Agent

@YagiHige, stop with the unproductive and off-topic spam posts.

This should now be fixed. MSI updated and launcher patch pushed.

My understanding is that it doesn't like something the launcher does with permissions (According to @Schmitzenbergh). I should probably push an update at some point.

Alright so after examining logs and his installation, I've determined the following: His copy of the Renegade X client appears valid. He is attempting to join a valid server (CT), and it is not a connection-based issue. There are no obvious permissions issues. Permissions on the folder were completely permissive. It doesn't appear to be a firewall issue, because the error message is a package mismatch error. The package he has on his computer is no different than the package which is on mine. The GUIDs and sizes match. The GUID in the error message in his logs appears to be a GUID from a previous installation, but that file doesn't appear to exist anywhere on his computer. He's running Windows 7. Basically: His installation appears valid, he's connecting to a valid server, there aren't firewall issues, and there aren't permissions issues. I have absolutely no idea why a package mismatch error is being thrown. I searched his entire system for files named "RenXHud.upk", and the only result was the valid file and an old version of the file in the /patches/backups folder (which I ended up deleting). Does anybody else have any ideas?

The only important thing is that it's not happening due to technical limitations; otherwise this would've probably been implemented. Thread locked.

I'm not sure why people are supporting these strange "commander-only" features. If it was implemented, everybody would be able to use it. It's not going to be implemented though.

Could you post your log file in UDKGame/Logs so that we can take a glance at it? It still sounds like a networking/firewall issue, but it's still worth looking at them.

It sounds like your game client is completely unable to connect to the server then. Make sure there aren't any firewalls blocking it by temporarily disabling all firewalls and anti-virus applications.

If this error is still appearing: Then it's not uninstalled. Try deleting both of the files mentioned in the error. Then open the launcher, click "Settings" at the top right, and click "verify game integrity". This should resolve that issue, and may resolve the other issue. Essentially is sounds like a file got moved at some point and for some reason it's still lingering around. If problems still persist, delete the entire "E:\Renegade X\" directory, and install from scratch using the installer that is on the downloads page. In addition, to not update from Beta 3. Beta 3 does not have the auto-updater.

This thread is going in circles, and no realistic ideas to solve the shortcomings of the current mining system have been proposed for many pages now. Any further discussion about mining should take place within the development team rather than this thread. Thank you to those who participated in the poll. Thread locked.

No.

Poll results at time of closing (may replace later):

There have been quite a few posts in the last day, and I may have skipped a few. The claim that laser/energy walls don't have AoE potential is absurd. You're going into design details that haven't even been considered yet, and could easily be taken care of -- the end implementation might not even use a laser. "Laser wall" just makes it very clear that the doors will be automatically defended (though repairs may be necessary) and can be disabled by charging through them (just as is the case with the current mines) or disabling them (just as is the case with the current mines). The key differences are that over-mining is completely eliminated, proximity mines are removed from a stringent defensive role, mines per building don't increase with every building kill, and you end up with a much simpler mechanic for players to familiarize themselves with. Those would be the explicit goals of a "laser wall". It is a fact that there is presently only one way to use mines, and that is for base defense, and more specifically defending doors. If you want doors to be automatically defended, then this should be simplified into a door/window defense mechanism. This isn't that complicated; it's simpler AND more aesthetically pleasing than the current mine system. There is absolutely zero chance that we will categorize players into "good" and "bad" miners. That's the single worst suggestion I've read to date.

I was thinking there would be a laser wall for each wall of windows (so 3 laser walls covering 7 windows).

Laser walls seem to be the most attractive option thus far. Since players hate the idea of removing mines entirely, this would probably have to be combined with making mines a personal weapon (same style as remote c4 and AT mines) that also can't be placed on friendly buildings (after all, you can't very well have explosives attached to your buildings! That would damage them!). Laser walls keep the gameplay that mines currently provide intact, while eliminating the team-hampering potential that comes with mines. If people genuinely enjoy mines for their defensive role, this is the route to go. Mines have no other positive role right now, other than frustrating players. As far as difficulty of implementation, that would have to be investigated further but certainly it couldn't be too difficult. The next best alternative would be my previous recommendation of making mines a purchasable item, and removing the limit. This is probably the easiest way to eliminate the mine limit.

Ultimately I don't think it's worthwhile to do squads every week, and it should probably be left up to each team's commander on how to split the team into squads (i.e: they might not want an "infiltration" squad). Commanders would definitely need the ability to move people between channels. I don't think we should do this today though -- it'll probably take more prep than that. This would be a good thing to TEST on the smaller Sunday PUGs. The Channel Commander stuff works similar to any other whisper list. TeamSpeak -> Tools -> Whisper Lists -> New -> Put your hotkey (I do '+' and '*' on the numpad). Change "Whisper to:" to "Groups" and "Group Whisper Type" to "Channel Commander". If you're the Commander, set "Group Whisper Target" to "Subchannels". If you're a squad leader, set "Group Whisper Target" to "Parent Channel".

@YagiHige, it sounds like what you're wanting is to use TeamSpeak's Channel Commander feature. This allows channel commanders to communicate with eachother, and I think it can also be setup where they just talk to the channel commander(s) in the higher up channel (i.e: the team commander). To illustrate exactly what I'm thinking:

Coming Soon™

Hi <3 Also, I would actually love to see lower population servers. I would also love to see more players to fill lower population servers.

Alpha generally comes before Beta, Thommy.

We'll almost certainly try to gain more publicity again once 1.0 is ready. YouTube videos and word-of-mouth are more than welcome in the mean time.

He's still permanently muted (notably, the only permanently muted player). He was banned for a time for abusing the fact that muted players used to still be able to use PMs. His ban was removed when that bug was fixed.

This is untrue. You can thank Max for this being fixed.\ A client-side mute list would be pretty great, but tricky and inconsistent without forcing everybody to use steam or implementing forum accounts. Hardware IDs could be used, but ideally those should only really be used for banning. Edit: Temporarily muting people (per match) would be easy client-side, however.

Boomer throws unnecessary surrender votes very frequently. They generally get voted down.

That is very strange.