Hicks

I don't know if someone has already said this but it seems that the new launcher no longer has the active Totemarts home link, facebook link etc.

I'm glad you're open to small changes even if they are about votes. Like all things to be implemented, you can't know exactly what people think until they are implemented, I as an average player and aware of how the community thinks about it tell you that implementing these two votes is the right thing, in in any case, going back to a previous situation is never that complicated (I know because in my job I often have to program even on complicated projects). If and when these votes are implemented I will continue to write in this thread to show how the community has reacted.

We have all been new to this game or others and we all know that the details are discovered over time. A rookie will always be helped by someone with more experience or more simply, as I did, "stealing with his eyes". A periodic on-screen warning I think is the best solution in the case of votes (no base kill & no nuke/ion), in order to inform the players that the server state is set with those two flags and then... it's also a quick way to get newbies interested in grades 😉

Thanks for the reply, I take the liberty of quoting what you say and letting you know my point of view, perhaps with some constructive ideas. You mean to use the VPs from the last game for picking teams in the next game? In this case the algorithm doesn't take into account players joining the game in progress, but it would still be a great start... I totally agree. I also think that the Pugs are more balanced, but I think they are not for everyone, at least not for me. The reason is simple, I don't speak English well and I have great difficulty understanding spoken English and I use google translate to write in English! In any case, I understand that they are only played once a week, correct me if I'm wrong, and that there are only public servers. Perhaps it would be useful, in public servers, to have the possibility of doing a short warm-up in which one could distribute oneself among teams, perhaps letting only two people choose, just like in the Pugs. Or introducing the possibility of creating clans directly from the game, a bit like what happened with the classic Renegade where you also had a clan lobby and in this way you would also have the possibility to organize Clan War, it would be really very interesting. Then I wanted to suggest two new votes that would be really useful in all games, I don't know if it's correct to write it here, maybe if it isn't tell me and I'll open a new thread. Often I play games with few players, for example 2v2. In this case often someone proposes not to kill the base until a minimum number of players is reached, for example to wait until it's 10v10. If so, in theory they should wait for the minimum number of players to actually start playing. In practice most of the time the players don't wait for that limit and this destabilizes the game itself. I understand very well that the ultimate goal of the game is to destroy the opponent's base but a broken deal most of the time leads to real quarrels between the players. These situations could be avoided by introducing an ad hoc vote so that the structures are not damaged, obviously there must also be a way to restore the destructibility of the structures. Another ambiguous situation is with superweapons (nuke/ion). I was playing a 2v2 game the other day and some of them nuked to win. I asked him why he used the nuke in a sparsely populated game and he replied that the nuke is provided by the developers and therefore he felt free to use it in that game and in all subsequent ones. His speech is undoubtedly correct, of course (but this is my point of view) superweapons ruin sparsely populated games. Next I was playing a 10v10 game and I nuke myself destroying the WF, at which point all the players taunted me for ruining the game! Again it would be useful to have a vote to enable/disable superweapons to avoid unpleasant situations where a game is ruined. Before you remind me, I know very well that superweapons are a tactical tool and that they have always been included in the game since the classic Renegade.

I have been playing for quite some time and after a break of more than a year I was hoping this problem would be fixed. More in detail, often at the beginning of a new game, the teams (which are probably chosen randomly from the game) are strongly unbalanced and I don't mean the number of players in one team compared to the other but I'm talking about the ability of individual players who make up one team over the other. All this besides being frustrating for a team spoils the games because many players of a team, the heavily disadvantaged one, leave the server. I think you wanted to use your resources for other projects, neglecting the aspects that you think are of little importance. A game should be fun for everyone, not frustrating. Many other players think like me too. So the question is, are you going to consider and fix the problem or not? As a programmer I say that it could take very little even just to improve the situation a bit because I realize that having two perfectly balanced teams is impossible.

I'll clarify your ideas a little because apparently you remember badly. 1) You weren't trying the controls peacefully when I entered as you were shooting at each other's structures. 2) If you had any game needs, for example not to kill the structures or you needed some advice or simply an explanation on the game mechanics or an explanation on the purpose of each single character I would have been happy to help you! It was enough to use a little education and ask! 3) The first time you took the vote to kick me I told you that this was a public server and that you couldn't take it all for yourself, you replied that you were free to kick me and therefore you would continue to do so! 4) I went in with a friend of mine to let you know that this was a public server and not a private one for your personal use and yes I taunt you by challenging you to kick me again after you did it six or seven times! 5) From all this I have learned that next time I call the server admin to take action. 6) RenegadeX is a small community and we are happy when there are new players but if I have to choose between staying a small community as we are or a large community full of people like you I prefer the first choice!

It probably is and it's one more reason to take action I think.

Hi, I wrote that I demolished most of their base, so yes I destroyed the buildings! But at this point if they didn't want something like this to happen: 1) Why did they start shooting at their enemy structures? I entered when the game had already started and the enemy bases were firing. 2) If you didn't want to destroy the enemy base why didn't they say so? Anyone who knows me knows that I am a fair person and if you want to play with me by putting the rules I certainly don't violate them. They just started kicking me saying they were free to do it! it is mainly for this reason that I wrote here, for their arrogance!

Hi Craz, we agree on one thing, that is to remove the 10 second limit. In any case, I have never said that I want to eliminate beacons or commanders permanently, my point of view is simple and is shared by many other players. I think it does not damage anybody if we introduce these two votes. As usual, I give examples for everyone's benefit to better explain my point of view. Let's say we start a 2v2 game on Field which is a very closed map with very little chance of rushing. We vote on the beacons and on the commanders and take away the possibility of using both the beacons and the commanders. After about 20 minutes of play the teams have grown and now the game is let's say 10v10 or 15v15, it is not important, what is important is that now someone proposes the votes to reintroduce the beacons and the commanders and everything is reintroduced. Moral of the story is that no one complained and won democracy as it should be.

Hello everyone, I am writing because I wonder if it is permissible to kick people from public servers for no reason, except that two people wanted to take over a public server to win a game against anyone. I start from the beginning, I joined a server with a game started 1v1 + 1 bot. after a couple of minutes I destroy the airstrip and my partner changes teams. After a few minutes only the Nod refinery remains intact. At that point they start kicking me off the server playing alone against nobody and every time I tried to get back they kicked me out again. I understand this attitude if it were a private server but it was a public server and therefore accessible and usable by everyone. Everything happened around 15:00 -15: 15 Italian time, about 15 - 30 minutes ago, on the Cynthia vanilla server and the nicknames of the two lamers are cuckroachking and stopdropkiller. In the video a few seconds in which I enter the game and they immediately kick me out for no reason! is it possible to ask for measures for these two lamers? 138959088_UDK(UnrealDevelopmentKit)basedgames2021_03.20-15_15_57_01.mp4

I agree with what you wrote but there are a couple of things you don't clarify and I'm curious to know what you think. I list them below: 1) What do you think about using beacons in a low pop game? 2) What do you think about a voting system to limit the use of the beacon in low pop games? Obviously if you agree to use the beacon even in low pop games, the second question would no longer make sense.

I am more and more convinced that even if you read the whole thread you do not understand the meaning, now I'll explain it to you better... here nobody talked about having to drastically eliminate the beacons or the commanders, in this case it could easily be done on the server side, as has suggested Try-Out, but there is talk of the need to introduce votes in this regard. So with the votes you can remove the possibility of using beacons or commanders but you can also re-establish their use. So you start a game for example 2v2 and remove the beacons and the commanders and then for example the teams grow and the beacons and the commanders are introduced again with another vote. Exactly as it happens with the vote for the bots!!! I don't think there is any server-side setting to introduce these votes! Is it clearer now?

Alternatively press the esc key and from there select chat and private. Choose who you want to send the message to, write the message and send it privately.

Who talks about beacons and commanders categorically disabled? No one here has ever said it! Here we are talking about having a vote about it to avoid what you do in game, that is to take the role of commander and place beacons on 2v2 games!

Apparently I am not the first and AshbyJones will not be the last to ask for a vote to limit the use of the beacon or the election of a commander. I am convinced that the developers have done an exceptional job but I wonder why not listen to the suggestions of the community? In the past in another thread Handepsilon answered me about it: "And I guess I'll let the other devs who's more regular than me decide on the votes." I was hoping that with the latest update to see some new constructive voting for matches, needless to say I was disappointed 😕 In any case now the question is not why you don't implement these new votes but the correct question is: why don't you want to implement them? It's not laziness, otherwise you wouldn't be releasing updates on a regular basis, so what's the reason? As I said to Handepsilon it is also a way to make the players independent from the decisions of the developers, that is to make it so that the players decide the rules of a game with the possibility of voting, not that the server with the rules implemented decides for them. I'll give you two examples of hypothetical situations just to be clearer: 1) in a 2v2 game 3 players want to add bots while the last one does not. The vote is made and bots are added. This is democracy and it is the right spirit. 2) in a 6v6 game 11 players don't want the beacon to be used while 1 absolutely wants to use it. This one player will use it against everyone's will and will be kicked off the server and the game ruined. This is not the right spirit for a match. So I keep wondering why you don't want to listen to the community when they ask you for a change to improve the game?

Sorry if inherent, but the situation is becoming unbearable! I was hoping that with the latest update I would see activated at least the vote regarding the beacons and instead of relaxing in front of my favorite game I get stressed every time in a low pop game I see people who win games by placing 4 or 5 nukes/ions! Please do something, it is mainly the fact that there is no fun chasing the continuous nuke/ion in 5v5 or 6v6 games, in this way the games and their fun are continually ruined. Please do something!

Secondary weapon is not that effective against moby / doza The best teacher is the practice, I like to engage the light infantry with the main weapon, every shot scored gives a lot of satisfaction 😛 but the greatest difficulty is to follow the target with the mouse, especially if they are too close 😞

Excuse my ignorance, but what is the PIC?

Thanks a lot 🙂

In this thread yeeeeeet was accused of racism, I wanted to understand how he was racist. I don't understand, the nick yeeeeet is somehow linked to the holocaust or is it just the impression of someone? Please explain to me.

Another bug found, this time around the Island-X map. This is an important bug as it prevents the NODs (I don't know if the GDI base has the same problem) from accumulating tiberium as the harvester is stuckeed. It is probably easy to fix this bug, in my opinion it is enough to raise the ground on the tiberium field so that the harvester can move freely. 548437220_UDK(UnrealDevelopmentKit)basedgames2021_01.18-13_02.29_01.mp4

I don't remember, I think not but I'm not sure.

Another small but annoying bug! Sometimes it happens that when you exit the tanks with the engineer or tech/hotty you exit with the repair beam on. 1054739250_UDK(UnrealDevelopmentKit)basedgames2021_01.15-13_01.27_01.mp4

I also add that this gives syd/rave a chance to win against doza/moby in a close match, while it is currently almost impossible.

I only raised this question because in the past I was an instantgib player in a q3 based game. My proposal, maybe to try only in one release and then consider whether to keep it or not, is to remove the delay and slightly reduce the range so that the rail is not very effective from long distance. This way syd/rave does not lose their nature against buildings and tanks but against other players they cannot hide and shoot from long range. What do you think?