evanb90

I didn't want to get into a drawn out discussion but the pros or cons of APB, but to simply imply it is different, so this is going to be my last post on the matter. Don't try to tell me how APB flows when I've played the game on a pretty regular basis for three years. On Ridge War, The Woods Today, Shallow Grave and Bunkers, 3 of 4 being "HUEG", there are game-changing strategies that can easily be executed prior to and even shortly after the first dump. (including in 2 of 4, Ore Truck rushes that can and often do succeed) It is indeed a problem the Soviets lack a rapid infantry transport and the Chinook HAD issues like that before, but not now. Allied AA is much weaker in CF- Rangers aren't going to swat Chinooks out of the sky, and RS actually have a balanced AA weapon now. As for the Supply Truck, it's actually coming to APB: Gamma, which is the next major release. Your next two points are the V2 and dump size. First, a fair number of APB maps have $1050 dumps, and second, balance stats and extensive personal experience show that only the worst Soviet teams suffer from the $700 dump. The V2 is also a siege artillery unit, meant to hit buildings first, different from Renegade artillery, which are more like "cardboard tanks" than artillery. As such, it doesn't need horizontal aiming. (and you don't say V2s are ass after getting hit directly by one )

QUOTE (epicelite @ Dec 29 2009, 06:26 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Because APB has a different game flow than Renegade, particularly in regards to income. Economy is supposed to be extremely important, not "lets pool up for mech-meds and tanyas before the first dump arrives and rape the Soviets!". That is also your second issue, which was addressed in CF. The Ore Trucks are quite a bit faster and the action gets started sooner. But don't say "have to stand", because there are plenty of things you can do in the maps with the long dump times- like Rifle rush the Ore Truck, pretty much giving you the game if you succeed in destroying it. But to each his own- APB's slow build-up is well worth it for me. edit- lol "for it me"

Realistic? Yes. A tank the size of the Mammoth could probably smash everything in the Nod arsenal but the Flame Tank. Not so sure it would be good for gameplay though.

QUOTE (R315r4z0r @ Dec 3 2009, 04:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yeah that wouldn't work, 100% certain. Lets say we have a 4 man imbalance on a 20 player game (from my experience, extremely common, sadly on both accounts). If the outnumbered team is under attack, they have less people that can go to repair without harshly impacting the team's ability to respond to the attack, and when they attack they can be more easily dealt with with. (and a handicap, unless dramatic, won't help either) Anyways my stance on it is that it should be like TF2 (or any other team based game for that matter) You got auto or your choice between the two teams. If GDI has 10 players and Nod has 9, you cannot join GDI until Nod has 10 players. If you reallllllly want to be on GDI/Nod, you can wait until the teams even up and then join. There should also be an auto-balance balance feature though. Not based by who is dead, but pseudo-random. Less priority to people with the lowest scores and highest scores though. Stuff like beacons, C4 simply removed as I feel it is a better alternative to leaving them there (and/or changing their teams as well) edit- Mixing would be a good feature too. Even if the teams are balanced in number, they rarely are in skill. Whenever I play RenegadeX it usually ends with one team (almost always Nod) being ludicrously stacked. (and that exact same team goes on to win the next 6 or 7 rounds in what amounts to be a rather boring series of no-contest, no-competition matches)

QUOTE (R315r4z0r @ Nov 15 2009, 10:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> My feelings exactly. I also find it funny when it comes to counterattacking the hill campers. In a recent match of Whoreglass, I was in a Light Tank, rushed up the hill to stop an MLRS which retreated into the safety bubble of the AGT as it saw me approach- I went right into the safety bubble and was under direct fire from the AGT and the MLRS, was able to destroy the MLRS and awhile still being under fire from the AGT, retreated and got to safety with about 200 HP remaining. Conversely, if I dared to do that against a Nod Arty, I would likely lose my tank/inf without even killing the Arty. (although to be fair I am discussing the weakness of GDI on the hill and the advantage of Nod on the hill)

Locking should be included as the benefits far exceed the downsides. If people are leaving their vehicles in the field, there is a good chance they will die before they get to where they intend to go and any half-decent locking system would automatically unlock the vehicle if A: the player died of any circumstance. B: the player changed team. C: the player left the game. I personally think Demigan's last post has it spot on for a proper locking system. Let people enter into the passenger/gunner seat, allow them to use the vehicle's weapons if applicable. Let people enter the one-seaters to keep them occupied and safe from stealing, but immediately kick them out if the owner tries to enter and don't let them drive. The only thing I disagree with is the idea of giving other players the ability to override a lock. I can see smug clanners and griefers working together to unlock and use vehicles because they are impatient or just want to be arses respectively. I have had several vehicles stolen from me in RenX so far, twice people have been kicked from the game because they went off and wasted them, and a few others went unpunished for their actions. Although none of the steals have been at inconvenient times (IE a Medium Tank I just bought with my last 800 to help defend the base), its annoying.