Quo Vadis

[Guest once upon the time]

                                                                           Quo Vadis Renegade X

 

 

Here are a few comments on how I see the situation at the moment.

I am also aware that there are already a lot of topics about it, which usually go down again and again.

You can be divided and it's just fine, but some people should not look too black ,
and others should not just close their eyes and say everything is alright.

 

1.     The number of players has been stagnant for years. Why?

Game changes was done and people left the game, because they didn’t like the changes. 
New player lost fast the interesst in this game because of the 
different gameplay in relation to other games.

 

Veteran system: 

The actual System is in my opinion dump, because its pushing a game to fast ends on Marathon too.

Heroic Tanks, “Rambo” Characters and this should be fun?

Nothing against a Veteran System but in a good way like more HP for Characters (but no self- healing).

Tanks should be out of the system, because try to kill a “Heroic Mammy”. It’s fun?

The Mammut had in the past a slow self- healing and that was in my opinion enough.

 

2.     Number of Player on Server (64)

 

My critic is now going to the Server owners. Do you really think that more ppl will play because of that? Result: No. 

I am still watching the launcher since long time and it is still stagnation.

It looks like that the owner is only looking on “his/her” Server and think he / she is doing a great job for the community. Again wrong.

Why you don’t go back to 40 player and all Server owner work together and help each other to seed a 2nd and a 3rd one. 

By the way some maps are so small for 64 that you have more fun in a rush hour on a highway.

 

3.     Commander Mode

 

Good idea but only for ppl who want to enjoy a leadership. 

Teamplay is Teamplay and you don’t need it. In a public game it is a success when a Team starts to play as a Team without this CM.

All this extra feature is again to reduce the playing time on a Marathon.

Someone remember that a Timed-Match-Modus exists? So why for hell was this implemented?

 

 

 

 

And yes, I stopped playing and if some ppl think that I have no idea about the game you could think this way. 

PS: I know that in a lot of countries are hollydays 

kind regards 
Silent

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 5, 2018 by once upon the time

[TK0104]

Player count has been the same over the past years. In the beginning every Renegade fan was hype: "Damn Renegade coming back! Gotta play it!" So yeah then there were 3-4 servers. But that happens to most games. They die slowly.

From Beta 1 to Beta 5 there were not that big changes to me. Some new maps were added some new weapons and some balancing but that was it during that time. It was most of the time 1 full server as far as I can remember. And thats still this day, after huge changes and additions.

Yes, Renegade X has a complete different game mode than other modern games like Battlefield, Call of Duty etc. Renegade X' game mode: C&C Mode is based on C&C Mode from Renegade, which is now 16 years old. We want to keep C&C Mode C&C Mode. 

 

The veteran system is actually something helpful to have an advantage for you and your team. Back in the day before the system, it felt too balanced. Soldier vs Soldier was the entire game the same. With this system you can have a small advantage later in the game. Giving more damage to the enemy / building etc. Look at CoD. You can customize your weapon to get an advantage which is pretty nice. In RenX its not the same but I hope I can make my point out of this.

 

Having 64 player limits are actually a huge improvent. Before 5.3, we had only servers with a limit of 40 players. I can remember I've been sitting hours and hours in the server browser and waiting till I could join. And even more people were waiting too. I don't have to worry about that anymore. I can join now whenever I want! 

Now I have to agree with you on this one: Some maps are not made for 64 players. But some maps are really big like Outposts, Tunnels, Beach Head (although that one is not in the game) that allows server owners to increase the limit to 64.

 

Commander system is helpful! Organising rushes was kinda hard in team chat cause of random bulls*** was typed in there too. The powers are quite helpful too. I love the offensive and defensive buff. For example in Field: the chance of being locked in base is big. But with using the defensive buff you can push your team out of base and have chance to turn the roles. EMP airstrike can stop the team for a short amount of time. Allowing to control the dumb harverster is the best feature ever! Nobody likes harversters giving no shit and pushing u outside base while the whole opposite team is out there!

 

Maps like Field & Under could still last more than an hour! But people will get bored after an hour locked in base and the opposite team that can't end it cause of 10 people sitting at the MCT repairing 24/7. 

Apparently the players like marathon more than AOW (Timed match) It was popular back in the day but hey times are changing.

So all is this is my opinion how I see the features. So these are no facts only opinions

 

And yes people are on holiday and it's summer so people go outside to have a drink somewhere or go to a festival. I expect the player base will increase somewhere during autumn and have a bunch of players during the winter. The highest PUG playercount is in January so that proofs most of it I guess

 

Playercount first PUG this year:

 

Playercount last PUG:

 

Difference of 13 players. Thats a lot for RenX

[NodSaibot]

The real question is why is this in off topic. 

For the server limit, I only set it to 64 because no other server will ever coordinate with us. I am happy to use the mutator I created and send half the server somewhere else at the end of a match. I could just send them to another one of our servers as well. Either way people will complain, and possibly doing that will just kill the game for that day.

I just don't agree with removing commanders.

And the game has no players probably because there's no advertising for it.

[Guest once upon the time]

@taishōTo your first question: Why here ? It was done by intention because their is in my opinion no big difference between General and Off Topic anymore.

All the other topic end like i wrote in the opening. Sad but true. Thank you for responding.

@TK0104

Thx for answering too. PUG is a good established Institution of this community (Thats correct).

Here my point of view:

18 hours ago, TK0104 said:

The veteran system is actually something helpful to have an advantage for you and your team. Back in the day before the system, it felt too balanced. Soldier vs Soldier was the entire game the same. With this system you can have a small advantage later in the game. Giving more damage to the enemy / building etc

Of course it was more balanced in the past and now its not anymore. With the old balance was more fair and you need more skill and Teamwork.

Imagine a player is joining in a runing game on the actual looser side (is Veteran for e.g) and must fight against Elite or Heroic. Must be real fun ....  for the Heroic player.

18 hours ago, TK0104 said:

Commander system is helpful! Organising rushes was kinda hard in team chat cause of random bulls*** was typed in there too. The powers are quite helpful too. I love the offensive and defensive buff. For example in Field: the chance of being locked in base is big. But with using the defensive buff you can push your team out of base and have chance to turn the roles. EMP airstrike can stop the team for a short amount of time. Allowing to control the dumb harverster is the best feature ever! Nobody likes harversters giving no shit and pushing u outside base while the whole opposite team is out there!

For PuG i agree but in Public games it is killing the gameplay. In this case you have more expirience like I because I dont play anymore on a Public Server.

(I am not talking about only PUG expirience, i clearly mean Public, PUG I never play )

In the past we called it Teamwork without CM (to be fair was not very often ) , but when you was playing as a Team without this additional features it was fun.

Completly disagree in the 64 part. Why the server owner dont work together ? (Still my impression).

18 hours ago, TK0104 said:

Having 64 player limits are actually a huge improvent. Before 5.3, we had only servers with a limit of 40 players. I can remember I've been sitting hours and hours in the server browser and waiting till I could join. And even more people were waiting too. I don't have to worry about that anymore. I can join now whenever I want! 

I played B2 until I think end of B4 , could be start of Beta 5 not sure).

In older betas was a very healthy community who was supporting each other and I never wait hours to join on a 40 player Server. Some People was helping each other to seed a 2nd server and normal both are getting full. One you will remember was TMX and the other was EKT 1.

On weekends normal  2 Server was full (In good times 2 and a half) and in the week often 1 to 2.

Your screenshots are nice, but one question : Is Ren X only Pug? (I dont think so). PUG is  arround 50% or less of the  complete playerbase and the rest are Public Gamer.  Again its nothing against PUG ( It is a great job done in the past and still alive, respect)

Your picture shows only that you have nearly constant player cont while PUG, nothing more.

Let us think positiv with the less 13 player (PUG) and say it is because of the hollydays

@TK0104Please dont take it as a personal offense its not my intention to attack you. I love open discussions.

@taishō

17 hours ago, taishō said:

And the game has no players probably because there's no advertising for it. 

You are absolutly right and its not easy.  I hope Tom will have succes with the advertising, it will be a long way.

I would like to ask you one question too.

Why the most of activities are moved to Discord?

In my opinion a Forum is the soul and the mirror of a community and it looks like we lost the soul when a lot of things switch to Discord.

Discord is great for gaming and Teams like TS too (depends on own taste), but as a community platform not the best way for new ppl.

regards

Silent

Edited August 6, 2018 by once upon the time

[NodSaibot]

For the server limit, it really comes down to what is the most amount of players we can have playing at once? You want to maximize this. While obviously there's a point where it's not worth it, like over 64 players. If you have over 64, the game optimization doesn't become noticeable at all and the game will lag insanely bad. However, if we set limits to 40, only 40 people will be able to play. I think that would end up with more people just sitting and waiting all day for a spot, and usually just forgetting about the game. I am happy to work on splitting a 64 server into 2 servers at 32 players/64 limit at the end of a match. But like I said yesterday, I don't want half the server of server 1 to leave, which would probably end up in everyone else leaving if it's then at 16. It will just have to be tested on the public I guess. I will have to try this on my days off, since I don't have much time to do work nowadays. 

[Guest once upon the time]

taisho , it s great that you are trying to find a solution.

But switching ppl without asking is not the best method. I know you haven't done yet.

The key is normal very easy when ppl wants to move things:

Teamwork and Cooperation between the Server and the player will see that 's one community and not a splitted one.

To get ppl in a "solo" way to play  will help no one.

[NodSaibot]

8 hours ago, SilentKnight said:

taisho , it s great that you are trying to find a solution.

But switching ppl without asking is not the best method. I know you haven't done yet.

The key is normal very easy when ppl wants to move things:

Teamwork and Cooperation between the Server and the player will see that 's one community and not a splitted one.

To get ppl in a "solo" way to play  will help no one.

There's a large difference of opinions between servers, so I don't really think working together is an option for us. We do answer each other's questions, and I help CT if they need code help or whatever, but I don't think we would do anything like that. Different ways of moderating and stuff like that are too big of a difference for me.

[Guest once upon the time]

Sad to read it ,

but my impression that the Community is divided in two parts seems to be approved.

That is not a good base to let a community grow. 

Don't missunderstand it , it is nothing against your point of view.

PS: You got my respect of your open words, thank you.

Edited August 7, 2018 by once upon the time

[Guest once upon the time]

I will now pose provocative questions to CT:

Are you happy with the actual situation?

Do you think that PUG is the majority of the Gamer?

Did you have plans to let the community grow?

Thanks to anyone who will reply.  When you don't like this questions its OK, but i will be happy of a constructive answer. 

kind regards

Silent Knight

[Fffreak9999]

I will attempt to answer each part of your questions:

29 minutes ago, SilentKnight said:

Are you happy with the actual situation?

As a community standpoint, the situation is not sustainable, there is too few people to meet the overall availability of the servers. We may not be happy with the situation, but beyond having a 1.0 version or massive advertising, there is very little growth to be had.

From a server provider view, CT already provides a massive variety of game play options. 

• Marathon
• Modded Marathon (derived from the old AGN mutator)
• Timed Matches
• Map Testing and Mutator Testing
• Deathmatch
• Organised Play

 

40 minutes ago, SilentKnight said:

Do you think that PUG is the majority of the Gamer?

Many of the old players prefer a closed session with significant co-ordination attempts. Much of the appeal of the game for these people lies in being able to co-ordinate teams more efficiently through voice comms, and without this level of co-ordination it fails to hold their attention as much.

However for the general public, the game play is fairly erratic and provides some measure of randomness which helps balances out the differences between skill levels to a moderate extent, however this sort of gameplay is rarely in-line with the organised players tastes.

 

1 hour ago, SilentKnight said:

Did you have plans to let the community grow?

Our main focus was to wait till a 1.0 release so we can actively promote a game without too many drawbacks and issues.

There is a fair few issues that need to be addressed before this can occur, such as a much improved launcher with increased features, much more balancing needs to be done in play styles between the 2 factions (as Nod currently wins a lot more matches than GDI, especially in organised play), we also need many more maps available for play, since the limited pool selection of maps constantly end up being reused (such as Field, Islands, Walls_Flying). 

I have no problem introducing people to the game, as it is a brilliant game to play, however with many of these outstanding issues still to be addressed, I will be hard pressed to spend more than passing attempts to recruit new players.

[Guest once upon the time]

Some ppl will now wonder why I write it here, but in my case it belongs in this Topic:

For me it is now the hardest part because I critize myself in the Squad War :

First at all : Thx , to all Teams who played.

1. I totally underestimated the time difference.

2. peopel in the organisation Team and mods should be neutral and not play in any Team  to avoid personal conflicts between own Team and Organisation.

3. I know that some peopel like to play together but in the first Squad War it wasn't healthy for the RSW. Some ppl even didn't build a Team because they was thinking : We have no chance.

Why i wrote it:

I still believe that the RSW is a good alternative for the future too. I hope some ppl will move on.

kind regards

SilentKnight

 

[Guest once upon the time]

First thanks to TK 0104, Taisho,Fffreak9999  for your constructive feedback.

I still have questions to another part of the community in Fact to the Devs like Agent, Yosh, Havoc and others.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Looks like you wants to make a full release of the game someday (and leave Beta Versions), is it correct?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Some of you still play active .

2. Are you really happy with the Balance in the game?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Did you see some changes you made in a self-critical way or was every change you made in your opinion fine?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. What is your impression of the climate of the Community?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I will be happy when i get constructive answers and thanks in advance.

regards

SilentKnight

 

Edited August 9, 2018 by once upon the time

[NodSaibot]

@yosh56 @Agent @Havoc89

[Guest once upon the time]

Good morning .

I want to say thank you for the replies to my questions and your point of view.

Nobody can be forced to answer here questions and of course I accept that.

When ppl read this Topic they can get good informations written in a constructive and civil way.

The readers can get their own picture of the situation and i think with the few substantial comments this is feasible.

Keep in mind that only 4 peopel gave their opinions.

For me this Topic is done and it was a big help to see where Ren X seems to go . (Quo Vadis).

When other ppl wants to write here i have only one wish, hold this Topic in a constructive and civil way.

kind regards

SilentKnight

 

[IPullHose]

Hello all.

I am going to give my two cents and take from it what you all will. I see that silent knight has brought up some good points and I see that some people feel different about his points. So here are the points I would like to make. 

Cnc renegade was a pretty popular game for a short period of time, with hundreds of players, and several clans. Many of them like me still get on renegade from time to time to bring back memories and fun times of a great game. I believe this game truly lost not because of its concept, but because it was ahead of its time for mmo. Many people had slow internet speeds, tons of lag, by the time internet improvements came along cnc renegade was already trashed by ea and unsupported yet several people still played for years to come. Over time there were no updates, to many cheaters, no new maps, no supported ladder ect.

Renegade X really isn't close to renegade at all. In fact I would say the original is 100 times betters. Renegade X could be 100 times better than the original game but its been ruined. The game play itself on renegade was excellent. Renegade X not so much.

Take a look as a veteran player and as a new player. Cnc renegade was simply a complex game for a new player to learn, lots of strategies and skills were required to get to the point were you could really have some fun and compete. Renegade x took a already complex game and turned it on its head. There is way to much going on. The different play status and damage done. The driving of the vehicles the sprint speed of character ect. All the way around the board it is just to much, recoil on tanks I could go on and on. Renegade X could be a great game if you truly just followed the excellent path the original game set. Get rid of the the extras, put the buildings, damage, movement speed, ect all back to the basics. Simply enhance the graphics, enhance the ladder, stop cheaters, give the game was EA didn't and this game will thrive. All these extras and changes you guys made with renegade x made the game play worse especially for new players and veterans alike. This game is a strategy game and fps. I feel that it needs a good balance like the original. But renegade x seems to be going down the wrong road.

[Moat]

I understand that people want to help improve. But for the rest I don' t get the complains. Renegade x is amazing and more people should know about it. And I like it more than the original. 

[Guest once upon the time]

Hi Moat, thx for your opinion.

I see one difference between "Complain " and "critic" :

Complains are the most times only Complains nothing more.

Critic could be constructive and sometimes different points of view can find a common name.

[NodSaibot]

32 minutes ago, IPullHose said:

Hello all.

I am going to give my two cents and take from it what you all will. I see that silent knight has brought up some good points and I see that some people feel different about his points. So here are the points I would like to make. 

Cnc renegade was a pretty popular game for a short period of time, with hundreds of players, and several clans. Many of them like me still get on renegade from time to time to bring back memories and fun times of a great game. I believe this game truly lost not because of its concept, but because it was ahead of its time for mmo. Many people had slow internet speeds, tons of lag, by the time internet improvements came along cnc renegade was already trashed by ea and unsupported yet several people still played for years to come. Over time there were no updates, to many cheaters, no new maps, no supported ladder ect.

Renegade X really isn't close to renegade at all. In fact I would say the original is 100 times betters. Renegade X could be 100 times better than the original game but its been ruined. The game play itself on renegade was excellent. Renegade X not so much.

Take a look as a veteran player and as a new player. Cnc renegade was simply a complex game for a new player to learn, lots of strategies and skills were required to get to the point were you could really have some fun and compete. Renegade x took a already complex game and turned it on its head. There is way to much going on. The different play status and damage done. The driving of the vehicles the sprint speed of character ect. All the way around the board it is just to much, recoil on tanks I could go on and on. Renegade X could be a great game if you truly just followed the excellent path the original game set. Get rid of the the extras, put the buildings, damage, movement speed, ect all back to the basics. Simply enhance the graphics, enhance the ladder, stop cheaters, give the game was EA didn't and this game will thrive. All these extras and changes you guys made with renegade x made the game play worse especially for new players and veterans alike. This game is a strategy game and fps. I feel that it needs a good balance like the original. But renegade x seems to be going down the wrong road.

Going to quote the same post I did for your thread.

On 2/27/2018 at 11:27 PM, Havoc89 said:

Renegade X is not a direct remake of C&C Renegade. Yes, you will see familiar maps, characters, weapons, and vehicles - the fundamentals of the game are the same. But, no weapon is identical to the way it was before. Certain vehicles play quite differently. A moderate amount of recoil and weapon spread has been given to guns. The graphics, audio, and physics have received a complete overhaul. Secondary weapons and new items have been added. Capturable buildings have been added. There's so much that is different - but keep in mind that we are die-hard Renegade fans, and we are very careful with the things we change. I played vanilla Renegade from the demo (November 2001) till about 2010, so I understand those who are most resistant to change. But, this is a new game, we are a new team of developers, and we're more interested in making a spiritual successor to C&C Renegade than simply redoing the game exactly as it was. There will be people who don't like our game, and that's fine. W3D Renegade is still alive and very playable. Just come in with an open mind and tell us what you think.

Suggestions and opinions are one thing, but saying we should look back to Renegade and mold the game after that just simply isn't what RenegadeX wasn't meant to be.

[yosh56]

Most of the complaints from beta 1-3 were about the game being TOO CLOSE to OldRen. The only thing capable of being attracted were OldRen players, and many of them came in with the intent of hating on RenX ever since the UT3 release that was more or less mirrored with the exception of some infantry movement. They already had it in their head that they were going to just pick out everything even slightly different, including the graphics, and complain for a game or two before going back to OldRen, and that's fine. I go back on OldRen and see exactly why I left it, and I don't miss any of the people who still play it. 

I'm not here just to shoot down every point of @IPullHose or @SilentKnight, but most points sound more like 'this is bad in theory' than what actually happens on a practical regular basis. 

On 8/5/2018 at 2:54 PM, SilentKnight said:

Veteran system: 

The actual System is in my opinion dump, because its pushing a game to fast ends on Marathon too.

Heroic Tanks, “Rambo” Characters and this should be fun?

Nothing against a Veteran System but in a good way like more HP for Characters (but no self- healing).

Tanks should be out of the system, because try to kill a “Heroic Mammy”. It’s fun?

The Mammut had in the past a slow self- healing and that was in my opinion enough.

There's very few instances where an entire team can get too far ahead in veterancy. There's already systems in place that make it harder to get veterancy off of players of lower rank. It's also fairly uncommon for a significant amount of heroics to exist before about 45-60 minutes into a game. An hour is enough for marathon for most people, and even then I consistently see games that take 2-3 hours on Lakeside and sometimes Field/Under. It all just depends on the same thing it did in OldRen (coordination and ability to zerg). It's just not nearly as long, drawn out and, frankly boring. 

Also killing a mammoth tank in general should take more than one person... Heroic mammoths are no exception, and just require you to exploit their weaknesses. 

I'd agree with you more if this was back in veterancy first came out and it was SUPER easy for one building kill to basically give a team so much VP that it was impossible to catch up. 

On 8/5/2018 at 2:54 PM, SilentKnight said:

Number of Player on Server (64)

 

My critic is now going to the Server owners. Do you really think that more ppl will play because of that? Result: No. 

I am still watching the launcher since long time and it is still stagnation.

It looks like that the owner is only looking on “his/her” Server and think he / she is doing a great job for the community. Again wrong.

Why you don’t go back to 40 player and all Server owner work together and help each other to seed a 2nd and a 3rd one. 

By the way some maps are so small for 64 that you have more fun in a rush hour on a highway.

I... honestly prefer 20v20. It's what the game was being balanced for, and  32v32 just throws those numbers off considerably. Granted, it's difficult to convince people to join empty servers, except those few people that join empty servers. 

The reason nobody wants to admit as to why there were 2 40 player servers filling up back in the day is because we had 2 communities... and the fact that many people from TMX simply refused to play marathon, and would only do AOW actually helped push people to flood into the AOW server. It's about the only time I'd say toxicity helped a lot. 

Still, not a fan of the 64 player thing 

On 8/5/2018 at 2:54 PM, SilentKnight said:

Commander Mode

 

Good idea but only for ppl who want to enjoy a leadership. 

Teamplay is Teamplay and you don’t need it. In a public game it is a success when a Team starts to play as a Team without this CM.

All this extra feature is again to reduce the playing time on a Marathon.

Someone remember that a Timed-Match-Modus exists? So why for hell was this implemented?

The commander mod really has nothing to do with reducing the time of matches. It's just there to try and give everyone a point of contact so it's not a bunch of people just yelling at each other. It's honestly brought out the best in some players from what I've seen, so I'd call it an absolute good. 

It also has resulted in some of the best team-play/rushes I've seen in game. Not just the retarded masses of one tank type either. Like 14 random infantry and vehicles congregating to buff and push. 

 

I honestly like topics like this. I just don't have the time/will to post immediately anymore. That, and I have to watch what I say a lot more since I'm not just another dude yapping on these boards. 

 

Now on to the other guy

12 hours ago, IPullHose said:

Cnc renegade was a pretty popular game for a short period of time, with hundreds of players, and several clans.

I dunno. I would never refer to CnC Renegade as 'popular'. The only friends I could get into it back in middle school/high school were people who were already into CnC. It was unique, but to the average person it was a pretty bad game compared to something like Battlefield. 

 

12 hours ago, IPullHose said:

Renegade X really isn't close to renegade at all. In fact I would say the original is 100 times betters. Renegade X could be 100 times better than the original game but its been ruined. The game play itself on renegade was excellent. Renegade X not so much.

I'd personally say the opposite. Renegade could have been a great game, but rushed development of multiplayer pretty much created an interactive chatroom with guns. I do remember my fondest memories of Renegade are honestly just the people I talked to, which I wouldn't say was a negative. Hell, I know somebody who got a job out of that, and there's a few people I learned a lot from there. In terms of playing the game completely solo, without talking.... memories aren't that great. 

13 hours ago, IPullHose said:

believe this game truly lost not because of its concept, but because it was ahead of its time for mmo. Many people had slow internet speeds, tons of lag, by the time internet improvements came along cnc renegade was already trashed by ea and unsupported yet several people still played for years to come. Over time there were no updates, to many cheaters, no new maps, no supported ladder ect.

I can point out a lot of other reasons Renegade was guaranteed never to be popular. The gameplay itself is extremely boring if you're a lone wolf, especially when playing Marathon. All out war was more tolerable, but Renegade does something that everyone I tried to get into it complained about in one form or another: It just feels like 'nothing is happening. Some people might like being left-click-champions in Artillery while they hang out in a repair circle-jerk shooting a static target, but it is definitely not appealing to the average person. I can wholly agree with that as well. 

OldRen also has a very strange separation of power.  

For example, Engineers were one of the most complained about things from new people outside of Renegade when they played RenX back in the first few betas. Engineers were the only unit that could disarm C4/beacons. Engineers were the only unit that could heal and repair units; Engineers were the only unit that could place Proxies, and easy-kill people with C4. That was true in both Renegade's to be honest, though X did have a bigger problem when sprinting was added. It's still very easy to do in OldREn as well though. Let's not forget that Engineers are the only unit that can also solo a building instantly. The moment anyone added drop-weapons in OldRen, there was little to no reason to play anything but an Engineer. Hell, if you were good with the pistol (which was strangely easy since it was virtually hit-scan), you didn't even need a weapon vs. most other infantry. To be honest, almost 100% of my time spent pre-2010 playing OldRen was just as a Hotwire or Technician sneaking into bases. 

Snipers were another issue in OldRen, as if you just got pretty good at clicking on things when the crosshair turned red, you beat every other infantry unit instantly from any range. Even going back and attempting to play to this day it's very obvious that most infantry classes, other than Engineers, Snipers, and PICs/Ravs, were basically there for novelty value. You were just devaluing yourself by being anything else. About the only possible exception is Gunner. If you didn't mind almost killing yourself in CQC you could really annoy people in the tunnels. This was(still is to an extent) actually the most complained about thing by new people. Infantry combat being strangely balanced against automatic weapons. 

That's just one example, but there's actually quite a lot that would make this post get entirely too lengthy for its purpose. The point is, Renegade was never appealing to the average gamer.  

------- 

13 hours ago, IPullHose said:

Take a look as a veteran player and as a new player. Cnc renegade was simply a complex game for a new player to learn, lots of strategies and skills were required to get to the point were you could really have some fun and compete. Renegade x took a already complex game and turned it on its head. There is way to much going on.

Honestly, you can ignore most of RenX's additions and just play and do just fine. Most of it is in the background enough that new players don't even notice it, nor need to worry about it. When they do, they just ask questions, and honestly curiosity keeps people around since it creates socialization and builds community the community. 

13 hours ago, IPullHose said:

All the way around the board it is just to much, recoil on tanks I could go on and on. Renegade X could be a great game if you truly just followed the excellent path the original game set. Get rid of the the extras, put the buildings, damage, movement speed, ect all back to the basics.

I would literally stop playing, and I can think a lot of people who would also walk off. I can also think of a lot of people who wouldn't come back either.. Basically sounds like it would be a bad move overall. RenX attracted a different demographic than OldRen, and it's a demographic that, percentage-wise, isn't too keen on playing a game that constantly results in 4 hour games purely out of de-powering most of the players.  

Also what recoil on tanks? 

I'll just leave off with saying I completely left CnC: Renegade to play A Path Beyond back in 2007-ish (don't quote me on that year). I always felt like it was the far better iteration of Renegade, and I'm utterly ecstatic that APB has seen a population rise in the last few months. Going back and playing OldRen does less to bring back nostalgia for me.... and more so just makes me ponder how anyone can stand playing it for more than 20 minutes. 

 

As for OP: I think there's something to be said about RenX surviving everything it's been through with as few active devs as it has. The game was already beginning to peter out around beta 4-5, yet it's still able to fill a 64 player server daily, and on weekends we push, and often break 100 players.... Most small games do not get to say that after 4 years. I don't even know if it's true that the player base is shrinking, as I've seen quite a few new players.... However, new players don't fill empty servers, so there's a mentality problem that isn't exactly easy to solve there. 

Hell... I don't even join servers till it's at least 16 players. 

[Guest once upon the time]

First Thank you for your reply on this Topic Yosh.

 

38 minutes ago, yosh56 said:

The reason nobody wants to admit as to why there were 2 40 player servers filling up back in the day is because we had 2 communities... and the fact that many people from TMX simply refused to play marathon, and would only do AOW actually helped push people to flood into the AOW server. It's about the only time I'd say toxicity helped a lot. 

I don't agree with that because I was a part of this history too and you wrote your point of view ( Thats Ok).I remember well some ppl who were hating marathon and high mine limits and they did a lot toxic things to eliminate it.

But thats the history and I was talking about the actual situation.

In one point I agree with Havoc, You and the others:

I never play the original Renegade so I cant say how it was. I start to play B2 and I loved the gameplay because it was different like a lot of other games.

regards

Silent

[yosh56]

21 minutes ago, SilentKnight said:

First Thank you for your reply on this Topic Yosh.

 

I don't agree with that because I was a part of this history too and you wrote your point of view ( Thats Ok).I remember well some ppl who were hating marathon and high mine limits and they did a lot toxic things to eliminate it.

Yes, and no. As someone who was actively part of TMX, I can say that there was legitimate toxicity and hatred propagated between the two... that somehow had a positive and negative effect. Like back then, some TMX actively REFUSED to play on EKT servers unless they were there to troll. 

Successfully, might I add. 

[Guest once upon the time]

I remember very well  the past and the names who was trolling , but i think we all agree :

The past is the past  and we should look forward . The game still  has a future.

So I wish the best for Ren X.

[NodSaibot]

There was definitely hate between TmX and EKT. I don't know how much of that was changed, since it's basically evolved into CT and FPI. There may not be feelings of love, but freak and I chat every once and a while and ask questions or get help with something.

While I can't speak for him or any other FPI administrator, at least the "hate or toxicity" is less vocal if it does exist. I do know for a fact that there are some hard feelings between specific dev team members (not me) and specific people in FPI, (not me) but that doesn't really matter. It will pass with time.

I just personally don't agree with the way CT is run, specifically with rules, enforcing those rules and bans. There is a big difference of rule interpretation between their admin team. But that's just me.

 

Edit: I think that we do share the main goal of keeping RenX alive though, so we will see how that works out. At least we have 1 thing in common.

[Radeon3]

@yosh56 @taishō

Not really. We (EKT) considered TMX as friends, can't say for sure the same from the other side as I was not part of it, but I experienced the same. There was no toxicity after clan wars, Munkei teached me some sneaking routes, went on bug hunting with Skeeze, Ruud shared his carefully guarded Crashsite with me and B0ng always helped me when I was reaching out for him... just to name a few. Of course tastes were different on matters like mines or PUG, but as a clan there was no hate between each other. If someone took this on another level like trolling, being toxic or abusing powers... well that's another cool story, but those did not represent the clans. And thankfully a splinter cell from TMX created CT to keep the picture clean.

For the reasons above I disagree that toxicity kept those 2-3 servers filled. If you truly believe that, was it worth to drive away one of the pillar community? Let's be real, it was proper seeding methods, better player pool and community members were motivated to play the type of game they preferred.

Not sure if we only have one community (CT) or FPI counts as another one, but it seems we stucked with one server which is apparently not CT. Back then we didn't have to think about mitigating and splitting players to help populating EKT-TMX. It's kinda sad that nowadays we have the tool for this -and the need as well-, but apparently the standards are/still different between FPI-CT to do so.

Since the very beginning, I'm failing to see the logic behind the 64 player servers. Some say we have a stagnating amount of players, others that we even gaining new ones, then we should able to fill 2 40 servers. I fail to understand that you Yosh, among with other devs (not to mention many players) prefer 20vs20, yet you were one of the first advocating the 64 player setting and finally made it official. For one or two maps it's nice to have 64 players but for the rest of the maps the RenX experience is just watered down. Player mitigation won't happen, dinamic map limit won't happen, yet we keep this flawed setting.

 

Edited August 17, 2018 by Radeon3
otyps

[NodSaibot]

As I have mentioned time and time again, I'm all for trying splitting servers when they reach 64, just need more help planning it and executing it.

[Goku]

FYI: There was no hate between TmX/EKT We shared our own IRC server and Skeeze old owner of TmX is pretty much an Ad-hoc admin on FPI with access to our dedibox. So not sure why people think that & we have TmX Ryz as staff.

EKT used to stick to marathon and TmX was AOW. 

[yosh56]

@Goku I'ma just leave it alone. Otherwise I may expose things about people that need not be considered part of their current character.

Either way viva la still being alive after 4 years of being told we were gonna die. 

[Agent]

12 hours ago, Radeon3 said:

I fail to understand that you Yosh, among with other devs (not to mention many players) prefer 20vs20, yet you were one of the first advocating the 64 player setting and finally made it official. 

Intense push back from certain developers and server owners lead is what ultimately caused the player limit to rise to 64. Mutators were being used to raise these limits, and since we failed to enforce the limit of 40, we moved the limit to an enforced limit of 64. The alternative was to suddenly start enforcing a limit of 40 out of nowhere, which would have been more troublesome than worthwhile.

We may choose to lower it to 40 later if we choose, but server owners can easily keep the setting at the default of 40.

[NodSaibot]

To extend off of what I said earlier, since I was writing on the phone while riding in the car...

I have already created the code necessary to send half of a server to our second server. The process of doing this is quite simple actually. However, the only thing I am concerned about is the possible reactions of the players. While I am all for player's choice, I think having two 32 player count servers being played simultaneously could potentially benefit the game more than one 64 player count server.

My concerns:

• Players leaving the second server to join the first, or just quitting the game for the day entirely. This would result in less players playing for that specific time.
• Players getting mad about being forced to a different server (mostly don't care, but I don't like having people raging in chat)
• I am almost never online when the server is full, due to work, so I would never be able to split the servers myself. I don't want the server doing it automatically either. I would need trusted individuals to split manually.
• The map voted for at the end of the match (when the server would split) would not be on the second server, so half the people would not be playing the map they voted for. (this could be averted by using a server to server connection, but I haven't tested this yet)
• Unbalancing the servers
• Some people do like high player counts, so if 10 of the 32 leave, then it's a 11v11 match. Some people may leave just because of that.

The only way to resolve some of these concerns is to test live I suppose.

[limsup]

10 minutes ago, taishō said:

The only way to resolve some of these concerns is to test live I suppose.

May I suggest the following:

On 4/30/2015 at 2:36 AM, DoctorB0NG said:

Hey all,

For the last week or so TmX has been testing seamless server switching. After a certain time of the day, we've been switching everyone over to a North American server from the European server in order to accommodate North American players when most Europeans are asleep.

What are your thoughts on this? Has anyone been on during the switch and liked it or disliked it?

For testing purposes maybe you guys could coordinate and implement that? North-American players used to "get trapped" on European servers usually from 1 or 2 AM CET - 10 AM CET well after the vast majority of European players left. In practice, they don't leave for a North-American server in a coordinated fashion, just keep on playing with 100+ pings...

Original topic here:

 

 

[NodSaibot]

39 minutes ago, limsup said:

May I suggest the following:

For testing purposes maybe you guys could coordinate and implement that? North-American players used to "get trapped" on European servers usually from 1 or 2 AM CET - 10 AM CET well after the vast majority of European players left. In practice, they don't leave for a North-American server in a coordinated fashion, just keep on playing with 100+ pings...

Original topic here:

 

 

Doesn't really matter when there's only like 10 NA players and 1 NA server only

[Guest once upon the time]

I will try to summarize my findings that i have gained. (My personal view):

Most ppl  love the game even those who have stopped for personal reason.

Some ppl see PUG like the only part of community (thats my impression) and compare this to the public games. PUG is a established part of Ren X and it is important too. Some forget that public gamer exist. You can't compare PUG with Pub.

We have 2 "Communities" in one game and this is the most difficult part : They should find a way to get together as a cooperation (not to be one server, that must not be).

To end a stagnation ( and I dont mean to die) is Teamwork between the Server owner and the Devs very important.

Advertisment of the game is important too and it is not easy too.

Ren X is still a good game and all ppl (Devs, Serverowner and Gamer ) can end the stagnation and move the game in a good future.

kind regards

SilentKnight

[Guest Gliven]

7 hours ago, SilentKnight said:

We have 2 "Communities" in one game and this is the most difficult part : They should find a way to get together as a cooperation (not to be one server, that must not be).

Not entirely true. Maybe like 2-3 of us that play in the pug dont play public games. Generally everyone else plays public games too.

The community is only split on saturdays and only during the pug, which is only 2-3 hrs.

[Guest once upon the time]

thx , for your opinion Gliven

I think you get me wrong and if you read the posts before , you will understand why this is my point of view.

I dont mentioned that Pug ppl did not play Pub games, but some ppl still compare Pug with pub games and that is different.