Rougey posted:

Ignoring that the above is awful and if we where not on an internet comedy forum I'd be concerned, I do like the idea of soldiers forming bonds with each other getting perks based on that.

Normal Adult Human posted:

Operation eternal gap

CrazyLoon posted:

One final question of Long War modding, then I gently caress off with it for good. Does anyone know where (if anywhere) I could mod the Damage Resistance values for individual robotic enemies?

Miftan posted:

Fire Emblem. What you want is Fire Emblem.

Internet Kraken posted:

Actually I want Xcom Emblem but the closest I can get to that is doing a run of Xcom 2 with the soldiers named and modeled after the ones in Fates.

trucutru posted:

Yes, I know where.

now gently caress off.

DefaultGameCore.ini, near the start

quote:

Characters=( strName="", iType=eChar_Cyberdisc, HP=18, Offense=70, Defense=0, Mobility=18, SightRadius=27, Will=0, ShieldHP=0, CritHitChance=0, CritWoundChance=0, FlightFuel=32, Reaction=0, ABILITIES[0]=eAbility_Fly, ABILITIES[1]=eAbility_CloseCyberdisc, ABILITIES[2]=0, ABILITIES[3]=0, ABILITIES[4]=0, ABILITIES[5]=0, ABILITIES[6]=0, ABILITIES[7]=0, Properties[0]=eCP_AirEvade, Properties[1]=eCP_Flight, Properties[2]=eCP_DeathExplosion, Properties[3]=eCP_Robotic, Properties[4]=0, Properties[5]=0, bCanUse_eTraversal_Normal=True, bCanUse_eTraversal_ClimbOver=True, bCanUse_eTraversal_ClimbOnto=True, bCanUse_eTraversal_ClimbLadder=False, bCanUse_eTraversal_DropDown=True, bCanUse_eTraversal_Grapple=False, bCanUse_eTraversal_Landing=True, bCanUse_eTraversal_BreakWindow=False, bCanUse_eTraversal_KickDoor=False, bCanUse_eTraversal_JumpUp=False, bCanUse_eTraversal_WallClimb=False, bCanUse_eTraversal_BreakWall=False, kInventory=( iArmor=eItem_NONE, iPistol=eItem_NONE, eClass=eSC_None, bHasPsiGift=False, fBioElectricParticleScale=1.25 )

Characters=( strName="", iType=eChar_SectoidCommander, HP=15, Offense=65, Defense=20, Mobility=12, SightRadius=27, Will=90, ShieldHP=0, CritHitChance=0, CritWoundChance=0, FlightFuel=0, Reaction=0, ABILITIES[0]=eAbility_TakeCover, ABILITIES[1]=eAbility_PsiControl, ABILITIES[2]=eAbility_Mindfray, ABILITIES[3]=eAbility_GreaterMindMerge, ABILITIES[4]=eAbility_PsiPanic, ABILITIES[5]=0, ABILITIES[6]=0, ABILITIES[7]=0, Properties[0]=0, Properties[1]=0, Properties[2]=0, Properties[3]=0, Properties[4]=0, Properties[5]=0, bCanUse_eTraversal_Normal=True, bCanUse_eTraversal_ClimbOver=True, bCanUse_eTraversal_ClimbOnto=True, bCanUse_eTraversal_ClimbLadder=True, bCanUse_eTraversal_DropDown=True, bCanUse_eTraversal_Grapple=False, bCanUse_eTraversal_Landing=True, bCanUse_eTraversal_BreakWindow=True, bCanUse_eTraversal_KickDoor=True, bCanUse_eTraversal_JumpUp=False, bCanUse_eTraversal_WallClimb=False, bCanUse_eTraversal_BreakWall=False, kInventory=( iArmor=eItem_NONE, iPistol=eItem_NONE, eClass=eSC_None, bHasPsiGift=False, fBioElectricParticleScale=0.75 )

CrazyLoon posted:

This is an excerpt from that section, comparing a Cyberdisc (some DR) and Sectoid Commander (no DR) that I've gone over before already a few times (minus all the custom, large and small items parts, that are identical between the two):


I might be an idiot with this, but where in this does it state Cyberdisc's damage resistance as well as the Sectoid Commander's lack thereof? Because I sure as poo poo could never find it. I doubt it's the oddly-named ShieldHP part, because that number is always zero, or is there something else at work here?

quote:

; ALIEN AUTOMATIC UPGRADES
;iDamage=Damage Bonus
;iCritHit=Alien Research threshhold to apply bonus;
;iAim=xxyy (xx=critical bonus, yy=aim bonus);
;iDefense=xxyy (x.x=Damage Reduction; yy Defense bonus)
;iHP=xxyy (xx=ShieldHp; yy HP bonus)
;iMobility=Mobility Bonus
;iWill=xxyy (xx=bonus regen (above +2 base granted by perk 45), yy Will bonus)


BalanceMods_Normal=(eType=eChar_Sectoid, iDamage=0, iCritHit=15, iAim=0, iDefense=0, iHP=1, iMobility=0, iWill=10)

BalanceMods_Normal=(eType=eChar_Cyberdisc, iDamage=0, iCritHit=0, iAim=0, iDefense=2000, iHP=0, iMobility=0, iWill=0)

quote:

BalanceMods_Normal=(eType=eChar_Outsider, iDamage=0, iCritHit=240, iAim=5, iDefense=1010, iHP=3, iMobility=1, iWill=105)

LotsBread posted:

quit posting you piece of poo poo

everytime I see your name, i get loving ulcers, that's how bad your writing is

Junpei posted:

Sounds like you need a hug.
Around the neck.
With a rope.

Psion posted:

I think the idea is neat but it could very easily go to poo poo. Chryssalid Romance Simulator 2016 is not what I want out of my XCOM 2.

Junpei posted:

Sounds like you need a hug.
Around the neck.
With a rope.

Internet Kraken posted:

Maybe with a snake tongue instead.

Rougey posted:

Ignoring that the above is awful and if we where not on an internet comedy forum I'd be concerned, I do like the idea of soldiers forming bonds with each other getting perks based on that.

For example:
- a sole survivor from a near squad wipe becomes "hardened", with a bonus to will and will not panic when teammates die in future
- if two soldiers are buddies and one dies, the other has a chance to go berserk (lose control, but squad mate will attack the closest enemy, advancing out of cover with a bonus to damage)
- soldiers who have lost a lot of buddies become immune to panic when teammates die, but have difficulty forming bonds.
- soldiers who are buddies get stat bonuses if they're within a couple of tiles of eachother


Soldiers become buddies by bonding in the skyranger to and from missions, saving eachother, or from the commander playing a dating sim minigame and setting up blind dates and trying to make them fall in love and buy a house with a white picket fence and

itskage posted:

Oh yeah it's fine if you want to gently caress Kaiden and Garrus but if I want to romance my xcom squad then it's weird.


But in all seriousness if you want squad based relationship bonuses, you could just randomly give everyone a zodiac sign and base it off of that. Have signs that do better get bonuses, signs that do worse get slight penalties, and then for the most compatible signs of the opposite gender give a big bonus. (Gender opposition ensures you can't stack all squad interactions with the bonus). Then enemies can have this assignment as well.

I think it would be a good system that would make for one of the best SRPGs ever.

Junpei posted:

A very successful game already did that.
It was called Final Fantasy Tactics.

Emy posted:

Please never post

Junpei posted:

A very successful game already did that.
It was called Final Fantasy Tactics.

itskage posted:

Are you loving kidding me? You think some SRPG from PS1 era that couldn't even get a direct sequel was good?

Junpei posted:

Stop acting like I killed your dad's, everyone.

Orgophlax posted:

Someone mentioned earlier in the thread something about a Beagle voice pack for LW? Anyone got a link for it? And any other voice packs as well?

Junpei posted:

Yes.
Also, thank you, I wear the title of "nerd" with pride.

Bholder posted:

You should stop posting for multiple reasons, one of them is mixing up Final Fantasy Tactics with Fire Emblem.

Jimbot posted:

The trailer for the new Independence Day movie gave me strong XCOM vibes.

itskage posted:

Oh yeah it's fine if you want to gently caress Kaiden and Garrus but if I want to romance my xcom squad then it's weird.

Junpei posted:

Stop acting like I killed your dad's, everyone.

Orgophlax posted:

Someone mentioned earlier in the thread something about a Beagle voice pack for LW? Anyone got a link for it? And any other voice packs as well?

RandallODim posted:

I am very excited about voice mods for XCOM 2, because it will mean I can make my 80s Kurt Russell trooper all the more accurate.

RandallODim posted:

Killed my dad's what?

Coolguye posted:

john madden

RandallODim posted:

Killed my dad's what?

Junpei posted:

Autocorrect, ment dad collectively, like...

YOUR DAD GETS KILLED!
YOUR DAD GETS KILLED!
EVERYONE'S DAD GETS KILLED!

Coolguye posted:

how do you type this and think 'hm yes this is a valuable post that a sane person makes'

Anime Schoolgirl posted: