Talk:Enemy Unknown (1994) Extended

From UFOpaedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

General Discussion

This is very useful, putting all these things together in one place with clear instructions. This could become the new "standard" version of the game. But I think it's only fair to explain that a lot of the choices you have made for the UFOExtender.ini file are personal choices - you should advise user to review your .ini file (and helpful explanatory comments) and see if they agree.

Spike 05:11, 17 August 2009 (EDT)


UFO Extender Templates

I think your comments to the .ini file are very helpful. Here are some alternative opinions on some of the options:

  • Range Based Accuracy
  • [MC] Line of Fire Check

- These are to make the game harder, which can be a good thing as experienced players consider the game too easy for XCom.

  • Retaliate Against Ground Assault

- Yes it does change the game dynamic but not by much. It makes the game harder for X-Com which is a good thing, makes the aliens behave smarter and more logically.

  • No Blaster Bomb Drift

- Drift actually only affects aliens so again it's an option that rebalances the game in favour of the aliens and makes it more challenging.

- Maybe you could group the above options together as they all make the game more challenging, i.e. balance the game more in favour of the aliens, and explain that to the player - if you want to make the game more evenly balanced, select these options.

  • Tactical Scroll
  • Video Pitch
  • Music Change Freeze


- You were not experiencing these issues, but others do experience it, so this is an important thing to make clear to users. They should check themselves.

  • Elerium-fuelled Craft Bug

- While it may well be unintended, this removes a significant limitation on X-Com and therefore unbalances the game in X-Com's favour.

  • Funky Fire

- This is definitely a bug/exploit, but the bug fix also includes some changes to the way incendiary weapons work. I think Seb's approach is correct, as he makes fire behave logically but still do roughly the same damage as non-exploit non-fixed usage. But it might be worth flagging up to the player as this is a difficult judgement call.

  • Crafts Always Ready

- I disagree, though this seems realistic, it gives advantages to XCom. In particular it removes the imperative to maintain multiple craft, which is a major resource drain early in the game and in fact throughout the game. You can also argue that the un-modded game is very realistic as this is how real-world air forces operate. It is totally against procedure to re-launch aircraft without a full logistics refit. Anyway, the point is, this is a significant advantage to XCom. Maybe this option should be "balanced" by creating a risk that the aircraft just falls out of the sky - with a warning before launch "this aircraft has not been properly maintained".

  • Keep Base Navigation Modules

- Potentially unbalancing? I really don't think so. Succeeding in an Alien Base assault is much, much harder than a UFO Recovery mission or Ground Assault mission that is normally used to recover Navigation Modules. This option was included by Seb at my request to facilitate a "No Interception" scenario where shooting down UFOs is impossible. It's not unbalancing, it just gives alternative ways to play the game.

  • Base Building Stacking "too complex for benefit"

- Very much a personal opinion! Enabling it does no harm, as no one is obliged to use the feature if they find it too complex. For others, it is useful for simplifying construction management, especially when managing lots of bases. You make your growth plan once, "stack" the builds, and then you can forget about it until those facilities are complete.

  • Stun Fest "overpowered"

- I don't agree it's overpowered. Beating up aliens is hard work. The melee weapon values are all moderate - less effective than a Stun Rod in every case, so how can that unbalancing? To me, this just adds to the game "flavour", adds realism, and is clearly part of the designers' original intent.

  • Assign All Personnel

- This is a real time saver

  • Hacks

Most of them are deliberate cheats and not meant for normal play so you're right to say they are hugely unbalancing.

However Recover All Clips is a kind of bug fix. Though it does give advantage to XCom it also eliminates the irritating need to manage ammo logistics. With human ammo this is not unbalancing. With scarce alien ammo, it could be, fair enough. No Score Game Over is a way of continuing "hopeless" games. Both of these have precedents in XComUtil, which a lot of players use.

  • Initial Base

Again there is precedent for this in XComUtil which either gives an improved layout base (like this one) or by default a base with Large Radar and Alien Containment already completed - a big step forward. I don't think the sensible base layout is too unbalancing and it saves the tedious task of reorganising the starter base. It also gives new players a better hint about how they should design a base layout.

Lastly, but not least, as Seb76 did so much of the work on UFOExtender, maybe you should give him a credit on the page? And add his UFOExtender page to the See Also?

Cheers, Spike 05:11, 17 August 2009 (EDT)

Spike, thanks. Yes, the choices I made were personal ones informed mostly by my (poor) memories of 15 years ago just to get the ball rolling. This is exactly the discussion I want to have because I think it would be good to come up with a consensus config for a standard version of X-COM for people who just want to get right into the game. I will review your points in detail, rethink the ini config., and make it more clear that seb's UFO Extender is the centerpiece. By the way, this talk page is a hard place to have a discussion - are strategycore forums better? Xeucom 01:57, 20 August 2009 (EDT)

Hey, great to have you back after 15 years! Sure let's figure out a consensus. Actually I was thinking we might be able to make a few different .ini templates based on some themes, eg:
  • Bug fixes only
  • Convenience features
  • "What the designers intended"
  • Making the game harder
  • Alternate scenarios
...etc. At the moment I'm trying to recover my account on StrategyCore (I want to post to Zombie's thread on offsets/modding). So when I get my account back I'm happy to talk there. Cheers! Spike 14:12, 20 August 2009 (EDT)
Do you remember what your account name is or what email you used to register? If so, I can set you up in a hurry. Just send me an email. --Zombie 20:10, 20 August 2009 (EDT)
A menu of configs is a good idea. I'd still say we should sweep up a balanced Bug Fixes, Conveneince Features, and Designers Intent into a consensus standard config and establish that as our base line. This is all meant to lure people in/back with a quick and easy setup, get them some play time, then let them explore all the neat options UFO Extender allows. The base line also gives us a standard testing config that we can focus on making bug free (or documenting workarounds). --Xeucom 01:30, 22 August 2009 (EDT)

Small Scout Map

Does the Combo Pack include Zombie's Small Scout Map fix? If not, maybe that should be included too. Spike 14:37, 20 August 2009 (EDT)

I don't have anything in the kit for the Small Scout because nothing is wrong with it. LOL I do, however, have a Small Scout Mod (found here) which reintroduces the old Small Scout lefover from the development days. --Zombie 20:10, 20 August 2009 (EDT)
I didn't include the Small Scout patch because it seemed too little gain for the additional step of installing it since people are installing it by manual steps. There is already a very small scout in the game (the one you can grav lift into one square with hole in top) The ideal would be if someone could cook up a little exe that downloaded all the mods and installed them (or we got permission from the authors to bake it into one download) so it was one download and double click. Then it would make sense to add in some more one-trick mods. --Xeucom 01:30, 22 August 2009 (EDT)