RoundShades

I always thought voting should be more complex yet wholesome. I wouldn't advocate the extra work if not it worth it. It should allow voting of all maps, including the last one played but only re-votable once, and then it is not votable again for 2 more maps. Or, make it require a 2/3rd vote to replay the last played map and 1/2 vote to replay the one before that, that way if less than half vote even if it was most voted or if people didn't vote at all, it won't choose it. Something needs to be done in my opinion, to make it somehow, where the last 3 maps played can't be so easily replayed. Still possible, just not so easy, like a weighted vote or removing them from vote for 3 rotations.

I agree with you. We have the same problem with Planetary Annihilation, or really any "beta" that doesn't also have an occult backing to it (Kerbal). So basically... This guy, he ragequits and uninstalls because it wasn't like League of Legends, a "bandwagon game" (way to blaze your own trail btw, LoL ftw along with anything with more than a million playerbase, ftw 'merica) But... thanks for helping submit bugs and feedback before you go? Because if I am not mistaken, you didn't actually realize you would be playing a beta and that's what you would be doing... But thanks anyway.

Actually, I agree on mines giving nod a sensible advantage, but actually, the mine limit showing on the UI gives mines a buff in visibility. The explosion was more obvious in Renegade. The fact you can see the mine limit go down instantaneously is more obvious than anything though, it is literally handwritten proof to check your base.

Sadly, this idea works and aleviates the situation, in a 40 person game. In a 12v12, it's fine. So, I am torn. Actually, I think more paths wouldn't hurt small games anyway, that's what mines are for.

Agreed. Right now, it is just that it is obscure, if you expect people to literally search for something, it won't happen unfortunately. For instance, minecraft, back in beta it released to sale. That was rare, which now it's common though. The few people who picked it up, were modders and made decent gary's mod esque things and servers with it. That got it attention, other communities moved in. That got it attention, raised pub sales. That got it attention, some people recorded playing it or endorsed it. That got it attention, and after all was said and done, Toby "Tobuscus" Turner and Felix "Pewdiepie" Kjellberg and all of their 2,000,000 viewers have probably got it. Maybe we need some big million subscriber player to play it. Two Sayains Play RenX? Sadly, I can do esquisite voices for "Nappa" and "Vegeta".

I found this hilarious. Also... If EA owns C&C universe, and this game allows use of it only because it's f2p, then that kickstarter, isn't it also technically highly illegally breaking EA copyright too? Or is "gigantor" too "generic"?

I can back that.

I don't think many posters have a valid point to be literally applying math to this sort of thing. Most games would be destroyed if players could just adjust balance by popular vote. I might just go in here as equalizer for the most unfavored yet unreasonably hated items. For instance: Fix: Gunner Leave: Airstrikes Everyone hates airstrikes, but after last nerf they aren't random instagibs anymore, anyone voting for them is out of personal spite. Gunner on the other hand needs a wee buff, which someone above voted for in the form of nerfing rocket soldier, yet it will technically be undone by this since his context was to nerf rocket soldier and leave gunner and mine is fix gunner. So you see where this is going? This will suck.

Whats that? AOW is for skill players and Marathon is for n00bs? Pfft, they are both "the game", I don't see why "hating the score system", which one could argue is broken in this game and is in no way like or better than the score system in Renegade Classic, is such a newbie scrub loser thing. I hate the score just because, if I play this game, I want to reach a conclusion. I simply do not want to play for 35 minutes and the game may cut off during a good attack or when someone is just making a comeback and dictate score. I mean, sometimes I feel the obvious winner got the higher score, sometimes I feel the teams were balanced and the winner exploited the point system. For instance, beacons, if some guys on my team planted 10 random beacons and they turtled, why should I lose because of it? Am I a retard for playing with randoms, should I just go play Planetside 2 if I am not going to get a full 12 man team together everyday I want to play? No, I am just going to play marathon, because when I play I am either going to kill a building and win a game or I am going to lose a building and lose a game. Ain't nobody's jibber jabber guna stop me. Retort?

Eh, you can already camp field with infinite vehicle ammo. Well, you need to go back for repairs... oh wait, the only class's main weapon with infinite ammo is the ENGINEERS, so you don't need that! Really, infantry has gotten better against vehicles with sprint. Still, they are only ones limited to back-and-forth refills when it should either be for health or death.

I approve of most of these updates. Good job Totem Arts. Ones I don't necesarily like, are removing default probability of death crate, all of the airstrike nerfs while I am glad about 80% of them, and some other things. Overall, I will gladly accept all the updates, as some are at my 49% approval rate and in no way bother me while the rest are at 100% absolute approval.

So, both teams have icons on bottom of player UI screen. One for each building in-game, bright if full health, red if serverely damaged, greyed out if destroyed. Can tech buildings such as the field silo be given an icon? Maybe one for both teams, that is greyed out to begin with, and changes based on "mct health"? So when it starts becoming your team's, it's red, and turns green as the mct is full health, and when an enemy captures it, torwards the end it goes red so you see it, then goes grey as the enemy silo icon starts to light up. Just a thought, thought it was constructive enough to belong here.

I have seen games with lasers possible to use shorter distances with less reaction time to it, but were more visible, and worked without complaint. This game obviously needs a bigger laser. It shouldn't matter if its very obvious, it is a very effective weapon. ACTUALLY, I think the best idea, is to make the place the laser lands glow bright red to the enemy, so as it is targetted, the enemy has plenty of ways to tell what is going on and reaction time to avoid it.

-I would not mind infantry having infinite ammo. Many Renegade servers have been playing like that for years. -I think tanks camping a front base is fine as far as vehicle ammo goes. Airstrikes make it easier than ever to punish camping in front of a base. Front base camping working in Renegade, its entirely different in Planetside but thats a different game. -I actually think it would add some interesting balance to add a very weak repair gun to the "secondary weapons" you can purchase. For just 200 credits, you can replace your pistol with a repairgun that repairs 80% the speed of a engineer and has an ammo limit enough to heal a tank once or twice. This also balances how secondary weapons give engineers more strength, by opting for a weaker limited repair on a unit with even more strength. Can also use for field mine disarming and repairing teammate infantry.

The only place that needs to be mined in Field is right next to the tib and bar where nukes can be placed and right next to the tib and strip where ions can be placed. Place the mines where they can't be disarmed without being in the LoS of the ob or AGT. If your team has control of the tunnel and intend to camp it anyway, placing some in the tunnel isn't bad. It can't be disarmed without taking ramjet to the face, so I don't see how it does anything except help your team hold mid tunnel if pushed back by buying time/thinning out the push.

idk, it is very nice for teams who lose production structures but still have a ref to have some form of utility for attempting to pull a game back. I generally think 1500 for airstrike is a bit high. I don't mind 800, if there was cooldowns per player and team. 3 minutes per player, 1 minute per team? It really is the stacked airstrikes and neverending airstrikes that are overpowered. Perpetual shielding is what that creates. The single use airstrikes themselves, they aren't that damaging, and THEY NEED TO BE MORE VISIBLE, but if they were then players should immediately react to dive into nearby vehicles for protection. Then that actually OPENS UP MORE STRATEGY. Instead of camping the front of a base with 4 shellers and 6 healers, you have to make sure you have enough repairers to keep the tanks alive, enough tanks to shelter the repairers during an airstrike, and possibly even add APCs to the blend as shelters for 3 additional repairmen per 1 tank. So now, ideally, you would have 3 shellers, 1 apc, and 6 repairers. With less people, instead of 3 shellers and 5 repairers, you would have 2 shellers 1 apc and 5 repairers. Just adds difficulty in camping a front base, and even helps cracking a front base that is turtling by airstriking upon entry, but it limits attackers using it by PT Distance and gives more advantage to "pushing out" use. Airstrikes are better than most people give credit. People are just tired of dying to them. They get way too many kills, they need to be highly visible once locked so a team can see and avoid it, and they need to be limited just a bit so dumping 2 onto a nuke/ion beacon doesn't gurantee a strike.

I think the parts of this game that function are amazing. I personally also love playing on moderated servers myself. Generally, I avoid full-on sized games though, 12 a side is fine for me. Anyway, I agree there is nothing wrong considering the game in discussion and it's development team. However, isn't no harm waiting for patches either

+1 for your forum name. Muffin button.

Gen-nanigans: One thing you can do for mildly risky or teamhampering terms, is lay a few mines along enemy mines in tunnels. Especially field, and especially if they mine mid tunnel for some reason. If they check one for team status, it is usually the closest one to them, so mine a few in the middle past the first 2, and when they see green they will prance on by then spontaneously combust. Nets kills fairly often you wouldn't believe, only downside is it costs minelimit and if full might cost teammates mines. I also endorse using them to cover escape. If you are at 13 health, that enemy will chase you into the base defences if you let them, so lay mines backpedalling and/or as turning corner, if anything then to kill/lose them.

As long as it's free. The question is, which console will let Renegade X be downloadable for free with no strings attached. Since console gamers are even more cheap most the time, this game would be a huge hit and would basically be demanded to come preinstalled on consoles because it is so solid a free to access game. I don't know if that would cut into other game's sales, or if microsoft/sony would care or not. However, generally they don't have any free games at all. Generally.

This system sounds creative and good. Honestly, this is what SMNC did really. They asked for people to send post-game demo files (which recreate the game as a replay), and post to the forums. Then they issued a steam ID ban, which I understand wouldn't fully work since this game doesn't depend on steam but partially, but maybe the game could generate an ID per install and use that. IP bans are strong as well though.

Hate to say it, but I agree. I am a big fan of Aircraftkiller's work, despite anything else. I also think michael vic is a good football player and michael jackson made some legacy music, undeniable despite anyone's opinion of them personally, their work is effective. Despite all else, Aircraftkiller made solid work in a game I personally affiliated with and didn't get much support from anyone else. His work is a charitable donation personally to me, and I am glad for his contributions. Heck, I only wish we could get some Glacier Flying up in this game

I don't see why this is arguable. There are some gray areas, but generally wherever it is placed should have a fair shot to be reachable by infantry and be disarmed. So, no on top of rampless roofs or something, no dropped into deep narrow tubes, no placed inside of logstacks, no placed inside of hallow tiberium silo pegs, none of that. I seen some effective spots that are reachable. The most hidden are usually the most overused, and the most semi-obvious are the least immediately checked, so there is a mindgame there. I prefer clumped corners for my placement, because with a bit of distancing, I can toss nades in to kill the first wave of repair. I think its fair to defend beacons, not to phase beacons into walls to make impossible to disarm.

It is a shotgun that does actual damage to armor. Right now, the shotgun does 10 damage to heavy armor, 40 to light armor, I think, and it does it only at short range if all hit. The flamethrower also arcs. Chem sprayer not so sure, just disperses. Either one has a bit of spread that gets "more damage" at closer range since less of the spread misses a la shotgun style. They just do less damage than shotgun, I think less damage on headshot in fact (by glitch), but are capable of structure and heavy armor damage. So, only get them if you need a free class capable of front door repelling heavy armor. Like attacking mammy tanks at front door of Field base. Or med tanks rolling through the front of walls flying. I believe you can even spray from top of plateau on walls flying, meaning you can get some vehicle/harvester damage from the ramp above. Again, also remember flamethrower arcs, you can see that in the flame animation, on the gun not the flametank, so with the infantry flamer, aim a bit high at extreme long ranges to land more bodyshot damage. Generally, they aren't highly strong, grenadier got a massive buff in RenX while flamethrower got a moderate buff, but thats balance for you, either way I like it a lot better thus far.

More like headshots in the original were over rewarded vs body shots. The changes to headshots here seem far better. The changes aren't perfect (Orca) but stop pretending that 5x damage headshots were a great way to balance the game. It was severely easy to kill people with headshots and not hard to land them in Renegade. Correct. For an arcade shooter and a fps rts game, aim shouldn't be that heaftily rewarded. They still are heavily, just not as much as a washout. I wouldn't consider them bads, I think the only thing overly good aim rewards in is every game most people avoid. Call of Duty, I haven't played since classic where the guns actually limited your killpower. Battlefield, pfft, you kidding me, that killed this game, it can go to hell. Counterstrike, maybe here and there, but then I always go to a game that doesn't piss me off.