Jump to content

NodSaibot

Totem Arts Staff
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2361

  • Joined

 Content Type 

Posts posted by NodSaibot

    Ren X is official ruined!

    in Feedback & Bug Reports

    Posted

    59 minutes ago, vandal33 said:

    Knowing Algol's behavior in game, not surprised he would make a topic like this.

    There are cunts in this game that needs to be addressed, but you could at least make your complain in a normal constructive manner instead of like a screaming teenager.

    I hope by cunts, you are referring to toxic players.

    • Like 1

    Whatchya do outside of RenX?

    in Off Topic

    Posted

    10 hours ago, Ryz said:

    Uhm I guess you will not be in the area of Bergen op Zoom (The Netherlands) often, but if you are I will do it any time!


    @Sarah! Disaster relief coordinator? I guess cause of the hurricane. How are things there? Not much news anymore about it here... GL!

    Every Friday, Saturday and Sunday I work most of the day organizing, creating and assigning teams their work orders. I process new requests and triage the new work orders we receive. I partially coordinate lunches for the teams and keep inventory of our tools/supplies.

     

    Work is tedious, dirty and disgusting. Basically the same thing at every house. There are large neighborhoods that were destroyed (unlivable). Luckily, mine was not one of them. It's a great thing to see the state and community as a whole overcome our differences and make a positive impact in the lives of each other.  

    • Like 3

    Whatchya do outside of RenX?

    in Off Topic

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Ryz said:

    Ha nice!
    I work as a freelancer in marketing and communication, varying from communication advice to companies to promote their products, till making websites, photos, articles, and so on. Besides work and gaming I like to cook (and also my visitors and my gf like it :)  ), visit musicevents, go for a party or just go out with friends. Besides work I also do some (partly) voluntary stuff varying from helping out local veterans to being on the board (not sure what the correct word is in English) of a youth healtcare organisation or help out with musical events in booking bands, mixing music and whatever comes along. 

    When are you going to cook for me?

    [Map] CNC-Sunrise

    in Works In Progress

    Posted

    59 minutes ago, Luhrian said:

    You sure that you didn't move anything after the lgihtning build? It can happen very quick by accident. You need to save it immediatly after the build is finished to prevent crashes (what happend to me way too often) and little accidents like this.

    Very sure, i think some setting is messed up.

    Fill Up Servers!!

    in Renegade X

    Posted · Edited by Sarah!

    I think the problem is that most people want to join action already, they just check to see if there are players, if not they load up a different game.

     

    There are a few people who join at low player count and try to get people joining, which I would guess are already in the CT server.

    60 player limit

    in Feedback & Bug Reports

    Posted

    2 hours ago, Schmitzenbergh said:

    I can only agree with you. The game becomes a total mess with 60 players on certain maps.. I do like the fact that more people can play but i'd prefer to see them split 30-30 over 2 servers.

    What I would like to see is that if a server exceeds a certain playercount (Lets say 50 players), the next match the server will be split on 2 servers with 25 players each (either via an automatic vote or something else). I don't know if this is technically possible, but it would even out the playerbase a bit. Id rather see 4 servers with 25 players each than 2 servers with 60 players.

    This is my personal opinion ofcourse.

     

    I do know transferring people between servers is possible, at least I remember something like that happening before. I am a strong proponent of this, as it would probably end up with a higher player count. A few things to keep in mind:

    1. Would people want to be changed? Maybe they only joined because of the 50+ players. (Very few, probably)
    2. If people were with friends? It's possible they wouldn't be on the same server. A small inconvenience.
    3. It was something good, but I forgot. Possible edit later.

     

    3 hours ago, Radeon3 said:

    Didn't want to derail the Team changing topic so created this one. @CampinJeff @Sarah! you already had an input on this matter, please share your opinion/argument here as well. Probably it's going to be a wall of text, so only read further if you are interested in the experience of an oldtimer who returned to the game after around a year. Before all I'd like to state I'm not angry at CT, but being the only server with a steady playerbase it has some global responsibilities. If there were a few other servers with noticable activity I wouldn't mind this issue at all.


    First off, more does not equal better. We have seen this with the debatable higher minelimit, increased credit flow, purchasable vehicles after destroyed WF/Strip (the latter two at the start of B4) and now with the 1377 minutes of waiting time for teamchange.

    With the increased max player limit everything loses impact on the game. The vehicle limit remained the same while the playercount increased by 50%. Tankers have to deal with significantly more mobs shooting at them instead of focusing on higher priority targets. Sieges are as boring as before but with more people! There's a bigger pool of people who constantly repair buildings under siege, which equalize the higher ranked vehicles with some exceptions (looking at you mammy). It's more convienent to repair buildings after you realize shooting vehicles with low tier units doesn't worth it. You get no VP, neglectable credits compared to repairing the MCT and dying a lot. Rushes aren't as effective as before because on avarage max 7 tanks go against possibly an additional 10 people defending the base. Don't even want to compare how difficult is to organise/build up a full scale rush and what's the chance of (even new) players realizing what is the most convienent thing to do in their base under siege.


    Infantry fight with this many people on maps with chokepoints is a mess. It only serves the K/D farmers and their added "value" to the game. If endless/meaningless shooting is your thing then obviously this is your golden age. Even if you shoot well, you can barely advance because you have to deal with higher numbers from the opposing force and their respawning multiply this effect.

     

    Small team tactics (SBH C4, stank rushes, fully loaded IonAPC, simultanious nukes to name a few) are less likely to work because there are more people to counter these. Many tactical aspects of the game are toned down which is a huge loss imo. Quantity become favoured instead of quality : (

     

    Just to recap, most maps don't even support 40 players. I'd love to play with 60 players or more on maps which were desinged for it but currently many of the maps are outright nightmare for that many people. Increasing the vehicle limit is not a solution as most maps are not suitable to handle more vehicles. Just think about how difficult is to maneuver at the crowded base entrance during sieges and you might realize even the current number of vehicles aren't supported by some maps.

    We always say that this game has a steep learning curve and new players should get into it. But what exactly are we talking about? Sure there are the basics and getting know the maps... but currently they don't lose much if that's all they know. I'd really like know what new players think of the game after being besieged for a whole match or trying to achieve something in vain.

    Last but not least this impacts the perfomance of the game. Not a serious issue, but to this day we have new players who have weak computers. A few FPS for them is the difference between playable and unplaybe.

     

    As I recall, this issue was addressed before and a few developers went against the 60 player idea. How and why did we get to this? What do you think? Do you feel that something is diminishing from the game with so many players in one server or I'm alone with this?

    Emphasis on the underlined part, I think this applies specifically to my map as well. There is no way it can hold 60 people.

     

    Anyways, I am only a proponent of higher player count until we can get something like automatic server switching, as described above by Schmitz. While it does ruin some aspects of the game, I don't think having a 40/40 server during the high-times would allow as many people to enjoy the game. This might lead people to not even starting the launcher or even bothering to check, which I wouldn't like.

    Team changing

    in Renegade X

    Posted · Edited by Sarah!

    41 minutes ago, Radeon3 said:

    So when will you guys reinstate the rule that 40+ ppl servers shouldn't exist? Playing on maps which don't even support 40 players (majority of them) isn't abuse by definition, yet it's clearly butchering the tactical aspect of the game.
    Make a max player limit for each map or something, don't want play a brainless shooter in the C&C universe.

    Snow with 60 players on, are you nuts?

    I think the more players, the better. This game is suffering as it is. While you make a point, it is impossible to make a max player limit per map, because what if the next map is higher than the current player count? While you could assume they could disable joining until it reaches max player count, it doesn't make much sense. And if it's on snow, the majority of players voted for it, so oh well.

     

    59 minutes ago, limsup said:

    While it is true, I wasn't here in those times when EKT still existed, so I am unaware of the backstory of this particular "incident"...

    I was just wondering here, how could one "abuse" a setting, which was provided by the developers for server administrators, and is freely configurable? I mean what is the point in taking away the freedom from server admins to decide such limits? Same with team swapping. Although I have mixed feelings regarding this, in my humble opinion it should be in the freedom of server admins/owners to decide - and for the players to flood said server-folks with complaints, if it is off-balance :D  So, why not raise the issue to the owner of that particular server? Theoretically that should be more convenient, than modifying the code itself...

    I wholeheartedly agree on this, such things should need some reasonable limits.

    It's abuse because they never intended for it to be that high. The original purpose of the setting is defeated by the way the admins are using it.

    Team changing

    in Renegade X

    Posted · Edited by Sarah!

    Actually the CT forum is pretty dead, and the admins check here pretty often so its fine.

     

    And I'm pretty sure the devs are going to disable the 'time lock' on team swapping, so its fine.

DDoS protection by Evolution Host

×
×
  • Create New...