Jarzey

Resorting to ad hominem and trying to derail the topic is certainly not going to help his argument win. Oh, he clearly thinks he is an omniscent entity above all (or god). Talk about being egoistic. I assume that he lost his patience and flipped, which caused him to throw expletives around. In light of such.. why is this person a mod on CT exactly? On topic: Often Steam needs to update and also show a newly released game or a sale, which appear in popup windows that some people find to be annoying; and just like how they find the intro movie in RenX annoying, these people just want to skip all and play right away.

Meh... the very concept of Most Valuable Player has different interpretations - could be the one with most points, the one with that highest k/d ratio, the player that donated tons of credits, the morale booster player in team, etc... after all, the "value" in MVP can basically be anything. Still, pertaining to OP's most recent topic: This is an opinion - a poll is necessary to find out how many are actually confused by it, because I personally have no problem distinguishing between score and VP, and I do not see many complaining about failure to differentiate points and vp. I will also add that players joining matches late receive vp to compensate, therefore they would earn points by doing literally nothing except joining the game. They could climb the leaderboard just by continuously joining and leaving. Multiplying points in presence of multiple enemies would snowball the veterancy gain rate and therefore the player would be able to hit heroic faster, unless the veterancy rate is made proportional to player amount, but that would just mean extra work for a system that already works.

I would sum it up with this - Sneaking has a certain percentage of success that increases with skill but will never reach 100%. I would agree, the player has to be a good driver and have good awareness of the map (in order not to bump into the map props, and the stank is not exactly the easiest vehicle to handle) and surroundings, along with the workings of automated defenses, if any. However, luck is still needed because of the limitations of the stank - medium speed and size (easier to get detected compared to SBH, because the stank is bigger, vehicle only entrances available, and hard to get away with only its medium speed once spotted). P.S. Stolen stank + Hottie is easier and harder to pull at the same time. Parking the stank outside Nod buildings is not something out of ordinary by Nod, and they will dismiss it thinking that the driver is just buying/refilling from the PT (all defenders out there - make sure to double check any vacant stank near building entrances). However, the rouge stank could be spotted by Nod Stanks or SBHs, akin to SBH spy. A skilled driver has higher chances to pull it off compared to an inexperienced driver trying for it, but luck will always play a part in it. Holding players in a building is useful for field control because enemy tanks will have less repairs, but it also prevents that building being infiltrated for obvious reasons. Afaik, points are proportional to the damage dealt towards the building. Example, you get the same points by dealing 10% damage to the building, no matter in which way or how fast you did it. Personally, I think that players should get a bonus modifier on points by pummeling the building as infantry from outside, since the player is vulnerable and has to refill after emptying their magazine (the rocket soldier would also become a VP farmer guy alternative to Hottie/Tech rep) compared to bombarding the building from inside a vehicle, where they are relatively safe if backed up by repairs and can keep firing without need of refills. That is an interesting idea, only thing that comes in my mind is troll groups trying to !rec one of theirs as MVP. For the voting, I think that can be done in the endgame screen, in tandem with the map vote. For example, It can go like this: the MVP section is initially empty. Simply double-click a player in the player list to put your vote (you can also vote for enemy players or for yourself if you like), and at the end of the time limit, the map is chosen, the votes are tallied up, and the player's name appears under the team's MVP section. Same with map voting, you abstain if you do not click on any player. If everyone abstains, no player is shown under MVP. Now, for the main problem of this - if 2 or more players have the same amount of votes, either both of them are shown under MVP or only one decided at random - there would be no time for a tiebreaker vote. But let's say that everyone voted for themselves... since all the players names will probably not fit under MVP, either the system decides to give it to a random player or nothing is shown under MVP.

Being a defender and a sneaker myself, I can share my opinion about the topic (not the OP's one, but rather the one about sneaking that has been brought up): Sneaking is about both luck and skill, with more emphasis on the former if you ask me. Still, having skills will increase the sneaker' chances to get in undetected or succeed. All that I can say is that a big part of sneaking relies on the enemy team's lack of defense skills. Skills that are useful while sneaking: - map knowledge (know-how to avoid defenses and take routes with lots of cover and sneaking spots) - extended 3rd person field of view and optimal graphic settings (to spot the enemy before they spot you, and peek around corners) - good aim (in order to take down players if spotted, it could decide the fate of the building in smaller matches or if the enemy team has no teamwork) - patience and perseverance (more like of a mental skill needed in order to not get distracted, distressed, and possibly angry) - good whereabouts judgment (basically when a sneaker should move or stay hidden. This one is fuzzy - could mostly be luck rather than a skill but some sneakers often have a "gut feeling or instinct" telling exactly them when and where to move next) Assuming that the sneaker is alone, reasons why sneaking succeeds (I consider lack of skills by the enemy as luck for the sneaker, since they were lucky to meet a less-skilled opponent): -(skill) Infiltrator has been spotted, but has a good aim and manages to gun down everyone in their way. -(skill) The Infiltrator is very good with their guns, managing to gun down defenders and reinforcements as they arrive, buying enough time for the C4 to explode and then finishing the building with their guns if necessary. -(variable) Small match, 10 vs 10 or less. Players cannot stop the infiltrator even if they wanted to (example: most players in field). -(luck) No one bothers to go back to stop the infiltrator when they respawn, and opposite team does not respond to chat. -(luck) Defenders spawn in buildings located far away from the infiltrator, and cannot reach them in time. -(variable and luck) The match has been going on for a while, the respawn time has become lengthy, and opposite team does not respond to chat. -(skill) Infiltrator has good knowledge of the map, its paths, and its hiding spots (including harv walking). -(luck) Defenders do not know the map well as the infiltrator does (and is not aware of harv walking). -(luck) Defenders spotted the sneaker, gave chase, but the sneaker gained enough distance (or cut a corner) and took a hidden route that the defender is not aware of, ultimately slipping away. -(variable) Small match, 10 vs 10 or less. -(variable) Sneaker's team has the field, making going through the field in certain maps easier for the sneaker. -(variable) Base is being heavily besieged and all defenders are needed as reps. -(variable) Sneaker's team has Comms, allowing the sneaker to peek in their minimap to detect nearby enemy players. -(skill) Infiltrator has good eyes and judgment, and they are able to efficiently see, estimate the location behind obstacles, and pinpoint enemy players moving around in their base, therefore using such knowledge to move accordingly in order to minimize exposure towards enemies' field of view and the chances of getting spotted. -(luck) "Defenders" know the map well but they are bad lookouts (example: do not have patience to stand there and look, go do other stuff). -(luck) There are no dedicated defenders or lack of patrols. -(luck) No one on the opposite team is watching mines or opposite team is overmining or does not know how to mine properly. -(luck) No one on the opposite team is paying attention to automated defenses firing. -(luck) Players spotted the sneaker, gave chase, lost them, and instead of warning the team they kept doing whatever they did before. -(luck) No one on the opposite team gives a shit. Enough defenders will usually stop a sneaker, no matter how good the sneaker is good with their guns (unless the sneaker is a heroic Mobi plowing thru hordes of recruit engis...). Indeed, not pure luck but he mostly relied on luck nonetheless - in this case, interpreted as team Nod being completely clueless. Quick hands/aim, good handling of the flame tank, and time/location judgment (when to move and where to) were the employed skills as far I reckon, as disarming mines, strafing, and firing a rep gun can be done by everyone. So, let's break down @CampinJeff 's actions in the video: Start point - entering Nod base -(variable) If GDI wasn't controlling the field and actively besieging the base, he would only have been able to deal perma the ref and perhaps the Ob, as his Flame Tank would have been struck by 2 Obi lasers. Or, most likely, he probably would not have chosen to sneak in at that moment. -(luck) If Nod recognized him as a spy as he approached the arty and entered the base, someone would have most likely gunned him down. -(luck) He could've taken the infantry path leading to the Air runway and the tunnels nearby, but he hoped (relied on luck) that Nod did not recognize him in the middle of the siege. -(skill and luck) he casually walked in, trying to look innocuous and repairing the arty knowing that it will be focused more on repelling the siege and its field of view either in first person or moved towards on the besieging tanks. Middle point - sabotaging Nod Ref -(variable) GDI was besieging the base, keeping most of Nod techs occupied with Obi. -(luck) No one saw him disarming mines or being inside Ref. -(luck) If Nod recognized him as a spy as he pretended to repair Ref from the outside, someone would have most likely gunned him down. End point- sabotaging Obelisk -(luck) At this point, If Nod recognized him as a spy as he pretended to repair the Stank and the Ltank, someone would have most likely gunned him down. -(luck) The Stank and Ltanks driver were not looking at their health bars and therefore they did not realize that he was not repairing them. Or they did not have much knowledge on the topic of spies. -(luck) If that specific Nod player did not leave the Flame Tank vacant, he might not have been able to keep killing the techs, and Obi could have survived. -(skill) If he did not have quick hands and good driving (quickly blocking the way towards the Obi MCT for techs outside), he might not have managed to kill all the techs repairing Obi, but he would still managed to deal perma to ref. -(skill and luck) he could have been spotted by Nod as he was taking down the tech if he did not exercise good judgment on where and when to go next to keep blending within the Nod base (notice the Flame Tank turning around and him just getting out of its view), but he would still managed to deal perma to ref. It seems that luck was the main factor that dictated the outcome in his sabotage spec ops.

Unless they plan to farm leaderboard points or play with bots, I doubt someone would play Ren X for 24 hr straight, especially nowadays, because there are not enough players from different timezones to keep a single server constantly well populated. Also, talking about achievements, Ren X has none, unlike the typical MMO games which determined (also known as "no-life") players grind for the end game gear in order to wage their guild wars, boss raids or whatnot... Sure, players can farm building kills in Ren X until them become number one in the leaderboard, but that does not award them anything or make them stronger in game, while players farming towards the leads in MMOs are often awarded with the best gear or have attained the best gear in order to become number one, and thus they can brag about it, be at the center of the attention, or simply indulge themselves in genocidal player killing, depending on the game and the player. As for a personal story, I can somewhat relate - I was once one of those no-life gamers who spent every day on the same game in order to become OP, and I pretty much went on a diet, skipping breakfast everyday and eating less in general. But then the game's servers permanently shut down (basically the game "died", as devs stopped updating it), and every effort I made (and real money I spent) to become OP got canned. At thit s point I moved toward another online game and sought for OPness just as the prior game, but some decisions by the devs pissed me off and after that day I started to have a life once again. No regrets about my past you ask me, I definitely had my fun.

So "Kane" was Abel all along! He killed the real Kane, had the scribes write Genesis 4 to portray Kane as the culprit, and he founded the Brotherhood of Nod.

"why should he 'get out'?" Also, switching to UE4 will not happen anytime soon (probably not at all), due to a small development team and other several constraints. I believe there have been few topics discussing about it if you search the forums.

There are plenty of reasons - cheating, impersonating, trolling, harassing, etc... ; these can be often found in the rules section of the forum. Cheaters that whine about being banned usually do not bother reading the EULA. off-topic: It might be somewhat weird, but I have this habit to get myself banned if I want to quit an online game for good. Such could be seen as a way to enforce self-control, I suppose. Still, I do not have any regrets for perma-quitting those games.

Tiberium Crystal War, a mod for original Renegade with CnC 3 (TibWar) units. Same concept as how Reborn , A Path Beyond, and Apocalypse Rising (also the less known Scud Storm as well) mods change Renegade units to match a game in the CnC series.

Still discussing about SBH Iron Sights? Yes, I do acknowledge that people aim better without iron sights. And I know about the Laser Rifle iron sight being obfuscating. In fact, I never encouraged people to shoot with iron sights on. "I can" is not the same as "I have to" - You certainly can hit a mammy with iron sights on, but you do not have to. Solution: Never use them, issue fixed. There is no urgency for removing them; they exist for aesthetic purposes. New players will try it once and learn never to try it again, simple as that. As for other weapons' iron sights, you better explain what is wrong (and which weapon besides the Laser Rifle) with the iron sights with plenty of details, because they work as intended right now, and changing the zoom to be like BF SW 2 is just your opinion. I never said I am always right, did I? And I do not argue merely for the sake of boosting my ego - I was arguing in order to make you realize that most of your suggestions are merely solutions to your issues and they do not reflect the playerbase for the whole time, and such will make you probably think twice before posting a new topic about gameplay suggestions. Nope, but generally the more questions you address back, the more chances you get for people to take you seriously and for your suggestions being considered. Do not expect something being implemented if you do not argue and counter-counter argue for it.

You should not make assumptions, because I can hit other players with them. You just have to find the right time to ambush them. Want good examples? Players standing still and big vehicles. Not using them all is alright. And you never know, perhaps some player performs really well with those iron sights. It is still an option which is better than nothing - they might be removed, but such is not top priority among the devs. It is not against the forum rules if there is a good reason (take for example "Make Ren X Great Again", it has been bumped multiple times). Still, it is funny how you claim that I am being stubborn, when this is my first time others replied to you multiple times. Perhaps everyone who writes too much is stubborn in your eyes. Also, it seems that you skimmed through two posts, as you did not address every question in my post and in the previous post. What a pity, it seems that you are going to give up already. You should come up with more responses so I can address them. I do enjoy writing...

The issues that the game has are mostly your personal issues with the game, and they do not reflect Ren X populace. Basically you want the devs to model the game based on what you want. It is only an issue if the majority of the populace finds it problematic after plenty of matches. You personally don't like Ren X 3rd person fov. This is your opinion and not an issue. You should ask others what they feel about it before flagging such as an issue. Same as above, you personally do not like how iron sights are handled in Ren X. This is your opinion and not an issue. Except for the Laser Rifle, I do not see many complaining about iron sights. It might be hard to hit someone with the Laser Rifle from afar, but it is hit-scan and you can always get closer to the enemy with your stealth capabilities. Maybe you should read your first post again before you type - Because this would completely changes the gameplay, as it modifies the game rather than solve an issue. Enemies camping? That's less people in field. Take field, then whore crates and vp until the team is comfortable enough to rush in. Again, just because you do not like something does not give you the right to claim that something as a game issue. And then OP lashes out with this: I think you should stick to proper decorum. All this ranting is certainly not going to help people taking you seriously. Lastly, you already had posted several suggestions in the forums, Neutron. Maybe you should stick them all to a single post so people do not have to go to and fro to read all of them.

My two cents, assuming that there were no patches changing the values in the meantime: Raise Light Tank base damage to 70. (Med still remains 80) Reduce Mammy cannons base damage to 70 (will still do more damage than Med/Light because of its multipliers). Reduce MRLS base damage to 70 (just to round up instead of 78) and its area of effect by tp 400 (assuming that tanks have 300 base area of effect, but I am not certain on this one). Also, a -10% damage versus infantry for both MRLS and Arty could be considered. Increase Flame Tank's health to 900 (1000/1100/1200 for veteran/elite/heroic) or even 1000 (1100/1200/1300 for veteran/elite/heroic). They are supposed to be heavily armored since they engage the opposition at basically melee range. A little bit of health will help keeping them alive for a few more seconds. If dodging shells is a concern, all tank shells could be slowed down to 6000 or 7000 (from 7625). Not sure if I made a mistake when transcribing the values , but the Tick Tank's shell speed (12000) should be put on par with all other tank shells' speed.

Crossover between Fallout series and Metro series confirmed.

Again, this would be an exploit if you were able to one shot them with one rocket - however rockets do not do unreasonable amounts of damage. At recruit, Rockets do 60.03 damage to light vehicles, 75 to aerial vehicles, and 45 to heavy vehicles. 7 rockets are needed to destroy a recruit arty. It takes about one second to reload a rocket, and you have to account for rocket's travel time towards the target; unless players are close to them (and if they are, they will be probably bombarded apart before they manage to fire 7 rockets) the arty will usually be able to get to cover or reps before 7 rockets hit it. If the arty driver does not bother to back up after 7 rockets, then the driver is not paying any attention and it is his fault. Also, it is appropriate for Rocket Soldiers to ambush enemy battalions, from inf paths, high paths, and entrenched positions, rather than confronting enemy armor face to face, which usually results into the Rocket Soldiers being either gunned down, blasted to smithereens, or simply ran over (assuming that there is not an insane numerical advantage over the enemy vehicles). Last, enemy drivers can always locate and track the trajectory of rockets if their are observant enough.

I would not call it an "exploit" - use of third person is already prevalent for spotting and infiltrating, and a feature of the game if nothing else. Also, homing rockets are best fired in such way in order to avoid any direct obstacles in the path and have better chances to hit enemies on upper ground (if fired straight, the rocket might not adjust fast enough and ending up slamming onto the hill if the opponent decided to pull back). Plus, I do not see this as something that is game-breaking; it actually empowers the Rocket Soldier instead, making him more able-handed to hit enemy vehicles. Akin to above, MRLS units would also benefit from firing upwards, usually achieved by driving onto a rock, a slope, or something similar (it is hard to pull off sometimes) in order for its rocket launcher to assume an inclined position, so that its rocket barrage will arc toward the blast area instead of going straight. This way allows MRLS rockets to fly over the front armor of enemy battalions and do more splash damage to the reps behind, since the rockets will usually hit the top center of the designated vehicle.

You could consider making a donation to Constructive Tyranny, a small community which hosts the main Renegade-X servers (and also servers in other games). Donations will keep the servers running, which allows people to play together. Still, since you mentioned that you are more of a single-player person, you might not feel committed to donate money for multiplayer servers. You may notice that the donate section of the site is not entirely updated (it shows March-April at the time of this post), but I can vouch that the donations will still be received and put to good use. Their domain is "tyrant.gg"

First - there is no perfect way to mine. I will say, to become a dedicated miner, you have to know every map and every path at its fullest. Good miners are often infiltrators, since they know which path to use, where to hide, and from where you can best get into the buildings, and they can employ such knowledge when mining. Of course, you do not have to become good at sneaking to be good at mining, but it helps. Most importantly, you will have to constant watch the mine limit (perhaps a mutator that enlarges the mine limit font to occupy the whole screen might be helpful... or not). Many players will mine the base up and then go do stuff in field, often forgetting about them or leaving mine management to the ones in base. Since most of the people think this way in pubs (after all, being a dedicated defender is usually boring), it is not surprising that no one ends up regularly checking on mines, thus when a building blows up, players are quick to rant and play the blaming game. So, if you want truly become a good miner, you might as well become a dedicated defender; and ask your team that you are to be the only one allowed to mine the base (this will never happen in pubs, I reckon), and keep watch of the mine limit. Just placing mines and not watching over them is one of the main reasons why infiltrators manage to get in. Theoretically, the best mine positioning would be to place all the mines on the same spot, so that infiltrators cannot pull off the "mine sweep" tactic, which consists of disarming all the mines to around 5% first and then sweeping all of them away in quick succession. In practice this would cause extensive confusion as there would be no way to tell how many mines a door has. So the best placement would be putting them close enough that you can see how many there are, while it still remains hard to disarm one specific mine at once. Personally I would avoid mining inf paths as it will create false alarms in base and you will have to go around checking all the buildings when those mines are lost. But by no means mining inf paths is something bad; especially if those inf paths are the only sneaky paths that lead to the base (example, Under's tunnels may be mined, Xmountain's entrance inf path should not be mined), albeit I still find it safer when all the mines are inside buildings. About EMP's: mining inside the building "should" work well for maps without automated defenses: it prevents EMP from disarming the doors, takes the defender near to PTs for quick refills, and shelters him from enemy tank fire. However, the main reason to not mine just inside - the infiltrator is more unlikely to be spotted while he disarms (this also applies with EMP). Chances of spotting the sneaking player are much higher when he is outside, because your teammates spend more time running to the field than staying inside buildings. In addition, infiltrators might be able to hide inside the building (think behind the open locker door in the barracks, or at the bottom floor of the air tower), or skillfully throw the C4 across the mines (albeit it can only really happen inside pp). Regarding outside EMP's, if there is a dedicated defender, he would be able to spot the EMP going off most of the time and repair the mines (if he is currently inside the building, albeit they usually patrol around in vehicles), or warn the team, at least in pug matches. Said that, my preferred way of mining is to use all the mines for the buildings, ignoring the inf paths. I would not place 3 mines at every door, but rather a different amount of mines for each building; for example, I would put 4 on each ref door, 3 on each hon door, and 5 on air door, so I have better chances knowing which building the infiltrator is inside - 4 mines down = ref, 3 mines down = hon, 5 mines down = air. Since most of the time the mine limit will not allow such frugal mining, I usually prioritize the back doors with different mine numbers; more mines will be added up to each door should a building fall. Granted, this tactic is not perfect, as a mine could have been lost to a random enemy wandering in base and the sneaking player got into the building with 3 mines, or there are multiple infiltrators, but it certainly helps identifying the whereabouts of the infiltrator. You may also get away by just putting 1 mine at front doors that are well covered by automated defenses - as long you are watchful for spies (this tactic shown here will most probably get you called "overminer" since players are not used to seeing such). In certain maps (Lakeside is a good example here), I would also put the mines for ref front door outside the door, but in between the small opening that leads to the door - so the infiltrator cannot crouch at the sides of such opening and avoid automated defenses fire. Due to the collision blocker, vehicles will not be able to pop those mines up (remember than the mines' trigger radius is far smaller for vehicles - basically you almost have to drive over them). Flying maps are more complicated: generally, it is safer to mine the inside rather than ramps (with exception of WF to prevent nukes on the vast WF roof; mining behind the corner at the end of the stairs could surprise someone), as players dropping from aerial vehicles would be able to get into hon or air without ever stepping on the ramps. Air is easy to mine up - just place mines at the junction with the MCT and bottom of the air tower; hon is a different story. Depending on the amount of mines remaining, I would commit up to 6 ~ 9 mines to cover the second floor and the ramp, with 2~3 on the ramp and both sides. If a team has only one building standing, often excess mines are placed around the edges of the building to prevent beacon placement; I do not recommend this since beacons can also be placed some distance away: their range might be small, about the size of a Tib Silo dome, but they do not have to be glued up to the building in order to succeed. I would rather mine up inf paths and put the remainder in the last building. Overall, I will say this is the best advice: there is no point in mining if you are not going to keep track of your mines.

This version has subtitles.

Typing "Stat FPS" into the console shows FPS values on the screen. Also, the console will automatically display possible options when you type in the first letters. For example, just typing "Stat" ,the console will reveal some (but not all) the available options that start with the word "stat" - (In Ren X's instance FPS, UNIT, LEVELS, GAME, MEMORY, XBOXMEMORY, PHYSICS, STREAMING, STREAMINGDETAIL, COLLISION, but there are way more) - all of those will give you statistics, metadata, and diagnostics about the game. Lastly, because Ren X is made with UE3, you can also refer to UE3 Documentation to see what console command is available.

The term "locked buildings" usually refers to the buildings' health bar being locked, meaning that they cannot take any damage at all, nor be destroyed by beacons. Also, the lock prevents players from farming vp in advance by shooting at the building, because they cannot deal any damage to it.

Depending on the amount of players and size of the base, you may also get away with 1 mine per door. Personally I would mine every building with different amounts if the mine limit allows so. The hassle of adopting such strategy may come either from remembering how many mines a door is supposed to have... or trying to explain other defenders not yet accustomed to this strategy what I did. People are just too used to see the usual 3 mines per door, and this kind of mining is exotic and out of place for those not used to it.

Neat; I see that you have been mining in the way that I usually do. Personally I prefer this kind of mining, using leftover mines to mark every building door with different amounts of mines rather than using the leftover to cover infantry paths. It is not foolproof, but it does give a lead where a single infiltrator probably is and possibly minimize searching times. I recall matches where buildings blew up because players have to look through every building and the last one they look for is usually the one with the sneaky player, and by then it is usually too late.

The aforementioned info is available on the Ren X wiki.

The aforementioned player's nickname was probably "Macri-Gato"; my associate has encountered that player in several matches, unless you are referring to another player who indeed goes by exactly how you spelled it - "MacGarito". The B2B on Snow is a known issue, and @Henk is already aware of such. It should be fixed by the next release.