XcomUtil question

[Misotu]

I have gradually been working my way through the UFOpaedia, amazingly good source of info (although quite hard to understand sometimes for someone like me who is :ahem: mathematically fairly challenged, formula-wise). While I appreciate the intellectuality of the "takes 0.797% damage from angled heavy plasma laser on a Wednesday but bear in mind the low accuracy and slow speed unless you have strength 50+ or a mind-controlled sectopod etc etc" approach, what I really want is the Management Overview at the beginning which says:

 

Alien X: Use plasma if possible. Avoid all incendiary weapons.

Alien Y: Set fire to it if possible. Resistent to laser weapons.

Sectopod: a) Run. Or b) blaster bomb it. Or c) laser weapons. Nothing else works. Only a) is certain.

 

That sort of thing I don't suppose there is a Simple Guide for Dummies anywhere, is there?

 

Anyway, I noticed references to the XcomUtil download and I like the sound of some of the changes it makes. Not so bothered about using interceptors as transports and that sort of thing, but changing the order of troops in the transport and having it remember their equipment sounds jolly neat and time-saving.

 

So I was wondering if people here generally use XcomUtil and do you have any feedback regarding major problems or major benefits? Also, I re-purchased the game through Steam in the hope that it would just run on my XP computer (it does) so I wondered whether there are any issues with Steam and/or DOSbox? Just looking at the XcomUtil site, it seems that I would have to use the current beta (1.7?) because of DOSbox, unless I've misunderstood. Which is a bit of a shame, as I quite liked the idea that MIA mind-controlled troops would come home if I won the mission

 

Edited to add: I have read up in various places: the Steam forum here https://forums.steampowered.com/forums/show...d.php?t=1113400 and also the bug reporting/discussion thread at xcomufo.com: https://www.xcomufo.com/forums/index.php?showforum=79 .

 

My difficulty is that I've never used the utility so it's hard to assess whether it's for me or not based on the comments there. And I really can't be doing with anything that requires me to fiddle around editing files or changing my computer set-up in order to get something to work. A lot of the people playing these games are software engineers or at least very computer literate. I'm not, so I really need something to work reliably without a load of messing around and reinstalling.

[Bomb Bloke]

I don't generally use XCU, but that's mostly because I spend more time documenting the game then I do playing it. That means I typically need to run it in its original form, without mods... This is true for a few of us around here.

 

9.7 is built to work with Steam (and pretty much everything else too, within the realms of possibility). You can always backup your game folder before installing it, if you're unsure.

 

You might be interested in a read through the USG. It's not 100% accurate, but it sounds a bit like what you're after.

[NKF]

The problem with the Ufopaedia wiki is that it's not written by professionals - just odd job folks like you and me in our spare time. The technical articles are often information dumps that are understandable by the authors, but need to be written down to a level other users can understand. It really relies on input by the readers and authors for continual improvement.

 

But if it's a guide you're after, there are some sprinkled throughout the wiki, but I don't know if they're geared exactly to what you're after. Or better still: ask questions here and that could lead to a new guide. After all, many of the authors there live on the various X-Com forums around the web.

 

But as for XComutil, the latest Beta version does require the latest copy of Dosbox to run, but that really shouldn't be a problem as mentioned. Some players actually extract the copy of X-COM from the Steam distribution and run it as a stand alone game without having to use the Steam program. That way they can run it directly through whatever latest version of Dosbox they may have.

 

XComutil is a Swiss-Army knife of tools. There's all sorts of stuff it can do for a variety of needs. Most of the automated options that you're thinking of can be done when you set up XComutil and forget about it afterwards. Most players who aren't technically minded go down this path and are quite happy with it.

 

For the more advanced users (or those that grew up in a command line environment), XComutil also provides a series of very useful Command Line functions that you can access from a command prompt console or via the Dosbox command prompt. They're very handy for working around some problems that you might encounter in the battlescape, or for testing and experimenting with the game (which is how some of the early information on the wiki was derived). Cheating too, but that's a conscious decision you have to make yourself!

 

But if you're unsure, just make a duplicate copy of your game and keep a plain vanilla copy and an X-Comutil 'enhanced' copy. That's what I'd do, and there's no harm in trying. You'll find out which one you like the best.

 

- NKF

[Misotu]

Thanks for the replies and recommendations NKF and Bomb Bloke. Hope I didn't sound like I was whining about the wiki - I was more having a wry dig at myself to be honest. The USG has a lot of helpful stuff but as you pointed out, there are a few discrepancies and I assume from what Bomb Bloke said that the USG tends to be wrong. For example, the wiki says categorically that the detection rate of long/short radars is not cumulative while the USG recommends buiding multiple radars per base, and there were others that I noticed.

 

The one that I'd really like to be sure of is research. The USG is saying that it's best to work on one research project at a time "because of the way research works". The wiki says several projects concurrently is most efficient, because of rounding. Which is correct?

 

The other area that's very thin in the wiki (unless I've missed it, in which case ) is bottom-line info on research, and particularly a research tree. Very long time since I've played this game and I can't remember any of the beelines at all. There is a research tree in the USG, but I can't get it to display even remotely usefully in Word. It's not a big deal, but it would be nice.

 

I did find the information in the USG on shooting down UFOs very helpful though. And the one thing I was blown away to find was part of a formula that I have been trying to work out myself (and failing miserably, although I know we covered this in maths at school :sigh:). I have a feeling that it's to do with inverted fractions and powers of ... or something ... you guys probably know. It's this:

 

If you have (picking a random number) a 30% probability of hitting something with a single shot, what is the probability of hitting the same thing once with any of three consecutive shots? And what is the actual formula for working this out? I'm trying to compare the autoshot with the snapshot of course - and there are other factors to take into account like TUs consumed, whether the ammo is unlimited or in short supply etc etc. But the main one is chances to hit. If I've understood the USG correctly, then I think the answer is 65.7%, which is actually pretty good, plus it gives you the chance of hitting something else handy. This must be a classic probability formula, but for the life of me I can't remember what it is. Although I do remember understanding it quite clearly all those years ago!

 

And then again, I'm not sure I've got this right because I have to say that my actual experience of autoshots and snapshots doesn't really match up to such an encouraging prognosis. I get wild autoshots from rookies especially, but quite a decent rate of success with snapshots. But that's probably just an emotional perspective. It's always traumatic watching a rookie autofire spectacularly wide of the the target into the back of my favourite sniper's head. Sort of thing that could put you off autofire permanently, heh.

 

Funny, I thought people would have quite strong views on XcomUtil ... response is much more muted than I expected! Well, I think I'll try it based on what you're saying. I really just wanted to make sure that there are no huge downsides or major known problems. I just want it to do some basic useful stuff that saves time on the tedious stuff. Not bothered about cheating ... I have absolutely no pride whatsoever and will simply play on Super Easy difficulty forever if that's all I can manage :lol:

[Bomb Bloke]

The other area that's very thin in the wiki (unless I've missed it, in which case ) is bottom-line info on research, and particularly a research tree. Very long time since I've played this game and I can't remember any of the beelines at all

This may be what you're after.

 

If you have (picking a random number) a 30% probability of hitting something with a single shot, what is the probability of hitting the same thing once with any of three consecutive shots?

Mathematically speaking, you hit the right answer. In practise, the percentage the game shows as your accuracy doesn't directly relate to your chance to hit something.

 

When you shoot a weapon, the game takes the accuracy percentage it showed you and rolls some random angles based on that. The lower your accuracy, the wider these angles can be; a trooper with lower accuracy is therefore more likely to shoot really wide, while a trooper with higher accuracy is more likely to shoot near the target (and hence is less likely to cap your commander in the head). The real "chance to hit" depends on the accuracy of the shooter in addition to the size of the target and the distance between them (the game processes all units and terrain objects in 3D for the purposes of tracking bullet paths, so kneeling literally turns your troopers into a smaller object, hence making them harder to hit - blaster bombs have a habit of sailing clean over the heads of crouched units for eg).

 

The exact accuracy formulas haven't been processed yet, but long story short, the numbers the game presents to you are misleading and only accurate in specific scenarios (that is to say, "just about never"). As accuracy goes up, the other two elements (distance/size) become less relevant, though it's still possible to miss a target at long range with 100% accuracy.

 

Speaking of kneeling, that not only makes your units harder to hit, it grants a small boost to your overall accuracy percentage. Use it.

[Misotu]

This may be what you're after.

 

How embarrassing. I looked at this a while ago and, because it wasn't in the format I expected to see, I totally failed to realise that the tiny text provides details of the research route. Ho hum. Thanks for this

 

 

Mathematically speaking, you hit the right answer. In practise, the percentage the game shows as your accuracy doesn't directly relate to your chance to hit something .....

 

Ah ok, yes, this is interesting and is broadly matching up with what I'm seeing in the game. Once my troops get more accurate they really are sniping beautifully, even over long distances, especially kneeling which makes a big difference, as you say. It's the rookies who are quite heart-stopping, especially on autofire when frankly the only surprising thing is that they don't shoot their own feet and the rest of the platoon.

 

Speaking of kneeling, that not only makes your units harder to hit, it grants a small boost to your overall accuracy percentage. Use it.

 

I absolutely do, whenever I can. The only problem with it is on longer/trickier shots when sometimes I kneel and then find I don't have a line of sight, even though I was sure it would be ok. And then, of course, when I stand I don't have enough TUs left for the shot Sometimes if it's really critical I don't risk it, just take a chance on the standing shot. I'm always surprised how often it comes off, really can't complain about the firing accuracy at all.