Demigan

Being able to epically push back lots of enemies with only a few of your own units is indeed quite rewarding, but assuming neither side managed to obliberate the enemy base it would still be a stalemate. Should the team that had fewer losses and made more points be awarded or the one that actually managed to sneak into the enemy base and kill their refinery? Personally, since C&C mode is about base destruction I would prefer the building kill to decide the winner. I understand perfectly what you mean, and either way it goes, it would promote more teamplay. people would be more bent upon killing a base if the most buildings destroyed would count highest. But it would also promote people giving up the moment a building goes up in flames and their team loses almost all chance of destroying another building. Points promote pointwhoring, and the game does currently suffer from people who sit somewhere all game simply shooting at a building without any chance of destroying it. On the other hand, people will be more determined to keep fighting even if they have one building left vs all of the enemy, and tactical choices about which unit to take to earn the most points without giving away more then you earn is also a good feat. Perhaps it would benefit the game if buildings would earn you more points when they are destroyed. At the moment you get around 750 points for total destruction of a building (including dealing damage and assuming no-one repairs). That's already enough points and credits for one player. Destroying a building is always a teameffort, even if a lonewolf destroys a building then the rest of the team still kept the enemy busy enough to allow him to get in. So instead of giving any player more points, the teampoints could be boosted a bunch, think 1000 to 3000 extra points for the team, so from one building the teampoints are increased with 1750 to 3750 points (including the points from the player that destroyed it). That way, building destruction counts a lot more, but a dedicated team can still win by points even if the enemy rips your buildings to shreds Yours sincerely, Demigan.

The information could be swapped, I agree with you there, but points should still be visible. Points are relevant to the game, they give you an idea of how much use you have been so far. It's usually fairly easy to spot the pointwhores, and they don't get that much 'status' from having lots of points that way. In fact, people usually know which people are the best, they have high stats in both points, kills and, this is important to identify the real base-killers, deaths. I would in fact place both these information bars in the same stats at the top right of the corner. By pressing tab a few times, you can swap between them, so you can keep up-to-date about your points, kills, money and your teammates possessions. The points system works incredibly well. It gives incentive to use the LESS expencive characters and tanks, it also makes tactical descisions about how many points you will be giving your enemy available. Timed games are a lot more about quick tactical thinking and choosing the right character at the right time. Having your vehicle production destroyed can actually be a good thing, as your enemy then tries to pound their way in. A team that manages to destroy dozens of tanks, while losing little themselves, should be rewarded. The points system does that exactly. In fact, if you use something less powerfull, you will earn more points! One-hit killing a basic soldier earns you 2 points, while killing him with a shitload of bullets earns you 3 points. Killing a havoc with a One-hit kill earns you around 80 points I believe, killing them with a basic earns you 100+ points. Edit: For some reason, timed games end a lot by base-destruction, people are much quicker, take far more risks and reap the benefits, or the punishment that comes with it. In marathon games, people just muck about a lot until some kind of status quo forms, then they try to find ways to break it. Yours sincerely Demigan.

Thanks for the answer, neat video. Maybe give each episode a focus, this time you showed a lot of sniper activity. Next time, focus on something else, building destruction, a specific tank, an SBH infiltrating, repairing vehicles etc. That way, people who watch it and never played the game itself, already get an idea of the possibilities that the game offers, and don't go entirely blind. People will then during the game see these components back into the game, and have some understanding of what is going on when an full APC is rushing to the enemy base. Yours sincerely, Demigan.

Place a puddle with 'EA' somewhere, wouldn't hurt them to get some positive publicity

Very short and easy question: will you put any easter eggs into the mod?

Allright, I didn't say nothin'

What kind and how many extra vehicles are we looking at? Will Tech buildings not only give additional items for infantry, but also for vehicles?

good against air units? how so? The rockets have a limited arc and range, any flying unit comming in from high and hanging somewhere above the mammoth tank can stay there safely. This tank deals the same amount of damage as a medium tank for each shot, it also is capable of firing twice as fast, doubling his damage output, and it's tusk missiles deal more damage then the normal bullets, but they are close range. Those missiles also have a great splash, and due to their short range before they explode, they are perfect anti-infantry weapons should they dare venture too close. A base defence in it's own right, but needs support in the open field. Yours sincerely, Demigan.

The stand-alone Black Dawn will be single-player only. A multiplayer will then be build out of all the components from Black Dawn, and several more components that are to be made later. I don't know if the FAQ is still being used, it might be updated soon, it might not be in use at all. Yours sincerely, Demigan.

My first thought about letting vehicles become slower was: NO. But that is for the original renegade, where one obi strike can slow the first tank, and then stop the entire stampede, making tankrushes near impossible. But with the larger maps, and probably more diverse pathing you can choose... I don't know, it might actually be worth something. One tank, slowly heading back to base, praying he can make it... Yours sincerely, Demigan,

you are right that it would be fun to be able to shoot from a vehicle, and that shooting people inside would also be fun and might negate the OP of a passenger buggy. But Renegade is a bit more cartoonish, build on the strange mechanics of the C&C universe. If you add those new features, it would become more a generic shooter (with the most awesome WORKING gamemode in existence). I say, let's keep renegade-x as unique as we can, while, indeed, giving suggestions on how to improve the game. Yours sincerely, Demigan.

Hello Darkmart, Giving suggestions is good, but I think these suggestions would change the game too much, they are probably even overpowered: -The buggy and humvee are good as it is. They are used in early rushes to surprise an enemy, or to be able to kill the enemy harvester, giving your team an early advantage. Also, snipers use them to travel great distances when they know they are going to run out of bullets. One last application: When all else fails, do a buggy/humvee rush. They are cheap, and while weaker then APC's and with less carry capacity, it's harder for the enemy to keep track of every one of them, making it possible for people to enter buildings unnoticed in the mayhem. If infantry can shoot from the vehicle, they would be perfect sniperspots on the move, let alone the advantage that gunners would give inside a humvee. It would make the humvee and buggy far more useful then the price you pay for it. -There are lots of players who are passengers of medium and light tanks, they just don't stay in them when the tank reaches it's destination. A passenger enters any tank for just one reason: to get to a destination, get out and do their thing. A passenger of medium/light tank either wants to get to the battlefield faster, or wants to keep the tank repaired as a hottie/tech. They jump back in when they are endangered. Giving a medium tank a machine gun as powerful as a buggy/humvee would make them too powerful, those guns are pretty mean vs both tanks and infantry you know! -Bots might be an option in low player games, but in larger games, it's a skill to have everyone fulfilling a task, such as keeping the buildings repaired, or dealing with a lone MRLS/arty. Having bots that keep the building up and running would also make sneaking in and placing C4 on the MCT much harder, and it's hard enough as it is! -Basic infantry serves a mighty role throughout the game. Every time someone runs out of money, they have to use the basic infantry to earn more, which is more then possible. Sometimes I even have more then enough money, but still take the basic infantry because I want to try something ludicrously dangerous while their weapons are more then ready for the job. Basic infantry are perfect for timed games where lots of snipers are around. your deathcount doesn't matter, if you hit a sak twice with your bullets, you already earn more points than she can from you! Let them boast about the kills they made, they need to kill you about 30 times before they earn enough points to compensate for one death of theirs! Also, I don't really understand what better role they would full-fill with more ammo. I usually die before I run out of ammo, and when I do run out, I can safely return home and get some more. Yours sincerely, Demigan.

Some hints in the video... I can only guess. Battles within a ship? the launching bay of the hovercraft looks too detailed to be just a prop. Also, the hovercraft has real good detail, enough room for a tank and several infantry, sea battles I hope! Bigger airstrips? If vehicles would be dropped with THAT transport, it would really be awesome. Players might actually be able to queue several vehicles even as it arrives, and while it flies in they are all dropped in one go. I see an icon in the HUD at 00:49 that shows a tiny man in a running stance. One of the new features could be that you have several stances, like sprinting, jogging, walking etc. Each having an effect on your accuracy and reload rate or something. Also, the chaingun is rather stocked: 463/1000 bullets. There is some text below, but can't make it out. It might be something to do with weapon life, there is a bar below the ammo counter. This could be a representation of the amount of ammo left, the quality of the weapon (the lower it get's, the more likely of missfire/worse accuracy?) Looking at later footage, it's an ammo counter bar. At 00:53, you can clearly see a speaker icon on the new scope machine gun, directional microphone still available? Also, the giant movement markers could be used in the multiplayer to order friends around. 1:02: AI capable of handling tanks, great! 1:10: Dodgerolls, perhaps cover system? 1:20: in the distance, you can see a destroyed building which looks like the HON, actual complete destruction of buildings available? 1:31: return of nightvision scope on snipers 1:41: Havoc is carrying 3 primary weapons 2:16: weapon emplacements with zoom function? 2:18: As Fobby explains about tech buildings and their advantages, Gunner is holding up a red tipped bullet. Maybe a damage increase or special ability for certain weapons could be gained with some tech buildings? As maps become bigger, wrecks won't be such a problem during rushes. You see helicopter and tank wreckage everywhere, so I guess that will be a new feature. TA tried to add it earlier on already. Yours sincerely, Demigan.

Given the size and scope of the new Renegade-x setup, my guess is that camping will be almost completely annihilated. I doubt that Renegade-x will sport huge maps that still have only one vehicle entrance/exit. On one hand, a problem out of the way. On the other hand, we do lose some gameplay. Hope the siegebreakers can find something new to get their kick out. Yours sincerely, Demigan.

You are right, that's why I was advocating things that do not make you harder to kill, or give you an easier time killing others, but things that make you more useful to others. Also, every game offers advantages that are consistent during that game. So earning during the game, will have you able to use it all that game long. I would like to see a game that takes all those earnings away the moment you die, if they enhance your character. What in the end would be best for a game like Renegade, is that people can earn more options as they 'level up'. With the example of the mammoth tank, new players just need one mode of fire for their missles, no need to make it more complicated by adding other modes just yet. So the basic mode would be the most used one: you fire all your missles at once as seen in the teaser. For more experienced players, other modes become available. For instance, shooting the missles in series will allow you to scare off infantry that might otherwise enter through a certain entrance. This way, player will never be at a disadvantage against more experienced players, and can learn the game without being overwhelmed by secondary, tertiary modes and dozens of additional gadgets that enhance gameplay. Especially if a new player suddenly gets a message with 'new mammoth tank firing mode aquired'. He will buy one, fiddle with it, try it out, learn how to use it himself and if need be ask other players. It's better then taking people by the hand in tutorials. Yours sincerely, Demigan.

Epicelite, I'm with you on the game industry becoming more and more alike. And you should have a say in what you think makes the game more COD like. So far, there are two things that I remember you saying that makes the game more COD like, the first is that you can only carry two primary weapons, the second that you will level up if you play. For carrying two primary weapons, it's a small change that, in my opinion, should not be rated as a defining feature for COD. I think there were even games before COD who used such a system. As for the leveling up as you play, we don't even know what this will entitle, what kind of advantages you will get. It could range from COD clone advantages, to whole new idea's that enhance Renegades gameplay. We don't know if you keep the advantages you earn if you die, perhaps all you are rewarded for is not dieing and earning lots of points and kills over time, but losing all when you die. Maybe the advantages won't be advantages over other people, but stragetic advantages. Being able to use the overhead tactical map to command your friends along, the capability to erase lower player's commands off the tactical map to create a more unifying plan from the best players. Being able to get different gadgets, like a directional microphone on your sniper, allowing you to hear what an enemy is saying over teamspeak if you are aiming at him. Those will not make other players more powerful then others, but will make them more useful. That would be far away from COD clones, and there are other ways to create improvements for players that are completely un-COD like. Like an option for higher level players to fire the missles of the mammoth tank in series rather than swarms, etc. My suggestion: give your own idea's on how to fill in the features the team presented to you, and try to make them as un-COD like as possible. In the meantime, you wait and see what they are actually planning to do. Yours sincerely, Demigan.

key words: or go for another tactic. For some reason, people think kills mean something in renegade. I never understood that, a player who is good isn't defined by his kills. It is defined by his kills versus deaths versus points. And those deaths don't really count if you use low grade units. If you die as a havoc a few times in a row, then it's time to switch tactics. If you don't understand that, you deserve to die by SBH snipers. Personally, I get an APC or organise a small hunt with one or two other people to kill an SBH sniper. Ramjets have 4 bullets in renegade, UNLESS you pick one up. A pickup ramjet holds only 1 bullet, and has 40 in reserve. How it will happen in Renegade-x? who knows? with less restrictions on vehicles, an SBH sniper might be hard put to find even a target to shoot at. And with larger maps, it will be harder not to use the zoom function, although it will be easier to hide. Yours sincerely, Demigan.

why would you go for basic infantry? It was never overpowered, an SBH was prone to taking too much time for aiming, they hamper the team more then anything else. Even worse: an SBH first needs to get a ramjet, and they don't drop that often, and the ramjet had only one bullet at a time. It takes 7 seconds for an SBH to recloak, by the way, and when you zoom in, you also become visible. An SBH with a sniper rifle is something powerfull, but if you keep at the task at hand, a stealth sniper will rarely fire. Think of the laser rifle itself, considering the cost/benefit of the weapon, it's probably the best weapon out there. Good vs infantry AND tanks, loads of ammo, good range, fast reload, good firerate, precise. Yet no-one ever uses it right, go on, take an SBH and treat it like it isn't stealth, shoot the moment you see an enemy, and you'll see it's a great weapon, especially for a price of 400. And yet it's rarely ever used properly, the same counts for any other weapon an SBH holds, people are too careful about unstealthing. Yours sincerely, Demigan.

Epicelite, could you just tell what is the exact problem you have with it? -Is it just the fact that you can't carry all the weapons? -Is it the fact that you cannot collect something during the game? Trying to gain prestige by wielding as many weapons possible? -Is is the fact that the game looks similar in some ways to other games? (although I would think it's a comparison of 'they have a wizard in their game, you cannot put one in this game as it would make it similar!', although I understand why you wouldn't like this seeming copy of another game) -Is it the fact that you think the game will be dumbed down by always throwing the right weapon at your feet? (although I think that they should refrain from exactly that and make it hard on you) -Is it the fact that you might need to backtrack? Yours sincerely, Demigan.

As he stated, you managed to add lots of radical changes that seem to be the next stage in Renegade's gameplay, without offending most of the players and fans. Normal games already have a ton of opposition the moment small changes are occuring. For bigger changes that are an actual improvement but completely ignored by fans, you could look at C&C Generals. While there were some faults in the gameplay that were debatebly a downgrade of the original C&C gameplay type, the radical differences between factions, great diversity of units and (at least in singleplayer) good balance of the factions showed an incredible increase in the quality of the game. Everything does seem to be an improvement on the original Renegade C&C style. Let's hope the essence of fun in Renegade remains in this new, updated version. Yours sincerely, Demigan.

Another thing that should be mentioned: when you can carry 20 weapons around, you'll be using only the best weapon for that situation. Which like you said is easy: on a cliff you have a sniper, through narrow hallways you pick a chaingun, in open fields you get a rocketlauncher. But if you carry only 2 weapons, you might have to make due with a weapon not so well suited to the situation. You will need to make tradeoffs: instead of a rocket launcher, you pick up a laser rifle, good vs both infantry and tanks, although it will take a while before you kill the tank. This will enhance the gameplay, anyone can be good in singleplayer if you always have the best gun for the task, but with a gun that isn't suited for the task, you need to be skilful and smart to be able to survive. I'm wondering, the loss of carrying all the weapons doesn't seem that great a loss to me, why does it seem the end of the world to you? Is there something that so defines your game when you play that taking it away will immidiately destroy the entire game? I always play on renegade servers with weapon drop, and I usually use only 2, maximum 3 of the primary weapons I pick up. It would only be the third weapon that might be a problem, but nothing else. Fobby, what was it you said about unlimited sidearms? How many kinds of sidearms we going to get?! Yours sincerely, Demigan.

What they are adding, epicelite, is more tactical insight and a good grasp of what's to come. I doubt that they will send wave after wave of infantry at you, then when all you got is anti-infantry, they drop some tanks on you. If they do, there will be at least some kind of anti-tank weapon available from a nearby soldier. So far I've never seen havock alone, there's allied tanks and infantry fighting alongside, with you spearheading them and trying to dominate the battlefield. Even if you end up with only anti-infantry weapons, your allies will be more then willing to destroy those tanks for you, if you keep them safe from the infantry. I also think it is a loss that you cannot carry all weapons anymore, just like I think it is a loss that the original maps won't be returning, or at least not any time soon. But we get a lot for it back! Renegade has always had a little more special moments. People taking incredible risks to kill that special unit running away, or having to circle around a bunch of enemies while trying to kill a tank. Renegade was special because in any other game the best target was the nearest target, and not in Renegade. I can already see two people with anti-tank weapons, running towards one anti-infantry weapon and hoping, PRAYING to get their first. Or someone suddenly doubling back a little to get a weapon more suited for the occasion, switching from a patchgun to that new machinegun sniper for example. Even better: a sniper quickly switches weapons to kill a few damaged guys, one of them manages to pick up the sniper from under his nose and tries to make off with it. This way, people could end up with strange loadouts, and new, strange things will be happening on the battlefield. Making Renegade more unique than it already is.

On one hand, I'm sad that most of the original maps won't be playable (if at all) in the first multiplayer version of black dawn. But seeing the SCOPE of the new game, halleluya, this trumps AFF! I was in doubt for a while which I found more fun, AFF with a great scope of diversive battles, or my all-time favourite and only REAL TACTICAL shooter out there. But with such large scale battles, this is going to rock. What kind of new maps were you thinking about? I really, REALLY hope you will make the first game with a REAL sea/land incorporated battle. Where you actually have to use boats to land on your enemies shore and start attacking land inwards, or you can go around their island to their port and try and blow their base from the sea. I saw those A-10's used as AA, will Nod ever use artillery or something similar to bomb GDI's advance during the campaign? will the A-10's be usable for airstrikes? If the maps are going to be bigger, will you be able to FLY one of those? I saw that the original '500' sniper is now turned into a heavy machine gun with low magazine cap? So how many different weapons will the game feature? -AR rifle -stumpy laserrifle etc The mammoth tank has become more TW style, I quite like the mass rockets fired, how will that play out in the multiplayer? Lights: at one point during that teaser, it was rather dark. Will the game feature (near)pitch darkness and the necessity of using flash/head lights? would be a real cool additional feature. As for tech buildings, I hope you intent to make those watchtowers one of them. From simply a sniperpoint to the ability to call in airstrikes or something (when there's a radar on top) to revealing the positions of nearby enemy's on the map, they would be fun to fight around. A rush towards the tower, an open, dangerous stairwell, having to fight your way up top and then having to clear out all enemies within. Would be fun! What is the scope of players you intent to go for in the multiplayer? If the maps are going to be bigger, then you will need more players (or AI to back you up). Even the small maps of Renegade were only fun when you had more then 20+ players, as you could really divide tasks between everyone, with room to spare to shift people from one duty to another. Infantry: I saw rolling, will it feature a cover system or lying prone? will the AI actively use that system to their advantage? What kind of 'upgrades' can you earn, defence, armor, speed, capability of calling in ammo drops, secondary modes on your weapons, more clip room, better or different standard pistols (machine pistol, shotgun pistol, desert eagle, explosive ammo), longer range before bullet dropoff, better control over vehicles, what, WHAT!?!?!? needless to say, you are driving me crazy... I saw only a little, and now all you leave me wanting with is more! I might actually get pumped up before the release of BD... Yours sincerely, Demigan.

No, bad idea. it would change the game too much. While I don't like the camping that goes on for hours on end, it is a part of the game. The problem right now is that the campers barely need teamplay to hold their position, while the highest standard of tactics is required for the other team to break through. That's an unfair advantage right there that should be fixed. Mostly, when you do break through, it is because the campers didn't pay too much attention right at the moment you are attacking. I've broken through numerous campers in my time, but I never had that special feeling like when you manage to destroy a building. As others do seem to have that, it would be a shame to destroy their experience of the game this way. We may have been looking at this wrong, instead of giving the opposing team a weapon to break the campers, we should force the campers to require more teamplay? Small changes could help out tremendously. Placing a big rock in front of the infantry entrance would create 2 ways where they can pop up, this would give enough leverage for dedicated teams to break a siege, as no one can stop your advance by simply shooting at the entrance for a few hours, and a little more teamwork is required by the campers to stop you. It's more fun to break a siege by fighting your way through snipers and mines and mines while still sporting enough anti-vehicle firepower. That would be almost as hard as breaking a normal siege. Yours sincerely, Demigan.

How about a compromise: First we wait for vanilla version, see how it plays, maybe sieges won't be as unbreakable in the X version, and that's the only problem I have with them, they are too damn hard to break. If it's still a problem, THEN we start brainstorming about solutions (I'm guilty). Maybe all that's neccesary is a tiny rock to hide behind to give both teams a way to break the other. Yours sincerely, Demigan.