s1rdwp9h

I find it hard to understand why it is so difficult to implement a repair score and a damage score in this game. Players with a strong repair score or damage score can be balanced evenly between teams (A team has both strong reps and strong attackers). The players who have both weak repair scores and damage scores can be balanced evenly between teams, equally distributing the liabilities for each team. Total score can then equal repair score + damage score. Repair score is a fundamentally important base data of the game and majorly impacts it, so it's bewildering, that this has not already been implemented for the players to see. Players who see a repair score can better understand what is happening in this game (for balance etc). Hiding the repair score with secret values does not help and is being counter productive to balance, we the players, cannot understand how much this hidden figure is messing up balance. As for people switching to the winning team, lock their rank at recruit for the rest of that game, problem solved. Renx is already very different to original Ren, why is implementing such a basic system of numbers so impossible?

Excuses for not helping to balance this game seem to be so weak...

I propose the in game scoreboard and leaderboard score be broken down into two further visible data columns \ values, a repair score and a damage score. The repair score would store points scored from repairing infantry, vehicles, buildings and defusing enemy c4, mines and beacons. The damage score would store points scored from damaging \ killing enemy infantry, vehicles and buildings. These two new score types could be used to balance teams with equally strong players in damage and repairing. For instance, it would be possible to avoid most good repairers being on the same team, while most of the best damage skilled players are on the opposite team (unbalanced).

The following is a proposal aimed towards making airstrikes easier to use, more fun, more rewarding and involve more teamwork. Currently when an airstrike is cast by player no.1 another member of the same team (player no.2) has to wait 60 seconds before they can cast their airstrike. Often this cancels the airstrike player no.2 is trying to perform and they may get killed for nothing as a result and lose the $800 airstrike without casting it. Therefore the following changes could be made: · Airstrikes do not cancel airstrikes of other players. Instead the airstrike is queued and casts on the next available window. · Multiple airstrike casts by allies at the same time in the same area results in a stronger airstrike (more damage) · Airstrikes should cost more (e.g. $1500) to reduce frequency of use

Here are some points to consider: • Currently the in-game-score-points and vp-score-points are disconnected and that causes confusion. • The idea behind RenX points is to link information together (in-game-score and vp-score). • For instance, for every 15 in-game-score-points you also receive 1 vp-score-point. • The amount of RenX points scored vs buildings, infantry, vehicles, C4, field repairers and beacons is open to change. • Regarding more enemy players. A simple multiplier on no. of enemy players is sought. • For instance, RenX point = RenX point + (number of enemy players * 1.25 - number of enemy players ) (rounded up or down). The multiplier of 1.25 is open to change. • Under this system the most valuable player (MVP) will typically be the first person to get to heroic. • Currently, bombarding a building progresses the game to an end by ranking up more quickly than the enemy. Bombarding a building holds down enemy players in that building. If I’m not mistaken that is useful? Again, the amount of RenX points scored vs buildings is open to change.

In the following I shall describe a proposal, aimed towards a more simplified, easier and accurate leaderboard and in game scoring system in Renegade-X. We may consider scoring in the game recorded as RenX points. A RenX point could consist of 1 VP and 1 in-game-score-point. Alternatively, a RenX point could consist of 1 VP and 2 in-game-score-points. The exact numbers will necessitate fine-tuning, in order to achieve a correct balance. The following are alternative calculation formulas for the Score Screen’s awards: · MVP title should be granted to the player with the most RenX points · BEST OFFENSE should = the most RenX points scored in the enemy half of the map (closer to the enemy base than the allied base) · BEST DEFENSE should = most RenX points scored in your teams half of the map (closer to the allied base than the enemy base) · BEST SUPPORT should be granted for the player who has the most RenX points scored from repairing Switching teams should be registered as a defeat on the leaderboard (no swapping in order to improve one’s Win-Loss-Ratio). Rage quits should be counted on the leaderboard (player quits the server when their team recently lost a building). AFK kicks should be counted on the leaderboard. More enemy players = more of a challenge. This should reward the player more (bonus RenX point(s) as taking on 20+ enemy players is a lot harder than taking on a handful). I would suggest the use of a multiplier, tied to the enemy team size on the server. Score achieved on bot only servers should not add to the leaderboard. Kills and damage vs bots should not add to the leaderboard. Suggestion: more than 3 human players required before leaderboard logging occurs? The leaderboard would naturally need a reset, should the changes described above be utilized e.g. a function to balance in game teams.