Talk:Battlescape - Revision history

Arrow Quivershaft: Question regarding wording

2007-12-21T05:25:36Z

Question regarding wording

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:25, 21 December 2007
Line 57:		Line 57:

	:::To be honest though, I believe that there's no issue over using an analogy to describe the battlescape. This portion of the game is turned based and I believe it makes quite good sense to describe it as a game of chess. Some of us spend more time thinking between the turns than they ever did at a game of chess. I don't think there is any loss of clarity, but if you want to make the article more succinct by 'map' and 'units', that would be no problem.--[[User:Vagabond\|Vagabond]] 03:04, 8 March 2007 (PST)		:::To be honest though, I believe that there's no issue over using an analogy to describe the battlescape. This portion of the game is turned based and I believe it makes quite good sense to describe it as a game of chess. Some of us spend more time thinking between the turns than they ever did at a game of chess. I don't think there is any loss of clarity, but if you want to make the article more succinct by 'map' and 'units', that would be no problem.--[[User:Vagabond\|Vagabond]] 03:04, 8 March 2007 (PST)

			==Slight wording question==

			"Most of the units left behind will be listed as MIA and will be unavailable for the rest of the game."

			Does this mean it is possible for a unit to be in an area where it would normally be tallied up as MIA and still be returned to the base roster? I've heard vague references to 'rescuing' MIA soldiers on the X-COM forums, but never seen it happen myself. If someone would clarify, I would be MOST appreciative. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft\|Arrow Quivershaft]] 21:25, 20 December 2007 (PST)

Vagabond at 11:04, 8 March 2007

2007-03-08T11:04:12Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:04, 8 March 2007
Line 56:		Line 56:
	::I'd just go with "map" and "units", which are more concise terms anyway. A little bit of metaphor or humor is nice, but never at the expense of clarity, IMO.--[[User:Ethereal Cereal\|Ethereal Cereal]] 02:33, 8 March 2007 (PST)		::I'd just go with "map" and "units", which are more concise terms anyway. A little bit of metaphor or humor is nice, but never at the expense of clarity, IMO.--[[User:Ethereal Cereal\|Ethereal Cereal]] 02:33, 8 March 2007 (PST)

	:::To be honest though, I believe that there's no issue over using an analogy to describe the battlescape. This portion of the game is turned based and I believe it makes quite good sense to describe it as a game of chess. Some of us spend more time thinking between the turns than they ever did at a game of chess. I don't think there is any loss of clarity, but if you want to make the article more succinct by 'map' and 'units', that would be no problem.		:::To be honest though, I believe that there's no issue over using an analogy to describe the battlescape. This portion of the game is turned based and I believe it makes quite good sense to describe it as a game of chess. Some of us spend more time thinking between the turns than they ever did at a game of chess. I don't think there is any loss of clarity, but if you want to make the article more succinct by 'map' and 'units', that would be no problem.--[[User:Vagabond\|Vagabond]] 03:04, 8 March 2007 (PST)

Vagabond at 11:04, 8 March 2007

2007-03-08T11:04:02Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:04, 8 March 2007
Line 55:		Line 55:

	::I'd just go with "map" and "units", which are more concise terms anyway. A little bit of metaphor or humor is nice, but never at the expense of clarity, IMO.--[[User:Ethereal Cereal\|Ethereal Cereal]] 02:33, 8 March 2007 (PST)		::I'd just go with "map" and "units", which are more concise terms anyway. A little bit of metaphor or humor is nice, but never at the expense of clarity, IMO.--[[User:Ethereal Cereal\|Ethereal Cereal]] 02:33, 8 March 2007 (PST)

			:::To be honest though, I believe that there's no issue over using an analogy to describe the battlescape. This portion of the game is turned based and I believe it makes quite good sense to describe it as a game of chess. Some of us spend more time thinking between the turns than they ever did at a game of chess. I don't think there is any loss of clarity, but if you want to make the article more succinct by 'map' and 'units', that would be no problem.

Ethereal Cereal at 10:33, 8 March 2007

2007-03-08T10:33:59Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:33, 8 March 2007
Line 44:		Line 44:
	3. Map screen.		3. Map screen.

	:: Are they necessary? For one thing, I know I am still quite at odds on how to use the motion detector properly (maybe a separate article/tutorial for it?) I am quite sure that there would be others as well. As for the Inventory screen, I think it is a must, and well, the Map screen, we can skip that as I think it is self explanatory... Well, I think that by doing all the screens and explainations, we might get the wiki article a tad too big...		: Are they necessary? For one thing, I know I am still quite at odds on how to use the motion detector properly (maybe a separate article/tutorial for it?) I am quite sure that there would be others as well. As for the Inventory screen, I think it is a must, and well, the Map screen, we can skip that as I think it is self explanatory... Well, I think that by doing all the screens and explainations, we might get the wiki article a tad too big...
	--[[User:Vagabond\|Vagabond]] 20:08, 7 March 2007 (PST)		--[[User:Vagabond\|Vagabond]] 20:08, 7 March 2007 (PST)

			:: They should probably each be on their own page.--[[User:Ethereal Cereal\|Ethereal Cereal]] 02:33, 8 March 2007 (PST)

	==Playing Piece/Boards?==		==Playing Piece/Boards?==
Line 51:		Line 53:

	: It's a good way of describing the playing area and the playing units on the field and so on. It ties it in with chess analogy (which I think is mentioned in the manual at one point) but I don't think we should use it all the way through the site. - [[User:NKF\|NKF]]		: It's a good way of describing the playing area and the playing units on the field and so on. It ties it in with chess analogy (which I think is mentioned in the manual at one point) but I don't think we should use it all the way through the site. - [[User:NKF\|NKF]]

			::I'd just go with "map" and "units", which are more concise terms anyway. A little bit of metaphor or humor is nice, but never at the expense of clarity, IMO.--[[User:Ethereal Cereal\|Ethereal Cereal]] 02:33, 8 March 2007 (PST)

NKF: /* Playing Piece/Boards? */

2007-03-08T06:54:51Z

Playing Piece/Boards?

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:54, 8 March 2007
Line 49:		Line 49:
	==Playing Piece/Boards?==		==Playing Piece/Boards?==
	I am wondering about this way of naming everything in the article, it means it is inconsistent with pretty much every article it will link too, which I think won't help people understand. Its not too bad when just reading this article itself, but it someone comes into one of the later sections, or is coming in and out of other articles it decreases the clarity I think. --[[User:Sfnhltb\|Sfnhltb]] 21:44, 7 March 2007 (PST)		I am wondering about this way of naming everything in the article, it means it is inconsistent with pretty much every article it will link too, which I think won't help people understand. Its not too bad when just reading this article itself, but it someone comes into one of the later sections, or is coming in and out of other articles it decreases the clarity I think. --[[User:Sfnhltb\|Sfnhltb]] 21:44, 7 March 2007 (PST)

			: It's a good way of describing the playing area and the playing units on the field and so on. It ties it in with chess analogy (which I think is mentioned in the manual at one point) but I don't think we should use it all the way through the site. - [[User:NKF\|NKF]]

Sfnhltb at 05:44, 8 March 2007

2007-03-08T05:44:14Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:44, 8 March 2007
Line 46:		Line 46:
	:: Are they necessary? For one thing, I know I am still quite at odds on how to use the motion detector properly (maybe a separate article/tutorial for it?) I am quite sure that there would be others as well. As for the Inventory screen, I think it is a must, and well, the Map screen, we can skip that as I think it is self explanatory... Well, I think that by doing all the screens and explainations, we might get the wiki article a tad too big...		:: Are they necessary? For one thing, I know I am still quite at odds on how to use the motion detector properly (maybe a separate article/tutorial for it?) I am quite sure that there would be others as well. As for the Inventory screen, I think it is a must, and well, the Map screen, we can skip that as I think it is self explanatory... Well, I think that by doing all the screens and explainations, we might get the wiki article a tad too big...
	--[[User:Vagabond\|Vagabond]] 20:08, 7 March 2007 (PST)		--[[User:Vagabond\|Vagabond]] 20:08, 7 March 2007 (PST)

			==Playing Piece/Boards?==
			I am wondering about this way of naming everything in the article, it means it is inconsistent with pretty much every article it will link too, which I think won't help people understand. Its not too bad when just reading this article itself, but it someone comes into one of the later sections, or is coming in and out of other articles it decreases the clarity I think. --[[User:Sfnhltb\|Sfnhltb]] 21:44, 7 March 2007 (PST)

Vagabond: To-do list related to battlescape interface, and thoughts

2007-03-08T04:08:01Z

To-do list related to battlescape interface, and thoughts

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:08, 8 March 2007
Line 34:		Line 34:

	:::Yeah. If I manage to stun a Sectoid Leader in an early mission (especially if it's the first Terror Mission), I'll grab him, pile into the ship, and dust off. Woot, Psi Lab.--[[User:Ethereal Cereal\|Ethereal Cereal]] 12:10, 7 March 2007 (PST)		:::Yeah. If I manage to stun a Sectoid Leader in an early mission (especially if it's the first Terror Mission), I'll grab him, pile into the ship, and dust off. Woot, Psi Lab.--[[User:Ethereal Cereal\|Ethereal Cereal]] 12:10, 7 March 2007 (PST)

			----

			'''Battlescape Interface'''

			To-do list:
			1. Inventory screen. (Already uploaded an image, but needs compressing)
			2. Motion detector Radar screen.
			3. Map screen.

			:: Are they necessary? For one thing, I know I am still quite at odds on how to use the motion detector properly (maybe a separate article/tutorial for it?) I am quite sure that there would be others as well. As for the Inventory screen, I think it is a must, and well, the Map screen, we can skip that as I think it is self explanatory... Well, I think that by doing all the screens and explainations, we might get the wiki article a tad too big...
			--[[User:Vagabond\|Vagabond]] 20:08, 7 March 2007 (PST)

Ethereal Cereal at 20:10, 7 March 2007

2007-03-07T20:10:53Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:10, 7 March 2007
Line 32:		Line 32:

	::That's basically admitting defeat. Don't forget you lose the ship if you abort an alien base attacks as well with no troops in the exit. By the way, lifting off from a site does not always count as a loss. You may very well have come for what you came for and didn't want to bother cleaning up the rest of the aliens. For example, in a typical smash-and-grab scenario, or if you've stolen some artefact or abduct a specimen from an alien race you're not ready to fight (like the ethereals before you learn your psi strength). The game tells you you've lost, but you've technically won if you've accomplished what you came for. Just pointing out the silver lining. - [[User:NKF\|NKF]]		::That's basically admitting defeat. Don't forget you lose the ship if you abort an alien base attacks as well with no troops in the exit. By the way, lifting off from a site does not always count as a loss. You may very well have come for what you came for and didn't want to bother cleaning up the rest of the aliens. For example, in a typical smash-and-grab scenario, or if you've stolen some artefact or abduct a specimen from an alien race you're not ready to fight (like the ethereals before you learn your psi strength). The game tells you you've lost, but you've technically won if you've accomplished what you came for. Just pointing out the silver lining. - [[User:NKF\|NKF]]

			:::Yeah. If I manage to stun a Sectoid Leader in an early mission (especially if it's the first Terror Mission), I'll grab him, pile into the ship, and dust off. Woot, Psi Lab.--[[User:Ethereal Cereal\|Ethereal Cereal]] 12:10, 7 March 2007 (PST)

Sfnhltb: Talk:Battlescape Overview moved to Talk:Battlescape

2007-03-07T15:38:50Z

Talk:Battlescape Overview moved to Talk:Battlescape

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:38, 7 March 2007
(No difference)

NKF: Pasted question on what happens when lifting off without anyone in the exits

2007-03-07T11:26:16Z

Pasted question on what happens when lifting off without anyone in the exits

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:26, 7 March 2007
Line 21:		Line 21:
	----		----
	Nothing, except the craft is lost. (MC'd aliens are not in Soldier.dat and cannot be considered a true X-COM unit). --[[User:Zombie\|Zombie]] 19:49, 21 January 2007 (PST)		Nothing, except the craft is lost. (MC'd aliens are not in Soldier.dat and cannot be considered a true X-COM unit). --[[User:Zombie\|Zombie]] 19:49, 21 January 2007 (PST)

			----

			Just copy and pasted the discussion from main article - plus a thought of my own:


			<i>What happens if you hit Lift Off with NO units in the dropship? - BB</i>

			:<i>You will end the scenario immediately. Chances are, you will not have killed enough aliens to cover the loss of all the soldiers missing in action. Yeah, you will still have the transport though!--[[User:Vagabond\|Vagabond]] 02:40, 7 March 2007 (PST)</i>

			::That's basically admitting defeat. Don't forget you lose the ship if you abort an alien base attacks as well with no troops in the exit. By the way, lifting off from a site does not always count as a loss. You may very well have come for what you came for and didn't want to bother cleaning up the rest of the aliens. For example, in a typical smash-and-grab scenario, or if you've stolen some artefact or abduct a specimen from an alien race you're not ready to fight (like the ethereals before you learn your psi strength). The game tells you you've lost, but you've technically won if you've accomplished what you came for. Just pointing out the silver lining. - [[User:NKF\|NKF]]