64 replies to this topic

[Kikanaide]

"The weapon mounted on the XCAP-AG chassis is a slightly modified version of a research prototype created during the development of the Plasma Cannon."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That gives me an idea - what about
"The weapon chosen for the XCAP-AG chassis..."
Thoughts?

[Zombie]

The word "chosen" makes it sound like the weapon situation is still unresolved. When someone is reading the entry, everything should be set in stone.

- Zombie

[Mad]

"The weapon mounted on the XCAP-AG chassis is a slightly modified version of a research prototype created during the development of the Plasma Cannon."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That gives me an idea - what about
"The weapon chosen for the XCAP-AG chassis..."
Thoughts?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yea, very good. Use chosen.
Oh, and something more:

The weapon that will be mounted on the XCAP-AG chassis is a slightly modified version of a research prototype created during the development of the Plasma Cannon. The Plasma Cannon was based

There is a repetition of Plasma Cannon. Maybe just use "It" or something else the second time, or rephrase these sentences.

---Edit---
Just saw Zombies post...

The word "chosen" makes it sound like the weapon situation is still unresolved. When someone is reading the entry, everything should be set in stone.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hm. Are you sure about this? I think it is as good as mounted on, but reflects that there were several possibilities. After all this is (supposed to be) a Lab report, so they might want to include their reasons and thoughts.

Edited by Mad, 07 March 2006 - 11:07 AM.

[Kikanaide]

Gotta love simul-posts, eh?

Zombie's comment hits at one of the problems with CTD - the report comes out, in the timeline, before a single model is produced. Which is why I didn't say "the weapon mounted" the first time...'cause if one had been mounted, it seems as though you should get the tank after you research the text.

Of course, the text implies (more like directly says) that prototypes of the PC were developed, which weren't given to the player to use. So it's not like I'm perfect. Just seems like you have to have prototypes when you're building something for the first time, unlike when you just replicate alien technology.

I like "chosen" or "selected"... I suppose the past tense is absolute enough for me. But I have timeline problems... Let me know what you think, Zombie.

[Mad]

Zombie's comment hits at one of the problems with CTD - the report comes out, in the timeline, before a single model is produced.  Which is why I didn't say "the weapon mounted" the first time...'cause if one had been mounted, it seems as though you should get the tank after you research the text.

I like "chosen" or "selected"... I suppose the past tense is absolute enough for me.  But I have timeline problems... Let me know what you think, Zombie.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually I don't see a timeline problem here. Of course every item that is researched on will have a prototype built in the Labs, which will not be accessible to the player. If you have a problem with it in this special case, you could write something like: "The weapon is designed to be mounted..."

[Kikanaide]

Actually I don't see a timeline problem here. Of course every item that is researched on will have a prototype built in the Labs, which will not be accessible to the player. If you have a problem with it in this special case, you could write something like: "The weapon is designed to be mounted..."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's not a huge problem - it's just funny to me. I mean, really, imagine this scenario.
Commander - "Alien invasion of New York! The US isn't happy and we might lose their funding if we don't respond now! Half our soldiers are wounded! We need tanks...now! Hey, there's one right there." *points to prototype*
Scientist - "You can't have that one."
Commander - "Why not?"
Scientist - "Because it's our prototype."
Commander - "...And...it's not fully functional?"
Scientist - "No, it works...it's just...you can't use it."
Commander - "So you need it...to do...more research...or something?"
Scientist - "No, actually, every tank we build will be identical to that one. No improvements, no real reason for us to keep it..."

It's a standard video game cliche, really. Not entirely unlike the king who sends you out to save his kingdom without even giving you a decent sword. Or the merchant who sells you guns even though everyone else is dead. That sort of thing.

That said, I really don't feel like changing the cliche with Xenocide. I mean, if we gave someone a free tank for discovering the tech, then they'd ask questions like "where did you get the Xenium" and stuff like that. In the end, it's a video game. Being fun is more important than being totally realistic. Note the success of Halo.

[Mad]

It's a standard video game cliche, really.  Not entirely unlike the king who sends you out to save his kingdom without even giving you a decent sword.  Or the merchant who sells you guns even though everyone else is dead.  That sort of thing.

That said, I really don't feel like changing the cliche with Xenocide.  I mean, if we gave someone a free tank for discovering the tech, then they'd ask questions like "where did you get the Xenium" and stuff like that.  In the end, it's a video game.  Being fun is more important than being totally realistic.  Note the success of Halo.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I do understand your problem there, but well, just pretend they disassemled it again, to work on something new. Or because it didn't fit through the lab doors, or because it, since it is a prototype, doesn't have any armour...

Edited by Mad, 07 March 2006 - 12:07 PM.

[Kikanaide]

I do understand your problem there, but well, just pretend they disassemled it again, to work on something new. Or because it didn't fit through the lab doors, or because it, since it is a prototype, doesn't have any armour...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There we have it - the final line:
Scientist: "But then, it doesn't have an engine, or armor...or...well...actually, the tank is just an exact replica made out of paper mache and PVC pipe...so..."

[Mad]

I do understand your problem there, but well, just pretend they disassemled it again, to work on something new. Or because it didn't fit through the lab doors, or because it, since it is a prototype, doesn't have any armour...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There we have it - the final line:
Scientist: "But then, it doesn't have an engine, or armor...or...well...actually, the tank is just an exact replica made out of paper mache and PVC pipe...so..."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

good fluff! I love it!

[Kikanaide]

Hello all...been a while. For an explanation of what the heck happened, look at the lounge.

Research into aircraft plasma weapon design and Alien aircraft has produced an interesting byproduct - the Plasma XCAP-AG. The weapon itself is on par with the most powerful of handheld plasma weapons, but is more Xenium-efficient and requires no separately manufactured clips. With the added maneuverability and durability of a XCAP-AG chassis, it is a valuable addition to the X-Corps arsenal.

The weapon adapted for the XCAP-AG chassis is a research prototype created during the development of the Plasma Cannon. The Plasma Cannon was based upon research on handheld weapons, and several design strategies were implemented along the way. When the AG chassis came to the attention of the research team, the specifications for weapon size and weight matched almost exactly with the third prototype developed. This intermediate model, already too bulky for handheld use and not yet powerful enough to penetrate alien craft hulls, is much more Xenium efficient than its alien predecessors. With just a few mounting modifications, and the addition of the clipless Xenium processing system, it has been appproved for XCAP-AG operation.

Optional fluff - "Paper mache."

For explanation of the fluff, read the last few posts. If someone cares to trim it down (like all my humor, it's too wordy) I'd welcome it. Or else someone else can add some random fluff.

Edited by Kikanaide, 08 June 2006 - 09:37 PM.

[Mad]

good draft! I wonder if you could take parts of the explanation on why this cannon needs no xenium from the plasma cannon CT and work it into this one?

[Kikanaide]

Unfortunately, probably not...I just got looking back through the Plasma Cannon texts (it's been a while) and not much Xenium efficiency text survived to the final version... which means I need to rewrite a bit of this because my reference to the PC's efficiency might go poorly. Grr...I'm stuck...

[Mad]

Unfortunately, probably not...I just got looking back through the Plasma Cannon texts (it's been a while) and not much Xenium efficiency text survived to the final version... which means I need to rewrite a bit of this because my reference to the PC's efficiency might go poorly.  Grr...I'm stuck...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm sure you will come to think of sth. We thought about using xenium as a catalyst. maybe it's sufficient to explain it like this?

[Kikanaide]

Hokay, so...

I've been thinking about this...but my understanding (at present) is that in Xenocide, both the Plasma Cannon and the XCAP - Plasma will require Xenium. IIRC, the official statement was that the "bug" of geoscape and tank plasma weapons (including defense) would be "fixed." If this is no longer the case, please let me know b/c the final version of my Plasma Cannon text is wrong, and it's already in Complete.

So, unless the above is a mistake, I'm currently thinking about leaving the efficiency stuff alone (it ended up not being in the PC entry b/c no decision has been made on how MUCH Xenium will be needed) and being done with this. Let me know what you all think, and feel free to make suggestions for other additions as well.

[Mad]

Ok, this was my fault. I missed Az's post in the Cannon CT where he said that the bug will be fixed. So, although I think this will have a major impact on game mechanics/playbility, go with the XCAP needing Xenium like the Cannon does. (That way we won't have to write a nother CT for the rounds and impact on playability might be a bit less.)