isupreme

Where Are You Renegade X US server? Am I the kiss of death? Just when i was checking you out and appreciating your finer features.... you disappear! When i turn on the game and there are only a few players.... Or when the ONE Big server is full.... I miss you. I could have some fun and maybe some other players might enjoy the fun as well... but no... My only option is marathon.... And its marathon with very small teams... so we cant use nucs..... and we cant sneak.... and we cant really push!win!destroy!... God help us if we actually organize and use teamwork. You are cursed if you use a Commander.... so I am not sure what the point of all that is .. .except to maybe allow some new players to gain a false sense of SEE-CURE-IT-TAY and corrupt the game. sigh.....

Current Rough Draft: 5/2/21 This is a work in progress..... A mind exercise. With no know benefits. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This is a list of ALL the ways that players express, experience or give Voice to Teamwork in Renegade X. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Well... we will see what kind of list results from this project. I have been thinking a lot about the teamwork i love in this game and this will be a place for that. Comments and input will update this info. My goal here is to explore all the ways that teamwork is utilized in this game. As a community we often tout the glories of teamwork in this game. This game is not just about being the Uber shooter. Thankfully there is so much more fun to be found in teamwork. Teamwork is a curious and subtle creature. It can grow strong or be snuffed out. Team spirit can turn on a dime. Could we INCREASE the teamwork in the game? I do not know, but I think a good honest look at the current situation could be beneficial. So... here goes. Maybe we can see the paths to more teamwork. Teamwork in Renegade X. Outline. 1. In Game, battle 2. In Game, conceptual 3 In Game, Meta 4.Out of Game ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1. In Game, battle. a. repair help... Healing infantry, tanks, and buildings./ resisting enemy advances. b.firepower . ie : backup by shooting at same targets/joining rushes c.base care. ie : repair buildings/mining/sound alarms. 2. In Game Conceptual a. Cooperative driving b. front line support c.denial of entry d.small squad tactics e. Commander abilities and harvy management 3.In Game, Meta a. allowing the game to mature, not insta destruction b.balancing c. proper map choice for size teams d. Commander ability to organize. 4. Out of game. a. forums/ discord b.donations c. internet visibility. d. development

Dear Server, I take this opportunity to celebrate your existence. I don't know where you came from, but I am glad you are here. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Firstly, may I say, your decision to be 15 min A.O.W. is AMAZING! ( A.O.W. is All Out War - which is a timed match where the points can win the match. As opposed to Marathon.) I have already enjoyed several games and hope for many more. Granted they are mostly games with only 1 or 2 players so far - but the funny thing is that on this server it was very easy to create some fun and enjoy the game even with a low population. Throw in some bots, focus on keeping teams balanced, and go for it. See how many points you can score in 15 minutes and just enjoy the fights. Less Meta game - more jousting. Nice. Losing a building seems less stressful as it will all be over shortly anyway. Secondly, I think this concept is so solid that it may be time to consider modified versions. Could this be used as a Tutorial/Trainer ? 1. Another Option is: points win, 15 min match, with no building destruction option? ? 2. Creative mode. This could be really amazing. This set up is for training. One experienced player could coach a new friend on the game quite easily in this format. New player on one side. Bots of decent difficulty on other side. ?? 3. This is an old request. We need to find a way to let humans group on the same team if they prefer. The recent wave of new players points to the Value in this proposition. I have played a few games on this server already where it would have been helpful to have humans vs bots ability. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Big thanks to the server. My dreams for the possible are only a testimony to the fun I have experienced. Too much Fun!

sigh... it takes me back... I used to steal vehicles in Renegade when I first started. I really had no idea why I should not use that empty vehicle. Yeah I was total newb. I can still see in my mind the angry texts on the screen... "That's my tank Isupreme! " Well thank goodness I caught on eventually, but I am sad to say I probably caused much pain in the interim.

Yeah it really is freaky to see how out of it this new crop of players can be. But you are right that we should relax our Uberness for a bit and try help when we can. My favorite helping mechanisms are to answer any newb questions with short, helpful, kind answers - and I spend more time healing players on the field. I remember when I started out - that incredible rush you can get when you are in a battle and someone else steps up to Heal you. True teamwork. One of my favorite helps is to heal a common soldier who is clearly just learning the game.

Well go back in and kick some butts! Just joking : to say I find that answer unacceptable. I would not care if they were inconsistent. I see no reason why that should be deciding factor. If I know exactly how long beacons take - then I am pro player. But a pro player could also adjust expectations. Or could the information on timer length be conveyed to the players, maybe when buying the beacon. The issue we currently face is in small games where the custom is to not use beacons. Thus the mechanic is totally abandoned - or is the cause of player conflict. This confusion is not good for the game. I would rather be confused about how long the beacon time might run than to loose this excellent game mechanic in smaller games.

I really like that video. Yeah it is a bit twitchy and fast, but it does a GREAT job of laying out the information. Thanks for sharing it. I checked out the YouTube videos by Bluedrake42 and I gotta say it was great to hear someone speak about this game with the enthusiasm I feel for it. Awesome. I thought he nailed it ALL right on the Head. Including:

Mystic, because of your post - I am going to change my stance on comms that the whole team cannot see. If it means we could achieve: RATHER THAN this stale and momentum killing tactic of one giant rush. Then sign me up. I would willing try communications that are occult/hidden to the general team. If they produce teamwork, and the average player can easily participate in them.

I don't quite understand this , tho i sense its truth. How does this happen?

When the team limit on Vehicles has been reached, and you try to Purchase.... If i am not mistaken, there is no signal that your purchase did not go thru. With the influx of new players !!Nice! I have been noticing the issues that they run into. Yes there are many, including the lack of a tutorial...... But one thing I noticed was players saying " I can't find my tank" Now there can be many reasons for this.. But I think this post is about one of them. If there is no signal your purchase has failed... .and you do not know to look at the Vehicle Limit.... And you are not noticing your credits........then you ask... . Where is my Tank??? Should we have a sound or Notice that you cannot buy vehicles at this time?

I had not heard about the issue with surround sound. When i ran 32 bit i would get the sound bug during the game.. Poop. So i switched to 64. I prefer it because the SB only happens rarely and then it is only between matches.

Reasons I will vote FOR surrender include at the top of the list: Low team score. Especially if the harvester is always dying, we are base locked, with no commander, and the Veteran points are stacking up against us. Also a big factor for me is the amount of teamwork and cooperation I see. The loss of a building is very low on my list. I used to be very much against the surrender mechanic. But I now see the value in it.

Could the commander have a small message PANEL that pops up when we access purchase terminal? So a Commander could say: Save for x.y.z rush plan. Or, We Must Take the Plateau! Keep Reporting Infantry Path Status. etc. Or more interestingly, If the commander has a philosophy of warfare - I would like to know it and try to make it happen. Shoot the Ground Mode! Generate superior firepower in the cave = win. etc... This could be a place for a commander to direct the team without issuing orders in heat of battle. What the heck... he/she is our commander. Why not give them more platforms to express the desired direction of Warfare I very much feel this game overloads players with information. I make use of it as I can, but I think a lot of new players just see it as snow as a result. Snow = ( o isn't that interesting but it has no impact on me) If we can divert the flow of info into appropriate channels maybe we can lessen the need for repeated spamming of information and reduce the snow. When a player goes to the purchase terminal we KNOW that they have a moment to absorb input. Likewise we KNOW that in the heat of a fight players are effectively blind to anything outside of the kill zone. So lets direct the information to where the player is most likely to receive it and the at the right time to make decisions on purchases.

There were some times when the NA server was busy. For awhile It was great of some servers to try and switch from EU to NA during the appropriate times. During that time, when the EU server was not dominating and absorbing all the NA players - we actually had some good NA games. - so ofc some EU players were not happy about the server being NA.. ya cant win for losing eh?

one can only hope... I believe that an active N.Am serer is the litmus test of this game. When this game snags/attracts a group of American time zone gamers - who keep the servers busy during the down times the servers currently see... Then we will have a game that is truly exciting and active. I see no reason why this game could not be tailored to fit this.

NodSaibot you see clearly the bias I am showing. And I understand the point you raise about allowing things to happen. < worth more consideration than I have given. And YES the very big maps with defenses is over reaching. So strike those maps but can my larger point still stand? WE NEED to tailor these map choices a bit to enhance small and very small teams enjoyment. Lately I am tired of the maps with no real defenses when small teams are playing. Fast and useless games. Usually someone knows the tricks and then a building is dead and the life goes out of the fight. Often small teams also mean that there is not a lot of participation in change votes, and then the game just feels lame. But give us Field or Under and a small team can goof around and have some fun. One or two players who can communicate can defend very well and launch fun attacks that are not Guaranteed Victories. For me, when teams are small - if there is just one or two more players who will cooperate - then we need challenges appropriate to that - NOT the trick one of us knows that kills a building... does that make sense? In small games I wish the focus would always be toward centralized battle and conflict and AWAY from separated and anonymous actions. I believe this is what made the early maps so successful. Tho the battle raged all around you.. you still could have a sense of what others were doing. Doing well or not. As for the maps where there is cheese.. ( what a great term for it) Is that so "it allows more action to happen?" I think yes. This points to the core mechanics. I think small teams deserve some cheese but not an open invitation into the base. Thus I am advocating for maps with Obelisk and AGT for small teams. As a slow learner I like that each map has different tricks and techniques that call on me to become a better player. This is a great feature in the game - the intuitive response to the situations in this game can lead a perceptive player to become better. I had a friend start playing recently. It has been fun to see him experience the game and draw conclusions. He quickly learned the value of repairing and the grenade launcher. So it is not just about being the better BoinKer.. but about becoming aware to your abilities and teamwork options. >steps off soapbox.

I note with interest that all the replies so far are about stopping beacons - which is what my idea is about preventing....... If smaller team games had a longer timer for the beacons then it could allow teams to respond. Even as things are I often can pull off the field to help stop a beacon if a teammate calls where it is located. A bit more time and I could imagine a 5 v 5 game where beacons are an acceptable tactic.

Full Stop.

Expand Field to Field X when population grows. Sigh. So.. why not? It could be a cool effect to have the map expand. Today we started a field match with medium sized teams. The teams grew to 32v32. It would be kinda fun to see the map grow was my thought. o0?

Where do I sign up? I think this would be a beneficial project for our community. We need : 1. a realistic goal 2. somewhere to make it happen. 3. receipts or proof of purchase! 4. More good commanding without dropping out of the game. o0o0o0o0

I would like us to encourage more small population games. O sure it is fun to play the big the big 64, but many times that is inaccessible or just a few players are seeding a server - hoping more will come along to build a server population, or some players prefer smaller matches if you can believe it. We have been blessed with enough players to keep a large server active for long periods of time. But!..... It is the small games that give new players more opportunity to feel useful and semi-skilled instead of getting Boinked constantly. It is the small games that keep a server going until more players arrive It is in small games that players a chance to be commander without so much pressure. It is in small games that the value of cooperation shines the brightest. Even just 2 or 3 working together can have huge effects. Please make these maps accessible to small population servers. ( Each one is only available to teams of 20 or more) Field X, Arctic Stronghold, Hourglass, Eyes, and Outposts. Each of these maps has defenses and/or are ideal for small teams. Please remove these maps from small population servers. Lakeside, X mountain, Complex, Reservoir, Canyon, and Volcano. Each of these maps has minimal defenses and is oriented to large teams not small. I could go into more detail about all the maps ...including the Nvn maps, but these changes would be a great start. It is excellent that the maps have been designated for differing size teams! I just feel that changing the designation of a few of these maps could have a wonderful benefit for the small population games.

Thanks for information! More questions ofc..... I count 42 maps. Of those 9 are NvN and 33 are standard. To me, having 1/4 of all maps as NvN seems like too much.... but that is my dislike of NvN showing. I can appreciate now that some players like NvN. But I see the vast majority of players choose standard map options when they are suitable. If players are always choosing Regular maps.. does it make the NvN maps more likely to come up? I ask because sometimes it seems this way. At night when the crowds have thinned -and we are only given 5 choices and 2 of them are NvN and a vote to change the map gives us 2 more NvN...... This means only 3 options for the most popular format. If the best maps have just been played then we get only three leftovers...

I remain highly curious how this game selects maps for us to vote on. I have seen some things fly by in forums, but I don't have even the basics down yet. In particular: How does server population figure in. i.e. What maps are presented to 64 players, and what is presented to less - especially Very Small Populations. How does a map being selected affect subsequent availability? How long until it is available again. What is the standard procedure for the Official server and in what ways can other servers alter this? # of choices, etc. Of course I am going to use all this to further my arguments in support of maps for small populations, but try to ignore that and help me learn the mechanics if you feel inclined. Thanks.

Firstly I would like to say that this collection of maps is HEAVILY weighted towards servers with 64 players. Not everyone prefers this. Some of us would very much prefer to have maps that support smaller teams. Please consider that maps which are appropriate for smaller population severs are Important to the survival of this game. 1. Walls. Not my favorite, but I do enjoy the offensive action with the plateau overlooking the base front gate. This combined with the defensive options the wall provides - yields satisfactory action. Being able to go around the plateau two ways with vehicles, as well as infantry thru the middle provides enough optional routes to turn the tide. Clearly Air Power is emphasized and it is rather fun to see rushes transported to the Plateau. For a map without major defenses, this is still relatively playable for mid sized teams and even kind of playable for small teams. 2. Islands. What is not to love? The palm trees, the water elements including the river by the base where so much action happens. Each base has reasonable targets for both the field and for rushes. I do not feel locked in on this map for some reason. Although the island is a bit small for 64 and all the vehicles and that can lead to trapped feelings. Too small for 64 but Perfect for a moderate size team. Worthless to small teams. 3. Field X. Finally a map with Defenses! Best map enlargement yet. Great for 64, 48 or even just a few players. Yeah! Two field silos to fight over provide good jousting on the field - especially as the outer path can play into the center of the field. Heck even the tunnel folks can join the field fun via the falls. Map is so good it can really test your battlefield awareness. Swivel head go! A BIG DEAL to me. When I cannot just focus ahead - the game is much more interesting. The new power plant placement with the long tunnel adds even more options in tunnels. 4. Lakeside. While not a map with major defenses, The hill approach, a busy team and GTs provide sufficient screening against small nonsense rushes. The field is again very large but due the split into upper and lower it can feel kinda jammy. At least the river on the sides allows options to work around the enemy, although it seems to favor stank rushes a bit too much. Your team can readily get trapped in base, sadly. Air rushes help break this some. The forest paths are tons of fun with all the tree cover, and so only a stupid team will not keep an eye on it - which is only one reason this map is not suitable for small teams - As the vehicles and the infantry paths are mostly split from each other there is high chance of minimal teamwork wrecking this map. 5.X Mountain. When this map first came out, it was pleasing simply because of the new and different overall look. Even now I find I really enjoy the look of this map. On the downside it is rather flat. The field has very little terrain and even the infantry path is just some mild slopes and a few rocks. Each approach is isolated. The result is can often feel like fighting in a tunnel even when you are in a vehicle. For instance the silo path totally separates from the field - so the field is basically two tunnels. The infantry path is one tunnel that barely connects to the field over the bridge. This map can feel team trapped as a result. Not good. Heavily weighted to favor the use of SBH, but no real GDI advantage to counter that beyond total field domination - that I can see. Long paths for tanks and infantry = Another map good for large or medium teams but crap for small teams. Only 1 map in this list is ideally suitable for small teams........ Executive Summary. For big teams I prefer maps where the field action has room to move around and its ok if the infantry are off somewhere else. For small teams we need maps with decent defenses and where the infantry are not separated from the field.

I would donate again if this were made possible again. Allowing a passenger to shoot is B.A.S.I.C. teamwork building exercise.