SFJake

When buying vehicles, its just grayed if you can't buy them, regardless of the reason. Items that can't be bought in a map at all should have a different color altogether. (or just not show up) Its one thing that can confuse people.

The tiberium weapons might be a problem, the weapons you should be able to get here should never be power weapons, and even 200$ infantry should give more power than those. Which is why I think the Carbine for instance is perfectly fine.

Spies are definitely underpowered right now. The reason being they show up with the original name colors, they show up as red when you aim around them, basically they still completely show up as enemies except for their uniforms which makes them WAY WAY WAY too easy to detect. Even if the ONLY way to detect them would be to shoot them, it would still be really easy to detect them, but might give you a chance. Its still really easy considering you could just tell there's a spy because of the dumb message telling EVERYONE (which is kind of lame). I mean, I'm just saying here. I like the spy mechanic, just don't like how it is.

I can't wait for the mammoth fad to die, they're everywhere.

Its really funny to me how people frown about things like weapon drop and engy drops, yet they actually barely change how the game works (as seen in, you know, all the bloody wepaon drops game I played) compared to something like airstrikes that destroys about a dozen incredibly crucial part of the game. Whatever, just food for thought. I realize I don't know who is and isn't against either or both.

Whiteout and Walls are fine at 64. Fields is only bad because of the design of the chokepoint. Walls and Whiteout have a bigger variety of ins and outs that makes them interesting even at high count, while Field has.. well, nothing, really.

Like I said in another topic and like my fellow with the amazing name above me said, its one beauty of this game that a game can reach a stalemate through "normal" play and force both teams to employ teamwork or advanced strategies to achieve victory. If brute force can go through a proper defense easily, then whats the point of the game? And its quite the Renegade moment to have 1 building and survive against 3+.

So do weapon drops, doesn't stop it from being great...

Its completely irrelevant.

I mentioned weapon drops because they actually said it was coming back later! So thats some good news for you. I'm not sure how exactly they're going to do it, though. I'd like an option on top of it to disable ramjet-sniper-pic-railgun pickups for stealth.

I agree, I mean, other things were buffed and nerfed, mostly buffed and thats perfectly fine, and in comparison the railgun-PIC seems just fine as they -were-.

We're talking about the repair gun, not the advanced one. A havoc repairing vehicles in an emergency works, but really, you want that big sniper pointed at the enemy, and you want an hotwire repairing, since they repair much faster and thats a much better use of a player. Engineers are still good in that they are free compared to an expensive repair gun, and hot/techs have a repair gun thats so much better its not funny. So thats why I don't see the issue, personally.

Stalemates is just another word for "the 2 teams are lacking in teamwork". Teamworks breaks stalemates. Which is why I prefer if the game is more likely to create stalemate -> it forces teams to work together to break through. And yes, you need to force it in pubs.

Don't remind me. Airstrikes on beacon is the most ridiculous thing. I hope motion sensors make it in, but never as part of a capturable mid-field building. They need a defense against stealth.

Why is buying a repair gun such a terrible idea? I need to repair, either pay 300 credits for a side repair gun (random price, I do think it should be pricey) or waste 1000 credits losing your precious characters just to get an engineer. (+350 if you want a tech) Heck I played with weapon drops all the time and everybody could get a repair gun. Game was fine. Why are people against mechanics that just makes things more versatile? I don't care about the competitive side of things by the way, they can disable whatever they want for those matches. But such things can just make matches more interesting. Player harvesters was an idea thrown around. I think it has potential, but its hard to say. I hate the OP airstrikes (oh lets walk around there and *boom* 1000 credit character lost, no ref, are you kidding me, it wasn't a sniper, it wasn't anything, it was just the remnant of an airstrike I never knew was even hitting this place because I wasn't even there). I could name a thousand situations where airstrikes piss me off. McFarland needs a cost increase. I hope he doesn't just get nerfed, though. Love the char, but price is definitely too low. The orca & apache are too weak right now. Beacons definitely needs to be possible to be disarmed up to the last milli-second, don't care how it looks. They can add visual effect (like nuke explodes in the sky and ion just gets sucked back up) later down the road. Too much to talk about from the first post, just sharing my point of view on a few points.

Then go to those servers and don't try to ruin it for people who like higher player count. I specifically hate games where nobody can even stop paying attention for a second otherwise a guy magically sneaks in and destroy a building on his own. Not everybody likes the same kind of matches.

Thats Under.

The problem with this is just the mine limit. If you screw your team's base defense because you wanted to ram some, you're technically griefing. Thus the reason why it was not allowed. If at least your team agrees, or the mine limit allows, then you're not griefing.

...........sigh.

Maps lacking in complexity still limits strategies. Maps like field with their small size, heavy chokepoints and base defenses, those kind of maps always did limit the potential strategies. The fact that Spies are REALLY weak and so obvious to spot doesn't help break through either.

I liked Skirmish on paper and how they advertised how good the bots were, but they're actually really bad right now (sure, miles away from the original but the original didn't even try). Lots of efforts put into it, but in the end bots seems very simple minded, and there's very little possibilities (they don't even go everywhere, I have never seen a bot on top of walls). I like AI, however for a game like this it needs a lot more to replace playing with players. And I do want better bots if the game is ever to die. I also wish we could organize things with bots or order them precisely, and that they would be capable of rushing and stealth attempts on their own. Its a lot to ask, I know. Its unfortunate if thats all you have to play, because they really deliver an incredibly linear and not very fun experience at the moment.

Good news, thank you.

I think I genuinely want to kill anyone that wants slow infantry, heavy recoil and all that modern crap.

All this talk of damage which means absolutely nothing at all. What are turrets? Stationary, abusable. The only problem with the turrets is they respawn, and they respawn FAST, making their destruction nearly useless. Yet that problem was not even brought up here, and I have no idea why.

The voice seems map-wide. If there is an icon, it really should be a lot bigger and stand above the character, not next to their name which doesn't always show up anyway. I don't know if this was in vanilla renegade or not, but I do remember those big icons and they were hard to miss.