Jump to content

svett89

Members
  • Posts

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by svett89

  1. Hi, There was a rather heated debate in a public game tonight regarding the use of commander powers to bring down Guard Towers. From my understanding, it's the Airstrike + Cruise Missile combo which instantly kills a Guard Tower unless the cruise missile is intercepted. This feels like it goes against the spirit of the game - it requires no team coordination and encourages the commander to go on a solo mission to take down base defences. It's also very frustrating for the team on the receiving end since there's very little you can do unless you have someone constantly ready to intercept cruise missiles above their own base. This was experienced on Reservoir but might be easily doable on more maps. What makes this worse is that an SBH is ideal for performing this strategy and GDI GT's are especially designed to protect against SBH's. This means that any map where it can be done can turn into an SBH sneak fest very easily. Could we please get a nerf to this strategy? I'm OK with the cruise missile hurting the GT but taking one out should require at least some team coordination. If this combo brought the GT to, say, 30 % HP it would still require some kind of coordinated follow-up with a few rockets or the like, making the strategy feel much more fair. As it is, it's just frustrating and turns something which should require team coordination into a solo effort. EDIT: Phrasing
  2. 1) Daybreak - most underrated map in the game, always loved this map since it was introduced 2) Reservoir - it's just a really well-designed map in all regards. 3) Walls - solid classic 4) Goldrush - best match I've ever played was on this map 5) Islands - solid classic Honorable mentions: Crash Site - the map with the most potential for fun matches. I think adding AGT/Ob to this map would improve it, since now it usually turns into a sneak fest or a quick tank steamroll Storm - why is this map so rarely played? It's really, really good. The excessive siege potential of some of the bridges could be a problem, though. Complex - solid classic. Am I the only one who forgets the actual "Complex", i.e. the tunnels, exist on this map? Think I've spent a grand total of like 2 minutes down there in total. Great above-ground map, though.
  3. Oh baby. What's going on? 🙂
  4. The excessive curving was definitely a little OP on some maps. I think the MRLS just needs a bit of a boost in head-to-head fights to compete a little better with Arties. Maybe something simple like speeding up the non-homing missiles a bit (i.e. right-click firing) to make a more balanced risk-reward trade-off between fire modes. A more radical approach could also be to change the non-homing fire mode to be more of a burst attack. Something like a 1.5-second charge-up, then launching all missiles in a 1.5-second window (maybe with some added spread/inaccuracy). PS. Is it just my imagination, or does the Arty have longer range than the MRLS? If so, I think they should be aligned.
  5. Looks really cool! Any plans on faction differentiation, or are the 2 factions intentionally meant to be the exact same for a really balanced game? 🙂 If not, I think it could be really nifty if at least the vehicle selections could be differentiated a bit between the two factions. Perhaps something like Stanks being replaced by Tick Tanks for BH? Infantry differentiation would be awesome, but that would obviously take a lot of work. Either way, really cool concept! Looking forward to playing it!
  6. I really like the new HUD! You did a great job with it! I really only have 2 suggestions for improvements: 1. Would be lovely if we could see tech building status on the HUD again without having to open up the map. Perhaps the info's still there and I'm just blind? 2. I'd love it if the health section could be made slightly larger, mostly because it's now quite a bit harder to tell from the corner of your eye roughly how much health you have. This is especially important when dancing in and out of cover while tanking. The optimal solution could be to give the option of scaling the entire HUD (don't know how difficult this would be to implement, so if it's not feasible, I completely understand). Other than those 2 points, I really like it. Now I just gotta get used to looking at the left-hand-side of the screen for chat. 🙂
  7. I could see a couple of different effects. Regardless of other effects, I think one of them should be buildings repair at a rate of ~1 Engineer healing the outside of each building. Note that like normal repairs, it should only repair armor, not health. As for other effects, maybe one or more of these: Commander Points generate 50% faster Airstrikes cost 400 instead of 800, Repair guns cost 100 (or are free). If team loses the MCV, Airstrikes cost 1200, Repair guns cost 400, and Beacons become unavailable (beacons should perhaps be linked to Temple of Nod/Advanced Communication Center though). Gain additional Veterancy Points. Either a passive income of like 2 VP/30 secs, or add ~1 VP to regular VP sources. Minor base defences (Guard Towers/Turrets/SAM Sites/AA Towers) automatically rebuild after being destroyed (with some internal cooldown of ~10 minutes) Additional faction-specific Commander Power unlocks while MCV is alive. Maybe something like temporary mass-cloaking field for Nod and an Orbital Strike for GDI. Alternatively, could also have the Commander Power which airdrops in a limited number of advanced vehicles for each faction, like Tick Tanks for Nod and Titans for GDI. Makes the team's C4/Proximity Mines twice as slow to disarm. Makes mines immune to EMP. Could also be integrated into map design so that additional routes into the respective base becomes available if MCV goes down (similar to what happens when the Dam is captured on Reservoir). Something like gates opening, revealing one additional vehicle path and one additional infantry path through which the enemy team can attack.
  8. Any feedback on this? Might have to do with the CQC mutator? It doesn't just affect Harvesters - the flamethrower's vehicle damage in general is ludicrously poor at the moment. I was in an MRLS, and my passive healing from being Elite outpaced a flamethrower continuously attacking my vehicle. I assume this is a glitch.
  9. Good point. I do agree that it could impact overall faction balance negatively, especially since early Arties and Light Tanks would be weakened. Perhaps one could try either: A) A slight vehicle damage nerf at rank 1 & 2 with a slight projectile speed increase? B) Nerf the projectile speed scaling, but increase the damage scaling? This could make Gunner have a slightly more "aligned" playstyle, where his projectiles are always hard-hitting, but hard to hit. Something like nerfing speed scaling by 33 % but buff damage scaling by 20 %? This is by no means a big issue, but it could make for Gunner feeling like a more rewarding class to play throughout the whole match. Option B could also raise the skill cap of Gunner quite a bit. I'm fine with how he currently plays, but it could make for a more interesting design, IMO. 🙂
  10. Heyo! Something that's been bothering me a bit recently is how dependent Gunner is on veterancy, mainly due to how much it speeds up his projectiles. When at rank 1 at the start of the game, Gunner rockets travel at a snail's pace compared to when you've ranked up (especially noticeable once you're Elite). This makes it extremely difficult to use Gunner at longer ranges before you've ranked up, which in turn gives Nod a huge advantage when it comes to countering vehicles early-game, compared to GDI, since no equivalent problem exists for the LCG: Veterancy gives LCG more damage. Veterancy gives Gunner more damage and projectile speed. Since both units are balanced around their respective possible engagement distances, this means that Gunner is in much greater need of veterancy to perform well compared to the LCG. Essentially: Gunner at rank 1 is meh LCG at rank 1 is great Gunner at rank 3 is great LCG at rank 3 is great I don't think giving Gunner greater projectile speed with veterancy is a bad idea, but perhaps the gaps could be made smaller? I.e. keep the speeds at elite/heroic the same, but buff the private/veteran speeds slightly? This would mean that early-game gunners could be slightly more comparable to LCGs in their ability to counter vehicles, as the current gap feels massive in the early-game. Thoughts?
  11. I got to play Daybreak tonight in the public game - and while I had to leave before the round finished, I can say with confidence that I find it to be the absolute best-designed map in RenX. I believe this map complements the core gameplay of Renegade in a way that no other map does, and feels like the way the game was meant to be experienced. As such, I'd like to to attempt to break down the elements that Daybreak incorporates, so that we can get more maps in the future that use some of its fantastic design choices. 1. A central vehicle chokepoint The central Silo chokepoint is brilliant. You're guaranteed good vehicle combat around it, since both sides need to push through, and want to control it for the silo. Infantry can also join in on the fun very quickly thanks to the cleverly designed infantry paths leading to it. This area also plays into the strengths of both factions - the long vehicle reinforcement distance means GDI cannot reinforce with Meds and Mammies as easily as Nod can reinforce with Light Tanks and Arties. GDI, meanwhile, compensates for this with their stronger individual tanks that can shine in the open areas around the chokepoint. Gunners are also great in that environment. This leads to a balanced battle for control of the middle, where both sides are at an equal "disadvantage" - Nod lacking a lot of good cover and having a harder time dancing in and out of that which is there, and GDI having trouble reinforcing and pressuring Arties hiding in the back. Perhaps a slight advantage to GDI, but the map caters to other strengths of Nod (more on that later). The single choke also makes Stanks not be overpowered, despite the large map size. That's a problem we've seen on some other large maps (Outposts comes to mind). If GDI can hold the choke, Stanks can't slip through. 2. Large, open fields outside the bases The fact that there is a large, open area in front of each base is fantastic! It makes it so that endless sieging is very difficult, since there is not much cover, and the reinforcement distance is so long for the besieging army. We don't get the scenarios you see on maps like Under where one team sieges until Heroic and then finally steamroll. There is potential for a much greater "flow" in the battle, where the defenders can push the siege back to the chokepoint. Sieges are still possible, and can result in building kills, but they can be more easily broken than on most other maps. The additional GT/Turret is also a really good "first line of defense" for each side, again preventing early excessive sieging. 3. Quick infantry access to everything The infantry tunnels are like the opposite of the vehicle paths - short, and with multiple paths. They allow for quick access to the Silo chokepoint and the enemy base, and are valuable to control. The large cave area is also a great arena for fighting over tunnel control. The most important thing about the tunnels though, is, in my opinion, the rushing potential. It makes up for the lack of good vehicle siege/vehicle rush potential. It's like a better version of the Field tunnels. 4. Playing to the strengths and weaknesses of both factions This is the most crucial point which makes me love this map - both sides can be played to their strengths, but can also be punished for "doing too well". GDI vehicles and Gunners can control the Silo chokepoint better than Nod, but if they do lose it, Nod can Stank rush extremely effectively thanks to the large map size. Also, if GDI pushes forward without good repair support and a critical mass, Stanks can slip by the choke point, or the siege be repelled and Nod quickly countering by reclaiming the Silo and besieging GDI before they can reinforce due to the long distance. SBHs can be deadly, but they need to run reeeally far across the field, so Nod gives up a lot of map control by doing mass-SBH. GDI sieging or Gunner rushing field is similar - the Silo and a lot of map control can be accidentally given up if they push forward too much. Since both sides essentially gives up map control by pushing forward or rushing - it's all high-risk, high-reward, which leads to intense and strategic gameplay. TLDR Daybreak is incredibly good. I want more maps like it! 🙂
  12. I work as a programmer in a small-ish coastal town in Sweden. Surprisingly fun work considering it's a large firm. Other than that, I play Renegade-X and Age of Empires 2. Sometimes I make music if I'm in the mood. I also like to go out and feed the birds with peanuts and leftovers on the weekends. I mainly want to feed crows and jackdaws, but the seagulls and mallards tend to show up whether I like it or not.
  13. This post grew out of control, so I'll split it into sections. I should also say upfront that I think the game balance is currently pretty damn good! Nearly all of my serious suggestions are small changes to damage/health/mechanics. I don't think anything is currently so under/over-powered that it needs drastic changes (with one exception regarding Sydney/Raveshaw). Vehicles and sieges I personally feel that Nod lags behind GDI when it comes to games with lower levels of team organisation, i.e. random games (which, let's be honest, is what most of us spend the majority of our game time playing). GDI's only real unique rush (so not counting Mobius/Doza, Sydney/Raveshaw, etc.) that requires any higher level of organisation is the Gunner rush, which is typically only used as a last resort due to GDI vehicles being so good at taking field control. With that in mind, it's important to not buff Nod to make them too strong in PuGs or with more organized teams. Changes to lessen Nod's reliance on heavy team organisation need to be small in nature. With that said, even with little-to-no team communication, GDI naturally tends to park 3-4 Mammies + 3-4 Meds + 1-2 MRLS outside the Nod base, then farm VP until they're Elite/Heroic and then just steamroll. It's fine that GDI is better at taking field control, as Nod has better rushing options, but Nod needs to be given some better tools for breaking a siege, as well as being a bit more flexible when it comes to taking field control and besieging GDI. There's currently not really any realistic way for Nod to take out a full force of GDI heavy armour camping their base unless the team organises a very large LCG counter rush. Flame tanks are too soft and slow to be able to do enough damage on most maps, and Arties can only do so much with limited LoS and GDI vehicles dancing in and out of cover / getting repairs. On the other hand, even if GDI fails to repel the early Nod arty party, and it's Nod that's besieging, GDI can much more easily break a Nod siege. Since Nod relies so heavily on Artillery (which they kind of have to, as Light Tanks don't stack up, and Stanks are too soft to effectively maintain a siege, as they should be), a small amount of Mammies/Meds can often quite easily break the Nod glass cannon siege on many maps even with little team coordination. Nod's only hope of maintaining a siege is on maps where they can make good use of Flame Tanks covering the GDI entrance, which is very boring for the FT driver. I personally feel that GDI vehicles are fine overall, but I'd love to see some changes for Nod to reduce their over-reliance on Artillery. Nod essentially needs a more versatile meat shield that can also dish out meaningful damage at range. Light Tanks As others have said, Light Tanks need some love. I'd like to se the Light Tank have a higher RoF, possibly with a small cost increase (700 instead of 600 or such). I'd like to see LT's lose against meds 1v1 because of lower HP, but still being able to dish out good damage to counter Mammies and Meds, and act as a meaningful damage-contributing meat shield for arties. I'd even be fine if the Light Tank out-dpsed the Med slightly, so that a small group of them could actually put some fear into a Mammy driver's heart. Light Tanks being a meaningful siege vehicles would also allow Nod to more easily farm VP the same way GDI can with Meds and Mammies. Artillery Nerf their damage against heavy armour by a small amount. Nod shouldn't almost exclusively rely on them to counter GDI tanks, and with Light Tanks bringing more meaningful damage, arties could be brought back a tiny bit to compensate. They should of course still be higher dps against vehicles than Light Tanks, but I think the gap should be made slightly smaller. Flame Tanks I think a buff to the Light Tank would automatically put the Flame Tank in a more comfortable position, so I feel that it can remain untouched. If Nod could counter a GDI siege with a combo of Flame Tanks up front, Light Tanks in behind, then I don't think the Flamer needs to be buffed. It's already very deadly if it reaches its target, and if it can be effectively supported by Light Tanks, I don't think it needs to change. If anything, I could see a small reduction in damage vs heavy armour, but with a speed increase to compensate. This could mean that Nod doesn't have to put a Flame Tank or two outside the GDI base that does nothing most of the time just to maintain a siege, but it's still a very effective rushing vehicle. Stealth Tanks They're fine as-is. I wouldn't mind seeing a tiny increase to their HP, at a tiny cost of attack power vs vehicles, but I don't want them to lose their glass cannon status. All other vehicles are fine as-is! Infantry Sydney/Raveshaw I know this will probably get mixed responses, but I think these two classes should get no headshot multiplier, and not be able to one-shot ANY infantry. Having a class that is essentially on par, arguably better, than a sniper at close-to-medium range against infantry, while also being anti-vehicle, is simply too strong. Currently, in capable hands, a Sydney/Raveshaw is a death-dealing machine against infantry, while still being strong against armour. I personally feel that these classes should be more exclusively oriented towards their intended role, which the game itself states is anti-vehicle. I would like to see a slight increase in heavy armour damage, in combination with doing at most 75 % damage to infantry in one shot, meaning that one has to either whip out the pistol or land 2-3 shots to kill infantry. Mobius/Mendoza should be the preferred anti-infantry classes at close range, with Havoc/Sakura handling long-range and one-shots. Patch As others have mentioned, Patch feels a bit too strong against infantry at the moment. A slight nerf would be appreciated. LCG I'd like to see a small increase in long-range accuracy to be able to compete better with Patch at longer ranges. Depends on if/how Patch is changed though. Other than that, I think they're fine. Crazier ideas All of these ideas are pretty off-the-wall, so don't take them too seriously. These are mostly meant as points for discussion than serious game balance suggestions. :-) APCs and Buggies/Humvees I would personally like to see the APC being a bit more capable against heavy armour, just to give a team without WF/Strip at least some vehicle that can pose a small threat to enemy tanks, as well as having it serve some additional purpose other than rushing. Either a buff to the machine gun damage against heavy armour, or if you really wanna go crazy, give them an alternate fire mode along the lines of the IFVs from Battlefield 3 (something like the 6-shot HE cannon on the BTR-90 IFV). Obviously, the APC shouldn't be able to go toe to toe with any actual tank, but I'd like them to be a bit more versatile. If the APC would also be nerfed slightly against infantry, it could fill the role of a "jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none", with the Humvee and Buggy being buffed in some way to make them the dedicated anti-infantry vehicles. Again, just a crazy idea. Power Plants and Obelisk/AGT I know this point has been brought up before, but I feel that PP's are too valuable on maps with advanced base defences compared to maps without. I know we don't want never-ending games on Under and Field, but I think Veterancy has largely solved that issue. I think it would be reasonable to make tank pushes much easier if PP goes down, but not allow infantry to swarm into the base unless the Ob/AGT itself is destroyed. Something along the lines of: - Obelisk shoots a more puny beam that does very little damage to tanks, but is still deadly against infantry. This means that infantry can't just start sneaking like crazy if PP goes down, but a tank push is much easier. - AGT no longer shoots missiles, but machine guns are still strong against infantry, meaning that a tank push is much easier, but SBH Nuke Party is not possible unless the AGT itself is destroyed. Airstrip on Islands Airstrip position in Nod base on Islands is messed up. If GDI acquires field control at any point, it's GG for Nod, as they struggle to even get vehicles out without GDI destroying them as they spawn. I've attached a very poorly-made MS Paint picture on how the base could be re-designed to give Nod a better shot at holding off a GDI siege without their vehicles getting sniped, while still allowing GDI to effectively siege all three buildings. It wouldn't be as aesthetically pleasing, but it could make the map a bit more balanced. Again, just a crazy idea, and I felt like doing a shitty MS paint drawing before going to bed anyway. :-) Good night!
  14. EDIT: Like the other thread, this should've perhaps gone into the General discussion forum instead. If so, sorry in advance. Decided to create a separate thread for this, since it doesn't really relate to the Spy post I made earlier. Am I the only one feeling that GDI really, really needs some better rushing capabilities? Apart from an APC rush (which Nod can also do) or a Gunner rush (still the most underused rush tactic ever, and only slightly stronger than a Nod Rocket Soldier rush), GDI really hasn't got any ability to rush buildings down compared to Nod's Flame / Stank rush. I know GDI's meant to have more of a "Field Control" play style, but their lack of rushing vehicles makes this tactic near worthless since Nod can almost always repair faster than GDI can dish out the damage from their siege. In addition, Nod can break the siege quite easily with a defensive Flame Rush. In a timed game, this is fine, since GDI can just hoard points, but in a Marathon match, this often puts GDI in a really troublesome position. I personally think this could be solved in a couple of ways: Option 1: Make Mammoth Tanks GDI's rushing vehicle. Buff their speed and reduce their size (something like 75% of their current size so you don't get the "Conga Line" problem) and make their Missiles do a LOT of damage VS buildings (almost on par with a Flame Tank in terms of DPS). Option 2: Give Medium Tanks an alternate fire mode that is essentially a short-range anti-building attack. Maybe something like a Scatter Shot that can be used at short range VS infantry and buildings (like a bigger version of McFartlands regular shots). Give it a medium-to-long reload time so that it can't be spammed VS infantry, but make it's damage VS buildings pretty significant to allow them to be used effectively for rushes. Option 3 (probably quite unrealistic, but throwing it out there for funsies): Give GDI a completely new vehicle. Nod already has one more vehicle than GDI (8 for Nod, 7 for GDI), so even though it wasn't in Renegade classic, I'd love to see another vehicle added for GDI. Maybe something like the Shatterer or the Disruptor (I know it kinda breaks the C&C timeline to have a vehicle like that in Ren X, but come on, we're in it mostly for the gameplay ). Could be something like a short-medium range anti vehicle/building weapon. Kinda like the Flame Tank with slightly more range but less damage. Just tossing ideas out there to create some discussion.
  15. EDIT: Sorry if I posted this in the wrong section! Just realised this probably should've gone in the General discussion forum. If so, could a mod please move the thread? Just had a random idea earlier today relating to the complaints surrounding Nod having SBH and GDI not having anything comparable to it. What if GDI had a Spy class? It could essentially work as the current spy crate minus the ability to not be shot by automated base defences. Additionally, it could make you always turn into a randomly selected free Nod infantry class (Flamer, Shotgunner, Marksman or Engie) so that Nod knew what to look out for. It would allow GDI to attempt some sneaky Ions, and would fit with their overall style since Spy units have typically been reserved for the "Western Superpower" faction in C&C games. I know this would make GDI have more character classes than Nod, and probably is a really shite idea once other people pick it apart, but I just wanted to share some random thoughts.
×
×
  • Create New...