yosh56

Wait... they did? So basically both of you can't shoot each other And this effect is gamebreaking and thus should be banned because of it! Just immagine people doing this to deflect the shots! Well-placed C4's makes someone immortal, he runs in the enemy base and the C4's explode near the MCT by the person who placed them. WITHOUT anyone dieing! How real is it to have C4's pasted on your body, run in like a suicide bomber and not die? C4 doesn't do splash damage to buildings/MCTs, calm yourself. It has to be right on them to damage them. I honestly think it should be like this for vehicles as well, or at least reduced splash to vehicles so flaming vehicles aren't so freakishly powerful. I'm shocked people don't use them to break Field stalemates vs. GDI.

Gave it some time before formulating an opinion on it,and in the end I had to go with I just don't like them. Granted, I may like them if they weren't just a buyable item that could be thrown by anyone with money, but that's just me. The smokescreen effect is cool, but it looks like it belongs on its own item. As for the EMP itself, it seems like far too much power in one player's hand. You can literally bring an entire rush to a halt in one click of the mouse. Airstrikes are support, as you have a warning, you can get out of the way, and (now) their damage is significant, but not overwhelming. EMPs have a tendency to be 'by the time you see this, it's too late', and for what they do it just seems like too much power in one player's hand. I already voiced my opinion that defence was being made entirely too easy the moment EMP nades and AT-mines were introduced, and in action that's starting to prove quite true.

The success rate is only low on a map like Field where it would be difficult to traverse a lot of open terrain. On maps like Islands, it is very easy to just suddenly be too close to stop a 300 credit Buggy from blowing up a 1500 credit Mammoth in a half a second. If the mine-limit permits, this tactic is beyond overpowered. Techs and Arts are barely cool being about 1.5-1.8x cost effective against tanks while requiring some form of coordination. The last thing Nod needs is something that's 5x cost effective against tanks, and only requires one person to pull off. Even flaming infantry takes at least 2 people to work effectively, and it's nowhere near as game-breaking considering infantry aren't the fastest units in the game. Tactics like this are fun in games like Battlefield where you didn't have to buy your tank or you can also one-hit-kill light vehicles. In Renegade, being 5x cost effective with virtually no skill required is just plain broken.

5 to 3 feet? Are you kidding me, you can see SBHs across the entire length of the entrance on Walls. It just depends how bright the area you're looking at is. Also, you see them a bit further away in First-person, as comes into play especially one Whiteout. EDIT: autocorrect is your worst enemy.

People did it in OldRen. It was a banned tactic for most servers however. Vehicles laced with C4 are known as flaming vehicles.

The auto rifle comes out just barely any better than the carbine...and I mean JUST barely. We're talking 4 DPS difference kind of barely. A sizeable sidearm is nice, yes (though there's not really much work involved in getting the silo), but still a rifle isn't a sidearm. As stated, this is less about any of the sidearms being OP, and more about the fact that there should be a difference between sidearms and buyable weapons that are often better than the primaries of 1st/2nd tier infantry. For instance, limit SBHs and Engineers to sidearm-type weapons, while more assault-type infantry can keep their sidearm and a second rifle if they so choose.

Wall-hopping was generally illegal on many servers. GDI is supposed to be harder to infiltrate with infantry, it's why the AGT has guns instead of just all anti-vehicle weapons. Besides, you can wall-hop the Barrack's sandbags on Islands if you jump off the rock beside it, and land on another soldier's head. A lot harder than OldRen, but proven doable. I'll agree that Nod should be able to Harv-walk on Field though, as that surprised me the first time I tried doing it.

...Yet again, Ob-walking referred to the actual GLITCH in Renegade where the Obelisk would actually fail to kill you even while you were walking in plain sight of it. This is why Ob-walking was banned, because it was legitimately unfair and not supposed to be part of the game. Running into buildings with somebody tanking the first shot of the Obelisk is not Ob-walking. http://www.renegadewiki.com/index.php/Obelisk_Walking

I've been seeing quite a bit of instances calling out some of the 'sidearms' as being OP or what not, and I honestly believe the Carbine especially is a bit too far up there in effectiveness to be a so-called supplementary weapon. Now, as much as the carbine/tib-weapons are called sidearms, last I checked, when I ever armed up in real-life, nobody ever issued me another rifle and called it a sidearm. Pistols, machine-pistols, maybe even compact SMGs are sidearms. Now this is Renegade, a game where originally we could carry like 10 weapons and be fine, but from the looks of it the devs already wanted to decrease that to 2 real weapons tops (according to Black Dawn and even the current system). That's not necessarily a bad thing, and Id have been fine with even being able to carry infinite weapons. My main point is however, that sidearms should be sidearms (replace the pistol, are a bit better but not too hugely so) while weapons like the Carbine should be considered second primaries with either their own slot, or having to remove C4 to access it. The heavy pistol is a pretty good example of a sidearm. It does quite a bit more damage than the silenced pistol per shot, and can do noticeable yet not too concerning damage to vehicles. It doesn't fire quite as fast, the projectile has travel time, and it has a smaller clip. Cool, this is a nice replacement if you happen to have the aim for it, and you know you'll be in the field where you might be able to pick off a low-health vehicle.so heavy pistol pro/con breakdown: Pro +Damage per shot higher +ROF isn't too much worse +Bit of damage to vehicles Con -Bit harder to aim due to bullet travel -Range is still pretty bad compared to primary weapons -Primary weapons can still kill faster due to rate of fire Step up 50 credits and you've got the carbine masquerading as a sidearm. It has a decent scope, enough range to fight all the way from one end of the tunnel on Walls to the other, and oh right, is replacing the silenced pistol with a gun capable of being at least a tier 2 weapon. It can't damage heavy armour...what a burden when you're busy owning the tunnel war with remote c4 and you're 'sidearm'. The pros and con list for having a carbine vs. the silenced pistol: Pro +Automatic weapon with obvious rate of fire advantage +Accurate when ADS, while still decently accurate from the hip +Does almost the same damage as the silenced pistol per shot. (3-4 damage difference) +Range is significantly higher than that of the pistol +Is actually more silenced than the silenced pistol...by a lot. +Can punish snipers you sneak up on with kind of rediculous headshot DPS +Costs $125 which is easily affordable as long as you're not throwing money away. Cons -Barely any damage to heavy armour -Clip is somewhat small, but rate of fire doesn't consume it rediculously fast -Doesn't have infinite ammo I don't think I need to get to the Tiberium weapons. I don't think they're OP at all stats-wise, but to be 'sidearms' they're a bit up there compared to what they replace. What I'm pretty much looking at is if anyone agrees that actual sidearms should be what replaces the silenced pistol, vs. having all buyable weapons replace it. The heavy pistol is a sidearm. If the Tiberium Fletchette gun was nerfed some it could work as a sidearm. That would also give a better distinction between the Fletchette and the rifle, with one being a primary weapon and the other being an actual sidearm. The main culprit that sparked this topic is of course engineers/technicians, as they're the ones who get the absolute most out of being able to carry a 'sidearm' instead of a silenced pistol. Their whole point is to be the support class with minimal to no offensive capability. Toss them a carbine or tib rifle and watch that philosophy go straight out the window. Bottom line: Sidearms like the heavy pistol and maybe a nerfed Fletchette gun (or buffed machine pistol) should replace the silenced pistol. Alternate primaries should either be their own slot, or replace the C4/Grenade slot. Preferably the former, but the latter makes sense in enforcing the idea that you're just out to kill, not blow stuff up.

...because Hourglass wasn't the map that everyone tried desperately to !voteskip... I'm fairly certain Hourglass went down as one of the most hated, stalemate maps, so saying 'everything that made it work well' is kind of just wrong. I'm sure someone else out here probably thinks that having ridiculous distances to rush while under the gaze of base defences is fun. I'm also sure someone out there liked driving up a hill for a minute and a half, or fighting on very basic side-paths with no real tactical appeal due to how far away base defences could murder half a rush in the time it took you to get under their minimal range. Yeah sure, Hourglass was so 'great'...it was universally hated or anything. And don't bring up exceptions, as the extreme minority generally could never stop that !voteskip from going through.

Dit it as a Hotwire on Mesa two days ago, and there weren't any other players distracting the obelisk, there were only 4 people on the server. I walked into airstrip. You need to clarify what Ob-walking you're referring to, as a lot of people use the term wrongfully. I can think of several ways to get to buildings past the Obelisk, but they're not necessarily what you'd refer to as Ob-walking.

Wait, Ob-walking doesn't exist in Renegade X. You can face backwards and walk in all the funny ass patterns you want, but it is going to strike you down like a very vibrant fist from the heavens no matter what. If you're referring to the fact that the Obelisk just shoots slow and can't hit more than one infantry every 4-ish seconds...then that's just because the Obelisk is built to deal with vehicles. Hell, you can engi-rush the AGT on Field already.

...GDI can definitely repair in the field,they just have to be smarter and more cautious about it. I've actually stolen more Nod vehicles while playing as GDI than I have vice-versa thanks to people thinking like that. Tranquility has the point here, though I still think there should be a bit more exposure when Arts are at the bunker. It's actually not game-breaking though, as Nod's vehicles generally do benefit from cover better, especially the Light tank with its short profile.

Again, I was going with being relatively easy to code when I was referring to simplistic. From what I can tell they've already got functions to destroy vehicles at a certain point (The Airstrip for instance), though I'm not sure how difficult it would be to just tell the Harvester AI to stop and go. A map overview is going a bit above and beyond, coding wise, and would involve more work for a 2D/3D artist. As for choosing a commander, I believe it could just be a vote option. Again, we already have a voting system implemented in game.

I know there's always talk about a commander mode and all that, but I feel as though the ideas for it get blown out of proportion to the point where it would become a daunting task for the devs to implement it. After a little thought, I think having a single 'commander' with just a few abilities could help the gameplay without becoming a monstrous undertaking. The only REAL abilities that would need to be tied to a person of importance would be: Blocking the Harvester so it will get out of the way and stop being whored to death. Unblocking the Harvester. Destroying the Harvester on the off chance that it is glitched. (This could be a timed detonation so it can't be used to kill the Harvester just to keep it from giving the enemy points). As a non-Harvester ability, the ability to place beacons that show up to all friendly players would be nice. For instance, beacons that denote 'xxx rush, meet here' or what not. While a lot of players seem to miss team chat, an obvious marker may actually catch their attention. Again, not something the game so much 'needs' as much as could benefit from without having to become freakishly overwhelming. Half of the time when I hear the idea pitched, it somehow becomes making tactical maps and overviews that would need Fog of war and things of that nature. Just keeping it simple.

I thought about just using it as a buyable item, and it makes a little bit of sense. The issue I'm seeing here is that there are a total of of 18 actual unique classes in Renegade (10 overlapping and 8 unique), yet only 2 have anything beyond their weapon that makes them actually worth buying...and both of them are on Nod (Chem trooper and the SBH). I don't think attaching unique items to classes can really do anything but add some variety to the game, and give snipers reason to focus on classes other than Hotwires/Techs and other snipers when the enemy's Bar/HON dies. Besides, they already have models for the health and armour pickups, may as well stop letting them collect dust.

Rypel [DEV] released a mutator to disable base defences after X amount of time, We ran this on EKT server, however people started bitching about it so we removed it. People will happily whore and whore and whore, but soon as they lose a building they all leave, so go figure, Rypel was kind enough to make this mutator, the people in server at the time bitched about it, so pretty much made there bed, they can lie it in. Pretty sure Action was just referring to map design. Disabling base defences doesn't really stop anyone from point-whoring. Granted, I still think point-whoring isn't as huge of a deal as some people make it out to be. It's not like they're completely safe while doing it.

Well, if you are looking towards the enemy and you leave the vehicle, you'll end up in FRONT of the vehicle, in that place where the enemy sees you and kills you. That's not a realistic place one would disembark (in the enemy fire? Or behind cover?) Pretty sure this was discussed already too... How hard is it to just look away for a second before you press E? We've (Me anyway) been exploiting this for quite some time now to jump out of Orcas onto the windows of the HON. It really isn't much of a nuisance at all once you know how it works.

I'm pretty sure this has been discussed countless times before, and in the end it ends up that the original person who starts the argument gets owned by the fact that you actually have MORE time to disarm beacons in RenX. Not around to check the exact time, but I'll edit when I search and find it. Pretty sure you have around 50-55 seconds before it hits the point of no return. EDIT: Yep, 50-55 seconds from plant time to point of no return. Closer to 50.

I'll preface this with "You can kill a building with 2 timed C4s and a Tib rifle." And again that may be an issue if we went with a Battlefield/Planetside style of refilling ammo, and then tied it to the engineer. If it required a different class entirely, wasn't an instantaneous drop, and could be stolen by an errant soldier/SBH then refilling mid-field wouldn't be much of an issue at all. Going on the original idea that almost seems to have been forgotten, if an Officer and a Hotwire made it into the back of a base rigged a building, and were able to have Nod not notice a beacon (think smoke beacons from the original CnC) then I don't think it'd be that huge of a deal for remotes to get refilled. That'd just be extended oversight on Nod's end and if they don't stop them from reaching another building, that's further failure to defend. On GDI's end it would have required at least 2 people working together, and full exploitation of bad defence. I used to believe engineers were support classes, then I took a tib silo, grabbed a flechette gun and realised I could beat anything that wasn't 1000 credits, put more pressure on a Sakura than Patch's weapon (irony), win vs. any free infantry, and fight light vehicles. When sidearms are actual sidearms, I'll believe engineers are support classes. That made sense in OldRen, it no longer flies as a valid argument in X. The flechette gun is actually about as effective as the auto rifle against aircraft...and the auto rifle isn't exactly trash against aircraft. The only thing Engineers can't do with side arms is hit aircraft from very far away. Mobius also can't hit Aircraft from very far away...nor Patch...or quite a few other infantry. They all do decent damage to light armour however. Mobius obviously can kill an air unit in one clip if they're close, but he's 1000 credits and still can just get kited to death by an Apache. Honestly, calling any infantry weapon but those built specifically for AA out on their lack of ability to kill aircraft is a bit of a useless point. The range on the tib weapons also isn't that much worse than the other automatic weapons in the game. I would say the only thing engineers can't do, other than snipe obviously, is fight heavy armour, but considering engineers are the usual cause of Mammoth tank deaths.... Hell...ever used the heavy pistol? You can rip through over 130 points on heavy armour, reload and still have time to keep tanks alive beside you. Why exactly would the engineer need anymore power? They already have a monopoly on everything that is support and base-defence (remote C4 and instant refill). They can capture buildings, and they can solo structures quietly. In the end, the objective is to destroy the enemy base. Back on topic: I say nay to the Battlefield/Engineer ammo box. Ammo boxes aren't CnC's style, but we've had supply/reinforcement beacons since Tiberian Dawn.

I feel like that should probably be its own glitch/bug topic...seriously that's game-breaking.

...On one end, I'd love variety, and maybe having a weak rocket launcher for anti-tank (Though the heavy pistol is good AT right now) I'm just concerned with what reason I'll have to play anything but a sniper or an engineer if any of the sidearms added are as borderline OP as the Carbine or Tib weapons.

...weird, you were the guy in one of Nod's last artilleries in the Goldrush game I was referring to. Again, it comes down to finishing an enemy. Of course when there's only one sole point of interest to defend it's going to get a lot harder to attack. They know where you're coming from and what you're coming for. If you don't break them down to their most basic of resources, and simply sit back and ignore what's killing you, then you've got other issues besides points. This just encourages the hell out of camping, and defenders already have it easier. No need to make it easier AND be a game-winner just to sit back and repair. Agree that points should be rebalanced, as in a bit less for damaging buildings and more for infantry and vehicles, but in the end the primary objective is to destroy the enemy base: it should remain the highest value target. Also, a camping arty/MRLS is still sitting in the field, and they're actively forcing the enemy to divert their attention. There's more to sieges than point-whoring. I won't lie that I like the idea of a multiplier for buildings destroyed though. Let there still be a chance for defence, but do take into account that the enemy was getting rofl-stomped.

I've seen this a lot, but I don't think changing the scoring system solves the issue you're presenting here. A lot of why GDI won that is sheer game mechanics and the Nod team basically throwing points at GDI. Naturally, when it's infantry vs. vehicles, infantry win points-wise. Killing a free infantry only offers you about 10 points, while infantry can get that many points just by shooting at an artillery for a second or two, not even destroying it. Much of this comes down to players knowing how to mass, but not knowing what to really do with it. I personally played a game of GoldRush that was the opposite of this Nod just had an Obelisk and a Powerplant, while GDI had lost nothing. Nod won. The reason GDI lost is because they didn't ever pay attention to the number of points they were throwing away. 6 Mammoth rushes (Terribe idea from the start), focusing on buildings instead of systematically taking out the last of Nod's artillery nestled into the back of their base, AND using the most expensive, point-who're able units they could is why GDI lost. I was on this GDI team...I listened to them complain that we should have own, and I already had the list of reasons why Nod deserved the win for GDI's own stupidity. Basically, people need to know the point system if they're going to play AOW. You don't necessarily need to point whore to win, but you do need to keep an eye on points, and reduce your enemy to the most basic of defenses before you foolishly rush at a single building. On top of that, rushing every 5 minutes makes your enemy camp even harder, meaning they'll just be ready to eat those points before you even get to their base. As for the marathon comment... +10

And you've made yourself irrelevant and annoying in one fell swoop. I'll admit the warm-up/grace period is a good idea for slow-loaders, but honestly defending APC rushes early on is a joke...If they've already got the teamwork to pool money, they've probably won anyway. 1 guy spamming for donations is an incredibly sad definition of teamwork. You're playing pubs in a game that only ever has 1-2 servers running while asking for more ways to try and pubstomp to win 5min games... Not sure if you're aware that it takes 5 people to make an APC rush actually work. It's basically like any RTS: you'll figure out how to stop losing to rushes 5 minutes into every game you play, whether you talk to teammates or not. The first one you lose to is just your introduction into 'This is Not Battlefield'. But go on...more server options are usually a good thing, and that's the only good thing that will come from it. Hopefully TmX doesn't spastically adopt no early donations before I return though.