Kriemhild Gretchen

Not quite sure what you were going for with the image here...

Because it comes down to if the mechanic was intended or not. If it wasn't intended, NOTHING of the sort should be allowed as it is abusing a glitch. If it is intended, EVERYTHING should be allowed, even the 6-8-man drop from a chinook onto a single structure to both defend the beacon/hotwires/engineers and destroy it. The compromises you suggest, make it sound like the mechanic is/was intended and should be tweeked a bit for balancing issues. If it WAS intended, then there should be 'seats' or 'slots' on top of a vehicle for an outside character to 'ride and repair' the vehicle. Basically the same thing, but as the surfing character is 'bound' to the vehicle, there is no chance of falling off, but still susceptible to splash damage and sniping. On top of that, you shouldnt have to drop from a higher location on top of the vehicle to reach the spot, but just press a number (seat number) when in the vehicle. To that end, humvees/buggies and maybe other vehicles should be snipable through the windows aswell, to kill the driver and other occupants to steal the vehicle. But thats a whole other idea. Point is, vehicle occupants are protected from damage until the vehicle is destroyed and therefore, the proposed idea of 'outside seats' is also a bit hard to realize. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergent_ ... _emergence Please read this. Fighting game combos came from an unintended behavior in Street Fighter II. Should that have just been fixed and ignored, leaving us with games where you can only do single attacks? Rocket jumping, now in many FPSes, came from unintented behavior in Quake. Some of the greatest things, not just in video games, were made as mistakes. Chinese potstickers come to mind. A tactic's origin shouldn't be the determinant for its overall value. This is just another neat thing which makes Renegade X not like other games. It shouldn't just be eliminated outright, making it yet another bland shooter. It should be embraced, but rebalanced, making it a viable tactic, but not an instant win button.

And therein lies the thinking error. It should be either allowed (and intended for that matter!) or not allowed in it's entirety. Accept the good and the bad that comes with a single decision. If you accept vehicle surfing, then you MUST also accept surfing by 6 people altogether than just limiting it to a certain number for tactical purposes. Realy?! How realistic is it for a person to stand on top of a heli/transport with rotors turning?! I call mincemeat to those fools! Orca, might be possible, but what about the jets, shouldnt they 'suck in' the person and expelled out like the air is used for lift? Ok, lets ban surfing on flying vehicles, that bans out 1 typ of surfing, so banning 1 part of surfing but not the other (ground vehicle surfing) is again the same type of solution as limiting the surfer numbers is. There it is again, accept it as a whole or reject it as a whole. Dude, why are you acting like you can only pick one of two extremes? You've really given no compelling reason for why you can't accept my compromise. Your only argument is that it's not realistic, which doesn't hold given that this isn't a realistic game. Cargo planes dropping off self-propelled artillery pieces isn't realistic. Bigass spires that fire red lasers (Lasers that powerful are actually invisible) at enemies isn't realistic. We can compromise. We don't just have to pick an extreme. Vehicle surfing is a type of emergent gameplay that unintentionally came out. Renegade X isn't like other games, and I see that as something wonderful. It should be embraced and rebalanced rather than just eliminated. It's what makes this game great.

The SBH is basically Nod's primary tactic for winning games. Disregarding player skill, in a straight up slugfest, GDI's tanks will beat Nod's. I do agree that SBH could use some rebalancing, though I think it should be slight. My contributed idea was to be able to Q an SBH after you shot him. This would mean people couldn't just macro Q spam and sweep over the base on top of places like, say, the middle of Walls: Flying. "SBH spotted near War Factory!" would be very convenient, particularly given that this game doesn't have a voice chat. (We need one, desperately.) Another idea would be to up the health, and perhaps prevalence, of the basic guard towers. They'd still fall pretty easily, but if the team protected them, they would protect the team by knocking out any attempted infiltrations. But at the same time, the SBH should not be nerfed into uselessness. It's basically what makes Nod viable as a team. Even if they don't directly win, diverting GDI resources to beacons rather than pushing the front lines contributes a LOT to Nod's war effort. Intelligent balancing, with consideration of all factors, is needed. Hell, perhaps there should be a Mobile Sensor Array item you can set up, which for a period of five minutes, will detect stealthed enemies in a small radius. Of course, it would be destroyable.

You should be able to Q them, really. Maybe have it give a tooltip on other player's screens, like an objective marker in other games. Or would that be too easy?

In vehicles like buggies, Humvees and APCs, it's often next to impossible to drive forward well while firing at something behind you. One of my favorite parts of rushes is mowing down enemy infantry on the way, but I can't do that and drive well at the same time. (Not that I'm a good driver, as others can attest...) There should be an option to turn over control of any vehicle's weapon to the passenger. This would allow the driver to focus on driving and the gunner to focus on gunning, as is the case in real life, actually. Obviously, this should only be allowed by mutual consent. Perhaps both players would need to hit V to accept it.

Just shows how game-breaking vehicle surfing is ... I mean, server owners can set up rules like: surfing is allowed only on orca's/heli's when the WF/Strip of the opposing team isn't destroyed. Or Surfing is only allowed in circumstances X and Y when A and B are not destroyed and when server admin is present to follow the exact movement of the surfer/vehicle in order to prevent exploits. Ugh, just admit already that this kind of tactic isnt an tactic and was not intended to be possible at all. In all reason, the Devs are so into the game for these many years that they play/develop it for fun and do not think of possibilities one might have to abuse the game mechanics to play it the way it wasnt intended. So saying that the Devs should have thought about it or should have designed it another way to prevent it is b@llcr%p. On your example Luna, 2 havocs could have killed it easily, it takes 5 shots to kill a heli/orca with a ramjet, so 8 would be too much to repair through. In my opinion, vehicle surfing is an example of emergent gameplay, and shouldn't be patched out. Rather, just as with other tactics, it should be able to be countered. Flame tanks are powerful in good hands, but keeping your distance turns them into mincemeat. SBHs can win games, but they can be countered with proper mining and vigilance. A good solution, in my opinion, is to ensure only one, MAYBE two technicians can surf a vehicle at any given point in time. A healing Apache whose healing mechanism can be taken out by a good sniper or concentrated fire? Fun! An Orca with six guys on it who drop on top of your airstrip, making it near impossible to counter? Not fun!

I implore you not to release the game onto Steam until it's heavily updated. In its current state, it is not ready for a public release. It's buggy, crashes frequently and has nowhere near enough protection from cheaters.

>In-app purchases No, thanks.

I had an idea from seeing an enemy Mammoth Tank in some shadows on the Islands map. (At least, that's what I think it was. I remember it having two silos, a hill and a very long path between the two bases.) It looked like it had the Nod color scheme. Tiberian Sun beta plans aside, I thought, wouldn't it be neat if stolen vehicles changed color schemes? It'd be really nice to be able to identify which faction a vehicle belonged to without actually targeting it. It'd be a good amount of work to redo the textures, so it's fine if it can't be implemented.

Glitch beacons are a known issue. Devs are working on it, I think.

This game is in beta. A possible cause for the issue will be fixed in Beta 3.

Can anything be done about this? Is there a better version of UDK they can get without these issues? They could take donations for it if they can't afford it.

Don't get me wrong I appreciate what the devs are doing and that they are not paid under staffed and don't get enough caffeine but surely they could make a poll for us players to vote on what nerfs we think are fair? Goks Yeah, I don't really support completely ruining the SBH like that. No C4 would eliminate their capability to destroy buildings, and a blinking light would pretty much make them useless, as the nuke would be all they had left. It takes three SBHs to blow up a building, and if you let three SBHs get into your base and kill your mines, you are at fault. Their weapon is total crap, anyway, so if their stealth aspect is removed, they're basically going to be useless.

What if it were made possible to use Q to spot invisible SBHs? Granted, there needs to be a limit to this. Otherwise, certain people will do something like set up macros spamming Q while looking across the no-man's-land to instantly spot them. But it's quite frustrating when I spot one in base and can't alert the rest of the team due to not having voice chat. My suggestion is to only be able to use Q while within pistol range, and perhaps only after hitting them at least once.

This would be a good idea, if only to avoid impersonators. Perhaps just do something simple, like turning your name orange. In all seriousness, though, I'm quite happy you're playing the game. The best independent games I've ever played had involved dev teams, who actually liked what they made and took the time to play it and see what works and what doesn't. As opposed to some teams, who just make it and don't actually experience it.

Yeah, this is pretty irritating, as I type pretty quickly so I get caught in it. Perhaps have it only take effect on identical messages?

I'd like for it to be possible to hide the beacon to make it that much less probable the enemy will be able to find it, but its location should be announced when a member of the team finds it and Qs it.

The short answer: It's not done. The long answer: Putting it on Steam right now would be a really bad idea, given that that would be everyone's impression of it. Forever. I'll be honest, the game, as it stands, is a glitchy, crash-ridden mess. It has a lot of potential to evolve into something much better, but people don't see that. People see a game that crashes after every match. People see a game that's an alpha test. After we get a full release, after some balancing issues have been resolved, after the crashes aren't constant, then it should be put up on Steam. But right now, it's a niche project, and it's better that way.

Have a contest like Mental Omega did for whoever can provide the best voices.

Perhaps it would be a good idea to make it possible to use Q on a deployed enemy beacon. It would put an announcement out of its location, such as "Beacon spotted on top of barracks!" or "Beacon spotted under stairs of power plant!" Might be difficult to implement, but I think something should be added, as there's no voice chat to conveniently share the location of the beacon.

If not even more. Lasers are very hot.

I don't really think this is a good idea, to be honest. A central facet of Renegade X is the teams being unequal. Like RTSes, they aren't just mirror images of each other. They work with different strengths and weaknesses. Nod being what it is forces GDI to compensate in certain ways, such as never leaving a vehicle unoccupied outside of base. Stealth Black Hands, Stealth Tanks and Flame Tanks are really the only things that make Nod viable as a faction. There's no reason to give GDI an equivalent to one of these and thereby further weaken Nod.

The laser chain gun is the weapon of Nod's laser chain gunner, which has a very high DPS. Spinning means the barrel continues spinning, as despite being a laser weapon, it's modeled after a chaingun.