Getting into this game isn't easy.. I can see how newcomers would quickly move on.

[RelentlessChaos]

Maybe it's because I'm older now compared to when I played the original Renegade back in the day, or maybe I was too young back then to realize the flaws of this game. For Renegade X, these online matches can be extremely frustrating or never ending and tedious. I think one reason for that is the fact that people spend several minutes just trying to kill each other.. in other words, is it me or does everything in this game have a 1% accuracy rating? If not that, then barely anything does damage so it takes forever to push the opposing team back. Honestly, I'm not sure what it is that makes these matches so hard to finish off. Perhaps it's just the fact that there's too much to take on when trying to destroy enemy buildings.

Anyways, what is it exactly about this game that keeps people playing? Is it just the nostalgia factor of the original Renegade and being in the universe from a first person perspective? That's probably it for me.. otherwise, I would rather be playing a real FPS or RTS C&C game.

Edited March 22, 2017 by RelentlessChaos

[boxes]

Games are long mostly because of flawed map design and lack of proper re-additive gameplay mechanics 

[yosh56]

3 hours ago, CampinJeff said:

Games are long mostly because of flawed map design

It depends on what we're referring to as 'long'. I'd consider 40 minutes pretty average considering the nature of the game, and things under like 20 minutes are usually less interesting maps that just ended in a rush and wait for surrender. 

 

4 hours ago, RelentlessChaos said:

or does everything in this game have a 1% accuracy rating?

There's like literally no spread on any of the weapons beyond the LCG and the SMG. Autorifle's is only noticeable after like 50m.

4 hours ago, RelentlessChaos said:

first person perspective

^ Third person*

 

4 hours ago, RelentlessChaos said:

what is it exactly about this game that keeps people playing?

More interesting community than most games, especially since it's pretty small. Most games I just feel like I'm slogging around with a bunch of adaptive bots. 

 

Also because it feels like it has more substance than most, and can keep my attention. I start falling asleep on RTSs after 20 minutes in one match, so if they're not done by then then I'm probably going to quit on account of boredom. I haven't bought an FPS since Overwatch, and that one I mostly only play because it's with a bunch of people that play RenX. BattleField never held my interest after Bad Company 2, and I only played that because of the group of people I was hanging with. Overall most games just sort of... force themselves to an end with time limits, or hidden time limits (i.e tickets from BF). Playing the same re-skinned games. over and over got very boring, really quickly. And yes I just called COD, Battlefield, P

Chea, while I can't for the love of God stand Old Renegade anymore, this is just way more entertaining and at least now has a reason to grind with veterancy (and not the pretty much useless vet system from Old Ren's servers). 

 

4 hours ago, RelentlessChaos said:

That's probably it for me.. otherwise, I would rather be playing a real FPS or RTS C&C game.

Way to suddenly sound like a dick in your last sentence. 

 

----------

3 hours ago, CampinJeff said:

lack of proper re-additive gameplay mechanics 

There's only so much you can do without suddenly turning every game into either a 10 minute rush fest, or go the other route and make it so the game isn't punishing enough for being too defensive, so killing a building feels like little more than a slap on the wrist. 

[RelentlessChaos]

5 hours ago, yosh56 said:

^ Third person*

 

I know you are a developer and all, but are you aware that there is also a first person view feature in both Renegade & Renegade X? The only games that allows you to be in the first person view within the Command and Conquer universe (one of the biggest selling points). Hence the reason I chose to say first over third.

Edited March 23, 2017 by RelentlessChaos

[Xtractor]

Game too long : Countless time I played old Ren for Hours in never ending match .

If old renegade is your thing, stick with it and have fun ,thats the purpose of video gaming.

I played Both games and will never come back to old Ren I have move on  ..RenX FTW !

 

[boxes]

7 hours ago, RelentlessChaos said:

I know you are a developer and all, but are you aware that there is also a first person view feature in both Renegade & Renegade X? The only games that allows you to be in the first person view within the Command and Conquer universe (one of the biggest selling points). Hence the reason I chose to say first over third.

He's joking, first person in renx is pretty much obsolete 

[testman]

1 hour ago, CampinJeff said:

He's joking, first person in renx is pretty much obsolete 

B-b-but I play in first person.
>top kek bro do you even tactical advantage
M-muh immersion

[LavaDr4gon]

Nostalgia definitely is the biggest reason why people play this game. 

Another thing is that new players find it difficult to learn this game, quickly at least.  Lack of tutorial or any experience of this game mode tends to scare people off.  Take a look at this stream of a player who was new to the game:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GEEXVoZyQI

 

[vandal33]

21 hours ago, RelentlessChaos said:

Anyways, what is it exactly about this game that keeps people playing? ................. I would rather be playing a real FPS or RTS C&C game.

And what is it exactly about "a real FPS or RTS C&C game" that keeps you playing them? If you like FPS and RTS C&C game, Renegade is the FPS version of C&C in a way, that's what keeps people playing it.

Sure, the game is quite different than other FPS games, but what's the point of playing a game if it's exactly the same like the other so that's what keeping people playing the game. If you do not like how renegade x is different, try to adapt or..... stick to whatever games that work for you. It isn't newbie-friendly like you said, it just needs more time and practicing. If you're an old renegade player and also play "real FPS", it should be okay to stay.

[RelentlessChaos]

10 hours ago, vandal33 said:

And what is it exactly about "a real FPS or RTS C&C game" that keeps you playing them? If you like FPS and RTS C&C game, Renegade is the FPS version of C&C in a way, that's what keeps people playing it.

That's exactly what I said in the OP, people stay in order to experience that first person perspective in the C&C universe. That's the only reason I stay despite all the frustrations that the game has to offer each and every match. 
 

10 hours ago, LavaDr4gon said:

Nostalgia definitely is the biggest reason why people play this game. 

Another thing is that new players find it difficult to learn this game, quickly at least.  Lack of tutorial or any experience of this game mode tends to scare people off.  Take a look at this stream of a player who was new to the game:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GEEXVoZyQI

 

Yes, a tutorial would be nice and would help out new players. Overall, I really don't see this game appealing to new players at all. Don't get me wrong, I would love to see the game gain some popularity, but I definitely do not see that happening. Again, I'm almost certain anyone who continues to play this game does it because they grew up with RTS C&C games or also played the original Renegade.

Edited March 24, 2017 by RelentlessChaos

[djlaptop]

I think high playercounts account for many of the stalemates and long games. Anything over about 32 players becomes nearly impossible for a single player's strategy to make a difference (with a few exceptions). Larger games undoubtedly require teamwork, which can be difficult for newcomers as they haven't even figured out basic game mechanics yet.

[Quinc3y]

2 hours ago, djlaptop said:

high playercounts account for many of the stalemates and long games.

On 23.03.2017 at 1:27 AM, CampinJeff said:

flawed map design

These two combined, pretty much. Few small things here and there, but these two are the main reason why so many public games turned into boring slugfests.

[Sn4ke]

On 23.3.2017 at 10:25 PM, LavaDr4gon said:

 

I like how Ryz is acting in this video (team-/globalchat)

[Xtractor]

^^ This guy is realy realy new to the game ..there a need to watch a very Basic tutorial before going into a new game imo.

Talking about tutorial ,why the basic fobi tuto isnt in the launcher (before launching the game a short basic tuto would be handy) ,there no need of an advance tutorial at this point (like mining and starg ,characters choices and their weapons/abilities...).

But just covering the basic ,who you are, whats the goal ,your base ,your economy ,how change/buy character, how  to repair and protect your buildings is enought. Like any other games ,if you like it, you go watch more tutos for perfecting your game knowledge.

 

Edited March 25, 2017 by Xtractor

[Guest Gliven]

he looked like he was new to shooters in general to be honest. regarding that multiplayer madness video.

[RelentlessChaos]

23 hours ago, djlaptop said:

I think high playercounts account for many of the stalemates and long games. Anything over about 32 players becomes nearly impossible for a single player's strategy to make a difference (with a few exceptions). Larger games undoubtedly require teamwork, which can be difficult for newcomers as they haven't even figured out basic game mechanics yet.

Yeah, kind of what I said earlier about there is too much to take on. In other words, vehicles, infantry, helicopters, base defenses, mines, etc.

 

On 3/22/2017 at 5:27 PM, CampinJeff said:

Games are long mostly because of flawed map design and lack of proper re-additive gameplay mechanics 

Definitely this the more I play, I can't stand half of the maps since they seem to give an advantage to GDI. 

Example = Under... Nod just gets camped at their base entrance with mammoths and MLRS.

 

Edited March 26, 2017 by RelentlessChaos

[Madkill40]

The moment a game on the FPS of an RTS lasts longer than a game on the RTS itself.  

With a game like Renegade X, like a lot of games where tactics are a concern, it is a good idea to see what another player is doing and to copy them. Monkey-see, Monkey-doo and thus is practice. 

When I was younger and played original Renegade I'd always assume the guys with the higher scores were the guys to follow and pay attention to because their score meant they were most into the fight, but that doesn't seem to be the case in Renegade X maybe because a lot of games fall under luck than actual tactics or maybe its just as I'm older I'm not as naive to this games' playing style.

In all honesty, the loading screens without actual gameplay information or even map-based information are the biggest step back from progress Renegade-X ever took from being easy on the newbies. I've never liked that. I've even got a detailed info screen planned out for CNC-Frostbite. [A map overview with indicated routes, additional gameplay information for new players as well]

[LavaDr4gon]

50 minutes ago, Madkill40 said:

In all honesty, the loading screens without actual gameplay information or even map-based information are the biggest step back from progress Renegade-X ever took from being easy on the newbies. I've never liked that. I've even got a detailed info screen planned out for CNC-Frostbite. [A map overview with indicated routes, additional gameplay information for new players as well]

Its true that the loading screen doesn't provide useful information, but too detailed loading screens (beta 4) aren't helpful either.  Loading screens usually last a couple of seconds and should only contain that much information. 

I guess a useful place to put tips and advice would be whenever you die.  As the game progresses with longer spawn times, more helpful tips can be displayed.

[Madkill40]

5 minutes ago, LavaDr4gon said:

Its true that the loading screen doesn't provide useful information, but too detailed loading screens (beta 4) aren't helpful either.  Loading screens usually last a couple of seconds and should only contain that much information. 

I guess a useful place to put tips and advice would be whenever you die.  As the game progresses with longer spawn times, more helpful tips can be displayed.

Good point.

Maybe an additional UI with a key-shortcut which is basically a "How to play" board for multiplayer games, something players can refer back to if they're unsure of anything.

[Canucck]

On 3/25/2017 at 6:53 AM, djlaptop said:

I think high playercounts account for many of the stalemates and long games. Anything over about 32 players becomes nearly impossible for a single player's strategy to make a difference (with a few exceptions). Larger games undoubtedly require teamwork, which can be difficult for newcomers as they haven't even figured out basic game mechanics yet.

+1

The only servers 40p was ever fun on were thepitts and moonlightshakers, because both were a collection of the best players from each region all gathered in one server every night. Normal games were like renx pugs where nearly everyone was on the same level as the top5 players in this game. Any other 40p+ server was only popular because they had a high a00 name.

 

60p is just retarded, and so is increasing the vehicle limit on any map no matter what the player limit. It is exponentially harder for 10 attacking vehicles to kill 10 defending vehicle compared to 8 attacking killing 8 defending.

Edited March 26, 2017 by Canucck

[yosh56]

4 hours ago, Canucck said:

and so is increasing the vehicle limit on any map no matter what the player limit. It is exponentially harder for 10 attacking vehicles to kill 10 defending vehicle compared to 8 attacking killing 8 defending.

This myth's been very much debunked.. Reservoir is actually capable of ending now that it has a higher vehicle limit.  'nuk just mad cuz it's less people for him to snipe.

Also... I haven't really run into that many stalemates since I've been playing recently. Everything good well and over on average of 40 minutes, with Under/Reservoir usually over by 60-90 minutes.   Still not a fan of 60 players, but I don't think its as detrimental as most make it out to be. 

 

[boxes]

The real stalemates happen when both teams are missing structures, most notably the refineries, and it doesn't matter what map it's is being played on. Game will last hours long because rushes are a lot riskier and options to blow buildings up get narrowed down.

[j0g32]

How about getting back to the "How-to: C&C mode" loading screens, but also with the Mininap overview of the current level ?

 

[Shadow277]

Would it be possible to remaster the original campaign?
Or at least a tutorial map to facilitate a better learning curve?

[j0g32]

3 hours ago, Shadow277 said:

Would it be possible to remaster the original campaign?
Or at least a tutorial map to facilitate a better learning curve?

 

we're working on it

 

[Madkill40]

On 3/27/2017 at 1:58 AM, CampinJeff said:

The real stalemates happen when both teams are missing structures, most notably the refineries, and it doesn't matter what map it's is being played on. Game will last hours long because rushes are a lot riskier and options to blow buildings up get narrowed down.

Players got mad when the time limit ran out and a game was decided by score. 

Imagine an infantry-only-maps AOW server with a time limit of 20 minutes, for short games. 

Actual full-base maps on servers running marathon.

All those infantry-only maps that exist (there's more than just valley) which don't get played cos nobody wants to marathon on infantry-only.

[Red]

Bumping a slightly-old thread instead of making a new one.  Btw, funny since when it was decided by score was the best, a motivation for a real push to get points and do something.

I've had a hell of a time trying to get people into the game and I've basically given up.  Probably gonna pull the vids I posted on youtube awhile back because tired of listening to them bitch.  It's usually not the complexity that gets them, it's the 1k whoring.  There's enough drama over people claiming X or Y is or isn't cheating, and the game needs restructuring in infantry combat badly to balance it out.  I'm sick of bringing friends on, urging them to install and that it's good, teaching them how everything works with the buildings and such if they aren't used to Ren-like games, and then someone insta-headshots them with a Havoc or a Doza repeatedly until they quit (usually takes about 2-3 times).

I've been playing for over a year now just Renx, and played APB for years, and I'm even utterly disgusted with it.  This stuff needs serious changing.  Catering only to people who play every day at higher level in a few classes poisons the game.

Possible ideas:

• far more weapon spread while moving.  Reduces the bunnyhop, incentive for more tactically-oriented play.  Bunnyhop was always cancer anyway
• add ballistics and spread to snipers.  A Path Beyond has excellent sniper mechanics, there are range lines etched on the scope icon and the round is hard to see but visible, has time and drop
• Make 1-hit kills harder.  A shot to a helmet shouldn't insta-kill, only to the lower section.
• reduce ease of sniper base-camping especially
• make 1-hit weapons not able to be used accurately insta-kill from hip (seriously wtf)
• have "breathing effects"
• literally anything but current situation

Also might be good to have a more effective anti-aimbot solution to quell accusations and frustrations.  This is a more complicated topic for another time, but, there are various technical solutions that are possible.  Notably simple statistical analysis should provide insight.  Human beings have a lower bound of reaction time and a player k/d bell curve with the same class shouldn't exceed 4:1.

Worth adding: infantry combat imbalance generally is, 9 times out of 10, what makes me leave games.  The imbalance multiplies when several people leave, as one team is short, usually of better players.

Edited June 5, 2017 by Red

[boxes]

Restricting infantry movement further isn't the right idea because it makes 1-shot weapons even easier to use. Bunny-hop is fine because it doesn't incrementally increase your speed unlike for example the source engine. 

You are right in the fact that 1-shot weapons are too strong in that they can completely lopside an infantry fight when in the right hands, I've been pointing that out frequently to the devs. However instead of directly nerfing them, the better way to deal with it is to buff every other weapon's TTK and performance, particularly removing recoil entirely or increasing headshot damage for all weapons. Another frequent complaint is that infantry combat is too spongy for automatic weapons. 

[yosh56]

I think the biggest reason for complaining about the automatic weapons being spongy is actually... because OHKOs exist. That's what I've seen from my stealthy ventures into PUBs and people's random thoughts. 

I honestly don't find sniper's long range abilities all that crazy, though I rarely get sniped since I just kinda spam shift in the weirdest patterns possible, and rarely ever jump. 

 

11 hours ago, Red said:

far more weapon spread while moving.  Reduces the bunnyhop, incentive for more tactically-oriented play.  Bunnyhop was always cancer anyway

Bunny hopping actually makes it easier to hit you in this game considering there's no real acceleration in the air... 

About the only thing I can really accept when it comes to snipers, as somebody who doesn't really have that many issues with them, is that they still seem kinda' strong in CQC.. Maybe a true health nerf, like Engineer levels of health nerf, or hip-fire nerf. Other infantry combat seems mostly adequate... People die fairly fast even from the basic weapons now, just not so fast that infantry start feeling useless. 

[RoundShades]

Still going to say, snipers, and even other OHKO, wouldn't be that bad, with sensible headshot multipliers, coupled with sniper and PIC/Rail rounds following kevlar armor mechanics. Snipers killing engineers, somewhat their job. I'm beginning to think 500s shouldn't even be able to kill officers with a single headshot (devastating damage is still acceptable, just not instakill), and 1ks shouldn't be able to bodyshot-kill without a veterancy advantage or instakill on heashot any kevlar over 400 credits. It's just not their job. I'd even vouch for a machinepistol or something to compensate for damage reduction.

[vandal33]

1k characters oneshot kill against base level infantry is fine as long as the auto rifle, shotgun and flamethrower does much more damage to them.

[CommanderConnery]

the only annoying thing is when your airfield/weapons factory dies 5 minutes in

[Madkill40]

On 6/5/2017 at 3:53 PM, YagiHige said:

Still going to say, snipers, and even other OHKO, wouldn't be that bad, with sensible headshot multipliers, coupled with sniper and PIC/Rail rounds following kevlar armor mechanics. Snipers killing engineers, somewhat their job. I'm beginning to think 500s shouldn't even be able to kill officers with a single headshot (devastating damage is still acceptable, just not instakill), and 1ks shouldn't be able to bodyshot-kill without a veterancy advantage or instakill on heashot any kevlar over 400 credits. It's just not their job. I'd even vouch for a machinepistol or something to compensate for damage reduction.

Given that recoil and gun stabilisation doesn't exist in RenX, this actually seems pretty fair.