HaTe

As far as damaging a vehicle goes - the total destruction of the vehicle should equal out to 10% of the price of the vehicle. It was set up this way in Renegade for a reason. The same applies for infantry character, with the exception of free infantry, of course. A havoc costs 1000, so it should be 100 points for a kill (it was actually 99 in Renegade - so as to avoid any thousandth calculations - Renegade only went as far as hundredths). Light tank costs 600, and so it should be 60 points for a full kill on it. Mammoth costs 1500, and so it should be 150 for a full kill on it. That is how the pointsfix worked in Renegade, and how it should work in Renegade X as well. Regarding the pointsfix though: The addition of the pointsfix in Renegade prompted many servers to use the 2/3 credit tick system. Meaning 2 credits the first second, and 3 credits the next second (averaging out to be 2.5 credits/second). This also made the PP destruction give the team 1/2 credit ticks, rather than 1/1. People liked this because the pointsfix means less credits earned capabilities, and when the PP was down in a non-pointsfix server, people could still earn enough credits. With the pointsfix, this became increasingly impossible, and so the 2/3 credit tick was implemented. I believe Renegade X should use the 2/3 credit tick system, rather than the 2/2.

Should be 300 points for a beacon disarm. Disarming a mine should give 30 points. Repairing a building should give you a lot of points, but not as much as the person damaging the building (I believe it was 50% of the points earned for repairing a building). Repairing a tank/vehicle is considered reward in itself and should only give a very small amount of points (someting like 1 credit per 2 seconds of repairing). That is how it is set up in renegade.

That doesn't work like renegade, then. Triggering them from any distance, so long as they explode, will do the same amount of damage no matter how far you are from the mine. The only exception is with the collision of a wall.

I'm also curious to as how the points system works. In renegade (with the pointsfix) it was determined by a set amount per damage to a unit, and then another set amount per destruction/kill of a unit. Is it set up the same way in renegade x? For instance, the point value for damaging a med tank was 0.050 per health/armor damage dealt, and then another 40 for the destruction of it. Meaning 80 points total for killing it. It should be 90 for a full apache kill as well, meaning if you truly did kill 6, you'd have 540 points to show for it in renegade.

This should be fixed in the uocoming patch I believe.

Based on shat you just said, I recommend reading my post about a possible edit. It seems that you are in an agreement with me, and not with the topic starter.

Are you talking to me when you're asking if I played renegade? Because I did. I played competitively, which is why I brought the suggestion up in the first place. 90% of purchases in competitive renegade are technicians and HotWires. There's rarely ever a reason to get anything else. The other 10% are for when a vehicle cannot be used to achieve the desired result (which was only in specific cases for competitive players).

My argument specifically wasn't that the unit is op - it was that the universality of the unit was too wide. The edit I suggested would simply make 2 role specific technicians rather than one universally good technician class. It's silly to think that the repair gun does equal damage to each armor type, whereas other weapons do different damage amounts based on which armor type they are hitting. It'd make more sense if it was split up into 2 separate units that each do their job slightly better, but the other's job slightly worse.

I had posted this prior to even playing the beta as an idea to split up the technician classes:1. Edited repairing units in Renegade: Instead of each team having one infantry option for a strong repair gun, I thought up of something a little bit different (since hotwires/technicians are almost always the most used character in the game, and honestly a bit OP when it comes to repairing). The idea actually came from Planetside 2's character system, which really works well with that game. Obviously I edited it up a bit so that it would work with Renegade - but here is the general idea: Two Hotwire/Technician options for each team. Both cost the standard 350 credits. (To give you perspective - the weak repair gun (engineer) in Renegade does -2 damage, and the strong does -4 per second to everything). One will be infantry/mine/beacon repairing based - doing damage equal to that of the current strong repair gun (-4 per second) to all infantry units and beacons, and doing -5 damage per second to all c4s/mines. To buildings and vehicles, however, this unit's repair gun only does -2 damage per second . The character will then also have: 3 remote c4s, but after laying 2 there is a 5 second reload time in order to lay the third one; one timed c4; a pistol; and the default proximity mines. The other will be vehicle/building repairing based - doing damage equal to that of the current strong repair gun (-4 per second) to all buildings and vehicles, and doing -5 damage per second repairing any building, but not when repairing the MCT (so when targeting the actual building). To infantry, mines/c4s, and beacons, this unit will do -2 damage per second. The character will then also have: 2 remote c4s; 2 timed c4s; a pistol; and a new set of anti-tank mines that are limited per player (rather than per team) at 3 per player. These mines don't count against the mine limit for the team in anyway, and instead are limited solely at 3 anti-tank mines per player. These mines are designed to explode only when a heavy unit (vehicles, not infantry) goes over them. They each do 55 damage to any vehicle (proximity mines do about 30), but cannot be put within 3 yards of each other - if this happens, the mine trying to be laid down will automatically disarm. This is to try and help the fact that proximity mines are pretty useless against tanks as is

They aren't 1.5x bigger.

I believe it will bring up a notification that the client's game needs to be updated in order to play, and then the player will be linked to the patch download from there. That is my understanding of it. So it's basically a combination of manual and automatic, really. It shouldn't really confuse people.

I've beta tested several games, and I would have to say that as far as open beta goes - this game is doing real well on the amount of glitches/bugs. There obviously is some, but the game-changing ones were fixed in time. Being a part of the private beta, I know firsthand on how many changes per build the devs make. The list is ~100+ per build just on edits they have done (each edit takes a significant amount of time, depending on what it is being edited). That's damn impressive considering a new build was out every 2 weeks or so... Speed hack has a temporary fix for already, and will probably be fixed even moreso in the patch. There's been no apparent aimbot or triggerbot hacks to my knowledge, which I personally am grateful for. Seriously, as far as a first build beta goes - this game is in great shape so far, relatively speaking. It will only improve as well, and hopefully the eventual final build will also be released on Steam. You are right though that now is not the time for a break. I also know that the devs are not taking a break at all, and are hard at work, however.

I think he goes unstealthed then back to stealthed while still shooting. When switching to hold down right click from holding down left click, he stealths back up but still shoots. Haven't tested it, but it sounds like that is what he is saying.

Well, the current vehicle blockers are in place to accommodate for the width of the buggy/humvee. So, the bike would have to be quite a bit bigger (and thus no longer really be a bike) to fit in. Think about it...vehicles aren't meant to go into buildings, and that should be obvious by their size alone. However, the recon bike should realistically be able to fit inside the buildings quite clearly, but they are not allowed in them (making the vehicle blockers that are supposed to be hidden and not blantant, completely obvious). Buildings are just one example, of course. The SSM launcher would at least not have this problem, and its gameplay usage would be what has to be considered if it was ever considered to be additional content to the game.

An infantry sized character's dimensions wouldn't even fit in a recon bike without folding him in half lol (even with him laying down). It sort of takes the unrealistic nature to a new level. But that's not even why it'd be bad in game (and is in renegade).

You can't shoot around corners by doing that though, which is why we would use it.

I requested such a button (that would lock the turret movement, but not the camera), but got no feedback on the request from the devs. So it's unclear if this will ever happen or not.

Are you on a laptop or a PC? I'd check your mouse settings in the control panel to be sure that it is just the one mouse being registered and not another one. Though why it would be happening just in game does seem odd, so I am not entirely sure.

Iran has dedicated his renegade x posts entirely to trolling, because he believes the game is bad. See jelly forums for examples. Just ignore him here

Yes, exactly.

I'm arrogant because I understand the affects that newcomers are propsimg to the game have on the game more than they are able to? If you say so. Just trying to provide some insight from a different perspective. If that's arrogant, then I'm not sure what the definition of narrow-minded is, then, huh?

Because some of us care about the game play beyond how fun it is to fuck around with. Some of us care about the competitive aspect of the game, and are not narrow minded and ignorant. Some of us also have way more experience with the original renegade, and laugh at the suggestions of some of the people who suggest things without knowing their full impact. I choose to try and explain it rather than make fun of, so try not to insult me too much, as I am merely choosing to be a messagenger for competitive players, since there are only a handful that post on this forums regularly.

But if those classes are balanced out with the other units (I.e. nod having better stealth vehicles, but GDI have more firepower in their infantry selection), then the balance in comparing classes doesn't really matter, in terms of balance per faction. Once again, that would be measured by the win % of each team per map.

Clearly you don't play the game for the competitive aspect, then. I need not argue my case any further with you, because you are viewing the game from a different perspective, and will not understand where I am coming from.

Don't misquote me because you either realize I'm right or completely failed to understand what I was saying. "Fun" is not a factor of balance. Fun is a factor of gameplay. Balance is measured by the final result statistics, whereas fun and gameplay are measured by opinion. My point is that you can't compare the two as if they are relatable. Just because a game is fun does not directly mean the game is balanced, and vice versa. They *can* be correlated with each other, but then again - so can ice cream and suicide statistics. Causation and correlation are two different things. You're implying that fun is a factor into the causation of a balanced game. It is not. I can think the game is the most fun game ever. If the end result is that nod wins 90% of the games, however, the game is not balanced, regardless of my opinion on how fun it is. Two different measurements entirely, my friend. Don't make the mistake of putting them together.