XCOM V4: "Svinnik - Why is Shen's daughter asian, when Shen is black?" - Games

[QUOTE=Destroyox;49899993]You're a fucking legend.[/QUOTE] haha thanks :D It's only 120+ separate voice lines. I still need to record a fuckton more, though. I intend to have full support of every single action, to make it an immersive experience of "what if a soldier with Moonbase Alpha's TTS was in the game?". Also as I said earlier I would really love to have in-game footage of this[B] thing[/B] in action, like in other voicepack mods, because it shows how actually retarded it is in-game, but my laptop can only run it in slide show that I'm used to, but it's not a pleasant viewing experience. If someone else could record this mod in action I'd very much appretiate it.

[QUOTE=Craigewan;49899698]Pretty sure that is just new camos/patterns being shown off - the only variation there seems to be one that replaces the coloured lights with amber/yellow rather than blue. But I'm pretty sure the screenshots we've seen are not comprehensive. However, I doubt the DLC entitled "Anarchy's Children" is going to have much to do with T3/T2 Customisation. I suspect, if anything, that Alien Hunters will cover that since it is themed around "XCOM as an elite alien hunting unit"[/QUOTE] Gasmask girl's armour looks like T2 to me, but I'm not too sure.

Welp, Now I know how I am going to outfit my "suicide mission" squad. It's going to be an interesting thing to see which of my lovable mad max rejects makes it to Lt...Hell, even Sgt. And which of them is going to be the one to trigger the Commander's Vest in the middle of several pods and civillians while screaming "WITNESS ME".

[QUOTE=Kljunas;49900017]Gasmask girl's armour looks like T2 to me, but I'm not too sure.[/QUOTE] You might be right, and I think I saw a sleeveless version of Predator/EXO armour posted on 4chan's /xcg/, and it was definitely a screenshot of AC because I saw things like the Mr. Foster-esque gasmask. Hell, I'll go grab it Edit: Here we go [t]http://i.imgur.com/VCRxIy1.jpg[/t]

i can tell you right now no soldier of mine is ever getting off the skyranger wearing cargo shorts and a codpiece

Those are the exact outfits I'd give suicide soldiers. The ones I don't want to keep.

[QUOTE=Gunner th;49900204]Those are the exact outfits I'd give suicide soldiers. The ones I don't want to keep.[/QUOTE] Give me a brown longcoat and red shirt to go with the guy 3rd from the right and we could make Firefly style Browncoats. I'm not seeing a downside to that.

[QUOTE=RocketRacer;49899643]"XCOM 2's first DLC, Anarchy's Children, lets you dress your soldiers as rejected Dragon Ball Z antagonists" - PCGamesN :v:[/QUOTE] Wait I thought that was a mod, not the first DLC

[QUOTE=Kommodore;49900159]i can tell you right now no soldier of mine is ever getting off the skyranger wearing cargo shorts and a codpiece[/QUOTE] I can tell you right now the only soldier of mine that will ever get off the skyranger wearing cargo shorts and a dickflap is the one who manages to miss every shot he ever takes the shorts will be hot pink

Is there any way to open existing XCOM2 soldier voicelines? I found that they might be inside the AkEvent blocks instead of being out in the open, and have no clue how to actually listen to them. It would make line recording much easier if I have a template of what each action sounds like. Of course I recognize most of the lines that I need to add, but having the voicelines from the actual game would make it a bit easier.

When did XCOM become a punk BDSM club

[QUOTE=MrDestroyer;49900514]When did XCOM become a punk BDSM club[/QUOTE] you talk like playing xcom isn't already a journey into S&M

[QUOTE=RocketRacer;49900500]Is there any way to open existing XCOM2 soldier voicelines? I found that they might be inside the AkEvent blocks instead of being out in the open, and have no clue how to actually listen to them. It would make line recording much easier if I have a template of what each action sounds like. Of course I recognize most of the lines that I need to add, but having the voicelines from the actual game would make it a bit easier.[/QUOTE] Not exactly. The soldier voice lines are within .bnk files, compiled Wwise projects. You would need to install Wwise and figure out how to get XCOM 2 to use custom .bnk files.

The aliens sometimes are genious as hell. Just had that type of missions where you need to destroy their relay. I was severally running out of time when i found the target in a building with an andromedon, a mech and some regular guy inside (didn't even have a chance to figure out which type of enemy he was). So one of my guys moves and spots them, triggering their reaction. The andromedon just goes straight to him, ignoring the walls and causing the roof to collapse. That, in turn, sets a gas tank off, killing that poor advent guy, damaging the mech and the andromedon himself as well as destroying the relay. Mission accomplished. That's actually one of those random moments that make the game pretty enjoyable, despite it's horribly irritating stuff like misses with 101% change to hit or endless unskippable dialogues about civilians being killed and so on.

[QUOTE=E3245;49900569]Not exactly. The soldier voice lines are within .bnk files, compiled Wwise projects. You would need to install Wwise and figure out how to get XCOM 2 to use custom .bnk files.[/QUOTE] ah damn, I'll just roll with what I think the lines mean and if I make them wrong then I'll just fix that with whatever approapreate lines are.

Honestly that looks kinda ?¿?¿?¿?¿?¿?. It's not even resistancey in terms of raggedness or whatever, it's just kinda childish. I'm biased obviously to the tacticool shit but heck.

[QUOTE=Hogie bear;49898469]I got so mad with the dodge mechanic that I actually opened the ini file and replaced every enemies chance of dodge to 0. I don't need a dice roll on top of a dice roll thank you.[/QUOTE] Dodge should really be counted in the Miss side of the roll. 100% chance to hit should be a 100% chance to [I]hit[/I]. If they dodge it, it's not a fuckin' hit, now is it? At the least, it should be [U]Miss -> Dodge -> Graze -> Hit -> Crit[/U], with target data only showing Hit and Crit percentage.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;49901038]Dodge should really be counted in the Miss side of the roll. 100% chance to hit should be a 100% chance to [I]hit[/I]. If they dodge it, it's not a fuckin' hit, now is it? At the least, it should be [U]Miss -> Dodge -> Graze -> Hit -> Crit[/U], with target data only showing Hit and Crit percentage.[/QUOTE] Dodge and graze are the same thing. Also I don't think dodge should be calculated on the Miss side, because that literally gives the attacker a bonus. If you Miss, but you roll a dodge, you still do damage, which shouldn't be the case. If anything, priority wise the chain should be: Crit -> Dodge -> Hit -> Miss. The problem right now is, even if you can score a crit, dodge takes priority, but if it's done like I mentioned, Crit's would guarantee no dodge chances.

But why would you want your hit chance reduced to a glorified miss? If I see a 100% chance to hit, I bloody well expect that shot to [I]hit[/I]. If it's 99% sure, there's always that chance, but not 100. Calculating dodge as a hit just means the hit chance is essentially lying to you. I suppose you could just subtract 10 from the hit chance on every attack, but it's still not a good design imo. It'd be like if there was an invisible chance for your gun to malfunction every turn, a small chance that your soldier will be forced to reload instead of shooting.

[QUOTE=CGNick;49901099]Dodge and graze are the same thing. Also I don't think dodge should be calculated on the Miss side, because that literally gives the attacker a bonus. If you Miss, but you roll a dodge, you still do damage, which shouldn't be the case. If anything, priority wise the chain should be: Crit -> Dodge -> Hit -> Miss. The problem right now is, even if you can score a crit, dodge takes priority, but if it's done like I mentioned, Crit's would guarantee no dodge chances.[/QUOTE] And it makes sense too. Crit is literally the opposite of a dodge and should take precedence. Piss off with those 8 damage dodges, Archon. I got 132% crit rate on my Ranger, I damn well should be getting those fat crits.

i am actually pretty bummed they decided to go with a hair metal dlc instead of something, like, partisan themed instead [editline]9th March 2016[/editline] it looks pretty lame

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;49901184]But why would you want your hit chance reduced to a glorified miss? If I see a 100% chance to hit, I bloody well expect that shot to [I]hit[/I]. If it's 99% sure, there's always that chance, but not 100. Calculating dodge as a hit just means the hit chance is essentially lying to you. I suppose you could just subtract 10 from the hit chance on every attack, but it's still not a good design imo. It'd be like if there was an invisible chance for your gun to malfunction every turn, a small chance that your soldier will be forced to reload instead of shooting.[/QUOTE] How is it lying to you? It does as stated: It hit. Again, if it were calculated on the miss side, it would give the attacker a bonus, by giving them a chance to still do damage even if it were a miss. That's what stocks are for. Dodge is fine being calculated on hit chances, but Crit should be able to override it. That alone would make dodge far less annoying, especially when most of the time, when it comes to dealing with Dodging enemies like Archons, you resort to shooting them in the face with a shotgun.

[QUOTE=CGNick;49901229]How is it lying to you? It does as stated: It hit.[/QUOTE] If it says there is a 100% chance to do 6-8 damage, and it does 3, then it lied about the chances.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;49901263]If it says there is a 100% chance to do 6-8 damage, and it does 3, then it lied about the chances.[/QUOTE] You mean just like how it still says 6-8 damage when you score a crit?

Crit and dodge should both be done with separate rolls imo. Fuck this one roll bullshit.

[QUOTE=CGNick;49901280]You mean just like how it still says 6-8 damage when you score a crit?[/QUOTE] There's a massive difference between not killing an enemy at a vital moment, and overkilling them which has no consequences. Not killing a Viper at a vital moment when the UI says you had a 100% chance to do so can cost you a ranger. It's as much bullshit as crit through heavy cover.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;49901422]There's a massive difference between not killing an enemy at a vital moment, and overkilling them which has no consequences. Not killing a Viper at a vital moment when the UI says you had a 100% chance to do so can cost you a ranger. It's as much bullshit as crit through heavy cover.[/QUOTE] My point is it doesn't lie to you about hitting or not. It tells you 100% chance to hit, so you hit. Now whether or not it's a crit, or the enemy dodges is, you still deal damage to them, be it smaller or bigger than expected.

[QUOTE=CGNick;49901442]My point is it doesn't lie to you about hitting or not. It tells you 100% chance to hit, so you hit. Now whether or not it's a crit, or the enemy dodges is, you still deal damage to them, be it smaller or bigger than expected.[/QUOTE] Well the point is that when the game tells you "this shot has 100% chance to hit for 4-6 damage", that is simply a lie. Given how important it is in XCOM for you to have a 100% safe back-up plan, having the game tell you that you are 100% guaranteed to kill this 4 health enemy should definitely mean that you are 100% guaranteed to kill that 4 health enemy. It doesn't matter if you're still dealing 2 damage to that 4 health enemy, because if you were relying on that 100% chance to kill the enemy to save your squad member, that 2 damage doesn't mean jack shit. Your soldier's still dead because the game didn't give you vital information. All it needs is for the game to also have a "10% to graze" under the chance to hit, because the player [I]needs[/I] to know that.

[QUOTE=Mort Stroodle;49901494]Well the point is that when the game tells you "this shot has 100% chance to hit for 4-6 damage", that is simply a lie. Given how important it is in XCOM for you to have a 100% safe back-up plan, having the game tell you that you are 100% guaranteed to kill this 4 health enemy should definitely mean that you are 100% guaranteed to kill that 4 health enemy. It doesn't matter if you're still dealing 2 damage to that 4 health enemy, because if you were relying on that 100% chance to kill the enemy to save your squad member, that 2 damage doesn't mean jack shit. Your soldier's still dead because the game didn't give you vital information. All it needs is for the game to also have a "10% to graze" under the chance to hit, because the player [I]needs[/I] to know that.[/QUOTE] Actually, it's "100% to Hit. 6 - 8 Damage." The two things are seperate, it is telling you your hit chance and then your damage roll under normal circumstances. A Dodge OR a Crit override that.

I'm not upset the first DLC is cosmetic stuff. I'm upset the cosmetics are some suicide squad Harley Quinn shit