Ryz

Sorry but if you havent seen the numerous comments and topics about you and some others stacking on *insert random server name here* then it says something about you. There have been numerious post for years and this was all even before FPI started and if nothing changes it will be when the next server arrises... Also I know for fact people tried to talk to you, but you just ignore any comment / people you don't like. Offcourse nobody has the right to accuse you from hacking or to bully you with whatever swearwords they use. But since it turns out you have such a good eye to snipe you can't be blind for some suggestions to change your own behaviour... I don't want to insult anyone, but just do a search for previous topics and you will see that what you state is not true.

Exaggerated, but a lot of truth in it: Some good and balance games last longer and the server will stay populate till later (East American time) if the games are balanced... A few 'unbalanced 'pro rounds' and the player dies... Seen some good games of Under / Xmountain / Resevoir last till long! Team picking / squad thing sounds interesting.

Thanks for clarifying about some things about the mutators, I do (offcourse) not agree however I can understand circumstances change and there is a need to change the rules. I only hope you are also open for the other side of the medal. It would be ashame if all the time you and other developers have invested would go wasted because of (in my opinion) some bad choices which influence the playerbase negatively. About the above part (in quote The problem is not that some people (for example the ones named above) play together. The problem is they ONLY play together or go afk once in another team... It's offcourse annoying that these people are being punished for being good by some people who call them 'ugly things.' On the other hand they can also be good against eachother, which almost never happens... it would surely improve their popularity and reduce the complaints. Developers should consider that there hasn't been a single topic ingame which received so much feedback then 'these people' and the 'killwhore stacking'... It would be good if they play together one round, are against eachother the next (and not go afk), be together the other and so on. Then atleast it is random. In reality you just know once the 'group' is teamed up they will stay that way round after. A lot of players realize this and because they play together you see also a lot of other good people trying to switch to them (or go afk). It's not the good players fault offcourse that this happens, but the people who know who the good players are will even more unbalance the game by stacking to them. That's also part of the problem... TLDR: In reality a few elites who are never divided over teams by 'faith,' 'luck' or a 'balancer' will always play together and many others realize this. These players act like a magnet completly disrupting the game....

No offence, but since the teambalance still doesn't work as intented I think it isn't too bad to fixate on the teambalance a bit more by manually moving people or making the balance more equal. Offcourse playing with friends is ok, but most of the regular players will confirm that if some of the ' elite players' which might be friends play together the balance will drift fuhrter off thus making the game unplayable for the majority... It also looks like some off these elite players are friends because they share the same skill: namely being good at aim... We' ve seen many times when this stacking happens the server just empties quick and dies. Offcourse this also happened when people joined the same team after PUGs and in many other situations... Hoorah for the people who had some fun with a few short round, but in the end the whole community loses cause of these games... At least it will not help the playerbase... Also I do not get why some people ' want to play Renegade-x with friends' while in reality they change the teambalance in such a way that it is not longer the formula which is called Renegade-x, but it's just downgraded to a single sided slaughter with no effort... If that is the way people want to have it... Where is the challenge then...? Or the fun... Anyways: What I don't get is that there is a topic (see below and there are more) where mutators are encouraged to change the game experience. Once one is provided which doesn't focus on adding extra content but on balance it is not appreciated while the playerbase seams to show they like it. It would be good if people could choose between various servers with various settings so one can choose the gameplay he / she likes. Unfortunately the playerbase is too small for that. Ironically the playerbase might also stay smaller cause of the unbalanced games... For me a good game is a balanced game where I rather lose after a good fight, then win a game where I' ve been (accidently or not) part of a super good group and where we win without effort. In the end I guess we all win with games like this and the playerbase might even grow...

Good this is discussed here! I have a feeling, but that might be the times when I join, that stacking is more a thing for the last few weeks or maybe month then a periode before, while it used to also be bad last year. In the end stacking wins the game for a small group of people, but kills the playerbase. It's very easy to see when a 'pro group' of players is together for a few rounds after eachother. These end (really) quick, the playerbase drops and in the end the 'pro players' leave together (often within seconds from eachother) with a server half filled or less then at the moment when they joined... Balancing can improve the game a lot and this might even increase the playerbase or keep the servers alive longer so North American people can join. People also drop out of the game cause of the time (who needs sleep?), but I've seen balanced games last longer and / or have more rounds till later in the evening / night (Dutch time). Ideally teams should be balanced on: - Based on points - Based on veterancy - Based on k/d - Based on vehicle kills - Based on building kills (if this can be calculed who did the most damage, not just the last shot) - Based on repairpoints to the base - Based on repairpoints to vehicles - Based on placed mines - Based on defence kills mines - Based on damage done by vehicles - People who use teamchat (and yes you can argue they might use voice, but still basic game communication helps the team) - People who have experience in commanding Not necessarly in this order, but I guess this should cover the basics... I know this is a lot and I am not sure where to start. If you would balance a game only on VP or points you might end up with 10 people who had a good score last game while someone who mined might have a lesser score, but saved the base five times. The problem is to come up with a good way to divide the people, for example a miner might also have the highest k/d. The goal is to make sure the teams have 'sort off' equally skilled teams where the base functions are present Since I am not sure how the 'best defence, best offense and best support' notification are created it is hard for me to determine what still needs to be done. I suggest: 1) move the person with most building damage to a team and the second to another team starting from the the player with the most points (so if player 1 has 10000 points tanking) and players 2 5000 points only, but all base damage, move that one) 2) Do the same with the top tanker & sniper / person with k/d 3) Make sure each team gets a person who mined 4) Make sure each team gets a person who repaired buildings 5) Make sure the team gets a person who repaired vehicles 6) Spread the remaining people over the teams based on score I assume this can all be measured (since most of it allready is). Divide the rest who are left on score... It would off course be better to give a player scores in different fields and spread them over the teams like that, but that might be too difficult. Also an accounting system would also be nice, but I realize this is all volunteraly and takes a lot of time. Random teams will not work, especially if teamswitching will be as it is now cause the teams will soon not be random... Persons realizing what they are doing will likely switch to the more good team and / or their friends (unless they prefer a side) and the new and less good players will stay in the other team. In the end I still dont get why people rather win a few quick (super unbalanced / stacked) rounds without effort, then enjoy a challenging game which can be fun even while losing. It's sad that a lot of current games prove this behaviour.

Lol wonder whats real about this... Found some other Glacier 2.0 screenshot....

He allready has them But @iridesence can you give you the details on what he did with it....

Generally I don't like if people suggest themselves as commander. What I dislike is if people have them voted in as commander so the person can just use the CP to gain more veterancy points while he / she never communicates with the team, doesn't stop harv, and so on. I'dd say we leave the vote the same for now unless it's easy to archieve.

Also thought about this once. You would also be able to benefit from free AdWords for example!

Well props for the effort, but I see some improvements for some people.

Well don't get in a bar and spoil someones drink People who followed the news about the killed rapper will understand... Not sure if it's bad luck, or just a bad location...

Well, funny but odd. In the Netherlands we say 'poepen' when you have to shit in the bathroom In Belgium they say 'poepen' if you are going to fuck... Imagine there a villages here close to Bergen op Zoom (10 minutes drive) which have a part of it on Dutch soil and a part on Belgium....

Well the mountain maybe not that high as you expect either, but we have small mountains

I live in Bergen op Zoom Bergen = Mountains Zoom = name of river Town was built on top of a mountain at the river Steenbergen same Steen = stone... So something with stones over there

Lol cause there was a closed beta after beta1. I don't remember exactly which one, but beta 3 or 4 was tested in a 'closed' environment.

Google And an article on tweakers.net saying the game was to be released... When I checked that it was just released First time I joined I thought. This is EXACTLY like Renegade.... Untill I checked the original again and got scared by the graphics..

Well there was an AdWords campaign. @TomUjain knows the details (but they are also in a topic here). Campaign was halted for several reasons. One is because it lacked a good downloadpage on which is being worked...

Except for stealing vehicles and shooting SAMS SBHS arent usefull that much. They work great once coördinated but during must public games thats not a thing. If you have proper mines you and people caring to hold up your base defence you should have no problem with SBHS unless in big group or coördinated. What I see often is that people have SBHS before mines and teams even have 10 or 12 SBHS on 20 players and thus they lose... You also need vehicles and repairs. Having that said... A skilled SBH can be deadly ofc.

Belgium dance with German lyrics

Crash 50, pay 49 ?

Could someone make it so the rockets track and you have flares ? I can't aim... but was fun crashing 50 planes on every corner of the map!

Well, even with a surrender vote or map change half the people do not vote. Thinking the poll on the forum represents the majority of the gamers is is also statistically wrong...

Did a vote ingame again 1 person chose 40 / 9 chose 64 Will do these polls a few more times... And another poll by someone else 2 for 40, 18(!) for 64

Two days ago, when this was mentioned, I did a poll ingame. From the 50 players 19 answered. The choice was 40 or 64. All 19 chose 64 I am not saying that ONE poll ingame proves something, but I have a feeling there is a big gap between 'pro players / old renegade players' here and the majority which plays the game and is not active on the forums. Deciding purely on forum poll results might go directly against what the 'public' wants cause a lot of them aren't represented here...

Why not use Discord or a 'custom chat room' as a lobby instead?