salarite

I agree it needs to be adjusted. Maybe only allow surrender votes if at least half the buildings are dead? That should reduce the spam. Another issue is right now it's too easy to make a succesful surrender vote. I think the required default 'Yes' number should be increased. A lot of people don't notice these votes and often a small minority "sneakily" surrenders while most of the team would have actually wanted to continue..

I had played RenegadeX for many years since 2014, then took a long hiatus and now I'm back. I'm someone who could be considered a veteran player of RenX although this commander system is brand new to me. I've tried it a few times now, and here is my two cents for what it's worth. I think it is a good mechanic although it is not in an ideal state currently because there is only like 4-6 active players total who are willing to be commander at all. The reason is stress/pressure, as others have said. Proposed solutions: Command interface: Atomsk correctly pointed out above that the current access to commands is too cumbersome (CtrlC, then press numbers, then press other numbers). I wonder if a system like the radio shouts could be implemented? (E.g. you hold down one key and it shows ALL powers as numbers, then you just press that number.) Commander "light": Currently being a commander feels like working a job instead of playing. It also feels like roulette: if your team wins you are the hero, everybody !rec-s you. But if the team even just starts losing, you are the villain. There should be a Subcommander/Commander"light" position with all powers except for Deff/Off buff. This would be a laid-back commander: no buffs, no rush organizing, just generally helping your team with harvester, mine removal, scout planes, spotting, missiles, etc. At any given time there should only be either 1 (full) commander OR 1 subcommander. Which means if a full commander is elected then the subcommander is automatically stepped down, to avoid conflicts. Yes, a team with a commander will win over a team with only a subcommander. But having a subcommander is better than not using any CPoints at all. And I believe this "lighter" commander position would make more people volunteer for it. --- Related but slightly off-topic: is there a way to make the chat window more visible and for chat messages to decay slower? I'm often finding myself missing of lot of important chat - especially as a commander - when in the heat of battle (and manually opening Esc->Chat is too cumbersome).

Ah ok, thanks!

Hope to still see you ingame from time to time

Sounds interesting! How do you install it though?

Good idea! Although I don't know how hard would it be to implement (or if it could be done at all)..

The last real life flame tanks were made in the Cold War. The Americans used the M132 armoured flame thrower and the M67 "Zippo" flame tank. The M132 was basically an APC with a flamethrower attached. This bad boy was able to fire up to 170 m, although only for 30 seconds (80 gallon/300 liter fuel tank). Video: The M67 is much closer to our beloved Renegade X flame tank. The M67 had a 400 gallon/1500 liter fuel tank and could fire for ~60 seconds. Theoretical maximum range for the flame equipment was 256 meters. For this one I couldn't find good footage, but check out this video about 2 minutes in: There were some flamers used by the Soviets as well (modified T-62 tank), but I couldn't find good info/footage on them, maybe someone could help out. Further reading: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M132_Armored_Flamethrower https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M67_Flame_Thrower_Tank https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/coldwar/US/flame-thrower-tank-m67-zippo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flame_tank

First of all, thank you for making the map. It shows you have put a lot of hours into this, it looks great. There is one thing however I'd like to point out. It is a very big map, and because of this, the max 40 people get spread out a bit too thin. When I was playing I had thoughts like "ah this part of the map looks awesome. but nobody else is here..." I think this would be an excellent map with a 64 playerlimit, however I don't know if that is possible. And one more thing, as it is very open, you basically won't live very long as infantry out in the open, so perhaps more cover would be beneficial.

First of all thank you for this map, it is good to be experimenting with ideas. I think the reason why some people complain is because this map (as it is infantry only) is dominated by having a good aim. In vanilla maps, when you have a bad aim, you hop in a tank or go repair something and still help the team. I can see this map become sort of what sniper only maps are: a battle of a fewer number of people with good aim. So it might not appeal to the wide public, but can be fun for say a 10v10 battle.

Do I see right, was it the player called 'Ravenshaw'? And has any mods been alerted to this while happening?

Your English is really komische

Keep these posts coming! If there is enough of us a change might happen

Good job! It would be nice to see ingame. Is there a way to change the cost though? I would personally prefer expensive Tib Sun vehicles, so people would also use the old vehicles as well. Probably a 2-2,5x price increase would be good.

I think the current wait time for a specific person is fine (how much time until he can buy his 2nd vehicle). The problem lies in the following: a team can get a bunch of tanks together too easily with the current system. When the airdops become available, everyone can buy a tank. Sure, if those die, you won't be seeing another "round" any time soon. But the problem is already there, a team is having a ton of tanks with wf/as down. I suggest the following: Make it so that people have to wait in between buying. For example, guy#1 buys a tank, then guy#2 (the next guy) has to wait like 3-5 minutes before buying, and so on. Alternatively, (as others have suggested) restrict airdrop to basic vehicles, say APC and MRLS/Artillery only.

Umm where are the images?