When is the next patch?

[RelentlessChaos]

Just wondering when, if it's known when.

[Ryz]

And what will be in it?

I am fine with how the game is right now, but I am curious what will be added or improved.

[Ap2000]

I am not a fan of "when is XYZ coming?" threads at all, but since it's already there...

And what will be in it?

I am fine with how the game is right now, but I am curious what will be added or improved.

Here's hope for mines being only placeable on the ground, the ref not giving any more when destroyed and airdrops completely removed.

[Ryz]

I think airdrops will stay, but be part of a veteran system.

[RypeL]

People that just look at airdrops as black or white help to get my motivation to still work on this into the negative numbers.

[Ap2000]

People that just look at airdrops as black or white help to get my motivation to still work on this into the negative numbers.

Well, they do look cool and I'm sure they weren't easy to program, but I can't be convinced that a team should still be able to buy vehicles when their WF/airstrip is down, no matter the conditions.

Being able to buy vehicles in the enemy's building would be quite crazy. lol

But I don't think that'd be good from a balancing point of view.

I'd still like to be able to steal vehicles shortly after they were produced, though.

[RoundShades]

I like the airdrops, but they cause building loss to have little to no effect now.

That is NOT the drops fault. They do more good than harm: Keep a game from being an "abandon this and play any other game off steam" situation, because why stick with a sinking ship? That mentality is for just us old Renegade players, a community it makes not.

The culprit, is the fact that 3000 dollar mammoth tanks are still obtainable at a difficulty of about 8 or 9 out of 10. The player getting that sort of money, is like 3-7 minutes into a game, which isn't that much in an AOW, let alone a marathon. You play like 3 free classes for 2 minutes, and you can already afford a thousand dollar toy.

The culprit, is credit abundance. Drops would even function better right now, without veterancy, if their cost were up'd. The entire game including drops would function better right now, if credit ticks were either 75% the current speed or 50% current speed with 3 credits instead of 2 and silos and dead refs granting 1 credit at slower ticks or something. Counter it a bit with higher credit earnings for kills or vehicle destruction. But a lot of the game is pretty cheap to get ordinance.

I actually wish you could get infantry at 3x cost when infantry is destroyed. Not just basic neither. I don't mind SBH and Hotwires still being a thing, as long as they suck all the economy out of a team to employ. Same with tanks, I don't mind getting tanks, but a tank should be something you take 10 minutes to get, at least, when the ref is up but vehicle factory is down, and if both are down it should take a team scraping up for just 1 in a dire emergency (a defense mammy). Right now, a vehicle factory down can still amass a rush. What is the cost of 6 flamers without a factory, like just over 10k. 6 people will have over 10k amongst them a lot of the time. By the way, I wish the team bar had total credits as well as total score, so you could see a team's total economy value (not the enemies ofc)

[Xhap]

I think airdrops are the start of a great idea.

Renegade at it's core does involve handicapping your opponent to death, but when is it too much or too little?

I've seen many games in previous patches after the winning team destroys WF/air. Suddenly they want to go lazy, get instagib weapons, and farm instagib bait, as if the game has already been won.

I'll admit, I've done the same both winning and losing. I've lost my heavy armor, my team seem even less interested in communication at this point, instagib in the tunnels, platoon of tanks outside my base. I might have 10k credits at this point but what am I going to spend it on? Spamming EMP at the platoon of tanks for giggles? I may as well afk till next match or kill myself in mid so I can spectate, ending it quicker. I do like marathon servers but they make this case so much worse too when dragging out a lost game.

It's those type of experiences that we do not want new players to endure. We want them to experience how teamwork and strategy can have impact on the battlefield even in a losing situation, how they can download and make a difference on their first game. We want good impressions and stories to travel by mouth or type, instead of how one-sided the match became and then possibly dragged on for two hours, give or take.

[Xtractor]

I'm not a fan of airdrop as it is :

Saw a game where vehicules was dropping one after another on airstrip even if it was destroyed.

So what the point to destroy an airstrip if it still working at that pace.

I think When a building is destroyed it's should stay that way.

Why not making the Hand of Nod doing the same thing ?

It's unfair for the winning team .it's like giving a second chance to the loosing team to win and All work of the winning team goes unnecessary.

Want to make Airdrop or reinforcement make the loosing team work for it if they can't then no airdrop,If they can airdrop should be very minimal

[Axesor]

I think that APC and humvee/buggy should be only vehicles that should be able to buy after losing wf/strip.

Infantry can deter vehicles pretty well and with APC they will have chance to do some rush with 5ppl in it.

[RypeL]

The question is how high the penalty for air drops should be. Atm it's already double the amount of credits. If people can still afford them too often there are too many credits in the game wich many people argue is the case and should indeed be patched.

[HaTe]

When the vet system is made, won't the air drops just cost VP?

If you're talking temporarily, I think that they should only be purchasable every ten minutes. Joining after the WF/airstrip is dead bug should be fixed too though.

I really almost never find myself with an abundance of credits, personally. Probably because I always infantry rush and kill other infantry, but I almost never have credits to waste away.

[Ryz]

People that just look at airdrops as black or white help to get my motivation to still work on this into the negative numbers.

Luckely there are still players who also see certain grades of gray between black and white.

And yeah I can understand this isn't easy. If you release something people complain, if you don't release anything... ppl complain. I think you guys are doing a great job.

What would help the game and the developers is communication on one side, and maybe leading the debate sou you have a clear outcome. Just like Havoc did with polls about specific subjects. Yeah you will still have people complaining, but at least you get a better view on what the community feels about a subject by simple handling them a few options.

[Ap2000]

The question is how high the penalty for air drops should be. Atm it's already double the amount of credits. If people can still afford them too often there are too many credits in the game wich many people argue is the case and should indeed be patched.

Even a dead ref + silo still give a ton of free credits.

[RypeL]

Yeah Ryz i agree, thats why for example i made the "your top 5 balance issues" thread. I think more like that will follow.

[epicelite]

I think airdrops would be fine if you limit it to light vehicles such as Humvee/APC.

[RypeL]

Airdrops should help focussed teams to make a comeback. You cant make a decent push with just humvees. The idea behind airdrops is that you save up for them and then have some few opportunities to make a counter push.

[HaTe]

When the vet system is made, won't the air drops just cost VP?

[RypeL]

When the vet system is made, won't the air drops just cost VP?

First lets try to get some balance patching going. Then lets see if i can motivate myself to work on a VP system.

[Xtractor]

Lets assume NOD has only ref up

and GDI has all buildings

NOD via airdrops organize an ST rush and destroyed all GDI base ..NOD win !

To me is kind of unfair ,GDI had destroyed previously the AStrip and should have the advantage of this Action .

It's like 2 childs playing together and one say to the other ..'No its doesnt count lets redo it'

and BTW please stay with us devs you made a tremendous good game honestly.I heard somewhere else "Renegade X is in advance on his time "

[HaTe]

3 times cost, 10 minutes to purchase a vehicle per individual?

And yes, we really do appreciate the work. There's 70+ people playing at times during the day, and we all love the game, but just want it to keep improving moving forward. I think it's a good sign when people get worked up and try to get involved in the process - it means that they enjoy the game so much that they feel strongly about it.

[Xtractor]

3 times cost, 10 minutes to purchase a vehicle per individual?

And yes, we really do appreciate the work. There's 70+ people playing at times during the day, and we all love the game, but just want it to keep improving moving forward. I think it's a good sign when people get worked up and try to get involved in the process - it means that they enjoy the game so much that they feel strongly about it.

I vote for a drop of 10 ultra Bots enginers that will repair the destroyed AS/WF for the cost of 100 000 credits

(realy idk whats the best thing to do

[boxes]

Airdrops are fine as they are, it's just the credit system that's a little broken atm.

[RoundShades]

Airdrops are fine as they are, it's just the credit system that's a little broken atm.

I say this a lot too.

Really, there are 2 ways to fix it though, but 1 fixes a whole lot of other things too.

1) The quick fix is, like Hate said, make vehicles have a 9 minute cooldown and cost 3x more. This would make destroying a factory effective, albeit not completely remove vehicles from the enemy hands.

2) The better fix, is giving vehicles an 8 minute cooldown, cost 2x more, and just turn the credit income down a notch.

This also fixes seeing 1k units nonstop after 4 minutes into the game, for the remainder of the next 30 minutes.

It also fixes the value of the ref, if you lose it you get some passive credits but you need credits more if you don't get thousands by minute 4. I NEVER target the ref after 8 minutes in the game, it's death would never be noticed.

After 12 minutes in the game, a factory death isn't really noticed if the ref was alive the whole time, too much spare cash.

Really, the Bar/HoN are more noticable kills, which honestly you should be able to buy more infantry in my opinion, sbh for nod and hotwires for gdi would be fine if credit income was reduced and they cost 1k each with bar/hon down and 2k if bar/hon and pp are down? You can say allowing sbh without HoN would buff Nod too much, but the current situation buffs GDI too much because without vehicles they still have vehicles and without infantry Nod is in a much worse situation when they should be comparable.

[Ap2000]

Really, the Bar/HoN are more noticable kills, which honestly you should be able to buy more infantry in my opinion, sbh for nod and hotwires for gdi would be fine if credit income was reduced and they cost 1k each with bar/hon down and 2k if bar/hon and pp are down?

Nooooo please stop it already with the building nerfing.

[Ryz]

I think, the way I see the game, killing buildings is opting out certain attacks. HON down means NO SBH or tech unless they already have them. Bar down also means no hottie, snipers, unless they actually have them. If you can still get techs / hotties / sbh / sniper than there is just NO point killing the building. It would make the game a stalemate and I think we've seen enough off that

[RoundShades]

I think, the way I see the game, killing buildings is opting out certain attacks. HON down means NO SBH or tech unless they already have them. Bar down also means no hottie, snipers, unless they actually have them. If you can still get techs / hotties / sbh / sniper than there is just NO point killing the building. It would make the game a stalemate and I think we've seen enough off that

Well, I agree with you. That is why, they should be purchaseable for an amount dictated by the economy to be "unsustainable".

The pain everyone has for airdrops, isn't airdrops. It's eco allowing for airdrops being neverending. The idea is good, and even the player numbers show that, because prior to beta 4 an entire server would unpopulate every time a structure was lost because you might as well end the game that very moment, except it doesn't end for another 20 minutes of torture that most people realize they don't have to sit through.

Even if airdrops were removed as well as infantry purchases when structures were destroyed, would you see playercount being higher? Would you honestly back the economy being "okay"? "Yeah, it is perfectly fine to make 1000 credits every 3 minutes".

The game is less broken now sadly, and ignoring real issue for memories of nostalgia, isn't going to help. If anything, airdrops have done 1 good thing: Showed us that we could honest double the cost of every tank in the game and it wouldn't change their use, and/or we could half the economy and it wouldn't break the game.

When the vet system is made, won't the air drops just cost VP?

First lets try to get some balance patching going. Then lets see if i can motivate myself to work on a VP system.

If they are interested in balance patching, the likely next step is just rebalancing airdrops on the opposite end of the scale, with 3x cost and 9 minute cooldowns. That means, if a building is destroyed early in a AOW game, you get 3 tanks for 7200 credits across 27 minutes of the game? I agree with that next step personally, people should see the two ends of the candle before they decide the entire system is bad. I think people would like harsher balance airdrops more than the softer balanced ones we have now.

[TheOlsenTwins]

Or 2x the cost and only buggy/hummvee, APC and arty/MRLS

Makes the buildings loss visible but still gives a bit of hope

(and less credits per ref-tick)

[RypeL]

We will probably reduce the ammount of credits you get by damaging/repairing vehicles/buildings (not infantry) quite a bit.

[Ap2000]

We will probably reduce the ammount of credits you get by damaging/repairing vehicles/buildings (not infantry) quite a bit.

This sounds interesting.

Can you go into some more details?

[RypeL]

Maybe like 30% less credits for damaging/repairing vehicles/buildings. Motivation has been low for various reasons so theres not much progress on the patch yet.

[HaTe]

Maybe like 30% less credits for damaging/repairing vehicles/buildings. Motivation has been low for various reasons so theres not much progress on the patch yet.

I think this is a good idea.

[RoundShades]

We will probably reduce the ammount of credits you get by damaging/repairing vehicles/buildings (not infantry) quite a bit.

This sounds interesting.

Can you go into some more details?

Some elitist, I think either HaTe or Yosh, mentioned wanting passive credits reduced more than active ones, like combat related ones.

On that note, damaging/repairing buildings is a huge income and is welcomed to be part of the reduction in my opinion.

But it WOULD be nice if the silos granted 1 credit tick. That... will be changed, right?

[cncforever]

Maybe Airdrops, if possible could have vehicles that were weaker, less powerful or would arrive in need of repair from an engineer. Maybe Airdropped vehicles are from a backup storage facility where you had no access to your usual ones.

Perhaps this could be extended to the HON / Bar as well. The higher tier indfantry stil avaliable to you when those buildings die have less on the stats or have disadvantages.

Of course I have no idea if any of that would be possible or if it were, how much work would be involved. Imagine losing the Hon/bar or Strip/WF and only having access to infantry that were more vulnerable and vehicles that would always be slightly outmatched by the ones the opposing team had. Of course you wouldn't want to make them so weak they were not useful but just imagine the Mammy they got no longer had regen or simply had less hit points than the usual Mammy.

Food for thought.

[RypeL]

But it WOULD be nice if the silos granted 1 credit tick. That... will be changed, right?

Yes silo income decrease will be part of it aswell.

[RoundShades]

But it WOULD be nice if the silos granted 1 credit tick. That... will be changed, right?

Yes silo income decrease will be part of it aswell.

I love you. No homo. Not that there is anything wrong with that.

[DoctorB0NG]

Are there any plans to nerf the flechette rifle, rocket soldier and officer? I think the flechette rifle needs some more spread/damage or range decrease, rocket soldier needs a 15-20% damage nerf and officers shouldn't be hitscan.

[HaTe]

yeah flechette needs a minor nerf, especially when equipped by an SBH (I'd prefer it if SBH's couldn't purchase weapons at all, personally). Or at least a price increase. Officer is undoubtedly OP as is. I think that the rocket-soldier is okay as is. For nod, there really isn't many options for anti-air right now, since snipers/ramjets do so little damage to them. Rocket soldiers kind of need to be strong, just for anti-air purposes. I think if anything, how easy the lock-on happens (you don't even really need to be aiming at the target) should be nerfed for that.

[RoundShades]

I agree that the rocket soldiers are one of the most necessary balancing units in the game. They aren't real good at infantry, yet they offer a cheap always available option to specifically counter armor, and combined with a heavy pistol outright counter it even in extreme adversity. That is the kind of unit traits we need.

Honestly, if the officer was as fundamental anti-infantry and medium range light armor, it would be good. A spread increase, clip reduction, and bit of recoil, would do wonders in that regard. Then the officer would get nerfs where needed, longrange infantry melting and light armor melting. It doesn't need to kill artillery in 1 clip, and it doesn't need to kill infantry as fast unless shotgun range in which case it really only hurts the shotgunners so who cares? I personally don't sympathize with shotguns in this game.

[DoctorB0NG]

Agreed. Shotties need a slight damage or ramge nerf and the clipsize of the officer should be reduced.

With rocket soldiers, my main beef is that they kill orcas and Apache in 5 rockets. That seems a little too powerful for how well they lock on, how far the rockets travel and how cheap the actual unit is.

[Canucck]

McFarland makes the officer look like garbage, nerfing it without significant changes to the mcfarland gun would really kill Nod infantry fights. CG doesn't even really need a nerf, just need to be rebalanced to fill a more specific role. Something like doubling the RoF and halving the bullet damage, or the reverse, would keep dps the same but significantly change how the gun is used.

[RoundShades]

McFarland makes the officer look like garbage, nerfing it without significant changes to the mcfarland gun would really kill Nod infantry fights. CG doesn't even really need a nerf, just need to be rebalanced to fill a more specific role. Something like doubling the RoF and halving the bullet damage, or the reverse, would keep dps the same but significantly change how the gun is used.

It needs a much smaller clip. That is what melts light armor, the continuous nonstop damage without breaks.

Besides that, as long as it has a percentage of miss per range, it would be fine. Then it could kill at barreltap or arms reach in 1 second, but at the shotgunners max range it would start to do inconsistent damage to infantry as an occasional bullet hits it. It would still hit vehicles with their large hitbox, which is why it needs less ammo, or as you suggested less damage per bullet and more rate of fire, so a full clip does not finish an artillery from full health to dead.

Oh, and McFarland is another perfect example of utility. He takes 8 shots to kill someone over the course of 10+ seconds, but he can do it from complete cover. His shotgun can 2-3 hit kill someone, but an actual shotgun can 1-2 hit kill, and as I found out against a really good player, a shotgun 1 hit death is a very real threat as a mcfarland. One of those WarX guys made me have to never engage close range with them because it was instant death against them in 1 shot most of the time, and 2 shots if not.

Chem trooper is more than a suitable substitute for Nod. It melts infantry even faster and is immune to tiberium, just not good against tanks compared to officer.

[XD_ERROR_XD]

Yeah i know, late response, but i am still of the opinion to increase vehicle prices every time you buy one after vehicle factory destruction.

The problem here is, even with a passive credit count of 0, 1200 points+ can be earned within 10 minutes of tryharding (with another vehicle). Once you get yourself a vehicle and put some good thought into your vehicle combat (know when to retreat, push, blah blah), you will not lose money and end up with an infinite amount of vehicles.

My thought behind this change is that you should get punished more over time if your team is incapable of holding off the enemy for long enough (AOW) or 'properly' rushing the enemy team (marathon). The current system is too... noob-proof. Money is indeed too easily earnt. If you have rushed with your team multiple times but still failed, there has to be a legitimate reason behind this, and should NOT remain un-punished. even with a 0 credit count, the current system will not be fool-proof. The opportunity should always be there, but should be harder to maintain over time, so campers with a big money stack can still be punished. Give a team a chance to retaliate though, immediate punishment can be quite harsh (but often fair). Even campers can get killed with proper co-ordination, and your team should be rewarded properly if they managed to weaken the enemy.

I would suggest at least a 50% increase of the original vehicle price after every purchase, which could be doubled with the loss of a Power Plant.

[RoundShades]

Yeah i know, late response, but i am still of the opinion to increase vehicle prices every time you buy one after vehicle factory destruction.

The problem here is, even with a passive credit count of 0, 1200 points+ can be earned within 10 minutes of tryharding (with another vehicle). Once you get yourself a vehicle and put some good thought into your vehicle combat (know when to retreat, push, blah blah), you will not lose money and end up with an infinite amount of vehicles.

My thought behind this change is that you should get punished more over time if your team is incapable of holding off the enemy for long enough (AOW) or 'properly' rushing the enemy team (marathon). The current system is too... noob-proof. Money is indeed too easily earnt. If you have rushed with your team multiple times but still failed, there has to be a legitimate reason behind this, and should NOT remain un-punished. even with a 0 credit count, the current system will not be fool-proof. The opportunity should always be there, but should be harder to maintain over time, so campers with a big money stack can still be punished. Give a team a chance to retaliate though, immediate punishment can be quite harsh (but often fair). Even campers can get killed with proper co-ordination, and your team should be rewarded properly if they managed to weaken the enemy.

I would suggest at least a 50% increase of the original vehicle price after every purchase, which could be doubled with the loss of a Power Plant.

Now this also isn't a bad idea that for some reason I nor anyone else thought of.

So, basically, after a factory is down, their price is increased by double, and every individual that buys a vehicle has a personal cost increase of 50% for their next one. That way it serverely cripples one person funding his team with vehicles from his bottomless credit pool, as well as each vehicle being incredibly important but not ENTIRELY irreplaceable. Matter of fact, this exponentially increases the "loss" of a factory over time, making it virtually a "total loss" in only a few purchases.

Just to make it fair to purchase multiple humvees over 1 larger vehicle, maybe it should instead add the cost of your last vehicle, to your next vehicle, accumulatively. Hell, that would be a substancial nerf, in a very good place between "too lenient" and "instant total loss".

[HaTe]

Agreed. Shotties need a slight damage or ramge nerf and the clipsize of the officer should be reduced.

With rocket soldiers, my main beef is that they kill orcas and Apache in 5 rockets. That seems a little too powerful for how well they lock on, how far the rockets travel and how cheap the actual unit is.

I personally think that the ramjet/sniper rifle should be more effective against light armor (like in the original) and then the rocket soldier could see a nerf. Just nerfing it now though would provide nod even more of a disadvantage on flying maps. Ramjets should do ~65-75% damage to orcas/apaches per clip, rather than the current 45%. But yeah, shotties need a spread increase at the very least.

McFarland makes the officer look like garbage, nerfing it without significant changes to the mcfarland gun would really kill Nod infantry fights. CG doesn't even really need a nerf, just need to be rebalanced to fill a more specific role. Something like doubling the RoF and halving the bullet damage, or the reverse, would keep dps the same but significantly change how the gun is used.

I feel like no one mentions the mcfarland really, but how OP this unit is in the right hands is kind of insane. Splitting the RoF of the mcfarland in half would be a good solution. I personally think the LCG is fine where he is. He's versatile and effective, but not overly effective.

Increasing the cost of the next vehicle by 50% each time per airdrop would be a fine solution too. Yesterday on Xmoutain i killed the WF and one person with something like 40k credits just kept being able to buying a new med after I would kill it after 5 minutes without a problem. Making the price increase each time seems like a good and logical solution. Or, perhaps, increasing the time to purchase by 50%.

[RoundShades]

Mcfarland nor Rocket Soldier, are as strong as heavy pistol right now against vehicles. Let that sink in. Honestly, 1 clip takes 9% off a med tank, in 5 seconds. In that regard, if not nerfed, its name should be changed to the anti-armor handgun so that is much more clear, nobody chooses it over the carbine currently despite it's very different and effective role.

Well, McFarland is still not as strong as officer and shotgunner, so still. More situational, sure. His projectile also has too much range for sure, and is too fast to dodge.

[XD_ERROR_XD]

The Heavy Pistol's weakness should be ammo. There is no way you will take out a vehicle with full health before 1) you get killed, or 2) run out of ammo.

Heavy pistol should simply have 2 magazines less to fire with, the rocket soldier... That's more of a game mechanic which makes it powerful. all missiles can have an extreme arc and can slow down in mid-air to turn more effectively (MRLS, Stank, Rocket Soldier)

Here's the maximum firing arc for the MRLS in C&C Renegade:

Please note that the missiles do not slow down mid-air, and therefore is not able to turn in extreme angles. The same principle applies with every homing missile. Fix this and MRLS won't be OP anymore against acraft, and rocket soldiers against infantry.

[Canucck]

Mcfarland nor Rocket Soldier, are as strong as heavy pistol right now against vehicles. Let that sink in. Honestly, 1 clip takes 9% off a med tank, in 5 seconds.

3 mcfarland shots take ~10% off a med, in less time. A full clip (12) is 38%, it's 3 clips to do the same with a heavy pistol and several seconds slower. Mcfarland has higher burst, higher dps, and more damage over time compared to the heavy pistol

[Alkaline!]

rocket is perfect as is, if you are going to nerf tank damage than increase aircraft damage, rocket should be able to take out orca in 4 hits, same for apache.

Flying cockroaches must die.