Jump to content


Photo

Ufo2000 Weapon Set Upgrades


  • Please log in to reply
142 replies to this topic

#101 bamb

bamb

    Captain

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 155 posts

Posted 24 August 2007 - 06:41 AM

I'll restate what I've said before: let's use the Modified X-COM and the Classic UFO2000 weaponsets stats and merge them into a single one, without using the X-COM graphics (which is what we need to worry concerning copyright). Then we can have all matter of additional weaponsets: Human, Alien, etc.

This raises 3 issues, which are all valid:
1) Difference between conventional weapons vs. Laser/Plasma on the Modified X-COM weaponset. My answer: keep the difference to differenciate between the 3 types (Conventional - cheap, low power, limited ammo; Laser - medium power and cost, unlimited ammo; Plasma - expensive, high power, limited ammo). And this is variety - people complain about the low power of the conventional weapons but the truth is that they allow for larger/better armored squads to be deployed in contrast with only bringing lasers/plasmas. I've used over and over squads only equipped with bullets and it's not hard to win but most people assume bigger is better.


This is good and fine and makes sense. These definitely are and should be the broad categories for weapons.
The ufo2000 set adds the sniper rifles for each variety (conventional, laser and plasma), they mostly make sense - hitting with rifles from far away is very hard. Maybe indeed the snapshot TU:s could be increased to make them less of allround weapons. (In reality too, the scope is in the way if you try to make quick shots.)

In the newest version the heavy weapons also make sense, being medium range very heavy autoshot weapons. (In the 1071&1079 release version they were useless.) The main use now being shooting through walls with autoshot. (4 or 5 shots.)


2) Scout/Sniping. I say it's close to impossible to try to reduce this by weapons design, by downgrading the Plasma/Laser rifles or whatever means. The UFO2000 set never made me change my tactics regarding this. There are other ways to reduce this, such as light level and, more important, maps. I'd also say to have a look at the new terrain that is being developed: Scout/Sniping can work there but the building design will strongly place limits on it.


Yeah I don't think it can be changed by the weaponset much. I don't know what the game would become if all accuracies were dropped a lot.

3) Explosives. The current bane of all weaponsets. The less of them, the better, until HE block is implemented.

If anyone has a better idea than this to reach a compromise, then let's hear it. And if YOU (meaning all of us) are not interested in reaching a compromise and choose to continue to do things your way, then why am I wasting my time with all of this?


The explosives are a mixed thing, I don't really know what to think about them. In a sense, they heighten prediction and luck - you shoot somewhere where you guess the enemy has lots of guys. As a counter, you can either spread your guys or just hope he fires somewhere else. If you happen to have 3 guys where he shot, well, bad for you.
I recently played a game vs Boom where he carried three heavy missiles, and fired them across the road in the center of the map (he did spot me at least roughly). I got badly hit. They "only" cost 300 a piece, naturally I felt the urge to complain about that and ask to make them more expensive or heavier or something, but I resisted, gotta try more counters against them... <_<
I agree with the block thing, it should enable the main tactic against explosives that is currently missing, but it's probably quite hard to implement.

#102 Guest_Azrael Strife_*

Guest_Azrael Strife_*
  • Guests

Posted 24 August 2007 - 08:12 AM

It's unintuitive, confusing and requires remembering of special rules, if the same weapon behaves differently in different weapon sets. You always get surprises like "oh, last time I played, this weapon did xxx, why doesn't it do it anymore?" (yes, you learn after you have played many times, but why make it so when the mistake can be avoided?) or "darn, I didn't remember weapon yyy was that crappy in this set", which could happen to even somewhat experienced players. That's why I support separate sets. (Same as with map tiles - the same tile should behave similarly in all terrains.) WYSIWYG - what you see is what you get.

Though, of course, if the weapon set differences are minor, you save re-equipping your whole squad when switching sets, which would reduce set switching threshold. (Add to the fact the prematch screen's memory hogging which leads to game crashes later if you spend a lot of time there.)

I also will discuss later the issues raised by Hobbes.

I really don't follow what you're talking about, weapons cannot behave differently in different sets.

If what you're talking about is two weapons in different weaponsets named the same, then it's still a different weapon, regardless of the name, it's up to you to look after not naming two weapons the same...

#103 bamb

bamb

    Captain

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 155 posts

Posted 26 August 2007 - 12:38 PM

Why is this so hard?
It's the same weapon from the user's point of view either if
1) it has the same graphic
2) or it has the same name.

For example the small launcher can launch grenades in the modified X-com set while it can't do that in the original X-com set, am I correct? Thus the same weapon behaves differently in two weapon sets.

#104 Kratos

Kratos

    UFO2000 Staff

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,113 posts

Posted 26 August 2007 - 12:56 PM

Why is this so hard?
It's the same weapon from the user's point of view either if
1) it has the same graphic
2) or it has the same name.

For example the small launcher can launch grenades in the modified X-com set while it can't do that in the original X-com set, am I correct? Thus the same weapon behaves differently in two weapon sets.

It's not the same name. It's 'SMALL LAUNCHER' in Xcom Original, and it's 'Small Launcher' in xcom modified. You can't have duplicate entries, else the game will start swapping images/stats.

#105 Guest_Azrael Strife_*

Guest_Azrael Strife_*
  • Guests

Posted 26 August 2007 - 01:08 PM

Why is this so hard?
It's the same weapon from the user's point of view either if
1) it has the same graphic
2) or it has the same name.

For example the small launcher can launch grenades in the modified X-com set while it can't do that in the original X-com set, am I correct? Thus the same weapon behaves differently in two weapon sets.

Read up.

If what you're talking about is two weapons in different weaponsets named the same, then it's still a different weapon, regardless of the name, it's up to you to look after not naming two weapons the same...


The game doesn't really care what you name weapons, as long as they are in different weaponsets, they are different.

#106 bamb

bamb

    Captain

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 155 posts

Posted 26 August 2007 - 02:01 PM

The game doesn't really care what you name weapons, as long as they are in different weaponsets, they are different.


Not always from the user's point of view.

But I can stop talking about it, it doesn't seem to sink.

#107 Guest_Azrael Strife_*

Guest_Azrael Strife_*
  • Guests

Posted 26 August 2007 - 02:22 PM

The game doesn't really care what you name weapons, as long as they are in different weaponsets, they are different.


Not always from the user's point of view.

And who said anything about the user...? had you read any of my posts, you'd have read that I said "the game", repeatedly.

But I can stop talking about it, it doesn't seem to sink.

Thank you.

#108 bamb

bamb

    Captain

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 155 posts

Posted 26 August 2007 - 03:02 PM

Then why do you try to disprove my point by talking about something else completely?

#109 Kratos

Kratos

    UFO2000 Staff

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,113 posts

Posted 26 August 2007 - 05:12 PM

Then maybe you should be more specific. Unless your talking about the user adding weapons with some sort of change in the entry, they're a specifically defined weapon. It can't be defined any other way. For example, "GRENADE" is not the same weapon as "Grenade". But "Grenade" is the same as "Grenade", even if they are both defined in completely different sets. There's an exception to this but it's basically adding a space after the name: "Grenade " (spaced end), which is a bit odd looking under certain gameplay, and might cause errors (needs further testing). My Syndicate Mod's Pistol entry is an example of this. It's name index in the lua is defined as "PISTOL " (spaced end). It may appear fine on the surface, but this could cause crc errors if it does have issues with "PISTOL" in Xcom Modified.

But this topic has proven worthless, as nobody seems to agree what stands. So should we close this topic, or should we continue an endless debate? How about neither, so let's drop this issue until further notice, as it's wasting developer time. Believe it or not, there are programming surprises coming your way.

#110 Sporb

Sporb

    UFO2000 Staff

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 739 posts

Posted 26 August 2007 - 05:40 PM

Ya know what, i think im going to leave the weaponset exactly the way it is now(bar updates as a direct result of programming changes). Untill one of you drops a new set in my lap and says "this is going to be the new weaonset default for ufo2k" and we agree on it. In which case i will rename the set entirely to allow it preference. I Beleive Nachtwolf was working on a nice sparkly looking replacement for the current Xcom set that mimcs the scom weapons but adds better images.

Till then, if you dont like it, too bad. I will not be drastically changing it no matter how much you want to whine.

*Que whining

Edited by Sporb, 26 August 2007 - 05:41 PM.


#111 Hobbes

Hobbes

    UFO2000 Staff

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 719 posts

Posted 26 August 2007 - 05:42 PM

But this topic has proven worthless, as nobody seems to agree what stands. So should we close this topic, or should we continue an endless debate? How about neither, so let's drop this issue until further notice, as it's wasting developer time. Believe it or not, there are programming surprises coming your way.


I beg to differ... this topic is not worthless, despite the fact that there haven't been much advancement on this discussion from my last post. If we close the discussion now then everything remains as it stands and we're merely postponing this discussion.

Ya know what, i think im going to leave the weaponset exactly the way it is now(bar updates as a direct result of programming changes). Untill one of you drops a new set in my lap and says "this is going to be the new weaonset default for ufo2k" and we agree on it. In which case i will rename the set entirely to allow it preference. I Beleive Nachtwolf was working on a nice sparkly looking replacement for the current Xcom set that mimcs the scom weapons but adds better images.

Till then, if you dont like it, too bad. I will not be drastically changing it no matter how much you want to whine.

*Que whining


OK, lets give new images to the Modified X-COM weaponset then and make it the UFO2000 weaponset. Sounds like a plan to me. :)

Edited by Hobbes, 26 August 2007 - 06:56 PM.


#112 Kratos

Kratos

    UFO2000 Staff

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,113 posts

Posted 26 August 2007 - 07:05 PM

Ya know what, i think im going to leave the weaponset exactly the way it is now(bar updates as a direct result of programming changes). Untill one of you drops a new set in my lap and says "this is going to be the new weaonset default for ufo2k" and we agree on it. In which case i will rename the set entirely to allow it preference. I Beleive Nachtwolf was working on a nice sparkly looking replacement for the current Xcom set that mimcs the scom weapons but adds better images.

Till then, if you dont like it, too bad. I will not be drastically changing it no matter how much you want to whine.

*Que whining


OK, lets give new images to the Modified X-COM weaponset then and make it the UFO2000 weaponset. Sounds like a plan to me. :)

Sounds like the right way to go. :)

Edited by Kratos, 26 August 2007 - 07:07 PM.


#113 Sporb

Sporb

    UFO2000 Staff

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 739 posts

Posted 26 August 2007 - 09:51 PM

i nominate the Nachtwolf set - it was looking supreme last time i saw it. The images also adhere to the original weapons with a new more realistic spin.

#114 Exo2000

Exo2000

    Colonel

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,009 posts

Posted 26 August 2007 - 10:07 PM

OK, lets give new images to the Modified X-COM weaponset then and make it the UFO2000 weaponset. Sounds like a plan to me. :)


Seems easy enough. Keep the modified and tweaked set of 'original' weapons, and make it the default UFO2k set. Then make Sporb's set into some kind of massive armoury set, rather than flailing around in circles trying to get him to modify his set for other people's tastes and so on. :P
Posted Image

#115 bamb

bamb

    Captain

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 155 posts

Posted 27 August 2007 - 07:11 AM

That's exactly what my idea was too.

#116 Guest_Azrael Strife_*

Guest_Azrael Strife_*
  • Guests

Posted 27 August 2007 - 07:37 AM

OK, lets give new images to the Modified X-COM weaponset then and make it the UFO2000 weaponset. Sounds like a plan to me. :)


Seems easy enough. Keep the modified and tweaked set of 'original' weapons, and make it the default UFO2k set. Then make Sporb's set into some kind of massive armoury set, rather than flailing around in circles trying to get him to modify his set for other people's tastes and so on. :P

Actually, I believe it was his own idea to reduce the amount of weapons of the set.

I'm happy with the Classic or the Modified X-Com set anyway, can't get more perfect than that ^_^

#117 Exo2000

Exo2000

    Colonel

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,009 posts

Posted 27 August 2007 - 08:45 AM

OK, lets give new images to the Modified X-COM weaponset then and make it the UFO2000 weaponset. Sounds like a plan to me. :)


Seems easy enough. Keep the modified and tweaked set of 'original' weapons, and make it the default UFO2k set. Then make Sporb's set into some kind of massive armoury set, rather than flailing around in circles trying to get him to modify his set for other people's tastes and so on. :P

Actually, I believe it was his own idea to reduce the amount of weapons of the set.


Well whatever he wants to do with it, then. But you get the idea. :wink1:

And yeah, some of the items were... poorly devised, I must say. The Elite Plasma Rifle was just a flashy Plasma Rifle that needed more TU to fire and could accept pistol charges. I think it would have been better as a more rapid firing plasma rifle with superior accuracy (hence earning it it's title), at the cost of significantly higher cost and increased weight, perhaps with the option of a third charge specific to the EPR that had a useful side effect or other non-standard properties.

The Multi-Rocket Launcher was a fun and destructive concept, but is of extremely limited use. The poor accuracy made me wary of using such a weapon, should the shot nosedive into the pavement right in front of the firer. It would perhaps be useful in the case of large, armoured targets (such as a scenario where one has to fire up and destroy some kind of 'mech or large structure) where maximum damage is required over a large area, but it lacks the precision of, say, a decent rocketeer.

But that's just me.
Posted Image

#118 Popek

Popek

    Captain

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 231 posts

Posted 27 August 2007 - 02:59 PM

The Elite Plasma Rifle was just a flashy Plasma Rifle that needed more TU to fire and could accept pistol charges.


it actually was bugged (recently?) and required 0 TU's to autofire. reaction fire was impressive as it would spray shots basically until it's target was dead, or it used up the entire ammo cartridge.

#119 Exo2000

Exo2000

    Colonel

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,009 posts

Posted 28 August 2007 - 03:10 AM

The Elite Plasma Rifle was just a flashy Plasma Rifle that needed more TU to fire and could accept pistol charges.


it actually was bugged (recently?) and required 0 TU's to autofire. reaction fire was impressive as it would spray shots basically until it's target was dead, or it used up the entire ammo cartridge.


Or both, if it took the last shot to kill? :P
Posted Image

#120 bamb

bamb

    Captain

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 155 posts

Posted 04 September 2007 - 10:01 AM

Ufo2k weapon set is a very touchy subject right now. We're thinking about replacing it and letting Sporb call it a different name and you guys can download that. (Please don't discuss this here, in a different thread please)


So you want to strip the ufo2k set from the whole game. Man, great attitude. Take out something that people use.

It's very hard to get people to download any extra stuff and install them correctly and then do squads and then play.

I'm all for renaming and updating it, but not taking it out.

You guys can download that.

This speaks a lot of your attitude.

#121 Jezulkim

Jezulkim

    Captain

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 194 posts

Posted 04 September 2007 - 10:55 AM

Mind if I join this? I agree with bamb, there's no need to remove this set. I mean, you have to be a big noob if you have problem with the names.
That's my team in my avatar!

#122 Kratos

Kratos

    UFO2000 Staff

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,113 posts

Posted 04 September 2007 - 12:10 PM

I thought the author wanted this?:

you know what? lets just forget the whole thing shall we. There will henceforth no longer be a ufo2k weaponset. I will have somone remove it from the distribution shortly.

If he still wants it in there, that's fine. I personally don't like removing things from the distributive, but that's up to him. Sporb?

And I'm not sure where my attitude entwines with this decision, especially when I didn't make it. If you're just wanting flame me though....

#123 Blood Angel

Blood Angel

    Captain

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 513 posts

Posted 04 September 2007 - 12:16 PM

There's no need to take anything out of the release. Not at all.

#124 bamb

bamb

    Captain

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 155 posts

Posted 04 September 2007 - 02:44 PM

Sporb, please, can you upload or send your latest version to me via email? It'd be great to test it.

#125 Guest_Azrael Strife_*

Guest_Azrael Strife_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 September 2007 - 05:27 PM

Ufo2k weapon set is a very touchy subject right now. We're thinking about replacing it and letting Sporb call it a different name and you guys can download that. (Please don't discuss this here, in a different thread please)


So you want to strip the ufo2k set from the whole game. Man, great attitude. Take out something that people use.

It's very hard to get people to download any extra stuff and install them correctly and then do squads and then play.

I'm all for renaming and updating it, but not taking it out.

You guys can download that.

This speaks a lot of your attitude.

You should really read posts before replying to them, Sporb said himself that he wanted to take it ou.

That said, I could quote a post of yours but honestly all of them speak a lot about your attitude.

Now can we go back to being the big dysfunctional family I always thought you were and have fun together? :P

#126 Sporb

Sporb

    UFO2000 Staff

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 739 posts

Posted 04 September 2007 - 07:03 PM

I had no intention of implying that i was going to remove it from the distribution, simply that it would no longer be the Default for ufo2000 (the name would be changed to somthing else). If i gave the impression that i wanted it removed it (statement in above posts not to be taken literally at this stage) it was cause i was a little irritated with the whole ordeal. Removing it would remove the various additions such as sound Effects and Impact images etc meaning that ufo2k would take a step back from its goal of copyright free content.

The reason it is not updated in the new version is lack of communication in the team.

Edited by Sporb, 04 September 2007 - 07:08 PM.


#127 Dionis

Dionis

    Squaddie

  • New Forum Members
  • PipPip
  • 1 posts

Posted 06 September 2007 - 07:17 AM

I had no intention of implying that i was going to remove it from the distribution, simply that it would no longer be the Default for ufo2000 (the name would be changed to somthing else). If i gave the impression that i wanted it removed it (statement in above posts not to be taken literally at this stage) it was cause i was a little irritated with the whole ordeal. Removing it would remove the various additions such as sound Effects and Impact images etc meaning that ufo2k would take a step back from its goal of copyright free content.

The reason it is not updated in the new version is lack of communication in the team.


Hi, there,

Do you know how the plasmid core works ? And by the way, the latest beta version of UFO 2000 is eating up 200 MB of RAM. I don't think that's normal. Or is it ?

#128 NinthRank

NinthRank

    Sergeant

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 37 posts

Posted 06 September 2007 - 05:37 PM

Hello, all.
Dionis, the plasmid core must be dropped on the ground and then detonated with another explosive, but I'm not sure if this is the right topic to ask. Dunno 'bout the RAM, though.
Honestly, I've only played UFO2K on LAN against my brother, but my take on Sporb's (ex-UFO2K?) weapon set is that removing any weapon is sure to tick off somebody. On the other hand is the problem of balance (setting aside the issue of explosives), and on top of that is fear of the redundancy in having a second set of "modified XCom weapons." I think that the "official" (speaking in terms of the set itself, not the UFO2K game) weapon set should be much smaller, and, while it should provide gameplay comparable to the modified XCom weapons, it should be balanced independently and have its own nuances, or "feel" -- e.g., a sniper weapon for each tech, alien explosives tend to be incendiary, underslung grenade launchers, etc.. This set would cut out guns deemed "unnecessary," mabye the AR66, or the chainsaw, or the heavy laser. Another set (the "beta" set) would contain all the nifty guns and gadgets in addition to the primary weapons, and this would be where you'd find your flamethrowers, plasmid core, shotguns, plasma swords, and giant revolvers. I call it the "beta set" because weapons that are popular or that really stand out in that set (assuming a bunch of people actually play it!) can be moved to the primary set at the next update.
Reading over this, I realize that this is similar to the current situation with the UFO2K classic set vs. the full set. The main difference would be that the "full" set would be provided as an addon to the primary set, and it would be balanced according to changes in the primary set.

My $0.02. If any of that made sense, let me know ;).

Edit: Btw (speaking as an occasional UFO2K player), I only use the two-sheet set, and I'm pretty comfortable with the variety, even when some weapons seem redundant. I feel that it's fun to have so many weapons at my disposal, although this could indeed hurt the gameplay.

Edited by NinthRank, 06 September 2007 - 06:41 PM.


#129 Exo2000

Exo2000

    Colonel

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,009 posts

Posted 06 September 2007 - 11:21 PM

Hello, all.
Dionis, the plasmid core must be dropped on the ground and then detonated with another explosive, but I'm not sure if this is the right topic to ask.


Considering the Plasmid Core is one of the weapons from this pack, it is the right topic. :wink1: You're supposed to use the detonator 'grenade' ("Charge Pulse Detonator", though any other explosive should work too) if I remember rightly - it should be directly next to the Core on the item sheet.

Edited by Exo2000, 06 September 2007 - 11:42 PM.

Posted Image

#130 NinthRank

NinthRank

    Sergeant

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 37 posts

Posted 07 September 2007 - 07:42 AM

You're supposed to use the detonator 'grenade' ("Charge Pulse Detonator", though any other explosive should work too) if I remember rightly


Or drop the core on the ground and then throw a frag mine on top of it. :devillaugh:

#131 Exo2000

Exo2000

    Colonel

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,009 posts

Posted 07 September 2007 - 04:55 PM

You're supposed to use the detonator 'grenade' ("Charge Pulse Detonator", though any other explosive should work too) if I remember rightly


Or drop the core on the ground and then throw a frag mine on top of it. :devillaugh:


Proxies are only really useful if the enemy steps RIGHT on top of the Core though. The Core is meant to be a breaching charge, if I remember rightly. You set it against a tough wall, like UFO walls in stock, prime detonator and stand well back. ;)
Posted Image

#132 John Faust

John Faust

    Sergeant

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 77 posts

Posted 07 September 2007 - 07:00 PM

My tactic was the following
Sectoid+ Prox mine in hand+maxed time units+ Core in back pack+ pistol+ rush=
a big crater to see what they had. i could sometimes switch out the pistol for better weapons if i had the points leftover
I thought I'd pretend I was one of those deaf mutes, or should I?

#133 Popek

Popek

    Captain

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 231 posts

Posted 07 September 2007 - 07:39 PM

Sporb - do you have a more updated version of the ufo2k full weapon set handy? hopefully including the modified heavy weapons and new medical equipment? I was going to assemble one just to piss around with for some testing, but though I'd ask if you had one on the burner ready to serve up.

I'm hungry :)

Sectoid+ Prox mine in hand+maxed time units+ Core in back pack+ pistol+ rush= a big crater to see what they had.



In this scenario a plasmid core is a bit overkill. A proximity mine + HE explosives combined should be enough to take out the most armoured of personel, and anyone nearby. Plasmid Core is a bit limited in it's range. Though kudos for style points, we oughta match up sometime.

Edited by Popek, 07 September 2007 - 07:42 PM.


#134 kabu24

kabu24

    Squaddie

  • Forum Members
  • PipPip
  • 1 posts

Posted 07 September 2007 - 08:58 PM

Sporb, are you bringing the new heavy laser/plasma stats into the official version? Maybe more of the folks around here will better appreciate the variety offered by the ufo2k set if they've seen the tactical options opened up by popek and bamb's unofficial addition.

And even if some of the "variety" in this set is indeed just superfluous, what's been done with heavy L/p, by a couple of ufo2k set fans, suggests that as time goes by, the nagging redundancy in this set can end up promoting creativity! :D

With that said, some weapons truly do seem dead-end, and everyone here's agreed on that, so by all means remove them.

#135 Sporb

Sporb

    UFO2000 Staff

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 739 posts

Posted 08 September 2007 - 12:24 AM

i shall have a new version of the set a avaliable to those who wish to use it within a week or so.

#136 Exo2000

Exo2000

    Colonel

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,009 posts

Posted 08 September 2007 - 01:46 AM

My tactic was the following
Sectoid+ Prox mine in hand+maxed time units+ Core in back pack+ pistol+ rush=
a big crater to see what they had. i could sometimes switch out the pistol for better weapons if i had the points leftover


So not suicide bomber per se, so... more of a last laugh? ^_^

Nice tactic I must admit.

Edited by Exo2000, 08 September 2007 - 01:47 AM.

Posted Image

#137 NinthRank

NinthRank

    Sergeant

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 37 posts

Posted 08 September 2007 - 09:02 AM

i shall have a new version of the set a avaliable to those who wish to use it within a week or so.

I don't want to sound like a jerk, but could you spell guage "gauge" and missle "missile"?

#138 Sporb

Sporb

    UFO2000 Staff

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 739 posts

Posted 08 September 2007 - 11:05 PM

i shall have a new version of the set a avaliable to those who wish to use it within a week or so.

I don't want to sound like a jerk, but could you spell guage "gauge" and missle "missile"?

quite the contrary, im glad you picked those spelling mistakes out. - all fixed now

#139 Exo2000

Exo2000

    Colonel

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,009 posts

Posted 09 September 2007 - 09:35 AM

Hey, if we're going to get onto mistakes, currently they're actually rockets, because they don't have any guidance systems. :wink1:
Posted Image

#140 Blood Angel

Blood Angel

    Captain

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 513 posts

Posted 09 September 2007 - 11:40 AM

I was labouring under the misapprehension that a missile was any projectile designed for adverse effects on impact, whereas a rocket had to be self-propelled by exhaust thrust.

I could be wrong though.

#141 Exo2000

Exo2000

    Colonel

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,009 posts

Posted 09 September 2007 - 11:47 AM

I was labouring under the misapprehension that a missile was any projectile designed for adverse effects on impact, whereas a rocket had to be self-propelled by exhaust thrust.

I could be wrong though.


Well generally yes - a missile is a projectile and vice versa; any projectile is, by dictionary standards, a missile - but, when one gets picky about the specifics and the differences between guided and unguided self-propelled explosive projectiles, missiles are guided, rockets are not. ^_^

"Rocket-powered missiles are simply known as rockets if they lack post-launch guidance, and missiles or guided missiles if they have guidance and control after launch."


Edited by Exo2000, 09 September 2007 - 11:49 AM.

Posted Image

#142 NinthRank

NinthRank

    Sergeant

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 37 posts

Posted 09 September 2007 - 04:21 PM

On the other hand, it's possible that the missiles in UFO2k (and the rockets in XCom) do have a small guidance system, just that the engine does not show the effects. Basically, you just end up with a higher firing accuracy.

Edit: This has probably been mentioned in the XCom forums, but in the Ufopedia, it does mention that the rocket launcher is laser-guided (with an accuracy of 115%), so I think that "missile" is a valid label.

Edited by NinthRank, 09 September 2007 - 04:27 PM.


#143 Sporb

Sporb

    UFO2000 Staff

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 739 posts

Posted 09 September 2007 - 11:59 PM

If i remember correctly, there was a conflict with another weapon set during initial production in which myself and Plasma decided to opt for a different name to prevent such situations.