Jump to content

Havoc89

Former Developers
  • Posts

    3229
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Havoc89

  1. Surrendering has it's place, but it is certainly being overused. I'd recommend some kind of a minimum requirement to address the issue. The issue at it's core is that surrendering is triggered when there are still clear opportunities to come out with a win. 

    So with min requirements I'd suggest something like 50% of the buildings vs the enemy team's still functional buildings. I would also suggest a delay to surrender vote after a building dies. Give it like 5 mins before anyone is allowed to surrender. This way its not just a case of someone insta-triggering the vote after a building is lost.

    The game has plenty of opportunities to fight back. What kills the team is when moral dips. Usually when one person triggers a surrender vote that doesn't pass, it can have a noticeable impact on team moral when people think to them selves, "Oh well I saw X number of team members voting yes so I guess all of those players are basically not playing anymore."

    The surrender vote should also have like an alarm sound go off in the final few seconds of the vote so that players that dont notice the vote UI will have some other indication of the vote about to end. It should encourage more team members to vote rather than seeing people surprised after vote is passed and some people asking "what just happened?" 

    • Like 7
  2. Hey community!

    Its over... its finally over! 2020 comes to a close at last! What a strange year it's been but hey, tomorrow is the start of a new year, and a new beginning for us all!

    Nick Parker has some words to share, we thought we'd relay his message:

     

    Well said Mr.Parker... Well said!

     

    Happy new year to all!

    • Like 5
    • Haha 2
  3. Tick Tank is also one of those assets that I'm not a huge fan of either. It didn't translate over to 3d as well as it did in the concept art. The OG Tick Tank design was a tad bit bland and we were thinking of making it look more like an evolution of the Light Tank seen in Renegade.

     

    lucaciu-roland-ticktank-render.jpg.4aecd85c03a4eedee1bbc96718ee3bca.jpg

     

    That being said, the focus is to have all assets be completed before anything can be redone. Otherwise it will end up being a perpetual redoing of already completed assets, and thus wasting a lot of time. We may or may not end up redoing some assets, but first our goal is to finish up the remaining unfinished assets.

    • Like 3
  4. Hey community!

     

    As you may know by now, Renegade X has a lot of maps in game 35+ maps for just C&C mode. A lot of them were originally community made maps that were popular and eventually included in the base game. However we all know that only a small handful of the 35+ maps are being played in servers. Some maps will go un-played for days if not weeks. Having 35+ maps also creates a lot of burden for us to maintain and update all of them at any given time, especially when we are a small team.

    There is a clear issue with maps having an inconsistent set of standards in both gameplay, and visual quality. We would like to address this by removing large number of the more unpopular maps, so that we can instead clearly focus on the maps that aren't necessarily the best, but are also in much better shape than the ones that are clearly bad. This way we'll be able to narrow down and focus on maps that you guys want to see improved to reach the same level of quality as the most popular maps.

    As this is a pretty touchy subject as map opinions will be mostly subjective. There are clearly some gems, some diamonds in the rough, and some that are better off being removed. You may have noticed that there was a forum poll about picking favourite maps, however that poll isn't enough to really justify taking action in this regards.

    We've created a new survey that isn't simply tied to a forum poll, but instead allows for much wider exposure. This poll will also help us to more clearly identify maps that are the best, okay, the worse, and the ones you guys think should be improved. So please take 2 minutes of your time to answer the 4 questions in this survey as it will help us a lot to see what the majority of this community wants to see. As well as allow us to focus our efforts on the maps that are the most deserving of being updated.

     

    Survey can be found here:
    https://forms.gle/m3AiUviKgrEbiHHP7

     

    Thank you for your time!
    - Havoc89

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
  5. I'm not surprised that Islands is currently the highest voted map. Its always great fun.

    @Xtractor you know you could have made a poll right? Would be a lot easier to see the stats that way.

     

    As for my list, this is a tough one...

    1) Islands (Yeah... me too. Never a boring match)
    2) Reservoir (Low-key one of the best maps. Very consistently fun to play)
    3) Tunnels (Under rated map imo, I have fun every time in this map. Its just too bad it crashes for people a lot)
    4) Outposts (One of the few maps that encapsulates the entire sandbox with mixed combat very well)
    5) Goldrush (Never know with this one. Can go either way from either sides of the map) 

    • Like 1
  6. On 8/18/2020 at 1:35 PM, Mystic~ said:

    Somebody from the Totem Arts dev team might like to try reaching out to this guy? I stumbled across him on twitter/youtube. He's a gaming design student with quite a lot of UE experience from what his site says, but I don't know if he's available or actively looking for another project or not.

    @Havoc89

    https://twitter.com/JakoMako51

    https://www.artstation.com/artwork/xzNWQW

    https://jacopocolangelo.com/resume

    Has this individual expressed any interest?

  7. Hello,

    Ruling in this case is pretty simple. If the project is in active development, then its a no. If its an older project that isn't actively being worked on, then that is a different story.

    I know its easy to rip out our assets, however that doesn't mean one should. You have to understand that our assets aren't released or available to the public as source files. These are compiled and compressed assets for the engine that are being extracted out. Yes it is also inevitable that someone will do just that and take things out without asking. It's happened before and will very likely happen again. There were also cases in the past where individuals have "modified" ripped out assets and tried to profit off of those. Granted this is the worse case scenario but it has happened in the past. Things can very quickly spiral out of control as a result.

    I understand that you do not wish to sell anything however these are assets built specifically for a project that is still very much in development. To see them being used outside of this project before the project's completion can be harmful to the relationship between the project and the authors of said assets as they often end up becoming distrusting of the project and can cause issues with artists leaving or even worse not allowing use of their work.

    We are certainly humbled that people are inspired by our work and wish to use what we've done and build on top of it. However we ask that you also please respect the hard work by each developer and artist that spend hours if not days into creating every single asset. After we're done with the project that is when we're likely to allow the public to use them. We are wrapping up Renegade X pretty soon so until then we kindly ask that you do not use our assets in other projects. What you chose to do for your own use is up to you, however when it comes to anything visible to the public then that is where we draw the line.

    I've had my own personal and project specific work stolen on several occasions, and it sucks when that happens. I'd like to protect the work of the many artists and developers that have contributed to this project. I hope you can understand why in this case the answer is no.


    Regards,
    Havoc89

    • Like 3
  8. My old desktop had an evga gtx 1080ti and a ryzen 7 1800x. I had very very rarely dipped below 60fps with all my settings at the highest possible settings. I used to play in 64 bit all the time without that runtime command.

  9. There definitely is a lot of frustration in Renegade X. We briefly discussed addressing this specifically for Firestorm in the DevTalk. Most players prefer to play the classic remake maps over new ones that aren't as claustrophobic in their layout even though a lot of the non-remake maps do address choke points and base locking specifically. This is something we've struggled with in the base RenX game partially because at it's core it is a remake of the original game. There is a charm to keeping things somewhat similar to the original game, and deviating too much will take away from that charm and nostalgia. There is a balance that we have to find, that respects the original game, but also addressing major issues from the original game.

    A lot of this is being addressed in Firestorm simply because its not a remake and we have the freedom to explore and alter things. Claustrophobic choke points, and isolated infantry or vehicle only areas are things we generally want to remove from the map design. Instead create a more balanced mixed combat setup along with key areas to help create points of contention to help make more of a tug of war style of play.

    As per veterancy, that was introduced to help limit insanely long games that last way too long to help bring them to an end. This is another aspect that feels like its a necessary element to address 1.5h+ maps which was a huge problem before it was introduced. It is at the end of the day a bandaid fix for the core gameplay issues. Whether this system or something like it will be in Firestorm is another discussion we're having internally. With Firestorm we want to specifically address the core issues in a more robust manner. 

    • Like 3
  10. While we're on the subject, and since we're being very transparent. Here is some extra old footage that pre-dates our already old alpha test footage that you saw in the DevTalk video. Some of this footage is over a year old.

     

     

     

     

     

     

    • Like 4
  11. Since the average time for a single round is fairly high, its under stable that some people have to leave mid match. There are also a few very high and very low skilled players in this small community. On top of that role diversity is a very broad scope in C&C mode, so any player of any skill range can end up having varied amounts of contributions in each map depending on how they wish to play that day or that round.

    So I guess my question to you guy is, would you guys be okay with not being able to change teams manually and potentially moving over to the losing team mid or even late game? The last time players were prevented from changing teams it was met with a fair amount of frustration, and it will be again if the auto balancer is more aggressive.

    You may be the top 5 player on your team who's winning, and suddenly get swap over to the losing team. This is obviously the worse case scenario since you would have had to put a lot of effort into bringing your team to a winning scenario and now you're forced to be on the losing team. But the upside is that in theory teams can be more evenly balanced. Again, worse case scenario. Are you all prepared for such a thing?

    I also need to point out that there is a miss conception of what MMR is. It is definitely not a magic number that is 100% representative, but rather an estimation. As mentioned before, because the role diversity is very broad it allows anyone to be in a varying degrees of effectiveness. Some one with a very high MMR can be killing it one game, and the next game be chilling as a repair/defensive player.

    So before anyone says that auto balance on start up can solve the team balance. I need you guys to understand why it alone cannot solve the entire problem. Start up balance can provide a decent base. But players changing their play styles can throw it out of sync, and thus a more aggressive mid game MMR would need to be employed. I'm not talking about micro-details but more broad scope macro concept. When it comes to details, everyone will have varying opinions.

    So once again, are you guys prepare for such a system where you are not allowed to swap teams as freely as you'd like. And are you prepared for such a system that adapts mid game to reshuffle and re-balance the teams with as little or as many players as the system requires to make things fair?

    • Like 3
×
×
  • Create New...