Purdurabo Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 It is just that currently in their bugged state it is making this game extremely unfair. On maps without base defences Nod is almost guaranteed to win. And on maps with base defences I am usually the lone idiot who has to spend the whole match guarding the back entrance or else we loose anyway. This really makes the game unenjoyable for anyone playing GDI( i don't even enjoy playing Nod much due to how easy it is to cripple the enemy team.) because beacons are bugged and can be placed where they are impossible to see and often even disarm even if they can be seen. This allows one single person to destroy the others base with absolutely no team work nor even skill. Well either that or their price needs to be increased to around 5000 credits. This is a super weapon after all and it should not be as spammable as it currently is, It should be difficult to get and the person doing so should have to really disadvantage their early game play to be able to afford it. This might disadvantage Nod somewhat but they can still just as easily destroy a structure with some teamwork. 3 SBH with c4 could still take down a building easily enough but I consider that fairer as atleast it takes some teamwork instead of one lone low skill player being able to cripple the opposing team 5 min into a match by by abusing bugs. I know server owners can easily change the price on items so if anyone of you wants to try this price increase on super weapons please let me know as i will be playing exclusively on your server until this bug is fixed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGroundsKeeper Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 It is a low player count issue mostly. But ofc the exploits are a big issue aswell. Problem is with the cap as low as 40 you can sometimes walk all the way to the enemy base without meeting a enemy even without stealth. and during the constant offences there are not enough in the bases to stop all the SBH Cheapness. That is why we need 128 player games from the old ren back Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iran Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Yeah 128-200 player servers really need to be brought back. Increasing the price of beacons would be nice OR limiting them to one person per team. OR maybe add tech levels like APB mod for Renegade has? So beacons only become available later in the game and Nod doesn't have half their team camping with SBH until they can buy Nuclear Strike beacons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khawz Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Yeah 128-200 player servers really need to be brought back. That would be nice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unit Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 128-200 players "that would be nice"? are you actually kidding me? that would be so pointless that words cant really describe it. its bad enough in jelly on Spoonplex tribute days with 40 people per side. 200 players on any of the renegade stock maps would just be insanely dumb. this isnt planetside 2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HaTe Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Iran has dedicated his renegade x posts entirely to trolling, because he believes the game is bad. See jelly forums for examples. Just ignore him here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGroundsKeeper Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 128-200 players "that would be nice"? are you actually kidding me?that would be so pointless that words cant really describe it. its bad enough in jelly on Spoonplex tribute days with 40 people per side. 200 players on any of the renegade stock maps would just be insanely dumb. this isnt planetside 2. Well that is your opinion, i personally i think small games are dumb and for skilless retarded people who cant play. Now where do we go from here?!?? Dont diss people who prefer an alternative playstyle than you. You might like the smaller games because you can survive there and it makes you feel like a good player when you assault an empty base, or maybe you like the constant sbh attacks on empty bases. It matters not, because you can just join a game with a smaller cap. I hovever only played in the massive games since it totally changed the flow of the game towards something i liked, massive effort were needed to tip the game and infantry got a bigger role than tanks, wich i liked. And since theese servers always were FULL there is obvious others who enjoy theese games. And as far as i know, the max cap was actually 127 players in the original renegade. or it was the biggest games i could join in the classic when i played alot, and those games was the best shooter experiences i ever had. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommanderWasp1x Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 The problem with 64-200players is the maps that are currently in the game are too small and the max vehicles are too low, the small maps are better suited to 24-32 players and 10-12 vehicles, if they added Medium maps they'd be suited to 32-64players and upto 25vehicles per team and for large maps 128-200players and between 50-75vehicles per team. Rival games like Planetside2 have 3000players on a server, 3continents with 1000players on each and an unlimited number of vehicles based on resources spread between 3 Factions and the Maps are HUGE, BUT they have an in game profit system, selling digital goods for real money. Where as RenX is 100% free, so they make no profit, so we can give ideas, But 128-200players servers are expensive and the game and small maps can't support it at the moment. :-\ :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iran Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 The RenX developers don't pay for the game server. All the servers being hosted right now are being hosted by fans. The RenX remakes of the classical maps are a lot larger than the originals, scaled about 1.5x larger. It should hold larger player counts just fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robby609 Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 The RenX developers don't pay for the game server. All the servers being hosted right now are being hosted by fans.The RenX remakes of the classical maps are a lot larger than the originals, scaled about 1.5x larger. It should hold larger player counts just fine. Are you sure? I haven't noticed that difference on islands or walls Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HaTe Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 They aren't 1.5x bigger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
super_gsx Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Server option to disable superweapons would be nice. Everything else you said is a bad idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valor Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 I'm with this until we get an ETA on a fix for all the glitched nuke spots. Despite how integral ion/nukes are to the game, I feel this has gotten way out of hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stargazer Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Back when Westwood was still active and had a had active forums I suggested that a new class be introduced to both sides. It was liked by most if I recall, but I believe it was Divinoch ( I probably murdered his name it's been soon long ) said that due to limitations that it couldn't be done. The suggestion was for a dog unit. Faster unit then all normal infantry. Does the typical one shot kill bite attacks if enemy units got close like in the C&C games. But more importantly, at least for GDI. They can, withen specific radious around them, see invisible units. They can also bark, which makes the enemy stealth units flicker, which can help make them be seen by your team. Works on both SBH and Stealth Tanks. Not sure if worth it or even possible. But eh. Always felt that Nod had a huge advantage when defensive structors were down or not present. Heck, people used to use enemy harvestors to get past the advance guard towers a lot on specific maps pike cities. Out of curiousity, can you still plant where a harvestor sots to put tiberium into the refiner and have the harvestor make it block any attempts to disarm the beacon because it's sittig on the beacon? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PermaGrin Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 An option like this may come in the end. At this point we have a large amount of "server side options" that people would like to see. Unsure on how many is actually feasible before we start running into too much clutter. Once we start looking into expanding the options to customize a server, pretty sure "all" can not make it in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unit Posted March 14, 2014 Share Posted March 14, 2014 Words actually most of my play time like 2394570384570 hours was in 25 vs 25 player games. that is perfectly fine for all stock renegade maps. you are insane if you think 200 players on any stock map is 'good' or 'skillful', playing with less than 15 per side is stupid, playing with more than 25 a side is just as stupid. 200 players with a vehicle limit of 10 a mine limit of 30. good luck against that pack of 50 prototype ion cannons, gunners, havocs hell even 50 free infantry machine guns could maul a mammoth tank in seconds. or those 30 sbh in your base all planting nukes and c4ing your buildings. maybe in girlpants timed AOW matches where the map ends even if you spend the entire map pissing in a corner you might like it, i dont play boring that sissy yawn-fest. I play marathon like real renegade players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.