Command and Conquer: Renegade Official Forums - RDF feed
C&C: Renegade --> Dying since 2003™, resurrected in 2024!
I've decided to create an unofficial balance patch for Renegade, to be run server-side. Its concept is not changing the game as such, but rather fixing it - in a nutshell, making the useless units useful and cost-effective in a way I don't feel many of them currently are. Trouble is I don't know a damn thing about how to code stuff in Renegade. Changes: - BlackIntel's Pointsfix (presumably does not need to be part of the patch) - Empty vehicles remain aligned to the team of the last player who occupied it, meaning enemies gain points attacking it, allies lose points attacking it - Nod Soldier rifle damage increased to match GDI Soldier rifle damage against all targets - Nod Flamethrower damage against infantry and structures increased by 50%. Damage against other targets unchanged - Chaingun Officer cost reduced to 100 (from 175) - applies to both GDI and Nod - Tib Sydney cost reduced to 100 (from 150) - Patch tiberium flechette damage against infantry increased by 100% - damage against other targets unchanged - Rocket Soldier (for both GDI and Nod): --- tracks targets --- direct hit damage against infantry reduced by 50%. Damage against other targets unchanged --- cost reduced to 200 (from 225) - Deadeye/BlackHandSniper sniper rifle damage against light vehicles reduced by 50%. Damage against other targets unchanged - Chinook armour changed to Heavy Vehicle (from Light Vehicle) giving it the same durability as a Stealth Tank - Nod Turret rate of fire and damage increased to match that of the Medium Tank Would anyone be willing to help?
I may be able to help here and there. But not full-time. :v ~MathK1LL
maybe ask Yrr: http://www.renegadeforums.com/index.php?t=usrinfo&id=21713&rid=22983
They can all be done server side, but, changing costs wont reflect what the client sees at their PT.
MathK1LL wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 16:26 I may be able to help here and there. But not full-time. :v ~MathK1LL I don't really envision it being something the person coding it would need to work "full-time" on... simply making the changes, giving me a file and then leaving the rest to me.
RoShamBo wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 16:36 They can all be done server side, but, changing costs wont reflect what the client sees at their PT. that's not a big deal if someone can also make a client-side file to replace the PT screens.
Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 15:37 RoShamBo wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 16:36 They can all be done server side, but, changing costs wont reflect what the client sees at their PT. that's not a big deal if someone can also make a client-side file to replace the PT screens. The best way to update that would be to update always.dat with the new skins. ~MathK1LL
MathK1LL wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 22:41 Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 15:37 RoShamBo wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 16:36 They can all be done server side, but, changing costs wont reflect what the client sees at their PT. that's not a big deal if someone can also make a client-side file to replace the PT screens. The best way to update that would be to update always.dat with the new skins. ~MathK1LL Takes too long to export.. just include the skins in the map .mix or .pkg files...
no, the patch should only put a new screen.dds in the data folder... thats enough... *EDIT* i see theres no number on the screen so a new screen doesnt help
I don't see any reason to have a global always.dat change just for one simple texture.
Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 23:19 I've decided to create an unofficial balance patch for Renegade, to be run server-side. Its concept is not changing the game as such, but rather fixing it - in a nutshell, making the useless units useful and cost-effective in a way I don't feel many of them currently are. It will change gameplay anyway. Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 23:19 Trouble is I don't know a damn thing about how to code stuff in Renegade. Changes: - BlackIntel's Pointsfix (presumably does not need to be part of the patch) As you said, already done by BlackIntel's points fix and by Resurrection. Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 23:19 - Empty vehicles remain aligned to the team of the last player who occupied it, meaning enemies gain points attacking it, allies lose points attacking it Agreed. Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 23:19 - Nod Soldier rifle damage increased to match GDI Soldier rifle damage against all targets That's not a bug I think. Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 23:19 - Nod Flamethrower damage against infantry and structures increased by 50%. Damage against other targets unchanged play around with data/armor.ini Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 23:19 - Chaingun Officer cost reduced to 100 (from 175) - applies to both GDI and Nod - Tib Sydney cost reduced to 100 (from 150) Why? Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 23:19 - Patch tiberium flechette damage against infantry increased by 100% - damage against other targets unchanged Why? Does enough damage. Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 23:19 - Rocket Soldier (for both GDI and Nod): --- tracks targets Not possible server-side and impacts gameplay. Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 23:19 --- direct hit damage against infantry reduced by 50%. Damage against other targets unchanged --- cost reduced to 200 (from 225) Why? Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 23:19 - Deadeye/BlackHandSniper sniper rifle damage against light vehicles reduced by 50%. Damage against other targets unchanged Already done by Resurrection. Can be changed using data/armor.ini but impacts all shrapnel damage. Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 23:19 - Chinook armour changed to Heavy Vehicle (from Light Vehicle) giving it the same durability as a Stealth Tank Why? Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 23:19 - Nod Turret rate of fire and damage increased to match that of the Medium Tank Why? Fire rate and damage are quite good. Aiming is the problem.
He wants to have it as a server sided mod?
Quote: He wants to have it as a server sided mod? It's the first thing he said! Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 16:19 I've decided to create an unofficial balance patch for Renegade, to be run server-side.
I was commenting on Yrr's "why's"...
Yrr wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 19:08 It will change gameplay anyway. depends how you define "change" - it won't revolutionise gameplay and I don't think it should, but it'll make the useless stuff useful... as they ought to be. Yrr wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 19:08 Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 23:19 - Nod Soldier rifle damage increased to match GDI Soldier rifle damage against all targets That's not a bug I think. I didn't say it is, but it's pretty illogical and means Nod soldiers are barely worth using... right now the only use is if there's an MRLS, humvee or orca in your base and you can't afford anything better, but even so there's really no reason why they should be less effective at that than the GDI soldier is. Yrr wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 19:08 Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 23:19 - Chaingun Officer cost reduced to 100 (from 175) - applies to both GDI and Nod - Tib Sydney cost reduced to 100 (from 150) Why? because the officer is not worth 175 and the tib sydney is not worth 150. for these two units, I feel a simple cost decrease is better than altering their actual effectiveness. Yrr wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 19:08 Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 23:19 - Patch tiberium flechette damage against infantry increased by 100% - damage against other targets unchanged Why? Does enough damage. not to make it worth 450 it doesn't. Yrr wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 19:08 Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 23:19 - Rocket Soldier (for both GDI and Nod): --- tracks targets Not possible server-side and impacts gameplay. it'll impact gameplay in the sense of making rocket soldiers worth a damn against vehicles and aircraft, whereas right now they aren't... their only real use is against structures for points if the WF's dead Yrr wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 19:08 Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 23:19 --- direct hit damage against infantry reduced by 50%. Damage against other targets unchanged --- cost reduced to 200 (from 225) Why? the weaker against infantry part is based on their tracking ability, assuming it were possible. Yrr wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 19:08 Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 23:19 - Chinook armour changed to Heavy Vehicle (from Light Vehicle) giving it the same durability as a Stealth Tank Why? because they're not worth their cost, and in this case, there's a simple and viable way to make them worth that cost. Yrr wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 19:08 Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 23:19 - Nod Turret rate of fire and damage increased to match that of the Medium Tank Why? Fire rate and damage are quite good. Aiming is the problem. uh, dunno what game you're playing but the turret's fire rate and damage are absolutely pathetic.
Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 22:19 - Nod Soldier rifle damage increased to match GDI Soldier rifle damage against all targets Thats the point of GDI, they have more fire power than Nod. Increasing the effectiveness of the Nod soldier beats the purpose of GDI's soldier.
Coveman wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 19:22 Thats the point of GDI, they have more fire power than Nod. Increasing the effectiveness of the Nod soldier beats the purpose of GDI's soldier. the GDI soldier will still beat a Nod soldier pretty easily since the Nod soldier head is huge by comparison... but with the damage change, the Nod soldier will actually have some use, because right now it doesn't except vs a light vehicle if you can't afford anything better... vs infantry you may as well use a pistol
Spoony wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 01:26 Coveman wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 19:22 Thats the point of GDI, they have more fire power than Nod. Increasing the effectiveness of the Nod soldier beats the purpose of GDI's soldier. the GDI soldier will still beat a Nod soldier pretty easily since the Nod soldier head is huge by comparison... but with the damage change, the Nod soldier will actually have some use, because right now it doesn't except vs a light vehicle if you can't afford anything better... vs infantry you may as well use a pistol And the GDI soldier does that much better against heavy armored vehicles? I think you're trying to 'patch' something that isn't a bug.
Coveman wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 19:36 Spoony wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 01:26 Coveman wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 19:22 Thats the point of GDI, they have more fire power than Nod. Increasing the effectiveness of the Nod soldier beats the purpose of GDI's soldier. the GDI soldier will still beat a Nod soldier pretty easily since the Nod soldier head is huge by comparison... but with the damage change, the Nod soldier will actually have some use, because right now it doesn't except vs a light vehicle if you can't afford anything better... vs infantry you may as well use a pistol And the GDI soldier does that much better against heavy armored vehicles? I think you're trying to 'patch' something that isn't a bug. no one mentioned heavy vehicles faggot also i think making transports good is a great idea
Coveman wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 19:36 And the GDI soldier does that much better against heavy armored vehicles? I didn't say it did. Coveman wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 19:36 I think you're trying to 'patch' something that isn't a bug. For the second time, I didn't say it was. Officers costing 175 isn't a bug. Patch costing 450 isn't a bug. Those numbers aren't bugs - they're just poor balance.
Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 17:19 - Nod Soldier rifle damage increased to match GDI Soldier rifle damage against all targets Nod has the stronger vehcicles; are you going to buff the GDI vehicles as well?
cmatt42 wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 01:33 Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 17:19 - Nod Soldier rifle damage increased to match GDI Soldier rifle damage against all targets Nod has the stronger vehcicles; are you going to buff the GDI vehicles as well? all he mentioned was making nod soldier balanced with the gdi, no one talked about making all vehicles different god damn some of you are fucking retarded
RoShamBo wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 17:36 They changing costs wont reflect what the client sees at their PT. That's what I told him also. Prices would be changed but still require the original price just to access it.
People, it's a balance mod, not a bug fixing mod! Xpert wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 08:50 RoShamBo wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 17:36 They changing costs wont reflect what the client sees at their PT. That's what I told him also. Prices would be changed but still require the original price just to access it. That's one of the most annoying things :S.
Spoony wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 04:02 Coveman wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 19:36 And the GDI soldier does that much better against heavy armored vehicles? I didn't say it did. ... Quote: but with the damage change, the Nod soldier will actually have some use, because right now it doesn't except vs a light vehicle if you can't afford anything better... vs infantry you may as well use a pistol You just said that at the moment (without your patch) the Nod soldier doesn't have much use against anything except light vehicles and inf. You also said with the damage change it would. So that would mean that GDI's solider does more damage against something that isn't a light vehicle.
The Points Fix is already slated for release as part of the BI XWIS proxy DLL. However, Cost/Damage/Homing changes are not possible without turning off LagReduction (and making everyone lag beyond crazy, DISTRUST yourself from the console of a BIATCH-equipped server if you want to experience it) or modifying objects.ddb both server- and client- side (would require releasing an official patch through the Renegade patch mechanism along with cooperation from RenGuard). BTW: RG will get you every time for modifying armor.ini on the client-side, too. The Chinook armor change would be possible with a server-side objects.ddb modification and will not affect BIATCH (BIATCH damage hack detection looks at the raw damage before armor modifiers are applied). Finally, fixing the Nod Turret would require server-side and/or client-side objects.ddb modifications (RoF/damage) along with an aimbot developer (haven't you noticed that turrets can't aim at all?). I would be happy with just aiming fixes to the turrets, though.
cmatt42 wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 01:33 Nod has the stronger vehcicles; are you going to buff the GDI vehicles as well? no, because -a- Nod doesn't have the stronger vehicles, and -b- GDI vehicles are not underpowered like the Nod Soldier is.
Coveman wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 06:36 You just said that at the moment (without your patch) the Nod soldier doesn't have much use against anything except light vehicles and inf. no, I said it doesn't have much use against anything except light vehicles. I didn't say it was worth using against infantry, because it isn't. Coveman wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 06:36 You also said with the damage change it would. So that would mean that GDI's solider does more damage against something that isn't a light vehicle. you've only just worked out that GDI soldiers are better against infantry and you've also come to the conclusion that I've only just worked that out too? er, keep up
Someone poke matty3k10, he had some seriously scary turrets in a serverside mod somewhere, would save you some time.
Why question what he's doing? He wants to make a server-sided mod and find a coder, not be pounded with questions..
Spoony wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 13:16 Coveman wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 06:36 You just said that at the moment (without your patch) the Nod soldier doesn't have much use against anything except light vehicles and inf. no, I said it doesn't have much use against anything except light vehicles. I didn't say it was worth using against infantry, because it isn't. Coveman wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 06:36 You also said with the damage change it would. So that would mean that GDI's solider does more damage against something that isn't a light vehicle. you've only just worked out that GDI soldiers are better against infantry and you've also come to the conclusion that I've only just worked that out too? er, keep up Yes but nor does the GDI soldier so whats the point? I've known for years that the GDI soldier is stronger than Nod's and for good reason. I assumed you would have known as well which is why I can't understand why you want to make them the same. As for GDIs tanks are not underpowered.. I personally think that the med should beable to beat a engi repairing a building.
I know some basic C++, but I'm probably not 1337 enough to do what you're asking. Also, was nerfing the artillery intentionally left out of the list?
Coveman wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 08:29 Yes but nor does the GDI soldier so whats the point? I've known for years that the GDI soldier is stronger than Nod's and for good reason. I assumed you would have known as well I did know, what's with your sudden outpour of nonsensical statements? Coveman wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 08:29 which is why I can't understand why you want to make them the same. They won't be the same by a long shot. Coveman wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 08:29 As for GDIs tanks are not underpowered.. I personally think that the med should beable to beat a engi repairing a building. wouldn't make much difference to gameplay and really isn't necessary... the med can simply shoot another building, and there's one vehicle which DOESN'T need more power more than any other, it's the med tank. Dover wrote Also, was nerfing the artillery intentionally left out of the list? Absolutely. They don't need a nerf.
Errr...did EVERYONE IGNORE MY POST? THE DAMAGE FIXES ARE NOT POSSIBLE SERVERSIDE UNLESS YOU TURN LAGREDUCTION OFF!!!!
They are completly possible server side.
I'm assuming the increase in Patch damage is to make up for the lack of AP damage, like the LCG has. I'm just not sure if that's the right way to go about it... It completely destroys infantry already. Maybe a smaller increase, but not double. If it does lose any credibility in the AI department at all it's only due to the inbalance of other infantry. Like the ramjet clip size, it would be better at two instead of four shots. You also forgot to add a fix for the Nod Rocket Officer, you currently don't get any point for damaging him.
Spoony wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 12:44 Absolutely. They don't need a nerf. The need a limit, not a nerf. Artillery SHOULD NOT be Nod's main battle tank. It's absolutely ridiculous that in nearly every game of Renegade I play now Nod has 8 Artillery out on the field. Limit Artillery to two at a time and buff the LT damage by 20-30%.
Renx wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 11:31 I'm assuming the increase in Patch damage is to make up for the lack of AP damage, like the LCG has. I'm just not sure if that's the right way to go about it... It completely destroys infantry already. Maybe a smaller increase, but not double. it's barely more powerful than the GDI soldier against infantry... Renx wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 11:31 If it does lose any credibility in the AI department at all it's only due to the inbalance of other infantry. Like the ramjet clip size, it would be better at two instead of four shots. ramjet's fine as long as the pointsfix is used now that they have a hard counter... it's fine for them to be superlatively powerful against inf and nearly as good against light vehicles as tanks are if they're absolutely useless against a different class of unit. Renx wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 11:31 You also forgot to add a fix for the Nod Rocket Officer, you currently don't get any point for damaging him. valid
QUOTE Wars
Renx wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 17:35 The need a limit, not a nerf. Artillery SHOULD NOT be Nod's main battle tank. It's absolutely ridiculous that in nearly every game of Renegade I play now Nod has 8 Artillery out on the field. Limit Artillery to two at a time and buff the LT damage by 20-30%. why's it ridiculous? I think it's good people are finally figuring out how good artillery is, it only took 5 years light tanks definitely don't need any more power, and artillery without light tank support (except on Mesa) is asking for trouble... calling artillery Nod's main battle tank is really not true in the way you could call a med tank GDI's main battle tank. look at Field... if Nod gets nothing but arties and no lights, GDI can rip them up with MRLS pretty easily.
What hard counter? All you proposed was a buff to a GDI unit, I'm not seeing the counter to Havoc. Even at that, the Sakura would still only need to land 2/4 shots in that 3-4s span of time to kill the Patch. If there were only 2 shots per clip, there would be far more incentive to make every shot count, just like every other unit in the game.
Spoony wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 13:39 Renx wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 17:35 The need a limit, not a nerf. Artillery SHOULD NOT be Nod's main battle tank. It's absolutely ridiculous that in nearly every game of Renegade I play now Nod has 8 Artillery out on the field. Limit Artillery to two at a time and buff the LT damage by 20-30%. why's it ridiculous? I think it's good people are finally figuring out how good artillery is, it only took 5 years light tanks definitely don't need any more power, and artillery without light tank support (except on Mesa) is asking for trouble... calling artillery Nod's main battle tank is really not true in the way you could call a med tank GDI's main battle tank. look at Field... if Nod gets nothing but arties and no lights, GDI can rip them up with MRLS pretty easily. You know that's far from true. Go into any community match and watch Nod pull nothing but Artillery. 95% of the time they win. Having LT support just makes it slightly more unlikely that GDI will be able to counter. I'm glad it took people 5 years to start abusing Artillery, it was fun to play as GDI until then. Never before this year have I seen so many people leave a server when they see "Next Map: C&C_Canyon"
Renx wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 11:42 What hard counter? All you proposed was a buff to a GDI unit, I'm not seeing the counter to Havoc. how can you not see the counter to ramjets? Renx wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 11:42 You know that's far from true. Go into any community match and watch Nod pull nothing but Artillery. 95% of the time they win. lol... if CW was GDI we'd have no problem AT ALL countering nod on most maps if all they got was artillery. trust me... there have been comm matches where on Field they got 7 arties. result: they didn't get to fire a single shot on our WF for the entire 30 minutes. Renx wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 11:42 I'm glad it took people 5 years to start abusing Artillery throwing the word "abusing" in there doesn't make a thing that is not bad bad. Renx wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 11:42 Never before this year have I seen so many people leave a server when they see "Next Map: C&C_Canyon" The reason Canyon is horribly unfair in many servers is not the arty being overpowered - it's not. It's starting credits and donate. With 0 starting credits and no donate, Canyon is absolutely fair. Starting credits and donate remove GDI's best counter to arties. That's why it's unfair. Nod's best weapon on that map is still there - GDI's best counter to that weapon has gone.
Canyon was absolutely fine with starting credits and donate at this time last year. Coincidentally, there weren't 6 artillery on the field within the first 3 minutes of every map either at this time last year. The only possible counter to ramjets I see there is the reduction in cost to chaingun officers. But a reduction in cost to units that are still killed with half their clip, or an increase in damage to a unit that is still outranged by... the entire length of the map, won't do too much good.
Renx wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 12:00 Canyon was absolutely fine with starting credits and donate at this time last year. Coincidentally, there weren't 6 artillery on the field within the first 3 minutes of every map either at this time last year. that doesn't demonstrate that Canyon was fair, it demonstrates that most players weren't bright enough to use Nod's most effective weapon on that map. Renx wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 11:42 The only possible counter to ramjets I see there is the reduction in cost to chaingun officers. But a reduction in cost to units that are still killed with half their clip, or an increase in damage to a unit that is still outranged by... the entire length of the map, won't do too much good. I don't really believe I'm hearing you say this... the counter to ramjets is any heavy vehicle (as long as the pointsfix is in effect)
Rocko wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 08:40 cmatt42 wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 01:33 Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 17:19 - Nod Soldier rifle damage increased to match GDI Soldier rifle damage against all targets Nod has the stronger vehcicles; are you going to buff the GDI vehicles as well? all he mentioned was making nod soldier balanced with the gdi, no one talked about making all vehicles different god damn some of you are fucking retarded You cannot balance units on a one-on-one basis, that would result in both teams having exactly the same units. You have to balance the game through all units. If the Nod auto rifle does less damage, Nod needs an advantage somewhere else, e.g. by having a stealthed unit. =HT=T-Bird wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 14:06 The However, Cost/Damage/Homing changes are not possible without turning off LagReduction (and making everyone lag beyond crazy, DISTRUST yourself from the console of a BIATCH-equipped server if you want to experience it) or modifying objects.ddb both server- and client- side (would require releasing an official patch through the Renegade patch mechanism along with cooperation from RenGuard). You cannot change homing because clients would not see that a missile follows its target. Same for costs, the client does not see the change. But you CAN change damage server-side without touching LagReduction and without changing client's presets. =HT=T-Bird wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 14:06 BTW: RG will get you every time for modifying armor.ini on the client-side, too. Damage multiplicators from armor.ini are completely server-side. =HT=T-Bird wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 14:06 Finally, fixing the Nod Turret would require server-side and/or client-side objects.ddb modifications (RoF/damage) along with an aimbot developer (haven't you noticed that turrets can't aim at all?). I would be happy with just aiming fixes to the turrets, though. You can change damage server-side and the _improved_ turrets aim fine, but their bullets are too slow (and you cannot change their speed server-side without annoying clients).
Just because they give off less points now doesn't make them any more of a counter. An APC is still going to kill one in seconds regardless of how many point it gives away. A ramjet is still going to run away from a LT regardless of how many point it gives away. It's great that the game is more balanced now in terms of points, but that doesn't change the balance in terms of damage. If you changed it so Artillery gained no point for attacking buildings, would you not still use them in a community match? Of course you would, because they're excellent at killing buildings and the objective is base kill. If you're a ramjet, the objective is killing infantry (moreso now because of the point fix, the objective never should have been whoring points from vehicles), and they're far too effective at it.
Yrr wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 18:21 (The rest of his post...) =HT=T-Bird wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 14:06 Finally, fixing the Nod Turret would require server-side and/or client-side objects.ddb modifications (RoF/damage) along with an aimbot developer (haven't you noticed that turrets can't aim at all?). I would be happy with just aiming fixes to the turrets, though. You can change damage server-side and the _improved_ turrets aim fine, but their bullets are too slow (and you cannot change their speed server-side without annoying clients). Matty managed it somehow. I will go poke him.
Yrr wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 14:21 =HT=T-Bird wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 14:06 The However, Cost/Damage/Homing changes are not possible without turning off LagReduction (and making everyone lag beyond crazy, DISTRUST yourself from the console of a BIATCH-equipped server if you want to experience it) or modifying objects.ddb both server- and client- side (would require releasing an official patch through the Renegade patch mechanism along with cooperation from RenGuard). You cannot change homing because clients would not see that a missile follows its target. Same for costs, the client does not see the change. But you CAN change damage server-side without touching LagReduction and without changing client's presets. The missile still tracks even though the client doesn't see it, and damage is still dealt. We ran this on the n00bstories server for a while and it was very effective. You just need host messages to let people know about it.
Renx wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 12:21 Just because they give off less points now doesn't make them any more of a counter. uh yes, it does. Renx wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 12:21 An APC is still going to kill one in seconds regardless of how many point it gives away. A ramjet is still going to run away from a LT regardless of how many point it gives away. It's great that the game is more balanced now in terms of points, but that doesn't change the balance in terms of damage. it changes the balance in terms of balance. before the pointsfix, ramjets had no counter - they didn't really need to damage heavy vehicles in a big game, chances are someone else would - but the ramjet still strips them for points. even just one ramjet would allow the defending team to be ahead on points, which is a long way away from being balanced. Renx wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 12:21 If you changed it so Artillery gained no point for attacking buildings, would you not still use them in a community match? Of course you would, because they're excellent at killing buildings and the objective is base kill. why are you even asking that? Why should artillery get no points for damaging buildings when everything else does? Renx wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 12:21 If you're a ramjet, the objective is killing infantry (moreso now because of the point fix, the objective never should have been whoring points from vehicles), and they're far too effective at it. considering their cost, they really aren't.
The objective of the game is base kill. Points are only supposed to be a representation of how much you contributed towards killing the other teams base, or a backup for when neither team could kill the base. Although that was far from the case for the most part before the points fix, it still doesn't change anything that will aide or hinder either team from completing the main objective. I think you're trying to focus too much on the points aspect of this game. It should be balanced to the point where the game would run smoothly and properly without points at all.
Renx wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 12:47 The objective of the game is base kill. Points are only supposed to be a representation of how much you contributed towards killing the other teams base, or a backup for when neither team could kill the base. Although that was far from the case for the most part before the points fix, it still doesn't change anything that will aide or hinder either team from completing the main objective. I think you're trying to focus too much on the points aspect of this game. It should be balanced to the point where the game would run smoothly and properly without points at all. that's a completely flawed assertion, simply because Westwood specifically designed the game to have a time limit. unless that time limit's disabled, it is categorically false to say that basekill is everything and points is nothing but a "backup". you may as well say ped beacon is the objective and if your team couldn't ped beacon, settling instead for mere basekill as a "backup" (your word, not mine), you failed. and if, after playing Renegade for 5-6 years, anybody can not realise the colossal benefit sieging offers towards the "main objective" then I really don't know where to start
A ramjet who picks off basics makes no money, so to speak. Cost to ramjeter - 1000 Cost to opposing team - 0 Not worth it until you kill something that cost money...
Yrr wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 17:08 Spoony wrote on Tue, 01 January 2008 23:19 - Nod Flamethrower damage against infantry and structures increased by 50%. Damage against other targets unchanged play around with data/armor.ini If you do that you will give everyone that doesn't have a matching armor.ini file a case of the zero bug.
Spoony wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 14:53 Renx wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 12:47 The objective of the game is base kill. Points are only supposed to be a representation of how much you contributed towards killing the other teams base, or a backup for when neither team could kill the base. Although that was far from the case for the most part before the points fix, it still doesn't change anything that will aide or hinder either team from completing the main objective. I think you're trying to focus too much on the points aspect of this game. It should be balanced to the point where the game would run smoothly and properly without points at all. that's a completely flawed assertion, simply because Westwood specifically designed the game to have a time limit. unless that time limit's disabled, it is categorically false to say that basekill is everything and points is nothing but a "backup". you may as well say ped beacon is the objective and if your team couldn't ped beacon, settling instead for mere basekill as a "backup" (your word, not mine), you failed. and if, after playing Renegade for 5-6 years, anybody can not realise the colossal benefit sieging offers towards the "main objective" then I really don't know where to start You don't need to max out the vehicle limit on artillery to siege. Other vehicles are capable of damaging buildings as well. I never said it was nothing, and saying that it's a backup certainly doesn't imply that. There's a lot of different elements in Renegade's gameplay, and to work well together they should first have to work well on their own.
OK: @ Yrr, Jerad, and Friends: The reason why I am saying this is due to experiences where BIATCH cheaterbanned clients on servers with modified objects.ddb files. If you can pull it off in the presence of BIATCH, that's excellent. If you can't, well, there goes this patch attempt; BIATCH is simply too valuable of a cheat detection tool to throw away.
The problem with Arts is not that they super uber. its just way more easy to strat from beginning with all out of artillwery then stopping those AE-Bastards. Then you will need teamplay. Canyon is a problem. true. what if someone close the hole in the wall to GDI base? maybe this would nod force into a more offensive gameplay. The main problem breaking nods siege is that you have to get all out of a tiny entrance while artillerys with splash shooting you from all around the field. if the hole isn't there anymore nod is forced to camp in front of the gdi entrance. and then its the same to field. nod has direct fire GDI has diect fire. oh and the basic soldiers... .let them be differet. as you pointed out with 0 cred startup... GDI needs a startadvantage or Nod never let them bring out their heavy, but expensive firepower (med). rocketsoldier sounds fine but... autoaim isn't something i like. you can't do something against autoaim and it takes control from the player to the server. maybe i want this rocket go to this spot? just say 3 rockets a magazin double damage.... or something else same dps but more bunch a hit. Yes it would become more devastive against inf... but 3rounds a mag ... you have to aim good or you're enemy will bring you down in downloadtime
CarrierII wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 10:56 A ramjet who picks off basics makes no money, so to speak. Cost to ramjeter - 1000 Cost to opposing team - 0 Not worth it until you kill something that cost money... but taking out people cost time. one guy killing multiple enemys. yes. this free engineer don'T cost credits. but maybe he want to repair this building? or want to join a engieassault. Killing people also preventing them from getting money. everget shot 15 times in a row on mesa from a top above sniperwhore while you just want to get to your tank/repair this building/disarm zthis beacon?
=HT=T-Bird wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 23:39 OK: @ Yrr, Jerad, and Friends: The reason why I am saying this is due to experiences where BIATCH cheaterbanned clients on servers with modified objects.ddb files. If you can pull it off in the presence of BIATCH, that's excellent. If you can't, well, there goes this patch attempt; BIATCH is simply too valuable of a cheat detection tool to throw away. I can easily modify Resurrection to use new damage values. Dunno how much BIATCH would have to be changed.
Resurrection blocks out BIATCH so what's the point.
How many servers use RR and how many use biatch?
Xpert wrote on Thu, 03 January 2008 05:22 Resurrection blocks out BIATCH so what's the point. Resurrection replaces BIATCH, since it has the same features. Goztow wrote on Thu, 03 January 2008 09:35 How many servers use RR and how many use biatch? It is up to BIATCH then to make custom damage possible.
Renx wrote on Thu, 03 January 2008 09:10 You don't need to max out the vehicle limit on artillery to siege. Other vehicles are capable of damaging buildings as well. I fail to see what point you're trying to make with this statement. Artillery should be limited because they aren't the only vehicle capable of damaging a building...? Renx wrote on Thu, 03 January 2008 09:10 I never said it was nothing, and saying that it's a backup certainly doesn't imply that. Your statement implied that victory by points is somehow not really a victory compared to victory by basekill. It is not. w0dka wrote on Thu, 03 January 2008 09:10 The problem with Arts is not that they super uber. its just way more easy to strat from beginning with all out of artillwery then stopping those AE-Bastards. Then you will need teamplay. Wow, if you don't know what you're talking about then just don't. Artillery without teamplay is RIDICULOUSLY easy for GDI to counter. w0dka wrote on Thu, 03 January 2008 09:10 Canyon is a problem. true. what if someone close the hole in the wall to GDI base? maybe this would nod force into a more offensive gameplay. Won't fix the problem. GDI still won't be able to leave base, Nod will still end up winning by points. They'll win by less, but they'll still win. The hole in the wall isn't the problem... starting credits and !donate are the problem. w0dka wrote on Thu, 03 January 2008 09:10 oh and the basic soldiers... .let them be differet. as you pointed out with 0 cred startup... GDI needs a startadvantage or Nod never let them bring out their heavy, but expensive firepower (med). With these changes, GDI WILL STILL HAVE AN ADVANTAGE IN THEIR FREE INFANTRY. I don't know how many times I need to say this. GDI Soldiers will STILL own Nod soldiers and therefore give GDI a good chance of coming out favourably in the harv battles, Grenadiers will still be superior at attacking buildings externally (e.g. Field) and killing harvesters. It'll just mean that Nod Soldiers and Flamethrowers are actually somewhat comparable. w0dka wrote on Thu, 03 January 2008 09:10 rocketsoldier sounds fine but... autoaim isn't something i like. you can't do something against autoaim and it takes control from the player to the server. maybe i want this rocket go to this spot? it's not autoaim, it's tracking - there's a difference. it'll only track if your reticle is exactly covering the target.
BIATCH reads its values from the server's ammo and weapon definitions btw Yrr. However, what the client sends as a damage value is NOT changed apparently, and that's where the problems seem to begin in the case I saw.
CarrierII wrote on Wed, 02 January 2008 13:20 Someone poke matty3k10, he had some seriously scary turrets in a serverside mod somewhere, would save you some time. D: Don't remind me. You could never plant a Ion at the Nod Power plant on Under without them turrets giving you away.
=HT=T-Bird wrote on Thu, 03 January 2008 13:32 BIATCH reads its values from the server's ammo and weapon definitions btw Yrr. However, what the client sends as a damage value is NOT changed apparently, and that's where the problems seem to begin in the case I saw. That's how RR does it too. RR reverses the damage sent by the client to the weapon and ammo used by the client. In 99.999% of all cases, weapon and ammo can be determined, allowing me to change it's damage even before it reaches my cheat detection.