Sight to the square or not. In regards to dropped weapons/grenades/equipment/dead soldiers/dead aliens, this doesn't make a large difference. But in the case of STUNNED aliens, a quick scan across the Battlescape can tell you whether the alien you stunned 10 turns ago is still down, or stood back up(the stunned alien object will disappear from the stack). Of course, since aliens which have revived from stun are almost always disarmed(and the ones that aren't probably should've been killed instead), the usefulness of this 'exploit' is reduced mainly to finding out that the last alien you're looking for is just wandering aimlessly and unarmed. Perhaps leave stacks showing the same until you regain LoS to that area? [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 22:38, 7 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
====Crushed Buildings====<br />
<br />
Why don't we see any crushed or destroyed buildings? Does a UFO always fall like a rock, perpendicular to the ground? No marks on the ground? Such impact would do massive damage to the land (a small meteor can do much if it has a high speed...). (Also, at the [debatedly] "real" UFO crash zones UFO parts were scattered over miles)<br />
<br />
I'd like to see chopped buildings, entering UFO's through a barns; entering an abductor from a immediate house's roof if I have plasma and no flying suits yet. - [[User:N|n]] 15:01, 16 August 2010 (GMT+1)<br />
<br />
: The Pocket PC remake of the game did this, though it seems the site it concern has vanished off the face of the net. Could probably find a copy if you're interested.<br />
<br />
: By the way, you can generate a time/date stamped signature by typing four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 23:04, 16 August 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:: Amazingly enough (is it Truman Show of me or just a coincidence :)?), my GF found a low-tech palmtop (with/in a case)... on the pavement. With no personal data and means to find the owner; when I laid my hands on it, I actually found and installed Ufo:EU there, but it wouldn't run :(. [And thanks! again for the 4 tildes name/timestamp trick] - [[User:N|n]] 19:18, 18 August 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
===Restore Game from Battlescape===<br />
<br />
It would be nice to be able to reload a saved game directly from the Battlescape "?" screen, rather than having to go through the process of Abandoning to the Geoscape. Would you need to check it was a Battlescape save and not a Geoscape save? Maybe, maybe not. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
===Warm Grenades===<br />
<br />
Currently when you set the timer on a grenade (or HE pack), the timer runs down every turn regardless of whether the grenade is worn, held, or dropped. Then, when the timer runs out, it explodes unless it is held or worn. There is no real grenade or explosive that works this way. Once the timer (fuse) starts running, they explode regardless. However for most hand grenades, the timer (fuse) doesn't start until after you throw/drop the grenade. It would be nice to have both of these real world behaviours, and lose the game's default behaviour. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
: Technically the way the game implements grenades, they don't have a timer. At least, not as such. When you set a grenade, the game just assigns it a turn to blow up on. Once the turn has passed, the game checks to see that it's on the ground and blows it up if it is, otherwise it doesn't. I believe Seb76 has already addressed this in his patches where there's an option to make grenade blow up regardless whether they are in inventory or otherwise the moment the timer is set. X-Com Apocalypse does a good job of this. The moment the grenade is so much as moved after the timer is set, it counts down. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 23:01, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:: To simulate an actual timer, you would need to do something like: Every turn that a primed grenade is being held by a unit during the "explode" check, increment by +1 the turn when that grenade is going to explode. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:10, 14 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
:::I think I would change quantity2 ([[OBPOS.DAT]]) to a countdown instead of a turn, and use quantity3 as a flag indicating if the count has started. This flag is set any time a turn ends and the grenade has no owner. Taking it back in your hand once the timer has started won't help and the thing must be thrown... quantity2 is decreased if quantity3 is set, and the grenade blows up as usual. [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 01:35, 15 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
: That would be great. It would be exactly consistent with a 'spoon' type hand grenade. The timer only starts when you release the grenade, but after that it explodes at a definite time regardless of whether you pick it up or not. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
===Stun Grenades===<br />
<br />
I want flashbangs.--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 22:59, 11 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
:Instead of stunning, I'd see more effect if it would remove some TUs to units having line of sight (to be fare it should affect xcom units too). It would help against reaction fire (which is the point of flashbangs). Given that grenades detonate at the end turns, it would require a good coordination to have the grenade detonate exactly at the end of the alien turn, and just before your attack. Being able to open doors à la xcom2 would also help to throw flashbangs just before a craft assault... [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 22:03, 12 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
::That would be good. Hard to program, potentially extremely unbalancing, but good. I considered a "debuff" kind of ability (as you suggest) for flashbangs, vs the more obvious substitution of [[stun]] for [[Explosions|HE]] damage. In the end, I picked "I want flashbangs."--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 03:32, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
: Maybe flashbangs dont' work on Aliens - otherwise, XCom would use them, right? :) But seriously, I too would like flashbangs, and stun grenades / concussion grenades. Both of these would make the game easier, though. With flashbangs, you might have to compensate by just giving the aliens more TUs. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 13:33, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
::More options for the player is going to make it easier for any kind of game. Particularly of games like XCOM where the computer can't take advantage of the changes. However I don't believe a weak stun grenade (like 44 stun damage, comparable to AC-HE) would change the game much because the 80 item limit remains.--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 22:21, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
===Night Vision===<br />
<br />
I '''don't''' want to add night vision equipment to the game. I assume that either (1) all XCom units already have night vision gear as standard, but it's not as good as alien night vision, and the visibility that XCom units have at night is based on their standard-issue night vision gear, or (2) night vision gear does not work on Aliens. Either they do not appear on night vision, or maybe worse - maybe the aliens can manipulate night vision equipment, causing worse than normal vision, or hallucinations, and even tricking XCom units into firing on each other. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 13:33, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:Wouldn't it be nice though if it had gradients other than "day: 20 squares" "night: 9 squares" ? Like.. "early morning/late evening: 10-19 squares" ? I find the cut off from full daylight to full night kinda disturbing. ~ [[User:Renegrade|Renegrade]] 10:41, 19 August 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
===Throwing over stuff===<br />
'''(Moved to Talk, as this is not a bug and so does not need fixing.)'''<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
===Assault Time Limit===<br />
<br />
One of the cool things about UFO Defence is there are no time limits on the scenarios. This is great as it allows for a totally different kind of tactics and much more flexibility. <br />
It's more of a "thinking man's game" as a result. But... arguably this is not very realistic for UFO Assault missions. If the Aliens are getting creamed, they should try to make a getaway if they can (just like XCom would). A simple way to implement this would be a hard time limit (say 20 turns?) on a UFO Assault. Another way would be to base it on Alien Morale. At a certain Morale level the aliens decide to dust off. Give the player say 3 turns warning while they rev up the engines. Then if there is still a Navigator or Engineer in the Control Room alive, the ship takes off. Any XCom troops still aboard are MIA. <br />
<br />
You might run into problems if the UFO took off but then landed again or was shot down, generating another ground mission with potentially '''more''' Aliens than were still alive at the end of the Assault. (Still, maybe they hatch some more clones if they get time to....) [[User:Spike|Spike]] 09:51, 4 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
: It strikes me as justified they don't do that. Troops loose in the vessel could be seriously bad. It would be nice if they dusted off on the condition that their morale was low enough or 3 X-com soldiers had the door in their sights without aliens alive outside in the latter case and no X-com soldiers on board in either case. also, if the UFO has a hole in either the command or engine room, it would have to set down before leaving the atmosphere. [[User:(name here)|(name here)]]<br />
<br />
Taking off with troops onboard would be perfectly safe (for the aliens) and justifiable if one assumes that alien ships in flight are inherently inhospitable for humans. This is easily done by saying that they undergo accelerations that humans can't withstand (splat), can't withstand for any length of time (pass out), or that they intentionally make rapid accelerations in different directions, either normally or just if they're trying to bash some intruders around. Naturally, the aliens themselves would either be immune to these (tough physique / their built-in antigrav devices?), or be in acceleration chairs, safe from all this.<br />
<br />
Alternatively, when you get the warning that the UFO is going to take off, you've got a certain amount of time to either get everyone '''off''' the UFO, or to get everyone '''on''' it (or as many as you can). There could be a follow-up mission that takes place in "sky" terrain, where the outdoors is either impassable (the easy way) or else instantly withdraws units from combat (flying suits / parachutes). The soldiers' goals would be to either take out the aliens and presumably safely land and salvage the UFO, or take out the UFO's means of flying (power cores / navigator?). In the latter case, they might have a certain number of turns to withdraw or be caught in the crash, with possible casualties just like the aliens, mitigated to some degree by their armour and maybe where inside the UFO they are.<br />
<br />
In the case of a crash, there could be a final mission to finish off the surviving aliens, using the X-COM soldiers that survive the crash, and no landing craft (it's still back at the old landing site). Alternatively, you could say that there '''is''' an X-COM landing craft parked outside (with all remaining members of the original landing party), since the in-flight time / distance was presumably low and the original X-COM craft quickly packed up and flew to the new landing site. &mdash; [[User:Wisq|Wisq]] 17:11, 18 April 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
===Alien AI===<br />
<br />
====Attempts to rearm====<br />
Aliens cannot pick up items, but I wish they would. If an alien has no useful weapons in inventory they should either head for cover or head for a plasma weapon. Panicked aliens drop their weapons but never seem to pick them up when they managed to pull themselves together. It would be nice if they tried to arm themselves again. --[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 13:55, 19 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:Even if it's too hard to make aliens head towards weapons (is it safe?, could it be used to trap them, not to mention the complexities of route finding) - it would still be good if an unarmed alien checked for usable weapons in every square it moved through, and at least picked up one loaded weapon or grenade per turn. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
Fixing the AI for this could be really hard. Apart from all the possible exploits by XCom, the AI is probably a really hard part of the game to reverse engineer. You could say that an unarmed alien is no threat anyway (we are only concerned about aliens without psi or built in weapons). So nothing is lost even with an exploitable method of re-arming. By exploitable I mean the XCom player can manipulate re-arming, e.g. by leaving weapons out in the open as bait for traps. <br />
<br />
Maybe the simplest modification would be to ''not'' drop weapons when the alien panics? This does not require delving in to the AI, just intercepting the panic effects. Dont make aliens drop any weapons when they panic. It would be reasonable to return the weapon in hand to inventory, so there is a TU cost for the alien to bring the weapon back into play again. <br />
<br />
This would not work for aliens who were stunned and wake up, or who were mind controlled by XCom and made to drop their weapons. But it would probably catch 80% of cases. <br />
<br />
Another cheat, short of fixing the AI, is just to pick up weapons that the alien walks over. It could also pick up "spare" weapons from adjacent aliens (cheating on TUs - basically just teleporting the items to the unarmed alien). Spare alien weapons are almost invariably grenades. I have not had a lot of success in getting unarmed aliens to use grenades, so more research is needed here. Maybe only certain types of aliens use grenades, or only in certain circumstances?<br />
<br />
Really, really cheating would be to teleport any weapon laying around the battlefield into the alien's inventory. But I think it is more fair just to say panicked aliens dont drop their equipment. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 16:13, 13 February 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
==== End Psi Bullying and Psi Baiting ====<br />
When the aliens use psi attacks they always go for your guys with the most chance of failing the attack and going nuts. Is it possible to make those pesky aliens attack random soldiers, regardless of their psi skill/strength? <br />
<br />
: Not a bad idea to randomise this a bit, because while initially this tactic helps the aliens, it becomes so predictable that it can be used against them by deploying unarmed "Psi Bait" soldiers to draw off all the attacks. (Or make aliens avoid controlling/panicking soldiers who have no loaded weapons. But then folks would just give them pea shooters and wear armour.) [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
=== 80 Item Limit on Base Defense Mission ===<br />
: Well you get the 80 item limit on every mission, but it hurts more on a Base Defence as you have more limited ability, or sometimes no ability, to manage what goes into those 80 items. I was thinking about a couple of (theoretical) ways to fix this and I hit on a new one (new for me anyway): Why not take the 80 items from the Transport(s), first Transport then second Transport until you run out of items or hit 80. This has a few benefits:<br />
:* Ready made interface to manage the 80-item limit, the Stores <> Craft (Equip Craft) Screen.<br />
:* If you have no warning at all, the 80 items will probably make good tactical sense in general terms, even if they are are not totally optimised for Base Defence (no proximity mines, etc).<br />
: I think that copying the Transport inventory into the Battlescape inventory would be relatively to implement (though what do I know?). As a simplification, you could move only the inventory in the ''first available'' Transport that is present in the Base, into the Battlescape, and not bother looking in more than one place (other Transports, Base Stores) to get up to 80. It would then be a bit of a drag if your Transports are all out on a mission when your Base gets attacked though. Or perhaps inspect the inventory of Transport 1 (wherever it is in the world), and then attempt to copy its inventory, using equipment present in the Base?<br />
: Another way of doing it which has been mentioned elsewhere is to try to reverse the order of the items in the Stores list. This has the effect of putting the more advanced weapons first, rather than the more basic weapons. There could be all kinds of unwanted side effects of this, depending on various programming issues.<br />
: Actually there is already a fix for the 80-item limit in XComUtil. XComUtil records a standard assign weapon set for each of your troops, and then teleports those weapons to the Battlescape from your Base Stores, regardless of the 80-item limit (but still subject to the Battlescape's 170-item limit). Not 100% sure if this works for Base Defence missions though. <br />
:[[User:Spike|Spike]] 13:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
=== Collision Detection Bugs ===<br />
I have noticed that sometimes you can shoot through hard objects, for example, recently I had a soldier up on the roof of a house overlooking a large scout craft. When a Sectiod moved through one of the inner doors of the UFO, my man shot him straight through the intact ufo roof! <br />
<br />
=== Base Defence Systems Cause Alien Casualties ===<br />
<br />
I don’t know if this is already implemented in the game? When the aliens attack your base and you defend it with base defense measures does the following occur and if not a mod maybe? When you hit the battleship with your weapons but it still gets through (e.g. you hit the battleship with some missiles before it lands) can the number of attackers be reduced accordingly. For example if you hit it with some missiles then maybe they could have a couple less soldiers attacking (could be random small amount) or when you hit with loads of stuff like plenty of fusion balls and the battleship just makes it then their attack could be reduced to a few aliens (all others got killed in the defense). As I say not sure if this is already there to some degree (not played in a long time and I’m not at that stage yet this time round). <br />
<br />
: The general view is probably that Base Defence missions are a boon to XCOM already, so why make them any easier. At very least there would need to be more damage to the loot than there was to the Alien's combat effectiveness, otherwise this unbalances the game in favour of XCOM. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
=== Alien vs Alien ===<br />
This one is way out there. Alien v Alien battles out with main game, just random battlescape maps. Sectoid and their terrorists against Floaters and theirs etc. One side human controlled the other computer. Choice of ships involved etc. <br />
<br />
:I actually love this idea. It might just about be possible using XComUtil, if someone is a total XComUtil guru.<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
There was a utility to do this from Devisraad. it has long since been removed from his site, but someone may still have it. The basics was you renamed unit and it automatically replaced graphics flag to swap out the units. Didn't work on the Large Aliens but still was a fun mod --[[User:BladeFireLight|BladeFireLight]] 02:20, 6 January 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
=== Aircraft in Base Defence Battlescape ===<br />
<br />
New graphics for the Interceptor and Firestorm on the battlescape. All your ships could remain in their hangers when the aliens attack your base. Don’t understand why Mythos did not do this originally.<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Simply for one reason: the limit on the size of the battlescape. UFO maps are usually limited to 10000 tiles (50x50x4), on Bases you have 9600 (60x60x3), the last level one being dirt. You need 3 levels to display X-COM craft. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 14:28, 23 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Could you not do it but clip off the top level of the craft - leaving the ground level and 'deck' level? It would be a cool terrain area to fight in. I like the fact that in TFTD you can still see your subs during a base defence. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
It is possible to edit the map files to include the Skyranger, but you'll have to use Xcomutil to play with that terrain and I think it would never launch during base defense missions (but I'm not sure on that - never tried editing the X-COM base terrain). [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 19:25, 4 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
This could be done by creating new "hangar" map modules, each containing one of the five possible X-COM craft. Bung the modules into [[GEODATA.DAT]] at index 0C, and you're done. The catch is you can't have all craft or the MCD array will overflow. The base terrain uses ~160 tiles as it is (out of the max of 256), while the craft use about 60 each (on average). Putting them all in would take the table above 300 entries (that is to say, the game'd crash).<br />
<br />
'Cause XcomUtil already provides us with an Intercepter design made up of SkyRanger parts, I suppose the way to go would be to only implement those two craft. If you have any alien technology ships, they could either be left out ("they were fast enough to escape") or rendered as SkyRangers.<br />
<br />
It should also be noted that bases are made up of two levels, not three. Luckily, all the craft are only three levels high, so cutting out the landing gear still works. - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 19:56, 4 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Very true about the MCD limit, that's why I only mentioned the Skyranger but the Interceptor could be added as well (and would not make much sense to have your first defense mission with a nice Avenger parked on the hangar while your Interceptors are being blow to bits by Battleships). The bases are 3 levels but you can only modify two of them. The game engine automatically adds a layer of 'dirt modules' either at top or bottom. Hmmm, this just gave me an idea for the wish list... [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 20:29, 4 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Both alien and X-Com bases ''are'' only two levels. There must be something screwy in your game; XcomUtil maybe?<br />
<br />
It occurs to me that removing landing gear and stuff might make it ''just'' possible to jam in the Lightning tiles as well (as the MCD requirements would also shrink slightly). That'd make it possible to add the Firestorm, too. Seems a shame to get that far then leave out the Avenger, though...<br />
<br />
- [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 21:30, 4 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Nevermind, I completely misread your previous post. Yes, they are two levels only, could be Xcomutil that adds the 3rd level.<br />
<br />
- [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 22:30, 4 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
You may be able to get 3 levels in an X-Com Base but not 4. EU has a smaller amount of memory alocated. I dont know the limit but 60x60x4 will crash EU. TFTD has no problem --[[User:BladeFireLight|BladeFireLight]] 02:25, 6 January 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
I got partway through this and then decided to change my methods entirely and start from scratch. So I thought I might as well post my progress anyways, as it's already about on par with the crude TFTD implementation: You always have the same craft appear in your hanger regardless of what is (or isn't!) there.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Skyranger In Hanger.rar]]<br />
<br />
- [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 05:40, 17 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Hey BB, a while ago I have modded the plane terrain files so that the Skyranger appears facing east instead of south. If you want to use that one (to make it a little different) let me know. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 08:23, 17 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Thanks, but don't worry about it for now: it'll make the MCD arrays larger still, so I'll consider it when I get all the other stuff done. <br />
<br />
- [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 17:01, 19 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
The completed mod is now included in my toolpack. As usual, I've only done cursory testing on it, but I'm pretty sure it's stable enough. <br />
<br />
- [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 06:40, 20 January 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
=== Fixed firing TUs ===<br />
<br />
Something that always bugged me was how the weapons used percentages for firing TUs. It doesn't make sense that the faster a soldier got, the longer it would take to fire a weapon.<br />
: This is because you can't fire an automatic weapon any faster than it will shoot. However, it otherwise makes minimal sense, as you point out. I suggest two alternative solutions. Firstly, that only automatic fire modes use a fixed percentage of a soldier's time units, and other modes use a fixed number of TUs. This would entail the newer soldiers spraying and your most elite taking fast, selective single shots. The alternative is that each firing mode for each weapon entails its own formula (revealed in the UFOpaedia but essentially hidden during the battlescape) along the lines of "X% of TUs + Y TUs". Snap fire would be a low % of total plus a low fixed cost, Aimed would be a low % of total with a high fixed cost, and Auto would be a high % of total with a low fixed cost. While this is somewhat complex, in-game you wouldn't have to worry, and it accounts for what can be reduced (i.e. aiming speed) and what can never be improved by a soldier (i.e. cyclic rate of fire or time for a missile to lock). [[User:Stubbs|Stubbs]]<br />
:: These observations are very sensible. However we also need to consider the impact on game balance. If you implement this in an even-handed way, alien rates of fire will increase as they have high TUs. Or, if you fudge it so that alien rates of fire remain the same, then X-Com's advantage will increase as the game progresses. Neither of these are desirable. It would be extremely hard to implement this and still maintain game balance. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 08:41, 1 September 2009 (EDT)<br />
:::Each turn has the exact same duration, but is divided into TUs separately for each soldier. That's a simplification that works well in a turn-based game and reflects the fact that a soldier is fast or slow. However, weapons need to be aimed and will not fire faster than normal, thus they require a fixed percentage of the turn duration. In other words, soldiers gain movement speed, but fire at the same rate. This is both desirable and logical, just not self-explanatory. Thus, I would definitely stick to how TUs consumption is solved currently. [[User:mingos|mingos]]<br />
<br />
=== In-flight Interception ===<br />
<br />
Yes, I know that this idea is nigh-impossible, but I was thinking, wouldn't it be awesome to infiltrate a battleship, kill the aliens inside and escape, with the geoscape being shown zooming past underneath? Also, in a similar vein to the "aliens dust off after 3 turns" idea, after killing the aliens ( or blowing up the power cores, maybe?)you would have to get as many troops as possible to the drop ship in 3 turns(in retrospect I guess that you could only do this with the Lightning because of the doors) or the ship crashes and all troops not in the dropship are missing in action. Yes, this idea is impractical and would be really hard to program, but the idea of blowing a UFO up from the inside just seems epic to me. [[User:WolfenMage|WolfenMage]]<br />
<br />
=== Impose cost to using Psionic attacks===<br />
<br />
I think everyone agrees Psi attacks are too powerful. I would propose to impose a cost to using Psionic attacks. This could take the form of decreasing the physical stats after using a PSi attack (after all all: the psionic races are physically weak). This could for example lead to a soldier becoming a weakling or even fainting or dying from using psi-attack. Another possibility is to decrease mental stats (in this case the ratio would be that humans are not really being adapted to psi: you could be expected to go crazy playing mind games) leading to a decrease in psionic powers or maybe panicking or beserking the soldier using psi. Together with limiting psi attacks of MCed units proposed elsewhere this would rebalance the later game somewhat... [[User:Emphyrio|Emphyrio]] 07:22, 9 August 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
=== Make losing a base less costly ===<br />
<br />
My friends would often quit and reload after losing a base because it was so costly. It should definitely be a kick in the teeth, but even the game text suggests some ways you can recover:<br />
1. Scientists and engineers have already been evacuated -- on a defense loss, let me transfer them to bases with open living quarters.<br />
2. Likewise, move any ships at that location to another open hangar. (Maybe doing this requires that I have gotten advanced warning of the attack.)<br />
<br />
=== Have captured aliens be present in base defense ===<br />
<br />
The alien containment unit could have all my captured aliens present in jail cells. But this requires other things to happen first.<br />
<br />
On one hand, I think it would be cool if the attackers can rescue their friends and bring them into battle. So aliens would need to be able to pick up weapons. Psi powers would suck -- it would seem nuts if a captured ethereal suddenly started brainwashing my crew right away. Maybe they all start with -50 stun, or maybe (can we do this?) psi-powered enemies have it disabled if they start the game captured.<br />
<br />
Another issue is that each containment supposedly holds 10 aliens according to the game text, but there is no real limit in the game. Maybe we fix that 10-limit bug (which would mean that we would need to be able to kill overflow aliens), maybe we only take the first 10. And it definitely runs into tile issues.<br />
<br />
Would the enemies in containment need to be killed/re-stunned to end the mission? Maybe being in a locked jail cell automatically counts as captured.<br />
<br />
== Miscellaneous ==<br />
<br />
===Fix All Bugs===<br />
<br />
Oh no [[User:Seb76#Bug Fixes|Seb76]] already did this! :) [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
= I Wished (And My Wish Came True)... =<br />
<br />
== Geoscape and Strategic ==<br />
<br />
=== Fuel Ready always ===<br />
[[User:Seb76#Mods|Implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
I wish that I could send out craft at any fuel or ammo level. Normally craft can only leave a base if fully "ready". Craft is only "ready" at 100% fuel (or 0% fuel using an exploit) but there's no logical reason why a full tank and full ammo is required. Fully repaired... that's fine. I can live with pilots refusing to fly a plane missing a wing even if it means England is lost to aliens. 15 hours to fill a tank? Retarded but I can live with that too if I can send out a craft at 20% fuel.<br />
--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]]<br />
<br />
:Actually, many modern aircraft '''do''' require the fuel tanks to be full on takeoff, and fairly empty on landing. The weight of the fuel is figured into the takeoff aerodynamics, and the tank being full prevents fuel 'sloshing' in the tanks and not actually making it to the engine. (Conversely, many aircraft need to have dispensed of much of that fuel weight before landing.) This holds for most runway-takeoff craft, but may not apply to anything with VTOL capacity; I'm unsure there.<br />
<br />
:I do agree that non-full weapons aren't as critical, though. But from a logical standpoint, most modern aircraft should not be launched on an empty fuel tank. I also should noted that an Elerium-fueled craft with [[Known_Bugs#Elerium-fueled_Craft_Bug|50% fuel or less remaining]] will automatically return to base, regardless of distance from base. Of course, given that such craft fuel up quickly, its less of an issue there. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 22:05, 7 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:Hum, maybe you can try [[User:Seb76#Mods|this]]? [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 13:01, 8 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
::Thanks! But I can't try it. I've not been able to get my copy of Xcom to run properly except on a Win98 install. VC2008 requires a more modern OS. I'm sure I could ''eventually'' figure out a way to get it running, but I tried once and wasted too much time before giving up.--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 14:45, 8 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
:AFAIK VC2008 binaries should run OK on Win98 as long as the runtime is deployed. Anyway, the loader uses CreateRemoteThread API which is not available in Win98 so don't even bother. '''However''', you can manually patch the binary if you want ;-) Data to patch (all in hexadecimal):<br />
offset 0x41752: 2A0075 -> 18207C<br />
:HTH. [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 14:56, 8 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
===Base Build Stacking===<br />
[[User:Seb76#Base Building Stacking|Implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
At the moment you are only allowed to build next to a finished module, and you aren't allowed to plan ahead in your base construction. It would be nice to at least be able to plan more than one phase of construction in advance. This would be pretty easy to implement. There is no need to code any new "queuing system". Just place the new module next to an existing under-construction module, but increment the build time to the normal build time + the time remaining on the under-construction module (the lowest time remaining that would make the square you are building in, a legal square to build in). As a premium for build stacking, you have to pay the costs up-front. As with normal construction, all costs are non-refundable if you change your mind. (There would probably need to be some on-screen feedback for how long the module would take to build, before you were committed to building it.) [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
See also: Discussion on [[Talk:Wish List|Talk page]].<br />
<br />
<br />
== Battlescape and Tactical ==<br />
<br />
=== Equipment Management ===<br />
<br />
==== Soldiers remembers THEIR equipment ====<br />
[[XcomUtil|Implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
I wish soldiers remembered what equipment they LAST used and start with that gear when they land. Normally soldiers grab various gear and put lots of crap on their belt. I put most things on the shoulder slots, and keep many things spare things on the ship just in case I need them. (I only want IN rounds if it's night. Stop picking them up before I shoot you in the back!) Takes forever to sort out the gear so the weakling isn't carrying all the rockets etc.<br />
--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]]<br />
<br />
:This is already available in [[XcomUtil]]. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 22:07, 7 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
====Access to Stats screens during equipment allocation====<br />
[[User:Seb76#Equipment Screen|Mostly implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
In Battlescape you can get to Stats screens by right clicking on one of the unit's status bars. However you can't do this in the Equipment screen. Things like Statstrings and (even more so) [[User:Seb76|Seb76]]'s modified Equipment screen with actual/max weight help. But it would be nice to be able to see exact stats. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
===Decrease Accuracy for targets out of sight===<br />
[[User:Seb76#Range_Based_Accuracy|Brilliantly implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
How come you can easily shoot on something you do not see?<br />
I find the over-used scout-sniper tactic is a cheap exploit of the X-COM. The tactical game should describe a combat, not a cowardly shooting practice. It would turn into a nice feature, if there would be a penalty of (let us say) -20% to the accuracy of anybody who is firing on a target out of his current sight. This can greatly enhance the tactical depth of the game. (Seb around? ;-) --[[User:Kyrub|Kyrub]] 14:20, 30 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
...discussed [http://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Talk:Wish_list here]<br />
<br />
===Enough Smoke===<br />
[[User:Seb76#Mods|Implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
It would be nice to increase the current limit on smoke/fire hexes. This is due to their locations being stored in a small, fixed length array. In effect you can only get about 3-4 smoke grenades worth of smoke or fire on the map at the same time. Being able to use smoke liberally would really open up new tactics. At the moment all you can really do is cover the LZ in smoke when you exit the transport, and maybe cover one advance over open ground. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
:I did something for that on my loader. Heavy testing is required because it is hard to be make sure smoke still works as before (testing is the hardest part actually). [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 14:09, 18 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Alien AI ===<br />
<br />
====Aliens better with explosions====<br />
Partly implemented [[User:Seb76#Bug Fixes|here (waypoint bug fix)]] and [[User:Seb76#Mods|here (Blaster drift)]]. ''(Possibly move this to talk, as notwithstanding these 2 bugs, apparently the Aliens are fairly safe with lethal explosives.)''<br />
<br />
<br />
I wish that aliens using grenades or blaster bombs or stun bombs (anything that goes boom) would use more sense. They should not want to use items that go boom when they are guaranteed to be caught in the blast radius. The alien can use grenades and blaster bombs by going out of line of sight before the explosion goes off. That may not save them if the explosion blows out the walls. At least it would be less stupid then firing a point blank blaster bomb vs taking 5 steps and setting up another waypoint. Units with morale above 100 or mind controlled should still be suicidal as normal.--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 13:55, 19 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
: Actually, the aliens are quite careful with their explosives, they just seem to be prone to the occasional accident. They're not likely to fire off a blaster or grenade too close to them - as evident by the strategy where if you see an alien with a BB but can't shoot back, the safest place is to stand next to it. The blaster bomb vertical waypoint fix in the loader also eliminates the 'oops' moments where they plot a vertical right angle too close to themselves and there just happens to be a wall to the south. However, they do need more care with stun bombs as you often get to see an alien fire a stun bomb point blank into a HWP parked next to it. But I guess we are talking about three different weapon types here, so they may not be as careful with a standard firearm as they are with grenades and the BB. Wish the Apocalypse aliens at least had as much sense as the UFO/TFTD aliens. In that game, they're utterly psychotic with explosives and ignore nearby allies. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 14:34, 19 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Mind Controlled then Hostile ===<br />
If you mind control a human (civilians) in a terror mission, they become enemies when you lose control (meaning you have to kill the poor idiots to finish the mission). Any chance that they could revert to friendlies/non enemies again when you lose control.<br />
: Now fixed by the Seb76 loader [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:13, 11 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
=== Mind Controlled then MIA ===<br />
Men who are under alien control when you win become MIA, any chance they could be saved (you will have killed all the aliens after all).<br />
: I believe XComUtil fixes this MIA issue. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
:: XcomUtil 9.6 also restores all DOA if you win to. Not what was intended. This feature has been removed as of 9.7 until I can fix it. --[[User:BladeFireLight|BladeFireLight]] 02:27, 6 January 2010 (EST)<br />
: Now also fixed by the Seb76 loader [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:13, 11 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
=== Open Doors But Don't Enter/Exit ===<br />
<br />
Open doors like they do in TFTD (I know this is mentioned above with the good stun grenades idea).<br />
: Now fixed by the Seb76 loader [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:13, 11 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
<br />
= Category =<br />
The page needs to be listed in various categories, which ones I don't know. Also links on other pages to this one would aid people finding it.<br />
<br />
: OK how about this one: [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:21, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Oddities and bugs]]</div>Lobster Danhttps://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Wish_List_(EU)&diff=32822Wish List (EU)2011-01-25T17:48:35Z<p>Lobster Dan: /* Geoscape and Strategic */</p>
<hr />
<div>X-Com is a great game and as evidence just look to the fact this wiki exists even though the game pre-dates the internet. In all it's greatness X-Com has some elements and behaviors players wish they could change. This is a repository of those desires. Some day a fan mod may make your wish come true...<br />
<br />
= I Wish... =<br />
State what you want AND what X-com does normally. Sign your name if you think "Oh man! That would be great!"<br />
<br />
== Geoscape and Strategic ==<br />
<br />
=== Smarter Aircraft Movement Around Globe ===<br />
I wish all craft understood the shortest distance between two points on a globe is a curved path towards the poles. Normally a craft goes in the opposite direction than it should (towards the equator). Pain in the ass when the base in the UK sends a craft to Siberia.<br />
--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]]<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Smart Interception ===<br />
<br />
Aircraft intercepting a UFO just head straight toward the UFOs current position at all times. Unless the UFO is already on a head-on course, this results in the interceptor travelling through a closing parabolic spiral path, and often missing the UFO and ending up in a tail-chase, and then just falling further behind unless the UFO stops or reverses course. This is pretty basic stuff, fighter pilots have known how to do this better for nearly a hundred years. It is particularly important if the aircraft you are trying to intercept is moving faster than you (eg if you are flying an Interceptor). <br />
<br />
What is needed is to plot the UFO's current course and speed (which X-Com has from radar data), and plot an intercept course. The maths for this is pretty easy (the intersection of 2 vectors) and can be implemented in a few lines of code, if we can find out where the current interception algorithm is, and patch it. <br />
<br />
Actually the radar bearing shown on screen is only accurate to within 45 degrees. I presume that X-Com does actually know the UFO's bearing, since it can clearly track the UFO's movements. Finding where that variable is located might be different. <br />
<br />
While we're at it, it would be nice if the UFO detection information displayed the actual bearing in degrees, rather than just the compass direction (North East, South, etc). <br />
<br />
Even if the improved intercept algorithm only used a bearing accurate to within 45 degrees, that would still be better for remote UFOs. You might need to switch to "head straight for it" once you get to very close range. [[User:Spike|Spike]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
===Score for retaliation Battleships===<br />
<br />
When a Battleship on retaliation attacks your base and is shot down, you get no score for it. This is completely illogical and it discourages any use of base defences. You should get normal 700 (or even 1400) points for it.<br />
--[[User:Kyrub|Kyrub]] 14:05, 30 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
: I'm not sure about this. Yes it's illogical, but it could also be a licence to get a huge score if you have a strong enough base. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:16, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:: The impenetrable base setup would turn into a cheat. As the aliens will keep hammering the base with a battleship until one breaks through, you'll have a steady supply of points without having to really do anything. Some balancing, such as paying to rearm your defence modules, ought to be thrown in to balance things out. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 23:13, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
::: A better fix would be to remove the retaliation flag when a battleship is destroyed. If someone can post a savegame with a never-ending flow of base attacks, I may have a look at the fix. [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 01:05, 15 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:::: Ummm, it seems the best solution (I, for one, can't think of any better), but wouldn't it assume that only the BattleShip really locates the player's base? All those scouts for nothing? [Still the best solution, though] [[User:N|n]] 15:01, 16 August 2010 (GMT+1)<br />
<br />
=== All Aircraft Weapons Useful ===<br />
<br />
In a balanced game, all weapons should have their uses, or at least a niche, but sadly this is not so:<br />
<br />
The Cannon is only useful for shooting down Small Scouts, and even that is practically impossible, due to the difficulty in closing to 10km range with any UFO, particularly the fast-accelerating Small Scout.<br />
<br />
The Stingray is not even useful for shooting down Small Scouts (destroys them 57% of the time) and the Avalanche is better in every meaningful way. It also takes twice as long to rearm, making it operationally much worse than the Avalanche.<br />
<br />
The Laser Cannon is inferior to the Avalanche for everything. It does have a higher payload but this is hardly relevant. If attacking a UFO that you would struggle to kill with Avalanches, you are unlikely to own an aircraft that will survive long enough to inflict more damage than an Avalanche if it mounted Laser Cannon. <br />
<br />
The Fusion Ball Launcher has a [[Talk:Craft_Armaments#Fusion_Balls_better_than_Plasma_Beams.3F¦possible niche]] in fighting Battleships when mounted on Interceptors. Even then, it is difficult and expensive to have aircraft configured to fight only one enemy. <br />
<br />
Unfortunately, the optimum path for craft weapon development is all-Avalanche followed by all-Plasma Beam. This is a shame. <br />
<br />
Suggestions to 'tune up' the other weapons:<br />
<br />
*Cannon - Increase the damage to 15 and 50% hit. So at least there is a pay-off if you manage to get in close. <br />
*Stingray - Raise Stingray accuracy to 80% but drop Avalanche to 60%. Double the rearm rate so it can be reloaded as fast as an Avalanche launcher.<br />
*Laser Cannon - increase accuracy to 50% and damage to 100. <br />
*FBL - increase the ammo from 2 to 3. <br />
<br />
It might be worth considering 'tune down' the Plasma Beam as well, particularly its stand-off range. It seems odd that humans copy alien plasma weapons and right away improve the range.<br />
<br />
[[User:Spike|Spike]] 06:59, 14 February 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
An alternative to tweaking the stats, is to tweak the costs. Realistic costs such as $386K for an Avalanche and $125K for a Stingray will even things up quickly.<br />
<br />
See also: [[User:Spike#Balancing_Aircraft_Weapons]]<br />
<br />
=== Tougher UFOs ===<br />
<br />
==== The Problem ====<br />
<br />
So let me get this straight. The first hybrid airborne weapon that humans ever build, and it immediately outclasses every weapon the aliens ever built, including their Battleship weapon? After all the Aliens have only been building plasma weapons for a few million years, us humans have been doing it for ''months''!<br />
<br />
More to the point, once you get Plasma Beams, downing UFOs is like shooting fish in a barrel. Even Battleships aren't that exciting if you show up with enough ships. <br />
<br />
What is needed is to push up the range, damage, and rate of fire of all the UFO weapons, particularly the UFOs you will be fighting by the time you have plasma beams. At a minimum, the weapon on a Battleship should be at least as powerful as, say, 2 Plasma Beams (as found on the XCom craft it is fighting)? Instead of slightly less than half as powerful? Compared to a single Plasma Beam, only the Battleship weapon has better range. It has double the accuracy, slightly higher damage, but half the fire rate. Net 5.7% more firepower than one Plasma Beam, but no match for 2. And the Battleship weapon of course is the most powerful in the alien arsenal. <br />
<br />
Possible tune ups for UFOs:<br />
<br />
*Battleship - increase to 255 weapon power, improve reload rate to 12 (from 24). Now roughly equivalent to 4 Plasma Beams in total firepower (on Beginner difficulty). Increase range to 69km, so that the Battleship commences fire as soon as an XCom craft begins its attack run. Or better, increase range to 70+km, the limit of the interception window, so that the Battleship starts firing immediately the XCom craft enters air combat range. This would disrupt XCom aircrafts' ability to form up into a flight of 4, prior to commencing their attack. Overall, this would make it much harder to down Battleships. Increasing weapon range to 70+km would also make it much harder to tail a Battleship - manual control in the Geoscape would be needed to hold off outside of combat range. Really, the Battleship should not sit there like a sitting duck. Does it think XCom are friendly?<br />
*Terror Ship - increase range to 52 (or decrease Plasma Beam range to 42), so stand-off kills are not possible with Plasma Beams?<br />
*Actually maybe all the larger UFOs should have weapon range 69-70+km, so they behave very aggressively toward XCom craft. <br />
<br />
NB: Strange effects occur if weapon range goes over 70km so it's probably best to leave it at 70km rather than 75km.<br />
<br />
NB: Also, changes to rate of fire need to be looked at carefully though because Difficulty Level also reduces reload rate for UFOs. Between Beginner (Difficulty 0) and Superhuman (Difficulty 4), rate of fire (and thus firepower) for Battleships, Terror Ships and Supply Ships increases by 24/(24-4x2=16) or 50%. But if the base reload rate for these weapons was reduced to 12, the transition from Beginner to Advanced would increase firepower '''three''' times for these 3 UFOs (less so for the smaller UFOs). It is less risky to increase the weapon power. Unfortunately there are only 2 firepower variables to play with - damage and reload rate - so there are not a lot of options, especially for the Battleship which already has weapon strength 148 out of a probable maximum of 255.<br />
<br />
:More detail on this. For Medium Scout, Large Scout and Abductor, with nominal reload rate 48gs, the rate of fire improves +20% between Beginner and Superhuman. For Harvester (32gs) it improves one third. For Large UFOs (Terror Ship, Supply Ship, Battleship - 24gs) the improvement is +50%. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 20:28, 14 February 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
I think we should assume that the Battleship, which is bigger than the entire XCom base, is engaging XCom craft with its secondary weapons rather than its main armament, which could probably destroy Manhattan with a glancing hit. <br />
<br />
I would really like to see the hypothetical Mega-Battleship go up against XCom's finest - a flight of 4 Avengers armed with dual Plasma Cannon or dual Fusion Ball Launchers. With the Battleship having 70+km range, 255 weapon power, and an effective fire rate on Superhuman triple that of the PB, it would have the firepower of 11 Plasma Beams - 36% more firepower than the whole attacking XCom force combined. To be honest I think that would be carnage, not sure XCom could win. So that would be tuning the Battleship up too much. The 3-fold increase in rate of fire when on Superhuman is just too much. Maybe just max out the damage to 255 and range to 75. This gives a 72% increase in firepower, and a challenging tactical problem for XCom (forming up and approaching under fire).<br />
<br />
The smaller UFOs can probably stay as they are. It is not until later in the game that XCom advances so that even large UFOs are easy pickings. What is the crossover point? Maybe the medium UFOs. So it might be good to reduce the reload times of the medium UFOs from 48 / 32 to 24, a good increase in firepower. <br />
<br />
In general I think all UFOs energy weapons should have at least as good range as the XCom energy weapons, even the Medium Scout. Again, they have been using these weapons for millions of years and we only just figured out how to copy them from the aliens, how could our weapons be better than the aliens? How did our first plasma weapon out-range and out-perform all but the hugest UFO plasma beam? And on an airframe the size of a Small Scout we mount ''two'' such weapons? On the battlefield we only are able to replicate alien weapons; how is it that in the air we are able to improve on them ''masssively''?<br />
<br />
Perhaps there should never be a stand-off advantage, except possibly with missiles -which should be less accurate with longer range. The XCom stand off advantage is really unfair because as far as I have seen the UFOs never attempt to close to effective range, even when they are getting killed. They don't break off much, either, though I think I have seen that happen on occasion. <br />
<br />
==== Specific Proposals ==== <br />
<br />
===== No Standoff Beam Attacks =====<br />
<br />
Increase ''all'' UFO plasma weapon ranges to at least 55km (compared to 52km for the XCom plasma weapon). Now only launched XCom weapons (Avalanche and Fusion Ball) have standoff advantage. Probably also reduce the accuracy of the Avalanche to 60% and buff Stingray accuracy to 80%, providing both weapons with a useful niche role.<br />
<br />
===== No Standoff Attacks =====<br />
<br />
Increase ''all'' UFO plasma weapon ranges to 66km (compared to 52km for the XCom plasma weapon). Now ''no'' XCom weapon has standoff advantage. (The benefit of a longer range weapon is simply spending less time being fired on by the UFO.)<br />
<br />
===== Twitchy Aliens =====<br />
<br />
Increase all UFO ranges to 69km. They will attack as soon as XCom aircraft commence any attack run.<br />
<br />
===== Hostile Aliens =====<br />
<br />
Increase all UFO ranges to 70km. They will attack as soon as XCom aircraft enter intercept range. UFOs now fire first, and tailing them unchallenged is impossible. <br />
<br />
===== Improved Medium UFOs =====<br />
<br />
Reduce (improve) the nominal reload time of Medium UFOs, Abductors and Harvesters, from 48gs and 32gs to 24gs. This increases the challenge in the early-mid game, when XCom might first be deploying advanced weapons.<br />
<br />
===== Improved Battleships =====<br />
<br />
Increase damage to 255. They're firing (bigger) Fusion Balls! A Battleship now has the same firepower as one XCom Craft with dual Plasma Beams (gosh wow!). It's a start, but what if we...<br />
<br />
===== Super Battleships =====<br />
<br />
... also reduce nominal reload time to 18gs. Giving a further one-third extra firepower on Beginner, 60% more on Superhuman.<br />
<br />
===== Mega Battleships =====<br />
<br />
... or for a real challenge, reduce reload time to 12gs. A further doubling of the firepower on Beginner - a further ''four'' times increase on Superhuman. Now Superhuman Battleships out-gun the biggest fleet XCom can throw at them!<br />
<br />
[[User:Spike|Spike]] 00:25, 19 February 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
: the flip side of this is weakening Xcom craft - apart from firepower issues there is also the issue of range: the ranges of the transport craft are such that really no more than 1 manned base is necessary to cover the globe for terror site defense. Setting e.g. the fuel capacity of the Skyranger to 500 results in roughly 1 base per continent required. This has interesting strategic consequences: need for more bases makes the ecomics more challenging (and thus slows down research). [[User:Emphyrio|Emphyrio]] 08:43, 9 August 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
===Enforced Variant Games===<br />
<br />
Various people like to play various variant games, such as No Alien Technology, or No Detection, or No Lethal Weapons - see for example Scott Jones' notes to XComUtil. It would be nice to have options on the game executable to enforce these scenarios. Self restraint is hard! [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
Some of these variant scenarios have been implemented by [[User:Seb76#Mods|Seb76]].<br />
<br />
<br />
===Recruit Certain Alien Types===<br />
<br />
Consider that not all aliens are loyal to their master (most TFTD alien has a device lodged to its brain), it would be interesting (or at least cool) if we could recuit such aliens to the XCOM cause. Maybe we can remove the controling devices from captive aliens after research on that species. Or convince the head of the Snakemen that it would be far more benefit to his race to help us instead of the Ethereals [[User:L-Zwei|L-Zwei]] 23:25, 12 September 2008 (PDT).<br />
<br />
Only certain alien types should be recruitable. Ones that should NOT be include Mutons (as they are directly controlled by Ethereals), Chrysallids (unbalancing), etc. It would be nice to be able to reverse-engineer Cyberdiscs or Sectopods, or make it that a Cyberdisc must be researched to build hovertanks/etc.<br />
[[User:MagicJuggler|MagicJuggler]] 13:32, 18 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
: It's pretty obvious which ones should be recruitable: non-robotic terror units that are captured alive. Chryssalids should simply do melee damage instead of impregnating (as the resulting spawn would not be mind-controlled and therefore XCOM wouldn't do it). Silacoids would be pretty ineffectual, and reapers slightly less so, but both would be disposable scouts. Celatids might actually have some use (eating through hulls with acid, and arcing over walls) but are fragile. All of these would require capturing a terror alien alive after researching Psi Amp. The two robotic units should require a live alien Engineer researched as well as UFO Construction, and the materials for building one would be one corpse of the appropriate type, Alien alloys and Elerium (to repair and refuel the husk). The Sectopod should probably be nerfed somewhat, so that it isn't quite so invincible to Heavy Plasma shots - after all, it was probably a twisted and melted modern art piece by the time it finally went down). [[User:Stubbs|Stubbs]]<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Game option: sell only researched items ===<br />
<br />
The fact that you may sell the alien items for the best price once you get them, without any research, is illogical. Such staff would never get on the market, being top secret and potentially dangerous to the humanity.<br />
<br />
Selling without proper research does not help the replay value of the game either: once you know the "right path" to get the best items, you simply sell anything else immediately and ignore the unnecessary research. Too easy.<br />
<br />
Therefore I wish for this game option: unknown items are sold for 0 (including the alien corpses), the known ones for their full price. This makes the sustainable economics much harder to develop and it gives sense to the "useless" research. Last but not least, it adds a lot of depth to the gameplay: will you choose research of a new weapon you need on the field, or of a mind probe that will earn you millions in sales? --[[User:Kyrub|Kyrub]] 15:55, 6 April 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: I really like this option, it's a great idea. Makes the game harder and makes it more interesting, more varied. Gives extra value to the otherwise "useless" research paths. Good thinking! [[User:Spike|Spike]] 15:06, 24 August 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: I'd prefer that unresearched artifacts/corpses sold for a fraction of their original value (no more than 25%). It makes no sense that nobody would pay to research them for themselves. Additionally, Laser Cannon sell price needs to be nerfed. [[User:Stubbs|Stubbs]]<br />
<br />
: This would have the added benefit that you would know if it was 'safe' or not to sell an item research wise. Coloring the un-researched items differently on the Sell/Sack screen would be good too ~ [[User:Renegrade|Renegrade]] 13:30, 19 August 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
=== New Research Mechanics ===<br />
<br />
The above comments spurred some ideas to make the research more realistic and the path to victory less obvious. <br />
<br />
For flavor reasons, give research options vague names instead of exact names. This already exists in some research topics, such as "New Fighter Craft" instead of "Firestorm". So, research topics might read "Alien Hovertank Wreck" instead of "Cyberdisc Corpse", "Grey Alien Corpse" instead of "Sectoid Corpse" or "Alien Pistol" instead of "Plasma Pistol". The names would be revealed in the UFOpaedia entry, and certain items would then be renamed as per common sense.<br />
<br />
Hide the ranks of aliens in captivity until they are researched (so you'd see Live Grey Alien #1, Live Grey Alien #2 if you had two Sectoids available for research). However, if you happened to have two Soldier ranks in containment, you'd only see one topic. The same rank/race combination would never appear again, but you might have to research several specimens of the same species to get the useful one you want. The alternative would be to have researched Mind Probe, which would tell you exactly what you had in containment (just as it does on the battlefield).<br />
<br />
Once an alien or its corpse is researched, then all other instances of that alien or its body are renamed appropriately. For example, research a live Muton and Muton corpses become obvious, and vice versa. "Live Green Humanoid Alien" is also renamed to "Live Muton".<br />
<br />
Finally, there should be a few more prerequisites in place to make less useful research more necessary. As someone else has mentioned, you should need a Cyberdisc Corpse to research Hovertanks. I'd also suggest that Psi Amp and Mind Shield require the research of Mind Probe (seeing as both entail scanning for minds as a logical first step), and that Flying Suits require Floater Corpse, Cyberdisc Corpse or a live Floater researched as an additional prerequisite (not Ethereals, as they fly with the power of their huge brains). [[User:Stubbs|Stubbs]]<br />
<br />
:These are all good suggestions and make a lot of sense. An alternative explanation of the names (seen in some fan fiction) is that these names are not the real names, but are made up by XCom troops based on some limited battlefield experience of them. But revealing the "real" alien race names through Research is a fun idea. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 08:44, 1 September 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Keyboard shortcuts at bases ===<br />
<br />
I wish we had (customised, maybe?) keyboard shortcuts at the base screen. Numbers (at the "base information" screen as well) would switch bases, R for research, E for equip craft, T for transfer, M for manufacture, S for soldiers, B for build new base, P for purchase+recruit (or "B" for "buy" - let people double-bind if they need it), I for base information. The doubles (soldiers/sell+sack) could be solved by using the key under the primary one (x for sell+sack). - n (16:26, 16 Aug 2010 (GMT+1))<br />
<br />
=== Inventory management ===<br />
<br />
I only want to keep 1 (or 0) sectoid corpse. If I have any more, sell them immediately and automatically. Sometimes having to sell all the stuff you've captured is just a chore.<br />
<br />
=== Soldier table ===<br />
<br />
Soldiers should be listed in a sortable table, so I can sort them based on rank, ship order, firing accuracy, psi skills, in psi training, etc. If I want to find out my best shooters, it should be a very fast operation.<br />
<br />
At a more advanced level: do it across bases; have filter options; sort based on formula (so I can find the soldiers with the best reaction+firing, or the best psi strength + psi skill).<br />
<br />
=== Monthly maintenance fees ===<br />
<br />
Later in the game, when you are way beyond what the sponsor nations are paying you and are instead selling captured/manufactured items to fund your operation, the end of the month can be a real PITA, because you need to build up a reserve of cash to avoid being shut down for financial problems. (This was worse with the misreported funding bug.) At the least, show us in one place exactly how much we need to raise at that time.<br />
<br />
Or make payments be done on a weekly/daily/hourly/continuously basis. This also means that I don't have to pay a same salary to someone who I hire on the 2nd or I hire on the 27th.<br />
<br />
Oh, and the cheat of "soldiers/scientists/engineers in flight don't need to be paid" needs to be squashed while we're at it. (But watch out fixing this one without making salary payments continuous; my current strategy is to hire most people just before the end of the month, which I would need to modify to hiring just after the start of the month.)<br />
<br />
== Battlescape and Tactical ==<br />
<br />
===Equipment Management===<br />
<br />
All wishes are currently implemented!<br />
<br />
===Fog of War Improvements===<br />
<br />
I'm sure most of these would be an absolute PAIN to implement, but I figured I'd toss the ideas out here.<br />
<br />
====Prior Recon of Battlefield====<br />
One thing that has always irked me is X-COM has no terrain knowledge when it lands, despite having probably circled the place two or three times before landing and thus they should know at least some of the area. This would be nice, but isn't too important. Probably would be a pain to implement so X-COM would have all knowledge of external features but no knowledge of building interiors, anyways. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 22:38, 7 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:Yes at the very least, when you splash the UFO, it could tell you (via some miracle technology such as "satellite reconnaisance") what the terrain type is of the landing zone area. Then you could adjust equipment accordingly. And adjust your uniform camouflage (if using one of the uniform mods). [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:16, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:: Geoscape: center on the site, then maximum zoom. Aside from having to disambiguate forest from jungle, this works fine for knowing the exact terrain you're getting into. -- [[User:Zaimoni|Zaimoni]] 10:17, 4 Sept 2008 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::This is already present in the game. To center the Geoscape on a specific location, right-click on the target spot. To do maximum zoom in, right click on the Zoom-In button(and the same works for Zoom-Out). Also, Jungle and Forest use the same display algorithm, but are easy to differentiate; Forest occurs NORTH of the equator, and Jungle occurs SOUTH. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 13:23, 4 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:Returning to AQ's original suggestion, it wouldn't be too hard would it for the dropship to "radar map" the target, and then have the basic map show up on your scanner on Turn 1? [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
====Dynamic Fog====<br />
<br />
The Fog of War in X-COM is clumsily implemented, compared to modern expectations. Everything starts out black, but after exploring, is shown...and it's kept in the same showing, regardless of whether you actually have LoS to that area anymore. It would be nice if when you no longer had Line of Sight to a particular map area, it would be cloaked in a way so that you knew the terrain, but not the units there. Since I've sometimes spent over half an hour trying to hunt down that last alien hiding in area I'd already explored. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 22:38, 7 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
====Deactivate Object Radar====<br />
<br />
Currently, in X-COM, any objects dropped in a given square show on your Battlescape, regardless of whether you have Line of Sight to the square or not. In regards to dropped weapons/grenades/equipment/dead soldiers/dead aliens, this doesn't make a large difference. But in the case of STUNNED aliens, a quick scan across the Battlescape can tell you whether the alien you stunned 10 turns ago is still down, or stood back up(the stunned alien object will disappear from the stack). Of course, since aliens which have revived from stun are almost always disarmed(and the ones that aren't probably should've been killed instead), the usefulness of this 'exploit' is reduced mainly to finding out that the last alien you're looking for is just wandering aimlessly and unarmed. Perhaps leave stacks showing the same until you regain LoS to that area? [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 22:38, 7 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
====Crushed Buildings====<br />
<br />
Why don't we see any crushed or destroyed buildings? Does a UFO always fall like a rock, perpendicular to the ground? No marks on the ground? Such impact would do massive damage to the land (a small meteor can do much if it has a high speed...). (Also, at the [debatedly] "real" UFO crash zones UFO parts were scattered over miles)<br />
<br />
I'd like to see chopped buildings, entering UFO's through a barns; entering an abductor from a immediate house's roof if I have plasma and no flying suits yet. - [[User:N|n]] 15:01, 16 August 2010 (GMT+1)<br />
<br />
: The Pocket PC remake of the game did this, though it seems the site it concern has vanished off the face of the net. Could probably find a copy if you're interested.<br />
<br />
: By the way, you can generate a time/date stamped signature by typing four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 23:04, 16 August 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:: Amazingly enough (is it Truman Show of me or just a coincidence :)?), my GF found a low-tech palmtop (with/in a case)... on the pavement. With no personal data and means to find the owner; when I laid my hands on it, I actually found and installed Ufo:EU there, but it wouldn't run :(. [And thanks! again for the 4 tildes name/timestamp trick] - [[User:N|n]] 19:18, 18 August 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
===Restore Game from Battlescape===<br />
<br />
It would be nice to be able to reload a saved game directly from the Battlescape "?" screen, rather than having to go through the process of Abandoning to the Geoscape. Would you need to check it was a Battlescape save and not a Geoscape save? Maybe, maybe not. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
===Warm Grenades===<br />
<br />
Currently when you set the timer on a grenade (or HE pack), the timer runs down every turn regardless of whether the grenade is worn, held, or dropped. Then, when the timer runs out, it explodes unless it is held or worn. There is no real grenade or explosive that works this way. Once the timer (fuse) starts running, they explode regardless. However for most hand grenades, the timer (fuse) doesn't start until after you throw/drop the grenade. It would be nice to have both of these real world behaviours, and lose the game's default behaviour. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
: Technically the way the game implements grenades, they don't have a timer. At least, not as such. When you set a grenade, the game just assigns it a turn to blow up on. Once the turn has passed, the game checks to see that it's on the ground and blows it up if it is, otherwise it doesn't. I believe Seb76 has already addressed this in his patches where there's an option to make grenade blow up regardless whether they are in inventory or otherwise the moment the timer is set. X-Com Apocalypse does a good job of this. The moment the grenade is so much as moved after the timer is set, it counts down. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 23:01, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:: To simulate an actual timer, you would need to do something like: Every turn that a primed grenade is being held by a unit during the "explode" check, increment by +1 the turn when that grenade is going to explode. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:10, 14 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
:::I think I would change quantity2 ([[OBPOS.DAT]]) to a countdown instead of a turn, and use quantity3 as a flag indicating if the count has started. This flag is set any time a turn ends and the grenade has no owner. Taking it back in your hand once the timer has started won't help and the thing must be thrown... quantity2 is decreased if quantity3 is set, and the grenade blows up as usual. [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 01:35, 15 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
: That would be great. It would be exactly consistent with a 'spoon' type hand grenade. The timer only starts when you release the grenade, but after that it explodes at a definite time regardless of whether you pick it up or not. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
===Stun Grenades===<br />
<br />
I want flashbangs.--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 22:59, 11 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
:Instead of stunning, I'd see more effect if it would remove some TUs to units having line of sight (to be fare it should affect xcom units too). It would help against reaction fire (which is the point of flashbangs). Given that grenades detonate at the end turns, it would require a good coordination to have the grenade detonate exactly at the end of the alien turn, and just before your attack. Being able to open doors à la xcom2 would also help to throw flashbangs just before a craft assault... [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 22:03, 12 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
::That would be good. Hard to program, potentially extremely unbalancing, but good. I considered a "debuff" kind of ability (as you suggest) for flashbangs, vs the more obvious substitution of [[stun]] for [[Explosions|HE]] damage. In the end, I picked "I want flashbangs."--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 03:32, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
: Maybe flashbangs dont' work on Aliens - otherwise, XCom would use them, right? :) But seriously, I too would like flashbangs, and stun grenades / concussion grenades. Both of these would make the game easier, though. With flashbangs, you might have to compensate by just giving the aliens more TUs. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 13:33, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
::More options for the player is going to make it easier for any kind of game. Particularly of games like XCOM where the computer can't take advantage of the changes. However I don't believe a weak stun grenade (like 44 stun damage, comparable to AC-HE) would change the game much because the 80 item limit remains.--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 22:21, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
===Night Vision===<br />
<br />
I '''don't''' want to add night vision equipment to the game. I assume that either (1) all XCom units already have night vision gear as standard, but it's not as good as alien night vision, and the visibility that XCom units have at night is based on their standard-issue night vision gear, or (2) night vision gear does not work on Aliens. Either they do not appear on night vision, or maybe worse - maybe the aliens can manipulate night vision equipment, causing worse than normal vision, or hallucinations, and even tricking XCom units into firing on each other. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 13:33, 13 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:Wouldn't it be nice though if it had gradients other than "day: 20 squares" "night: 9 squares" ? Like.. "early morning/late evening: 10-19 squares" ? I find the cut off from full daylight to full night kinda disturbing. ~ [[User:Renegrade|Renegrade]] 10:41, 19 August 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
===Throwing over stuff===<br />
'''(Moved to Talk, as this is not a bug and so does not need fixing.)'''<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
===Assault Time Limit===<br />
<br />
One of the cool things about UFO Defence is there are no time limits on the scenarios. This is great as it allows for a totally different kind of tactics and much more flexibility. <br />
It's more of a "thinking man's game" as a result. But... arguably this is not very realistic for UFO Assault missions. If the Aliens are getting creamed, they should try to make a getaway if they can (just like XCom would). A simple way to implement this would be a hard time limit (say 20 turns?) on a UFO Assault. Another way would be to base it on Alien Morale. At a certain Morale level the aliens decide to dust off. Give the player say 3 turns warning while they rev up the engines. Then if there is still a Navigator or Engineer in the Control Room alive, the ship takes off. Any XCom troops still aboard are MIA. <br />
<br />
You might run into problems if the UFO took off but then landed again or was shot down, generating another ground mission with potentially '''more''' Aliens than were still alive at the end of the Assault. (Still, maybe they hatch some more clones if they get time to....) [[User:Spike|Spike]] 09:51, 4 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
: It strikes me as justified they don't do that. Troops loose in the vessel could be seriously bad. It would be nice if they dusted off on the condition that their morale was low enough or 3 X-com soldiers had the door in their sights without aliens alive outside in the latter case and no X-com soldiers on board in either case. also, if the UFO has a hole in either the command or engine room, it would have to set down before leaving the atmosphere. [[User:(name here)|(name here)]]<br />
<br />
Taking off with troops onboard would be perfectly safe (for the aliens) and justifiable if one assumes that alien ships in flight are inherently inhospitable for humans. This is easily done by saying that they undergo accelerations that humans can't withstand (splat), can't withstand for any length of time (pass out), or that they intentionally make rapid accelerations in different directions, either normally or just if they're trying to bash some intruders around. Naturally, the aliens themselves would either be immune to these (tough physique / their built-in antigrav devices?), or be in acceleration chairs, safe from all this.<br />
<br />
Alternatively, when you get the warning that the UFO is going to take off, you've got a certain amount of time to either get everyone '''off''' the UFO, or to get everyone '''on''' it (or as many as you can). There could be a follow-up mission that takes place in "sky" terrain, where the outdoors is either impassable (the easy way) or else instantly withdraws units from combat (flying suits / parachutes). The soldiers' goals would be to either take out the aliens and presumably safely land and salvage the UFO, or take out the UFO's means of flying (power cores / navigator?). In the latter case, they might have a certain number of turns to withdraw or be caught in the crash, with possible casualties just like the aliens, mitigated to some degree by their armour and maybe where inside the UFO they are.<br />
<br />
In the case of a crash, there could be a final mission to finish off the surviving aliens, using the X-COM soldiers that survive the crash, and no landing craft (it's still back at the old landing site). Alternatively, you could say that there '''is''' an X-COM landing craft parked outside (with all remaining members of the original landing party), since the in-flight time / distance was presumably low and the original X-COM craft quickly packed up and flew to the new landing site. &mdash; [[User:Wisq|Wisq]] 17:11, 18 April 2010 (EDT)<br />
<br />
===Alien AI===<br />
<br />
====Attempts to rearm====<br />
Aliens cannot pick up items, but I wish they would. If an alien has no useful weapons in inventory they should either head for cover or head for a plasma weapon. Panicked aliens drop their weapons but never seem to pick them up when they managed to pull themselves together. It would be nice if they tried to arm themselves again. --[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 13:55, 19 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:Even if it's too hard to make aliens head towards weapons (is it safe?, could it be used to trap them, not to mention the complexities of route finding) - it would still be good if an unarmed alien checked for usable weapons in every square it moved through, and at least picked up one loaded weapon or grenade per turn. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
Fixing the AI for this could be really hard. Apart from all the possible exploits by XCom, the AI is probably a really hard part of the game to reverse engineer. You could say that an unarmed alien is no threat anyway (we are only concerned about aliens without psi or built in weapons). So nothing is lost even with an exploitable method of re-arming. By exploitable I mean the XCom player can manipulate re-arming, e.g. by leaving weapons out in the open as bait for traps. <br />
<br />
Maybe the simplest modification would be to ''not'' drop weapons when the alien panics? This does not require delving in to the AI, just intercepting the panic effects. Dont make aliens drop any weapons when they panic. It would be reasonable to return the weapon in hand to inventory, so there is a TU cost for the alien to bring the weapon back into play again. <br />
<br />
This would not work for aliens who were stunned and wake up, or who were mind controlled by XCom and made to drop their weapons. But it would probably catch 80% of cases. <br />
<br />
Another cheat, short of fixing the AI, is just to pick up weapons that the alien walks over. It could also pick up "spare" weapons from adjacent aliens (cheating on TUs - basically just teleporting the items to the unarmed alien). Spare alien weapons are almost invariably grenades. I have not had a lot of success in getting unarmed aliens to use grenades, so more research is needed here. Maybe only certain types of aliens use grenades, or only in certain circumstances?<br />
<br />
Really, really cheating would be to teleport any weapon laying around the battlefield into the alien's inventory. But I think it is more fair just to say panicked aliens dont drop their equipment. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 16:13, 13 February 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
==== End Psi Bullying and Psi Baiting ====<br />
When the aliens use psi attacks they always go for your guys with the most chance of failing the attack and going nuts. Is it possible to make those pesky aliens attack random soldiers, regardless of their psi skill/strength? <br />
<br />
: Not a bad idea to randomise this a bit, because while initially this tactic helps the aliens, it becomes so predictable that it can be used against them by deploying unarmed "Psi Bait" soldiers to draw off all the attacks. (Or make aliens avoid controlling/panicking soldiers who have no loaded weapons. But then folks would just give them pea shooters and wear armour.) [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
=== 80 Item Limit on Base Defense Mission ===<br />
: Well you get the 80 item limit on every mission, but it hurts more on a Base Defence as you have more limited ability, or sometimes no ability, to manage what goes into those 80 items. I was thinking about a couple of (theoretical) ways to fix this and I hit on a new one (new for me anyway): Why not take the 80 items from the Transport(s), first Transport then second Transport until you run out of items or hit 80. This has a few benefits:<br />
:* Ready made interface to manage the 80-item limit, the Stores <> Craft (Equip Craft) Screen.<br />
:* If you have no warning at all, the 80 items will probably make good tactical sense in general terms, even if they are are not totally optimised for Base Defence (no proximity mines, etc).<br />
: I think that copying the Transport inventory into the Battlescape inventory would be relatively to implement (though what do I know?). As a simplification, you could move only the inventory in the ''first available'' Transport that is present in the Base, into the Battlescape, and not bother looking in more than one place (other Transports, Base Stores) to get up to 80. It would then be a bit of a drag if your Transports are all out on a mission when your Base gets attacked though. Or perhaps inspect the inventory of Transport 1 (wherever it is in the world), and then attempt to copy its inventory, using equipment present in the Base?<br />
: Another way of doing it which has been mentioned elsewhere is to try to reverse the order of the items in the Stores list. This has the effect of putting the more advanced weapons first, rather than the more basic weapons. There could be all kinds of unwanted side effects of this, depending on various programming issues.<br />
: Actually there is already a fix for the 80-item limit in XComUtil. XComUtil records a standard assign weapon set for each of your troops, and then teleports those weapons to the Battlescape from your Base Stores, regardless of the 80-item limit (but still subject to the Battlescape's 170-item limit). Not 100% sure if this works for Base Defence missions though. <br />
:[[User:Spike|Spike]] 13:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
=== Collision Detection Bugs ===<br />
I have noticed that sometimes you can shoot through hard objects, for example, recently I had a soldier up on the roof of a house overlooking a large scout craft. When a Sectiod moved through one of the inner doors of the UFO, my man shot him straight through the intact ufo roof! <br />
<br />
=== Base Defence Systems Cause Alien Casualties ===<br />
<br />
I don’t know if this is already implemented in the game? When the aliens attack your base and you defend it with base defense measures does the following occur and if not a mod maybe? When you hit the battleship with your weapons but it still gets through (e.g. you hit the battleship with some missiles before it lands) can the number of attackers be reduced accordingly. For example if you hit it with some missiles then maybe they could have a couple less soldiers attacking (could be random small amount) or when you hit with loads of stuff like plenty of fusion balls and the battleship just makes it then their attack could be reduced to a few aliens (all others got killed in the defense). As I say not sure if this is already there to some degree (not played in a long time and I’m not at that stage yet this time round). <br />
<br />
: The general view is probably that Base Defence missions are a boon to XCOM already, so why make them any easier. At very least there would need to be more damage to the loot than there was to the Alien's combat effectiveness, otherwise this unbalances the game in favour of XCOM. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
=== Alien vs Alien ===<br />
This one is way out there. Alien v Alien battles out with main game, just random battlescape maps. Sectoid and their terrorists against Floaters and theirs etc. One side human controlled the other computer. Choice of ships involved etc. <br />
<br />
:I actually love this idea. It might just about be possible using XComUtil, if someone is a total XComUtil guru.<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
There was a utility to do this from Devisraad. it has long since been removed from his site, but someone may still have it. The basics was you renamed unit and it automatically replaced graphics flag to swap out the units. Didn't work on the Large Aliens but still was a fun mod --[[User:BladeFireLight|BladeFireLight]] 02:20, 6 January 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
=== Aircraft in Base Defence Battlescape ===<br />
<br />
New graphics for the Interceptor and Firestorm on the battlescape. All your ships could remain in their hangers when the aliens attack your base. Don’t understand why Mythos did not do this originally.<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Simply for one reason: the limit on the size of the battlescape. UFO maps are usually limited to 10000 tiles (50x50x4), on Bases you have 9600 (60x60x3), the last level one being dirt. You need 3 levels to display X-COM craft. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 14:28, 23 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Could you not do it but clip off the top level of the craft - leaving the ground level and 'deck' level? It would be a cool terrain area to fight in. I like the fact that in TFTD you can still see your subs during a base defence. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
It is possible to edit the map files to include the Skyranger, but you'll have to use Xcomutil to play with that terrain and I think it would never launch during base defense missions (but I'm not sure on that - never tried editing the X-COM base terrain). [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 19:25, 4 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
This could be done by creating new "hangar" map modules, each containing one of the five possible X-COM craft. Bung the modules into [[GEODATA.DAT]] at index 0C, and you're done. The catch is you can't have all craft or the MCD array will overflow. The base terrain uses ~160 tiles as it is (out of the max of 256), while the craft use about 60 each (on average). Putting them all in would take the table above 300 entries (that is to say, the game'd crash).<br />
<br />
'Cause XcomUtil already provides us with an Intercepter design made up of SkyRanger parts, I suppose the way to go would be to only implement those two craft. If you have any alien technology ships, they could either be left out ("they were fast enough to escape") or rendered as SkyRangers.<br />
<br />
It should also be noted that bases are made up of two levels, not three. Luckily, all the craft are only three levels high, so cutting out the landing gear still works. - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 19:56, 4 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Very true about the MCD limit, that's why I only mentioned the Skyranger but the Interceptor could be added as well (and would not make much sense to have your first defense mission with a nice Avenger parked on the hangar while your Interceptors are being blow to bits by Battleships). The bases are 3 levels but you can only modify two of them. The game engine automatically adds a layer of 'dirt modules' either at top or bottom. Hmmm, this just gave me an idea for the wish list... [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 20:29, 4 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Both alien and X-Com bases ''are'' only two levels. There must be something screwy in your game; XcomUtil maybe?<br />
<br />
It occurs to me that removing landing gear and stuff might make it ''just'' possible to jam in the Lightning tiles as well (as the MCD requirements would also shrink slightly). That'd make it possible to add the Firestorm, too. Seems a shame to get that far then leave out the Avenger, though...<br />
<br />
- [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 21:30, 4 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Nevermind, I completely misread your previous post. Yes, they are two levels only, could be Xcomutil that adds the 3rd level.<br />
<br />
- [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 22:30, 4 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
You may be able to get 3 levels in an X-Com Base but not 4. EU has a smaller amount of memory alocated. I dont know the limit but 60x60x4 will crash EU. TFTD has no problem --[[User:BladeFireLight|BladeFireLight]] 02:25, 6 January 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
I got partway through this and then decided to change my methods entirely and start from scratch. So I thought I might as well post my progress anyways, as it's already about on par with the crude TFTD implementation: You always have the same craft appear in your hanger regardless of what is (or isn't!) there.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Skyranger In Hanger.rar]]<br />
<br />
- [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 05:40, 17 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Hey BB, a while ago I have modded the plane terrain files so that the Skyranger appears facing east instead of south. If you want to use that one (to make it a little different) let me know. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 08:23, 17 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Thanks, but don't worry about it for now: it'll make the MCD arrays larger still, so I'll consider it when I get all the other stuff done. <br />
<br />
- [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 17:01, 19 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
The completed mod is now included in my toolpack. As usual, I've only done cursory testing on it, but I'm pretty sure it's stable enough. <br />
<br />
- [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 06:40, 20 January 2010 (EST)<br />
<br />
=== Fixed firing TUs ===<br />
<br />
Something that always bugged me was how the weapons used percentages for firing TUs. It doesn't make sense that the faster a soldier got, the longer it would take to fire a weapon.<br />
: This is because you can't fire an automatic weapon any faster than it will shoot. However, it otherwise makes minimal sense, as you point out. I suggest two alternative solutions. Firstly, that only automatic fire modes use a fixed percentage of a soldier's time units, and other modes use a fixed number of TUs. This would entail the newer soldiers spraying and your most elite taking fast, selective single shots. The alternative is that each firing mode for each weapon entails its own formula (revealed in the UFOpaedia but essentially hidden during the battlescape) along the lines of "X% of TUs + Y TUs". Snap fire would be a low % of total plus a low fixed cost, Aimed would be a low % of total with a high fixed cost, and Auto would be a high % of total with a low fixed cost. While this is somewhat complex, in-game you wouldn't have to worry, and it accounts for what can be reduced (i.e. aiming speed) and what can never be improved by a soldier (i.e. cyclic rate of fire or time for a missile to lock). [[User:Stubbs|Stubbs]]<br />
:: These observations are very sensible. However we also need to consider the impact on game balance. If you implement this in an even-handed way, alien rates of fire will increase as they have high TUs. Or, if you fudge it so that alien rates of fire remain the same, then X-Com's advantage will increase as the game progresses. Neither of these are desirable. It would be extremely hard to implement this and still maintain game balance. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 08:41, 1 September 2009 (EDT)<br />
:::Each turn has the exact same duration, but is divided into TUs separately for each soldier. That's a simplification that works well in a turn-based game and reflects the fact that a soldier is fast or slow. However, weapons need to be aimed and will not fire faster than normal, thus they require a fixed percentage of the turn duration. In other words, soldiers gain movement speed, but fire at the same rate. This is both desirable and logical, just not self-explanatory. Thus, I would definitely stick to how TUs consumption is solved currently. [[User:mingos|mingos]]<br />
<br />
=== In-flight Interception ===<br />
<br />
Yes, I know that this idea is nigh-impossible, but I was thinking, wouldn't it be awesome to infiltrate a battleship, kill the aliens inside and escape, with the geoscape being shown zooming past underneath? Also, in a similar vein to the "aliens dust off after 3 turns" idea, after killing the aliens ( or blowing up the power cores, maybe?)you would have to get as many troops as possible to the drop ship in 3 turns(in retrospect I guess that you could only do this with the Lightning because of the doors) or the ship crashes and all troops not in the dropship are missing in action. Yes, this idea is impractical and would be really hard to program, but the idea of blowing a UFO up from the inside just seems epic to me. [[User:WolfenMage|WolfenMage]]<br />
<br />
=== Impose cost to using Psionic attacks===<br />
<br />
I think everyone agrees Psi attacks are too powerful. I would propose to impose a cost to using Psionic attacks. This could take the form of decreasing the physical stats after using a PSi attack (after all all: the psionic races are physically weak). This could for example lead to a soldier becoming a weakling or even fainting or dying from using psi-attack. Another possibility is to decrease mental stats (in this case the ratio would be that humans are not really being adapted to psi: you could be expected to go crazy playing mind games) leading to a decrease in psionic powers or maybe panicking or beserking the soldier using psi. Together with limiting psi attacks of MCed units proposed elsewhere this would rebalance the later game somewhat... [[User:Emphyrio|Emphyrio]] 07:22, 9 August 2010 (EDT) <br />
<br />
== Miscellaneous ==<br />
<br />
===Fix All Bugs===<br />
<br />
Oh no [[User:Seb76#Bug Fixes|Seb76]] already did this! :) [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
= I Wished (And My Wish Came True)... =<br />
<br />
== Geoscape and Strategic ==<br />
<br />
=== Fuel Ready always ===<br />
[[User:Seb76#Mods|Implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
I wish that I could send out craft at any fuel or ammo level. Normally craft can only leave a base if fully "ready". Craft is only "ready" at 100% fuel (or 0% fuel using an exploit) but there's no logical reason why a full tank and full ammo is required. Fully repaired... that's fine. I can live with pilots refusing to fly a plane missing a wing even if it means England is lost to aliens. 15 hours to fill a tank? Retarded but I can live with that too if I can send out a craft at 20% fuel.<br />
--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]]<br />
<br />
:Actually, many modern aircraft '''do''' require the fuel tanks to be full on takeoff, and fairly empty on landing. The weight of the fuel is figured into the takeoff aerodynamics, and the tank being full prevents fuel 'sloshing' in the tanks and not actually making it to the engine. (Conversely, many aircraft need to have dispensed of much of that fuel weight before landing.) This holds for most runway-takeoff craft, but may not apply to anything with VTOL capacity; I'm unsure there.<br />
<br />
:I do agree that non-full weapons aren't as critical, though. But from a logical standpoint, most modern aircraft should not be launched on an empty fuel tank. I also should noted that an Elerium-fueled craft with [[Known_Bugs#Elerium-fueled_Craft_Bug|50% fuel or less remaining]] will automatically return to base, regardless of distance from base. Of course, given that such craft fuel up quickly, its less of an issue there. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 22:05, 7 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
:Hum, maybe you can try [[User:Seb76#Mods|this]]? [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 13:01, 8 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
::Thanks! But I can't try it. I've not been able to get my copy of Xcom to run properly except on a Win98 install. VC2008 requires a more modern OS. I'm sure I could ''eventually'' figure out a way to get it running, but I tried once and wasted too much time before giving up.--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 14:45, 8 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
:AFAIK VC2008 binaries should run OK on Win98 as long as the runtime is deployed. Anyway, the loader uses CreateRemoteThread API which is not available in Win98 so don't even bother. '''However''', you can manually patch the binary if you want ;-) Data to patch (all in hexadecimal):<br />
offset 0x41752: 2A0075 -> 18207C<br />
:HTH. [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 14:56, 8 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
===Base Build Stacking===<br />
[[User:Seb76#Base Building Stacking|Implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
At the moment you are only allowed to build next to a finished module, and you aren't allowed to plan ahead in your base construction. It would be nice to at least be able to plan more than one phase of construction in advance. This would be pretty easy to implement. There is no need to code any new "queuing system". Just place the new module next to an existing under-construction module, but increment the build time to the normal build time + the time remaining on the under-construction module (the lowest time remaining that would make the square you are building in, a legal square to build in). As a premium for build stacking, you have to pay the costs up-front. As with normal construction, all costs are non-refundable if you change your mind. (There would probably need to be some on-screen feedback for how long the module would take to build, before you were committed to building it.) [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
See also: Discussion on [[Talk:Wish List|Talk page]].<br />
<br />
<br />
== Battlescape and Tactical ==<br />
<br />
=== Equipment Management ===<br />
<br />
==== Soldiers remembers THEIR equipment ====<br />
[[XcomUtil|Implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
I wish soldiers remembered what equipment they LAST used and start with that gear when they land. Normally soldiers grab various gear and put lots of crap on their belt. I put most things on the shoulder slots, and keep many things spare things on the ship just in case I need them. (I only want IN rounds if it's night. Stop picking them up before I shoot you in the back!) Takes forever to sort out the gear so the weakling isn't carrying all the rockets etc.<br />
--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]]<br />
<br />
:This is already available in [[XcomUtil]]. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 22:07, 7 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
====Access to Stats screens during equipment allocation====<br />
[[User:Seb76#Equipment Screen|Mostly implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
In Battlescape you can get to Stats screens by right clicking on one of the unit's status bars. However you can't do this in the Equipment screen. Things like Statstrings and (even more so) [[User:Seb76|Seb76]]'s modified Equipment screen with actual/max weight help. But it would be nice to be able to see exact stats. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
===Decrease Accuracy for targets out of sight===<br />
[[User:Seb76#Range_Based_Accuracy|Brilliantly implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
How come you can easily shoot on something you do not see?<br />
I find the over-used scout-sniper tactic is a cheap exploit of the X-COM. The tactical game should describe a combat, not a cowardly shooting practice. It would turn into a nice feature, if there would be a penalty of (let us say) -20% to the accuracy of anybody who is firing on a target out of his current sight. This can greatly enhance the tactical depth of the game. (Seb around? ;-) --[[User:Kyrub|Kyrub]] 14:20, 30 August 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
...discussed [http://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Talk:Wish_list here]<br />
<br />
===Enough Smoke===<br />
[[User:Seb76#Mods|Implemented - here]]<br />
<br />
It would be nice to increase the current limit on smoke/fire hexes. This is due to their locations being stored in a small, fixed length array. In effect you can only get about 3-4 smoke grenades worth of smoke or fire on the map at the same time. Being able to use smoke liberally would really open up new tactics. At the moment all you can really do is cover the LZ in smoke when you exit the transport, and maybe cover one advance over open ground. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:06, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
:I did something for that on my loader. Heavy testing is required because it is hard to be make sure smoke still works as before (testing is the hardest part actually). [[User:Seb76|Seb76]] 14:09, 18 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Alien AI ===<br />
<br />
====Aliens better with explosions====<br />
Partly implemented [[User:Seb76#Bug Fixes|here (waypoint bug fix)]] and [[User:Seb76#Mods|here (Blaster drift)]]. ''(Possibly move this to talk, as notwithstanding these 2 bugs, apparently the Aliens are fairly safe with lethal explosives.)''<br />
<br />
<br />
I wish that aliens using grenades or blaster bombs or stun bombs (anything that goes boom) would use more sense. They should not want to use items that go boom when they are guaranteed to be caught in the blast radius. The alien can use grenades and blaster bombs by going out of line of sight before the explosion goes off. That may not save them if the explosion blows out the walls. At least it would be less stupid then firing a point blank blaster bomb vs taking 5 steps and setting up another waypoint. Units with morale above 100 or mind controlled should still be suicidal as normal.--[[User:Brunpal|Brunpal]] 13:55, 19 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
: Actually, the aliens are quite careful with their explosives, they just seem to be prone to the occasional accident. They're not likely to fire off a blaster or grenade too close to them - as evident by the strategy where if you see an alien with a BB but can't shoot back, the safest place is to stand next to it. The blaster bomb vertical waypoint fix in the loader also eliminates the 'oops' moments where they plot a vertical right angle too close to themselves and there just happens to be a wall to the south. However, they do need more care with stun bombs as you often get to see an alien fire a stun bomb point blank into a HWP parked next to it. But I guess we are talking about three different weapon types here, so they may not be as careful with a standard firearm as they are with grenades and the BB. Wish the Apocalypse aliens at least had as much sense as the UFO/TFTD aliens. In that game, they're utterly psychotic with explosives and ignore nearby allies. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 14:34, 19 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Mind Controlled then Hostile ===<br />
If you mind control a human (civilians) in a terror mission, they become enemies when you lose control (meaning you have to kill the poor idiots to finish the mission). Any chance that they could revert to friendlies/non enemies again when you lose control.<br />
: Now fixed by the Seb76 loader [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:13, 11 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
=== Mind Controlled then MIA ===<br />
Men who are under alien control when you win become MIA, any chance they could be saved (you will have killed all the aliens after all).<br />
: I believe XComUtil fixes this MIA issue. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:22, 24 November 2008 (CST)<br />
:: XcomUtil 9.6 also restores all DOA if you win to. Not what was intended. This feature has been removed as of 9.7 until I can fix it. --[[User:BladeFireLight|BladeFireLight]] 02:27, 6 January 2010 (EST)<br />
: Now also fixed by the Seb76 loader [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:13, 11 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
=== Open Doors But Don't Enter/Exit ===<br />
<br />
Open doors like they do in TFTD (I know this is mentioned above with the good stun grenades idea).<br />
: Now fixed by the Seb76 loader [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:13, 11 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
<br />
= Category =<br />
The page needs to be listed in various categories, which ones I don't know. Also links on other pages to this one would aid people finding it.<br />
<br />
: OK how about this one: [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:21, 3 September 2008 (PDT)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Oddities and bugs]]</div>Lobster Danhttps://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Wish_List_(TFTD)&diff=32821Wish List (TFTD)2011-01-25T17:31:10Z<p>Lobster Dan: /* Geoscape */</p>
<hr />
<div>Suggestions for fixes or improvements that would be nice to have for X-COM: Terror From The Deep (TFTD). ''Since TFTD shares its game engine with X-COM: Enemy Unknown (EU), there are many problems that are common to both games. Please make any shared/common wishes under the EU Wish List (link at the bottom of this page).''<br />
<br />
<br />
= Fixes =<br />
<br />
== Geoscape ==<br />
<br />
* Research Tree bugs<br />
* The really annoying "Cannot intercept over land" message that pops up continually (more than once a second) during some pursuits along coastlines.<br />
* Coelacanth\Gauss reload issues. [[User:Tifi|Tifi]] 16:31, 16 December 2009 (EST)<br />
* The interception routes seem really broken in TFTD, usually taking a longer path than I can do by manually creating waypoints. (This might exist in EU, too, but not be as noticeable because of the geography.)<br />
<br />
== Battlescape ==<br />
<br />
* Underwater-only weapons reaction-firing on land<br />
* Bio-Drone melee attack has no effect. This is a serious flaw in the Bio-Drone, as it always uses this attack when Aquanauts are adjacent. <br />
* Bugs with MC at the end of one stage of a multi-stage mission. (Does this also affect EU, e.g. the 2-stage Cydonia mission?)<br />
* Permit aliens to use carried melee weapons. (This is a game engine bug that applies to EU as well, but is moot since EU aliens don't have carried melee weapons.) This fix could inadvertently make the game easier, as aliens would use Sonic Pulsers (their default option since they can't use melee weapons) less often. So it is essential to ensure the AI chooses sensibly between drills and Pulsers.<br />
* Make ship terror missions less annoying, especially the passenger ship. Aliens hide in labyrinthine structures and every single spot needs to be revisited if a single alien is left out, otherwise the mission is failed. Often over 100 turns are needed to win, as aquanauts quickly run out of energy and finding the last cowardly tasoth is a pain.<br />
* The above also applies to other missions, namely the 2nd stages of alien colony assaults and artifact sites, but both can, fortunately, be won without killing all the aliens.<br />
: Specific suggestion as to how to do this please? For example, reveal last 1-2 alien positions after XX turns, or (EU style), force all aliens to go on the offensive after XX turns (probably not as this is too easy). [[User:Spike|Spike]]<br />
:: Easiest method would be to edit the map modules ("lock" some doors) and route node tables to remove the hidey holes. Heck, just messing with the nodes might be enough to do it - for example, at least one actually allows for large units to spawn in a tiny cabin where they can't move ''at all''. Assuming you find it, you've then got to deal with reaction fire from a critter that will always have maximum TUs on your turn... Stupid Xarquids... [[User:Bomb_Bloke|Bomb Bloke]]<br />
::: In my view, the problems lies in the fact that the last terrified alien simply picks a hiding spot and remains there until you find it. Aliens should be more active, more aggressive. It's not a matter of game balance or difficulty, but playability. [[User:mingos|mingos]]<br />
:::: Good point, there are at least 2 cases: aliens with failed morale, and aliens stuck in the map. For aliens with failed morale, the game should just end with them as prisoners (if they have no built in weapons and no chance of regaining morale). But for aliens stuck in the map by walls or waypoints or whatever, as Bomb Bloke said above, more measures are called for. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 20:42, 12 December 2009 (EST)<br />
::::: I'm not sure it has anything to do with morale. After a few turns they'd've recovered from any "frights" they had (assuming they didn't drop their guns, but seeing as it's often [[Tentaculat]]s which go "missing" I doubt that has much affect on matters). I think the route nodes just send them on one way trips into certain out-of-the-way areas. The aggression stat ([[UNITREF.DAT|unitref(44 / 2C)]]) might actually be the way to go - the theory is that pumping this higher makes a creature more likely to leave cover and attack your agents head on. [[Alien Stats (TFTD)|By default]] most aliens already have it "maxed out", but for all I know the value can be cranked higher then the observed cap of 2. - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 00:59, 13 December 2009 (EST)<br />
:::::: Same happens to me with other races too. Bio Drones and Tasoths seem to do the same quite often. While Tasoths are probably shaken up and disarmed, entaculats and Bio Drones have their weapons inbuilt, plus, they rarely panic. Not long ago I saw a Bio Drone fire from cover each turn, then hide again, and after I started looking for it, it simply picked a hiding spot and stayed there for ~20 turns until I found it and zapped it. The funny thing was that it was the beginning of the mission and there were only 2 or 3 aliens killed so far. [[User:mingos|mingos]]<br />
::::::: OK the aggression stat sounds a good option for all this hidey behaviour. A 100 turns to finish a game is incredibly frustrating. In EU, you could Seb76's UFO Extender to make the remaining aliens visible. With TFTD, you have the option of using the '''xcomutil dis''' command to get the coordinates of the remaining aliens. There might also be an xcomutil command to make all units visible. And if all else fails you can use the '''xcomutil win''' command to kill the last aliens off. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 09:31, 13 December 2009 (EST)<br />
* Aquanaut strength overflow often prevents highly skilled soldiers from throwing items, as they become strong enough to arc an object above the highest battlescape level (and 'out of bounds') thus generating a 'Cannot Throw Here' message. [[User:Tifi|Tifi]] 16:29, 16 December 2009 (EST)<br />
:I think there might be 2 issues here involved: first one is the fact that when the stats overcome their limit they are reset to 0 by the game; second is that due to height limits the game will not allow for objects to be thrown at some distances because the throwing arc would go over the height limit. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 12:01, 17 December 2009 (EST)<br />
* Synchronized attacks. Like the waypoint setting for launchers, several aquanauts could target different enemies, and all of them would shoot at the same time. It would not be possible to follow all the trajectories on screen simultaneously, so it should probably focus on one target at a time, or show each shot individually. This would give beginners a chance against e.g. [[Bio-Drone]].<br />
<br />
= New Features =<br />
<br />
* Airborne Interception - what's the point of flying subs without air to-air weapons anyway?(Avalanches anyone?) Surely it's better to 'splash' the USO ''before'' it makes it to the safety of water?<br />
*Alternatively, get rid of the pretense that subs can fly. How does sonar track a USO over land, anyway?<br />
:Both sonar and radar use the same principle (radio or sound waves being emitted and reflected back to a receiver) so it isn't unconceivable to have equipment that can use both detection methods. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 22:35, 12 December 2009 (EST)<br />
::Hmm. Steam engines and internal combustion engines are pretty similar too but you rarely see both on the same vehicle! The sensors in TFTD are called sonars, not sonar/radar combinations. I would be quite happy if the names were just changed from Sonar to Sonar/Radar or to Sensor, that would be fine. It is possible to use something very similar to passive sonar to track bearings to aircraft, similar things were used in WWII before the development of radar. Without triangulation, it would be very difficult to get the actual range to the target, and almost impossible to get the target's heading and speed. It is very normal for modern subs and surface ships to have both sonar and radar, but they are totally separate systems aboard the vessel, with different capabilities. I would be fine if the name was changed to Sensor or Sonar/Radar, and the UFOPaedia description changed to say that it used both technologies. Mainly I just object to the flying subs not being able to intercept over land. You can see why though, since it would pose the question of why there were no land USO recovery missions. But you could just take the same approach as EU. Just as UFOs disintegrate if shot down over water, USOs could disintegrate if shot down over land. Or even better, the land/sea game below, allowing land recovery vs USOs and underwater recovery vs UFOs. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 09:22, 13 December 2009 (EST)<br />
::: UFOs didn't disintegrate in water - it was just the Elerium (and presumably the crew!). After the aliens were beaten, X-COM's new job essentially boiled down to finding those drowned ships and scavenging whatever was left. - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 21:09, 13 December 2009 (EST)<br />
:::: Game-wise, they did disintegrate. The whole story about SORESO and elerium recovery was made up later in order to give a meaning to the subsequent games. [[User:mingos|mingos]]<br />
* Bind equipment set to Aquanaut, so not to pick it every single time.<br />
:This can already be done using XcomUtil. <br />
* Add mortar (acting both on land and underwater).<br />
: A mortar would be very advantageous to X-Com, since a lot of the tactical difficulty in the map is aliens hiding behind obstacles to direct fire. This is what grenades and Pulsers are for of course. An indirect fire weapon seems kind of 'realistic' but I'm not sure helping X-Com kill aliens is good for the game balance. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 09:22, 13 December 2009 (EST)<br />
* Add Ion weapons (They have Ion Beam Accelerators, right?). So why not make them smaller, more compact, and fire faster (if not weaker) shots?<br />
: From the description of Gauss weapons, they sound similar to an Ion weapon of some kind. But yes in general maybe the discovery of IBAs could help the humans develop some weapon and not just armour/mobility technology. But then, the aliens don't seem to have a weapon based on Ions. Though some of the creatures (BioDrone, Xarquid) do have particle-type weapons. Maybe X-COM could design a new weapon based on these principles. Does the game really need new weapons though? [[User:Spike|Spike]] 09:22, 13 December 2009 (EST)<br />
*Allow aquanauts to see through the view ports of their subs (at least the Triton has several black openings which I presume to be view ports). Don't know if this is possible, engine-wise, but would be highly useful as you would be able to take in your surroundings without having to expose your troops to enemy fire by opening the door. --[[User:Safe-Keeper|Safe-Keeper]] 12:02, 30 May 2010 (EDT)<br />
:Possibly this can already be done using [[XcomUtil]], check it out. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 13:59, 6 June 2010 (EDT)<br />
* 3D water movement: allow Aquanauts in ''any'' armour type (including "none") to move up or down in water. Almost as if they were suspended in some kind of buoyant fluid... This would probably also need to be applied to SWS units and to all aliens. The flags exist in the game files. One question would be whether alien AI would properly take advantage of the vertical movement. If not, it could be unbalancing. Unarmoured Aquanauts would still probably want to keep low to avoid being easy targets. But at least the option would exist. Mag-Ion Armour would then need some compensating factor, such as an increased movement rate under water. Or it could just be left as is, a slightly more powerful type of armour that opens up Sub Construction. <br />
* Combined land/sea game, with subs and aircraft, USOs and UFOs, Aquanauts and Soldiers, land and sea bases. Now that would be cool!<br />
**A slightly less dramatic change: on any land mission, automatically swap Dart Guns, Jet Harpoons, HydroJet Cannons and Torpedo Launchers for (respectively) Pistols, Rifles, AutoCannon and Rocket Launchers "from stores" (including their ammo of course). Purchase price of the weapons would be doubled (or just add the cost of the XCOM-EU equivalent) to reflect this versatility. <br />
:Essentially the game would switch icons and elements of OBJECT.DAT for a land mission. Could also switch Grenade types perhaps? But it's best to keep some underwater weapons (eg Gas Cannon), especially for land missions where there is some water present. Conceivably, in recognition of the progress made by X-COM, and the increasing threat, the authorities might even make available some of the scarce (?) stocks of laser weapons, to exchange for Gauss weapons during land missions. (But this is not really necessary, as Gauss weapons are quite adequate on land.) Working plasma weapons of course have long since vanished due to lack of Elerium. (Although by the same argument, 1st Alien War-era Personal Armour should be issued to any unarmoured troops on land missions. Maybe it takes 200% damage from Sonic weapons.)<br />
*Variant on this - allow 1st Alien War equipment to be purchased or leased by X-COM, for a quite high price, to be used on land missions only. Mainly laser weapons and armour. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 09:22, 13 December 2009 (EST)<br />
:The direction that this suggestion is heading seems to point to merge the systems of both games. One idea to do so could be that both types of modules (Sonar and Radar) could be built at X-COM bases. Each of them would only detect USOs/UFOs either underwater or airborne. That would represent a strain on X-COM resources since the player would have to choose which ones to build at each base. Just having one type of system at a base would limit detection and tracking, which would also add another challenge. <br />
:Concerning Subs intercepting USOs over land another interesting change could be that the subs' armaments could also be of limited use while on air, just like the ground battles. Torpedo weapons would be impossible to use on the air (Ajax, DUP and PWT) which would limit the weapons to Gas and Gauss Cannons. Based on the criteria of the ground weapons the Sonic Oscillator could also be used but I'd drop the power of it to 50 so that the TFTD Battleships (equivalent to Terror Ships) could have also a change to strike back at X-COM craft. Another possibility would be prevent the Oscillator from being used on air (the logic would that the sound waves dissipate as the range goes higher) which would present another challenge to the player since he/she would have to make choices concerning how to equip the subs, since it would only be possible to hit airborne USOs with Gas and Gauss Cannons. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 13:09, 13 December 2009 (EST)<br />
::I like these ideas. I wonder if we should split off a different section or page on combined land/sea EU/TFTD? It would make an awesome game. If a game company was working on a remake of X-COM, it would be great to make an EU/TFTD hybrid from the start. It would be reminiscent of the UFO TV series that was probably one of the inspirations for X-COM. <br />
::In the realm of possibility for player mods might be a game that combines sea and land bases on the same geoscape map, with USOs and UFOs flying around, crash sites on land or underwater depending on the location of the crash, and land (EU) or sea (TFTD) loadouts depending on the crash location. Terror sites and other land sites would probably use EU loadouts? MC and Psi would need to be merged into the same phenomenon, probably. That wouldn't be too hard since under the skin it's the same thing. This could be as simple as calling the EU battlescape for land missions and the TFTD battlescape for undersea missions. Of course the Geoscape changes would be trickier. Only one political map could be used at one time. But possibly you could play first with an EU geoscape, EU political map, and EU victory conditions, and then play again with TFTD geoscape/map/victory conditions. The only difference in the geoscape .exe would be to permit bases and interceptions over sea (in EU) and land (in TFTD). Opening the base screen of a land base in TFTD might requiring calling a patched module from EU, and vice versa. Tech research would need to follow the geoscape (EU or TFTD), unless a way was found to combine the research trees of both games. But I doubt that is possible in a player mod because there is only room for one set of technologies in things like the object table. So basically researching lasers would give you gauss, and vice versa, across the board. Researching each EU technology would give its TFTD equivalent and vice versa. This would be OK I think. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 18:22, 13 December 2009 (EST)<br />
:::I was thinking more of the TFTD plotline rather than EU's when making this suggestion. USO's don't appear on EU nor could their appearance be explained by the plotline. But the opposite would fit TFTD rather nicely. TFTD's political map could be expanded to land and additional cities would have to be placed. Terror attacks on inland cities would be different than the Port attacks on costal cities. Alien land colonies could also be a possibility but plot like they wouldn't make much sense (unless the aliens were preparing to flood the colonies areas. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 18:53, 13 December 2009 (EST)<br />
::::I did actually [http://www.strategycore.co.uk/forums/UFO-TFTD-Combo-Mod-t7367.html make a start] towards such a game, but sorta lost interest due to the usual lack of testers and the limitations the TFTD engine enforces. If/when I get around to resuming work on it I'll probably be restarting under the UFO engine instead. - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 21:09, 13 December 2009 (EST) <br />
:::::IIRC the UFO engine has even more limitations than the TFTD one. I've read the post and although a full merger of both games sounds better, why not stick to making TFTD the way I described above? [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 10:39, 14 December 2009 (EST)<br />
::::::Granted, TFTD allows for larger maps, has native support for things like underwater palettes, lets you open doors without going through them, plus a few other minor features. But other then that? Certain weapons/HWPs don't work in certain missions, nor do your flying suits. USOs have a habit of going "airbourne" (even when over a valid geoscape polygon!), preventing you from intercepting them, and seldom fly over "land" even if you have bases there. The tech tree has more constraints slapped on it then I care to count, and running the CE version of the game with a split executable makes it crash all the time.<br />
<br />
::::::Sure, most - if not all - of this stuff could be dealt with by messing with the executable, but with my current skills ("basic understanding of how machine code is read with no practical knowledge of opcodes at all") it's easier for me to just do it in UFO using external code (executable hacks can only realistically be applied to one version of the game anyway). Ditto for the concepts you described. Heck, even porting TFTD's plot to UFO's engine wouldn't be much of a challenge in comparison; other then the drills, cruise ships and artifact sites it'd be fairly straightforward to do, because everything else is the same thing under a different name!<br />
<br />
::::::On the other hand, if anyone ever comes out with a suitably hacked TFTD executable, I'd be happy to help provide whatever else was needed to make a playable game out of it. - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 19:39, 14 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Fair enough :) [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 20:17, 14 December 2009 (EST)<br />
* Make Gauss useful?<br />
: Explain? Gauss weapons are pretty useful. A big improvement on the starting weapons. Make them "more" useful? The XComUtil variant of Heavy Gauss is more useful, it packs quite a punch. Specific proposals please? [[User:Spike|Spike]] 09:22, 13 December 2009 (EST)<br />
:: I agree. Gauss weapons are useful against most aliens, at least on an easy difficulty level. My aquanauts all use Gauss Rifles and the shots needed to down aliens are:<br />
Alien Gauss Rifle hits<br />
Aquatoid 1<br />
Gill Man 1-2<br />
Tasoth 3-5<br />
Lobster Man ~10<br />
Deep One 1<br />
Calcinite 2<br />
Xarquid ?<br />
Hallucinoid 2-4<br />
Tentaculat 2-3<br />
Bio-Drone 2-4<br />
Triscene immune<br />
::As you can see, Gauss Rifles are useful and quite powerful. Plus, they offer autofire. The only pain in the butt are Lobster Men, which are near immune, and Triscenes which appear to be totally immune. But these are resistant to pretty much anything anyway, save for grenades in case of Triscenes, and drills in case of Lobster Men. So, uh... what's wrong with Gauss? [[User:mingos|mingos]]<br />
:::Agreed - well demonstrated. Hmm, maybe the point is to make Craft Gauss weapons (Gauss Cannons) more useful? [[User:Spike|Spike]] 18:22, 13 December 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
= See Also =<br />
<br />
[[Wish List (EU)|Wish List (Enemy Unknown)]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Oddities and bugs]]<br />
[[Category:TFTD]]</div>Lobster Dan