isupreme

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.

Ack! we been hijacked! Thread was dead so bring it on. Your thoughts remind me of what Firestorm has planned. - with vehicles carrying multiple team and firing.

I kinda tripped out a bit when I saw that in the latest firestorm Dev talk. I guess great minds think alike

Should Nucs and Beacons be given a longer timer for smaller team games? Would it allow the mechanic to be allowed and useful instead of looked down upon and restricted? IDK. Just wondering if it could help us have more fun.......

+10 Slashes I am sold. You got this so right its not even funny. As I see it, every ability given to commanders could be given to players. The game could easily enable players to have a more dynamic interaction with battlefield conditions - Respond to what is happening faster than any Commander can organize. Let players voice their experiences thru the choices they make. But this i cannot support: One of the great things about RenX is that it is totally and really free. Really free. And each game we all start equal. I really like this about the game.

again tonight. In my opinion what a horrible selection of maps for small teams. game after game just horrible. Are we trying to keep this game from becoming popular? Why can't we provide map choices with base defenses to low population servers? Giving players an experience that lasts more than 10 minutes might be helpful to the game. You cannot add enough bots to make up for the lack of base defenses. Must they choose NvN to get get field? apparently so....... if what i saw tonight is any evidence. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ *I should probably specify what server I am using if anyone cares. For awhile I thought maybe the lack of suitable map choices was due to only having 5 choices. But tonight we had more and. . . ... .. AND THEY STILL!. .... . ,, . 5. 6.7.8.9.10. . . . . .. They still were lousy options for a small population server. Please consider how this game might be made Attractive to small population servers. So many games only exist by having a HUGE population to keep them attractive in the wee hours of internet activity. Renegade X has survived by always populating at least one server at peak times. This game has all the potential to grow a larger dedicated player base IF it can provide entertaining game play with a minimum of players. The BIG games with FULL servers sure are fun. But the spirit of RenX is alive in small squad cooperation - like what we find in small population servers. When just one or two players find communication and cooperation.. that is the basis of the fun we all enjoy no?

Yes!

This reminds me of when could spend money to repair turrets. I kept losing all my money because I didn't realize what I was doing. But I am intrigued by your variation. It might be fun to commit more money to a particular healing operation to a player or a vehicle. I really like when the game has critical action and you can choose to (try to) turn the tide of war.

I just finished 5 maps with only a few players who were great fun and looking to see the server populate. We were only 10 players, but there was good sporting and fun so we kept trying maps.... ALWAYS looking for an Under or a Field so the server population might grow.... or any map appropriate to small teams. Never saw them come up. Never even saw a decent map for small teams. O... we did get NvN maps..... one time even two of the five available choices. CRAP. Did we get a map with base defenses that could help build the server population? NO. Did we get a broken map and a bunch of crappy choices? Yes. I do not understand why this game does not present appropriate maps for smaller teams. Sorry to be so negative lately. I do so enjoy playing this game and hope for more for it.

Random input: Donations Now Possible! After 15 years of fan built fun, you can NOW join the team. Teamwork starts Here: Can't Program? Digital Art not your strong point? No prob. You can Donate now. Can you believe EA gave us the respect we deserve and allowed us to accept donations? EA free zone. Donate to the movement! Donate in the name of your favorite faction today. For Kane! BoatyMcBoatFace Says Donate today!

Nice Trivia. But new players will not understand. Are you picking this up? ... sounds like an insult. We need your help. ... sounds desperate. Where is the celebration of this being possible?

There is entirely TOO much Change MAP going on. 1. It is a big distraction from game play. 2. It often involves repeated distractions from game play. 3. It is really ANNOYING and destructive of immersion. I understand the mechanic and the value it gives to us players to control the fun. It can allow us to skip a map with problems, or a when teams are small - choose an appropriate map. Sometimes it is really helpful. But Sometimes it just seems to be used for petty reasons, is the cause of conflict and is used to no good end but to force players to give up 10 -20 min of immersion. We all have opinions on maps, I guess I wish we could diminish this aspect of conflict and enable the selection of maps to be more organic. When the game starts, every action I take, every thing I observe - it all builds my commitment to play. The fun is in the Evolution. Every time that is cut/ended/aborted! - my commitment to the game is severed. My enjoyment is thwarted.

For the Record I have donated. Maybe its just me but i do not find the notice appealing. We need your help... are you picking this up. It strikes me the wrong way. Kinda negative. I would rather see something that encourages my participation by invoking teamwork, or being a part of the Forward march of RenX etc. This is such an awesome game and I have always enjoyed being a tiny part of it's evolutions. Appeal to this.

I don't think there is a name for this. ??or is there? On Walls you see them just outside the wall on the left and right. Those little platforms with 4 ramps and4 shields just right for a defender. Can we have a little fun and try naming them? And no, BoatyMcBoatface is not the name... Who Remembers when the British Government let the internet name their new polar exploration boat? lol.. boatymcboatface #1. My Suggestions: Gunny Deck. Platyform.