XD_ERROR_XD

Just imagine playing Chess with Renegade characters!

I've done some searching for you and this is the only one i managed to find: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Command-Conquer ... 0978868572 I personally don't think it looks as cool as the picture you provided but i couldn't find anything better.

N3tRunn3r, i respect you for the things you did for RenegadeX and from my experiences with playing with or against you in the original. You seem like a nice guy to me. I can see why you don't like certain aspects of the game, but i don't see why you need to attack the developers for it instead of trying to properly explain why you don't like it. It certainly helps bringing your opinion to others. I might like C&C Renegade more than Renegade X but i still fully support them and will do this for a very long time. They simply deserve it. If i don't like something and i know i'm the only one that doesn't, too bad for me but if i feel like something seriously needs changing i at least try to be as constructive as possible so i can bring over my point, or make a video about it. And if i feel like something's seriously wrong, i sure as all hell am going to get myself heard. I guess it's the same with you but it has shown that your methods haven't really been helping you...

Thank you for the fantastic idea. Didn't consider free infantry swapping, just the refill delay, and the purchasing free infantry repetitively is like free-refill. I approve!

UH, why? Especially with Field, why would you want to make it even more campy? Field is getting worse with every patch... if something those walls should be REMOVED, not moved up... On Volcano that ref wall jump was the best way for technicians to sneak, I didn't look at it as a bug. When you remove it, Volcano will become another map where GDI has many more sneaking possibilities. http://renegade-x.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=76126#p159663

lol More maps, huh? I hope Snow won't turn into the never-ending campfest in crowded games, even with added vehicle paths. Anyhow, great job!

I'm pretty sure this has been tried already, but you can try to find a copy of that file on the internet and open both with Notepad. I remember that the previous build had some corrupted files, even when redownloading it. If it's not, i can't help you

Some tips and may be more useful in AOW than Marathon. - Some vehicles' turrets are placed at the back of the vehicle, So try to learn how to drive and shoot backwards effectively for minimum coverage of your vehicle! - Engaged in a long-range tank-fight? make clever use of ground elevations, and drive with different speeds to throw your enemy off and easily dodge shells! - Always have a backdoor when engaging the enemy. Calculate the amount of time needed to get to a safe position, and make sure you always have enough health to make the escape! If you don't, you might want to change your approach. - Remember, a shot that kills is worth much more points than a shot that doesn't. Even a heavily damaged tank can still fire at full capacity and earn points for his own team. Always try to focus fire with your allies to increase your team's points, and decrease the enemy's! - Playing AOW? Is the enemy camping, or are you outnumbered? Don't fire a shell if you're going to get multiple ones in return! Instead, lure enemies to a weaker spot where more allies can help you! It's not worth getting points yourself if you are going to give the enemy even more points in return for it. - Playing AOW and your barracks/HoN is destroyed? Don't worry, the enemy infantry can no longer efficiently earn points off your team's infantry, while you can still shoot them for tons of points! Try to stall the game instead and increase that point lead of yours! - Playing AOW? Remember SBHs, beacons may change the outcome of a game, but also negatively! They give lots of points to the enemy if they get disarmed. Always try to act as a team. - Don't throw stones in glass houses without proper protection. That is all.

Hehehe, didn't expect to see HaTe coming back here. I've re-read the topic and i must say that you make some solid points. Too bad i'm not as much of a fan of vehicle combat in RenX than in the original... The vehicles feel so bouncy, as if i'm driving an old MRLS at double speed, with only half the weight. Anyways, have a good one!

I like this! Cockpit view would make for great youtube material

Hmm.... You see, the machineguns of RenX's AGT may deal less damage than the original, but this is because they are very consistent. You'd still die in seconds, but you can more reliably challenge it, without getting shot to the head immediately. I like this. If the blind spot on these defences were increased, i could sneak into the Obelisk on field without entering the Airstrip first, and use the harvester (which now can be used as cover when exiting the tunnel) to get in the AGT unnoticed. However... I honestly don't think these buildings need much more of a change. The only change i'd actually love to see is a speed reduction of the AGT missile. It's really, really fast! You often see me pulling off tricks what make the missile hit a wall instead, but it's really difficult now to do this. What we need are small tweaks so mappers can more easily make opportunites to infiltrate them. And i think the blind spot honestly is the only matter that really needs changing to make this happen. It's just map design for the remainder. If a map allows for sneaking too easily, the buildings will simply be camped more, which leads to stalemates. It needs to be possible, but made difficult. This is the most important part, really. Die 100 times, being laughed at by the enemy team, until you found the sweet spot and suddendly turn into a machine of destruction! Oh man, i love this if i have to make examples of how it's done right, i would pick Whiteout. The Infantry only access route is at the edge of the base, therefore less crowded and it's hard to access aswell. Once you died 20 times before getting there, The game takes on an entirely different shape. Suddendly, you have to be as silent as a cougar, time everything perfectly until everyone is distracted or looks the different way, and you run! you get shot by the turret numerous times but nobody sees it happening! You get in the Power Plant and blow it up! Walls does the same, but idk, It's just not as fun without the added challenge of base defences By the way, i do have to agree about the playercount. There is not much that can be done about it until the numbers are more evenly spread. Ah well...

I am honestly surprised at how my points made in a year old video are still relevant: bwxPHkhBAyM Watch it. All the way through. The only point that actually got fixed was the bugged Obelisk, so you can skip 1:07 - 2:16. If you do not want to watch the video, to explain why your suggestion actually makes no sense: Sneaking in Renegade X currently does not require skill. sneaking in the original did. Many aspects that the original had, have been removed. Firstly, Renegade X mainly relies on chokepoints that lead to building entrances, just like the original. However, if this chokepoint leads to very easily accessible buildings, this will lead to increased activity in these tunnels by both teams. More people will go through them to infiltrate those buildings, while defending their own ones, same for the opposite team. However, even though having crowded tunnels makes it nearly impossible to "sneak in, undetected". there is a catch. If it was not crowded and you could get to the other side of a tunnel, a chokepoint is very easily defended by a vehicle, again rendering them useless. This is my second point. The effects of this can be reduced by placing the tunnel entrances in more remote locations, which brings me to my third point. There is a reason why Glacier_Flying in the original often had games decided by infiltration. The entrances were part of a large base, and were mainly put at the edge of the base, or not even in the base at all. there was also more than one tunnel, so that Sakura or Havoc camping could not haunt you at every possible tunnel entrance by simply changing location in the same tunnel. Some of the methods were even incredibly hard to pull off, in fact, they were so difficult or hard to come up with that i was the only person in the game at some point to even attempt it. They were only known by some of the most seasoned people in the game. Now have you watched my video yet? If you have, you might understand why i would really want to see the blind spots increased on advanced base defences. Oh my god, these buildings get so annoying at times. Also, i did not even mention this at my video, but did you know that the AGT actually fires missiles from 2 different points? This makes hiding behind lanterns impossible in Renegade X when facing the AGT (yes, i actually did this in the original). TL;DR: No, don't make infiltration easier. In fact, they should be made much, MUCH harder.

Pedestal beacons favour GDI when all buildings are still intact. However, Pedestal beacons heavily favours Nod if GDI lost their barracks and Nod didn't lose their HoN. You see, the main advantage of the barracks (only 1 way in) and the main disadvantage of the HoN (up to 4 ways in) is turned completely upside down once advanced infantry are no longer an option. If GDI had to defend the Barracks, they could barge in with Mobiuses, Havocs and whatnot, kill the enemy troops and switch classes. However, if they had no access to advanced infantry, GDI is forced to attack with autorifles or remote C4, while enemy Sakuras can shoot them from a small, but sufficient distance, with no chance at all to get flanked. If Nod had to defend the Hand of Nod, they first of all had to do this a lot more often, as it's easier to access. But they can still defend with heavy firepower. Off course, more opportunities lead to more chances at a successful beacon rush but if Nod had no advanced infantry, they could still throw remotes at GDI from many different angles, at a pedestal which could pretty much be shot by vehicles. A disadvantage always has an advantage to it, and the other way around. I am all in for a pedestal, simply because it gives a losing team at least a tiny chance to win a game, even when all hope is lost. A pedestal should be easily accessed, but also easily defended by the defending team. Therefore, No pedestals at places where long-range sniper cover is an option, but also no pedestals at difficult to access locations. Vehicle cover should always be an option, directly or indirectly, in the means of vehicles can block off the access route, or defend the pedestal itself.

Let me quote something here: "Furthermore, the 'siege' strategy is completely possible to counter, just like any other offensive strategy such as a flame rush, sneaking Hotwire or Stealth Black Hand nuke attack is possible to counter. If someone is sieging you with artillery and the like, here is what you do about it: Get tanks, go out there and kill their tanks. If you try to do this and you fail, then it is an absolutely undeniable fact that one of the following statements is true: 1. The opposing team has greater tankskill than your team. It does take a good deal of skill to use a tank effectively in a firefight against enemy tanks. 2. The opposing team has better teamwork than your team, in the sense that they are focusing more players into the overall sieging effort. This can take the form of a Technician repairing you, another tank covering you, and so on. 3. Both of the above To make the point more apparent, let's summarise the above conjecture. If you try to rush their sieging units and fail, then one of the following is true: 1. the enemy is more skilled than you 2. the enemy has better teamwork than you 3. both of the above So, if the enemy has more skill or more teamwork or both, then surely the enemy DESERVES to be beating you. Claiming the sieging tactic to be "lame" or whatever you want to call it is asinine, because it is perfectly possible to counter it. If you have a greater level of skill and teamwork to your opponent, you WILL counter it. If you have a roughly even level of skill and teamwork, you have a fighting chance of countering it. If you don't have the same level of skill and teamwork, you'll fail. Now, many players will say it does not take skill to shoot a building with, say, an Artillery. While this is true, the statement completely lacks its necessary context and therefore it is bunk. It does not take skill to put C4 on a building's MCT. The skill and strategy is required to get you there in the first place and defend it if necessary once it's placed. It does not take skill to attack a building with a flamer or stank. The skill and strategy is doing it at the opportune time. It does not take skill to lay a beacon down. The skill and strategy is doing it at the opportune time and defending it effectively. So, what about tanks? It doesn't take skill to shoot a building with a tank. The skill comes into play when your opponent tries to stop you. If a skilled player has a tank sieging a building, and an unskilled player rushes them to try to make them stop, the skilled player will win, and the sieging player can go on sieging. If an unskilled player has a tank sieging a building, and a skilled player rushes them to try to make them stop, the skilled player will win, and the siege will be broken. Correct usage of tanks can truly demonstrate a player's skill. Tankfighting is one of the most skilful aspects of this game. So: a quick summary. If someone's sieging you, get your team organised, get tanks, and do something about it. If you try this and fail, the enemy is better than you. Instead of whining about the fact your enemy is "pointwhoring", learn some sportsmanship and accept the fact you lost fair and square thanks to a more skilled, better organised opponent. In a nutshell, if someone can stay there the entire game hitting a building with a tank, it is not the tank user who has no skill and teamwork. It is the enemy." You are kind of proving my point here. i'm not gonna give examples on how to do it, but this quote should explain it: "So, if the enemy has more skill or more teamwork or both, then surely the enemy DESERVES to be beating you. Claiming the sieging tactic to be "lame" or whatever you want to call it is asinine, because it is perfectly possible to counter it. If you have a greater level of skill and teamwork to your opponent, you WILL counter it. If you have a roughly even level of skill and teamwork, you have a fighting chance of countering it. If you don't have the same level of skill and teamwork, you'll fail." I'm not bashing your map here. I think you're doing great work. But some of the standpoints behind them make no sense at all to me.

Let me get this straight. Under, a map where Hotwires and Technicians are barely a viable option due to the amount of infantry walking freely in the field, now gets a new vehicle route? I can understand that maps like under can take long because building destruction is more difficult, but there is nothing wrong with this on it's own. Yes, the Airstrip and Nod Refinery were easy to attack, this should be fixed but your guys' standpoint on sieging makes no sense at all. A game where teamwork is paramount, has a map where teamwork is so relevant that people can't take it, and start whining. ...What? There is a difference between a challenging map and an imbalanced map. The Airstrip and Refinery are too easily attacked, this needs to be rebalanced. Hotwires and Technicians die too easily on the field, this needs to be rebalanced. Sieging has become too difficult. Let's take Field, where there is a infantry only ramp at the front of each base entrance. Free infantry can jump off and throw timed c4's on top of vehicles, where they are out of reach and are guaranteed to explode. Did not want to destroy the vehicles, but the repairers instead? No problem, just throw a remote c4 on their head! Need a good view to find out where the best spot is to place an airstrike? Don't worry, this has been taken care of! Sieges do not necessarily make maps shorter. However, they at least give a team the chance to properly attack an enemy base and plan a rush. Oh wait a minute, did i forget to say that both stalematey base-defence maps are GDI favoured? Well, i would wonder how this could happen. Let's take the fact that repairers are barely a viable option, therefore GDI gets a more natural advantage with their superior armour. The main counter of GDI's armour, the Artillery, has an arc which shoots too high in close ranges, especially aiming upwards towards your opponent. They will miss a lot, therefore GDI will encounter less resistance fighting the enemy! Now GDI has an even bigger advantage. Allright, let me get this straight. I appreciate the fact that you try to fix a map that needs some rebalancing. However, what i dislike is the approach that is being made towards the rebalancing of maps. Incorrect assumptions are being made, leading to new issues.

Eh? So you think this is a good idea? So the already omnipresent SBH's in any non-basedefence map will now have an actual use while sleeping in the enemy base? You know what, i'll just go to the enemy base with a friend while GDI has the field, i will sit next to the WF door to see if anyone is inside at the time of vehicle purchase, if there is not, i'll relay this information to my friend, he nukes and i steal the Mammy that just got bought. No. just NO. 20 seconds minimum, if i just bought a vehicle and straight after i'm the only one to see 2 arties pounding the refinery, i'm sure as all hell going to the refinery first by foot. You can't leave it unoccupied next to the refinery door after all, that would be much worse! Oh wait, my vehicle got stolen because an SBH saw i ran off to the Refinery. 800 credits lost because of this mechanic. Do not fix what is not broken. There currently are no downsides to the 30 second protection which is provided, why reduce it to 5? It may sound like a good idea to you, UNTIL someone uses it against you. Then sure as all hell you're going to get mad.

Oh man, this made me giggle! I actually remember that the waiting time for purchase was increased for 2 seconds from 7 to 9 after the Nod harvester landed. In certain maps it would still die due to a fat artillery landing before TT 4.0 happened i believe. Memories... Not always good ones though

I've already put some feedback about this map on another thread, but i want to hear your opinions about vehicle combat. Is there not enough strategic locations to hide your vehicle in or do you like the amount of brawling that the small open environment gives? I haven't tested the map myself but i do think this is going to be the prime character of this map.

Now, i haven't played the RenX version of Tomb yet but i do have some experience with the original. It's a relatively small map with lots of rushing opportunites early-game and, like Mesa, allows for flanking maneuvrability in the vehicle routes, as it's difficult to keep both vehicle routes strong while being adaptable at the same time. It often happens that both teams mostly control a flank, and one of them overrun the enemy base if the enemy focus shows to be weak. This map is really fast-paced, and i expect it to end rather quickly on average. Now i'm all in for rush maps, but i'm not sure if this map has enough key locations to control. I would honestly like to see an increase in the size of the rocks on the outer side of the vehicle route entrance on 3:15 and next to the silo's on 9:20. Now i'm not sure if this map actually needs good cover because of it's small size, and i'm all in for testing this on the PUGs but there aren't really any locations to cover your vehicle in except for your own base. Aesthetic-wise, i think this map looks great! but the inside of the tombs could use some more props to make it look even better!

For these situations, you could add an ending phrase you could always say something in the lines of: "If you are still unsure on how something works or is used, and don't want to look silly asking these questions, a good way to learn can be to observe instead. Game mechanics are easier to understand if you see them in action instead of just getting it explained by word" blablablabla. But the game is still in Beta, and to create a fully fledged tutorial right now would make it quickly obsolete in future patches. I'm all in for explaining the basics of the basics in detail, trying to absorb too much in a single period of time only makes you forget most of it. That's why i liked the very straightforward and simplistic tutorial C&C Renegade had.

The original was pretty darn big aswell, but could still make for great games. You see, 50% of the field never gets used at the same time anyhow as with such a field it's not easy for both forces to sustain a strike force in the middle of the field with little to no cover. The biggest trouble with such a big field is actually retaking so much ground without losing your support troops to snipers located at the top, which is once again going to be a huge issue in this map. The sniper issue could be solved by making the top a LOT more narrow with rocks across the entire middle part so it's a lot easier to get splashed on by vehicles. But i've never played this map before in RenX so i'm not sure how things will work out in this version.

Thanks for your kind words! But it's still uncertain whether the game can actually be put on Steam without getting sued by EA. The developers have gotten special permission to create this game from EA, but it's not sure whether we can put it on Steam aswell, and they seem to have trouble contacting the right people about this. Either way, i think putting this game on Steam would be pretty sweet and i personally would do it but i feel like the game should be made ready more first before we start putting ourselves in an 'unfamiliar' market with unfamiliar faces.

This depends. Try reading this article about pointwhoring: http://www.renegadewiki.com/index.php/T ... ointwhore' This artical (sometimes painfully) shows why pointwhores do what they do, and how they get away with it. Marathon games may be different but many points still stand. I've had enough games where a team was completely distracted by a certain threat like Artywhores to only get killed by another threat lurking.

So, is RypelCam still a thing? I could try it to make a cool promotional video or something.

I think that the current problem is is that the current snipers are thrown in maps that are not built for them balance-wise. So far any unit in this game has a counter to them which makes them balanced, Snipers on the other hand have insane burst damage potential which is quite difficult to beat in the right hands. If every weapon had the same skill cap as a sniper would have (or the other way around), i would not complain but in it's current situation it's too powerful in too many situations in the right hands, and i don't see this getting properly balanced anytime soon. Either way i'm not going to really complain about snipers though as there are other factors to this game that annoy me much more. Things like tank-combat (IMO) is a completely unorganised chaos due to "vehicle-sprint", which is supposed to have drawbacks but it's drawback is irrelevant when all you have to do is drive forward and backward to dodge properly and turning would slow you down too much.