roweboat

What would you do if it did?

@Luhrian I think the map is close to being really great! As another small piece of feeback... I think the extra character models standing around are an interesting choice, but are actually a bit confusing during gameplay. At one point I was trying to shoot one because I thought it was the enemy

It's allllllll in your mind =]

That all said, the map has always had the issue of being too small. I agree it's too easy to get locked in.

Call me Tom Cruise but I really felt Nod could have easily won. Biggest reason I saw Nod failing was due to lack of common goal. I came into the match 40 minutes in, tried to rallied the team with organized rushes. But there was only so much we could do. It wasnt a total loss we took out the barracks around 1hr15min mark, but we focused too much on offense and not enough defense. I realized sending the team to go field and not telling anyone to stay to defend (assumed too much) is what ended it.

I could imagine the pathing alone for something like that would be a mess. Because the creature is designed to appear randomly, to have random movements, and not be assigned to "good" or "bad" team. If tiberium creatures exist in the future, would probably need a team of coders that focus solely on them.

@Try-Out ah this is very similar to my computer when Renegade X first launched. Had to wait about 6 months to save money to buy a better PC Me in 2013: "NEW RENEGADE!? HOW HAVE I MISSED THIS, I GOTTA PLAY IT ASAP!!!" *Loads to Menu* *5 FPS* .... "oh...".

And this is why only Devs have horns.

That's putting alot of faith in erm... people.

I think half the problem is it could greatly affect current game balance and make the game even more convoluted.

@Mystic~ Actually the idea of reinforced glass could be interesting. As it stands, the barracks in an impenetrable fortress compared to the hand of nod

So then the question is, what sort of defense system can be established, that: requires player input, is intuitive and self-evident, can be disabled simply by opposing team, and can have a layer of depth as to not make gameplay stale? Because that is what is required to replace the mining system for defense.

True enough, I removed the word "door"

@Handepsilon are you eluding to the fact that the mining defensive system currently in place should be completed overhauled with something new? Or a quickfix: It is not inherently obvious that "proximity mines" = "building defense". Maybe the first step to make things less convoluted, could be to simply give the "building defense mines" a different, more specific name than "proximity mines". E.g. Give a Hotwire 3 proximity mines (used as is) and 3 "Base Defense Mines".

I haven't had time to test the new updates but I will soon

PAIN CAUSING [ √ ]

yes thats another thing to consider, even if your stealth tactics are good, there are only so many places to hide. And a good GDI player will know to check them all.

Well I'm not expert. But I do feel like most people try to play both sides the same ways. Most don't understand how to properly use light tank's speed or stealth tank's stealth. Sbh are spotted more easily than people understand. Whereas GDI playstyle is very straightforward. Nod has a higher learning curve so if newer players are using Nod, it would make sense if Nod is losing more often.