Demigan

I wouldnt mind one but I dont think its as simple as "large map with players and restricting ring". A key element is keeping the player busy during the game. You should always have something to do that feels useful. Looting, hiding, hunting, waiting in ambush, mapping through an area etc. How would you balance the weapons? A ramjet in open territory seems a bit more OP than a shotgun or grenade launcher. You can use rarity ofcourse but many weapons would obviously be way more powerful. This many weapons also means that sharing ammo becomes an issue, and you would either have to shower the player with ammo everywhere (and likely tank FPS), throw a lot of weapons under one ammo type which means people will limit themselves to the best option or cut out a lot of weapons. Maybe you can invent something with upgrade items? You pick up a low-tier weapon of one ammo type and are able to upgrade it to higher tiers through exploration and perhaps sacrifice of some of your supplies and equipment. It would add a uniqueness compared to most other battle royales.

Copy one of the few intelligent designs from Tib Wars: when engaging infantry it fires along a horizontal line, damaging and killing anyone and anything in its path. Also arent the NOD turrets supposed to compensate for this? Change their shell AOE size and proclaim they are HE and they should do a good job right? Maybe let the aim near the feet so a miss wont negate all the damage.

I read a lot of donts, but what about do's? What is a good way to inspire people? You have to start somewhere earning that name for yourself so any small and easy things you can start with to build it up? What are good tactics to take the field when you are being camped?

Yes, good point. It would be nice to have alternatives that dont require a refill after use though.

Would be nice if players themselves could also try and track stealth dudes without having to bother the commander for the limited amount of spyplanes. What if they get paint-grenades/mines or something similar to try and detect them?

I'm on Folding@Home now. Thought it would be appropriate to watch some origami on my phone while it happens

I think there are two types of teamwork available in RenX. Long-term, which is based on getting a mass rush together, and short-term where players who are nearby each other want to stick together for a moment. Long-term could have a vote-in option. For example if the commander asks for a RocketRush the players could press a button to say they are in, which puts them in a similar squad and makes everyone more visible to each other. Short-term could simply be based on proximity and actively joining. Actively joining would be friends or trusted players who you want to stick with that you can have join in a squad so its easier to find each other again and stick with each other. Proximity-based squads would simply show the nearest X players and put them in your squad so you have an easier time seeing and communicating with them. But if one of their number dies or goes out of range they are removed from the squad so you aren't relaying information to someone who isn't even there anymore (until they return that is). This does mean that player has a different proximity-based squad depending on where they are in relation to each other. This gives the best of both worlds. People who stay in squad through death will actively join each other, impromptu squads would rely on proximity-based tactics but have no problem if one of their number dies.

I've been keeping my eye on that since forever for the TS release...

I want to do my part, but only if its worth it. Looking at Warcraft 3 remaster here. So the moment I know this isnt a bug riddled mess that has enough looks to be worth it, I'll probably buy it. Otherwise I'll just start my First Decade pack and replay them from there.

People seem to hate stalemates these days. But what if that is the wrong conclusion? They might not hate stalemates, they hate not having the satisfaction of finishing a fight. So instead of trying to unbalance the game or make it easier to destroy stuff while making it harder to defend (destroying that awesome feeling you got in original Ren when you had a good shot at destroying something), perhaps you could add mid/late-game goals that help players feel like they accomplished something? That way the feeling of reaching a milestone so you can leave can be created even if you havent finished the battle.

Looks good! What kind of editing software are you using for this?

Young and old people are the most likely to die. But people of all age groups and medical care availability have died, including several doctors. Just ask yourself: how lethal is the ordinary flu for children and the elderly? And how lethal is this one? The biggest problem with Corona is how it has little symptoms with many people who spread the disease unknowingly, and its hyper agressive at other people who might die from it. And while it is unlikely, the unfortunate truth is that any one of us could still die from it. When I get home from vacation I'll definitely get my pc working on this.

A Rating won't be that good will it? It's not indicative of the map, but the subjective experience that player had at that moment. For example there are a lot of people who seem to hate Under, yet it is voted for an aweful lot by the community. So by default you have a bunch of players who hate the map flow and will rate against it, while another group might be influenced by how well the game was played. I prefer close battles where my opponents are about equal in power and skill, yet as a rule a lot of people will go "GG!" the moment they can absolutely crush their opponents despite them beating up an outnumbered bunch of newbs. And even that loss can cause people to rate it negatively even though there might be nothing wrong with the map. I think the forums are a better place to discuss the maps. Perhaps you could make a weekly/monthly discussion about a single map, and also advertise that in-game so players are encouraged to come here and talk about it. That way you get a more clear idea of the pro's and con's of each map as you take in the entire experience, not just that one game where people weren't having fun. For example: Besides that it's picked a lot, what is the reason there is a hard-core anti-Under group that get's outvoted so much? Is it the map flow? Is one faction much more likely to win? Perhaps add the win/loss ratio of GDI/NOD in the thread if you have those numbers.

Ah, seeing that V shape there finally got me up to speed...

Kirov reporting!