boxes

That, as well as faction-biased people who play by themselves on empty or very low population servers.

Numbers don't necessarily mean GDI/Nod will win "#" games out of 10, it's just the weight of how much bias I feel the map has towards one faction over the other. Under: That's about it. Artys at their bunker location can also be hit with ramjet on the GDI hill, so they can be taken care of without too much hassle. The difference is how much easier it is to break out as GDI compared to Nod. GDI has a huge hill filled with lots of places to hide and take cover, while Nod has a flat metal platform that completely exposes you to sniper fire. When attacking a base, the distance from the entrance to the AGT compared to the Obelisk is laughably in favor for GDI. They can also hit the Ref/Strip safely outside of the base while Nod can barely hit the WF. GDI can sneak to the airstrip as well as HON/PP with smokes from the hill. Meanwhile in GDI's base, the AGT will slaughter you if you try to get to the WF, even with smoke. Field: The only way to infiltrate Nod PP is with Sydney or Gunner, while GDI PP can be infiltrated with a tech. And since the door is facing the Nod base, the EMP cloud should be pretty obvious. You can also infiltrate the GDI Ref with smoke and/or a distraction on the AGT. Tomb: Yeah you're right, but I still consider it a GDI map, but perhaps not 70/30. I wouldn't consider early money crates though as a part of map design, as they can (should) be turned off in a competitive scenario for the first minute. Map is fairly small yes, particularly around the tib-field area, but the back path is a huge pain to deal with as Nod because of how easy it is for GDI to bombard the Nod base. That area is flat and wide open, perfect for meds, and is a very safe place for hotties to hide behind tanks. The gun turrets on the Wall makes it a bit easier for GDI to suppress Nod tanks hitting ref. We still need to play this in a PUG, which we haven't done in ages. Until then I'll reconsider depending on what happens. Lakeside: I judged mostly in a competitive scenario, so yes the PUGs.

Updated

The problem is that if there's remotes in a choke point, the person who placed them is likely standing safely behind cover in third person waiting for you to walk in their trap. You usually have to walk through the remote C4s to reach engineer. Repair tool range and repair rate makes disarming remote C4s absolutely pointless as it takes ages just to remove 1 C4 and the range is within the remote blast radius. It also exposes you as you're probably in the open disarming a remote with your repair tool in your hand, not your primary weapon. If there's an actual game-breaking feature on EMPs disarming remote C4s, I'm down to hear it. The reason I support it is because it discourages an annoying tactic (mentioned above) and nerfs adv.engie infiltration which at its current state is by far the most efficient way to kill buildings, particularly during multi-pronged attacks. But if not possible, limiting remotes to 2 would probably work wonders as well. Would also be nice if remotes would bounce off friendly pawns. Flaming vehicles is pretty stupid, and flaming infantry is even more so.

there's a huge difference between being noticed by an LCG compared to a tech, think you should know why As henk said there are other infiltrators, if you're inside a building with sydney you have no way of repairing your timedc4 from emps unless you have a rep tool. just having emps affect remotes nerfs engie based infiltration while leaving other forms alone. example if there's a huge mcfarland rush or something and there's 15 timed on the mct, emps would disarm all of them

forgot to mention that emps should only affect remote c4s and not timed because 1, it nerfs solo hottie infiltration, and 2 because remotes can be used the same way as proxy mines.

you can repair your c4s if they're being emp'd the same way when an engineer is disarming. this forces you to be more attentive during an infiltration process instead of simply running away from anything that's not a technician you can say the same thing with 10 techs camping the hon, except that scenario is a lot more annoying because they can also repair the building

pugs are based on UK time which already had daylight savings. So if you live somewhere that didn't have dst yet or doesn't have it, pug starts 1 hour later

You convinced your team to vote for Volcano when playing as GDI. That itself shows how dedicated your team is to listening

Gliven vs Ryz Lakeside - Same old apache/orcas, nod wins by infiltration on bar with follow up apache rush, GDI MRLS and orca rush fail Fort - GDI gets 2 armor breaks with an initial gunner rush and stops a light tank rush, but an infiltrator kills the ref and Nod wins with a nuke and a stank rush. Canyon - Both harvys die, Nod goes arty/tech/flamer and GDI gets crushed Walls - GDI goes for humvee rush while Nod goes for APC rush, both fail. Orca/Apache battle goes on, GDI controls the top and wins with orca rushes w/ ion. Volcano - Nod rapes GDI, carry on Xmountain - Infiltrators kill bar and PP sometime later, GDI surrenders 4-2 Team Gliven

I think I've had enough of these 30-40 player pugs. Same issue every week: too much off-topic chatter, people not knowing whats important or not important to say in TS, and people not using push-to-talk with noise in the background. Unless Saturdays are limited to ~20 players as well, you'll only see me on Sundays now.

fun for one team, not so fun for the other Goldrush - light tank rush destroys pp, rocket rush destroys bar, stanks and others finish. GDI mcfarland and med rushes both fail Whiteout - infiltrators kill Hon, tanks finish off the base. Buggy and Apache rush fail. Xmountain - infiltrators kill bar, GDI surrenders.

There's also a spot in the middle of the field where artys can poke the ref chimney while GDI has no counterpart.

The difference like I said is the mobility. Aircraft can easily swarm a building whenever they want and wherever, while tanks have to use a specific path to enter a base. Aircraft also have the most burst damage and are also unable to be physically blocked.

I highly doubt that's the case, maybe the missiles themselves have that range but sams wont engage you in a heli until you're also within firing range

That's because on whiteout using ground vehicles is more optimal in keeping the enemy team holed up in their base as you can shell a building from 3 areas instead of 1. Spamming air vehicles with inf support can work just as well as it does on walls concerning map control. SAMs if anything need a buff in range so they can keep air vehicles out of base perimeters. Their range currently is the same as apache/orca missiles which plays no role except during a base raid.

Limiting aircraft restricts rushes which is not what we're aiming for. Air rushes still need to be a thing, but the way it functions now is stupidly powerful. The problem is that rushes with air vehicles have insane burst damage with speed and 400+ HP per helicopter. You can't block air vehicles unlike a med rush, where you'd put 1-2 flame tanks at the base entrance to prevent tanks from rolling in. Just 6 recruit apaches/orcas alone, only the missiles, can break building armor instantly. Add on top of that the machine guns which deal 12+ damage per magazine as well as Technician/Hotwire pilots infiltrating with remotes. You can alternate between buildings instantly when inside a base during a rush. Matters are even worse when there's superweapons included, as you have to take care of those as well as the building(s) that are getting shredded by helis. All the noise they make can also mask the beacon location. As a vehicle in general, they have the best anti-infantry capability, far exceeding that of the humvee/buggy which were buffed against inf in the recent patch. They are the best for quickly transporting infantry from one location to another, again much better than that of the humvee/buggy. They can counter dedicated AA vehicles by using the environment, and tanks/artillery don't stand a chance in almost any circumstance. When it comes to covering beacons, nothing is better than using orcas/apaches to wipeout repairmen with the machineguns or simply by running them over. Rooftop beacons especially as they are far away from purchase terminals and ground vehicles can't get up there.

Personally I think instead of changing the map, orcas/apaches need a nerf so that they're not the must-have vehicle on Walls and Lakeside. They have the best base-killing potential among all vehicles, insane maneuverability (fastest vehicle to go to point A to B at any circumstance), hard counter vs any kind of incoming rush and infiltrators, best choice for beacon cover, and have decent survivability. But that's for another topic.

In the pug games I witnessed only 1 game where a team made a comeback from being down a refinery, but it came down to pure luck. A comeback scenario is far more possible with any other structure loss than the refinery. In general there's just no way you can counter a non-stop tank force backed with 1k infantry and dedicated defenders with no income. The building armor/damage point decrease that happened around 5.1 made repairing buildings less rewarding towards earning credits as well.

It's actually a pretty big deal, doubling the income rate from a destroyed refinery. Just by standing around and doing nothing for 5 minutes, you get 300 credits as opposed to 150. Add on top of that such as repairs and damage, that's a difference between getting a hotwire instead of a rocket soldier. It halves the time of getting to your purchase goal. The problem is that, from what I've seen in the PUGs, is that destroyed refineries forces a team on the defensive. You can't build up anything substantial and every time you lose something it'll take ages to regain the income to get it back. My point is that games without refineries are unprogressive and boring because there's often no clear way to win against a team with income other than turtling while praying somebody gets super lucky with an infiltration kill. Games themselves as a whole are boring when there's no clear way to win, and the most common way to win games in Renegade is through use of credits, and limiting credits severely reduces your victory conditions. Losing PP on the other hand is hardly noticeable because you still have the same credit potential as the other team. Losing Infantry or vehicles is less harsh because you still have the credits to pull off rushes given with whatever production structure you have. Removing credits restricts the potential of both production structures, takes ages to organize a rush (donate this person, donate that person, oh wait I gave you too much can you donate me back), and opens up very ragey circumstances: Ah, at last, literally 20 minutes later after bashing my head against a wall I can finally afford this sydney character! Sniped as soon as you step out of the barracks. Leave game. Never come back.

if you join the server through the launcher it'll download the map for you

Refineries once destroyed makes the game extremely stale because you simply can't do anything with no money. Don't even get me started on no ref vs no ref. Silo control will be very difficult because you don't have any sort of income to back it up. Losing the harvester dumps and cutting the tick rate in half (+2 every second to +1 every second) I feel is (was, since it was like this before) enough and is more comparable to a 50% price increase destroyed PP.

Walls - Nod controls plateau all game and 2 apache rushes w/ sbh nuke and 1 tranny LCG rush finishes the game. GDI attempts multiple transport and orca rushes, but failed to destroy any building as they were intercepted by apaches and plateau infantry. Harvesters by both teams died a lot, so this was a rather low eco game. Lakeside - Nod wins with Apache and sbh nukes, and they control the field and harvester/silos all game. The first harvy advantage sealed the deal. GDI tried multiple transport, orca, and inf rushes, but none work. Complex - Nod wins with a arty/light rush and a follow up flame rush. GDI, going for meds, had no chance for offense as they simply got overwhelmed from the start. Mesa - Nod APC rush takes out the ref, and rolled down GDI with tanks. An attempted APC rush by GDI fails after their ref went down. Canyon - Nod wins through sheer brute force with artys and inf along with infiltration. Despite having saving the initial harvester, GDI gets careless with their meds and go broke after they all died. Goldrush - GDI wins with a mcfarland rush that destroys HoN and PP. Meds and inf along with infiltration destroys the rest of the base. Tunnels - Nod wins with an APC rush, buggy infiltration, (no bar and wf) and light tanks. GDI infiltration destroys the HON, but didn't stop the vehicle rush. 5-2, good games, everybody played well for the most part.

All I want is some kind of implementation that discourages this: Old video but the point still stands. A new player using the proximity C4s (they're given to you by default as an adv.engie, so why not use them? Oh wait I have to go through a huge lecture first to understand mining) without knowing it's removing the mines back in base. And guess what, the new player isn't going to care about learning how to mine if they're just going to casually drop in and play a game or two on occasion. Mining as well as other features in the game need to be more noob-friendly, but still retaining a similar style to please both audiences.

Not necessary by any means, nor do I know how hard it would be to implement, but I feel surrenders should simply make the enemy team all Heroic while everyone on the losing team goes back to recruit. People do have a point in that surrendering is the most unexciting way to end a game, as it removes the climax, making the winners unsatisfied and the losers shrug their shoulders.