UFOpaedia - User contributions [en]

Talk:Main Page

2009-05-10T11:55:15Z

RedNifre: /* Humor and Flavour Text */

__TOC__
----

== Site TODOS ==
A general dump of to-dos or maybe not-do's. Add any where appropriate:

* Template navigation toolbars for subsections. (Some tests have started)
* Strategy by terrain notes?
* Mention of bug where unit gets stuck in the corner of the map
* Mention of bug where you reload a battlescape mission only to be on an invalid level and how to recover from it (use OHMap, go back down to legal level, click until you find the map again, save the game). Often happens after editting the game, strangely enough. Is it possible the game stores map camera coordinates as a file checksum or somesuch?

== Discussion/talk page proposed format ==
Ok folks, we all seem to have our own ways of adding comments to a discussion page. The way it stands now, it becomes really difficult to follow a discussion when it is broken apart with different formats. What I suggest is this: when you leave a comment use a horizontal line to separate your post from the one(s) above it. In this manner, everything is left justified and the comments are separated. The reason why I do not support the colon as comment separation is that as the discussion progresses you are going to be adding more and more just to get the indenting correct. It also makes it confusing. Another side effect is that once you have a lot of colons present it pushes the text off the page itself and forces a scroll to the right to view. That isn't good.

I suppose if we really want to use colons as separators, we could alternate the use. If a comment is indented above yours, do nothing. If a comment is not indented, use a colon for your submission. Still, the constant zig-zagging isn't really the best idea either.

My vote is therefore to stick with the horizontal line (four dashes). If the discussion veers way off course, or if you have a couple questions/comments, break it apart into different headings. And always sign your post too as that makes it easier to follow.

Discuss.--[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:46, 9 March 2007 (PST)

Works for me, Zombie. Another problem with indentation is that one isn't necessarily addressing only the previous comment, but it could be about the previous one, and tying together things that are 4, 6, ''and'' 12 entries back. Colons are fine for quick rejoinders, but not as a requirement. A potential alternative is to leave two blank lines, as I just did after your sig. This is a fairly clear delineator for folks scanning quickly. However, the horizontal separator is more clear, in general. So I guess I'd vote for the hor-sep for all except quick comments thrown in, which can use colons. And anything that's a new topic or big break should get a new topic, using = signs. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 21:10, 9 March 2007 (PST)

----

I've reformatted [[Talk:Exploits#Extra_Ammo_Exploit]] to demonstrate how the indentation style ''can'' work, if done consistently. I think it's somewhat better than the line-separator style for very long discussions, making the structure a little clearer. However, if it's sometimes-used and sometimes-not things get messy, as you've noticed.

I'll codify the rules right here (surprisingly, they're not well-codified on Wikipedia itself, despite the fact that it's used quite consistently throughout the site):

*Add an indent for each reply
*Reuse your prior level of indentation if it's a back and forth:

First person's comment

:Second person's comment

::Third person's comment

:Second person again

::Third person again

::Third person's afterthought

:Second person again

::First person jumping back in

:::Third person once more

::First person again

*If you get to 5 or 6 indents, just "reset" (start without indents for the next reply).
*If you have an addendum to your own comments, use the same indent level and re-sign.
*If somebody doesn't know/doesn't use the right indent level, fix it when adding your next reply so the rules become clear during the course of conversation.
*Likewise, if someone adds a new comment to the top or fails to add a heading when starting a new subject, fix it when replying.

The problem we've had lately is the mixing of styles, neither being used correctly. So far it seems that myself, Sf, and NKF have been using indents, you (Zombie) and Mike favoring dashes, and most newcomers failing to use either. No clear winner just yet. ;-)
--[[User:Ethereal Cereal|Ethereal Cereal]] 23:56, 9 March 2007 (PST)

:What if you're addressing several and various issues raised before, not just a comment on the previous statement? (And it runs on for four or six paragraphs?) - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 00:14, 10 March 2007 (PST)

::If you're consolidating a bunch of replies to several earlier points, that's a good time to reset the indent.--[[User:Ethereal Cereal|Ethereal Cereal]] 01:07, 10 March 2007 (PST)

::: Works for me, Eth - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 16:47, 9 November 2007 (PST)

== British vs. American spelling ==

Summary: Use which ever convention you want. It does not matter as long as you do not get into petty spelling convention battles.

== XCOM Box Art ==

Someone (NKF? Danial?) once asked if anybody could scan XCOM's box art, so that they might e.g. put a better graphic on the main page. I just uploaded a 300 dpi scan of all four sides as [[Media:XCOM_UFO_Defense_DOS_US_Box_Art.zip]] (3.2 MB). The box is not in mint condition (see the ReadMe), but a little tweaking by somebody with skillz (Danial) could easily spruce it up. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 18:05, 19 October 2007 (PDT)

: Was it me? Hmm. Can't remember. I did think to just grab the cover for the PDF version of the X-Com Player's Handbook (US version - with the Mars/Super Avenger cover), but it's black and white. Could've sworn I've seen a copy in colour somewhere. Not that sepia version wouldn't look great though!
: Oh hang on, I don't think it was for the front page graphic in particular, but we did want to get various versions of the box art for the various games. - [[User:NKF|NKF]]

----
NKF - or anybody - can we consider replacing the current main page art, with the XCOM box art? Or a portion of it. I loved the game's intro and in-game "cartoon art", but why not use the game's best image, for our primary Main Page image? (Is there somebody with skills that can clean it up quickly? I'm happy to, but I'm no pics wizard.)

[[image:XcomScExample.png|thumb|100px|One of many possible screencaps]]Related to this, I think it would be a nice touch if anyone put a bunch of selected and/or random screen captures (screencaps) onto a page, with a link just "under" (i.e., indented under the Main Page entry for) [[Info|About X-COM: UFO Defense]]...

:I have a sneaking suspicion that we get a ton of lurkers (someone who is there but never speaks) who once played X-COM and came across our page by chance, and would like to relive it, if even for a few screencaps... yet as it is now, our site is becoming more of an in-depth encyclopedia, instead of a "you were once here" kind of place. All us hard core players gravitate toward the encyclopedia - but even if folks who once played it don't stay, if they say, "wow, I remember doing all that" based on a stack of screenshots, that would be good. I'm thinking of easy sections that are light on text (and no Ufopaedia info), but heavy on thumbnails and click-on screencaps (see the image to the right - I love that financier in the background) like:
:*My first base - Decisions
:*The Globe - Radar alert!
:*First contact! Small farm in Iowa, USA
:*Managing Research
:*Terror in Sydney! ''(include zombies - squad wiped out - see next)''
:*Headline: World Council generally supports X-COM efforts - subheadline - Australia may now be under the control of aliens ''(funding results for a month)''
:*Headline: X-COM squad impacted by "Blaster bomb" - the world cries (before and after pix)
:*The tricky depths of a Battleship
:*Elite squad Mind Controls all aliens
:*Final showdown: Cydonia
:Each of the sections above might have 1-5 images. Something like that.

:If no one objects, can I ask that anyone who is willing to do it, make a bunch of screencaps, using .pngs and thumbnails as shown above. Then lurkers can "remember the days" right up front. And a few more lurkers than currently breeze through, might stay.

:To put this in context, CNN recently had a number of articles admiring Commodore 64s (one of them [http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/ptech/12/07/c64/index.html?iref=newssearch here]). X-COM is like that, to me... it lives past its "life expectancy" to gamers, because of how well put together it was, especially including how much it hit you in the gut.

In summary, then. I have one question for us XCOM hardcore (can we change the Main Page image) and one for everybody (want to post a lot of screencaps?). I have made a stub page for the screencaps page. I'll retract it if the hardcore object or there's no response in a couple of months' time. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 21:44, 14 December 2007 (PST)
----

I'm perfectly fine with getting the main title changed. Get a few more ayes and we'll make it so.

A screencap section would be nice. I'm quite partial to creating screencap mini-comics (no, not real comics. Just sequential before/during/after images), although I never use them and they just get deleted in the end.

One benefit is that some of the shots can also be recycled throughout the rest of the site to illustrate certain things. Or for an article that's no more than a solid block of text, something to break up the monotony. I'm also always for a few well placed humorous shots.

-[[User:NKF|NKF]] 01:02, 15 December 2007 (PST)

:Sounds good, NKF. There could easily be a "comics" page link several ways:
::1) The new Main Page entry indented under [[Info|About X-COM: UFO Defense]] could also have a link to a comics page, but on the screenshot page itself,
::2) That same new entry on the Main Page could read something like "[[Screenshots]] - and [[Comics]]!" The concept of the screenshots page is to help folks relive the past. And something just as good as screenshots - or better - is screenshots with humor.
::3) Or, make a link for it, all by itself, somewhere obvious on the Main Page.
:I think it's a great idea!
:As for the other idea - you said you're fine re: changing the main title. But it's the graphic at the top of the Main Page that I'm talking about. Just to make sure we're clear on that. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 17:21, 21 December 2007 (PST)

== Favicon ==

Does the UFOpaedia have a favicon? -- [[User:NinthRank|NinthRank]] 17:51, 6 November 2007 (PST)

:We did have it at one time but I think it disappeared after an upgrade to the wiki software. If you have an idea for a favicon, submit it here. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 18:21, 6 November 2007 (PST)

Okay, I don't know where that logo in the upper left came from, but after a quick GIMP edit, I came up with this: [[Media:favicon.zip]]. I'm not quite sure how The GIMP works with icons, so I also included the .png's. What do you think? -- [[User:NinthRank|NinthRank]] 18:51, 6 November 2007 (PST)

:Not too shabby. Next time I talk to GazChap, I'll run it past him. Any more ideas for a favicon? I'd like to get a few (at least 3) and run it through a vote here. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:28, 6 November 2007 (PST)

::[[image:FavIcon-Crude1.png|thumb|16px]][[image:FavIcon-Crude2.png|thumb|16px]]NinthRank and Z, my two cents are something like this. My pics are incredibly crude - I'm a total graphics n00b - and would need somebody like you, Ninth, to turn it into the "burnished gold and navy" (or is that black?), like you did with yours. I couldn't even get my damn background to change for me using simple MS Word art ... what do you use? (See how n00b I am?)

::I think you have some great ideas there, but my favicons show as 16x16 pixels. (Is this because I use small icons? I had never heard the the word until you said it, Ninth, at which point I read the wiki entry, and it made immediate sense.) At 16<sup>2</sup>, you have to keep it incredibly simply... having the COM on a big X does that, because it doesn't "waste a repetitive 'X-' across the center", if that makes sense. Another idea is be careful with the X ... I didn't like the X in your 16x16 and 32x32 because it was "narrow" (more vertical than horizontal). I definitely like your 48x48. (I can't tell what's going on with your animated 16x16 .ico, my friend - a 16x16 pic on a 1280x1024 screen (or higher) needs to be real simple. It looks like a tiny pulsing thing, with an X sort of there, overall.) I think the X should be, if not symmetric, then, more wide than high - to me, this implies something "ominous". A true X would have to be "cut off" at the corners to be "wide and fat" at 16x16. This shows more in my second try than the first.

::You can make things bigger than 16<sup>2</sup>, a real plus and you get much more flexibility, but for me, only 16x16 exists.

::My two cents. I love your overall idea, and using navy (or black?) with gold trim. Thanks for signing in and helping out, NinthRank! -[[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 19:40, 14 December 2007 (PST)

==Technical Commentaries==

I just thought of adding a specific section concerning commentaries regarding the game, i.e., trying to explain how the weapons/diplomacy/funding/etc. would work in real life. The idea here is not to expand on the canon X-COM material but to describe/explain in a rational way.
I've come with this idea after reading Spike's section (on his [[User talk:Spike]] page) explaining the economics of X-COM and starting my own section regarding the Council of Funding Nations.
I think there is plenty of material available on the Data canisters that could be used/adapted to this. Also, the discussion regarding Elerium (with all those formulas) on the Talk Page is exactly the sort of thing I was thinking of.

- [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 22:59, 10 March 2008 (PDT)

: I don't see any problem with it. Go for it. We've started with a magnificent wealth of knowledge about the game itself (and a bit beyond, with the binary file diving). Theories and explanations of the X-Com world wouldn't be out of place. They'd certainly add a bit of literary colour and interest for those that wish to look beyond the game. There are lots of interesting bits and pieces scattered throughout the articles (like real world equivalents of weapon or tanks, just to name one example) that would probably fit better in a section like that than in the articles. Perhaps a an expanded data-canister like section would be in order. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 01:13, 11 March 2008 (PDT)

== Game Editors ==

I was going to add a link off the Main Page to the [[Game editors]] section that I wrote, under Misc. I still have a nagging feeling there is another list of them somewhere, but I can't find it. Any comments?

Also, any additions to the Game editors section are welcome.

[[User:Spike|Spike]] 03:40, 15 March 2008 (PDT)

: I don't think we've ever had a particular listing of editors.

: Tell you what, I'll throw these changes in, and we'll see how this works out.

:# I'll put the new game editor section onto the UFO main table (I've also renamed the page to stick to the first capital letter naming convention the other articles use).
:# I removed XComutil off the main table, since it'll be under the game file section.
:# Removed the UBK - it's just a tool for wiki editors and not something that would interest players of the game.

: I might also add the [[Command Prompt]] to the game editor section for its notes on using MS-Edit as a binary file editor.

:- [[User:NKF|NKF]] 04:46, 15 March 2008 (PDT)

:: While I see the validity of adding XComUtil to a page regarding editors won't it make sense to keep a sublink to the page which deals on how to use it, together with MSEdit? I mean, the other editors only have links to them on that page and I think that at least XComUtil deserves main page status because of its notoriosity and complexity. What do you guys think? - [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 14:08, 15 March 2008 (PDT)

----
a good idea to include the Command Prompt help. How about broadly dividing it into 2 sections: X-COM-specific tools and general purpose tools?
[[User:Spike|Spike]] 07:08, 17 March 2008 (PDT)

== Newb questions ==

Hello good sirs. Sorry for my bad non-native english. While in total noob in wiki, im relatively for long playd this great games. Great thanks for you for this great site, it really helped me with some ideas, especially with Funding Nation, even dont know how i played it before without it. Now more close to point, i realized what TFTD section here are, say, unperfect, if not somewhat wrong. As i readed somewhere not all play TFTD much, UFO1 instead, so it maybe be the point. Id edit something on it, but im totally dunno how to do it, and my language will have too many mistakes to be proudly presented to people. So id be glade to hear what you may propose for me to do. Again big thanks. Ill wait for answer.

PS Or im searched too badly, or its differ in TFTD (i play only it now) from UFO1, but i cant find here about stunned persons behaviour. Cant find what they awake only if theyr stun is lower then HP's and if only they have awaken person in theyr tile during end of turn. IMHO its important thing to know off, at least for me.

PPS. My friend made great tiny changes to one tiny file, what make FundingNations game way more easy and elegant then described in issue. I can upload it if you need this, tho its for TFTD im sure he can do UFO1 also if its needed. Anyway this game too easy even on FN to play it without it :).

Eh PPPS. Dunno how to properly log on :(.

: Do not worry about the language barrier - sometimes it's harder to understand people who speak English natively! ;) In any case, There'll be other editors who will be able to help fix the article for you if you can get the idea across.

: To get started editing pages, check the Community Portal on the left sidebar. That has links to articles that can help you get started - more or less. One good way to find out how some text is formatted (or anything else you'd like to duplicate) is to edit the page and see how it's done in the source.

: If in doubt, or if you're unsure about editing the article, feel free put your ideas or suggestions in the article's Discussion page.

: Because TFTD and UFO share a lot of the same mechanics, there would be a lot of unnecessary duplication if we were to write up articles for it that are already available in the UFO articles. Therefore we mainly include articles that cover topics that are unique to TFTD, like the weapons, door opening, aliens, etc. General mechanics like how damage works or how experience is earned is identical to UFO's, so there's no need to duplicate them. What sections do you think need improving or what sections do we need to add? The more input the better.

: Regarding consciousness, have you checked the [[Unconscious]] article? I think we might need to redo that article bit and perhaps add a few illustrations. One note about the difference between UFO and TFTD with the visual appearance of a unit recovered with a medikit needs to go in there too if it hasn't already. Oh well. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 22:54, 22 May 2008 (PDT)

: PS, to sign your messages in the discussion pages, put four tilde's <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> anywhere you want to insert your name and the timestamp.

== same questions ==

Thank you for answer. I been somwhat incorrect in my english. I didnt mean what TFTD pages are bad or what they lose reduntand UFO1 information. All they lack are only slightly wrongly described alien's dangers levels (one of most dangerous creatures cant be low treat, and least dangerous one medium) and lack of mission types what only TFTD have. Also i readed "Unconscious@ article few times, stiil cant find only how to use medkit and no word about what generally need for stunned person to rise. From that follow advices to grenade stunned chryssalids and so on.

PS. Oh, yes, and whats wrong with door openings?
[[User:Derrida|Derrida]] 08:59, 23 May 2008 (PDT)

: A unit falls unconscious when the stun bar is equal or greater than the unit's remaining health points. If it's under that, the unit will be awake.

: To wake a soldier up, you have to reduce the stun level by either waiting for the stun to wear off, 1 point per turn, or use stimulants on a medikit. Looks like the TFTD section doesn't have its own medikit page, but UFO's [[Medi-Kit]] section explains how to use it, as they are identical. Basically, if the unit is unconscious, the medic must stand on top of the unconscious unit and use stimulants (the second choice) until the unconscious soldier wakes up. When the unconscious unit wakes up, they'll appear to the north of the medic.

: TFTD's stun weapons are much more powerful than in TFTD, so you often have to use a lot of stimulants to wake a person up.

: TFTD's unique because it allows you to open doors by right clicking them - and it's a free action so you won't spend any TUs to do it. UFO cannot do this (except the Playstation version).

: As for the threat levels of the aliens - I agree, some should be reclassified. Personally I'd move the Gill-Men and Calcinite up to medium threat - all the current medium level threats look just about right though. What are your suggestions?

: Hang on, why are there so many references to vibroblades in the overview article? That can't be right. I'll have to update that later on. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 15:05, 23 May 2008 (PDT)

Nonono. I mean what if unit's stun damage falled below it's HP, and no one stand in tile it lying, it will never rise. Medkits not the point. No stunned aliens or soldiers will rise if no one will end turn on it, or take it to inventory/hand. I tried to say this. Maybe it been different in UFO1 (as with doors, i thought what doors always open by right click, and in UFO1 too (btw cant find about door opening anywere in wiki)), but in TFTD it means what you dont have to bother with stunned tentaculats etc to rise after stun if you do not stand on it, or try to move it in backpack/hand. Same with soldiers, you can click zillion turns, but they will never rise until someone stand on it. Without this game must be horrible with all this undying lobsters awake afer you pass them.
With danger level id suggest this: Harmless: hallucinoid; deep one; Low: gillmen; aquatoid; Meduim: zombie; calcinite; bio-drone; lobsterman; xarquid; high: tasoth; triscene; What really matters: tentaculat. In line of growing dangerness. [[User:Derrida|Derrida]] 16:30, 23 May 2008 (PDT)

== Regarding image file formats ==

I'd really like to add a note somewhere obvious about using GIFs for screenshots in the wiki, rather than JPGs. For 256-color images like X-COM uses, GIFs are no larger than JPGs and generally look much better. For example, see the nasty compression artifacts on the terrain maps in the [[Terror ship|Terror Ship]] article. PNGs might work just as well, I'm not sure, but we should really avoid JPGs.

Where would be the best place to mention this? I'm thinking near the top of the main page for visibility, but that might be more clutter than people want. [[User:Phasma Felis|Phasma Felis]] 23:59, 11 June 2008 (PDT)

:It's been dealt with [[User_talk:Zombie#Image_Types|here]] that PNG is the preferred file format of the wiki; however, where to note this...I honestly don't know. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 00:37, 12 June 2008 (PDT)

:: PNG's reduced to 256 or less colours can be quite the space saver for X-Com screenshots. You can go the extra step and run them through PNG compression programs and somesuch - but they're pretty good as-is. Jpgs should be reserved for images with a broader range of colours. One place the note could go is in [[Guidelines to writing articles]]. In fact, that section could do with a few extra additions in any case to expand is to that it's not just covering the composition of the language of the articles, but to cover the creation of the articles. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 03:04, 12 June 2008 (PDT)

== Hosting move. ==

Hi guys. It appears I'm still hosting the UFOpaedia - I did discuss moving it to StrategyCore with both Zombie and Pete a while ago and I think I gave them copies of what would be required.

Anyway, I'm moving hosting servers so the UFOpaedia is going to move too. I'm aiming to carry out the transfer on Sunday September 28th at about 8pm GMT+1. Any changes made between this time and the time that the transfer completes may be lost, but hopefully not. Just thought I'd give you guys a bit of notice.

I should point out that I still have no objection to hosting the UFOpaedia on my servers, it's a great project and you guys have done a bang-up job with it, it's far surpassed my original intentions :) However, if StrategyCore want to take over hosting to remove the potential "failure point" (i.e. me) then that's fine and we can give it another shot?

GazChap, 25th September 2008 12:50 GMT+1

:Thanks for the heads-up Gaz-Chap! Sure, StrategyCore is still willing to host the UFOpaedia. Sorry things didn't quite work out the last time we talked. Pete needs to be constantly reminded to do things as he's easily distracted. I'll try and start a fire under his bum to get the ball rolling again. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 07:14, 25 September 2008 (PDT)

::Hosting has now been moved to StrategyCore. Cheers to Pete and Zombie for sorting it out. GazChap, 11:28, 1 October 2008 (GMT+1)

::: There may be a slight problem with caching of the temporary holding page ("coming back soon". On some browsers I'm using (not all), the temporary page is still up and you can't see the UFOPaedia site. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 17:48, 1 October 2008 (CDT)

::The new website address is quite likely still propagating out through DNS, since we moved hosts. So that's just the nature of the internet and should be gone in a day or two. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 19:06, 1 October 2008 (CDT)

:Most browsers seem to allow a full page refresh via Ctrl + F5. There's also an option re caching under the Misc section of your Preferances - I had to disable it ages ago 'cause it was always failing to show me page changes... - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 21:54, 1 October 2008 (CDT)

Sorry about the downtime everyone. The bandwidth limit wasn't set high enough after the recent change in hosting and basically didn't allow access. I contacted Pete and he fixed the issue. Good to catch these issues earlier rather than later. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 15:11, 15 October 2008 (CDT)

=== 14 March 2009 ===

Zombie mentioned that Pete may be moving the server this weekend. I'm getting lots of errors and more or less unable to make updates to the site. Probably this is to do with the server move. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:14, 14 March 2009 (EDT)

:Apparently the move has been complete most of the day. So if you guys continue to have problems, please contact me and I'll relay it over to Pete. I'm not experiencing any problems though. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 21:34, 14 March 2009 (EDT)

== 500 Internal error ==

This seems to occur whenever I edit a subsection on a page, and I click the edit button on the TOP of the page instead of the edit button next to the subsection title. So, if you wanna avoid this error, try using the button which only edits that subsection... [[User:Jasonred|Jasonred]] 05:40, 21 March 2009 (EDT)

:Already been tried. Doesn't work any better. UFOpaedia admin is on it, I've been told. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 12:05, 21 March 2009 (EDT)

:: Pete's finished his latest round of changes. Give it another go. - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 22:12, 21 March 2009 (EDT)

== Proposed top level links ==

I've written some pages which I'd like to be proposed be linked to the main page, unless anyone can suggest where to put them (careful now!).

I'd like to link [[Fictional Equivalents]] to the main page.

I'd like to link [[Wish List (TFTD)]] to the TFTD page. It would also be good to start a [[Known Bugs (TFTD)]] page, for TFTD-specific bugs.

However as some tricky template work is involved, I'd rather not make these links myself for fear of screwing up the main page(s). Thoughts? [[User:Spike|Spike]] 11:20, 14 November 2008 (CST)

: Feel free to edit the templates - as long as the tables look okay when you preview them, they shouldn't break the page. The templates are standard pages but with a fancy prefix to their file name to categorize them as templates. This was needed so that any updates to them would show up on the main page right away without forcing the viewers to force-refresh the page. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 12:46, 14 November 2008 (CST)

::It should be noted that the [[TRTBAG]] more or less covers the "Known Bugs for TFTD" segment. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 16:08, 14 November 2008 (CST)

:Well it covers the Research Tree bugs but not any of the other TFTD-specific bugs as far as I can see. Still that's a good starting point, thanks AQ! And thanks Zombie for adding the links. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 17:34, 14 November 2008 (CST)

::Maybe TRTBAG should just BECOME the "Known Bugs(TFTD)" page. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 17:36, 14 November 2008 (CST)

:Because TRTBAG is such an excellent self contained guide, and well written, and quite long, I think it should be separate. I will link to it under the Known Bugs (TFTD) page. I suggest the main page link to TRTBAG be remained "''Research'' Bug Avoidance Guide". Probably the TFTD Alien Glitches page can be gotten rid of. It only mentions one bug, which is not a bug at all. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 06:16, 15 November 2008 (CST)

==Terminology==

===X-COM/XCOM/XCom/Etc.===

I remember reading about this discussion before and if something concrete comes out I think it should be added to the [[Guidelines to writing articles]].
Do we have set a proper spelling to refer to the organization? IIRC the game uses X-COM/XCOM/X-Com/etc. Should we set a standard for the Wiki? [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 07:52, 21 November 2008 (CST)
:It's a good idea to agree on a single standard spelling for the Wiki, if only to keep links consistent and prdictable. But it's a shame if there is no clear canonical spelling though. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:28, 21 November 2008 (CST)
::From what I recall there isn't a standard followed on UFO Defense, where you have X-COM/XCOM/XCom/etc. Apocalypse might be more consistent and I have no idea for the other games. I try to use X-COM and I've done some edits to follow this standard spelling but I'd like to read more opinions [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 17:43, 22 November 2008 (CST)
:I've had a check through the in-game strings and most if not all of them say "Xcom", which is my least favourite spelling. :( I think X-COM has the best flavour. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:41, 22 November 2008 (CST)
If any of you folks here have been following what I've been up to lately at the StrategyCore forums, you'll see I have been amassing a collection of most of the game versions in the series. Checking my [http://www.strategycore.co.uk/xcom/pg/ufogameversions UFO Game Versions] site page, you'll see that the original European release used XCom while the budget releases used X-Com. Other than that, those spellings quickly fell by the wayside as MicroProse decided on X-COM which quickly gained approval and remained the standard spelling throughout the series. (You can't really go by in-game text as those were not checked for consistency). Anyhow, I'd opt for the same route MicroProse took: <b>X-COM</b>. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:33, 22 November 2008 (CST)

===Capitalization guidelines/rules for the wiki===

Another thing that crossed my mind are guidelines/rules tossed in to prevent overcapitalization.

Specific ingame terms/names should be always capitalized:
*Weapons (Boomeroid, Elerium, Entropy Launcher
*Alien Races (Sectoid, Lobsterman, Skeletoid, etc.)
*Organizations (MarSec, General Dynamics, Council of Funding Nations)
*X-COM Crafts (Skyranger, Manta, Dimension Probe)

Generic ingame terms/names (that already exist in English) should be capitalized the first time they are mentioned on a wiki entry. Some examples:
*Weapons (Plasma Rifle, Torpedo Launcher, Vortex Mine, etc.)
*UFO types (Large Scout, Dreadnaught, Alien Mothership, etc.)
*Soldier Attributes/Agent Stats (Stamina, Psi-defense, etc.)
*Base Facilities

Wiki terms should be capitalized the first time they are mentioned on a wiki entry:
*Tactics
*Economics
*Game Mechanics
*Etc.

A few other rules to prevent overcapitalization and make a smooth reading:
*After the 1st mention, generic ingame terms are not required to be capitalized. As an example, after the first mention of a Laser Pistol, any additional mention(s) to them can simply use the term pistol(s).
*When refering to similar names/terms, it is advisable to capitalize both when they are mentioned. Eg. "Auto Cannon, unlike Heavy Cannon, allows for automatic fire" "Large Scouts are more dangerous than Medium Scouts".
*The same applies to wiki terms.

[[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 16:54, 23 November 2008 (CST)

== Humor and Flavour Text ==

GEH!!! This whole issue is taking on a life of it's own. On one hand, yes, I can see the allure of ufopedia being a serious informative site. On the other hand, there's the "fun" factor... When you get right down to it, Xcom is actually a rather simplistic game in terms of storyline, and storyline interactivity, so we REALLY have to make up our own, otherwise the game degenerates into "capture this technology, research research, shoot shoot. MC = win game". The ingame UFOpedia is great, but it's limited to several paragraphs to describe an entire race of creatures, and 2-3 lines to describe the horror of Blaster Bombs and such. ... I vote that this online UFOpedia becomes everything that the ufopedia in-game was missing... let's have something that ENTERTAINS as well as giving good accurate information!

I'll wait for the votes to come in before touching anything else. I agree with you guys, the Lobstermen and other aquatic aliens getting eaten is something that is VERY much a part of the X-com community's culture... it should go into the UFOpedia. [[User:Jasonred|Jasonred]] 04:00, 13 March 2009 (CDT)

: I've nothing against humour. All for it. In fact I'd very much like to see more of that so that definitely gets my vote. A few light hearted moments in between all the seriousness does wonders. Perhaps not when you're getting into the particulars, but the descriptions or opening paragraphs that don't get into deep detail could be livened up a little. In moderation, of course!

: However, the hard part is deciding on the line between being humorous within the confines of what's available (yes, funny discussions amongst the troops about eating lobstermen after battle instead of selling it could count towards that), and then there's making stuff up. Apologies to Morken for borrowing an example from his on-going graphic novel: explaining the alien's general idiocy/sportsmanship through their strong belief in the tenets of Amgoth. Highly amusing, but not part of the story. Granted, I don't think we've got anything like that on the wiki, but you never know.

: In any case, a good mental exercise for the writers. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 05:14, 13 March 2009 (CDT)

My two cents then: I like the humour, anecdotes, flavour and fan fiction but I think the main purpose of UFOPaedia is informational and that should not be compromised. I like the little touches of humour, and I've been known to attempt them myself. But humour and anecdotes should be kept brief and supplementary - e.g. one-liners and wry observations at the end of a section. Non-canonical flavour text and fan fiction (especially) should be kept clearly separate and distinguishable. Someone reading the site with no prior knowledge of XCOM should be able to tell right away what is factual vs what is humour or speculation/imagination. Not quite sure how to do that - maybe by using sidebars, the Humour category... ok ran out of ideas there already. Maybe we need an "official" font for reproducing canonical, in-game flavour text, so it stands out. Not sure.

Also, humour, anecdote and flavour are much more subjective than fact. What one person thinks is funny, others may not. So non-factual content may just get edited out unless a lot of people agree that it's funny/cool/interesting etc - in fact that's probably already happening. Maybe a good idea is to make the jokes on the Talk pages, and if they are found to be universally funny, move them on to the main articles later - pretty much the same as factual content in fact? [[User:Spike|Spike]] 05:19, 13 March 2009 (CDT)

: I'm certain that we would all agree that the wiki is first and foremost an informative site. We needn't go so far as to point out to the readers what is or isn't. That would be overdoing it. A dash of humour anywhere we can get away with it without compromising the message, facts or turn it into fan fiction is really all that's required and can be more effective. Like spices, the right amount can add to the flavour of a dish. Too much and it just ruins it.

:Now a little creative writing to make the articles (with or without the humour) more captivating to the reader and less like text-books will certainly go a long way. But then again, I believe that we've always attempted to do this. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 06:04, 13 March 2009 (CDT)

:: I agree with NKF's point here regarding humor. But, concerning fanfic, to make up and add things that aren't on the original UFOPaedias or the History distributed with Interceptor is to take too much liberty with the original material (in regards with fan fiction). Just because it gets discussed in the forums at strategycore or xcomufo or that it is mentioned in someone's fanfic doesn't mean that it should be taken as a fact, regardless of the argument that the game story belongs to its fans/players. The game belongs to all of them and quite frankly we are quite a minority (although a very loyal one) regarding that. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 21:58, 2 April 2009 (EDT)

I personally hate the in-game perspective of some articles. I come to this page mainly to get information, not cheesy stories somebody made up. How about splitting it into two wikis? A serious one in the style of a guide book and a fan-fic one full of funny stories and made up background information? [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 07:55, 10 May 2009 (EDT)

==XML dumps available?==
Hello guys! Kudos for creating this amazing wiki!

I have some ideas and I'd like to test them on an XML dump of ufopaedia, since it's a small but interesting wiki. Do you offer the dumps for download somewhere (like wikipedia does)? That would be absolutely fantastic. :) [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 10:23, 2 May 2009 (EDT)

:Do you mean [[Special:Export]]? --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:31, 2 May 2009 (EDT)

::I'm not sure if that export page does the job. It seems that it only allows downloading a list of articles I have to type in. What I want is ALL articles of Ufopaedia in XML, be it one file per article or one file for all articles(which I would prefer, since that is what Wikipedia provides and I'd like my software to work with all wikis). You can see what Wikipedia offers here [[http://download.wikimedia.org/]] and here [[http://download.wikimedia.org/enwiki/20090501/]]. Thanks! [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 23:19, 2 May 2009 (EDT)
::Never mind, I just entered all the relevant categories into the export page and got the XML file I was looking for (Downloading only the files relevant to playing X-COM 1 results in 1.5MB of XML). Thanks! [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 11:21, 4 May 2009 (EDT)

More problems! Since "Special:Export" seems to only allow categories it is impossible to download articles that have no category (e.g. "civilian"). I see two ways how you could fix this: Add an option "Include all uncategorized articles to export" to the export page or put every article in categories. Or run a script that puts every article without category in a "Other" category. [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 07:26, 10 May 2009 (EDT)

User:RedNifre

2009-05-10T11:27:47Z

RedNifre: New page: Hi! I'm currently working on something cool that is related to x-com and ufopaedia.org. I just started working on 10. May so it will take a while to complete it. Stay tuned! ~~~~

Hi!

I'm currently working on something cool that is related to x-com and ufopaedia.org. I just started working on 10. May so it will take a while to complete it.
Stay tuned! [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 07:27, 10 May 2009 (EDT)

Talk:Main Page

2009-05-10T11:26:11Z

RedNifre:

__TOC__
----

== Site TODOS ==
A general dump of to-dos or maybe not-do's. Add any where appropriate:

* Template navigation toolbars for subsections. (Some tests have started)
* Strategy by terrain notes?
* Mention of bug where unit gets stuck in the corner of the map
* Mention of bug where you reload a battlescape mission only to be on an invalid level and how to recover from it (use OHMap, go back down to legal level, click until you find the map again, save the game). Often happens after editting the game, strangely enough. Is it possible the game stores map camera coordinates as a file checksum or somesuch?

== Discussion/talk page proposed format ==
Ok folks, we all seem to have our own ways of adding comments to a discussion page. The way it stands now, it becomes really difficult to follow a discussion when it is broken apart with different formats. What I suggest is this: when you leave a comment use a horizontal line to separate your post from the one(s) above it. In this manner, everything is left justified and the comments are separated. The reason why I do not support the colon as comment separation is that as the discussion progresses you are going to be adding more and more just to get the indenting correct. It also makes it confusing. Another side effect is that once you have a lot of colons present it pushes the text off the page itself and forces a scroll to the right to view. That isn't good.

I suppose if we really want to use colons as separators, we could alternate the use. If a comment is indented above yours, do nothing. If a comment is not indented, use a colon for your submission. Still, the constant zig-zagging isn't really the best idea either.

My vote is therefore to stick with the horizontal line (four dashes). If the discussion veers way off course, or if you have a couple questions/comments, break it apart into different headings. And always sign your post too as that makes it easier to follow.

Discuss.--[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:46, 9 March 2007 (PST)

Works for me, Zombie. Another problem with indentation is that one isn't necessarily addressing only the previous comment, but it could be about the previous one, and tying together things that are 4, 6, ''and'' 12 entries back. Colons are fine for quick rejoinders, but not as a requirement. A potential alternative is to leave two blank lines, as I just did after your sig. This is a fairly clear delineator for folks scanning quickly. However, the horizontal separator is more clear, in general. So I guess I'd vote for the hor-sep for all except quick comments thrown in, which can use colons. And anything that's a new topic or big break should get a new topic, using = signs. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 21:10, 9 March 2007 (PST)

----

I've reformatted [[Talk:Exploits#Extra_Ammo_Exploit]] to demonstrate how the indentation style ''can'' work, if done consistently. I think it's somewhat better than the line-separator style for very long discussions, making the structure a little clearer. However, if it's sometimes-used and sometimes-not things get messy, as you've noticed.

I'll codify the rules right here (surprisingly, they're not well-codified on Wikipedia itself, despite the fact that it's used quite consistently throughout the site):

*Add an indent for each reply
*Reuse your prior level of indentation if it's a back and forth:

First person's comment

:Second person's comment

::Third person's comment

:Second person again

::Third person again

::Third person's afterthought

:Second person again

::First person jumping back in

:::Third person once more

::First person again

*If you get to 5 or 6 indents, just "reset" (start without indents for the next reply).
*If you have an addendum to your own comments, use the same indent level and re-sign.
*If somebody doesn't know/doesn't use the right indent level, fix it when adding your next reply so the rules become clear during the course of conversation.
*Likewise, if someone adds a new comment to the top or fails to add a heading when starting a new subject, fix it when replying.

The problem we've had lately is the mixing of styles, neither being used correctly. So far it seems that myself, Sf, and NKF have been using indents, you (Zombie) and Mike favoring dashes, and most newcomers failing to use either. No clear winner just yet. ;-)
--[[User:Ethereal Cereal|Ethereal Cereal]] 23:56, 9 March 2007 (PST)

:What if you're addressing several and various issues raised before, not just a comment on the previous statement? (And it runs on for four or six paragraphs?) - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 00:14, 10 March 2007 (PST)

::If you're consolidating a bunch of replies to several earlier points, that's a good time to reset the indent.--[[User:Ethereal Cereal|Ethereal Cereal]] 01:07, 10 March 2007 (PST)

::: Works for me, Eth - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 16:47, 9 November 2007 (PST)

== British vs. American spelling ==

Summary: Use which ever convention you want. It does not matter as long as you do not get into petty spelling convention battles.

== XCOM Box Art ==

Someone (NKF? Danial?) once asked if anybody could scan XCOM's box art, so that they might e.g. put a better graphic on the main page. I just uploaded a 300 dpi scan of all four sides as [[Media:XCOM_UFO_Defense_DOS_US_Box_Art.zip]] (3.2 MB). The box is not in mint condition (see the ReadMe), but a little tweaking by somebody with skillz (Danial) could easily spruce it up. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 18:05, 19 October 2007 (PDT)

: Was it me? Hmm. Can't remember. I did think to just grab the cover for the PDF version of the X-Com Player's Handbook (US version - with the Mars/Super Avenger cover), but it's black and white. Could've sworn I've seen a copy in colour somewhere. Not that sepia version wouldn't look great though!
: Oh hang on, I don't think it was for the front page graphic in particular, but we did want to get various versions of the box art for the various games. - [[User:NKF|NKF]]

----
NKF - or anybody - can we consider replacing the current main page art, with the XCOM box art? Or a portion of it. I loved the game's intro and in-game "cartoon art", but why not use the game's best image, for our primary Main Page image? (Is there somebody with skills that can clean it up quickly? I'm happy to, but I'm no pics wizard.)

[[image:XcomScExample.png|thumb|100px|One of many possible screencaps]]Related to this, I think it would be a nice touch if anyone put a bunch of selected and/or random screen captures (screencaps) onto a page, with a link just "under" (i.e., indented under the Main Page entry for) [[Info|About X-COM: UFO Defense]]...

:I have a sneaking suspicion that we get a ton of lurkers (someone who is there but never speaks) who once played X-COM and came across our page by chance, and would like to relive it, if even for a few screencaps... yet as it is now, our site is becoming more of an in-depth encyclopedia, instead of a "you were once here" kind of place. All us hard core players gravitate toward the encyclopedia - but even if folks who once played it don't stay, if they say, "wow, I remember doing all that" based on a stack of screenshots, that would be good. I'm thinking of easy sections that are light on text (and no Ufopaedia info), but heavy on thumbnails and click-on screencaps (see the image to the right - I love that financier in the background) like:
:*My first base - Decisions
:*The Globe - Radar alert!
:*First contact! Small farm in Iowa, USA
:*Managing Research
:*Terror in Sydney! ''(include zombies - squad wiped out - see next)''
:*Headline: World Council generally supports X-COM efforts - subheadline - Australia may now be under the control of aliens ''(funding results for a month)''
:*Headline: X-COM squad impacted by "Blaster bomb" - the world cries (before and after pix)
:*The tricky depths of a Battleship
:*Elite squad Mind Controls all aliens
:*Final showdown: Cydonia
:Each of the sections above might have 1-5 images. Something like that.

:If no one objects, can I ask that anyone who is willing to do it, make a bunch of screencaps, using .pngs and thumbnails as shown above. Then lurkers can "remember the days" right up front. And a few more lurkers than currently breeze through, might stay.

:To put this in context, CNN recently had a number of articles admiring Commodore 64s (one of them [http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/ptech/12/07/c64/index.html?iref=newssearch here]). X-COM is like that, to me... it lives past its "life expectancy" to gamers, because of how well put together it was, especially including how much it hit you in the gut.

In summary, then. I have one question for us XCOM hardcore (can we change the Main Page image) and one for everybody (want to post a lot of screencaps?). I have made a stub page for the screencaps page. I'll retract it if the hardcore object or there's no response in a couple of months' time. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 21:44, 14 December 2007 (PST)
----

I'm perfectly fine with getting the main title changed. Get a few more ayes and we'll make it so.

A screencap section would be nice. I'm quite partial to creating screencap mini-comics (no, not real comics. Just sequential before/during/after images), although I never use them and they just get deleted in the end.

One benefit is that some of the shots can also be recycled throughout the rest of the site to illustrate certain things. Or for an article that's no more than a solid block of text, something to break up the monotony. I'm also always for a few well placed humorous shots.

-[[User:NKF|NKF]] 01:02, 15 December 2007 (PST)

:Sounds good, NKF. There could easily be a "comics" page link several ways:
::1) The new Main Page entry indented under [[Info|About X-COM: UFO Defense]] could also have a link to a comics page, but on the screenshot page itself,
::2) That same new entry on the Main Page could read something like "[[Screenshots]] - and [[Comics]]!" The concept of the screenshots page is to help folks relive the past. And something just as good as screenshots - or better - is screenshots with humor.
::3) Or, make a link for it, all by itself, somewhere obvious on the Main Page.
:I think it's a great idea!
:As for the other idea - you said you're fine re: changing the main title. But it's the graphic at the top of the Main Page that I'm talking about. Just to make sure we're clear on that. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 17:21, 21 December 2007 (PST)

== Favicon ==

Does the UFOpaedia have a favicon? -- [[User:NinthRank|NinthRank]] 17:51, 6 November 2007 (PST)

:We did have it at one time but I think it disappeared after an upgrade to the wiki software. If you have an idea for a favicon, submit it here. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 18:21, 6 November 2007 (PST)

Okay, I don't know where that logo in the upper left came from, but after a quick GIMP edit, I came up with this: [[Media:favicon.zip]]. I'm not quite sure how The GIMP works with icons, so I also included the .png's. What do you think? -- [[User:NinthRank|NinthRank]] 18:51, 6 November 2007 (PST)

:Not too shabby. Next time I talk to GazChap, I'll run it past him. Any more ideas for a favicon? I'd like to get a few (at least 3) and run it through a vote here. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:28, 6 November 2007 (PST)

::[[image:FavIcon-Crude1.png|thumb|16px]][[image:FavIcon-Crude2.png|thumb|16px]]NinthRank and Z, my two cents are something like this. My pics are incredibly crude - I'm a total graphics n00b - and would need somebody like you, Ninth, to turn it into the "burnished gold and navy" (or is that black?), like you did with yours. I couldn't even get my damn background to change for me using simple MS Word art ... what do you use? (See how n00b I am?)

::I think you have some great ideas there, but my favicons show as 16x16 pixels. (Is this because I use small icons? I had never heard the the word until you said it, Ninth, at which point I read the wiki entry, and it made immediate sense.) At 16<sup>2</sup>, you have to keep it incredibly simply... having the COM on a big X does that, because it doesn't "waste a repetitive 'X-' across the center", if that makes sense. Another idea is be careful with the X ... I didn't like the X in your 16x16 and 32x32 because it was "narrow" (more vertical than horizontal). I definitely like your 48x48. (I can't tell what's going on with your animated 16x16 .ico, my friend - a 16x16 pic on a 1280x1024 screen (or higher) needs to be real simple. It looks like a tiny pulsing thing, with an X sort of there, overall.) I think the X should be, if not symmetric, then, more wide than high - to me, this implies something "ominous". A true X would have to be "cut off" at the corners to be "wide and fat" at 16x16. This shows more in my second try than the first.

::You can make things bigger than 16<sup>2</sup>, a real plus and you get much more flexibility, but for me, only 16x16 exists.

::My two cents. I love your overall idea, and using navy (or black?) with gold trim. Thanks for signing in and helping out, NinthRank! -[[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 19:40, 14 December 2007 (PST)

==Technical Commentaries==

I just thought of adding a specific section concerning commentaries regarding the game, i.e., trying to explain how the weapons/diplomacy/funding/etc. would work in real life. The idea here is not to expand on the canon X-COM material but to describe/explain in a rational way.
I've come with this idea after reading Spike's section (on his [[User talk:Spike]] page) explaining the economics of X-COM and starting my own section regarding the Council of Funding Nations.
I think there is plenty of material available on the Data canisters that could be used/adapted to this. Also, the discussion regarding Elerium (with all those formulas) on the Talk Page is exactly the sort of thing I was thinking of.

- [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 22:59, 10 March 2008 (PDT)

: I don't see any problem with it. Go for it. We've started with a magnificent wealth of knowledge about the game itself (and a bit beyond, with the binary file diving). Theories and explanations of the X-Com world wouldn't be out of place. They'd certainly add a bit of literary colour and interest for those that wish to look beyond the game. There are lots of interesting bits and pieces scattered throughout the articles (like real world equivalents of weapon or tanks, just to name one example) that would probably fit better in a section like that than in the articles. Perhaps a an expanded data-canister like section would be in order. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 01:13, 11 March 2008 (PDT)

== Game Editors ==

I was going to add a link off the Main Page to the [[Game editors]] section that I wrote, under Misc. I still have a nagging feeling there is another list of them somewhere, but I can't find it. Any comments?

Also, any additions to the Game editors section are welcome.

[[User:Spike|Spike]] 03:40, 15 March 2008 (PDT)

: I don't think we've ever had a particular listing of editors.

: Tell you what, I'll throw these changes in, and we'll see how this works out.

:# I'll put the new game editor section onto the UFO main table (I've also renamed the page to stick to the first capital letter naming convention the other articles use).
:# I removed XComutil off the main table, since it'll be under the game file section.
:# Removed the UBK - it's just a tool for wiki editors and not something that would interest players of the game.

: I might also add the [[Command Prompt]] to the game editor section for its notes on using MS-Edit as a binary file editor.

:- [[User:NKF|NKF]] 04:46, 15 March 2008 (PDT)

:: While I see the validity of adding XComUtil to a page regarding editors won't it make sense to keep a sublink to the page which deals on how to use it, together with MSEdit? I mean, the other editors only have links to them on that page and I think that at least XComUtil deserves main page status because of its notoriosity and complexity. What do you guys think? - [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 14:08, 15 March 2008 (PDT)

----
a good idea to include the Command Prompt help. How about broadly dividing it into 2 sections: X-COM-specific tools and general purpose tools?
[[User:Spike|Spike]] 07:08, 17 March 2008 (PDT)

== Newb questions ==

Hello good sirs. Sorry for my bad non-native english. While in total noob in wiki, im relatively for long playd this great games. Great thanks for you for this great site, it really helped me with some ideas, especially with Funding Nation, even dont know how i played it before without it. Now more close to point, i realized what TFTD section here are, say, unperfect, if not somewhat wrong. As i readed somewhere not all play TFTD much, UFO1 instead, so it maybe be the point. Id edit something on it, but im totally dunno how to do it, and my language will have too many mistakes to be proudly presented to people. So id be glade to hear what you may propose for me to do. Again big thanks. Ill wait for answer.

PS Or im searched too badly, or its differ in TFTD (i play only it now) from UFO1, but i cant find here about stunned persons behaviour. Cant find what they awake only if theyr stun is lower then HP's and if only they have awaken person in theyr tile during end of turn. IMHO its important thing to know off, at least for me.

PPS. My friend made great tiny changes to one tiny file, what make FundingNations game way more easy and elegant then described in issue. I can upload it if you need this, tho its for TFTD im sure he can do UFO1 also if its needed. Anyway this game too easy even on FN to play it without it :).

Eh PPPS. Dunno how to properly log on :(.

: Do not worry about the language barrier - sometimes it's harder to understand people who speak English natively! ;) In any case, There'll be other editors who will be able to help fix the article for you if you can get the idea across.

: To get started editing pages, check the Community Portal on the left sidebar. That has links to articles that can help you get started - more or less. One good way to find out how some text is formatted (or anything else you'd like to duplicate) is to edit the page and see how it's done in the source.

: If in doubt, or if you're unsure about editing the article, feel free put your ideas or suggestions in the article's Discussion page.

: Because TFTD and UFO share a lot of the same mechanics, there would be a lot of unnecessary duplication if we were to write up articles for it that are already available in the UFO articles. Therefore we mainly include articles that cover topics that are unique to TFTD, like the weapons, door opening, aliens, etc. General mechanics like how damage works or how experience is earned is identical to UFO's, so there's no need to duplicate them. What sections do you think need improving or what sections do we need to add? The more input the better.

: Regarding consciousness, have you checked the [[Unconscious]] article? I think we might need to redo that article bit and perhaps add a few illustrations. One note about the difference between UFO and TFTD with the visual appearance of a unit recovered with a medikit needs to go in there too if it hasn't already. Oh well. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 22:54, 22 May 2008 (PDT)

: PS, to sign your messages in the discussion pages, put four tilde's <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> anywhere you want to insert your name and the timestamp.

== same questions ==

Thank you for answer. I been somwhat incorrect in my english. I didnt mean what TFTD pages are bad or what they lose reduntand UFO1 information. All they lack are only slightly wrongly described alien's dangers levels (one of most dangerous creatures cant be low treat, and least dangerous one medium) and lack of mission types what only TFTD have. Also i readed "Unconscious@ article few times, stiil cant find only how to use medkit and no word about what generally need for stunned person to rise. From that follow advices to grenade stunned chryssalids and so on.

PS. Oh, yes, and whats wrong with door openings?
[[User:Derrida|Derrida]] 08:59, 23 May 2008 (PDT)

: A unit falls unconscious when the stun bar is equal or greater than the unit's remaining health points. If it's under that, the unit will be awake.

: To wake a soldier up, you have to reduce the stun level by either waiting for the stun to wear off, 1 point per turn, or use stimulants on a medikit. Looks like the TFTD section doesn't have its own medikit page, but UFO's [[Medi-Kit]] section explains how to use it, as they are identical. Basically, if the unit is unconscious, the medic must stand on top of the unconscious unit and use stimulants (the second choice) until the unconscious soldier wakes up. When the unconscious unit wakes up, they'll appear to the north of the medic.

: TFTD's stun weapons are much more powerful than in TFTD, so you often have to use a lot of stimulants to wake a person up.

: TFTD's unique because it allows you to open doors by right clicking them - and it's a free action so you won't spend any TUs to do it. UFO cannot do this (except the Playstation version).

: As for the threat levels of the aliens - I agree, some should be reclassified. Personally I'd move the Gill-Men and Calcinite up to medium threat - all the current medium level threats look just about right though. What are your suggestions?

: Hang on, why are there so many references to vibroblades in the overview article? That can't be right. I'll have to update that later on. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 15:05, 23 May 2008 (PDT)

Nonono. I mean what if unit's stun damage falled below it's HP, and no one stand in tile it lying, it will never rise. Medkits not the point. No stunned aliens or soldiers will rise if no one will end turn on it, or take it to inventory/hand. I tried to say this. Maybe it been different in UFO1 (as with doors, i thought what doors always open by right click, and in UFO1 too (btw cant find about door opening anywere in wiki)), but in TFTD it means what you dont have to bother with stunned tentaculats etc to rise after stun if you do not stand on it, or try to move it in backpack/hand. Same with soldiers, you can click zillion turns, but they will never rise until someone stand on it. Without this game must be horrible with all this undying lobsters awake afer you pass them.
With danger level id suggest this: Harmless: hallucinoid; deep one; Low: gillmen; aquatoid; Meduim: zombie; calcinite; bio-drone; lobsterman; xarquid; high: tasoth; triscene; What really matters: tentaculat. In line of growing dangerness. [[User:Derrida|Derrida]] 16:30, 23 May 2008 (PDT)

== Regarding image file formats ==

I'd really like to add a note somewhere obvious about using GIFs for screenshots in the wiki, rather than JPGs. For 256-color images like X-COM uses, GIFs are no larger than JPGs and generally look much better. For example, see the nasty compression artifacts on the terrain maps in the [[Terror ship|Terror Ship]] article. PNGs might work just as well, I'm not sure, but we should really avoid JPGs.

Where would be the best place to mention this? I'm thinking near the top of the main page for visibility, but that might be more clutter than people want. [[User:Phasma Felis|Phasma Felis]] 23:59, 11 June 2008 (PDT)

:It's been dealt with [[User_talk:Zombie#Image_Types|here]] that PNG is the preferred file format of the wiki; however, where to note this...I honestly don't know. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 00:37, 12 June 2008 (PDT)

:: PNG's reduced to 256 or less colours can be quite the space saver for X-Com screenshots. You can go the extra step and run them through PNG compression programs and somesuch - but they're pretty good as-is. Jpgs should be reserved for images with a broader range of colours. One place the note could go is in [[Guidelines to writing articles]]. In fact, that section could do with a few extra additions in any case to expand is to that it's not just covering the composition of the language of the articles, but to cover the creation of the articles. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 03:04, 12 June 2008 (PDT)

== Hosting move. ==

Hi guys. It appears I'm still hosting the UFOpaedia - I did discuss moving it to StrategyCore with both Zombie and Pete a while ago and I think I gave them copies of what would be required.

Anyway, I'm moving hosting servers so the UFOpaedia is going to move too. I'm aiming to carry out the transfer on Sunday September 28th at about 8pm GMT+1. Any changes made between this time and the time that the transfer completes may be lost, but hopefully not. Just thought I'd give you guys a bit of notice.

I should point out that I still have no objection to hosting the UFOpaedia on my servers, it's a great project and you guys have done a bang-up job with it, it's far surpassed my original intentions :) However, if StrategyCore want to take over hosting to remove the potential "failure point" (i.e. me) then that's fine and we can give it another shot?

GazChap, 25th September 2008 12:50 GMT+1

:Thanks for the heads-up Gaz-Chap! Sure, StrategyCore is still willing to host the UFOpaedia. Sorry things didn't quite work out the last time we talked. Pete needs to be constantly reminded to do things as he's easily distracted. I'll try and start a fire under his bum to get the ball rolling again. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 07:14, 25 September 2008 (PDT)

::Hosting has now been moved to StrategyCore. Cheers to Pete and Zombie for sorting it out. GazChap, 11:28, 1 October 2008 (GMT+1)

::: There may be a slight problem with caching of the temporary holding page ("coming back soon". On some browsers I'm using (not all), the temporary page is still up and you can't see the UFOPaedia site. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 17:48, 1 October 2008 (CDT)

::The new website address is quite likely still propagating out through DNS, since we moved hosts. So that's just the nature of the internet and should be gone in a day or two. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 19:06, 1 October 2008 (CDT)

:Most browsers seem to allow a full page refresh via Ctrl + F5. There's also an option re caching under the Misc section of your Preferances - I had to disable it ages ago 'cause it was always failing to show me page changes... - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 21:54, 1 October 2008 (CDT)

Sorry about the downtime everyone. The bandwidth limit wasn't set high enough after the recent change in hosting and basically didn't allow access. I contacted Pete and he fixed the issue. Good to catch these issues earlier rather than later. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 15:11, 15 October 2008 (CDT)

=== 14 March 2009 ===

Zombie mentioned that Pete may be moving the server this weekend. I'm getting lots of errors and more or less unable to make updates to the site. Probably this is to do with the server move. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:14, 14 March 2009 (EDT)

:Apparently the move has been complete most of the day. So if you guys continue to have problems, please contact me and I'll relay it over to Pete. I'm not experiencing any problems though. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 21:34, 14 March 2009 (EDT)

== 500 Internal error ==

This seems to occur whenever I edit a subsection on a page, and I click the edit button on the TOP of the page instead of the edit button next to the subsection title. So, if you wanna avoid this error, try using the button which only edits that subsection... [[User:Jasonred|Jasonred]] 05:40, 21 March 2009 (EDT)

:Already been tried. Doesn't work any better. UFOpaedia admin is on it, I've been told. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 12:05, 21 March 2009 (EDT)

:: Pete's finished his latest round of changes. Give it another go. - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 22:12, 21 March 2009 (EDT)

== Proposed top level links ==

I've written some pages which I'd like to be proposed be linked to the main page, unless anyone can suggest where to put them (careful now!).

I'd like to link [[Fictional Equivalents]] to the main page.

I'd like to link [[Wish List (TFTD)]] to the TFTD page. It would also be good to start a [[Known Bugs (TFTD)]] page, for TFTD-specific bugs.

However as some tricky template work is involved, I'd rather not make these links myself for fear of screwing up the main page(s). Thoughts? [[User:Spike|Spike]] 11:20, 14 November 2008 (CST)

: Feel free to edit the templates - as long as the tables look okay when you preview them, they shouldn't break the page. The templates are standard pages but with a fancy prefix to their file name to categorize them as templates. This was needed so that any updates to them would show up on the main page right away without forcing the viewers to force-refresh the page. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 12:46, 14 November 2008 (CST)

::It should be noted that the [[TRTBAG]] more or less covers the "Known Bugs for TFTD" segment. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 16:08, 14 November 2008 (CST)

:Well it covers the Research Tree bugs but not any of the other TFTD-specific bugs as far as I can see. Still that's a good starting point, thanks AQ! And thanks Zombie for adding the links. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 17:34, 14 November 2008 (CST)

::Maybe TRTBAG should just BECOME the "Known Bugs(TFTD)" page. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 17:36, 14 November 2008 (CST)

:Because TRTBAG is such an excellent self contained guide, and well written, and quite long, I think it should be separate. I will link to it under the Known Bugs (TFTD) page. I suggest the main page link to TRTBAG be remained "''Research'' Bug Avoidance Guide". Probably the TFTD Alien Glitches page can be gotten rid of. It only mentions one bug, which is not a bug at all. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 06:16, 15 November 2008 (CST)

==Terminology==

===X-COM/XCOM/XCom/Etc.===

I remember reading about this discussion before and if something concrete comes out I think it should be added to the [[Guidelines to writing articles]].
Do we have set a proper spelling to refer to the organization? IIRC the game uses X-COM/XCOM/X-Com/etc. Should we set a standard for the Wiki? [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 07:52, 21 November 2008 (CST)
:It's a good idea to agree on a single standard spelling for the Wiki, if only to keep links consistent and prdictable. But it's a shame if there is no clear canonical spelling though. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:28, 21 November 2008 (CST)
::From what I recall there isn't a standard followed on UFO Defense, where you have X-COM/XCOM/XCom/etc. Apocalypse might be more consistent and I have no idea for the other games. I try to use X-COM and I've done some edits to follow this standard spelling but I'd like to read more opinions [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 17:43, 22 November 2008 (CST)
:I've had a check through the in-game strings and most if not all of them say "Xcom", which is my least favourite spelling. :( I think X-COM has the best flavour. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:41, 22 November 2008 (CST)
If any of you folks here have been following what I've been up to lately at the StrategyCore forums, you'll see I have been amassing a collection of most of the game versions in the series. Checking my [http://www.strategycore.co.uk/xcom/pg/ufogameversions UFO Game Versions] site page, you'll see that the original European release used XCom while the budget releases used X-Com. Other than that, those spellings quickly fell by the wayside as MicroProse decided on X-COM which quickly gained approval and remained the standard spelling throughout the series. (You can't really go by in-game text as those were not checked for consistency). Anyhow, I'd opt for the same route MicroProse took: <b>X-COM</b>. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:33, 22 November 2008 (CST)

===Capitalization guidelines/rules for the wiki===

Another thing that crossed my mind are guidelines/rules tossed in to prevent overcapitalization.

Specific ingame terms/names should be always capitalized:
*Weapons (Boomeroid, Elerium, Entropy Launcher
*Alien Races (Sectoid, Lobsterman, Skeletoid, etc.)
*Organizations (MarSec, General Dynamics, Council of Funding Nations)
*X-COM Crafts (Skyranger, Manta, Dimension Probe)

Generic ingame terms/names (that already exist in English) should be capitalized the first time they are mentioned on a wiki entry. Some examples:
*Weapons (Plasma Rifle, Torpedo Launcher, Vortex Mine, etc.)
*UFO types (Large Scout, Dreadnaught, Alien Mothership, etc.)
*Soldier Attributes/Agent Stats (Stamina, Psi-defense, etc.)
*Base Facilities

Wiki terms should be capitalized the first time they are mentioned on a wiki entry:
*Tactics
*Economics
*Game Mechanics
*Etc.

A few other rules to prevent overcapitalization and make a smooth reading:
*After the 1st mention, generic ingame terms are not required to be capitalized. As an example, after the first mention of a Laser Pistol, any additional mention(s) to them can simply use the term pistol(s).
*When refering to similar names/terms, it is advisable to capitalize both when they are mentioned. Eg. "Auto Cannon, unlike Heavy Cannon, allows for automatic fire" "Large Scouts are more dangerous than Medium Scouts".
*The same applies to wiki terms.

[[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 16:54, 23 November 2008 (CST)

== Humor and Flavour Text ==

GEH!!! This whole issue is taking on a life of it's own. On one hand, yes, I can see the allure of ufopedia being a serious informative site. On the other hand, there's the "fun" factor... When you get right down to it, Xcom is actually a rather simplistic game in terms of storyline, and storyline interactivity, so we REALLY have to make up our own, otherwise the game degenerates into "capture this technology, research research, shoot shoot. MC = win game". The ingame UFOpedia is great, but it's limited to several paragraphs to describe an entire race of creatures, and 2-3 lines to describe the horror of Blaster Bombs and such. ... I vote that this online UFOpedia becomes everything that the ufopedia in-game was missing... let's have something that ENTERTAINS as well as giving good accurate information!

I'll wait for the votes to come in before touching anything else. I agree with you guys, the Lobstermen and other aquatic aliens getting eaten is something that is VERY much a part of the X-com community's culture... it should go into the UFOpedia. [[User:Jasonred|Jasonred]] 04:00, 13 March 2009 (CDT)

: I've nothing against humour. All for it. In fact I'd very much like to see more of that so that definitely gets my vote. A few light hearted moments in between all the seriousness does wonders. Perhaps not when you're getting into the particulars, but the descriptions or opening paragraphs that don't get into deep detail could be livened up a little. In moderation, of course!

: However, the hard part is deciding on the line between being humorous within the confines of what's available (yes, funny discussions amongst the troops about eating lobstermen after battle instead of selling it could count towards that), and then there's making stuff up. Apologies to Morken for borrowing an example from his on-going graphic novel: explaining the alien's general idiocy/sportsmanship through their strong belief in the tenets of Amgoth. Highly amusing, but not part of the story. Granted, I don't think we've got anything like that on the wiki, but you never know.

: In any case, a good mental exercise for the writers. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 05:14, 13 March 2009 (CDT)

My two cents then: I like the humour, anecdotes, flavour and fan fiction but I think the main purpose of UFOPaedia is informational and that should not be compromised. I like the little touches of humour, and I've been known to attempt them myself. But humour and anecdotes should be kept brief and supplementary - e.g. one-liners and wry observations at the end of a section. Non-canonical flavour text and fan fiction (especially) should be kept clearly separate and distinguishable. Someone reading the site with no prior knowledge of XCOM should be able to tell right away what is factual vs what is humour or speculation/imagination. Not quite sure how to do that - maybe by using sidebars, the Humour category... ok ran out of ideas there already. Maybe we need an "official" font for reproducing canonical, in-game flavour text, so it stands out. Not sure.

Also, humour, anecdote and flavour are much more subjective than fact. What one person thinks is funny, others may not. So non-factual content may just get edited out unless a lot of people agree that it's funny/cool/interesting etc - in fact that's probably already happening. Maybe a good idea is to make the jokes on the Talk pages, and if they are found to be universally funny, move them on to the main articles later - pretty much the same as factual content in fact? [[User:Spike|Spike]] 05:19, 13 March 2009 (CDT)

: I'm certain that we would all agree that the wiki is first and foremost an informative site. We needn't go so far as to point out to the readers what is or isn't. That would be overdoing it. A dash of humour anywhere we can get away with it without compromising the message, facts or turn it into fan fiction is really all that's required and can be more effective. Like spices, the right amount can add to the flavour of a dish. Too much and it just ruins it.

:Now a little creative writing to make the articles (with or without the humour) more captivating to the reader and less like text-books will certainly go a long way. But then again, I believe that we've always attempted to do this. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 06:04, 13 March 2009 (CDT)

:: I agree with NKF's point here regarding humor. But, concerning fanfic, to make up and add things that aren't on the original UFOPaedias or the History distributed with Interceptor is to take too much liberty with the original material (in regards with fan fiction). Just because it gets discussed in the forums at strategycore or xcomufo or that it is mentioned in someone's fanfic doesn't mean that it should be taken as a fact, regardless of the argument that the game story belongs to its fans/players. The game belongs to all of them and quite frankly we are quite a minority (although a very loyal one) regarding that. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 21:58, 2 April 2009 (EDT)

==XML dumps available?==
Hello guys! Kudos for creating this amazing wiki!

I have some ideas and I'd like to test them on an XML dump of ufopaedia, since it's a small but interesting wiki. Do you offer the dumps for download somewhere (like wikipedia does)? That would be absolutely fantastic. :) [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 10:23, 2 May 2009 (EDT)

:Do you mean [[Special:Export]]? --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:31, 2 May 2009 (EDT)

::I'm not sure if that export page does the job. It seems that it only allows downloading a list of articles I have to type in. What I want is ALL articles of Ufopaedia in XML, be it one file per article or one file for all articles(which I would prefer, since that is what Wikipedia provides and I'd like my software to work with all wikis). You can see what Wikipedia offers here [[http://download.wikimedia.org/]] and here [[http://download.wikimedia.org/enwiki/20090501/]]. Thanks! [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 23:19, 2 May 2009 (EDT)
::Never mind, I just entered all the relevant categories into the export page and got the XML file I was looking for (Downloading only the files relevant to playing X-COM 1 results in 1.5MB of XML). Thanks! [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 11:21, 4 May 2009 (EDT)

More problems! Since "Special:Export" seems to only allow categories it is impossible to download articles that have no category (e.g. "civilian"). I see two ways how you could fix this: Add an option "Include all uncategorized articles to export" to the export page or put every article in categories. Or run a script that puts every article without category in a "Other" category. [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 07:26, 10 May 2009 (EDT)

Battleship

2009-05-04T15:24:24Z

RedNifre: /* Statistics */ I assume speed is meant to be km/h, not "km"

==General Information==
The battleship is the largest and most powerful [[UFOs|alien craft]]. It is normally the primary alien mission craft, equipped with powerful weapons and numerous crew members.

==Statistics==
<table {{StdCenterTable}}>
<tr {{StdDescTable_Heading}}><th align="left">Statistic</th>
<th>Value</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Size</td><td>Very Large</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Max Speed(km/h)</td><td>5,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Weapon Power</td><td>148</tr>
<tr><td align="left">Weapon Range(km)</td><td>65</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Weapon Range(range units)</td><td>520</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Damage Capacity</td><td>3,200</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">UFO Downed points</td><td>700</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">UFO Destroyed points</td><td>1,400</td></tr>
</table><br />

==Alien Missions==
Battleships are normally associated with retaliation, base construction and Infiltration missions, however, unlike Terran Battleships the alien battleship can fulfill a very diverse set of mission profiles. Unlike [[Supply ship|Supply Ships]], [[Terror ship|Terror Ships]], [[Harvester]]s, or [[Abductor]]s, a Battleship's presence does not lend itself to one or two specific [[Alien Missions|alien missions]]. For an [[X-COM]] Commander tracking a Battleship using radar, he or she must observe the Battleship's movement patterns in order to guess its mission. The Commander must then take appropriate measures to deal with the battleship. He or she may even choose to ignore the Battleship, as their size and firepower require an extensive commitment of personnel and equipment that may not justify the attack. Though not often, Battleships can occasionally accomplish nothing, with no penalty aside from a slightly raised [[UFO Activity]] graph. (''See: Alien Retaliation'')

Battleships can be involved in the following missions:

===Alien Base===
The construction of [[Alien Base Assault|alien bases]] are marked by heavy UFO activity in rural areas. In addition to the scouts and Supply Ships sent by the aliens to survey the potential base site, a Battleship is sent to inaugurate the base as soon as the construction is completed. To be precise, the moment the battleship appears in orbit means that the base is fully operational.
So, if a Very Large UFO appears as part of a large force of Small and Large UFOs, then it is likely to be on an Alien Base mission, and is likely to make a landing. It is possible to capture the Battleship's commander and 4 power plants intact at this time. It is much easier to find the commander on the bridge of a Battleship than deep inside the maze of an Alien Base.

===Alien Infiltration===
Two Battleships are always the primary component in the final phase of an infiltration. The Battleships are part of a large force of five ships sent, much like in Alien Base missions. However, ships involved in an Alien Infiltration mission will instead land in urban locations. Battleships contain the alien "diplomats" who will persuade (with 100% success rate, best door to door salesman ever!) one of Earth's countries to cease funding X-COM, and form a [[pact]] with the aliens. The alien "diplomats" leave the ship immediately upon entering the Earth's atmosphere, presumably through teleportation or alien parachutes, however, and continue their goal of signing a pact with one of Earth's countries regardless of what happens to their base ship. This means that a ground assault on the UFO will not prevent the aliens from accomplishing their mission. In addition, this alien diplomat will then convince the nation he has just converted to build an alien base for their new allies, which will be completed in a matter of hours.

In effect, as soon as you see the Battleships appear (with Hyperwave Decoder informing you that it is) performing Alien Infiltration, you have lost 1 funding country, and the an alien base has just appeared in or next to that country.

Battleships are most often seen on this type of mission. When two Battleships a force of three smaller craft are in the same region (sometimes coined the Mass Infiltration Fleet), then it is very likely a mass Infiltration mission.

===Alien Retaliation===
Alien Retaliation missions have two main components: Search, and Destroy. The Battleship quite often fulfills the "destroy" component for obvious reasons - it's the troop carrier. The heavy firepower of a Battleship is required to breach any barricaded underground [[Hangar]]s and [[Access Lift]]s, and they contain the troops, weapons, and terror units for the subsequent assault on any [[Base Defense|X-COM Base]] itself.

There are two theories on what occurs with the Battleship itself.
1st theory: After unloading its troops, a Battleship on a retaliatory mission will return to space instantly, disappearing from our detection range instantaneously. Perhaps is engages some form of FTL drive.
2nd Theory: Based on how the Battleship comes from space, enters Earth's atmosphere at Very High altitude, very rapidly switches to Very Low altitude, does not decelerate from it's maximum speed at any point, and disappears from radar existance as soon as it makes contact with the Xcom Base... it seems highly possible that the aliens use a kamikaze ramming attack in order to create a direct insertion of troops into the Xcom Base, thus explaining why your forces perform an interior assault defence, instead of exterior. This also explains why your base defences only have time for 1 volley, unless you use the Grav Shield to repel the battleship.
In any case, is thus impossible to assault the Battleship after the base has been defended.

Any Battleship that is going to attack your base will head on a direct path for the base at near-maximum speed. It is thus impossible to shoot down the Battleship except with the Avenger, or with base defenses. Even then, the chances of shooting down a battleship with an Avenger from the target base is very minimal. If a Very Large craft is detected on a direct course for one of your bases, then start [[Base Defense|base defense]] preparations immediately.

If [[Craft|X-COM craft]] are successful at downing all alien scout craft on a retaliatory operation, then the Battleship itself must search for your base. Despite the Battleship's formidable strength, one thing it does seem to lack is scanning and sensing equipment. It is rare that a Battleship searching for your base will ever find it, so these Battleships can be safely ignored.

An easy way to tell whether the battleship found your base is it's altitude. It always starts Very High, but if it almost immediately shifts to Very Low, your base has been found and it is going to head straight for your base and land at top speed. If it remains Very High, then it is merely searching.

Battleship movement on an Alien Retaliation mission is characterized by either a fast, direct course for one of your bases, or a repeated "weaving" pattern around where many UFOs have been downed recently. Often, a battleship which has not detected your base will make a fast direct course towards your base, but will then begin it's weaving pattern. They will only land to attack your base. A Battleship searching for your base will soon give up and head for space.

===Alien Harvest===
It seems that if X-COM forces are successful in downing or assaulting many [[Harvester]]s, then the aliens will send their glorious Battleships to do the dirty work in the hopes that X-COM does not have the resources to attack them. Or maybe they hope you just won't want to waste the effort

Battleships on harvest missions will fly and land in rural areas. Sometimes they work in pairs.

Of all the missions available, Harvest missions only generate activity points and can be safely ignored if you do not have the manpower or resources to tackle the Battleship.

===Alien Abduction===
The Battleship will sometimes participate in Alien Abduction missions. Like its participation in Harvest missions, this occurs only when X-Com has already been successful in preventing lesser craft from doing the job. The actual effects are minimal and can be easily compensated by having generated good area activity points for the month.

== Intercepting Battleships ==
===Speed===
Despite being the largest class of ships, alien Battleships have four [[Elerium-115]] powered [[UFO Power Source|power sources]], and as such can travel through Earth's atmosphere at a surprisingly high speed - they have been known to travel at over five thousand knots during atmospheric entry and exit. Because of this, it is very difficult for standard [[Craft|X-COM craft]] to intercept a Battleship during these phases of its flight. X-COM Commanders must usually wait for the Battleship to slow down as they approach their mission zone in order to intercept it.

===Weapon===

When X-COM forces have engaged a Battleship, the commander and pilots must be extra cautious due to the powerful nature of the battleship's weapon. The battleship's weapon has a range of sixty-five kilometres - equal to the Fusion Ball Launcher, which mean it has a firing range greater than every other weapon. Battleships have a damage range of 74-148 damage per hit. The Battleship will just barely fire 3 times before X-COM craft can get within Plasma Beam range to return fire.

To get a rough idea of how long the various aircraft can survive against direct hits from the Battleship weapon, refer to the following table.

<table {{StdCenterTable}}>
<tr {{StdDescTable_Heading}}><th align="left">Ship(health)</th><th>Hits to destroy</th>
<tr><td align="left">[[Interceptor]] (100)</td><td>1 ~ 2</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">[[Skyranger]] (150)</td><td>2 ~ 3</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">[[Firestorm]] (500)</td><td>3 ~ 6</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">[[Lightning]] (800)</td><td>5 ~ 10</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">[[Avenger]] (1200)</td><td>8 ~ 16</td></tr>
</table>

From here we can see that the lighter class Terran [[Interceptor]]s must rely on luck to survive the initial barrage from the UFO before they can get within [[Plasma Beam]] range. This means they have the great risk of destruction when sent against a battleship.

Advanced ships are therefore recommended due to their greater hit point allotments, allowing them to withstand more attacks. Multiple aircraft will always improve the odds of survival no matter the aircraft setup.

===Armour===
A Battleship is well armoured (3200 to be destroyed, 1600 to crash it). Native terran technology - [[Cannon]], [[Stingray]]s, and [[Avalanche]]s - have little chance of downing a battleship quickly unless used in high quantity. Anything less than an [[Avenger]] with single or twin [[Plasma Beam]]s is not discouraged as even an Avenger will sustain moderate damage when intercepting a Battleship by itself. [[Fusion Ball Launcher]]s may be effective, but only when intercepting with multiple craft or used in combination with a Plasma Beam.

If for what ever mad reason you suddenly decide to use cannons against the Battleship, four fully armed cannons are the absolute minimum, with some allowances given for multiple misses. The four cannons spread across two or more Avengers are required for any chance of success.

===Geoscape Engagement: Summary ===

The Battleship is the fastest, strongest and most durable UFO in the alien fleet. Only the best available ships armed with powerful long ranged weapons should be used to engage it in air to air combat.

Even with the best preparations, any ship can sustain heavy damage from a Battleship, resulting in long repair time. Engaging with multiple aircraft improves the efficiency of the interception and reduces overall damage received while allowing you to shoot down the Battleship sooner.

As a counterpoint to attacking a Battleship, because their appearance is often merely an obligatory gesture and is independent on the success rate of an Alien Base or Infiltration mission, there is no immediate benefit to shooting down a battleship to directly influence the effect of the mission. It may therefore be preferable to do an ordinary ground assault on a Battleship that has landed rather than attack it in the air.

Shooting down the Battleship also causes you to lose some of the power units, and consequently the elerium pods that come with them. Few aliens will be lost as between 0 to 1 engineer will be in any one of the Battleship's four struts. It must be noted however that Engineers on Battleships are armed with Blaster Bombs, making each engineer killed rather significant. Furthermore, these struts are considered fairly good UFO entry points, and a blown up power source will usually result in busted walls in the strut.

The primary advantage of shooting down a Battleship is therefore to forcibly ground it for a few hours, allowing you to attack it when you are ready.

== Assaulting/Recovering Battleships ==
===Mission Spoils===

Assaulting a landed or downed Battleship with ground forces is a dangerous operation, and the rewards from a successful raid are equally proportionate to the difficulty.

A Battleship has four [[UFO Power Source|power sources]], and two hundred units of [[Elerium-115]]. In addition, these Power Sources are far away from each other, which let's them vastly better survival rates compared to the Power Unit clusters found in Terror Ship. In short, the Battleship has the highest probability of any shot down UFO to have at least 1 surviving Power Source.

Battleships carry many [[Alien Entertainment]] and [[UFO Navigation]] units, and is constructed of vast quantities of [[Alien Alloys]].

Battleships are manned by a large crew comprising of every possible rank and alien combination in addition to their terror unit counterpart(s). From soldiers to the commanders X-COM needs to capture to end the war. Because the crew size is large, one can often find large amounts of alien [[Weapons|weapons]] and ammo. The Battleship is the *ONLY* UFO where it is possible to find and recover the Blaster Launcher and Blaster Launcher Bombs.

===Ground Threats===
The Battleship carries a large crew complement. These are often equipped with [[Heavy Plasma]]s and [[Alien Grenade]]s, which pose a large threat. In addition to the regular alien species, their associated [[Terror Units]] accompany them on Battleships. Last but not least, high ranking officers on a Battleship are armed with the dreaded [[Blaster Launcher]]. Squad leaders must be careful in their deployment of personnel on the battlefield.

===Entry===

Heavy Weapons Platforms can enter the central lift and navigate much of the second floor, however the lift on the third floor is closed off via small doorways. HWPs are very useful for opening the main doors on the bottom level and allowing soldiers to fire at any aliens inside, or to send a blaster bomb up into the interior of the UFO.

Forced entry using a Blaster Bomb is often used, as it also reduces the risk of succumbing to an alien ambush on the second or third floors. The four corner legs can be one entry point, although elerium may be damaged from such an entry. If [[Flying Suit]]s are available, then an entry from the top level is also an effective tactic that also minimizes the risk of damaging elerium. Entering via the top floor also gives a good chance of surprising and capturing alien officers. A pincer movement, with two or more fire teams working from multiple entry points, is a very effective tactic while storming a Battleship.

==Battleship Layout==

The Battleship consists of three layers. The ground level, mid section and the top level.

See [[#Terrain Maps|Terrain Maps and Floorpans]] for visuals of the various layers.

===Level 0: Ground Level===

The ground level has four "legs" one on each corner and a central leg that acts as the primary carriage way for the ship. lift shaft. The corner legs cannot be entered from the outside, as they house the power sources. The center leg or lift has two doors that give access to a wide lift.

Due to the compass orientation that the battleship always lands, the doors always open towards the south and west, the other directions are effectively blind. The doors are large enough to allow passage of large terror units and [[Heavy Weapons Platforms]] into the UFO. This pair of doors is the only formal access point in or out of the Battleship, therefore a siege is very effective here.

Be warned that any groups of soldiers sieging the the Battleship will be vulnerable to hostile blaster bombs, so use the tactic with discretion and consider your troop spacing with care. Alien Engineers have been known to patrol the fields with their trusty blaster launchers, and most aliens will carry alien grenades.

=== Level 1: Middle Level ===

The second level has four major hallways (or two, if you look at it that way). Each leads to a small lift that accesses the four outer pods holding the Power Sources. There are three main rooms, two of which seem to be used for storage. One is filled with the red spheres and cylinders on blue support legs that we have not yet identified. The fourth room, constructed heavily out of alien entertainment walls, is best thought of as the recreation deck.

Note that there is a small access grav-lift in the north-western portion of this floor, which can allow you to enter the upper level indirectly.

=== Level 2: Top Level ===

Unlike the level below it, the lift on this level is surrounded by strong walls. This level of the UFO has lots of smaller rooms and tight corridors, making it very dangerous. There are two major rooms which appear to be the navigation room, and bridge. Both rooms have the distinctive blue chairs, yet only one has any navigation modules. The two rooms are on opposite ends of the ship. The third level is also where X-COM forces are most likely to find any Alien Navigators or Alien Leaders, or possibly even the commander on non-Muton Battleships.

=== Level 3: Roof ===
The roof is a flat surface and nothing much else. It is of no threat to anyone. Suitable entrances into the level underneath it can be made with the aid of Blaster Bombs.

As with any UFO, soldiers wearing flying suits can also land on the roof and provide support for troops that are storming the UFO from the ground entrance by operating a motion scanner.

==Recoverable Components==
<table {{StdCenterTable}}>
<tr {{StdDescTable_Heading}}><th align="left">Item</th>
<th>Sell Price</th>
<th>Quantity</th>
<th>Value</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">UFO Power Source</td><td>$250,000</td><td>4</td><td>$1,000,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">UFO Navigation</td><td>$80,000</td><td>4</td><td>$320,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Alien Food</td><td>$5,000</td><td>0</td><td>$0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Alien Surgery</td><td>$38,000</td><td>0</td><td>$0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Alien Entertainment</td><td>$20,000</td><td>24</td><td>$480,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Examination Room</td><td>$9,000</td><td>0</td><td>$0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Alien Alloys</td><td>$6,500</td><td>231</td><td>$1,501,500</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Elerium-115</td><td>$5,000</td><td>200</td><td>$1,000,000</td></tr>
<tr><th colspan="3">Totals</th><td>$4,301,500</td></tr>
</table><br />
Also see [[UFO Recovery Values#Battleship|UFO Recovery Values]].

==Alien Deployment==
<table width="100%" cellpadding="5"><tr>
<td><table {{StdCenterTable}}>
<caption><b>Sectoids/Floaters</b></caption>
<tr {{StdDescTable_Heading}}><th align="left">Rank</th>
<th>Beg./Exp.</th>
<th>Vet./Gen.</th>
<th>Super.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Soldiers</td><td>4-8</td><td>6-10</td><td>8-12</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Navigators</td><td>1</td><td>1*</td><td>2</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Medics</td><td>1</td><td>1*</td><td>2</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Engineers</td><td>1</td><td>1*</td><td>2</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Leaders</td><td>1</td><td>2</td><td>3</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Commanders</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>1</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Terrorists</td><td>0-2</td><td>2-4</td><td>4-6</td></tr>
<tr><th>Totals</th><td>9-15</td><td>14-20</td><td>22-28</td></tr>
</table></td>
<td><table {{StdCenterTable}}>
<caption><b>Snakemen</b></caption>
<tr {{StdDescTable_Heading}}><th align="left">Rank</th>
<th>Beg./Exp.</th>
<th>Vet./Gen.</th>
<th>Super.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Soldiers</td><td>5-9</td><td>7-11*</td><td>10-14</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Navigators</td><td>1</td><td>1*</td><td>2</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Medics</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Engineers</td><td>1</td><td>1*</td><td>2</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Leaders</td><td>1</td><td>2</td><td>3</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Commanders</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>1</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Terrorists</td><td>0-2</td><td>2-4</td><td>4-6</td></tr>
<tr><th>Totals</th><td>9-15</td><td>14-20</td><td>22-28</td></tr>
</table></td>
<td><table {{StdCenterTable}}>
<caption><b>Mutons</b></caption>
<tr {{StdDescTable_Heading}}><th align="left">Rank</th>
<th>Beg./Exp.</th>
<th>Vet./Gen.</th>
<th>Super.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Soldiers</td><td>7-11</td><td>10-14*</td><td>14-18</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Navigators</td><td>1</td><td>1*</td><td>2</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Medics</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Engineers</td><td>1</td><td>1*</td><td>2</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Leaders</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Commanders</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Terrorists</td><td>0-2</td><td>2-4</td><td>4-6</td></tr>
<tr><th>Totals</th><td>9-15</td><td>14-20</td><td>22-28</td></tr>
</table></td>
<td><table {{StdCenterTable}}>
<caption><b>Ethereals</b></caption>
<tr {{StdDescTable_Heading}}><th align="left">Rank</th>
<th>Beg./Exp.</th>
<th>Vet./Gen.</th>
<th>Super.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Soldiers</td><td>4-8</td><td>6-10</td><td>8-12</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Navigators</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Medics</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Engineers</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Leaders</td><td>4</td><td>5*</td><td>9</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Commanders</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>1</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Terrorists</td><td>0-2</td><td>2-4</td><td>4-6</td></tr>
<tr><th>Totals</th><td>9-15</td><td>14-20</td><td>22-28</td></tr>
</table></td></tr></table>
<nowiki>*</nowiki> Needs testing to determine actual number.

==Terrain Maps==
<gallery>
Image:UFO_160MAP-L1.JPG|Level 0
Image:UFO_160MAP-L2.JPG|Level 1
Image:UFO_160MAP-L3.JPG|Level 2
Image:UFO_160MAP.JPG|Level 3
</gallery>

==Floor Plans==

<gallery>
Image:Battleship_0.gif|Level 0
Image:Battleship_1.gif|Level 1
Image:Battleship_2.gif|Level 2
</gallery>

==TFTD Note==
[[TFTD]] also has "Battleship" as a craft title. However its relegated to the place of TFTD's version of the [[Terror Ship]]. TFTD's direct Battleship parallel is the[[Dreadnought]].

==See Also==
{{UFO Navbar}}
[[Category: UFO (UFO Defense)]]
[[Category: Tactics]]

Talk:Main Page

2009-05-04T15:21:04Z

RedNifre:

__TOC__
----

== Site TODOS ==
A general dump of to-dos or maybe not-do's. Add any where appropriate:

* Template navigation toolbars for subsections. (Some tests have started)
* Strategy by terrain notes?
* Mention of bug where unit gets stuck in the corner of the map
* Mention of bug where you reload a battlescape mission only to be on an invalid level and how to recover from it (use OHMap, go back down to legal level, click until you find the map again, save the game). Often happens after editting the game, strangely enough. Is it possible the game stores map camera coordinates as a file checksum or somesuch?

== Discussion/talk page proposed format ==
Ok folks, we all seem to have our own ways of adding comments to a discussion page. The way it stands now, it becomes really difficult to follow a discussion when it is broken apart with different formats. What I suggest is this: when you leave a comment use a horizontal line to separate your post from the one(s) above it. In this manner, everything is left justified and the comments are separated. The reason why I do not support the colon as comment separation is that as the discussion progresses you are going to be adding more and more just to get the indenting correct. It also makes it confusing. Another side effect is that once you have a lot of colons present it pushes the text off the page itself and forces a scroll to the right to view. That isn't good.

I suppose if we really want to use colons as separators, we could alternate the use. If a comment is indented above yours, do nothing. If a comment is not indented, use a colon for your submission. Still, the constant zig-zagging isn't really the best idea either.

My vote is therefore to stick with the horizontal line (four dashes). If the discussion veers way off course, or if you have a couple questions/comments, break it apart into different headings. And always sign your post too as that makes it easier to follow.

Discuss.--[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:46, 9 March 2007 (PST)

Works for me, Zombie. Another problem with indentation is that one isn't necessarily addressing only the previous comment, but it could be about the previous one, and tying together things that are 4, 6, ''and'' 12 entries back. Colons are fine for quick rejoinders, but not as a requirement. A potential alternative is to leave two blank lines, as I just did after your sig. This is a fairly clear delineator for folks scanning quickly. However, the horizontal separator is more clear, in general. So I guess I'd vote for the hor-sep for all except quick comments thrown in, which can use colons. And anything that's a new topic or big break should get a new topic, using = signs. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 21:10, 9 March 2007 (PST)

----

I've reformatted [[Talk:Exploits#Extra_Ammo_Exploit]] to demonstrate how the indentation style ''can'' work, if done consistently. I think it's somewhat better than the line-separator style for very long discussions, making the structure a little clearer. However, if it's sometimes-used and sometimes-not things get messy, as you've noticed.

I'll codify the rules right here (surprisingly, they're not well-codified on Wikipedia itself, despite the fact that it's used quite consistently throughout the site):

*Add an indent for each reply
*Reuse your prior level of indentation if it's a back and forth:

First person's comment

:Second person's comment

::Third person's comment

:Second person again

::Third person again

::Third person's afterthought

:Second person again

::First person jumping back in

:::Third person once more

::First person again

*If you get to 5 or 6 indents, just "reset" (start without indents for the next reply).
*If you have an addendum to your own comments, use the same indent level and re-sign.
*If somebody doesn't know/doesn't use the right indent level, fix it when adding your next reply so the rules become clear during the course of conversation.
*Likewise, if someone adds a new comment to the top or fails to add a heading when starting a new subject, fix it when replying.

The problem we've had lately is the mixing of styles, neither being used correctly. So far it seems that myself, Sf, and NKF have been using indents, you (Zombie) and Mike favoring dashes, and most newcomers failing to use either. No clear winner just yet. ;-)
--[[User:Ethereal Cereal|Ethereal Cereal]] 23:56, 9 March 2007 (PST)

:What if you're addressing several and various issues raised before, not just a comment on the previous statement? (And it runs on for four or six paragraphs?) - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 00:14, 10 March 2007 (PST)

::If you're consolidating a bunch of replies to several earlier points, that's a good time to reset the indent.--[[User:Ethereal Cereal|Ethereal Cereal]] 01:07, 10 March 2007 (PST)

::: Works for me, Eth - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 16:47, 9 November 2007 (PST)

== British vs. American spelling ==

Summary: Use which ever convention you want. It does not matter as long as you do not get into petty spelling convention battles.

== XCOM Box Art ==

Someone (NKF? Danial?) once asked if anybody could scan XCOM's box art, so that they might e.g. put a better graphic on the main page. I just uploaded a 300 dpi scan of all four sides as [[Media:XCOM_UFO_Defense_DOS_US_Box_Art.zip]] (3.2 MB). The box is not in mint condition (see the ReadMe), but a little tweaking by somebody with skillz (Danial) could easily spruce it up. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 18:05, 19 October 2007 (PDT)

: Was it me? Hmm. Can't remember. I did think to just grab the cover for the PDF version of the X-Com Player's Handbook (US version - with the Mars/Super Avenger cover), but it's black and white. Could've sworn I've seen a copy in colour somewhere. Not that sepia version wouldn't look great though!
: Oh hang on, I don't think it was for the front page graphic in particular, but we did want to get various versions of the box art for the various games. - [[User:NKF|NKF]]

----
NKF - or anybody - can we consider replacing the current main page art, with the XCOM box art? Or a portion of it. I loved the game's intro and in-game "cartoon art", but why not use the game's best image, for our primary Main Page image? (Is there somebody with skills that can clean it up quickly? I'm happy to, but I'm no pics wizard.)

[[image:XcomScExample.png|thumb|100px|One of many possible screencaps]]Related to this, I think it would be a nice touch if anyone put a bunch of selected and/or random screen captures (screencaps) onto a page, with a link just "under" (i.e., indented under the Main Page entry for) [[Info|About X-COM: UFO Defense]]...

:I have a sneaking suspicion that we get a ton of lurkers (someone who is there but never speaks) who once played X-COM and came across our page by chance, and would like to relive it, if even for a few screencaps... yet as it is now, our site is becoming more of an in-depth encyclopedia, instead of a "you were once here" kind of place. All us hard core players gravitate toward the encyclopedia - but even if folks who once played it don't stay, if they say, "wow, I remember doing all that" based on a stack of screenshots, that would be good. I'm thinking of easy sections that are light on text (and no Ufopaedia info), but heavy on thumbnails and click-on screencaps (see the image to the right - I love that financier in the background) like:
:*My first base - Decisions
:*The Globe - Radar alert!
:*First contact! Small farm in Iowa, USA
:*Managing Research
:*Terror in Sydney! ''(include zombies - squad wiped out - see next)''
:*Headline: World Council generally supports X-COM efforts - subheadline - Australia may now be under the control of aliens ''(funding results for a month)''
:*Headline: X-COM squad impacted by "Blaster bomb" - the world cries (before and after pix)
:*The tricky depths of a Battleship
:*Elite squad Mind Controls all aliens
:*Final showdown: Cydonia
:Each of the sections above might have 1-5 images. Something like that.

:If no one objects, can I ask that anyone who is willing to do it, make a bunch of screencaps, using .pngs and thumbnails as shown above. Then lurkers can "remember the days" right up front. And a few more lurkers than currently breeze through, might stay.

:To put this in context, CNN recently had a number of articles admiring Commodore 64s (one of them [http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/ptech/12/07/c64/index.html?iref=newssearch here]). X-COM is like that, to me... it lives past its "life expectancy" to gamers, because of how well put together it was, especially including how much it hit you in the gut.

In summary, then. I have one question for us XCOM hardcore (can we change the Main Page image) and one for everybody (want to post a lot of screencaps?). I have made a stub page for the screencaps page. I'll retract it if the hardcore object or there's no response in a couple of months' time. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 21:44, 14 December 2007 (PST)
----

I'm perfectly fine with getting the main title changed. Get a few more ayes and we'll make it so.

A screencap section would be nice. I'm quite partial to creating screencap mini-comics (no, not real comics. Just sequential before/during/after images), although I never use them and they just get deleted in the end.

One benefit is that some of the shots can also be recycled throughout the rest of the site to illustrate certain things. Or for an article that's no more than a solid block of text, something to break up the monotony. I'm also always for a few well placed humorous shots.

-[[User:NKF|NKF]] 01:02, 15 December 2007 (PST)

:Sounds good, NKF. There could easily be a "comics" page link several ways:
::1) The new Main Page entry indented under [[Info|About X-COM: UFO Defense]] could also have a link to a comics page, but on the screenshot page itself,
::2) That same new entry on the Main Page could read something like "[[Screenshots]] - and [[Comics]]!" The concept of the screenshots page is to help folks relive the past. And something just as good as screenshots - or better - is screenshots with humor.
::3) Or, make a link for it, all by itself, somewhere obvious on the Main Page.
:I think it's a great idea!
:As for the other idea - you said you're fine re: changing the main title. But it's the graphic at the top of the Main Page that I'm talking about. Just to make sure we're clear on that. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 17:21, 21 December 2007 (PST)

== Favicon ==

Does the UFOpaedia have a favicon? -- [[User:NinthRank|NinthRank]] 17:51, 6 November 2007 (PST)

:We did have it at one time but I think it disappeared after an upgrade to the wiki software. If you have an idea for a favicon, submit it here. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 18:21, 6 November 2007 (PST)

Okay, I don't know where that logo in the upper left came from, but after a quick GIMP edit, I came up with this: [[Media:favicon.zip]]. I'm not quite sure how The GIMP works with icons, so I also included the .png's. What do you think? -- [[User:NinthRank|NinthRank]] 18:51, 6 November 2007 (PST)

:Not too shabby. Next time I talk to GazChap, I'll run it past him. Any more ideas for a favicon? I'd like to get a few (at least 3) and run it through a vote here. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:28, 6 November 2007 (PST)

::[[image:FavIcon-Crude1.png|thumb|16px]][[image:FavIcon-Crude2.png|thumb|16px]]NinthRank and Z, my two cents are something like this. My pics are incredibly crude - I'm a total graphics n00b - and would need somebody like you, Ninth, to turn it into the "burnished gold and navy" (or is that black?), like you did with yours. I couldn't even get my damn background to change for me using simple MS Word art ... what do you use? (See how n00b I am?)

::I think you have some great ideas there, but my favicons show as 16x16 pixels. (Is this because I use small icons? I had never heard the the word until you said it, Ninth, at which point I read the wiki entry, and it made immediate sense.) At 16<sup>2</sup>, you have to keep it incredibly simply... having the COM on a big X does that, because it doesn't "waste a repetitive 'X-' across the center", if that makes sense. Another idea is be careful with the X ... I didn't like the X in your 16x16 and 32x32 because it was "narrow" (more vertical than horizontal). I definitely like your 48x48. (I can't tell what's going on with your animated 16x16 .ico, my friend - a 16x16 pic on a 1280x1024 screen (or higher) needs to be real simple. It looks like a tiny pulsing thing, with an X sort of there, overall.) I think the X should be, if not symmetric, then, more wide than high - to me, this implies something "ominous". A true X would have to be "cut off" at the corners to be "wide and fat" at 16x16. This shows more in my second try than the first.

::You can make things bigger than 16<sup>2</sup>, a real plus and you get much more flexibility, but for me, only 16x16 exists.

::My two cents. I love your overall idea, and using navy (or black?) with gold trim. Thanks for signing in and helping out, NinthRank! -[[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 19:40, 14 December 2007 (PST)

==Technical Commentaries==

I just thought of adding a specific section concerning commentaries regarding the game, i.e., trying to explain how the weapons/diplomacy/funding/etc. would work in real life. The idea here is not to expand on the canon X-COM material but to describe/explain in a rational way.
I've come with this idea after reading Spike's section (on his [[User talk:Spike]] page) explaining the economics of X-COM and starting my own section regarding the Council of Funding Nations.
I think there is plenty of material available on the Data canisters that could be used/adapted to this. Also, the discussion regarding Elerium (with all those formulas) on the Talk Page is exactly the sort of thing I was thinking of.

- [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 22:59, 10 March 2008 (PDT)

: I don't see any problem with it. Go for it. We've started with a magnificent wealth of knowledge about the game itself (and a bit beyond, with the binary file diving). Theories and explanations of the X-Com world wouldn't be out of place. They'd certainly add a bit of literary colour and interest for those that wish to look beyond the game. There are lots of interesting bits and pieces scattered throughout the articles (like real world equivalents of weapon or tanks, just to name one example) that would probably fit better in a section like that than in the articles. Perhaps a an expanded data-canister like section would be in order. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 01:13, 11 March 2008 (PDT)

== Game Editors ==

I was going to add a link off the Main Page to the [[Game editors]] section that I wrote, under Misc. I still have a nagging feeling there is another list of them somewhere, but I can't find it. Any comments?

Also, any additions to the Game editors section are welcome.

[[User:Spike|Spike]] 03:40, 15 March 2008 (PDT)

: I don't think we've ever had a particular listing of editors.

: Tell you what, I'll throw these changes in, and we'll see how this works out.

:# I'll put the new game editor section onto the UFO main table (I've also renamed the page to stick to the first capital letter naming convention the other articles use).
:# I removed XComutil off the main table, since it'll be under the game file section.
:# Removed the UBK - it's just a tool for wiki editors and not something that would interest players of the game.

: I might also add the [[Command Prompt]] to the game editor section for its notes on using MS-Edit as a binary file editor.

:- [[User:NKF|NKF]] 04:46, 15 March 2008 (PDT)

:: While I see the validity of adding XComUtil to a page regarding editors won't it make sense to keep a sublink to the page which deals on how to use it, together with MSEdit? I mean, the other editors only have links to them on that page and I think that at least XComUtil deserves main page status because of its notoriosity and complexity. What do you guys think? - [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 14:08, 15 March 2008 (PDT)

----
a good idea to include the Command Prompt help. How about broadly dividing it into 2 sections: X-COM-specific tools and general purpose tools?
[[User:Spike|Spike]] 07:08, 17 March 2008 (PDT)

== Newb questions ==

Hello good sirs. Sorry for my bad non-native english. While in total noob in wiki, im relatively for long playd this great games. Great thanks for you for this great site, it really helped me with some ideas, especially with Funding Nation, even dont know how i played it before without it. Now more close to point, i realized what TFTD section here are, say, unperfect, if not somewhat wrong. As i readed somewhere not all play TFTD much, UFO1 instead, so it maybe be the point. Id edit something on it, but im totally dunno how to do it, and my language will have too many mistakes to be proudly presented to people. So id be glade to hear what you may propose for me to do. Again big thanks. Ill wait for answer.

PS Or im searched too badly, or its differ in TFTD (i play only it now) from UFO1, but i cant find here about stunned persons behaviour. Cant find what they awake only if theyr stun is lower then HP's and if only they have awaken person in theyr tile during end of turn. IMHO its important thing to know off, at least for me.

PPS. My friend made great tiny changes to one tiny file, what make FundingNations game way more easy and elegant then described in issue. I can upload it if you need this, tho its for TFTD im sure he can do UFO1 also if its needed. Anyway this game too easy even on FN to play it without it :).

Eh PPPS. Dunno how to properly log on :(.

: Do not worry about the language barrier - sometimes it's harder to understand people who speak English natively! ;) In any case, There'll be other editors who will be able to help fix the article for you if you can get the idea across.

: To get started editing pages, check the Community Portal on the left sidebar. That has links to articles that can help you get started - more or less. One good way to find out how some text is formatted (or anything else you'd like to duplicate) is to edit the page and see how it's done in the source.

: If in doubt, or if you're unsure about editing the article, feel free put your ideas or suggestions in the article's Discussion page.

: Because TFTD and UFO share a lot of the same mechanics, there would be a lot of unnecessary duplication if we were to write up articles for it that are already available in the UFO articles. Therefore we mainly include articles that cover topics that are unique to TFTD, like the weapons, door opening, aliens, etc. General mechanics like how damage works or how experience is earned is identical to UFO's, so there's no need to duplicate them. What sections do you think need improving or what sections do we need to add? The more input the better.

: Regarding consciousness, have you checked the [[Unconscious]] article? I think we might need to redo that article bit and perhaps add a few illustrations. One note about the difference between UFO and TFTD with the visual appearance of a unit recovered with a medikit needs to go in there too if it hasn't already. Oh well. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 22:54, 22 May 2008 (PDT)

: PS, to sign your messages in the discussion pages, put four tilde's <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> anywhere you want to insert your name and the timestamp.

== same questions ==

Thank you for answer. I been somwhat incorrect in my english. I didnt mean what TFTD pages are bad or what they lose reduntand UFO1 information. All they lack are only slightly wrongly described alien's dangers levels (one of most dangerous creatures cant be low treat, and least dangerous one medium) and lack of mission types what only TFTD have. Also i readed "Unconscious@ article few times, stiil cant find only how to use medkit and no word about what generally need for stunned person to rise. From that follow advices to grenade stunned chryssalids and so on.

PS. Oh, yes, and whats wrong with door openings?
[[User:Derrida|Derrida]] 08:59, 23 May 2008 (PDT)

: A unit falls unconscious when the stun bar is equal or greater than the unit's remaining health points. If it's under that, the unit will be awake.

: To wake a soldier up, you have to reduce the stun level by either waiting for the stun to wear off, 1 point per turn, or use stimulants on a medikit. Looks like the TFTD section doesn't have its own medikit page, but UFO's [[Medi-Kit]] section explains how to use it, as they are identical. Basically, if the unit is unconscious, the medic must stand on top of the unconscious unit and use stimulants (the second choice) until the unconscious soldier wakes up. When the unconscious unit wakes up, they'll appear to the north of the medic.

: TFTD's stun weapons are much more powerful than in TFTD, so you often have to use a lot of stimulants to wake a person up.

: TFTD's unique because it allows you to open doors by right clicking them - and it's a free action so you won't spend any TUs to do it. UFO cannot do this (except the Playstation version).

: As for the threat levels of the aliens - I agree, some should be reclassified. Personally I'd move the Gill-Men and Calcinite up to medium threat - all the current medium level threats look just about right though. What are your suggestions?

: Hang on, why are there so many references to vibroblades in the overview article? That can't be right. I'll have to update that later on. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 15:05, 23 May 2008 (PDT)

Nonono. I mean what if unit's stun damage falled below it's HP, and no one stand in tile it lying, it will never rise. Medkits not the point. No stunned aliens or soldiers will rise if no one will end turn on it, or take it to inventory/hand. I tried to say this. Maybe it been different in UFO1 (as with doors, i thought what doors always open by right click, and in UFO1 too (btw cant find about door opening anywere in wiki)), but in TFTD it means what you dont have to bother with stunned tentaculats etc to rise after stun if you do not stand on it, or try to move it in backpack/hand. Same with soldiers, you can click zillion turns, but they will never rise until someone stand on it. Without this game must be horrible with all this undying lobsters awake afer you pass them.
With danger level id suggest this: Harmless: hallucinoid; deep one; Low: gillmen; aquatoid; Meduim: zombie; calcinite; bio-drone; lobsterman; xarquid; high: tasoth; triscene; What really matters: tentaculat. In line of growing dangerness. [[User:Derrida|Derrida]] 16:30, 23 May 2008 (PDT)

== Regarding image file formats ==

I'd really like to add a note somewhere obvious about using GIFs for screenshots in the wiki, rather than JPGs. For 256-color images like X-COM uses, GIFs are no larger than JPGs and generally look much better. For example, see the nasty compression artifacts on the terrain maps in the [[Terror ship|Terror Ship]] article. PNGs might work just as well, I'm not sure, but we should really avoid JPGs.

Where would be the best place to mention this? I'm thinking near the top of the main page for visibility, but that might be more clutter than people want. [[User:Phasma Felis|Phasma Felis]] 23:59, 11 June 2008 (PDT)

:It's been dealt with [[User_talk:Zombie#Image_Types|here]] that PNG is the preferred file format of the wiki; however, where to note this...I honestly don't know. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 00:37, 12 June 2008 (PDT)

:: PNG's reduced to 256 or less colours can be quite the space saver for X-Com screenshots. You can go the extra step and run them through PNG compression programs and somesuch - but they're pretty good as-is. Jpgs should be reserved for images with a broader range of colours. One place the note could go is in [[Guidelines to writing articles]]. In fact, that section could do with a few extra additions in any case to expand is to that it's not just covering the composition of the language of the articles, but to cover the creation of the articles. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 03:04, 12 June 2008 (PDT)

== Hosting move. ==

Hi guys. It appears I'm still hosting the UFOpaedia - I did discuss moving it to StrategyCore with both Zombie and Pete a while ago and I think I gave them copies of what would be required.

Anyway, I'm moving hosting servers so the UFOpaedia is going to move too. I'm aiming to carry out the transfer on Sunday September 28th at about 8pm GMT+1. Any changes made between this time and the time that the transfer completes may be lost, but hopefully not. Just thought I'd give you guys a bit of notice.

I should point out that I still have no objection to hosting the UFOpaedia on my servers, it's a great project and you guys have done a bang-up job with it, it's far surpassed my original intentions :) However, if StrategyCore want to take over hosting to remove the potential "failure point" (i.e. me) then that's fine and we can give it another shot?

GazChap, 25th September 2008 12:50 GMT+1

:Thanks for the heads-up Gaz-Chap! Sure, StrategyCore is still willing to host the UFOpaedia. Sorry things didn't quite work out the last time we talked. Pete needs to be constantly reminded to do things as he's easily distracted. I'll try and start a fire under his bum to get the ball rolling again. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 07:14, 25 September 2008 (PDT)

::Hosting has now been moved to StrategyCore. Cheers to Pete and Zombie for sorting it out. GazChap, 11:28, 1 October 2008 (GMT+1)

::: There may be a slight problem with caching of the temporary holding page ("coming back soon". On some browsers I'm using (not all), the temporary page is still up and you can't see the UFOPaedia site. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 17:48, 1 October 2008 (CDT)

::The new website address is quite likely still propagating out through DNS, since we moved hosts. So that's just the nature of the internet and should be gone in a day or two. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 19:06, 1 October 2008 (CDT)

:Most browsers seem to allow a full page refresh via Ctrl + F5. There's also an option re caching under the Misc section of your Preferances - I had to disable it ages ago 'cause it was always failing to show me page changes... - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 21:54, 1 October 2008 (CDT)

Sorry about the downtime everyone. The bandwidth limit wasn't set high enough after the recent change in hosting and basically didn't allow access. I contacted Pete and he fixed the issue. Good to catch these issues earlier rather than later. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 15:11, 15 October 2008 (CDT)

=== 14 March 2009 ===

Zombie mentioned that Pete may be moving the server this weekend. I'm getting lots of errors and more or less unable to make updates to the site. Probably this is to do with the server move. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:14, 14 March 2009 (EDT)

:Apparently the move has been complete most of the day. So if you guys continue to have problems, please contact me and I'll relay it over to Pete. I'm not experiencing any problems though. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 21:34, 14 March 2009 (EDT)

== 500 Internal error ==

This seems to occur whenever I edit a subsection on a page, and I click the edit button on the TOP of the page instead of the edit button next to the subsection title. So, if you wanna avoid this error, try using the button which only edits that subsection... [[User:Jasonred|Jasonred]] 05:40, 21 March 2009 (EDT)

:Already been tried. Doesn't work any better. UFOpaedia admin is on it, I've been told. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 12:05, 21 March 2009 (EDT)

:: Pete's finished his latest round of changes. Give it another go. - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 22:12, 21 March 2009 (EDT)

== Proposed top level links ==

I've written some pages which I'd like to be proposed be linked to the main page, unless anyone can suggest where to put them (careful now!).

I'd like to link [[Fictional Equivalents]] to the main page.

I'd like to link [[Wish List (TFTD)]] to the TFTD page. It would also be good to start a [[Known Bugs (TFTD)]] page, for TFTD-specific bugs.

However as some tricky template work is involved, I'd rather not make these links myself for fear of screwing up the main page(s). Thoughts? [[User:Spike|Spike]] 11:20, 14 November 2008 (CST)

: Feel free to edit the templates - as long as the tables look okay when you preview them, they shouldn't break the page. The templates are standard pages but with a fancy prefix to their file name to categorize them as templates. This was needed so that any updates to them would show up on the main page right away without forcing the viewers to force-refresh the page. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 12:46, 14 November 2008 (CST)

::It should be noted that the [[TRTBAG]] more or less covers the "Known Bugs for TFTD" segment. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 16:08, 14 November 2008 (CST)

:Well it covers the Research Tree bugs but not any of the other TFTD-specific bugs as far as I can see. Still that's a good starting point, thanks AQ! And thanks Zombie for adding the links. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 17:34, 14 November 2008 (CST)

::Maybe TRTBAG should just BECOME the "Known Bugs(TFTD)" page. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 17:36, 14 November 2008 (CST)

:Because TRTBAG is such an excellent self contained guide, and well written, and quite long, I think it should be separate. I will link to it under the Known Bugs (TFTD) page. I suggest the main page link to TRTBAG be remained "''Research'' Bug Avoidance Guide". Probably the TFTD Alien Glitches page can be gotten rid of. It only mentions one bug, which is not a bug at all. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 06:16, 15 November 2008 (CST)

==Terminology==

===X-COM/XCOM/XCom/Etc.===

I remember reading about this discussion before and if something concrete comes out I think it should be added to the [[Guidelines to writing articles]].
Do we have set a proper spelling to refer to the organization? IIRC the game uses X-COM/XCOM/X-Com/etc. Should we set a standard for the Wiki? [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 07:52, 21 November 2008 (CST)
:It's a good idea to agree on a single standard spelling for the Wiki, if only to keep links consistent and prdictable. But it's a shame if there is no clear canonical spelling though. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:28, 21 November 2008 (CST)
::From what I recall there isn't a standard followed on UFO Defense, where you have X-COM/XCOM/XCom/etc. Apocalypse might be more consistent and I have no idea for the other games. I try to use X-COM and I've done some edits to follow this standard spelling but I'd like to read more opinions [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 17:43, 22 November 2008 (CST)
:I've had a check through the in-game strings and most if not all of them say "Xcom", which is my least favourite spelling. :( I think X-COM has the best flavour. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:41, 22 November 2008 (CST)
If any of you folks here have been following what I've been up to lately at the StrategyCore forums, you'll see I have been amassing a collection of most of the game versions in the series. Checking my [http://www.strategycore.co.uk/xcom/pg/ufogameversions UFO Game Versions] site page, you'll see that the original European release used XCom while the budget releases used X-Com. Other than that, those spellings quickly fell by the wayside as MicroProse decided on X-COM which quickly gained approval and remained the standard spelling throughout the series. (You can't really go by in-game text as those were not checked for consistency). Anyhow, I'd opt for the same route MicroProse took: <b>X-COM</b>. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:33, 22 November 2008 (CST)

===Capitalization guidelines/rules for the wiki===

Another thing that crossed my mind are guidelines/rules tossed in to prevent overcapitalization.

Specific ingame terms/names should be always capitalized:
*Weapons (Boomeroid, Elerium, Entropy Launcher
*Alien Races (Sectoid, Lobsterman, Skeletoid, etc.)
*Organizations (MarSec, General Dynamics, Council of Funding Nations)
*X-COM Crafts (Skyranger, Manta, Dimension Probe)

Generic ingame terms/names (that already exist in English) should be capitalized the first time they are mentioned on a wiki entry. Some examples:
*Weapons (Plasma Rifle, Torpedo Launcher, Vortex Mine, etc.)
*UFO types (Large Scout, Dreadnaught, Alien Mothership, etc.)
*Soldier Attributes/Agent Stats (Stamina, Psi-defense, etc.)
*Base Facilities

Wiki terms should be capitalized the first time they are mentioned on a wiki entry:
*Tactics
*Economics
*Game Mechanics
*Etc.

A few other rules to prevent overcapitalization and make a smooth reading:
*After the 1st mention, generic ingame terms are not required to be capitalized. As an example, after the first mention of a Laser Pistol, any additional mention(s) to them can simply use the term pistol(s).
*When refering to similar names/terms, it is advisable to capitalize both when they are mentioned. Eg. "Auto Cannon, unlike Heavy Cannon, allows for automatic fire" "Large Scouts are more dangerous than Medium Scouts".
*The same applies to wiki terms.

[[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 16:54, 23 November 2008 (CST)

== Humor and Flavour Text ==

GEH!!! This whole issue is taking on a life of it's own. On one hand, yes, I can see the allure of ufopedia being a serious informative site. On the other hand, there's the "fun" factor... When you get right down to it, Xcom is actually a rather simplistic game in terms of storyline, and storyline interactivity, so we REALLY have to make up our own, otherwise the game degenerates into "capture this technology, research research, shoot shoot. MC = win game". The ingame UFOpedia is great, but it's limited to several paragraphs to describe an entire race of creatures, and 2-3 lines to describe the horror of Blaster Bombs and such. ... I vote that this online UFOpedia becomes everything that the ufopedia in-game was missing... let's have something that ENTERTAINS as well as giving good accurate information!

I'll wait for the votes to come in before touching anything else. I agree with you guys, the Lobstermen and other aquatic aliens getting eaten is something that is VERY much a part of the X-com community's culture... it should go into the UFOpedia. [[User:Jasonred|Jasonred]] 04:00, 13 March 2009 (CDT)

: I've nothing against humour. All for it. In fact I'd very much like to see more of that so that definitely gets my vote. A few light hearted moments in between all the seriousness does wonders. Perhaps not when you're getting into the particulars, but the descriptions or opening paragraphs that don't get into deep detail could be livened up a little. In moderation, of course!

: However, the hard part is deciding on the line between being humorous within the confines of what's available (yes, funny discussions amongst the troops about eating lobstermen after battle instead of selling it could count towards that), and then there's making stuff up. Apologies to Morken for borrowing an example from his on-going graphic novel: explaining the alien's general idiocy/sportsmanship through their strong belief in the tenets of Amgoth. Highly amusing, but not part of the story. Granted, I don't think we've got anything like that on the wiki, but you never know.

: In any case, a good mental exercise for the writers. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 05:14, 13 March 2009 (CDT)

My two cents then: I like the humour, anecdotes, flavour and fan fiction but I think the main purpose of UFOPaedia is informational and that should not be compromised. I like the little touches of humour, and I've been known to attempt them myself. But humour and anecdotes should be kept brief and supplementary - e.g. one-liners and wry observations at the end of a section. Non-canonical flavour text and fan fiction (especially) should be kept clearly separate and distinguishable. Someone reading the site with no prior knowledge of XCOM should be able to tell right away what is factual vs what is humour or speculation/imagination. Not quite sure how to do that - maybe by using sidebars, the Humour category... ok ran out of ideas there already. Maybe we need an "official" font for reproducing canonical, in-game flavour text, so it stands out. Not sure.

Also, humour, anecdote and flavour are much more subjective than fact. What one person thinks is funny, others may not. So non-factual content may just get edited out unless a lot of people agree that it's funny/cool/interesting etc - in fact that's probably already happening. Maybe a good idea is to make the jokes on the Talk pages, and if they are found to be universally funny, move them on to the main articles later - pretty much the same as factual content in fact? [[User:Spike|Spike]] 05:19, 13 March 2009 (CDT)

: I'm certain that we would all agree that the wiki is first and foremost an informative site. We needn't go so far as to point out to the readers what is or isn't. That would be overdoing it. A dash of humour anywhere we can get away with it without compromising the message, facts or turn it into fan fiction is really all that's required and can be more effective. Like spices, the right amount can add to the flavour of a dish. Too much and it just ruins it.

:Now a little creative writing to make the articles (with or without the humour) more captivating to the reader and less like text-books will certainly go a long way. But then again, I believe that we've always attempted to do this. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 06:04, 13 March 2009 (CDT)

:: I agree with NKF's point here regarding humor. But, concerning fanfic, to make up and add things that aren't on the original UFOPaedias or the History distributed with Interceptor is to take too much liberty with the original material (in regards with fan fiction). Just because it gets discussed in the forums at strategycore or xcomufo or that it is mentioned in someone's fanfic doesn't mean that it should be taken as a fact, regardless of the argument that the game story belongs to its fans/players. The game belongs to all of them and quite frankly we are quite a minority (although a very loyal one) regarding that. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 21:58, 2 April 2009 (EDT)

==XML dumps available?==
Hello guys! Kudos for creating this amazing wiki!

I have some ideas and I'd like to test them on an XML dump of ufopaedia, since it's a small but interesting wiki. Do you offer the dumps for download somewhere (like wikipedia does)? That would be absolutely fantastic. :) [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 10:23, 2 May 2009 (EDT)

:Do you mean [[Special:Export]]? --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:31, 2 May 2009 (EDT)

::I'm not sure if that export page does the job. It seems that it only allows downloading a list of articles I have to type in. What I want is ALL articles of Ufopaedia in XML, be it one file per article or one file for all articles(which I would prefer, since that is what Wikipedia provides and I'd like my software to work with all wikis). You can see what Wikipedia offers here [[http://download.wikimedia.org/]] and here [[http://download.wikimedia.org/enwiki/20090501/]]. Thanks! [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 23:19, 2 May 2009 (EDT)
::Never mind, I just entered all the relevant categories into the export page and got the XML file I was looking for (Downloading only the files relevant to playing X-COM 1 results in 1.5MB of XML). Thanks! [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 11:21, 4 May 2009 (EDT)

Talk:Main Page

2009-05-03T03:19:21Z

RedNifre: /* XML dumps available? */

__TOC__
----

== Site TODOS ==
A general dump of to-dos or maybe not-do's. Add any where appropriate:

* Template navigation toolbars for subsections. (Some tests have started)
* Strategy by terrain notes?
* Mention of bug where unit gets stuck in the corner of the map
* Mention of bug where you reload a battlescape mission only to be on an invalid level and how to recover from it (use OHMap, go back down to legal level, click until you find the map again, save the game). Often happens after editting the game, strangely enough. Is it possible the game stores map camera coordinates as a file checksum or somesuch?

== Discussion/talk page proposed format ==
Ok folks, we all seem to have our own ways of adding comments to a discussion page. The way it stands now, it becomes really difficult to follow a discussion when it is broken apart with different formats. What I suggest is this: when you leave a comment use a horizontal line to separate your post from the one(s) above it. In this manner, everything is left justified and the comments are separated. The reason why I do not support the colon as comment separation is that as the discussion progresses you are going to be adding more and more just to get the indenting correct. It also makes it confusing. Another side effect is that once you have a lot of colons present it pushes the text off the page itself and forces a scroll to the right to view. That isn't good.

I suppose if we really want to use colons as separators, we could alternate the use. If a comment is indented above yours, do nothing. If a comment is not indented, use a colon for your submission. Still, the constant zig-zagging isn't really the best idea either.

My vote is therefore to stick with the horizontal line (four dashes). If the discussion veers way off course, or if you have a couple questions/comments, break it apart into different headings. And always sign your post too as that makes it easier to follow.

Discuss.--[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:46, 9 March 2007 (PST)

Works for me, Zombie. Another problem with indentation is that one isn't necessarily addressing only the previous comment, but it could be about the previous one, and tying together things that are 4, 6, ''and'' 12 entries back. Colons are fine for quick rejoinders, but not as a requirement. A potential alternative is to leave two blank lines, as I just did after your sig. This is a fairly clear delineator for folks scanning quickly. However, the horizontal separator is more clear, in general. So I guess I'd vote for the hor-sep for all except quick comments thrown in, which can use colons. And anything that's a new topic or big break should get a new topic, using = signs. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 21:10, 9 March 2007 (PST)

----

I've reformatted [[Talk:Exploits#Extra_Ammo_Exploit]] to demonstrate how the indentation style ''can'' work, if done consistently. I think it's somewhat better than the line-separator style for very long discussions, making the structure a little clearer. However, if it's sometimes-used and sometimes-not things get messy, as you've noticed.

I'll codify the rules right here (surprisingly, they're not well-codified on Wikipedia itself, despite the fact that it's used quite consistently throughout the site):

*Add an indent for each reply
*Reuse your prior level of indentation if it's a back and forth:

First person's comment

:Second person's comment

::Third person's comment

:Second person again

::Third person again

::Third person's afterthought

:Second person again

::First person jumping back in

:::Third person once more

::First person again

*If you get to 5 or 6 indents, just "reset" (start without indents for the next reply).
*If you have an addendum to your own comments, use the same indent level and re-sign.
*If somebody doesn't know/doesn't use the right indent level, fix it when adding your next reply so the rules become clear during the course of conversation.
*Likewise, if someone adds a new comment to the top or fails to add a heading when starting a new subject, fix it when replying.

The problem we've had lately is the mixing of styles, neither being used correctly. So far it seems that myself, Sf, and NKF have been using indents, you (Zombie) and Mike favoring dashes, and most newcomers failing to use either. No clear winner just yet. ;-)
--[[User:Ethereal Cereal|Ethereal Cereal]] 23:56, 9 March 2007 (PST)

:What if you're addressing several and various issues raised before, not just a comment on the previous statement? (And it runs on for four or six paragraphs?) - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 00:14, 10 March 2007 (PST)

::If you're consolidating a bunch of replies to several earlier points, that's a good time to reset the indent.--[[User:Ethereal Cereal|Ethereal Cereal]] 01:07, 10 March 2007 (PST)

::: Works for me, Eth - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 16:47, 9 November 2007 (PST)

== British vs. American spelling ==

Summary: Use which ever convention you want. It does not matter as long as you do not get into petty spelling convention battles.

== XCOM Box Art ==

Someone (NKF? Danial?) once asked if anybody could scan XCOM's box art, so that they might e.g. put a better graphic on the main page. I just uploaded a 300 dpi scan of all four sides as [[Media:XCOM_UFO_Defense_DOS_US_Box_Art.zip]] (3.2 MB). The box is not in mint condition (see the ReadMe), but a little tweaking by somebody with skillz (Danial) could easily spruce it up. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 18:05, 19 October 2007 (PDT)

: Was it me? Hmm. Can't remember. I did think to just grab the cover for the PDF version of the X-Com Player's Handbook (US version - with the Mars/Super Avenger cover), but it's black and white. Could've sworn I've seen a copy in colour somewhere. Not that sepia version wouldn't look great though!
: Oh hang on, I don't think it was for the front page graphic in particular, but we did want to get various versions of the box art for the various games. - [[User:NKF|NKF]]

----
NKF - or anybody - can we consider replacing the current main page art, with the XCOM box art? Or a portion of it. I loved the game's intro and in-game "cartoon art", but why not use the game's best image, for our primary Main Page image? (Is there somebody with skills that can clean it up quickly? I'm happy to, but I'm no pics wizard.)

[[image:XcomScExample.png|thumb|100px|One of many possible screencaps]]Related to this, I think it would be a nice touch if anyone put a bunch of selected and/or random screen captures (screencaps) onto a page, with a link just "under" (i.e., indented under the Main Page entry for) [[Info|About X-COM: UFO Defense]]...

:I have a sneaking suspicion that we get a ton of lurkers (someone who is there but never speaks) who once played X-COM and came across our page by chance, and would like to relive it, if even for a few screencaps... yet as it is now, our site is becoming more of an in-depth encyclopedia, instead of a "you were once here" kind of place. All us hard core players gravitate toward the encyclopedia - but even if folks who once played it don't stay, if they say, "wow, I remember doing all that" based on a stack of screenshots, that would be good. I'm thinking of easy sections that are light on text (and no Ufopaedia info), but heavy on thumbnails and click-on screencaps (see the image to the right - I love that financier in the background) like:
:*My first base - Decisions
:*The Globe - Radar alert!
:*First contact! Small farm in Iowa, USA
:*Managing Research
:*Terror in Sydney! ''(include zombies - squad wiped out - see next)''
:*Headline: World Council generally supports X-COM efforts - subheadline - Australia may now be under the control of aliens ''(funding results for a month)''
:*Headline: X-COM squad impacted by "Blaster bomb" - the world cries (before and after pix)
:*The tricky depths of a Battleship
:*Elite squad Mind Controls all aliens
:*Final showdown: Cydonia
:Each of the sections above might have 1-5 images. Something like that.

:If no one objects, can I ask that anyone who is willing to do it, make a bunch of screencaps, using .pngs and thumbnails as shown above. Then lurkers can "remember the days" right up front. And a few more lurkers than currently breeze through, might stay.

:To put this in context, CNN recently had a number of articles admiring Commodore 64s (one of them [http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/ptech/12/07/c64/index.html?iref=newssearch here]). X-COM is like that, to me... it lives past its "life expectancy" to gamers, because of how well put together it was, especially including how much it hit you in the gut.

In summary, then. I have one question for us XCOM hardcore (can we change the Main Page image) and one for everybody (want to post a lot of screencaps?). I have made a stub page for the screencaps page. I'll retract it if the hardcore object or there's no response in a couple of months' time. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 21:44, 14 December 2007 (PST)
----

I'm perfectly fine with getting the main title changed. Get a few more ayes and we'll make it so.

A screencap section would be nice. I'm quite partial to creating screencap mini-comics (no, not real comics. Just sequential before/during/after images), although I never use them and they just get deleted in the end.

One benefit is that some of the shots can also be recycled throughout the rest of the site to illustrate certain things. Or for an article that's no more than a solid block of text, something to break up the monotony. I'm also always for a few well placed humorous shots.

-[[User:NKF|NKF]] 01:02, 15 December 2007 (PST)

:Sounds good, NKF. There could easily be a "comics" page link several ways:
::1) The new Main Page entry indented under [[Info|About X-COM: UFO Defense]] could also have a link to a comics page, but on the screenshot page itself,
::2) That same new entry on the Main Page could read something like "[[Screenshots]] - and [[Comics]]!" The concept of the screenshots page is to help folks relive the past. And something just as good as screenshots - or better - is screenshots with humor.
::3) Or, make a link for it, all by itself, somewhere obvious on the Main Page.
:I think it's a great idea!
:As for the other idea - you said you're fine re: changing the main title. But it's the graphic at the top of the Main Page that I'm talking about. Just to make sure we're clear on that. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 17:21, 21 December 2007 (PST)

== Favicon ==

Does the UFOpaedia have a favicon? -- [[User:NinthRank|NinthRank]] 17:51, 6 November 2007 (PST)

:We did have it at one time but I think it disappeared after an upgrade to the wiki software. If you have an idea for a favicon, submit it here. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 18:21, 6 November 2007 (PST)

Okay, I don't know where that logo in the upper left came from, but after a quick GIMP edit, I came up with this: [[Media:favicon.zip]]. I'm not quite sure how The GIMP works with icons, so I also included the .png's. What do you think? -- [[User:NinthRank|NinthRank]] 18:51, 6 November 2007 (PST)

:Not too shabby. Next time I talk to GazChap, I'll run it past him. Any more ideas for a favicon? I'd like to get a few (at least 3) and run it through a vote here. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:28, 6 November 2007 (PST)

::[[image:FavIcon-Crude1.png|thumb|16px]][[image:FavIcon-Crude2.png|thumb|16px]]NinthRank and Z, my two cents are something like this. My pics are incredibly crude - I'm a total graphics n00b - and would need somebody like you, Ninth, to turn it into the "burnished gold and navy" (or is that black?), like you did with yours. I couldn't even get my damn background to change for me using simple MS Word art ... what do you use? (See how n00b I am?)

::I think you have some great ideas there, but my favicons show as 16x16 pixels. (Is this because I use small icons? I had never heard the the word until you said it, Ninth, at which point I read the wiki entry, and it made immediate sense.) At 16<sup>2</sup>, you have to keep it incredibly simply... having the COM on a big X does that, because it doesn't "waste a repetitive 'X-' across the center", if that makes sense. Another idea is be careful with the X ... I didn't like the X in your 16x16 and 32x32 because it was "narrow" (more vertical than horizontal). I definitely like your 48x48. (I can't tell what's going on with your animated 16x16 .ico, my friend - a 16x16 pic on a 1280x1024 screen (or higher) needs to be real simple. It looks like a tiny pulsing thing, with an X sort of there, overall.) I think the X should be, if not symmetric, then, more wide than high - to me, this implies something "ominous". A true X would have to be "cut off" at the corners to be "wide and fat" at 16x16. This shows more in my second try than the first.

::You can make things bigger than 16<sup>2</sup>, a real plus and you get much more flexibility, but for me, only 16x16 exists.

::My two cents. I love your overall idea, and using navy (or black?) with gold trim. Thanks for signing in and helping out, NinthRank! -[[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 19:40, 14 December 2007 (PST)

==Technical Commentaries==

I just thought of adding a specific section concerning commentaries regarding the game, i.e., trying to explain how the weapons/diplomacy/funding/etc. would work in real life. The idea here is not to expand on the canon X-COM material but to describe/explain in a rational way.
I've come with this idea after reading Spike's section (on his [[User talk:Spike]] page) explaining the economics of X-COM and starting my own section regarding the Council of Funding Nations.
I think there is plenty of material available on the Data canisters that could be used/adapted to this. Also, the discussion regarding Elerium (with all those formulas) on the Talk Page is exactly the sort of thing I was thinking of.

- [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 22:59, 10 March 2008 (PDT)

: I don't see any problem with it. Go for it. We've started with a magnificent wealth of knowledge about the game itself (and a bit beyond, with the binary file diving). Theories and explanations of the X-Com world wouldn't be out of place. They'd certainly add a bit of literary colour and interest for those that wish to look beyond the game. There are lots of interesting bits and pieces scattered throughout the articles (like real world equivalents of weapon or tanks, just to name one example) that would probably fit better in a section like that than in the articles. Perhaps a an expanded data-canister like section would be in order. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 01:13, 11 March 2008 (PDT)

== Game Editors ==

I was going to add a link off the Main Page to the [[Game editors]] section that I wrote, under Misc. I still have a nagging feeling there is another list of them somewhere, but I can't find it. Any comments?

Also, any additions to the Game editors section are welcome.

[[User:Spike|Spike]] 03:40, 15 March 2008 (PDT)

: I don't think we've ever had a particular listing of editors.

: Tell you what, I'll throw these changes in, and we'll see how this works out.

:# I'll put the new game editor section onto the UFO main table (I've also renamed the page to stick to the first capital letter naming convention the other articles use).
:# I removed XComutil off the main table, since it'll be under the game file section.
:# Removed the UBK - it's just a tool for wiki editors and not something that would interest players of the game.

: I might also add the [[Command Prompt]] to the game editor section for its notes on using MS-Edit as a binary file editor.

:- [[User:NKF|NKF]] 04:46, 15 March 2008 (PDT)

:: While I see the validity of adding XComUtil to a page regarding editors won't it make sense to keep a sublink to the page which deals on how to use it, together with MSEdit? I mean, the other editors only have links to them on that page and I think that at least XComUtil deserves main page status because of its notoriosity and complexity. What do you guys think? - [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 14:08, 15 March 2008 (PDT)

----
a good idea to include the Command Prompt help. How about broadly dividing it into 2 sections: X-COM-specific tools and general purpose tools?
[[User:Spike|Spike]] 07:08, 17 March 2008 (PDT)

== Newb questions ==

Hello good sirs. Sorry for my bad non-native english. While in total noob in wiki, im relatively for long playd this great games. Great thanks for you for this great site, it really helped me with some ideas, especially with Funding Nation, even dont know how i played it before without it. Now more close to point, i realized what TFTD section here are, say, unperfect, if not somewhat wrong. As i readed somewhere not all play TFTD much, UFO1 instead, so it maybe be the point. Id edit something on it, but im totally dunno how to do it, and my language will have too many mistakes to be proudly presented to people. So id be glade to hear what you may propose for me to do. Again big thanks. Ill wait for answer.

PS Or im searched too badly, or its differ in TFTD (i play only it now) from UFO1, but i cant find here about stunned persons behaviour. Cant find what they awake only if theyr stun is lower then HP's and if only they have awaken person in theyr tile during end of turn. IMHO its important thing to know off, at least for me.

PPS. My friend made great tiny changes to one tiny file, what make FundingNations game way more easy and elegant then described in issue. I can upload it if you need this, tho its for TFTD im sure he can do UFO1 also if its needed. Anyway this game too easy even on FN to play it without it :).

Eh PPPS. Dunno how to properly log on :(.

: Do not worry about the language barrier - sometimes it's harder to understand people who speak English natively! ;) In any case, There'll be other editors who will be able to help fix the article for you if you can get the idea across.

: To get started editing pages, check the Community Portal on the left sidebar. That has links to articles that can help you get started - more or less. One good way to find out how some text is formatted (or anything else you'd like to duplicate) is to edit the page and see how it's done in the source.

: If in doubt, or if you're unsure about editing the article, feel free put your ideas or suggestions in the article's Discussion page.

: Because TFTD and UFO share a lot of the same mechanics, there would be a lot of unnecessary duplication if we were to write up articles for it that are already available in the UFO articles. Therefore we mainly include articles that cover topics that are unique to TFTD, like the weapons, door opening, aliens, etc. General mechanics like how damage works or how experience is earned is identical to UFO's, so there's no need to duplicate them. What sections do you think need improving or what sections do we need to add? The more input the better.

: Regarding consciousness, have you checked the [[Unconscious]] article? I think we might need to redo that article bit and perhaps add a few illustrations. One note about the difference between UFO and TFTD with the visual appearance of a unit recovered with a medikit needs to go in there too if it hasn't already. Oh well. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 22:54, 22 May 2008 (PDT)

: PS, to sign your messages in the discussion pages, put four tilde's <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> anywhere you want to insert your name and the timestamp.

== same questions ==

Thank you for answer. I been somwhat incorrect in my english. I didnt mean what TFTD pages are bad or what they lose reduntand UFO1 information. All they lack are only slightly wrongly described alien's dangers levels (one of most dangerous creatures cant be low treat, and least dangerous one medium) and lack of mission types what only TFTD have. Also i readed "Unconscious@ article few times, stiil cant find only how to use medkit and no word about what generally need for stunned person to rise. From that follow advices to grenade stunned chryssalids and so on.

PS. Oh, yes, and whats wrong with door openings?
[[User:Derrida|Derrida]] 08:59, 23 May 2008 (PDT)

: A unit falls unconscious when the stun bar is equal or greater than the unit's remaining health points. If it's under that, the unit will be awake.

: To wake a soldier up, you have to reduce the stun level by either waiting for the stun to wear off, 1 point per turn, or use stimulants on a medikit. Looks like the TFTD section doesn't have its own medikit page, but UFO's [[Medi-Kit]] section explains how to use it, as they are identical. Basically, if the unit is unconscious, the medic must stand on top of the unconscious unit and use stimulants (the second choice) until the unconscious soldier wakes up. When the unconscious unit wakes up, they'll appear to the north of the medic.

: TFTD's stun weapons are much more powerful than in TFTD, so you often have to use a lot of stimulants to wake a person up.

: TFTD's unique because it allows you to open doors by right clicking them - and it's a free action so you won't spend any TUs to do it. UFO cannot do this (except the Playstation version).

: As for the threat levels of the aliens - I agree, some should be reclassified. Personally I'd move the Gill-Men and Calcinite up to medium threat - all the current medium level threats look just about right though. What are your suggestions?

: Hang on, why are there so many references to vibroblades in the overview article? That can't be right. I'll have to update that later on. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 15:05, 23 May 2008 (PDT)

Nonono. I mean what if unit's stun damage falled below it's HP, and no one stand in tile it lying, it will never rise. Medkits not the point. No stunned aliens or soldiers will rise if no one will end turn on it, or take it to inventory/hand. I tried to say this. Maybe it been different in UFO1 (as with doors, i thought what doors always open by right click, and in UFO1 too (btw cant find about door opening anywere in wiki)), but in TFTD it means what you dont have to bother with stunned tentaculats etc to rise after stun if you do not stand on it, or try to move it in backpack/hand. Same with soldiers, you can click zillion turns, but they will never rise until someone stand on it. Without this game must be horrible with all this undying lobsters awake afer you pass them.
With danger level id suggest this: Harmless: hallucinoid; deep one; Low: gillmen; aquatoid; Meduim: zombie; calcinite; bio-drone; lobsterman; xarquid; high: tasoth; triscene; What really matters: tentaculat. In line of growing dangerness. [[User:Derrida|Derrida]] 16:30, 23 May 2008 (PDT)

== Regarding image file formats ==

I'd really like to add a note somewhere obvious about using GIFs for screenshots in the wiki, rather than JPGs. For 256-color images like X-COM uses, GIFs are no larger than JPGs and generally look much better. For example, see the nasty compression artifacts on the terrain maps in the [[Terror ship|Terror Ship]] article. PNGs might work just as well, I'm not sure, but we should really avoid JPGs.

Where would be the best place to mention this? I'm thinking near the top of the main page for visibility, but that might be more clutter than people want. [[User:Phasma Felis|Phasma Felis]] 23:59, 11 June 2008 (PDT)

:It's been dealt with [[User_talk:Zombie#Image_Types|here]] that PNG is the preferred file format of the wiki; however, where to note this...I honestly don't know. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 00:37, 12 June 2008 (PDT)

:: PNG's reduced to 256 or less colours can be quite the space saver for X-Com screenshots. You can go the extra step and run them through PNG compression programs and somesuch - but they're pretty good as-is. Jpgs should be reserved for images with a broader range of colours. One place the note could go is in [[Guidelines to writing articles]]. In fact, that section could do with a few extra additions in any case to expand is to that it's not just covering the composition of the language of the articles, but to cover the creation of the articles. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 03:04, 12 June 2008 (PDT)

== Hosting move. ==

Hi guys. It appears I'm still hosting the UFOpaedia - I did discuss moving it to StrategyCore with both Zombie and Pete a while ago and I think I gave them copies of what would be required.

Anyway, I'm moving hosting servers so the UFOpaedia is going to move too. I'm aiming to carry out the transfer on Sunday September 28th at about 8pm GMT+1. Any changes made between this time and the time that the transfer completes may be lost, but hopefully not. Just thought I'd give you guys a bit of notice.

I should point out that I still have no objection to hosting the UFOpaedia on my servers, it's a great project and you guys have done a bang-up job with it, it's far surpassed my original intentions :) However, if StrategyCore want to take over hosting to remove the potential "failure point" (i.e. me) then that's fine and we can give it another shot?

GazChap, 25th September 2008 12:50 GMT+1

:Thanks for the heads-up Gaz-Chap! Sure, StrategyCore is still willing to host the UFOpaedia. Sorry things didn't quite work out the last time we talked. Pete needs to be constantly reminded to do things as he's easily distracted. I'll try and start a fire under his bum to get the ball rolling again. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 07:14, 25 September 2008 (PDT)

::Hosting has now been moved to StrategyCore. Cheers to Pete and Zombie for sorting it out. GazChap, 11:28, 1 October 2008 (GMT+1)

::: There may be a slight problem with caching of the temporary holding page ("coming back soon". On some browsers I'm using (not all), the temporary page is still up and you can't see the UFOPaedia site. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 17:48, 1 October 2008 (CDT)

::The new website address is quite likely still propagating out through DNS, since we moved hosts. So that's just the nature of the internet and should be gone in a day or two. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 19:06, 1 October 2008 (CDT)

:Most browsers seem to allow a full page refresh via Ctrl + F5. There's also an option re caching under the Misc section of your Preferances - I had to disable it ages ago 'cause it was always failing to show me page changes... - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 21:54, 1 October 2008 (CDT)

Sorry about the downtime everyone. The bandwidth limit wasn't set high enough after the recent change in hosting and basically didn't allow access. I contacted Pete and he fixed the issue. Good to catch these issues earlier rather than later. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 15:11, 15 October 2008 (CDT)

=== 14 March 2009 ===

Zombie mentioned that Pete may be moving the server this weekend. I'm getting lots of errors and more or less unable to make updates to the site. Probably this is to do with the server move. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:14, 14 March 2009 (EDT)

:Apparently the move has been complete most of the day. So if you guys continue to have problems, please contact me and I'll relay it over to Pete. I'm not experiencing any problems though. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 21:34, 14 March 2009 (EDT)

== 500 Internal error ==

This seems to occur whenever I edit a subsection on a page, and I click the edit button on the TOP of the page instead of the edit button next to the subsection title. So, if you wanna avoid this error, try using the button which only edits that subsection... [[User:Jasonred|Jasonred]] 05:40, 21 March 2009 (EDT)

:Already been tried. Doesn't work any better. UFOpaedia admin is on it, I've been told. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 12:05, 21 March 2009 (EDT)

:: Pete's finished his latest round of changes. Give it another go. - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 22:12, 21 March 2009 (EDT)

== Proposed top level links ==

I've written some pages which I'd like to be proposed be linked to the main page, unless anyone can suggest where to put them (careful now!).

I'd like to link [[Fictional Equivalents]] to the main page.

I'd like to link [[Wish List (TFTD)]] to the TFTD page. It would also be good to start a [[Known Bugs (TFTD)]] page, for TFTD-specific bugs.

However as some tricky template work is involved, I'd rather not make these links myself for fear of screwing up the main page(s). Thoughts? [[User:Spike|Spike]] 11:20, 14 November 2008 (CST)

: Feel free to edit the templates - as long as the tables look okay when you preview them, they shouldn't break the page. The templates are standard pages but with a fancy prefix to their file name to categorize them as templates. This was needed so that any updates to them would show up on the main page right away without forcing the viewers to force-refresh the page. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 12:46, 14 November 2008 (CST)

::It should be noted that the [[TRTBAG]] more or less covers the "Known Bugs for TFTD" segment. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 16:08, 14 November 2008 (CST)

:Well it covers the Research Tree bugs but not any of the other TFTD-specific bugs as far as I can see. Still that's a good starting point, thanks AQ! And thanks Zombie for adding the links. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 17:34, 14 November 2008 (CST)

::Maybe TRTBAG should just BECOME the "Known Bugs(TFTD)" page. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 17:36, 14 November 2008 (CST)

:Because TRTBAG is such an excellent self contained guide, and well written, and quite long, I think it should be separate. I will link to it under the Known Bugs (TFTD) page. I suggest the main page link to TRTBAG be remained "''Research'' Bug Avoidance Guide". Probably the TFTD Alien Glitches page can be gotten rid of. It only mentions one bug, which is not a bug at all. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 06:16, 15 November 2008 (CST)

==Terminology==

===X-COM/XCOM/XCom/Etc.===

I remember reading about this discussion before and if something concrete comes out I think it should be added to the [[Guidelines to writing articles]].
Do we have set a proper spelling to refer to the organization? IIRC the game uses X-COM/XCOM/X-Com/etc. Should we set a standard for the Wiki? [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 07:52, 21 November 2008 (CST)
:It's a good idea to agree on a single standard spelling for the Wiki, if only to keep links consistent and prdictable. But it's a shame if there is no clear canonical spelling though. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:28, 21 November 2008 (CST)
::From what I recall there isn't a standard followed on UFO Defense, where you have X-COM/XCOM/XCom/etc. Apocalypse might be more consistent and I have no idea for the other games. I try to use X-COM and I've done some edits to follow this standard spelling but I'd like to read more opinions [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 17:43, 22 November 2008 (CST)
:I've had a check through the in-game strings and most if not all of them say "Xcom", which is my least favourite spelling. :( I think X-COM has the best flavour. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:41, 22 November 2008 (CST)
If any of you folks here have been following what I've been up to lately at the StrategyCore forums, you'll see I have been amassing a collection of most of the game versions in the series. Checking my [http://www.strategycore.co.uk/xcom/pg/ufogameversions UFO Game Versions] site page, you'll see that the original European release used XCom while the budget releases used X-Com. Other than that, those spellings quickly fell by the wayside as MicroProse decided on X-COM which quickly gained approval and remained the standard spelling throughout the series. (You can't really go by in-game text as those were not checked for consistency). Anyhow, I'd opt for the same route MicroProse took: <b>X-COM</b>. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:33, 22 November 2008 (CST)

===Capitalization guidelines/rules for the wiki===

Another thing that crossed my mind are guidelines/rules tossed in to prevent overcapitalization.

Specific ingame terms/names should be always capitalized:
*Weapons (Boomeroid, Elerium, Entropy Launcher
*Alien Races (Sectoid, Lobsterman, Skeletoid, etc.)
*Organizations (MarSec, General Dynamics, Council of Funding Nations)
*X-COM Crafts (Skyranger, Manta, Dimension Probe)

Generic ingame terms/names (that already exist in English) should be capitalized the first time they are mentioned on a wiki entry. Some examples:
*Weapons (Plasma Rifle, Torpedo Launcher, Vortex Mine, etc.)
*UFO types (Large Scout, Dreadnaught, Alien Mothership, etc.)
*Soldier Attributes/Agent Stats (Stamina, Psi-defense, etc.)
*Base Facilities

Wiki terms should be capitalized the first time they are mentioned on a wiki entry:
*Tactics
*Economics
*Game Mechanics
*Etc.

A few other rules to prevent overcapitalization and make a smooth reading:
*After the 1st mention, generic ingame terms are not required to be capitalized. As an example, after the first mention of a Laser Pistol, any additional mention(s) to them can simply use the term pistol(s).
*When refering to similar names/terms, it is advisable to capitalize both when they are mentioned. Eg. "Auto Cannon, unlike Heavy Cannon, allows for automatic fire" "Large Scouts are more dangerous than Medium Scouts".
*The same applies to wiki terms.

[[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 16:54, 23 November 2008 (CST)

== Humor and Flavour Text ==

GEH!!! This whole issue is taking on a life of it's own. On one hand, yes, I can see the allure of ufopedia being a serious informative site. On the other hand, there's the "fun" factor... When you get right down to it, Xcom is actually a rather simplistic game in terms of storyline, and storyline interactivity, so we REALLY have to make up our own, otherwise the game degenerates into "capture this technology, research research, shoot shoot. MC = win game". The ingame UFOpedia is great, but it's limited to several paragraphs to describe an entire race of creatures, and 2-3 lines to describe the horror of Blaster Bombs and such. ... I vote that this online UFOpedia becomes everything that the ufopedia in-game was missing... let's have something that ENTERTAINS as well as giving good accurate information!

I'll wait for the votes to come in before touching anything else. I agree with you guys, the Lobstermen and other aquatic aliens getting eaten is something that is VERY much a part of the X-com community's culture... it should go into the UFOpedia. [[User:Jasonred|Jasonred]] 04:00, 13 March 2009 (CDT)

: I've nothing against humour. All for it. In fact I'd very much like to see more of that so that definitely gets my vote. A few light hearted moments in between all the seriousness does wonders. Perhaps not when you're getting into the particulars, but the descriptions or opening paragraphs that don't get into deep detail could be livened up a little. In moderation, of course!

: However, the hard part is deciding on the line between being humorous within the confines of what's available (yes, funny discussions amongst the troops about eating lobstermen after battle instead of selling it could count towards that), and then there's making stuff up. Apologies to Morken for borrowing an example from his on-going graphic novel: explaining the alien's general idiocy/sportsmanship through their strong belief in the tenets of Amgoth. Highly amusing, but not part of the story. Granted, I don't think we've got anything like that on the wiki, but you never know.

: In any case, a good mental exercise for the writers. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 05:14, 13 March 2009 (CDT)

My two cents then: I like the humour, anecdotes, flavour and fan fiction but I think the main purpose of UFOPaedia is informational and that should not be compromised. I like the little touches of humour, and I've been known to attempt them myself. But humour and anecdotes should be kept brief and supplementary - e.g. one-liners and wry observations at the end of a section. Non-canonical flavour text and fan fiction (especially) should be kept clearly separate and distinguishable. Someone reading the site with no prior knowledge of XCOM should be able to tell right away what is factual vs what is humour or speculation/imagination. Not quite sure how to do that - maybe by using sidebars, the Humour category... ok ran out of ideas there already. Maybe we need an "official" font for reproducing canonical, in-game flavour text, so it stands out. Not sure.

Also, humour, anecdote and flavour are much more subjective than fact. What one person thinks is funny, others may not. So non-factual content may just get edited out unless a lot of people agree that it's funny/cool/interesting etc - in fact that's probably already happening. Maybe a good idea is to make the jokes on the Talk pages, and if they are found to be universally funny, move them on to the main articles later - pretty much the same as factual content in fact? [[User:Spike|Spike]] 05:19, 13 March 2009 (CDT)

: I'm certain that we would all agree that the wiki is first and foremost an informative site. We needn't go so far as to point out to the readers what is or isn't. That would be overdoing it. A dash of humour anywhere we can get away with it without compromising the message, facts or turn it into fan fiction is really all that's required and can be more effective. Like spices, the right amount can add to the flavour of a dish. Too much and it just ruins it.

:Now a little creative writing to make the articles (with or without the humour) more captivating to the reader and less like text-books will certainly go a long way. But then again, I believe that we've always attempted to do this. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 06:04, 13 March 2009 (CDT)

:: I agree with NKF's point here regarding humor. But, concerning fanfic, to make up and add things that aren't on the original UFOPaedias or the History distributed with Interceptor is to take too much liberty with the original material (in regards with fan fiction). Just because it gets discussed in the forums at strategycore or xcomufo or that it is mentioned in someone's fanfic doesn't mean that it should be taken as a fact, regardless of the argument that the game story belongs to its fans/players. The game belongs to all of them and quite frankly we are quite a minority (although a very loyal one) regarding that. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 21:58, 2 April 2009 (EDT)

==XML dumps available?==
Hello guys! Kudos for creating this amazing wiki!

I have some ideas and I'd like to test them on an XML dump of ufopaedia, since it's a small but interesting wiki. Do you offer the dumps for download somewhere (like wikipedia does)? That would be absolutely fantastic. :) [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 10:23, 2 May 2009 (EDT)

:Do you mean [[Special:Export]]? --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:31, 2 May 2009 (EDT)

::I'm not sure if that export page does the job. It seems that it only allows downloading a list of articles I have to type in. What I want is ALL articles of Ufopaedia in XML, be it one file per article or one file for all articles(which I would prefer, since that is what Wikipedia provides and I'd like my software to work with all wikis). You can see what Wikipedia offers here [[http://download.wikimedia.org/]] and here [[http://download.wikimedia.org/enwiki/20090501/]]. Thanks! [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 23:19, 2 May 2009 (EDT)

Talk:Main Page

2009-05-02T14:23:56Z

RedNifre: downloading xml dumps?

__TOC__
----

== Site TODOS ==
A general dump of to-dos or maybe not-do's. Add any where appropriate:

* Template navigation toolbars for subsections. (Some tests have started)
* Strategy by terrain notes?
* Mention of bug where unit gets stuck in the corner of the map
* Mention of bug where you reload a battlescape mission only to be on an invalid level and how to recover from it (use OHMap, go back down to legal level, click until you find the map again, save the game). Often happens after editting the game, strangely enough. Is it possible the game stores map camera coordinates as a file checksum or somesuch?

== Discussion/talk page proposed format ==
Ok folks, we all seem to have our own ways of adding comments to a discussion page. The way it stands now, it becomes really difficult to follow a discussion when it is broken apart with different formats. What I suggest is this: when you leave a comment use a horizontal line to separate your post from the one(s) above it. In this manner, everything is left justified and the comments are separated. The reason why I do not support the colon as comment separation is that as the discussion progresses you are going to be adding more and more just to get the indenting correct. It also makes it confusing. Another side effect is that once you have a lot of colons present it pushes the text off the page itself and forces a scroll to the right to view. That isn't good.

I suppose if we really want to use colons as separators, we could alternate the use. If a comment is indented above yours, do nothing. If a comment is not indented, use a colon for your submission. Still, the constant zig-zagging isn't really the best idea either.

My vote is therefore to stick with the horizontal line (four dashes). If the discussion veers way off course, or if you have a couple questions/comments, break it apart into different headings. And always sign your post too as that makes it easier to follow.

Discuss.--[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:46, 9 March 2007 (PST)

Works for me, Zombie. Another problem with indentation is that one isn't necessarily addressing only the previous comment, but it could be about the previous one, and tying together things that are 4, 6, ''and'' 12 entries back. Colons are fine for quick rejoinders, but not as a requirement. A potential alternative is to leave two blank lines, as I just did after your sig. This is a fairly clear delineator for folks scanning quickly. However, the horizontal separator is more clear, in general. So I guess I'd vote for the hor-sep for all except quick comments thrown in, which can use colons. And anything that's a new topic or big break should get a new topic, using = signs. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 21:10, 9 March 2007 (PST)

----

I've reformatted [[Talk:Exploits#Extra_Ammo_Exploit]] to demonstrate how the indentation style ''can'' work, if done consistently. I think it's somewhat better than the line-separator style for very long discussions, making the structure a little clearer. However, if it's sometimes-used and sometimes-not things get messy, as you've noticed.

I'll codify the rules right here (surprisingly, they're not well-codified on Wikipedia itself, despite the fact that it's used quite consistently throughout the site):

*Add an indent for each reply
*Reuse your prior level of indentation if it's a back and forth:

First person's comment

:Second person's comment

::Third person's comment

:Second person again

::Third person again

::Third person's afterthought

:Second person again

::First person jumping back in

:::Third person once more

::First person again

*If you get to 5 or 6 indents, just "reset" (start without indents for the next reply).
*If you have an addendum to your own comments, use the same indent level and re-sign.
*If somebody doesn't know/doesn't use the right indent level, fix it when adding your next reply so the rules become clear during the course of conversation.
*Likewise, if someone adds a new comment to the top or fails to add a heading when starting a new subject, fix it when replying.

The problem we've had lately is the mixing of styles, neither being used correctly. So far it seems that myself, Sf, and NKF have been using indents, you (Zombie) and Mike favoring dashes, and most newcomers failing to use either. No clear winner just yet. ;-)
--[[User:Ethereal Cereal|Ethereal Cereal]] 23:56, 9 March 2007 (PST)

:What if you're addressing several and various issues raised before, not just a comment on the previous statement? (And it runs on for four or six paragraphs?) - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 00:14, 10 March 2007 (PST)

::If you're consolidating a bunch of replies to several earlier points, that's a good time to reset the indent.--[[User:Ethereal Cereal|Ethereal Cereal]] 01:07, 10 March 2007 (PST)

::: Works for me, Eth - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 16:47, 9 November 2007 (PST)

== British vs. American spelling ==

Summary: Use which ever convention you want. It does not matter as long as you do not get into petty spelling convention battles.

== XCOM Box Art ==

Someone (NKF? Danial?) once asked if anybody could scan XCOM's box art, so that they might e.g. put a better graphic on the main page. I just uploaded a 300 dpi scan of all four sides as [[Media:XCOM_UFO_Defense_DOS_US_Box_Art.zip]] (3.2 MB). The box is not in mint condition (see the ReadMe), but a little tweaking by somebody with skillz (Danial) could easily spruce it up. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 18:05, 19 October 2007 (PDT)

: Was it me? Hmm. Can't remember. I did think to just grab the cover for the PDF version of the X-Com Player's Handbook (US version - with the Mars/Super Avenger cover), but it's black and white. Could've sworn I've seen a copy in colour somewhere. Not that sepia version wouldn't look great though!
: Oh hang on, I don't think it was for the front page graphic in particular, but we did want to get various versions of the box art for the various games. - [[User:NKF|NKF]]

----
NKF - or anybody - can we consider replacing the current main page art, with the XCOM box art? Or a portion of it. I loved the game's intro and in-game "cartoon art", but why not use the game's best image, for our primary Main Page image? (Is there somebody with skills that can clean it up quickly? I'm happy to, but I'm no pics wizard.)

[[image:XcomScExample.png|thumb|100px|One of many possible screencaps]]Related to this, I think it would be a nice touch if anyone put a bunch of selected and/or random screen captures (screencaps) onto a page, with a link just "under" (i.e., indented under the Main Page entry for) [[Info|About X-COM: UFO Defense]]...

:I have a sneaking suspicion that we get a ton of lurkers (someone who is there but never speaks) who once played X-COM and came across our page by chance, and would like to relive it, if even for a few screencaps... yet as it is now, our site is becoming more of an in-depth encyclopedia, instead of a "you were once here" kind of place. All us hard core players gravitate toward the encyclopedia - but even if folks who once played it don't stay, if they say, "wow, I remember doing all that" based on a stack of screenshots, that would be good. I'm thinking of easy sections that are light on text (and no Ufopaedia info), but heavy on thumbnails and click-on screencaps (see the image to the right - I love that financier in the background) like:
:*My first base - Decisions
:*The Globe - Radar alert!
:*First contact! Small farm in Iowa, USA
:*Managing Research
:*Terror in Sydney! ''(include zombies - squad wiped out - see next)''
:*Headline: World Council generally supports X-COM efforts - subheadline - Australia may now be under the control of aliens ''(funding results for a month)''
:*Headline: X-COM squad impacted by "Blaster bomb" - the world cries (before and after pix)
:*The tricky depths of a Battleship
:*Elite squad Mind Controls all aliens
:*Final showdown: Cydonia
:Each of the sections above might have 1-5 images. Something like that.

:If no one objects, can I ask that anyone who is willing to do it, make a bunch of screencaps, using .pngs and thumbnails as shown above. Then lurkers can "remember the days" right up front. And a few more lurkers than currently breeze through, might stay.

:To put this in context, CNN recently had a number of articles admiring Commodore 64s (one of them [http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/ptech/12/07/c64/index.html?iref=newssearch here]). X-COM is like that, to me... it lives past its "life expectancy" to gamers, because of how well put together it was, especially including how much it hit you in the gut.

In summary, then. I have one question for us XCOM hardcore (can we change the Main Page image) and one for everybody (want to post a lot of screencaps?). I have made a stub page for the screencaps page. I'll retract it if the hardcore object or there's no response in a couple of months' time. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 21:44, 14 December 2007 (PST)
----

I'm perfectly fine with getting the main title changed. Get a few more ayes and we'll make it so.

A screencap section would be nice. I'm quite partial to creating screencap mini-comics (no, not real comics. Just sequential before/during/after images), although I never use them and they just get deleted in the end.

One benefit is that some of the shots can also be recycled throughout the rest of the site to illustrate certain things. Or for an article that's no more than a solid block of text, something to break up the monotony. I'm also always for a few well placed humorous shots.

-[[User:NKF|NKF]] 01:02, 15 December 2007 (PST)

:Sounds good, NKF. There could easily be a "comics" page link several ways:
::1) The new Main Page entry indented under [[Info|About X-COM: UFO Defense]] could also have a link to a comics page, but on the screenshot page itself,
::2) That same new entry on the Main Page could read something like "[[Screenshots]] - and [[Comics]]!" The concept of the screenshots page is to help folks relive the past. And something just as good as screenshots - or better - is screenshots with humor.
::3) Or, make a link for it, all by itself, somewhere obvious on the Main Page.
:I think it's a great idea!
:As for the other idea - you said you're fine re: changing the main title. But it's the graphic at the top of the Main Page that I'm talking about. Just to make sure we're clear on that. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 17:21, 21 December 2007 (PST)

== Favicon ==

Does the UFOpaedia have a favicon? -- [[User:NinthRank|NinthRank]] 17:51, 6 November 2007 (PST)

:We did have it at one time but I think it disappeared after an upgrade to the wiki software. If you have an idea for a favicon, submit it here. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 18:21, 6 November 2007 (PST)

Okay, I don't know where that logo in the upper left came from, but after a quick GIMP edit, I came up with this: [[Media:favicon.zip]]. I'm not quite sure how The GIMP works with icons, so I also included the .png's. What do you think? -- [[User:NinthRank|NinthRank]] 18:51, 6 November 2007 (PST)

:Not too shabby. Next time I talk to GazChap, I'll run it past him. Any more ideas for a favicon? I'd like to get a few (at least 3) and run it through a vote here. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:28, 6 November 2007 (PST)

::[[image:FavIcon-Crude1.png|thumb|16px]][[image:FavIcon-Crude2.png|thumb|16px]]NinthRank and Z, my two cents are something like this. My pics are incredibly crude - I'm a total graphics n00b - and would need somebody like you, Ninth, to turn it into the "burnished gold and navy" (or is that black?), like you did with yours. I couldn't even get my damn background to change for me using simple MS Word art ... what do you use? (See how n00b I am?)

::I think you have some great ideas there, but my favicons show as 16x16 pixels. (Is this because I use small icons? I had never heard the the word until you said it, Ninth, at which point I read the wiki entry, and it made immediate sense.) At 16<sup>2</sup>, you have to keep it incredibly simply... having the COM on a big X does that, because it doesn't "waste a repetitive 'X-' across the center", if that makes sense. Another idea is be careful with the X ... I didn't like the X in your 16x16 and 32x32 because it was "narrow" (more vertical than horizontal). I definitely like your 48x48. (I can't tell what's going on with your animated 16x16 .ico, my friend - a 16x16 pic on a 1280x1024 screen (or higher) needs to be real simple. It looks like a tiny pulsing thing, with an X sort of there, overall.) I think the X should be, if not symmetric, then, more wide than high - to me, this implies something "ominous". A true X would have to be "cut off" at the corners to be "wide and fat" at 16x16. This shows more in my second try than the first.

::You can make things bigger than 16<sup>2</sup>, a real plus and you get much more flexibility, but for me, only 16x16 exists.

::My two cents. I love your overall idea, and using navy (or black?) with gold trim. Thanks for signing in and helping out, NinthRank! -[[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 19:40, 14 December 2007 (PST)

==Technical Commentaries==

I just thought of adding a specific section concerning commentaries regarding the game, i.e., trying to explain how the weapons/diplomacy/funding/etc. would work in real life. The idea here is not to expand on the canon X-COM material but to describe/explain in a rational way.
I've come with this idea after reading Spike's section (on his [[User talk:Spike]] page) explaining the economics of X-COM and starting my own section regarding the Council of Funding Nations.
I think there is plenty of material available on the Data canisters that could be used/adapted to this. Also, the discussion regarding Elerium (with all those formulas) on the Talk Page is exactly the sort of thing I was thinking of.

- [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 22:59, 10 March 2008 (PDT)

: I don't see any problem with it. Go for it. We've started with a magnificent wealth of knowledge about the game itself (and a bit beyond, with the binary file diving). Theories and explanations of the X-Com world wouldn't be out of place. They'd certainly add a bit of literary colour and interest for those that wish to look beyond the game. There are lots of interesting bits and pieces scattered throughout the articles (like real world equivalents of weapon or tanks, just to name one example) that would probably fit better in a section like that than in the articles. Perhaps a an expanded data-canister like section would be in order. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 01:13, 11 March 2008 (PDT)

== Game Editors ==

I was going to add a link off the Main Page to the [[Game editors]] section that I wrote, under Misc. I still have a nagging feeling there is another list of them somewhere, but I can't find it. Any comments?

Also, any additions to the Game editors section are welcome.

[[User:Spike|Spike]] 03:40, 15 March 2008 (PDT)

: I don't think we've ever had a particular listing of editors.

: Tell you what, I'll throw these changes in, and we'll see how this works out.

:# I'll put the new game editor section onto the UFO main table (I've also renamed the page to stick to the first capital letter naming convention the other articles use).
:# I removed XComutil off the main table, since it'll be under the game file section.
:# Removed the UBK - it's just a tool for wiki editors and not something that would interest players of the game.

: I might also add the [[Command Prompt]] to the game editor section for its notes on using MS-Edit as a binary file editor.

:- [[User:NKF|NKF]] 04:46, 15 March 2008 (PDT)

:: While I see the validity of adding XComUtil to a page regarding editors won't it make sense to keep a sublink to the page which deals on how to use it, together with MSEdit? I mean, the other editors only have links to them on that page and I think that at least XComUtil deserves main page status because of its notoriosity and complexity. What do you guys think? - [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 14:08, 15 March 2008 (PDT)

----
a good idea to include the Command Prompt help. How about broadly dividing it into 2 sections: X-COM-specific tools and general purpose tools?
[[User:Spike|Spike]] 07:08, 17 March 2008 (PDT)

== Newb questions ==

Hello good sirs. Sorry for my bad non-native english. While in total noob in wiki, im relatively for long playd this great games. Great thanks for you for this great site, it really helped me with some ideas, especially with Funding Nation, even dont know how i played it before without it. Now more close to point, i realized what TFTD section here are, say, unperfect, if not somewhat wrong. As i readed somewhere not all play TFTD much, UFO1 instead, so it maybe be the point. Id edit something on it, but im totally dunno how to do it, and my language will have too many mistakes to be proudly presented to people. So id be glade to hear what you may propose for me to do. Again big thanks. Ill wait for answer.

PS Or im searched too badly, or its differ in TFTD (i play only it now) from UFO1, but i cant find here about stunned persons behaviour. Cant find what they awake only if theyr stun is lower then HP's and if only they have awaken person in theyr tile during end of turn. IMHO its important thing to know off, at least for me.

PPS. My friend made great tiny changes to one tiny file, what make FundingNations game way more easy and elegant then described in issue. I can upload it if you need this, tho its for TFTD im sure he can do UFO1 also if its needed. Anyway this game too easy even on FN to play it without it :).

Eh PPPS. Dunno how to properly log on :(.

: Do not worry about the language barrier - sometimes it's harder to understand people who speak English natively! ;) In any case, There'll be other editors who will be able to help fix the article for you if you can get the idea across.

: To get started editing pages, check the Community Portal on the left sidebar. That has links to articles that can help you get started - more or less. One good way to find out how some text is formatted (or anything else you'd like to duplicate) is to edit the page and see how it's done in the source.

: If in doubt, or if you're unsure about editing the article, feel free put your ideas or suggestions in the article's Discussion page.

: Because TFTD and UFO share a lot of the same mechanics, there would be a lot of unnecessary duplication if we were to write up articles for it that are already available in the UFO articles. Therefore we mainly include articles that cover topics that are unique to TFTD, like the weapons, door opening, aliens, etc. General mechanics like how damage works or how experience is earned is identical to UFO's, so there's no need to duplicate them. What sections do you think need improving or what sections do we need to add? The more input the better.

: Regarding consciousness, have you checked the [[Unconscious]] article? I think we might need to redo that article bit and perhaps add a few illustrations. One note about the difference between UFO and TFTD with the visual appearance of a unit recovered with a medikit needs to go in there too if it hasn't already. Oh well. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 22:54, 22 May 2008 (PDT)

: PS, to sign your messages in the discussion pages, put four tilde's <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> anywhere you want to insert your name and the timestamp.

== same questions ==

Thank you for answer. I been somwhat incorrect in my english. I didnt mean what TFTD pages are bad or what they lose reduntand UFO1 information. All they lack are only slightly wrongly described alien's dangers levels (one of most dangerous creatures cant be low treat, and least dangerous one medium) and lack of mission types what only TFTD have. Also i readed "Unconscious@ article few times, stiil cant find only how to use medkit and no word about what generally need for stunned person to rise. From that follow advices to grenade stunned chryssalids and so on.

PS. Oh, yes, and whats wrong with door openings?
[[User:Derrida|Derrida]] 08:59, 23 May 2008 (PDT)

: A unit falls unconscious when the stun bar is equal or greater than the unit's remaining health points. If it's under that, the unit will be awake.

: To wake a soldier up, you have to reduce the stun level by either waiting for the stun to wear off, 1 point per turn, or use stimulants on a medikit. Looks like the TFTD section doesn't have its own medikit page, but UFO's [[Medi-Kit]] section explains how to use it, as they are identical. Basically, if the unit is unconscious, the medic must stand on top of the unconscious unit and use stimulants (the second choice) until the unconscious soldier wakes up. When the unconscious unit wakes up, they'll appear to the north of the medic.

: TFTD's stun weapons are much more powerful than in TFTD, so you often have to use a lot of stimulants to wake a person up.

: TFTD's unique because it allows you to open doors by right clicking them - and it's a free action so you won't spend any TUs to do it. UFO cannot do this (except the Playstation version).

: As for the threat levels of the aliens - I agree, some should be reclassified. Personally I'd move the Gill-Men and Calcinite up to medium threat - all the current medium level threats look just about right though. What are your suggestions?

: Hang on, why are there so many references to vibroblades in the overview article? That can't be right. I'll have to update that later on. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 15:05, 23 May 2008 (PDT)

Nonono. I mean what if unit's stun damage falled below it's HP, and no one stand in tile it lying, it will never rise. Medkits not the point. No stunned aliens or soldiers will rise if no one will end turn on it, or take it to inventory/hand. I tried to say this. Maybe it been different in UFO1 (as with doors, i thought what doors always open by right click, and in UFO1 too (btw cant find about door opening anywere in wiki)), but in TFTD it means what you dont have to bother with stunned tentaculats etc to rise after stun if you do not stand on it, or try to move it in backpack/hand. Same with soldiers, you can click zillion turns, but they will never rise until someone stand on it. Without this game must be horrible with all this undying lobsters awake afer you pass them.
With danger level id suggest this: Harmless: hallucinoid; deep one; Low: gillmen; aquatoid; Meduim: zombie; calcinite; bio-drone; lobsterman; xarquid; high: tasoth; triscene; What really matters: tentaculat. In line of growing dangerness. [[User:Derrida|Derrida]] 16:30, 23 May 2008 (PDT)

== Regarding image file formats ==

I'd really like to add a note somewhere obvious about using GIFs for screenshots in the wiki, rather than JPGs. For 256-color images like X-COM uses, GIFs are no larger than JPGs and generally look much better. For example, see the nasty compression artifacts on the terrain maps in the [[Terror ship|Terror Ship]] article. PNGs might work just as well, I'm not sure, but we should really avoid JPGs.

Where would be the best place to mention this? I'm thinking near the top of the main page for visibility, but that might be more clutter than people want. [[User:Phasma Felis|Phasma Felis]] 23:59, 11 June 2008 (PDT)

:It's been dealt with [[User_talk:Zombie#Image_Types|here]] that PNG is the preferred file format of the wiki; however, where to note this...I honestly don't know. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 00:37, 12 June 2008 (PDT)

:: PNG's reduced to 256 or less colours can be quite the space saver for X-Com screenshots. You can go the extra step and run them through PNG compression programs and somesuch - but they're pretty good as-is. Jpgs should be reserved for images with a broader range of colours. One place the note could go is in [[Guidelines to writing articles]]. In fact, that section could do with a few extra additions in any case to expand is to that it's not just covering the composition of the language of the articles, but to cover the creation of the articles. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 03:04, 12 June 2008 (PDT)

== Hosting move. ==

Hi guys. It appears I'm still hosting the UFOpaedia - I did discuss moving it to StrategyCore with both Zombie and Pete a while ago and I think I gave them copies of what would be required.

Anyway, I'm moving hosting servers so the UFOpaedia is going to move too. I'm aiming to carry out the transfer on Sunday September 28th at about 8pm GMT+1. Any changes made between this time and the time that the transfer completes may be lost, but hopefully not. Just thought I'd give you guys a bit of notice.

I should point out that I still have no objection to hosting the UFOpaedia on my servers, it's a great project and you guys have done a bang-up job with it, it's far surpassed my original intentions :) However, if StrategyCore want to take over hosting to remove the potential "failure point" (i.e. me) then that's fine and we can give it another shot?

GazChap, 25th September 2008 12:50 GMT+1

:Thanks for the heads-up Gaz-Chap! Sure, StrategyCore is still willing to host the UFOpaedia. Sorry things didn't quite work out the last time we talked. Pete needs to be constantly reminded to do things as he's easily distracted. I'll try and start a fire under his bum to get the ball rolling again. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 07:14, 25 September 2008 (PDT)

::Hosting has now been moved to StrategyCore. Cheers to Pete and Zombie for sorting it out. GazChap, 11:28, 1 October 2008 (GMT+1)

::: There may be a slight problem with caching of the temporary holding page ("coming back soon". On some browsers I'm using (not all), the temporary page is still up and you can't see the UFOPaedia site. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 17:48, 1 October 2008 (CDT)

::The new website address is quite likely still propagating out through DNS, since we moved hosts. So that's just the nature of the internet and should be gone in a day or two. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 19:06, 1 October 2008 (CDT)

:Most browsers seem to allow a full page refresh via Ctrl + F5. There's also an option re caching under the Misc section of your Preferances - I had to disable it ages ago 'cause it was always failing to show me page changes... - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 21:54, 1 October 2008 (CDT)

Sorry about the downtime everyone. The bandwidth limit wasn't set high enough after the recent change in hosting and basically didn't allow access. I contacted Pete and he fixed the issue. Good to catch these issues earlier rather than later. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 15:11, 15 October 2008 (CDT)

=== 14 March 2009 ===

Zombie mentioned that Pete may be moving the server this weekend. I'm getting lots of errors and more or less unable to make updates to the site. Probably this is to do with the server move. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:14, 14 March 2009 (EDT)

:Apparently the move has been complete most of the day. So if you guys continue to have problems, please contact me and I'll relay it over to Pete. I'm not experiencing any problems though. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 21:34, 14 March 2009 (EDT)

== 500 Internal error ==

This seems to occur whenever I edit a subsection on a page, and I click the edit button on the TOP of the page instead of the edit button next to the subsection title. So, if you wanna avoid this error, try using the button which only edits that subsection... [[User:Jasonred|Jasonred]] 05:40, 21 March 2009 (EDT)

:Already been tried. Doesn't work any better. UFOpaedia admin is on it, I've been told. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 12:05, 21 March 2009 (EDT)

:: Pete's finished his latest round of changes. Give it another go. - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 22:12, 21 March 2009 (EDT)

== Proposed top level links ==

I've written some pages which I'd like to be proposed be linked to the main page, unless anyone can suggest where to put them (careful now!).

I'd like to link [[Fictional Equivalents]] to the main page.

I'd like to link [[Wish List (TFTD)]] to the TFTD page. It would also be good to start a [[Known Bugs (TFTD)]] page, for TFTD-specific bugs.

However as some tricky template work is involved, I'd rather not make these links myself for fear of screwing up the main page(s). Thoughts? [[User:Spike|Spike]] 11:20, 14 November 2008 (CST)

: Feel free to edit the templates - as long as the tables look okay when you preview them, they shouldn't break the page. The templates are standard pages but with a fancy prefix to their file name to categorize them as templates. This was needed so that any updates to them would show up on the main page right away without forcing the viewers to force-refresh the page. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 12:46, 14 November 2008 (CST)

::It should be noted that the [[TRTBAG]] more or less covers the "Known Bugs for TFTD" segment. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 16:08, 14 November 2008 (CST)

:Well it covers the Research Tree bugs but not any of the other TFTD-specific bugs as far as I can see. Still that's a good starting point, thanks AQ! And thanks Zombie for adding the links. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 17:34, 14 November 2008 (CST)

::Maybe TRTBAG should just BECOME the "Known Bugs(TFTD)" page. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 17:36, 14 November 2008 (CST)

:Because TRTBAG is such an excellent self contained guide, and well written, and quite long, I think it should be separate. I will link to it under the Known Bugs (TFTD) page. I suggest the main page link to TRTBAG be remained "''Research'' Bug Avoidance Guide". Probably the TFTD Alien Glitches page can be gotten rid of. It only mentions one bug, which is not a bug at all. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 06:16, 15 November 2008 (CST)

==Terminology==

===X-COM/XCOM/XCom/Etc.===

I remember reading about this discussion before and if something concrete comes out I think it should be added to the [[Guidelines to writing articles]].
Do we have set a proper spelling to refer to the organization? IIRC the game uses X-COM/XCOM/X-Com/etc. Should we set a standard for the Wiki? [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 07:52, 21 November 2008 (CST)
:It's a good idea to agree on a single standard spelling for the Wiki, if only to keep links consistent and prdictable. But it's a shame if there is no clear canonical spelling though. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:28, 21 November 2008 (CST)
::From what I recall there isn't a standard followed on UFO Defense, where you have X-COM/XCOM/XCom/etc. Apocalypse might be more consistent and I have no idea for the other games. I try to use X-COM and I've done some edits to follow this standard spelling but I'd like to read more opinions [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 17:43, 22 November 2008 (CST)
:I've had a check through the in-game strings and most if not all of them say "Xcom", which is my least favourite spelling. :( I think X-COM has the best flavour. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:41, 22 November 2008 (CST)
If any of you folks here have been following what I've been up to lately at the StrategyCore forums, you'll see I have been amassing a collection of most of the game versions in the series. Checking my [http://www.strategycore.co.uk/xcom/pg/ufogameversions UFO Game Versions] site page, you'll see that the original European release used XCom while the budget releases used X-Com. Other than that, those spellings quickly fell by the wayside as MicroProse decided on X-COM which quickly gained approval and remained the standard spelling throughout the series. (You can't really go by in-game text as those were not checked for consistency). Anyhow, I'd opt for the same route MicroProse took: <b>X-COM</b>. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:33, 22 November 2008 (CST)

===Capitalization guidelines/rules for the wiki===

Another thing that crossed my mind are guidelines/rules tossed in to prevent overcapitalization.

Specific ingame terms/names should be always capitalized:
*Weapons (Boomeroid, Elerium, Entropy Launcher
*Alien Races (Sectoid, Lobsterman, Skeletoid, etc.)
*Organizations (MarSec, General Dynamics, Council of Funding Nations)
*X-COM Crafts (Skyranger, Manta, Dimension Probe)

Generic ingame terms/names (that already exist in English) should be capitalized the first time they are mentioned on a wiki entry. Some examples:
*Weapons (Plasma Rifle, Torpedo Launcher, Vortex Mine, etc.)
*UFO types (Large Scout, Dreadnaught, Alien Mothership, etc.)
*Soldier Attributes/Agent Stats (Stamina, Psi-defense, etc.)
*Base Facilities

Wiki terms should be capitalized the first time they are mentioned on a wiki entry:
*Tactics
*Economics
*Game Mechanics
*Etc.

A few other rules to prevent overcapitalization and make a smooth reading:
*After the 1st mention, generic ingame terms are not required to be capitalized. As an example, after the first mention of a Laser Pistol, any additional mention(s) to them can simply use the term pistol(s).
*When refering to similar names/terms, it is advisable to capitalize both when they are mentioned. Eg. "Auto Cannon, unlike Heavy Cannon, allows for automatic fire" "Large Scouts are more dangerous than Medium Scouts".
*The same applies to wiki terms.

[[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 16:54, 23 November 2008 (CST)

== Humor and Flavour Text ==

GEH!!! This whole issue is taking on a life of it's own. On one hand, yes, I can see the allure of ufopedia being a serious informative site. On the other hand, there's the "fun" factor... When you get right down to it, Xcom is actually a rather simplistic game in terms of storyline, and storyline interactivity, so we REALLY have to make up our own, otherwise the game degenerates into "capture this technology, research research, shoot shoot. MC = win game". The ingame UFOpedia is great, but it's limited to several paragraphs to describe an entire race of creatures, and 2-3 lines to describe the horror of Blaster Bombs and such. ... I vote that this online UFOpedia becomes everything that the ufopedia in-game was missing... let's have something that ENTERTAINS as well as giving good accurate information!

I'll wait for the votes to come in before touching anything else. I agree with you guys, the Lobstermen and other aquatic aliens getting eaten is something that is VERY much a part of the X-com community's culture... it should go into the UFOpedia. [[User:Jasonred|Jasonred]] 04:00, 13 March 2009 (CDT)

: I've nothing against humour. All for it. In fact I'd very much like to see more of that so that definitely gets my vote. A few light hearted moments in between all the seriousness does wonders. Perhaps not when you're getting into the particulars, but the descriptions or opening paragraphs that don't get into deep detail could be livened up a little. In moderation, of course!

: However, the hard part is deciding on the line between being humorous within the confines of what's available (yes, funny discussions amongst the troops about eating lobstermen after battle instead of selling it could count towards that), and then there's making stuff up. Apologies to Morken for borrowing an example from his on-going graphic novel: explaining the alien's general idiocy/sportsmanship through their strong belief in the tenets of Amgoth. Highly amusing, but not part of the story. Granted, I don't think we've got anything like that on the wiki, but you never know.

: In any case, a good mental exercise for the writers. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 05:14, 13 March 2009 (CDT)

My two cents then: I like the humour, anecdotes, flavour and fan fiction but I think the main purpose of UFOPaedia is informational and that should not be compromised. I like the little touches of humour, and I've been known to attempt them myself. But humour and anecdotes should be kept brief and supplementary - e.g. one-liners and wry observations at the end of a section. Non-canonical flavour text and fan fiction (especially) should be kept clearly separate and distinguishable. Someone reading the site with no prior knowledge of XCOM should be able to tell right away what is factual vs what is humour or speculation/imagination. Not quite sure how to do that - maybe by using sidebars, the Humour category... ok ran out of ideas there already. Maybe we need an "official" font for reproducing canonical, in-game flavour text, so it stands out. Not sure.

Also, humour, anecdote and flavour are much more subjective than fact. What one person thinks is funny, others may not. So non-factual content may just get edited out unless a lot of people agree that it's funny/cool/interesting etc - in fact that's probably already happening. Maybe a good idea is to make the jokes on the Talk pages, and if they are found to be universally funny, move them on to the main articles later - pretty much the same as factual content in fact? [[User:Spike|Spike]] 05:19, 13 March 2009 (CDT)

: I'm certain that we would all agree that the wiki is first and foremost an informative site. We needn't go so far as to point out to the readers what is or isn't. That would be overdoing it. A dash of humour anywhere we can get away with it without compromising the message, facts or turn it into fan fiction is really all that's required and can be more effective. Like spices, the right amount can add to the flavour of a dish. Too much and it just ruins it.

:Now a little creative writing to make the articles (with or without the humour) more captivating to the reader and less like text-books will certainly go a long way. But then again, I believe that we've always attempted to do this. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 06:04, 13 March 2009 (CDT)

:: I agree with NKF's point here regarding humor. But, concerning fanfic, to make up and add things that aren't on the original UFOPaedias or the History distributed with Interceptor is to take too much liberty with the original material (in regards with fan fiction). Just because it gets discussed in the forums at strategycore or xcomufo or that it is mentioned in someone's fanfic doesn't mean that it should be taken as a fact, regardless of the argument that the game story belongs to its fans/players. The game belongs to all of them and quite frankly we are quite a minority (although a very loyal one) regarding that. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 21:58, 2 April 2009 (EDT)

==XML dumps available?==
Hello guys! Kudos for creating this amazing wiki!

I have some ideas and I'd like to test them on an XML dump of ufopaedia, since it's a small but interesting wiki. Do you offer the dumps for download somewhere (like wikipedia does)? That would be absolutely fantastic. :) [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 10:23, 2 May 2009 (EDT)

Talk:Known Bugs

2008-05-12T00:35:03Z

RedNifre: /* Strength Overflow */

== Bugs vs Exploits ==

Could someone comment please on the distinction between a bug and an exploit, and where to put each one? I would guess that a bug is something that undesirable and an exploit "might be" desirable, if you want to cheat. But what about exploits that happen by accident, or bugs that need to be forced to happen?

I was going to add the Research Rollover bug to the Exploits sections, but they seem to all be under construction. What's the agreed approach?

[[User:Spike|Spike]] 04:16, 15 March 2008 (PDT)

* i think that an exploit is somthing you can trigger and gain an advantage from. a bug may or may not have a known trigger, and does not give an advantage if it does.

== Difficulty Bug ==

We should for historical reasons outline the "Difficulty Bug" that [[XcomUtil]] has saved most of us from. Any takers? --[[User:JellyfishGreen|JellyfishGreen]]

-----

That would only require two or three short lines. Something like this:
'' " Because of one or two incorrectly set bytes in all dos versions of the game( 1.0 through to 1.4), no matter what difficulty was selected, the difficulty bug would reset to beginner at the end of the first mission. XcomUtil performs a very minor tweak that corrects this problem. This bug was officially fixed in the Collectors Edition Windows port (also commonly known as UFO Gold). " ''

Or perhaps something a bit more succinct, and with less commas. Ha!

- [[User:NKF|NKF]]

-----

This is a technical bug that doesn't happen to everyone and one this article wasn't really meant to chronical - but we won't turn away helping a fellow player if it can't be helped. It's just that there are so many random crash points in this game that it would take far too long to find them all or come up with solutions for them.

Certainly, the transfer crash can happen to some players, but it's not one that can be reproduced easily. It's just like the random crash that some players get when they research a floater medic. It crashes the game for some of us, but others don't seem to notice it at all.

It really depends on your hardware and OS setup, whether or not your copy of the game is damaged or your savegame is damaged, etc.

Does it happen in all games or just this one savegame?

- [[User:NKF|NKF]]

-----

== "Invisible Muton" bug ==

Upon shooting repeatedly a Muton, it sometimes plays its "death" animation without sound (as if falling unconscious) and it is no longer displayed in the screen, while remaining visible to my soldiers (I can center the screen and the cursor appears yellow over them). Under this state, they cannot be targeted by Stun Rods. They may play their death animation anytime they get shot, until they truly die, when they emit their characteristic sound and leave a corpse (along with any items carried).

I'm quite fond of laser weapons, maybe this happens more often with those.

Also, though I remember experiencing this quite often fighting Mutons, it may happen to any other high health race.--[[User:Trotsky|Trotsky]] 02:59, 2 July 2006 (PDT)

-----

Never seen that one myself. Another "unpatched game" thing maybe?

There's a (very rare) bug that allows your soldiers to live if they become stunned by an explosion that happens to kill them. Sometimes the game will register their death, and THEN register that they've been stunned. In every case I've seen this happen, however, the unit will have such a low amount of health that a single fatal wound will render it dead (again) on the next turn. I have a vague memory that other players may have been able to get a medkit to the scene on time...

I dunno if that's related to your issue at all (I doubt it, but... meh). I'd advise using a Mind Probe on the alien the next time it happens so you can check the aliens stun/health levels.

- [[User:Bomb_Bloke|Bomb Bloke]]

----

I'm pretty sure I've seen this with Mutons. Possibly Chrysallids as well, another high health, high armor creature. They were still readily killed by shooting the place they are. Good thought on the MP, BB

---[[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 08:51, 2 July 2006 (PDT)

----

I've been known to have a dying muton(in fire) to spin around and then switch to the female civilian death animation. With the scream and everything. Even got a civilian death registered at the end of the mission. And this didn't just happen once, but on another separate occasion.

Hmm. shape-shifting reptilians in the game! LOL! Happens alot [[User:EsTeR|EsTeR]]

Unusually enough, I once had a sectopod die and then drop a tank corpse. I was using the Lightning at the time for my troop carrier, so you can imagine my surprise.

Then there was one occasion where a floater dropped a snakeman corpse. Let's not even get into the sort of things the aliens like to stuff themselves with.

Your invisible alien bug is quite common, although there appears to be many causes for it. I think one involves a full object table when it comes to invisible aliens in bases. But it can also happen in ordinary missions as well. I'm guessing the game may have tried to do something in the wrong order, and sprite information for the unit may have been lost or corrupted along the way.

Having had an experience where all the chryssalids become invisible in one base defence mission was quite a shocker. I fixed this by saving the game, quitting and then restarting the game. If you ever get an invisible alien again, try this and see if it helps. If it doesn't, well, just keep a careful watch on your map and any alerts that pop up as you play.

There's a similar but less severe bug where a dead alien will still leave its centre-on-unit alert button, but this goes away shortly after you move or turn.

- [[User:NKF|NKF]]

----

That last bug happens when exploding Cyberdiscs kill nearby Sectoids, doesn't it?--[[User:Trotsky|Trotsky]] 23:56, 2 July 2006 (PDT)

----

This is a pretty easy one. I guess this bug occured on UFO recovery on a battleship, an alien base assault or a base defense mission? As soon as there are too many items on the map, the game saves some item slots for the equipment to be displayed (since it is more valuable and more important to research). This would also make stun weapons lethal if the stunned aliens would vanish. therefore the game has a failsafe if an alien is stunned (or badly wounded and becoming uncontious). The downed alien's stun level is set exactly on its left health points therefore resurrecting it instantly. This cycle is broken when the alien is finally killed. This means if you want to stun an alien in such a situation you have to destroy some items first.

- by tequilachef (April 4th 2007)

== Vanishing snakemen ==

I've known snakemen to become invisible when standing on a hay bale. On the first occassion I had a poor tank getting shot while spending numerous turns looking for it. On the second occasion I had an alien under Psi-control, left it on the hay bale, and couldn't find it next turn. - Egor

---

This is not limited to snakemen. Hay bale block visibility quite much when a unit is standing on it. Two possible solutions:
- Destroy the hay before entering
- Shoot at the hay. If it is destroyed any unit on it will become visible (as long as no other bales are blocking the line of sight). You might also hit the enemy directly.

I Dnt know if the aliens are affected by this diminished sight, too. My guess would be no.

- By tequilachef (April 4th, 2007)

== Blaster Bomb Bug ==

I'm currently playing through X-com UFO Defense, I have the collectors edition version. I'm in the process of trying to catch a live alien commander and the blaster bomb bug is making this very difficult. If i remember correctly a commander is always in the command center of the the alien bases. The problem is anytime i get close there is always a dude with a blaster launcher up there that tries to kill my troops. When they try to fire it down at me the bug kicks in and they blow up the whole command room and all the aliens in it because they can't figure out how to get the blaster bomb down the grav lift thing in there. This is making it very dificult to actually catch a live commander. Anyone have any ideas for tactics or anything to breach that room without the aliens trying to fire a blaster launcher up there? - eL Hector

: I can suggest two possible solutions. The first is to wait outside the command room for the alien to move closer to you. If it comes out of the room or if you know it has moved down the lift, you then burst in and stand right next to it to stop it from firing the blaster. This is risky because there could very well be a heavy plasma toting alien in there. The other is to use a small launcher and launch it up at the ceiling near where you think the alien with the blaster is standing. -[[User:NKF|NKF]]

== Disappearing Ammunition ==

I have observed that problem with X-COM 1.2, modded with XCOMUTIL. My stun bombs and heavy rocket missiles, along with clips for the auto cannon went missing.
[[User:Vagabond|Vagabond]]

------

Just run a test using my 1.4 DOS version with XComUtil but my stun bombs didn't disappear: 30 + 1 back in the base they came from, same number after I went tactical and I dusted-off immediately. Are you running XComUtil with Runxcom.bat or did you simply run Xcusetup?

[[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 22:12, 22 February 2007 (PST)

:Is it a case of hitting the 80-item limit?--[[User:Ethereal Cereal|Ethereal Cereal]] 12:28, 23 February 2007 (PST)

------
With runxcomw.bat, as everytime. Apologies, I retested and it seems like I was mistakened, but I could have sworn that I lost them dang stunbombs. Had to manufacture some. I will test some more, using four heavy weapons and seeing whether their ammunition disappears at all. Thanks. [[User:Vagabond|Vagabond]]

==MC at end = MIA?==

I am sure I have seen this again recently, where I won a mission with no casualties (I thought), but the last thing I killed was a Commander that had been chain MC'ing a psi-attack-magnet trooper, and that trooper was listed as MIA at the end (presumably because he was on the enemy side at the end of combat). Is this a bug, or is there another way to get MIA's on a completed mission that I might have missed?

Since then I have been waiting for the leaders to panic at the end before killing them (or waiting for a rare resist), so I can safely exit, but am I being overcautious?

--[[User:Sfnhltb|Sfnhltb]] 13:45, 27 February 2007 (PST)

If the trooper was mind controlled on the turn you killed the last alien it will be listed as MIA. No bug there :)

[[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 18:16, 1 March 2007 (PST)

Huh, why would that happen - your soldier should recover the very next round, why would he go MIA?

--[[User:Sfnhltb|Sfnhltb]] 18:20, 1 March 2007 (PST)

Doesn't make sense to me as well but that's how the game works.

[[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 15:05, 2 March 2007 (PST)

----

It seems that regaining control of units under enemy mind control works different for alien and human players. My guess: aliens under human MC are reverted to alien control AFTER THE ALIEN AND BEFORE THE HUMAN TURN while human units under alien control are reverted RIGHT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE HUMAN TURN. This explains three different phenomenons:

- The discussed MIA "bug" (he unit would be returned in the next human turn, but since it never starts it is lost. The mission is still won since no unit with a "genuine alien" marking is left)

- The fact that a mission is lost when the last human falls under MC while it is not won when this happens to the last standing alien (the aliens get their unit back before their turn starts and therefore have a unit left to pass the "anyone alive?" check, the humans would have no unit left to start a turn with. They WOULD have as soon as the turn starts, but no unit left before turn means bust)

- The fact that aliens still can see all an MCed human saw at the end of the human turn that follows the MC while this is not vice versa (The MCed human can give information to the alien side before reverted while an MCed alien is reverted too early). The result is that aliens can control a human indefinitely without having any alien seeing him until the MC is disrupted for one turn.

All confused? Then I did a good job! No seriously, this must be the explanation, I couldn't think of any other way.

- By tequilachef (April 4th, 2007)

: You're absolutely correct on the first two points. It's a sequence issue - you never get round to recovering the unit before the new turn starts, so you end without any units whatsoever. Makes senses too since the aliens would continue to continue to mind control that same unit over and over indefinitely.

: The third point however: The aliens don't need to know the location of the last MC'd unit. They know the location of all your troops whether they've seen them or not from the very start. They appear to give you a few turns of grace where they won't attack you outright (unless, from my observation, all your soldiers are incredibly weak). This is evident because all of the aliens will eventually make their way towards the nearest soldier even though their movement pattern may seem semi-random. Also, they know where you are because they can initiate psionic attacks without having seen any of your troops. They generally go after the weakest troops first.

: Just to add a semi-related point, but from the alien's perspective. If an MC'd alien unit is in the exits when you abort the mission, this alien is not recovered and in fact simply vanishes. Any equipment it was carrying is recovered, unknown artefacts or otherwise. You could possibly think of this as their version of MIA. However, the aliens differ ever so slightly in that if it's the last alien standing and under temporary mind control by the player, the mission doesn't end straight away. But I guess this is only because the player has everything under control, whereas in the other scenario, the Ai is in control.

: -[[User:NKF|NKF]]

== Crash Site in the atlantic ocean ==

That's right, my game generated a crash site on water. Here are the details:

- Crash Site a bit southeast of the USA (which was infiltrated a few days before by sectoids, resulting base had already been taken out), but certainly not on land.

- UFO: battleship, floater, alien harvest

- Geoscape: 8 X-Com Bases, 1 (known) Alien base, 2 other crash sites, 1 other (known) flying UFO (though almost worldwide decoder coverage), 3 X-Com Crafts out, 1 waypoint

- Date: January 2000

- Most Interesting: The Craft that downed the ship was a recently finished Firestorm (first human-alien hybrid craft I had built, I know this is lame for that date. Limited myself on 25 Scientists to improve the challenge) equipped with twin plasma. I had it built and equipped in Antarctica and then transferred to Europe. This base had no Elerium, a fact that enabled me to use the infinite fuel exploit which was in effect when downing the UFO. My craft was only slightly damaged when doing so. The battleship was the first target assigned to the craft, it came directly from my base.

- When shot down, the UFO was not targetted by any other craft.

- I had not lost or sold a single craft to that point.

- When sending a squad to the crash site the game didn't crash but generated a farm land ground combat terrain.

- I was not able to reproduce the bug from the savegame dated 2 hours before downing the UFO

Well guys, any intelligent guesses? I still have the savegames (before and after downing)! If you want to have a look, write here.

- By tequilachef (April 5th 2007)
----
: Well I'm sure you know about crash sites that are near land can sometimes actually be on water, so I'm going to assume that this site is well far away from any land mass. Could it be a weird entry in GEODATA\WORLD.DAT that has a land mass out in the ocean? Also are you sure the game didn't crash? Sometimes when it does it will load the previous mission (and usually 90% are at farm terrain). Are you sure it generated a new map and not load the last one?
:No real guesses but maybe some starting points to look at. I've probably stated some obvious situations you know about and have accounted for, but it never hurts to double check :D
- [[User:Pi Masta|Pi Masta]] 14:23, 5 April 2007 (PDT)

== Inconsistencies in MCing Cyberdiscs and Sectopods ==

I experienced, that when MCing one quadrant of a large terror unit any action it does only affects this quadrant (especially use of time units). That means, when TUs are up for one part, MC another one and continue firing. This however does not work out when moving the unit while it is not under complete control. The TUs used up by the resulting reaction fire from the rest of the unit is also deducted from the TUs "your" part has left (making it impossible for the controlled parts to return fire). This however only happens under reaction fire, not if "your" part fires on it's own. I don't know if this comes up when uncontrolled parts shoot by themselves in the alien turn, since this is hard to find out.

: That's because large units literally are made up of four separate units. They only share the same set of general stats (in unitref.dat). Unfortunately the 'under mind control flag' is unique to the four units, not the shared stats! So you in effect have multiple units under different control sharing the same stats. So if you move and it results in a reaction from the unit, it will spend the TUs you're using.
: Successful mind control automatically fills up the unit's TUs, so each mind controlled sector gets to move or attack again until there are no more sectors to mind control. Useful way of turning reapers into long range scouts!
: In TFTD, they attempted to fix this bug, but in fact made it much-much worse! The only way to mind control the unit properly is to control the upper left quadrant. Only! Any other quadrant will result in a partial (clockwise) control, and you may gain control of units other than that unit, or may even get into situations where you gain permanent 'partial control' of a large unit you haven't even sited. Wackiness all around!

:- [[User:NKF|NKF]]

== Facility Dismantle Bug ==

Boba: I've never experienced this bug myself in all my games in the Collectors Edition. It may very well vary from computer to computer.

-[[User:NKF|NKF]]
:I, however, have experienced it. I lost an entire month's worth of playtime because I couldn't solve it. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]]

::Anyone, any ideas on why it might vary from PC to PC? -[[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]]

:::I'd check other factors before blaming a given system. Assuming no mods are being used the most obvious is the order in which you initiated the construction of the modules. Then we've got which one was due to be completed first, and I'm sure there's a few other things to test out. Usually, a player won't cancel in-progress modules on a regular basis, so you wouldn't expect this bug to turn up often. - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 01:53, 9 June 2007 (PDT)

== Manufacturing Limit Bug ==

Unfortunately, Mike, no you did not get it correct. It is the raw number of hours needed to complete the project, not the projected hours. I discussed this on the X-Com Forums a few months back at the following link: http://www.xcomufo.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=242027760&st=0&#entry164411

I did tests at the time in regard to the accuracy of the data given there, but I've lost the results. I'll quickly redo the tests in the next hour or so. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 19:00, 8 June 2007 (PDT)

:Tests complete. The breakpoints for every item were exactly where I predicted, regardless of number of engineers assigned. (I ran up a huge queue of items at my dedicated factory base on an old game, and then assigned whatever engineers would fit onto one project at a time, canceling projects as data was confirmed. This is only semi-random, but it serves our purposes.) I did run into a single issue, though. It appears that despite having 5 empty hangars at a (different!) base, the workshop there could not queue up more than 3 of any one craft at a time, thus making this bug impossible to replicate with the Firestorm or Lightning, as you must be producing more than three for the bug to occur. However, it still works with the Avenger. Later, I shall see about constructing a dedicated Hangar base with 7 hangars in order to attempt to replicate the bug. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 19:33, 8 June 2007 (PDT)

::Sounds great, Arrow. Why not post a simple example that shows how the problem works. As in, "with 1 Eng and 2 Avengers you might think X, but no, it's Y". And please delete my example. And it's a fine pleasure to meet you! Cool - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]]

:::When you say the usual resources are used by the "lost" resources, that includes cash, right? It sounds like if you're willing to foot the extra bill [[Buying/Selling/Transferring#Manufacturable_Prices|money/component-wise]], this could be used to build Avengers slightly faster then normal.

::: The usual time is 34000 hours. Double that and subtract 65535 and you're left with a paltry 2465 hours. Even a single workshop squad of 10 engineers will pull that off in a little over ten days. - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 01:53, 9 June 2007 (PDT)

::::Sadly, this exploit doesn't work, because the high bit is stored SOMEWHERE. I lack a hex reader and have no code reading skills to speak of, so I'm a bit limited here. If you set up a Workshop as you described, the game would take all the time for 2 Avengers, all the resources for the same, but in the end only produce 1 Avenger. Meanwhile, I'll run more tests on the resources thing. I could swear it consumes the resources, but I'll double check.

:::::There is no need to store the high bits if the actual completion condition (assuming adequate money) is "number made is number ordered", which wouldn't reference the hours remaining at all. - [[User:Zaimoni|Zaimoni]] 01:49, 9 Oct 2007 (CDT)

::::Tests done; I was unable to replicate the 'disappearing item' trick,(Which I didn't test for last night) even with Avengers! It appears I was wrong; this still counts as a bug, though, because the wraparound is a problem.

::::Ironic that so much of this discussion centers around Avengers, because that's where I discovered this in the first place! [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 06:48, 9 June 2007 (PDT)

----

I'm revisiting XCOM and was working on [[Manufacturing Profitability]]... Arrow, can you (or anyone else) say a little bit more on the Known Bugs page about this [[Known_Bugs#Manufacturing_Limit_Bug]]? It's not clear to me exactly what the bug does, except that it understates hours. Is that all?... does it still take the (non-buggy) amount of time, still use all the same resources, still make the same number, etc.? It sounds like it could be a drastic bug - or is it only a very superficial one, a display bug for the hours? It sounds like you're leaning toward this latter.

Also on a semi-related note... I could swear I saw much more detailed info on the [[Known_Bugs#Facility_Maintenance_Costs]] issue... IIRC, the incorrect amount that's charged for maintenance, depends on exactly where a facility is in the base. IOW, different "rows" of the base cost different amounts. Could somebody provide a link there, and/or flesh the bug out better?

Thanks! - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 11:22, 8 October 2007 (PDT)

:I've actually seen the bug work both ways, but I've only been able to actually replicate the more superficial version of the bug. So the bug report up is about a superficial bug that drastically understates production time. If you wish to make this clearer, you have my blessings. As well, that 'different charging based on location' is dealt with here: http://ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Talk:Base_Facilities ; however, the table has been broken with the Wikiupgrade, and I lack sufficient knowledge of HTML table code to fix it. But it should be of use to you. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 11:26, 8 October 2007 (PDT)

::Cool, I fixed [[Talk:Base Facilities]] but also re-organized and expanded [[Base Facilities]] so that it includes that bug in detail, as per Talk... this is an important issue that should be up front. I see that there's a separate [[Maintenance costs]] page, but I can't see having something so important (the maintenance bug explanation) all on its own page (which makes for a rather short page) rather than together with all the rest of the base facility info. If others agree (or don't care), I'll move anything remaining on Maintenance Costs to the Base Facilities page, then delete Maintenance Costs and re-route links. And if somebody does care, then please move my new section to Maintenance Costs, and move all the links, etc. Oh also I put in more words on your Manufacturing Limit Bug - how does it look? - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 16:37, 8 October 2007 (PDT)

:Looks pretty good, although it'll wrap fully; if you ask for 120000 hours, it won't be displaying 'almost no' time. The way I discovered it was when building two Avengers; I ordered two, paid for two, waited for two...and got one. But as said, haven't managed to repeat it, so until I do, we'll leave it like that. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 18:00, 8 October 2007 (PDT)

::I just revised and put in your specific example, because it's certainly possible some of us die-hard players will order up more than 1 Avenger at a time - and it's guaranteed it'd be a pain if 1 of them disappeared, laugh. I wasn't sure how concrete you were on that example but now I hear you say, you are sure it happened at least once. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 18:33, 8 October 2007 (PDT)

:I have a question concerning the manufacturing "bug" which eats a craft in production due to wrap-over of the byte. Arrow (or whoever did the test), did you have a large quantity of craft already built at your bases? If so, I think this bug has more to deal with clogging up [[CRAFT.DAT]]. See, that file has a limit of 50 entries. Each craft takes up one record and each base you have built also consumes one spot. 8 bases allows 42 craft to be housed, while 6 bases allow 44. If you try to buy or manufacture craft once the file is full, nothing shows up in the game even if you have hangar space available. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 19:00, 8 October 2007 (PDT)

::Huh, I never knew that. I don't see it listed on the Bugs page... I'll stick it in there. I've never approached that number, but some folks might. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 19:07, 8 October 2007 (PDT)

:I was able to continue building other Avengers after that project, and they appeared correctly, so I do not believe that is the issue. In any event, I have a very bad case of 'archivism' and probably still have the save game and the CRAFT.DAT file around on my system; in fact, I think I was playing it a few days ago. I can see if I can find it and upload it; it created a 'hole' in the Avenger fleet numbers, where Avenger's x and x+2 were built, but x+1 was not. I'll look for it tonight and tomorrow and upload it to the wiki if I find it. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 19:10, 8 October 2007 (PDT) EDIT: I found the file; I have 28 Avengers and 1 Skyranger in my employ. All Avenger numbers EXCEPT #2(Avenger-2) are accounted for, and I have not sacked or lost any Avengers. So this is where the hole and 'eaten' Avenger is. If anyone wants the CRAFT.DAT file from this game, I'd be happy to forward it. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 21:20, 8 October 2007 (PDT)

::Sure, send it my way and I'll take a look at it. (Might as well send me the whole saved game as I may want to look at the other files too). I have tried to recreate this bug by manufacturing 1, 2 and 3 Avengers at a clip but all of them always show up. Don't know what else I could do to get this problem to crop up. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 21:32, 8 October 2007 (PDT)

:File emailed. On the side, I've tried the same thing, and never been able to repeat the bug. It's been months since the first discovery, so I can't recall whether it was the first or the second Avenger that didn't appear. So maybe it was just a fluke. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 21:57, 8 October 2007 (PDT)

== Unconscious Enemy in Equipment Screen ==

The following happened to me repeatedly over the last few days.

In the last tactical Mission a live alien has been captured. When now beginning an UFO crash recovery mission this type of alien (same race and rank) appears in the equipment screen before the mission starts, meaning I can give it to any of my soldiers.
If I do so I can store the alien in the skyranger for the duration of the mission and, if it gains consciousness, kill or stun it at the end of it. A pile of equipment without a corpse will be in the UFO, indicating that the stunned alien is not some kind of duplicate but instead has been taken from the aliens of this mission. This is supported by the fact that in those missions the maximum number of crew members has not been surpassed.
If I do not do so the Alien will be placed in the crashed UFO. Whether it is unconscious or not I do not know, but the fact that it is completely disarmed when encountered in the battle suggests that it is.

So far it seems the following is necessary for the bug to occur:
# An alien has to be captured alive in the last tactical combat
# It has to be of the same race and rank as one of the aliens in the new tactical combat

So far this only worked...:
# If the new tactical combat was an UFO crash recovery of a medium scout.
# For floaters and mutons
# For soldiers and navigators
# If the alien in the last mission was stunned by normal weapon fire (although I do not think this is important) and not picked up (again, not likely to be important) or destroyed (which would mean it has to be actually captured)

It seems NOT to depend on the following:
# The type of the last mission (were, so far: Ground assault battleship, crash recovery large scout, base defense)
# Which squad or vessel was involved capturing the alien
# Where it is locked up
# If it has been transferred since capture or not

Would be interesting to know:
# What happens if the alien in the inventory screen is the only survivor
# If the alien in the invenory screen is one of the aliens randomly killed in the crash or not (it is likely to be one of the killed aliens, so far the equipment piles were always within the UFO)
# If this is not limited on crashed medium scouts: Does this work with terror units? What about large ones?

Maybe this is related to the proximity grenade bug (transfer of item properties to next tactical combat).

Additionally, in one of those mission a part of the terrain was not generated correctly. It was in farm terrain (The house on the right square, or north east square, in [[Image:Terrain-cult.gif|this pic]]). The outer wall right to the right window of the southern wall (1st Floor) was missing. Directly outside of the hole was a floor tile. I could walk a soldier through the wall, but he fell right through the tile. Dunno if this has to do with the stunned alien bug.

Version is collectors edition (the one from abandonia.com).

----------------

When a mission starts, the GeoScape engine generates the unit and object tables (in MissDat's [[OBPOSREF.DAT]], [[UNIPOS.DAT]], and [[UNIREF.DAT]]) before "shutting down". The Tactical engine then generates the maps, places the aliens on it, and blows up the UFO (if need be). Whether or not map generation and the subsequent events happen before you equip your soldiers I don't yet know.

The test would be to check the aforementioned files to see if they contain an unconcious alien, and/or the body.

Note that you can't see the bodies of large units on the ground (they count as four seperate objects covering four seperate tiles, so allowing the user to pick one up would essentially let you rip them apart).

- [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 06:35, 5 August 2007 (PDT)

----------------

I honestly have no idea of how all those files work. But I still have a savegame in battlescape that is in one of those missions. So if anyone wants to have a look at those files...

I forgot to mention: I reloaded a geoscape savegame shortly before the battle to recreate the bug, but it seems that reloading in geoscape before the buggy battle eliminates the bug. I guess his should narrow down the possible reasons...

--------

Next time it happens, backup the aforementioned files before you start another mission. I'm afraid a savegame wouldn't be of much help.

- [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 00:54, 7 August 2007 (PDT)

== Soldiers moved to outside of combat screen ==

Hi, I've got a DOS version of UFO:EU, and I've encountered a bug in the tactical combat. Sometimes (rarely) a X-COM soldier changes its location on the map on player's turn start and is placed on outside of the map, one tile north from the (north) border of the field. AFAIR the unit is then selectable (you get the flashing highlight when cursor is above), but is stuck outside of the field. Has anybody encountered this bug? It seems to happen randomly, but more frequently during the terror missions and on early turns (so maybe it's caused by high number of player/alien/civilian units?). --[[User:Maquina|Maquina]] 08:16, 3 September 2007 (PDT)

:I've never encountered this bug in CE of UFO. Presuming AFAIR means "As Far As I Recall," what exactly was the soldier doing? Any equipment data, location, or stat info might help us pin it down. Were afflicted soldiers always carrying a specific equipment set or weapon? Where were they on the map before they got moved? Did they get bumped a few spaces, or teleported halfway across the Battlescape? Does it happen more often on a specific difficulty?(Your theory would suggest this would happen most commonly on Superhuman) Against a certain type of alien? Best of all, if you can recreate the situation in a game, save the game and then you could upload the save file to the forums or this wiki, and the rest of us could take a look for ourselves and the code divers could root around for the cause. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 15:03, 3 September 2007 (PDT)

:: I've had this happen to me several times in UFO and TFTD. I don't know if it's specific to the Dos version or if it can happen in the CE as well. Sometimes the soldier ends up beyond the boundary of the map right at the start of the mission, at other times it happens after you load a game. This game is glitchy, which is the source for so many of its bugs, so your soldier's coordinates are probably getting corrupted to the point where they are -1 on either the X or Y axis of the maps's normal boundaries. For me it's commonly along the top edge of the map. I don't ever recall it happening mid-mission, only at the start or after a load. I cannot faithfully say whether it happened with or without XComutil, but that could be one of the possibly many causes for this. - [[User:NKF|NKF]]

:: I don't play UFO often, so I rely on just several campaigns played. This happens rarely (I've encountered this bug twice in my last campaign with ~80 missions played), but if you haven't seen this happen then it probably doesn't show up in the CE edition. In my experience the soldier is moved always beyond the north/top map border. I think (but I'm not sure) that this affects the first soldier from the team more commonly than others (or maybe even exclusevily?). The equipment/armor carried is probably not relevant, since the units moved this way don't have any special stuff, and this bug shows up on different stages of the gameplay (ie. sometimes when you have ordinary rifles, sometimes when all your units got heavy plasmas and power suits). --[[User:Maquina|Maquina]] 04:12, 4 September 2007 (PDT)

'''MY ramblings have been moved to my discussion page''' [[User:EsTeR|EsTeR]]

=Great Circle Route=

Should we have the Great Circle Route bug noted on this page at all? [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 20:33, 6 October 2007 (PDT)

=Bug not listed: SWS-Gauss Dissappearing Ammo=

I just found this the hard way...

* The Coelacanth/Gauss does NOT return any remaining ammo to your stores at the end of a mission. In addition, when you assign a Coelacanth/Gauss to a troop transport, 50 Craft Gauss Cannon rounds will be immediately deducted. These rounds cannot be refunded by any means. If you change your mind about assigning it, deassign it, and then reassign it, the premium will be deducted yet again from your stores.

=Bug not listed: Missing soldiers during base defense=

I encountered an interesting bug concerning base defense missions:
My base got attacked while about 30 soldiers and 10 HWPs were present. The usual equipment assignment screen was skipped and the mission started instantly with only the HWPs spawned at the map. Not even a single soldier bothered to show up... *sigh*
Although this turned out to be in my favor (you should have seen the puzzled Ethereals trying to panic my tanks) I´d like to avoid this bug if possible. I was able to reproduce this bug several times and with different bases.
Can anyone explain this bug and/or tell me how to avoid it?

Game version: Collectors edition. - [[User:NewJoker|NewJoker]]

-----

Well, ideally, we need to know what your base's construction was to be sure of this, but I think the most likely circumstance is that the HWPs took up all the spawn points. HWPs have maximum priority for spawning(followed by Soldiers, and then Aliens), so if you have enough of them garrisoning a base, it's entirely possible that soldiers and aliens won't spawn. However, this doesn't explain why the soldiers didn't start stealing the Alien spawn points...in any event, you might want to take the save game file, zip it up, and get ready to email it. I'm sure [[User:Zombie|Zombie]] would be quite interested. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 15:28, 13 November 2007 (PST)

-----

It's not the spawn points, it's a [[UNITPOS.DAT]] limitation. A maximum of forty records (out of the total of eighty) are allocated for your units, and tanks (which take up four records each) get first pick. Having ten tanks means there's no room left for anything else.

Ditch one HWP and you should see four units take it's place. - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 16:42, 13 November 2007 (PST)

-----

I´ll try with a decreasing number of tanks and report the results. As I wrote above having only HWPs isn´t too bad dependent on what enemy is attacking. [[User:NewJoker|NewJoker]]

----

This should be mentioned in the [[ExploitsE#Base Defence Mission Spawning Issues]] section. The Bugs/Exploits really need to be sorted and consolidated. - [[User:NinthRank|NinthRank]] 16:57, 13 November 2007 (PST)

-----

The limitation to 40 records seems to be the case; each tank I dumped got replaced by four soldiers.
So this can be used to effectively manage unit combination. Thanks for the quick replies! [[User:NewJoker|NewJoker]]

=Bug not listed: Ufo Gold (Windows Vers. abandonia.com) crashin when plasm defense is finished=

I recordnized this bug a few times now. (with hacked AND unhacked game)
If i place a plasma defense in 7 bases at the same Time and they are finished at the same Time, the game crashes sometimes.
In hacked game, it seems to crash even more when Alien containment is finished, plasma defense, shield defense...etc.
couldnt find it here...greetz

: I somehow doubt the sourcing is the issue. [You may want to fund the next XCOM series game with a Take2 re-release of UFO :)] More generally: the game only reports the construction of a given type of facility <b>once</b>, no matter how many bases it completes at simultaneously. I've only tested this <i>in vivo</i> with three-of-a-kind at once across six bases, however. It does seem reasonable that some sort of counter of undisplayed completions would "overflow" (attaining crash). -- [[User:Zaimoni|Zaimoni]] 10:05, Feb. 28 2008 CST

::I've encountered this bug myself with General Stores, actually, not just Plasma Defense(which I never build). EDIT: Some quick tests seem to show that there's a chance the game will crash any time two base facilities are done at the same time, regardless of whether they're in the same base or not or if they're the same facility.(although it seems to happen MUCH more in the event they're in different bases.) [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 10:13, 28 February 2008 (PST)

= Soldier Recruiting Bugs Tested =

Just to note that I have positively tested and replicated the bugs listed under the new(ish) section [[Known Bugs#Soldier Recruiting Bugs|Soldier Recruiting Bugs]]. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 18:08, 19 March 2008 (PDT)

=Floater Medic Bug=

I have not thus far encountered the Floater Medic Bug; in fact, Floater Medics are often used to fill up my Rogue Gallery with interrogations. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 06:50, 24 April 2008 (PDT)

=Strength Overflow=

During one of my games with TFTD I noticed a really annoying thing happen during battles.
As my troops rose up the 'stat.' ladder they got better and better (as you'd expect), until they hit about 50 strentgh and completely lost the ability to throw anything.
Even trying to throw something tiny like a grenade or flare into the adjacent tile resulted in the 'Out of Range' message being displayed.

Anyone come across this before?
This was in TFTD CE.
[[User:Tifi|Tifi]] 07:55, 27 April 2008 (PDT)

:This is fairly well documented. The pathfinding algorithm for throwing objects will balk if anything is in the way of the throw and refuse to allow you to throw. What's happening is that your soldiers have become so strong that their throws are intercepting the 'ceiling' of the Battlescape(the top of L3), and as such the game thinks that the throw is blocked(because in order for the throw to complete, the object would have to be tossed up to the nonexistant L4). There's two ways around this:

:The Normal Way: Try shorter throws, throwing from lower heights, or throwing while kneeling. Beyond that, possibly get some new troops.

:The Sneaky Way: Manually edit the Strength scores of your soldiers in [[SOLDIER.DAT]] so that they're back to a usable strength level. If you set "Initial Strength" (offset 46 decimal or 2E hex) to 0 and "Strength Improvement" (offset 57 decimal or 39 hex) to a value of 50, you can permanently lock the soldiers at 50 strength. (You can lock them higher than that if you so choose, but not lower.

:Other than this, there's no workarounds I can think of offhand. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 08:10, 27 April 2008 (PDT)

:: There's normally no problem with the max level of 70 in open settings. However TFTD has a lot of low ceilings such as in the shipping lane missions and colonies, and the lower ceilings impairs your throwing quite a bit. In addition to shorter throws/kneeling, try moving out from under any overhangs if there is one just above you. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 12:33, 27 April 2008 (PDT)

= Bug not listed: Sticking your head through the ceiling =
This is something I just discovered: When you step on a small object inside of a building your soldier sticks his/her head through the ceiling and can see what's upstairs. You can even see the soldiers head coming out of the floor and that soldiers can shoot aliens upstairs. When I did this the alien I saw/shot was facing the other way, but I guess you could get shot if the alien was facing you. [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 17:34, 11 May 2008 (PDT)

Talk:Known Bugs

2008-05-12T00:34:38Z

RedNifre:

== Bugs vs Exploits ==

Could someone comment please on the distinction between a bug and an exploit, and where to put each one? I would guess that a bug is something that undesirable and an exploit "might be" desirable, if you want to cheat. But what about exploits that happen by accident, or bugs that need to be forced to happen?

I was going to add the Research Rollover bug to the Exploits sections, but they seem to all be under construction. What's the agreed approach?

[[User:Spike|Spike]] 04:16, 15 March 2008 (PDT)

* i think that an exploit is somthing you can trigger and gain an advantage from. a bug may or may not have a known trigger, and does not give an advantage if it does.

== Difficulty Bug ==

We should for historical reasons outline the "Difficulty Bug" that [[XcomUtil]] has saved most of us from. Any takers? --[[User:JellyfishGreen|JellyfishGreen]]

-----

That would only require two or three short lines. Something like this:
'' " Because of one or two incorrectly set bytes in all dos versions of the game( 1.0 through to 1.4), no matter what difficulty was selected, the difficulty bug would reset to beginner at the end of the first mission. XcomUtil performs a very minor tweak that corrects this problem. This bug was officially fixed in the Collectors Edition Windows port (also commonly known as UFO Gold). " ''

Or perhaps something a bit more succinct, and with less commas. Ha!

- [[User:NKF|NKF]]

-----

This is a technical bug that doesn't happen to everyone and one this article wasn't really meant to chronical - but we won't turn away helping a fellow player if it can't be helped. It's just that there are so many random crash points in this game that it would take far too long to find them all or come up with solutions for them.

Certainly, the transfer crash can happen to some players, but it's not one that can be reproduced easily. It's just like the random crash that some players get when they research a floater medic. It crashes the game for some of us, but others don't seem to notice it at all.

It really depends on your hardware and OS setup, whether or not your copy of the game is damaged or your savegame is damaged, etc.

Does it happen in all games or just this one savegame?

- [[User:NKF|NKF]]

-----

== "Invisible Muton" bug ==

Upon shooting repeatedly a Muton, it sometimes plays its "death" animation without sound (as if falling unconscious) and it is no longer displayed in the screen, while remaining visible to my soldiers (I can center the screen and the cursor appears yellow over them). Under this state, they cannot be targeted by Stun Rods. They may play their death animation anytime they get shot, until they truly die, when they emit their characteristic sound and leave a corpse (along with any items carried).

I'm quite fond of laser weapons, maybe this happens more often with those.

Also, though I remember experiencing this quite often fighting Mutons, it may happen to any other high health race.--[[User:Trotsky|Trotsky]] 02:59, 2 July 2006 (PDT)

-----

Never seen that one myself. Another "unpatched game" thing maybe?

There's a (very rare) bug that allows your soldiers to live if they become stunned by an explosion that happens to kill them. Sometimes the game will register their death, and THEN register that they've been stunned. In every case I've seen this happen, however, the unit will have such a low amount of health that a single fatal wound will render it dead (again) on the next turn. I have a vague memory that other players may have been able to get a medkit to the scene on time...

I dunno if that's related to your issue at all (I doubt it, but... meh). I'd advise using a Mind Probe on the alien the next time it happens so you can check the aliens stun/health levels.

- [[User:Bomb_Bloke|Bomb Bloke]]

----

I'm pretty sure I've seen this with Mutons. Possibly Chrysallids as well, another high health, high armor creature. They were still readily killed by shooting the place they are. Good thought on the MP, BB

---[[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 08:51, 2 July 2006 (PDT)

----

I've been known to have a dying muton(in fire) to spin around and then switch to the female civilian death animation. With the scream and everything. Even got a civilian death registered at the end of the mission. And this didn't just happen once, but on another separate occasion.

Hmm. shape-shifting reptilians in the game! LOL! Happens alot [[User:EsTeR|EsTeR]]

Unusually enough, I once had a sectopod die and then drop a tank corpse. I was using the Lightning at the time for my troop carrier, so you can imagine my surprise.

Then there was one occasion where a floater dropped a snakeman corpse. Let's not even get into the sort of things the aliens like to stuff themselves with.

Your invisible alien bug is quite common, although there appears to be many causes for it. I think one involves a full object table when it comes to invisible aliens in bases. But it can also happen in ordinary missions as well. I'm guessing the game may have tried to do something in the wrong order, and sprite information for the unit may have been lost or corrupted along the way.

Having had an experience where all the chryssalids become invisible in one base defence mission was quite a shocker. I fixed this by saving the game, quitting and then restarting the game. If you ever get an invisible alien again, try this and see if it helps. If it doesn't, well, just keep a careful watch on your map and any alerts that pop up as you play.

There's a similar but less severe bug where a dead alien will still leave its centre-on-unit alert button, but this goes away shortly after you move or turn.

- [[User:NKF|NKF]]

----

That last bug happens when exploding Cyberdiscs kill nearby Sectoids, doesn't it?--[[User:Trotsky|Trotsky]] 23:56, 2 July 2006 (PDT)

----

This is a pretty easy one. I guess this bug occured on UFO recovery on a battleship, an alien base assault or a base defense mission? As soon as there are too many items on the map, the game saves some item slots for the equipment to be displayed (since it is more valuable and more important to research). This would also make stun weapons lethal if the stunned aliens would vanish. therefore the game has a failsafe if an alien is stunned (or badly wounded and becoming uncontious). The downed alien's stun level is set exactly on its left health points therefore resurrecting it instantly. This cycle is broken when the alien is finally killed. This means if you want to stun an alien in such a situation you have to destroy some items first.

- by tequilachef (April 4th 2007)

== Vanishing snakemen ==

I've known snakemen to become invisible when standing on a hay bale. On the first occassion I had a poor tank getting shot while spending numerous turns looking for it. On the second occasion I had an alien under Psi-control, left it on the hay bale, and couldn't find it next turn. - Egor

---

This is not limited to snakemen. Hay bale block visibility quite much when a unit is standing on it. Two possible solutions:
- Destroy the hay before entering
- Shoot at the hay. If it is destroyed any unit on it will become visible (as long as no other bales are blocking the line of sight). You might also hit the enemy directly.

I Dnt know if the aliens are affected by this diminished sight, too. My guess would be no.

- By tequilachef (April 4th, 2007)

== Blaster Bomb Bug ==

I'm currently playing through X-com UFO Defense, I have the collectors edition version. I'm in the process of trying to catch a live alien commander and the blaster bomb bug is making this very difficult. If i remember correctly a commander is always in the command center of the the alien bases. The problem is anytime i get close there is always a dude with a blaster launcher up there that tries to kill my troops. When they try to fire it down at me the bug kicks in and they blow up the whole command room and all the aliens in it because they can't figure out how to get the blaster bomb down the grav lift thing in there. This is making it very dificult to actually catch a live commander. Anyone have any ideas for tactics or anything to breach that room without the aliens trying to fire a blaster launcher up there? - eL Hector

: I can suggest two possible solutions. The first is to wait outside the command room for the alien to move closer to you. If it comes out of the room or if you know it has moved down the lift, you then burst in and stand right next to it to stop it from firing the blaster. This is risky because there could very well be a heavy plasma toting alien in there. The other is to use a small launcher and launch it up at the ceiling near where you think the alien with the blaster is standing. -[[User:NKF|NKF]]

== Disappearing Ammunition ==

I have observed that problem with X-COM 1.2, modded with XCOMUTIL. My stun bombs and heavy rocket missiles, along with clips for the auto cannon went missing.
[[User:Vagabond|Vagabond]]

------

Just run a test using my 1.4 DOS version with XComUtil but my stun bombs didn't disappear: 30 + 1 back in the base they came from, same number after I went tactical and I dusted-off immediately. Are you running XComUtil with Runxcom.bat or did you simply run Xcusetup?

[[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 22:12, 22 February 2007 (PST)

:Is it a case of hitting the 80-item limit?--[[User:Ethereal Cereal|Ethereal Cereal]] 12:28, 23 February 2007 (PST)

------
With runxcomw.bat, as everytime. Apologies, I retested and it seems like I was mistakened, but I could have sworn that I lost them dang stunbombs. Had to manufacture some. I will test some more, using four heavy weapons and seeing whether their ammunition disappears at all. Thanks. [[User:Vagabond|Vagabond]]

==MC at end = MIA?==

I am sure I have seen this again recently, where I won a mission with no casualties (I thought), but the last thing I killed was a Commander that had been chain MC'ing a psi-attack-magnet trooper, and that trooper was listed as MIA at the end (presumably because he was on the enemy side at the end of combat). Is this a bug, or is there another way to get MIA's on a completed mission that I might have missed?

Since then I have been waiting for the leaders to panic at the end before killing them (or waiting for a rare resist), so I can safely exit, but am I being overcautious?

--[[User:Sfnhltb|Sfnhltb]] 13:45, 27 February 2007 (PST)

If the trooper was mind controlled on the turn you killed the last alien it will be listed as MIA. No bug there :)

[[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 18:16, 1 March 2007 (PST)

Huh, why would that happen - your soldier should recover the very next round, why would he go MIA?

--[[User:Sfnhltb|Sfnhltb]] 18:20, 1 March 2007 (PST)

Doesn't make sense to me as well but that's how the game works.

[[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 15:05, 2 March 2007 (PST)

----

It seems that regaining control of units under enemy mind control works different for alien and human players. My guess: aliens under human MC are reverted to alien control AFTER THE ALIEN AND BEFORE THE HUMAN TURN while human units under alien control are reverted RIGHT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE HUMAN TURN. This explains three different phenomenons:

- The discussed MIA "bug" (he unit would be returned in the next human turn, but since it never starts it is lost. The mission is still won since no unit with a "genuine alien" marking is left)

- The fact that a mission is lost when the last human falls under MC while it is not won when this happens to the last standing alien (the aliens get their unit back before their turn starts and therefore have a unit left to pass the "anyone alive?" check, the humans would have no unit left to start a turn with. They WOULD have as soon as the turn starts, but no unit left before turn means bust)

- The fact that aliens still can see all an MCed human saw at the end of the human turn that follows the MC while this is not vice versa (The MCed human can give information to the alien side before reverted while an MCed alien is reverted too early). The result is that aliens can control a human indefinitely without having any alien seeing him until the MC is disrupted for one turn.

All confused? Then I did a good job! No seriously, this must be the explanation, I couldn't think of any other way.

- By tequilachef (April 4th, 2007)

: You're absolutely correct on the first two points. It's a sequence issue - you never get round to recovering the unit before the new turn starts, so you end without any units whatsoever. Makes senses too since the aliens would continue to continue to mind control that same unit over and over indefinitely.

: The third point however: The aliens don't need to know the location of the last MC'd unit. They know the location of all your troops whether they've seen them or not from the very start. They appear to give you a few turns of grace where they won't attack you outright (unless, from my observation, all your soldiers are incredibly weak). This is evident because all of the aliens will eventually make their way towards the nearest soldier even though their movement pattern may seem semi-random. Also, they know where you are because they can initiate psionic attacks without having seen any of your troops. They generally go after the weakest troops first.

: Just to add a semi-related point, but from the alien's perspective. If an MC'd alien unit is in the exits when you abort the mission, this alien is not recovered and in fact simply vanishes. Any equipment it was carrying is recovered, unknown artefacts or otherwise. You could possibly think of this as their version of MIA. However, the aliens differ ever so slightly in that if it's the last alien standing and under temporary mind control by the player, the mission doesn't end straight away. But I guess this is only because the player has everything under control, whereas in the other scenario, the Ai is in control.

: -[[User:NKF|NKF]]

== Crash Site in the atlantic ocean ==

That's right, my game generated a crash site on water. Here are the details:

- Crash Site a bit southeast of the USA (which was infiltrated a few days before by sectoids, resulting base had already been taken out), but certainly not on land.

- UFO: battleship, floater, alien harvest

- Geoscape: 8 X-Com Bases, 1 (known) Alien base, 2 other crash sites, 1 other (known) flying UFO (though almost worldwide decoder coverage), 3 X-Com Crafts out, 1 waypoint

- Date: January 2000

- Most Interesting: The Craft that downed the ship was a recently finished Firestorm (first human-alien hybrid craft I had built, I know this is lame for that date. Limited myself on 25 Scientists to improve the challenge) equipped with twin plasma. I had it built and equipped in Antarctica and then transferred to Europe. This base had no Elerium, a fact that enabled me to use the infinite fuel exploit which was in effect when downing the UFO. My craft was only slightly damaged when doing so. The battleship was the first target assigned to the craft, it came directly from my base.

- When shot down, the UFO was not targetted by any other craft.

- I had not lost or sold a single craft to that point.

- When sending a squad to the crash site the game didn't crash but generated a farm land ground combat terrain.

- I was not able to reproduce the bug from the savegame dated 2 hours before downing the UFO

Well guys, any intelligent guesses? I still have the savegames (before and after downing)! If you want to have a look, write here.

- By tequilachef (April 5th 2007)
----
: Well I'm sure you know about crash sites that are near land can sometimes actually be on water, so I'm going to assume that this site is well far away from any land mass. Could it be a weird entry in GEODATA\WORLD.DAT that has a land mass out in the ocean? Also are you sure the game didn't crash? Sometimes when it does it will load the previous mission (and usually 90% are at farm terrain). Are you sure it generated a new map and not load the last one?
:No real guesses but maybe some starting points to look at. I've probably stated some obvious situations you know about and have accounted for, but it never hurts to double check :D
- [[User:Pi Masta|Pi Masta]] 14:23, 5 April 2007 (PDT)

== Inconsistencies in MCing Cyberdiscs and Sectopods ==

I experienced, that when MCing one quadrant of a large terror unit any action it does only affects this quadrant (especially use of time units). That means, when TUs are up for one part, MC another one and continue firing. This however does not work out when moving the unit while it is not under complete control. The TUs used up by the resulting reaction fire from the rest of the unit is also deducted from the TUs "your" part has left (making it impossible for the controlled parts to return fire). This however only happens under reaction fire, not if "your" part fires on it's own. I don't know if this comes up when uncontrolled parts shoot by themselves in the alien turn, since this is hard to find out.

: That's because large units literally are made up of four separate units. They only share the same set of general stats (in unitref.dat). Unfortunately the 'under mind control flag' is unique to the four units, not the shared stats! So you in effect have multiple units under different control sharing the same stats. So if you move and it results in a reaction from the unit, it will spend the TUs you're using.
: Successful mind control automatically fills up the unit's TUs, so each mind controlled sector gets to move or attack again until there are no more sectors to mind control. Useful way of turning reapers into long range scouts!
: In TFTD, they attempted to fix this bug, but in fact made it much-much worse! The only way to mind control the unit properly is to control the upper left quadrant. Only! Any other quadrant will result in a partial (clockwise) control, and you may gain control of units other than that unit, or may even get into situations where you gain permanent 'partial control' of a large unit you haven't even sited. Wackiness all around!

:- [[User:NKF|NKF]]

== Facility Dismantle Bug ==

Boba: I've never experienced this bug myself in all my games in the Collectors Edition. It may very well vary from computer to computer.

-[[User:NKF|NKF]]
:I, however, have experienced it. I lost an entire month's worth of playtime because I couldn't solve it. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]]

::Anyone, any ideas on why it might vary from PC to PC? -[[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]]

:::I'd check other factors before blaming a given system. Assuming no mods are being used the most obvious is the order in which you initiated the construction of the modules. Then we've got which one was due to be completed first, and I'm sure there's a few other things to test out. Usually, a player won't cancel in-progress modules on a regular basis, so you wouldn't expect this bug to turn up often. - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 01:53, 9 June 2007 (PDT)

== Manufacturing Limit Bug ==

Unfortunately, Mike, no you did not get it correct. It is the raw number of hours needed to complete the project, not the projected hours. I discussed this on the X-Com Forums a few months back at the following link: http://www.xcomufo.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=242027760&st=0&#entry164411

I did tests at the time in regard to the accuracy of the data given there, but I've lost the results. I'll quickly redo the tests in the next hour or so. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 19:00, 8 June 2007 (PDT)

:Tests complete. The breakpoints for every item were exactly where I predicted, regardless of number of engineers assigned. (I ran up a huge queue of items at my dedicated factory base on an old game, and then assigned whatever engineers would fit onto one project at a time, canceling projects as data was confirmed. This is only semi-random, but it serves our purposes.) I did run into a single issue, though. It appears that despite having 5 empty hangars at a (different!) base, the workshop there could not queue up more than 3 of any one craft at a time, thus making this bug impossible to replicate with the Firestorm or Lightning, as you must be producing more than three for the bug to occur. However, it still works with the Avenger. Later, I shall see about constructing a dedicated Hangar base with 7 hangars in order to attempt to replicate the bug. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 19:33, 8 June 2007 (PDT)

::Sounds great, Arrow. Why not post a simple example that shows how the problem works. As in, "with 1 Eng and 2 Avengers you might think X, but no, it's Y". And please delete my example. And it's a fine pleasure to meet you! Cool - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]]

:::When you say the usual resources are used by the "lost" resources, that includes cash, right? It sounds like if you're willing to foot the extra bill [[Buying/Selling/Transferring#Manufacturable_Prices|money/component-wise]], this could be used to build Avengers slightly faster then normal.

::: The usual time is 34000 hours. Double that and subtract 65535 and you're left with a paltry 2465 hours. Even a single workshop squad of 10 engineers will pull that off in a little over ten days. - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 01:53, 9 June 2007 (PDT)

::::Sadly, this exploit doesn't work, because the high bit is stored SOMEWHERE. I lack a hex reader and have no code reading skills to speak of, so I'm a bit limited here. If you set up a Workshop as you described, the game would take all the time for 2 Avengers, all the resources for the same, but in the end only produce 1 Avenger. Meanwhile, I'll run more tests on the resources thing. I could swear it consumes the resources, but I'll double check.

:::::There is no need to store the high bits if the actual completion condition (assuming adequate money) is "number made is number ordered", which wouldn't reference the hours remaining at all. - [[User:Zaimoni|Zaimoni]] 01:49, 9 Oct 2007 (CDT)

::::Tests done; I was unable to replicate the 'disappearing item' trick,(Which I didn't test for last night) even with Avengers! It appears I was wrong; this still counts as a bug, though, because the wraparound is a problem.

::::Ironic that so much of this discussion centers around Avengers, because that's where I discovered this in the first place! [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 06:48, 9 June 2007 (PDT)

----

I'm revisiting XCOM and was working on [[Manufacturing Profitability]]... Arrow, can you (or anyone else) say a little bit more on the Known Bugs page about this [[Known_Bugs#Manufacturing_Limit_Bug]]? It's not clear to me exactly what the bug does, except that it understates hours. Is that all?... does it still take the (non-buggy) amount of time, still use all the same resources, still make the same number, etc.? It sounds like it could be a drastic bug - or is it only a very superficial one, a display bug for the hours? It sounds like you're leaning toward this latter.

Also on a semi-related note... I could swear I saw much more detailed info on the [[Known_Bugs#Facility_Maintenance_Costs]] issue... IIRC, the incorrect amount that's charged for maintenance, depends on exactly where a facility is in the base. IOW, different "rows" of the base cost different amounts. Could somebody provide a link there, and/or flesh the bug out better?

Thanks! - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 11:22, 8 October 2007 (PDT)

:I've actually seen the bug work both ways, but I've only been able to actually replicate the more superficial version of the bug. So the bug report up is about a superficial bug that drastically understates production time. If you wish to make this clearer, you have my blessings. As well, that 'different charging based on location' is dealt with here: http://ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Talk:Base_Facilities ; however, the table has been broken with the Wikiupgrade, and I lack sufficient knowledge of HTML table code to fix it. But it should be of use to you. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 11:26, 8 October 2007 (PDT)

::Cool, I fixed [[Talk:Base Facilities]] but also re-organized and expanded [[Base Facilities]] so that it includes that bug in detail, as per Talk... this is an important issue that should be up front. I see that there's a separate [[Maintenance costs]] page, but I can't see having something so important (the maintenance bug explanation) all on its own page (which makes for a rather short page) rather than together with all the rest of the base facility info. If others agree (or don't care), I'll move anything remaining on Maintenance Costs to the Base Facilities page, then delete Maintenance Costs and re-route links. And if somebody does care, then please move my new section to Maintenance Costs, and move all the links, etc. Oh also I put in more words on your Manufacturing Limit Bug - how does it look? - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 16:37, 8 October 2007 (PDT)

:Looks pretty good, although it'll wrap fully; if you ask for 120000 hours, it won't be displaying 'almost no' time. The way I discovered it was when building two Avengers; I ordered two, paid for two, waited for two...and got one. But as said, haven't managed to repeat it, so until I do, we'll leave it like that. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 18:00, 8 October 2007 (PDT)

::I just revised and put in your specific example, because it's certainly possible some of us die-hard players will order up more than 1 Avenger at a time - and it's guaranteed it'd be a pain if 1 of them disappeared, laugh. I wasn't sure how concrete you were on that example but now I hear you say, you are sure it happened at least once. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 18:33, 8 October 2007 (PDT)

:I have a question concerning the manufacturing "bug" which eats a craft in production due to wrap-over of the byte. Arrow (or whoever did the test), did you have a large quantity of craft already built at your bases? If so, I think this bug has more to deal with clogging up [[CRAFT.DAT]]. See, that file has a limit of 50 entries. Each craft takes up one record and each base you have built also consumes one spot. 8 bases allows 42 craft to be housed, while 6 bases allow 44. If you try to buy or manufacture craft once the file is full, nothing shows up in the game even if you have hangar space available. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 19:00, 8 October 2007 (PDT)

::Huh, I never knew that. I don't see it listed on the Bugs page... I'll stick it in there. I've never approached that number, but some folks might. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 19:07, 8 October 2007 (PDT)

:I was able to continue building other Avengers after that project, and they appeared correctly, so I do not believe that is the issue. In any event, I have a very bad case of 'archivism' and probably still have the save game and the CRAFT.DAT file around on my system; in fact, I think I was playing it a few days ago. I can see if I can find it and upload it; it created a 'hole' in the Avenger fleet numbers, where Avenger's x and x+2 were built, but x+1 was not. I'll look for it tonight and tomorrow and upload it to the wiki if I find it. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 19:10, 8 October 2007 (PDT) EDIT: I found the file; I have 28 Avengers and 1 Skyranger in my employ. All Avenger numbers EXCEPT #2(Avenger-2) are accounted for, and I have not sacked or lost any Avengers. So this is where the hole and 'eaten' Avenger is. If anyone wants the CRAFT.DAT file from this game, I'd be happy to forward it. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 21:20, 8 October 2007 (PDT)

::Sure, send it my way and I'll take a look at it. (Might as well send me the whole saved game as I may want to look at the other files too). I have tried to recreate this bug by manufacturing 1, 2 and 3 Avengers at a clip but all of them always show up. Don't know what else I could do to get this problem to crop up. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 21:32, 8 October 2007 (PDT)

:File emailed. On the side, I've tried the same thing, and never been able to repeat the bug. It's been months since the first discovery, so I can't recall whether it was the first or the second Avenger that didn't appear. So maybe it was just a fluke. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 21:57, 8 October 2007 (PDT)

== Unconscious Enemy in Equipment Screen ==

The following happened to me repeatedly over the last few days.

In the last tactical Mission a live alien has been captured. When now beginning an UFO crash recovery mission this type of alien (same race and rank) appears in the equipment screen before the mission starts, meaning I can give it to any of my soldiers.
If I do so I can store the alien in the skyranger for the duration of the mission and, if it gains consciousness, kill or stun it at the end of it. A pile of equipment without a corpse will be in the UFO, indicating that the stunned alien is not some kind of duplicate but instead has been taken from the aliens of this mission. This is supported by the fact that in those missions the maximum number of crew members has not been surpassed.
If I do not do so the Alien will be placed in the crashed UFO. Whether it is unconscious or not I do not know, but the fact that it is completely disarmed when encountered in the battle suggests that it is.

So far it seems the following is necessary for the bug to occur:
# An alien has to be captured alive in the last tactical combat
# It has to be of the same race and rank as one of the aliens in the new tactical combat

So far this only worked...:
# If the new tactical combat was an UFO crash recovery of a medium scout.
# For floaters and mutons
# For soldiers and navigators
# If the alien in the last mission was stunned by normal weapon fire (although I do not think this is important) and not picked up (again, not likely to be important) or destroyed (which would mean it has to be actually captured)

It seems NOT to depend on the following:
# The type of the last mission (were, so far: Ground assault battleship, crash recovery large scout, base defense)
# Which squad or vessel was involved capturing the alien
# Where it is locked up
# If it has been transferred since capture or not

Would be interesting to know:
# What happens if the alien in the inventory screen is the only survivor
# If the alien in the invenory screen is one of the aliens randomly killed in the crash or not (it is likely to be one of the killed aliens, so far the equipment piles were always within the UFO)
# If this is not limited on crashed medium scouts: Does this work with terror units? What about large ones?

Maybe this is related to the proximity grenade bug (transfer of item properties to next tactical combat).

Additionally, in one of those mission a part of the terrain was not generated correctly. It was in farm terrain (The house on the right square, or north east square, in [[Image:Terrain-cult.gif|this pic]]). The outer wall right to the right window of the southern wall (1st Floor) was missing. Directly outside of the hole was a floor tile. I could walk a soldier through the wall, but he fell right through the tile. Dunno if this has to do with the stunned alien bug.

Version is collectors edition (the one from abandonia.com).

----------------

When a mission starts, the GeoScape engine generates the unit and object tables (in MissDat's [[OBPOSREF.DAT]], [[UNIPOS.DAT]], and [[UNIREF.DAT]]) before "shutting down". The Tactical engine then generates the maps, places the aliens on it, and blows up the UFO (if need be). Whether or not map generation and the subsequent events happen before you equip your soldiers I don't yet know.

The test would be to check the aforementioned files to see if they contain an unconcious alien, and/or the body.

Note that you can't see the bodies of large units on the ground (they count as four seperate objects covering four seperate tiles, so allowing the user to pick one up would essentially let you rip them apart).

- [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 06:35, 5 August 2007 (PDT)

----------------

I honestly have no idea of how all those files work. But I still have a savegame in battlescape that is in one of those missions. So if anyone wants to have a look at those files...

I forgot to mention: I reloaded a geoscape savegame shortly before the battle to recreate the bug, but it seems that reloading in geoscape before the buggy battle eliminates the bug. I guess his should narrow down the possible reasons...

--------

Next time it happens, backup the aforementioned files before you start another mission. I'm afraid a savegame wouldn't be of much help.

- [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 00:54, 7 August 2007 (PDT)

== Soldiers moved to outside of combat screen ==

Hi, I've got a DOS version of UFO:EU, and I've encountered a bug in the tactical combat. Sometimes (rarely) a X-COM soldier changes its location on the map on player's turn start and is placed on outside of the map, one tile north from the (north) border of the field. AFAIR the unit is then selectable (you get the flashing highlight when cursor is above), but is stuck outside of the field. Has anybody encountered this bug? It seems to happen randomly, but more frequently during the terror missions and on early turns (so maybe it's caused by high number of player/alien/civilian units?). --[[User:Maquina|Maquina]] 08:16, 3 September 2007 (PDT)

:I've never encountered this bug in CE of UFO. Presuming AFAIR means "As Far As I Recall," what exactly was the soldier doing? Any equipment data, location, or stat info might help us pin it down. Were afflicted soldiers always carrying a specific equipment set or weapon? Where were they on the map before they got moved? Did they get bumped a few spaces, or teleported halfway across the Battlescape? Does it happen more often on a specific difficulty?(Your theory would suggest this would happen most commonly on Superhuman) Against a certain type of alien? Best of all, if you can recreate the situation in a game, save the game and then you could upload the save file to the forums or this wiki, and the rest of us could take a look for ourselves and the code divers could root around for the cause. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 15:03, 3 September 2007 (PDT)

:: I've had this happen to me several times in UFO and TFTD. I don't know if it's specific to the Dos version or if it can happen in the CE as well. Sometimes the soldier ends up beyond the boundary of the map right at the start of the mission, at other times it happens after you load a game. This game is glitchy, which is the source for so many of its bugs, so your soldier's coordinates are probably getting corrupted to the point where they are -1 on either the X or Y axis of the maps's normal boundaries. For me it's commonly along the top edge of the map. I don't ever recall it happening mid-mission, only at the start or after a load. I cannot faithfully say whether it happened with or without XComutil, but that could be one of the possibly many causes for this. - [[User:NKF|NKF]]

:: I don't play UFO often, so I rely on just several campaigns played. This happens rarely (I've encountered this bug twice in my last campaign with ~80 missions played), but if you haven't seen this happen then it probably doesn't show up in the CE edition. In my experience the soldier is moved always beyond the north/top map border. I think (but I'm not sure) that this affects the first soldier from the team more commonly than others (or maybe even exclusevily?). The equipment/armor carried is probably not relevant, since the units moved this way don't have any special stuff, and this bug shows up on different stages of the gameplay (ie. sometimes when you have ordinary rifles, sometimes when all your units got heavy plasmas and power suits). --[[User:Maquina|Maquina]] 04:12, 4 September 2007 (PDT)

'''MY ramblings have been moved to my discussion page''' [[User:EsTeR|EsTeR]]

=Great Circle Route=

Should we have the Great Circle Route bug noted on this page at all? [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 20:33, 6 October 2007 (PDT)

=Bug not listed: SWS-Gauss Dissappearing Ammo=

I just found this the hard way...

* The Coelacanth/Gauss does NOT return any remaining ammo to your stores at the end of a mission. In addition, when you assign a Coelacanth/Gauss to a troop transport, 50 Craft Gauss Cannon rounds will be immediately deducted. These rounds cannot be refunded by any means. If you change your mind about assigning it, deassign it, and then reassign it, the premium will be deducted yet again from your stores.

=Bug not listed: Missing soldiers during base defense=

I encountered an interesting bug concerning base defense missions:
My base got attacked while about 30 soldiers and 10 HWPs were present. The usual equipment assignment screen was skipped and the mission started instantly with only the HWPs spawned at the map. Not even a single soldier bothered to show up... *sigh*
Although this turned out to be in my favor (you should have seen the puzzled Ethereals trying to panic my tanks) I´d like to avoid this bug if possible. I was able to reproduce this bug several times and with different bases.
Can anyone explain this bug and/or tell me how to avoid it?

Game version: Collectors edition. - [[User:NewJoker|NewJoker]]

-----

Well, ideally, we need to know what your base's construction was to be sure of this, but I think the most likely circumstance is that the HWPs took up all the spawn points. HWPs have maximum priority for spawning(followed by Soldiers, and then Aliens), so if you have enough of them garrisoning a base, it's entirely possible that soldiers and aliens won't spawn. However, this doesn't explain why the soldiers didn't start stealing the Alien spawn points...in any event, you might want to take the save game file, zip it up, and get ready to email it. I'm sure [[User:Zombie|Zombie]] would be quite interested. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 15:28, 13 November 2007 (PST)

-----

It's not the spawn points, it's a [[UNITPOS.DAT]] limitation. A maximum of forty records (out of the total of eighty) are allocated for your units, and tanks (which take up four records each) get first pick. Having ten tanks means there's no room left for anything else.

Ditch one HWP and you should see four units take it's place. - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 16:42, 13 November 2007 (PST)

-----

I´ll try with a decreasing number of tanks and report the results. As I wrote above having only HWPs isn´t too bad dependent on what enemy is attacking. [[User:NewJoker|NewJoker]]

----

This should be mentioned in the [[ExploitsE#Base Defence Mission Spawning Issues]] section. The Bugs/Exploits really need to be sorted and consolidated. - [[User:NinthRank|NinthRank]] 16:57, 13 November 2007 (PST)

-----

The limitation to 40 records seems to be the case; each tank I dumped got replaced by four soldiers.
So this can be used to effectively manage unit combination. Thanks for the quick replies! [[User:NewJoker|NewJoker]]

=Bug not listed: Ufo Gold (Windows Vers. abandonia.com) crashin when plasm defense is finished=

I recordnized this bug a few times now. (with hacked AND unhacked game)
If i place a plasma defense in 7 bases at the same Time and they are finished at the same Time, the game crashes sometimes.
In hacked game, it seems to crash even more when Alien containment is finished, plasma defense, shield defense...etc.
couldnt find it here...greetz

: I somehow doubt the sourcing is the issue. [You may want to fund the next XCOM series game with a Take2 re-release of UFO :)] More generally: the game only reports the construction of a given type of facility <b>once</b>, no matter how many bases it completes at simultaneously. I've only tested this <i>in vivo</i> with three-of-a-kind at once across six bases, however. It does seem reasonable that some sort of counter of undisplayed completions would "overflow" (attaining crash). -- [[User:Zaimoni|Zaimoni]] 10:05, Feb. 28 2008 CST

::I've encountered this bug myself with General Stores, actually, not just Plasma Defense(which I never build). EDIT: Some quick tests seem to show that there's a chance the game will crash any time two base facilities are done at the same time, regardless of whether they're in the same base or not or if they're the same facility.(although it seems to happen MUCH more in the event they're in different bases.) [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 10:13, 28 February 2008 (PST)

= Soldier Recruiting Bugs Tested =

Just to note that I have positively tested and replicated the bugs listed under the new(ish) section [[Known Bugs#Soldier Recruiting Bugs|Soldier Recruiting Bugs]]. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 18:08, 19 March 2008 (PDT)

=Floater Medic Bug=

I have not thus far encountered the Floater Medic Bug; in fact, Floater Medics are often used to fill up my Rogue Gallery with interrogations. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 06:50, 24 April 2008 (PDT)

=Strength Overflow=

During one of my games with TFTD I noticed a really annoying thing happen during battles.
As my troops rose up the 'stat.' ladder they got better and better (as you'd expect), until they hit about 50 strentgh and completely lost the ability to throw anything.
Even trying to throw something tiny like a grenade or flare into the adjacent tile resulted in the 'Out of Range' message being displayed.

Anyone come across this before?
This was in TFTD CE.
[[User:Tifi|Tifi]] 07:55, 27 April 2008 (PDT)

:This is fairly well documented. The pathfinding algorithm for throwing objects will balk if anything is in the way of the throw and refuse to allow you to throw. What's happening is that your soldiers have become so strong that their throws are intercepting the 'ceiling' of the Battlescape(the top of L3), and as such the game thinks that the throw is blocked(because in order for the throw to complete, the object would have to be tossed up to the nonexistant L4). There's two ways around this:

:The Normal Way: Try shorter throws, throwing from lower heights, or throwing while kneeling. Beyond that, possibly get some new troops.

:The Sneaky Way: Manually edit the Strength scores of your soldiers in [[SOLDIER.DAT]] so that they're back to a usable strength level. If you set "Initial Strength" (offset 46 decimal or 2E hex) to 0 and "Strength Improvement" (offset 57 decimal or 39 hex) to a value of 50, you can permanently lock the soldiers at 50 strength. (You can lock them higher than that if you so choose, but not lower.

:Other than this, there's no workarounds I can think of offhand. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 08:10, 27 April 2008 (PDT)

:: There's normally no problem with the max level of 70 in open settings. However TFTD has a lot of low ceilings such as in the shipping lane missions and colonies, and the lower ceilings impairs your throwing quite a bit. In addition to shorter throws/kneeling, try moving out from under any overhangs if there is one just above you. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 12:33, 27 April 2008 (PDT)

== Bug not listed: Sticking your head through the ceiling ==
This is something I just discovered: When you step on a small object inside of a building your soldier sticks his/her head through the ceiling and can see what's upstairs. You can even see the soldiers head coming out of the floor and that soldiers can shoot aliens upstairs. When I did this the alien I saw/shot was facing the other way, but I guess you could get shot if the alien was facing you. [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 17:34, 11 May 2008 (PDT)

Talk:UFOGRAPH

2008-05-10T20:24:33Z

RedNifre: New page: How can I get all the graphic tiles? Can I download them here or is there a way I can extract them from my game? ~~~~

How can I get all the graphic tiles? Can I download them here or is there a way I can extract them from my game? [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 13:24, 10 May 2008 (PDT)