Difference between revisions of "User talk:NKF"

From UFOpaedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Many, many thanks for the Apoc info - post it?)
m (REMOVED link to virus.... yes it was an active link to the file. That shit should of been deleted years ago.)
 
(93 intermediate revisions by 16 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
= NKF:Talk =
 
= NKF:Talk =
  
Welcome to NKF Talk. NKF once asked the question "What is NKF Talk?" - he didn't have a clue, so he decided to make it up as he went along. NKF Talk is now NKF's personal but ultimately temporary soapbox for ... well anything NKF jolly well wants, but it will be for [[X-COM]]-related articles in this wiki, that's for sure.   
+
Welcome to NKF Talk. Pardon the mess.   
  
NKF is referring to himself in the third person for no apparent reason - although is rumoured to be absolutely bonkers, which explains a lot.<br>
+
==The NKF-Centric TO-DO-List of Doom==
  
P.S: NKF is not NFK. NFK is some weirdo that keeps stealing NKF's thunder. Also NKF doesn't have any hidden psychological meaning, and are merely initials.  
+
* "[[NKF's X-Com Apocalypse: Starter's Guide|X-Com Apocalypse Starter's Guide]]"  - kind of there. Kind of not there. Perpetually.  
  
=The NKF-Centric TO-DO-List of Doom=
+
== UFO Base Kit ==  
  
* The first of the articles I'd like to see started is an "[[NKF's X-Com Apocalypse: Starter's Guide|X-Com Apocalypse Starter's Guide]]", as I've been concentrating far too much on UFO and TFTD, might as well get started on the third game. I've written a lot about the subject on several different Apocalypse forums - it's high time to gather everything into one place. Where to begin? Time will answer that question. Hopefully not too much time.
+
The UBK is a transclusion template I created so that you could plug base layouts into your articles and discussions. Go see the template and its documentation at [[Template:UBK]] to see how to use it.
  
* An article on radars to explain everything you need to know about them.
 
* <strike>Try to understand Wiki page transclusion to allow easy use of templates and all that. </strike>
 
  
=Them Articles=
+
== Test of Gallery markup ==
  
Or rather, short paragraphs that will eventually lead to a larger article that may very well get a page of its own.  
+
<gallery>
 
+
File:Ufobadge.gif
{| {{stdTable}}
+
File:Ufobadge.gif | Yes, this is a caption
|- {{stdTable Heading}}
+
File:TFTDBadge.gif
| {{UFO Icon}} X-Com UFO Radar Info
+
File:Ufobadge.gif
|-
+
File:ApocBadge.gif
|style = "background: #eee;" |
+
File:Ufobadge.gif
 
+
</gallery>
= Radars =
 
{| cellpadding = "4" width = "30%" align = "right" style = "border-collapse: collapse; border: 1px red dashed; margin: 1em;"
 
|-
 
|
 
; Hint
 
<small>For TFTD, substitute words where ever appopriate. For example, Radar with Sonar, Hyperwave Decoder with Transmission Resolver, etc. They have different names, but are essentially the same thing.</small>
 
|}
 
 
 
Radars - and Terror From The Deep's radar parallel, sonar - can be installed in any of your bases for the purpose of detecting and then tracking enemy ships.  
 
 
 
Each base comes with three different radar abilities. Short, Long and Hyperwave detection. As would be expected, you can access these with the short and large radar systems, and the hyperwave decoder, respectively. Short and Long range detection function exactly in the same manner and Hyperwave detection provides the additional benefit of decoding UFO mission data.
 
 
 
 
 
<br style="clear:both;">
 
 
 
== Radar Abilities ==
 
 
 
Each radar can only add its abilities to the base once. Refer to the following table to see how the radars can build on each other.
 
  
 +
----
 +
Now with adjustments
  
{| width = "60%" align = "center" style = "border: 1px solid; border-collapse:collapse;"
+
<gallery caption = "Icons" widths = "50" heights = "50" perrow = "3">
|+ Table 1: Radar Ability Combinations
+
File:Ufobadge.gif
|- style = "font-size:larger; font-weight: bold; border-bottom: 1px black solid; background: gray; color:white;"  
+
File:Ufobadge.gif | Oo-fow
| Radar Module / Scan Type || Short || Long || Hyperwave
+
File:TFTDBadge.gif | Tee-eff-tee-dee
|- style = ""
+
File:Ufobadge.gif
| Small Radar || 10 || 0 || 0
+
File:Ufobadge.gif
|-
+
File:ApocBadge.gif | Ah-pock
| Large Radar || 20 || 20 || 0
+
File:Ufobadge.gif | Yoo-eff-ow
|-
+
File:TFTDBadge.gif | Tiftid
| Hyperwave || 0 || 0 || 100
+
File:Ufobadge.gif
|- colspan = "4" style = "border-top: 1px dotted; font-wight: bold;"
+
File:ApocBadge.gif | Ay-pock
| Radar Combinations
 
|- style = "background: #EEE;"
 
| Sm + Sm || 10 || 0 || 0
 
|-
 
| Sm + Lg || 30 || 20 || 0
 
|-style = "background: #EEE;"
 
| Sm + Hyp || 10 || 0 || 100
 
|-
 
| Lg + Lg || 20 || 20 || 0
 
|-style = "background: #EEE;"
 
| Lg + Hyp || 20 || 20 || 100
 
|-
 
| Hyp + Hyp || 0 || 0 || 100
 
|-style = "background: #EEE;"
 
| Sm + Lg + Hyp || 30 || 20 || 100
 
  
|}
+
</gallery>
  
 +
Note to self: The new wiki software is really case sensitive these days! A good thing in one respect.
  
This table was constructed by making multiple saves for each radar combination and then referring directly to the save game file for the radar values.
+
== Smoke Grenades ==
  
Compare how different the values in the table are to text in the Ufopaedia. It can probably be assumed that the 10, 20, 30 and 100 values are in percentages. Therefore it we could say that 10 short range scanning will provide a 10% scan for every sweep of the radar.  
+
IMO they're only useful turn 1. And even that goes out the window if you have a tank. A tank is worth it in the early game, if only because it draws alien Plasma Pistol fire away from your squishy unarmoured dudes. Later on, though, when you have armour and the aliens switch to Heavy Plasma, tanks become less useful and you can bring out the Smoke Grenades. [[User:Magic9mushroom|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom|talk]]) 00:02, 22 August 2014 (EDT)
  
Once the UFO has been spotted, it'll be forever painted on your radar except when it drops out of tracking range.  
+
: Like the tank (or 4 rookies, for the budget conscious), the smoke grenade is just another tool at your disposal that you can use depending on how you like to play. The smoke grenade is certainly most useful for the initial deployment, but that's not so say that is the only time you can take advantage of it. I know I've had many occasions where I managed to save a bunch of soldiers that were stuck out in the open in full view of some aliens by throwing a smoke grenade between them. The [[Smoke Grenade]] page has some scenarios listed. [[User:NKF|NKF]] ([[User talk:NKF|talk]]) 03:26, 22 August 2014 (EDT)
  
== Radar Stats on the Base Information Screen ==
+
::Four rookies die to four plasma pistol shots or one alien grenade. A tank can take either and keep trucking. It's also faster.
  
When referring to your base details, you will see two bars representing the long and short range radars. The short range bar increases for every small radar system, and the long range bar increases for every Large Radar system and Hyperwave decoder.  
+
::I guess Smoke Grenades are okay if they're pre-primed and kept on the shoulder straps. Otherwise there's too big a TU cost to use opportunistically. Turn 1, on the other hand, you're not doing anything anyway because of all the full-TU aliens.
  
Although you are presented with this information, it is highly inaccurate and should never be relied on. The listing only counts how many radars are currently assigned to the base as opposed to the base's actual ability to locate enemy ships.
+
::At least we can agree that Dye Grenades are terrible! [[User:Magic9mushroom|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom|talk]]) 05:59, 22 August 2014 (EDT)
  
Refer to the Phantom Radar section further along for more insight on how radars work.  
+
:::I'd take the tank myself as it has plenty of merits, and the later Plasma Hovertank/Sonic Displacer are superb. However those that prefer 4 rookies do argue that they are cheaper, can spread out, carry more weaponry and still take the 4 (or more) shots to dispose of. Those that live through can go onto greater things. The tank just needs one bad roll of the die and it ends up a very expensive afterthought. Bit of a RTS peon pumper meat grinder mentality going on here methinks.  
  
 +
:::Grenades are in the same boat as the smoke grenade and do cost a lot to use. That's probably why they are best relegated to the support units that back up those on the front. Then again, front-line units carrying pre-armed grenades are handy for ninja-style retreats. [[User:NKF|NKF]] ([[User talk:NKF|talk]]) 16:21, 22 August 2014 (EDT)
  
== Brief Radar Range Comparison ==
+
Well, like I said, the main advantage of the tank is against aliens with Plasma Pistols at the very start of the game. A tank's front plate is guaranteed to survive at least 7 Plasma Pistol shots even if they all roll absolute max (which they won't), so you can park it on the opposite side of a UFO hatch to your firing line, close in, and draw fire from the aliens coming out until they use too many TUs and get reaction-fired to death (since on Superhuman, alien Reactions are usually high enough for them to avoid taking reaction-fire from stepping out of the hatch alone). In addition, you don't lose a huge amount of firepower by going with a tank right at the start since its cannon does twice the damage of Rifles. Once you've got lasers, the tank starts to hurt your firepower significantly, and once you've got decent armour and the aliens start using heavier weapons the defensive qualities of the tracked tanks go down the drain.
  
If we use the town of Novosibirsk as our point of reference, the tracking radius for the Small Radar can go roughly as far as Moscow. The large radar goes all the way to Berlin, and the Hyperwave Decoder can go as far as London and perhaps slightly beyond.  
+
HWPs do have something of a renaissance later on when you get Avengers and are running into the 80-item limit, since a hovertank, while not reaching anywhere near the firepower of four Heavy-Plasma-equipped soldiers, does have more firepower than four soldiers without guns. Hovertanks/Launcher also don't count their ammo against said limit.
  
==Multiple Radars?==
+
In TFTD it's a whole different kettle of fish thanks to the existence of Tentaculats and the lower fire rate of Sonic weaponry. Displacers/Sonic are absolutely essential due to their ability to lure Tentaculats - taking Artefact Sites without them is almost impossible thanks to That Goddamned Room. There's also the lower clip sizes making the 80-item limit an even bigger problem.
  
Though it's natural to believe that installing multiple radars of the same type at a base will make your radarsmore powerful, they certainly do not.  
+
A pre-loaded Small Launcher does a lot of the same stuff a pre-armed Grenade does, and has the upside of taking the "suicide" out of "suicide bomb". There are a lot of ways to use those things. [[User:Magic9mushroom|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom|talk]]) 21:49, 22 August 2014 (EDT)
  
Refer to table 1 above. Notice how when two radars of the same type are combined that they do not provide any additional benefit over a single radar. This means that only one of each type of radar is able to stack its scanning abilities on top of another.  
+
: Small Launchers are certainly quite handy beyond just capturing key aliens, and the Thermal Shok Launcher in TFTD is scary indeed. But they have their own share of drawbacks as well. Deciding which to use to get the best result for the task at hand is all part of the fun I guess. [[User:NKF|NKF]] ([[User talk:NKF|talk]]) 03:18, 25 August 2014 (EDT)
  
In addition to the detection ability, multiple radars of the same type do NOT extend a base's detection radius or its tracking radius.
+
== Geocities site? ==
  
Therefore, multiple radars of the same type do not work. The only multi-radar combination worth pursuing is the small and large radar combo. Once you get the hyperwave decoder, the small and large radar combo are immediately outclassed. Still, there's no harm in having a 30% and 20% contingency even if you've got 100% detection and the money to hang on to build the older modules.  
+
Hi. I suppose there's a good chance you might be the "nkfarma" who at one time had a page i found linked on the strategycore forums -- specifically http://www.geocities.com/nkfarma/temporary/lsc_lure.html . Did you ever manage to get those geocities pages moved to a different host? -- [[User:Jokes_Free4Me|Jokes_Free4Me]] ([[User_talk:Jokes_Free4Me|talk]]) 11:47, 9 April 2015 (EDT)
  
The only practical reason for including multiple radars of the same type would be for base layout purposes. The small radar, for example, has a clear corridor, making it a good place for combat with weapons that have a wide radius of effect.
+
: The same. It has been a while, but I did manage to save some of the content. After reviewing it though, it was mostly trivial stuff. My most important work that was on the old Geocities page, the [[TRTBAG|TFTD Research Tree Bug Avoidance Guide]], survives in its current form on this wiki. [[User:NKF|NKF]] ([[User talk:NKF|talk]]) 02:53, 10 April 2015 (EDT)
  
: Questions on this:
+
:: Okay, i trust your judgement on this<small>, even though my curiosity still makes me want to read through all that other "trivial stuff"...</small>
: 1 Do you happen to know if the Radar Stacking bug also applies to TFTD Sonars? The BASE.DAT structure is different, and does not encode the detection strengths of the base there, so maybe they fixed it?
 
:2 Now that the Radar Stacking bug is fixable (via Seb76's loader, or more crudely via my Python script), a new question arises - does it make any '''practical''' difference? Or do UFOs spend long enough inside detection range, that a 10% or 20% chance will always detect them? So at best multiple radars will give you a detection some fraction of an hour earlier, but not really increase total UFOs detected? [[User:Spike|Spike]] 03:43, 2 October 2008 (CDT)
 
  
:: 1. Yes - they've moved stuff around and I think they increased the size of some entries from from words to dwords. Same thing happened with soldier.dat: They moved variables around and replaced a few 8-bit variables with 16-bit variables. So yes, TFTD base.dat still tracks short long and trans. resolver stats.
+
:: As for the [[User_talk:Jokes_Free4Me#Rolling_back_NKF|revert issue]], your first paragraph about it is just as sensible as i presumed any admin would be. Contacting Spike just for this is not worthwhile IMO, since he's been inactive since August and this really is quite "trivial stuff" too. It's not too big a deal if the sections stays or goes... I reverted merely because i'm an [[wikipedia:Wikipedia:Inclusionism|inclusionist]] (as you might have guessed) and favour preserving all information, even if obsolete. As the saying goes, "Those who cannot remember the past are [more likely] to repeat it." -- [[User:Jokes_Free4Me|Jokes_Free4Me]] ([[User_talk:Jokes_Free4Me|talk]]) 07:25, 10 April 2015 (EDT)
:: 2. From personal experience, not really. The basic radars will pick up any enemy ship flying in their detection radii eventually. So yes, if you do want to make stacking radars useful, perhaps letting them pick up enemy ships faster would be the way to go. The HWD/T. Resolver just slams down a perfect 100 for detection ability, so it picks up enemy ships the instant they enter detection range.  
 
:: By the way, all my notes here are quite old and a lot of discussion on the radar mechanics has occurred since then. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 03:59, 2 October 2008 (CDT)
 
  
:::Actually, it would make a difference. While the regular radars are fine for detecting anything that's meandering around in the area near your base, anything that's just passing through will likely not be detected on your radars(something that can be very painful in 1-Mission X-COM.)  So any UFOs just passing through your detection on their way to a mission won't be detected. Of course, on the counterpoint, since they're on a distance mission, they'll be moving pretty fast and you probably won't have the craft to be able to intercept them. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 08:51, 2 October 2008 (CDT)
+
:::The files I recovered were mostly the media files. Some .gif and .jpgs. Mainly game screenshots and a few fan-art scribbles I did on the back of some envelopes. Two zip files containing UFO save files, one being my "Solo Floater Base Assault Challenge" and one labelled scratch.zip. A no-base start file. I still use the challenge save on occasion to relearn how to play after long periods between games. There is a html file called The Deep One Dilemma - which was the basis for research tree bug avoidance guide. Also a grenade guide I had started but only ever got round to writing up the grenade relay. That's about it. [[User:NKF|NKF]] ([[User talk:NKF|talk]]) 23:15, 10 April 2015 (EDT)
  
::::To elaborate on AQ's response, all radars run their detection check every 30 minutes. In between those checks (on the hour and half-hour), nothing is detected. So every half hour the Hyperwave is perfect, but it's just as bad as the other radars on any other time slot. I would assume that if you have multiple normal radars of the same type (with a fix to allow them to work together) constructed, they would all separately run their checks every 30 minutes which would increase the chances of detecting a UFO within range. Having 10 small radars wouldn't guarantee 100% detection though, as each one still only has 10%. It's just that you have more radars which run their 10% check instead of one. Hope this makes sense. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 09:45, 2 October 2008 (CDT)
+
==Pile of calcs==
  
::: The algorithm for (fixed) Multiple Radar stacking multiplies all the detection chances together, so 10 small radars have about a 65% short range detection chance. I'm tempted to try it to see if there is a discernible difference in number of detections. On the other question, can people confirm whether TFTD also suffers from a similar Sonar Stacking bug?
+
So I did [[User:Magic9mushroom#TFTD_weapon_effectiveness_calculations|a thing]] and I think it's fairly important, but I'm not really sure where to put it or what to link to it. I'm thinking call it Weapon Effectiveness (TFTD) and stick a link to it in Weapon Analysis; is there anywhere else you think it should go? [[User:Magic9mushroom|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom|talk]]) 19:32, 27 April 2015 (EDT)
[[User:Spike|Spike]] 10:44, 2 October 2008 (CDT)
 
  
::::While I can't confirm explicitly, I'd suspect so. As a good rule of thumb, if it's a bug in X-COM(DOS version), it's also a bug in TFTD. Microprose's team did a 6-month face lift of UFO to resell it; very few bugs were fixed, just the appearance was changed and the weapons rebalanced. The code wasn't touched much.  [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 10:52, 2 October 2008 (CDT)
+
: I did give this some thought as you were compiling the data. It can certainly be included on the Weapon Analysis page. However, I'm also thinking that the information is quite relevant to TFTD so could also take a place on the main TFTD menu. For example, if you look at the UFO section's technical section under data tables, there's a [[Kill Modelling]] subheading that follows slightly similar lines. I am however starting to wonder if that fits the data table category. Perhaps a sub heading under Analysis might be best? [[User:NKF|NKF]] ([[User talk:NKF|talk]]) 01:57, 28 April 2015 (EDT)
  
==Phantom Radar==
+
Well, the difference between this and all the data tables currently there is that this is a set of calculations rather than raw game data. And it's less like the weapon analyses we have than part of the framework on which they're based. I think I'll stick a "See also" in the TFTD section of [[Weapon Analysis]] and link it on the main TFTD menu. [[User:Magic9mushroom|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom|talk]]) 06:14, 28 April 2015 (EDT)
  
What is a Phantom Radar?
+
: Sorry, I was thinking aloud at the end there and forgot to put the context. I was wondering about where Kill Modelling fits in. Like your table, it's not raw game data as such. [[User:NKF|NKF]] ([[User talk:NKF|talk]]) 01:46, 29 April 2015 (EDT)
  
A base with a phantom radar, as I've coined it, is a base that is able to continue detecting ships without actually physically owning the radar.
+
== VIGILO CONFIDO ==
  
This is achieved by removing your existing radars. The game will retain the base's radar ability until another radar, of any type, is built. Basically, you're retaining the ghost of your previous radar, or radars.
+
You say on the main page that you found VIGILO CONFIDO hidden somewhere on the Advent page. I would appreciate you specifying where those words are hidden so people can check themselves. [[User:PizzaMan|PizzaMan]] ([[User talk:PizzaMan|talk]]) 04:17, 30 May 2015 (EDT)
  
The modules themselves do not retain the physically ability to detect ships. It's The base itself has the ability, however the game only assigns (and recalculates, if there are existing radars) the strength of the scanning ability at the moment a new radar module is built.
+
: To be honest, I usually steer clear of promotional pre-hype until the games are finally out, so have been avoiding it. Hobbes, who added that item to the news, may know more about it. However I had a quick look anyway, and one of the links the site points to https://downloads.2kgames.com/adventfuture/images/en/ADVENT_LIES.html has part of the clue. It's just a bit of treasure hunt. [[User:NKF|NKF]] ([[User talk:NKF|talk]]) 04:50, 30 May 2015 (EDT)
 +
: [http://i.imgur.com/ZaaiO3D.png] [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] ([[User talk:Hobbes|talk]]) 19:19, 30 May 2015 (EDT)
  
If you want to test this yourself, start a new game and remove the default radar and let time run.
+
==Sunken plane?==
  
===Phantom Radar: Life Span===
+
I noticed you added a TFTD bug about "sunken plane missions". What in blazes is a "sunken plane mission", and why do they have different versions of their right wings? I have no clue what you're on about. [[User:Magic9mushroom|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom|talk]]) 06:58, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
The life span of the phantom radar lasts until the next base facility is built at that base.
 
  
  
===Phantom Radar: Advantages===
+
: I'm referencing the mission where you are recovering or assaulting an alien sub while fighting around the wreck of a sunken cargo plane. If you haven't seen it before, try looking for it. It's quite neat. There are a couple different versions of its wings.  
The advantage of removing the facility will be that you can downsize your base just that bit more, making it much easier to defend. Although this can be a disadvantage if your entire strategy hinges around the lower level layout of the module. Plus, the empty dirt module will start costing you money.
 
  
The phantom radar is extremely useful if you choose to upgrade your radar from an older type to a new type by simply removing the old radar and building the new radar in its place. This avoids the [[Known_Bugs#Paying_For_Dirt|Paying for Dirt]] bug. This only works as long as the next module to be built is the radar. Otherwise the base will be flying blind in the interim.
+
: See, when the Geoscape.exe portion of the game generates this map, it creates a 5x5 grid that forms the map outline. Each grid location is a 10x10 map chunk. Tactical.exe uses this outline to create the actual map you end up playing on.  
  
===Phantom Radar: Questions===
+
: When populating the map outline, the game first marks off the area of the map where the X-Com sub and alien sub will go. Then it attempts to install the left and right wings of the plane into the map, followed by the various parts of the fuselage and finally fills in all the holes with random 10x10 map blocks in the terrain set.
; Is this cheating?
 
: Depends on how you look at it. You did pay for the scanning abilities in the first place - and the cost of a hyperwave module is not cheap!
 
  
:On the other hand, you no longer have to pay for the maintenance of the module (except for that 80k/month for [[Known Bugs#Paying For Dirt|Paying For Dirt]] unless you immediately built over it, in which case its lifespan is fairly short anyway). That's about as far as the cheating goes. I'd say it's cheating if you're having money trouble. If you're raking in more cash than you ever need to spend, it doesn't matter if you physically own the module or otherwise.  
+
: Each wing is a 20x20 map block. If it is not able to install the wing, say one of the subs is in the way, it will then try to use the small 10x10 version of the wing. If there is no space in the location it wants to place the small wing, then nothing is placed.
  
; Do I really have to do this?
+
: The installation of the left wing of the plane works fine. However, when it gets around to installing the right wing and it fails to place the big wing and tries to place the small wing, instead of checking the exact destination to see if it the area is free, it checks the completely wrong part of the map. The block at 1,1 (which I have incorrectly stated as 0,1 in the article). This means that the small right wing could potentially overwrite anything that may be in that spot.  
: No, but it's good to know. And it stops you from being startled if your base continues to pick up enemy ships after removing the radars. Actually, it's the whole purpose of this article.
 
  
; You're a bit full of yourself sometimes, aren't you?
+
: Most of the time you probably will not even notice the difference even if the bug had occurred. But if the small right wing overwrote the landing area for your Triton for example, you'll start the map with odd bits of the wing around the Triton. Luckily the game places the Triton after the wing, otherwise I imagine you'd start the mission with floating Triton bits and your Aquanauts standing on the wing. At it is, it ends up looking like the Triton's forced its way into the wing.  
: Sad, but true. I do indeed like some types of cheese. Wait, what were we talking about?
 
  
|}
+
:Again, players might not notice this as a bug, considering the chaos of debris around the map. [[User:NKF|NKF]] ([[User talk:NKF|talk]]) 02:07, 26 August 2015 (EDT)
  
= Total Randomness =
+
Ah, now I get you. [[User:Magic9mushroom|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom|talk]]) 21:20, 26 August 2015 (EDT)
  
This is a work in progress
+
::Do you have a hex address where this error occurs? -[[User:Morgan525|Tycho]] ([[User talk:Morgan525|talk]]) 21:43, 26 August 2015 (EDT)
  
{{UBK|=
+
:::Myself, no. But check this [http://www.strategycore.co.uk/forums/topic/11176-procedurally-generated-maps-algorithm/page__st__20#entry145227 post] on Strategycore for the discussion. If for some reason that link doesn't take you direct to the post, it should be on page 2. [[User:NKF|NKF]] ([[User talk:NKF|talk]]) 01:50, 27 August 2015 (EDT)
|dirt|dirt|hangar1|hangar2|dirt|dirt|=
 
|dirt|dirt|hangar3|hangar4|dirt|dirt|=
 
|dirt|dirt|lift|quarters|dirt|dirt|=
 
|dirt|small_radar|stores|lab|workshop|dirt|=
 
|hangar1|hangar2|dirt|dirt|hangar1|hangar2|=
 
|hangar3|hangar4|dirt|dirt|hangar3|hangar4|=}}
 
  
Just in case anyone's wondering what I'm doing here, I'm trying to make a template called the UFO Base Kit - or something like that. Seems okay, I guess. If you want to fiddle with it, feel free to do so.
+
== Drills ==
  
Oddly enough, the Wiki software for this site doesn't allow default values for template parameters - so I have to manually enter 'dirt' for all the dirt sections. Ah well - next software update, I guess.
+
You mean they cost 5% TU more than we thought, and we missed it for years? Holy crap... [[User:Magic9mushroom|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom|talk]]) 04:28, 22 September 2015 (EDT)
  
Possible entries
+
: I know. Considering the drills rank amongst my favourite weapons in this game, I'm surprised I only just noticed this error. [[User:NKF|NKF]] ([[User talk:NKF|talk]]) 04:47, 22 September 2015 (EDT)
  
dirt 
+
With this discovery, the drills' damage-per-TU is actually in strict ascending order (Vibroblade < Thermic Lance < Heavy Thermic Lance). Not that it particularly matters, of course, since most aliens are substantially overkilled by a Heavy Thermic Lance hit. Still, any objections to fixing the outdated claim that Vibroblades are the best and Thermic Lances are the worst? [[User:Magic9mushroom|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom|talk]]) 05:49, 22 September 2015 (EDT)
lift
 
lab
 
workshop
 
psi
 
containment
 
storage
 
quarters
 
  
hangar1
+
:: On reflection, referencing a very old copy of the game that I'd heavily tinkered with (for the purpose of researching research!) may not have been the wisest reference to look up. Doh. Sorry, false alarm.
hangar2
 
hangar3
 
hangar4
 
  
small_radar
+
:: As to the best and worst of the drills, that is somewhat subjective and depends entirely on what you're fighting. Weak enemies and lobstermen for example are better dealt with by Vibroblades, as it provides a more efficient use of TUs. Enemies with more protection on the other hand make a good argument for the Thermic Lance. [[User:NKF|NKF]] ([[User talk:NKF|talk]]) 06:18, 22 September 2015 (EDT)
large_radar
 
hyperwave
 
  
(Defense modules)  
+
"Which drill is the best in which circumstance" is, indeed, one of the things I did that huge pile of calculations for. [[User:Magic9mushroom|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom|talk]]) 00:49, 23 September 2015 (EDT)
grav
 
mind
 
missile
 
laser
 
plasma
 
fusion
 
  
 +
== Spambot missed? ==
  
Here's an example.  
+
I noticed you didn't ban one of the five spammer accounts in the recent attack (the one whose name started with a phone number). Did you miss it? [[User:Magic9mushroom|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom|talk]]) 01:21, 8 February 2016 (EST)
<pre>
 
<nowiki>
 
;How you should NOT build a base:  
 
{{UBK|=
 
|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|hyperwave|=
 
|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|lab|=
 
|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|quarters|=
 
|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|workshop|=
 
|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|quarters|=
 
|psi|mind|stores|stores|stores|lift|=}}
 
</nowiki>
 
</pre>
 
  
Produces:
+
: I got it. I just hid the log by mistake. The bots left a bunch of pages with very long titles after they signed up. This left a lot of clutter on the Recents page after I deleted them, so I had them hidden. Unfortunately the tool for tidying up the Recents page is very rudimentary and doesn't tell you what you're updating apart from the name of the person that did the update. [[User:NKF|NKF]] ([[User talk:NKF|talk]]) 02:22, 8 February 2016 (EST)
;How you should NOT build a base:  
 
{{UBK|=
 
|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|hyperwave|=
 
|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|lab|=
 
|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|quarters|=
 
|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|workshop|=
 
|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|quarters|=
 
|psi|mind|stores|stores|stores|lift|=}}
 
  
And just as a quick comment on this design: Thanks to the Base Disjoint Bug, all of the above modules will be sealed off from each other.
+
Okay. My mistake. I saw the pages, though. Oh god did I see them. [[User:Magic9mushroom|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom|talk]]) 04:16, 8 February 2016 (EST)
  
  
----
+
Holy crap, that was a lot of them. Anything we can do to block the flood of 'em? --[[User:Xuncu|Xuncu]] ([[User talk:Xuncu|talk]]) 01:28, 10 February 2016 (EST)
Another example of the template in its intended use:  
 
  
{|
+
:  Holy crap indeed. Not a lot at this stage, I'd rather not anyone edit the spam. At the moment I'm indiscriminately blocking anyone creating or editing these pages so I don't want to accidentally block a legit user. I've sent a message to Pete about the situation, hope he sees it soon. [[User:NKF|NKF]] ([[User talk:NKF|talk]]) 01:44, 10 February 2016 (EST)
|-
 
|
 
{{UBK|=
 
|hangar1|hangar2|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|=
 
|hangar3|hangar4|stores|dirt|dirt|dirt|=
 
|dirt|dirt|lift|quarters|dirt|dirt|=
 
|dirt|dirt|large_radar|dirt|dirt|dirt|=
 
|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|=
 
|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|=}}
 
|
 
{{UBK|=
 
|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|=
 
|dirt|dirt|large_radar|hangar1|hangar2|lift|=
 
|dirt|dirt|dirt|hangar3|hangar4|dirt|=
 
|dirt|dirt|dirt|stores|dirt|dirt|=
 
|dirt|dirt|dirt|quarters|dirt|dirt|=
 
|dirt|dirt|dirt|small_radar|dirt|dirt|=}}
 
|
 
{{UBK|=
 
|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|=
 
|dirt|dirt|lift|dirt|dirt|dirt|=
 
|dirt|quarters|hangar1|hangar2|dirt|dirt|=
 
|dirt|dirt|hangar3|hangar4|hyperwave|dirt|=
 
|dirt|dirt|dirt|stores|dirt|dirt|=
 
|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|dirt|=}}
 
|}
 
  
The above are examples of my standard plain vanilla listening/intercept outpost. The module placement is completely random. There is no sense to it at all - except that they are as bare-bones as possible. Due to the small number of entry points, a few well placed rockets is all that's needed to clear a large chunk of aliens before things can get nasty.  
+
Soon as we were back online, started getting this, from Symatec/Norton, I didn't get it before:
 +
*Threat Name: Trojan.Gen
 +
*Location: <deleted> <br>[[User:Xuncu|Xuncu]] ([[User talk:Xuncu|talk]]) 23:13, 17 February 2016 (EST)
  
 +
:: My copy of Firefox is blocking the link as well, seems it's been reported as malware. Will post a message on the forum about it. The previous iterations of the file seem all right.  [[User:NKF|NKF]] ([[User talk:NKF|talk]]) 23:35, 17 February 2016 (EST)
  
----
+
== Tvol-bot ==
  
== Main page - distributions ==
+
Thanks for the update. I promise to keep using it wisely. (This is good news too because I found-out MS Paint's eyedropper tool lies so now I have to run through the ability images again to get the colour right. >.< ) --[[User:Tvol|Tvol]] ([[User talk:Tvol|talk]]) 02:48, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
  
Hi NKF. As you are thinking about the main page, could you add a place to organise "where to get it" / "distributions", and/or a place to talk about Steam? Thank you. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 03:20, 2 October 2008 (CDT)
+
:: Ran into some issues. Please see [[User_talk:Hobbes#Image_Strangeness]] if/when you have a moment. --[[User:Tvol|Tvol]] ([[User talk:Tvol|talk]]) 22:19, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
  
: Heh, actually I was implementing something as you posted this. It's not the best and really just a hack of a solution, but it gets a link onto the main page that we can work with. It'll do for the present, but a more prominent location should be decided on eventually (I'm thinking as in an overhaul of the main page and moving the three main game menus into their respective pages). - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 03:34, 2 October 2008 (CDT)
+
== Deletion request ==
 
 
 
 
----
 
  
NKF, thank you so much for all that great Apoc advice. Would you mind if I moved parts of it onto the Wiki? There is a real dearth of even basic Apoc information anywhere I can find. If I can post your points verbatim and signed as Discussion, in appropriate categories, it will be hugely useful. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 03:27, 17 October 2008 (CDT)
+
Hi, I accidentally uploaded a file with the wrong name; I've moved it to the proper page now, so could you please delete the old page? I mean this one: https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=File:Tacp_000.png&redirect=no  [[User:Darkpast|Darkpast]] ([[User talk:Darkpast|talk]]) 17:39, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 21:11, 3 December 2023

NKF:Talk

Welcome to NKF Talk. Pardon the mess.

The NKF-Centric TO-DO-List of Doom

UFO Base Kit

The UBK is a transclusion template I created so that you could plug base layouts into your articles and discussions. Go see the template and its documentation at Template:UBK to see how to use it.


Test of Gallery markup


Now with adjustments

Note to self: The new wiki software is really case sensitive these days! A good thing in one respect.

Smoke Grenades

IMO they're only useful turn 1. And even that goes out the window if you have a tank. A tank is worth it in the early game, if only because it draws alien Plasma Pistol fire away from your squishy unarmoured dudes. Later on, though, when you have armour and the aliens switch to Heavy Plasma, tanks become less useful and you can bring out the Smoke Grenades. Magic9mushroom (talk) 00:02, 22 August 2014 (EDT)

Like the tank (or 4 rookies, for the budget conscious), the smoke grenade is just another tool at your disposal that you can use depending on how you like to play. The smoke grenade is certainly most useful for the initial deployment, but that's not so say that is the only time you can take advantage of it. I know I've had many occasions where I managed to save a bunch of soldiers that were stuck out in the open in full view of some aliens by throwing a smoke grenade between them. The Smoke Grenade page has some scenarios listed. NKF (talk) 03:26, 22 August 2014 (EDT)
Four rookies die to four plasma pistol shots or one alien grenade. A tank can take either and keep trucking. It's also faster.
I guess Smoke Grenades are okay if they're pre-primed and kept on the shoulder straps. Otherwise there's too big a TU cost to use opportunistically. Turn 1, on the other hand, you're not doing anything anyway because of all the full-TU aliens.
At least we can agree that Dye Grenades are terrible! Magic9mushroom (talk) 05:59, 22 August 2014 (EDT)
I'd take the tank myself as it has plenty of merits, and the later Plasma Hovertank/Sonic Displacer are superb. However those that prefer 4 rookies do argue that they are cheaper, can spread out, carry more weaponry and still take the 4 (or more) shots to dispose of. Those that live through can go onto greater things. The tank just needs one bad roll of the die and it ends up a very expensive afterthought. Bit of a RTS peon pumper meat grinder mentality going on here methinks.
Grenades are in the same boat as the smoke grenade and do cost a lot to use. That's probably why they are best relegated to the support units that back up those on the front. Then again, front-line units carrying pre-armed grenades are handy for ninja-style retreats. NKF (talk) 16:21, 22 August 2014 (EDT)

Well, like I said, the main advantage of the tank is against aliens with Plasma Pistols at the very start of the game. A tank's front plate is guaranteed to survive at least 7 Plasma Pistol shots even if they all roll absolute max (which they won't), so you can park it on the opposite side of a UFO hatch to your firing line, close in, and draw fire from the aliens coming out until they use too many TUs and get reaction-fired to death (since on Superhuman, alien Reactions are usually high enough for them to avoid taking reaction-fire from stepping out of the hatch alone). In addition, you don't lose a huge amount of firepower by going with a tank right at the start since its cannon does twice the damage of Rifles. Once you've got lasers, the tank starts to hurt your firepower significantly, and once you've got decent armour and the aliens start using heavier weapons the defensive qualities of the tracked tanks go down the drain.

HWPs do have something of a renaissance later on when you get Avengers and are running into the 80-item limit, since a hovertank, while not reaching anywhere near the firepower of four Heavy-Plasma-equipped soldiers, does have more firepower than four soldiers without guns. Hovertanks/Launcher also don't count their ammo against said limit.

In TFTD it's a whole different kettle of fish thanks to the existence of Tentaculats and the lower fire rate of Sonic weaponry. Displacers/Sonic are absolutely essential due to their ability to lure Tentaculats - taking Artefact Sites without them is almost impossible thanks to That Goddamned Room. There's also the lower clip sizes making the 80-item limit an even bigger problem.

A pre-loaded Small Launcher does a lot of the same stuff a pre-armed Grenade does, and has the upside of taking the "suicide" out of "suicide bomb". There are a lot of ways to use those things. Magic9mushroom (talk) 21:49, 22 August 2014 (EDT)

Small Launchers are certainly quite handy beyond just capturing key aliens, and the Thermal Shok Launcher in TFTD is scary indeed. But they have their own share of drawbacks as well. Deciding which to use to get the best result for the task at hand is all part of the fun I guess. NKF (talk) 03:18, 25 August 2014 (EDT)

Geocities site?

Hi. I suppose there's a good chance you might be the "nkfarma" who at one time had a page i found linked on the strategycore forums -- specifically http://www.geocities.com/nkfarma/temporary/lsc_lure.html . Did you ever manage to get those geocities pages moved to a different host? -- Jokes_Free4Me (talk) 11:47, 9 April 2015 (EDT)

The same. It has been a while, but I did manage to save some of the content. After reviewing it though, it was mostly trivial stuff. My most important work that was on the old Geocities page, the TFTD Research Tree Bug Avoidance Guide, survives in its current form on this wiki. NKF (talk) 02:53, 10 April 2015 (EDT)
Okay, i trust your judgement on this, even though my curiosity still makes me want to read through all that other "trivial stuff"...
As for the revert issue, your first paragraph about it is just as sensible as i presumed any admin would be. Contacting Spike just for this is not worthwhile IMO, since he's been inactive since August and this really is quite "trivial stuff" too. It's not too big a deal if the sections stays or goes... I reverted merely because i'm an inclusionist (as you might have guessed) and favour preserving all information, even if obsolete. As the saying goes, "Those who cannot remember the past are [more likely] to repeat it." -- Jokes_Free4Me (talk) 07:25, 10 April 2015 (EDT)
The files I recovered were mostly the media files. Some .gif and .jpgs. Mainly game screenshots and a few fan-art scribbles I did on the back of some envelopes. Two zip files containing UFO save files, one being my "Solo Floater Base Assault Challenge" and one labelled scratch.zip. A no-base start file. I still use the challenge save on occasion to relearn how to play after long periods between games. There is a html file called The Deep One Dilemma - which was the basis for research tree bug avoidance guide. Also a grenade guide I had started but only ever got round to writing up the grenade relay. That's about it. NKF (talk) 23:15, 10 April 2015 (EDT)

Pile of calcs

So I did a thing and I think it's fairly important, but I'm not really sure where to put it or what to link to it. I'm thinking call it Weapon Effectiveness (TFTD) and stick a link to it in Weapon Analysis; is there anywhere else you think it should go? Magic9mushroom (talk) 19:32, 27 April 2015 (EDT)

I did give this some thought as you were compiling the data. It can certainly be included on the Weapon Analysis page. However, I'm also thinking that the information is quite relevant to TFTD so could also take a place on the main TFTD menu. For example, if you look at the UFO section's technical section under data tables, there's a Kill Modelling subheading that follows slightly similar lines. I am however starting to wonder if that fits the data table category. Perhaps a sub heading under Analysis might be best? NKF (talk) 01:57, 28 April 2015 (EDT)

Well, the difference between this and all the data tables currently there is that this is a set of calculations rather than raw game data. And it's less like the weapon analyses we have than part of the framework on which they're based. I think I'll stick a "See also" in the TFTD section of Weapon Analysis and link it on the main TFTD menu. Magic9mushroom (talk) 06:14, 28 April 2015 (EDT)

Sorry, I was thinking aloud at the end there and forgot to put the context. I was wondering about where Kill Modelling fits in. Like your table, it's not raw game data as such. NKF (talk) 01:46, 29 April 2015 (EDT)

VIGILO CONFIDO

You say on the main page that you found VIGILO CONFIDO hidden somewhere on the Advent page. I would appreciate you specifying where those words are hidden so people can check themselves. PizzaMan (talk) 04:17, 30 May 2015 (EDT)

To be honest, I usually steer clear of promotional pre-hype until the games are finally out, so have been avoiding it. Hobbes, who added that item to the news, may know more about it. However I had a quick look anyway, and one of the links the site points to https://downloads.2kgames.com/adventfuture/images/en/ADVENT_LIES.html has part of the clue. It's just a bit of treasure hunt. NKF (talk) 04:50, 30 May 2015 (EDT)
[1] Hobbes (talk) 19:19, 30 May 2015 (EDT)

Sunken plane?

I noticed you added a TFTD bug about "sunken plane missions". What in blazes is a "sunken plane mission", and why do they have different versions of their right wings? I have no clue what you're on about. Magic9mushroom (talk) 06:58, 25 August 2015 (EDT)


I'm referencing the mission where you are recovering or assaulting an alien sub while fighting around the wreck of a sunken cargo plane. If you haven't seen it before, try looking for it. It's quite neat. There are a couple different versions of its wings.
See, when the Geoscape.exe portion of the game generates this map, it creates a 5x5 grid that forms the map outline. Each grid location is a 10x10 map chunk. Tactical.exe uses this outline to create the actual map you end up playing on.
When populating the map outline, the game first marks off the area of the map where the X-Com sub and alien sub will go. Then it attempts to install the left and right wings of the plane into the map, followed by the various parts of the fuselage and finally fills in all the holes with random 10x10 map blocks in the terrain set.
Each wing is a 20x20 map block. If it is not able to install the wing, say one of the subs is in the way, it will then try to use the small 10x10 version of the wing. If there is no space in the location it wants to place the small wing, then nothing is placed.
The installation of the left wing of the plane works fine. However, when it gets around to installing the right wing and it fails to place the big wing and tries to place the small wing, instead of checking the exact destination to see if it the area is free, it checks the completely wrong part of the map. The block at 1,1 (which I have incorrectly stated as 0,1 in the article). This means that the small right wing could potentially overwrite anything that may be in that spot.
Most of the time you probably will not even notice the difference even if the bug had occurred. But if the small right wing overwrote the landing area for your Triton for example, you'll start the map with odd bits of the wing around the Triton. Luckily the game places the Triton after the wing, otherwise I imagine you'd start the mission with floating Triton bits and your Aquanauts standing on the wing. At it is, it ends up looking like the Triton's forced its way into the wing.
Again, players might not notice this as a bug, considering the chaos of debris around the map. NKF (talk) 02:07, 26 August 2015 (EDT)

Ah, now I get you. Magic9mushroom (talk) 21:20, 26 August 2015 (EDT)

Do you have a hex address where this error occurs? -Tycho (talk) 21:43, 26 August 2015 (EDT)
Myself, no. But check this post on Strategycore for the discussion. If for some reason that link doesn't take you direct to the post, it should be on page 2. NKF (talk) 01:50, 27 August 2015 (EDT)

Drills

You mean they cost 5% TU more than we thought, and we missed it for years? Holy crap... Magic9mushroom (talk) 04:28, 22 September 2015 (EDT)

I know. Considering the drills rank amongst my favourite weapons in this game, I'm surprised I only just noticed this error. NKF (talk) 04:47, 22 September 2015 (EDT)

With this discovery, the drills' damage-per-TU is actually in strict ascending order (Vibroblade < Thermic Lance < Heavy Thermic Lance). Not that it particularly matters, of course, since most aliens are substantially overkilled by a Heavy Thermic Lance hit. Still, any objections to fixing the outdated claim that Vibroblades are the best and Thermic Lances are the worst? Magic9mushroom (talk) 05:49, 22 September 2015 (EDT)

On reflection, referencing a very old copy of the game that I'd heavily tinkered with (for the purpose of researching research!) may not have been the wisest reference to look up. Doh. Sorry, false alarm.
As to the best and worst of the drills, that is somewhat subjective and depends entirely on what you're fighting. Weak enemies and lobstermen for example are better dealt with by Vibroblades, as it provides a more efficient use of TUs. Enemies with more protection on the other hand make a good argument for the Thermic Lance. NKF (talk) 06:18, 22 September 2015 (EDT)

"Which drill is the best in which circumstance" is, indeed, one of the things I did that huge pile of calculations for. Magic9mushroom (talk) 00:49, 23 September 2015 (EDT)

Spambot missed?

I noticed you didn't ban one of the five spammer accounts in the recent attack (the one whose name started with a phone number). Did you miss it? Magic9mushroom (talk) 01:21, 8 February 2016 (EST)

I got it. I just hid the log by mistake. The bots left a bunch of pages with very long titles after they signed up. This left a lot of clutter on the Recents page after I deleted them, so I had them hidden. Unfortunately the tool for tidying up the Recents page is very rudimentary and doesn't tell you what you're updating apart from the name of the person that did the update. NKF (talk) 02:22, 8 February 2016 (EST)

Okay. My mistake. I saw the pages, though. Oh god did I see them. Magic9mushroom (talk) 04:16, 8 February 2016 (EST)


Holy crap, that was a lot of them. Anything we can do to block the flood of 'em? --Xuncu (talk) 01:28, 10 February 2016 (EST)

Holy crap indeed. Not a lot at this stage, I'd rather not anyone edit the spam. At the moment I'm indiscriminately blocking anyone creating or editing these pages so I don't want to accidentally block a legit user. I've sent a message to Pete about the situation, hope he sees it soon. NKF (talk) 01:44, 10 February 2016 (EST)

Soon as we were back online, started getting this, from Symatec/Norton, I didn't get it before:

  • Threat Name: Trojan.Gen
  • Location: <deleted>
    Xuncu (talk) 23:13, 17 February 2016 (EST)
My copy of Firefox is blocking the link as well, seems it's been reported as malware. Will post a message on the forum about it. The previous iterations of the file seem all right. NKF (talk) 23:35, 17 February 2016 (EST)

Tvol-bot

Thanks for the update. I promise to keep using it wisely. (This is good news too because I found-out MS Paint's eyedropper tool lies so now I have to run through the ability images again to get the colour right. >.< ) --Tvol (talk) 02:48, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Ran into some issues. Please see User_talk:Hobbes#Image_Strangeness if/when you have a moment. --Tvol (talk) 22:19, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Deletion request

Hi, I accidentally uploaded a file with the wrong name; I've moved it to the proper page now, so could you please delete the old page? I mean this one: https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=File:Tacp_000.png&redirect=no Darkpast (talk) 17:39, 30 June 2020 (UTC)