Jump to content


Photo

Base Stats


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 UnFleshed One

UnFleshed One

    Programming Department

  • Xenocide Inactive
  • 304 posts

Posted 06 August 2005 - 04:13 PM

Different thread be it then :)

Well if not soldiers, then bases should be different depending on location. :)

Radars can have non-circular areas, wich would be affected by base's height and nearby height variations, like mountains or oceans. This way you can have alien base right across that ridge and realise it just before you go to mars :).

You can't put a base on the peak (because of construction problems), so any base in vicinity of the ridge will have a blind spot. But it will get a bonus to defences and a garantee that nobody from the other side will ever spot it (that is, unless they cross the ridge or go high enough).

(UFOs will have height property, right?)

Even if any base will be 9x9, it is always possible to reduce ammount of hangars by disabling one cell from some or every 2x2 square (hangars are 2x2, right?). That makes perfect sence in mountains, IMHO.

In planes and other lowlands there won't be any base space restrictions, but radars will have smaller range and bigger blind spots if there are mountains nearby.

In one word, you can hide and see nothing or you can go out and be spotted.

There sould be other modificators in forest for example, but I can't think of any right now :)

PS
BTW, how come that superior aliens can not triangulate on a radar?

Edited by UnFleshed One, 06 August 2005 - 04:15 PM.

Darkness is under the candle.

#2 red knight

red knight

    Xenocide Project Leader

  • Xenocide Inactive
  • 3,310 posts

Posted 07 August 2005 - 07:03 PM

The post by jtgibson is doable to be done and probably implemented in the optimal V1.0; We will have to talk about it with the Senior Team yet. But it is considered for implementation.

Some admin, please move this latest post to the workshops.

Greetings
Red Knight
Sourceforge Nick: flois - Federico Andres Lois
Visit my blog at: flois.blogspot.com

Posted Image

Pookie cover me, I am going in.

#3 Blehm 98

Blehm 98

    Colonel

  • [Global Moderators]
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,626 posts

Posted 07 August 2005 - 11:32 PM

I think that desert should give defence bonuses to Plasma and Laser defences only, and mountains to missile defences only, non-tracking defences would have problems with mountains, so they get -% affectiveness, and missiles get +%

Plains and desert would get direct fire defences a +% bonus, because they have unobstructed view, while missiles get a -% bonus as the UFO has a lot more maneuvering room - this is also to give you a reason to build defences other than fusion balls, i would say missiles get -25% effectiveness, which brings it equal to plasma defences, but plasma defences get +10% bonus so they are better

hmmm, crap, i just noticed, those percentages are based on damage, should we do damage bonuses or accuracy, accuracy isn't really enough unless you really put severe negatives onto them, fusion balls hit a lot of the time so you would need a good -50% at least to make this worthwile

PS - when i say missiles i mean fusion ball and missile defences, in no way would fusion missiles be excempt from this
Top Secret Xenocide Status report

BF2 Hackers =5SF= have busted
]sD[ Engageo <-- couldn't get him banned though, no screenshot of him ingame
]sD[Nomisser
an AK guy
The anti-logarithm of the logarithm of X plus the logarithm of Y equals X times Y, or 10^(logX + logY) = XY
Posted Image
I hate spider solitaire...

#4 jtgibson

jtgibson

    Rookie

  • Forum Members
  • Pip
  • 0 posts

Posted 10 August 2005 - 04:25 PM

Plains and desert would get direct fire defences a +% bonus, because they have unobstructed view, while missiles get a -% bonus as the UFO has a lot more maneuvering room - this is also to give you a reason to build defences other than fusion balls, i would say missiles get -25% effectiveness, which brings it equal to plasma defences, but plasma defences get +10% bonus so they are better

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


I actually tend to think of the opposite. =) A craft can't reliably avoid a guided projectile (guidance systems are far too good for that), but it can avoid direct-fire weapons simply by dodging out of the way (pilots are human and can't compensate as easily for target maneuvers).

Thus: In the mountains, guided projectiles have to have additional terrain avoidance (boom, it collides with a mountainside), whereas in the desert, missiles are much easier -- just fire-and-forget. In the mountains, direct fire weapons don't have to worry about UFOs getting out of the way because there's no room to dodge, while in the desert, the targets can dodge at leisure.

Also, the main justification I had for cheaper missiles in the desert was the fact that the desert is wide open, so it's much, much easier to build an array of silos. Just dig and install. It's not quite as easy in plains because you have a water table to worry about once you dig deep enough.


*pokes his unincreasing post count absent-mindedly*

Edited by jtgibson, 10 August 2005 - 04:27 PM.


#5 UnFleshed One

UnFleshed One

    Programming Department

  • Xenocide Inactive
  • 304 posts

Posted 10 August 2005 - 11:06 PM

Off topic:
jtgibson, Those who figure out the enigma of post counting automatically become senior members. I guess it is a count of topics you created (and wich was answered).
Darkness is under the candle.

#6 sir_schwick

sir_schwick

    Captain

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 481 posts

Posted 11 August 2005 - 08:22 AM

You cannot avoid guided projectiles, but you can confuse their guidance systems. It would be silly to assume the Alien ECM technology is inferior to our own.

#7 jtgibson

jtgibson

    Rookie

  • Forum Members
  • Pip
  • 0 posts

Posted 11 August 2005 - 06:52 PM

You cannot avoid guided projectiles, but you can confuse their guidance systems.  It would be silly to assume the Alien ECM technology is inferior to our own.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


That also works in my favour... in the mountains, there are a whole bunch of natural metal deposits and radioactive elements that would make it that much more difficult for a missile to achieve a good lock -- in the desert, there's nothing but silicon and oil. ;-)

I tend to think that the chance of a missile failing to hit in X-COM already simulates the ECM.

#8 tzuchan

tzuchan

    Xnet Proof Task Force

  • Xenocide Creative-Text Departmen
  • 502 posts

Posted 11 August 2005 - 07:19 PM

Off topic:
jtgibson, Those who figure out the enigma of post counting automatically become senior members. I guess it is a count of topics you created (and wich was answered).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not so much that it's strange and unique system, nor is it new topics and messages that are replied to. Just that in parts of the forums, like the labs and the spam forum, posts there do not count towards the post counts. This was put in place mainly to discourage people who reply just for the sake of post counts.

As to which forums counts and which don't I can't really answer that because I've stuck mainly with the labs, spam forum and the workshops myself.
tzuchan - the last sane CTD writer
- Writer of the Anti-Astyanax Gun CT
- Read my X-Com Profile
Main reason I've got no free time anymore:
Posted Image
Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!

#9 Guest_Azrael_*

Guest_Azrael_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 August 2005 - 07:23 PM

AFAIK, only the X-COM forums and Workshops increase your postcount, maybe some others like Water Cooler, but I'm not sure, as I stick mainly to Workshops :)

Edited by Azrael, 11 August 2005 - 07:24 PM.


#10 Guest_Azrael_*

Guest_Azrael_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 August 2005 - 07:26 PM

The post by jtgibson is doable to be done and probably implemented in the optimal V1.0; We will have to talk about it with the Senior Team yet. But it is considered for implementation.

Some admin, please move this latest post to the workshops.

Greetings
Red Knight

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Moved.