RypeL

To be successful a project like Ren-X needs someone who doesent crack under pressure, someone to rally the team when it matters, someone to remain calm and collected and someone to steadily follow a vision against all odds. Havoc has been this person from day 1. Others did regularly quit, took breaks or started much later. Havoc is the only one that has been activly working on Ren-X all years, every year and always with big contributions and a vision. His personality and the sheer amount of work he put in gained him the respect of everyone. Thank you Havoc, it has been a pleasure working with you and i wish you the best of luck for your new projects!

It wasent random but it might have felt that way because often there might be less room in front of you cause of other tanks, rocks or other cover that your squeezing your tank against, then behind you. So then the system needed to find alternative spots to exit you and those probably felt kind of random. Behind you (more specific: opposite side your looking at) more often is open space so the system doesent need to find alternative locations.Thats my theory atleast why it might have felt more random before.

It was exiting you to the same side till about a year or so ago. I changed it to opposite side exactly for this reason as to make it easier and saver to jump out for repairs in battle. It might be annoying when you are somewhere safe, but it seemed more annoying to first have to run arround your tank to get in cover before you can safely start repairing.

A simple bad word filter should be easy to do and could start simple by obfuscating single words like gay when they stand alone.

Super cringe responses.... Especially for a thing that should be this easy to fix.

Also just here to clarify: The current balancer doesent just balance based on score. It takes a combination of score and amount of kills into account. I think I already posted the formula in the forums sometime somewhere. The posted code is only half the picture that’s why it doesent Show any kills beeing taken into account. And yeah, RX devs don’t get paid so you can’t do it for life and disagreements in the dev team can get to you too. Part of the reasons I left and since i was handling most of that balancer there aren’t much people left who could work on it so ya. @kiraI added enough mutator hooks to the balancer so that it’s possible to change or completely replace it with a mutator. So if you really would wanna take the time to get into it you could get full control over it with a mutator and could try it out that way without having to wait for game updates etc.

They can. Those are map specific settings for both AGT and Ob.

The Ob Prioritizes things it can kill in the next shot. That’s why it will sometimes pick an infantry over a healthy tank. This also means that it will kill off a damaged tank in a rush more often then wasting the shot on a healthy mammoth. So there are pros and cons to this. I’m pretty much the only one ever working on the Obelisk/defenses code and I don’t know how the orig Ob picked targets so I made my own decisions and the thinking was that going for a less healthy target produces situations where it’s beneficial for the defenders and sometimes situations where it can go against them. In the end I hoped it balances itself out and also for the experienced RenX player it might be something they can take strategic advantage of. I had to tell it how to prioritize targets somehow and that’s what I came up with. Prolly surely not perfect but on the other hand probably every decision the ob can make can have advantages and disadvantages to either attackers or defenders. If you wanna propose changes go ahead, though as I think I finally retired for good with no chance of another comeback, you’d have a hard time finding a active dev willing and skilled/experienced enough for picking it up.

I´d also like to say goodbye for having to deal with too many frustrations lately and some dev posts and decisions i dont agree with. Maybe im too picky (possible), but i´m out. As my last gift to the community i modified the mapvote to filter the available maps by current playernumber (customizabel per server) as part of the next patch. It was quite a journey and i´m not sure if i will never return, but unfortunatly i think it would need a few culture changes for me to be able to feel at home again even though the devteam mostly still consists of great people. I´ve never been ingame arround the community much, so you might be wondering who this guy even is. For my own reference and if you wanna find out more about the journey that goes into specifically coding and finetuning something like RenX i attached a list of those of my contributions that i could still g et a hold off. RypeL_Commits_2008_to_2020.txt

My proposition is also suggesting lowering the current respawntime in some situations like low player count. In like a 20 player game one could argue that respawntime should be lowered or removed completly. But for 64 player matches that turn into a stalemate and dont want to end it is a different story.

hmmm ... maybe. But this could lead to too much of a disadvantage for new players i feel.

I cant be doing such tiny improvement to such tiny tiny niche product forever. I started RypelCam 15 years ago (and im a RenX dev for 12). I cant just be there for my old projects forever. Nowadays everything i still do on this projects has to be considered as exceptional bonus that shouldnt be taken for granted. Its really up to new guys to pick up if they want. I dont want to spend my time anymore on such low impact changes, too old for that. And no i cant fix the clock. Its a engine problem, not a RypelCam problem. Also RypelCam for RenX got out of my focus cause the game started to lagg in demos at some point and nobody knows why, wich degraded its usefullness even more.

The question is not about who doesent want to wait. Ofcourse noone really wants to wait. But, like other games that have respawntimes, they are there for a reason and for the bigger picture, for balancing and for ending games timely. Its a strategy game with progression and not just a deatmatch shooter.

Dont use seekTo. Use seekToFrame instead. Its much more accurate (the normal clock gets often broken when fast forwarding). RypelCam displays the framenumber. You can calc what time is roughly what framenumber by deviding framenumber by the framerate If i remember correctly you can use the console command 'ViewPlayer playername' to directly switch to a specific player

I dont think we are making the most of the respawntime atm. Atm it just increases from a min of i think 3 seconds to a max of 8 seconds based on elapsed game time. However it doesent take into account number of players or player veterancy. I think the system would be better off factoring in both and i would like to know what you think. Suggestion: Scale respawntime based on playercount. So if theres just like 6 players respawntime should be lower and shouldnt even go up to the current 8 seconds max. With 64 players the game could benefit from higher respawntime though i feel as it would reduce the players on the field a bit. I would suggest a respawntime scaling factor of like 0.1 at 0 players and 1.0 at 64 players. So that it would be just a linear scaling. Additonally i would suggest to scale respawntime based on veterancy level. Meaning a heroic would have a higher respawntime then a veteran etc. This would serve two things: Killing a higher level player gives you a bigger reward and some good kills could make your team come back more easily If everyone is heroic and the game drags on everyone having a bit higher respawntime should result in good rushes with good kills meaning more and beeing more likely to end the game. So scaling respawn time based on veterancy could i think help ending like 64 player stalemates or stomps more timely I would be happy to hear about your honest oppinions. This would be increadibly easy to implement so if we could come to terms we could add this in the next patch without problems.

Maybe we are even thinking too complicated ? Like what about just a pop up when you hit join in the launcher that pops up if the server uses custom maps and has info like: "This server uses custom maps. Pls downoad them from "ftp://...Maps.zip. Maps last updated on Nov 3rd 2019" With a short info where to unzip and the zip could contain a readme aswell. Server admins could add the info to one of the game configs so that it would be send to the launcher like servername etc. And by checking the last update time players could know if they need to download again. It wouldnt be perfect but would be a solution that should be doable with fairly limited effort in game and launcher changes and downloading would then just use a ftp or something.

@AgentThe server admins already pay quite a bit so pls refrain from saying they are not paying enough and should even pay more so that everyone could download the maps AT THE SAME TiME wich obviously is much higher, ridicuouls bandwith demand and something very different then if every player would download maps from the launcher as that would stretch out the downloads a lot over time. Then theres also the timeout problem with ingame downloads it seems. Im sure many people wouldnt mind letting the launcher download a bunch of maps if they get an indiaction how much maps/time is left. You could do 1 Million things while its downloading and its mostly a one time thing. Im sure servers dont put up a new custom map every day. Right now when its suddenly downloading ingame on a mapswitch you dont know whats going on though and how long it will take etc so thats a much more unpleasent situation. And saying if we would have launcher downloads the servers would be filled with gigabytes of custom maps is a claim not backed up by anything. Surely maps would go in and out of rotation. Often times maps few or single maps are put in public servers in order to test them.

Im sure they are watching the situation, but its up to them what maps they use. What i really wish we had is a custom map downloader in the launcher, so that it downloads all maps before you even join.

I think a few more days and then we should have a clear picture on which we can act.

If you think an admin or moderator treated you unfairly here is how you should appeal for the meantime. Only do it if you really strongly disagree with the punishment you got. If you were banned In-Game: Please appeal by contacting the server admins from the server you were playing on. Either in Discord or via PM in the forums. If you were moderated by a global moderator and not a server admin, the server admins are asked to then forward the issue to the developers. In the appeal at least include: Reason why you are appealing Your name you used on the server when it happened Time of day it happened and the name of the map it was on (so that we can easily find the replay) Name of the moderator who moderated you, if known Screenshot of the warning message if you got one via chat or through the special middle of the screen warning message we integrated like two patches ago (and moderators are asked to use this special warning message preferably) If you were banned from Discord: Open a Forum topic in 'Feedback & Bug-Reports -> To Staff' Reason why you are appealing Your name you used on the discord server when it happened Time of day it happened and chat log if you have it Name of the moderator who moderated you, if known If you were banned from the forums: Please appeal by contacting moderators or administrators in the RenX Discord. They are then asked to forward your appeal to the internal discord moderation channel by forwarding exactly what you wrote to them in your appeal In the appeal at least include: Reason why you are appealing Your name you used on the server when it happened Time of day it happened and the name of the map it was on (so that we can easily find the replay) Name of the moderator who moderated you, if known Screenshot of the warning message if you got one via chat or through the special middle of the screen warning message we integrated like two patches ago (and moderators are asked to use this special warning message preferably) Overall: Just try to be nice and respectful and remember about fair play and you shouldn't have any issue. See also:

JFYI playerstrenght for Teambalancing is currently calculated like this: ln(lastroundscore) + ln(lastroundkills - lastrounddeaths)/2 (with ln meaning natural logarithm and lastroundkills are only taken into account if > lastrounddeaths) That its just lastround score leads to players that just connected dont having a score for the balancer to take into account etc. So a first step to improve this could be to persist like the average score from the last three matches for every player so the balancer always has something to go by.

How do you like the Killcam ?

@Handepsilonworked pretty much alone and hard on this new HUD (with concepts by Havo89). So give him and Havoc a break for trying new and ballsy stuff. Im sure babyproblems will get cured.

We will add this option again next patch. Server owners can configure the playerlimit needed for nukes to activate and additionally the PT Nuke/Beacon icons will now display how many players are needed before it activates, so that players can be aware. If a better solution comes up and finds enough fans we can reevaluate.

So there seems to be a clear winner.