Home » General Discussions » General Discussion » Havoc\Sakura on Ramjet Rifles - Final Word
| Havoc\Sakura on Ramjet Rifles - Final Word [message #127905] |
Mon, 20 December 2004 16:34   |
 |
Crimson
Messages: 7429
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
| Aircraftkiller |
People don't stop playing games because they're fun. They stop playing them, like this one, because it sucks.
|
Like you... you started playing, and just three short years later you were done!
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Havoc\Sakura on Ramjet Rifles - Final Word [message #127916] |
Mon, 20 December 2004 16:45 |
 |
rm5248
Messages: 1156
Registered: November 2003
Location: USA
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Aircraftkiller |
People don't stop playing games because they're fun. They stop playing them, like this one, because it sucks.
|
Or, you know, maybe people get bored with it after a while?
w00t?
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Havoc\Sakura on Ramjet Rifles - Final Word [message #127929] |
Mon, 20 December 2004 17:50 |
dal11
Messages: 67
Registered: December 2003
Location: St. Louis
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
I'm sorry but CS was and still is geared to DM people. Run, shoot, kill, dearm bomb\plant bomb, kill the hostage\save the hostage, wash rinse repeat. And you talk about a game being boring? So please stop with the "CS is better game cause it has more people playing it" syndrome.
One reason I still play renegade and sometimes BF1942 , is the vehicle warfare part of it. Add building kills and it adds another level of uniqueness NOT found in the suppossed uber leet CS. Is this a knock against CS? From me personaly, yes I don't like FPS DM games with the exeption of Ureal Tourney, a knock against the game it self? No, it remains popular because of one reason, It was designed by fans for fans and Seirra was smart enough to not mess with its formula when they started publishing it.
And remember this when you talk about how ugly renegade looks, CS looks ugly because it used old tech when it was made. But you still like to play it right? Or are you playing just because it looks pretty now?
O_o
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Havoc\Sakura on Ramjet Rifles - Final Word [message #127931] |
Mon, 20 December 2004 18:02 |
 |
YSLMuffins
Messages: 1144
Registered: February 2003
Location: Moved a long time ago (it...
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star)
Moderator - Mod Forum |
|
|
| Aircraftkiller |
What does that leave undamaged, but getting horrible points off?
APC
Mammoth Tank
Medium Tank
Light Tank
Stealth Tank (which literally gives off like 23 points a shot)
Oh yes. Lets get those units so they can shoot my Light Tank for 10 points a shot. By the time I drive across the bridge on City Flying, assuming I haven't been shot up already, they can have 100+ points from just shooting at my tank. By the time I destroy one, I made no point profit. I gave the enemy more points by just getting a vehicle than I did killing the soldier that did the damage to my vehicle.
|
I think we all agree about the flawed point system now. :-\
-YSLMuffins
The goddess of all (bread products)
See me online as yslcheeze
|
|
|
|
| Havoc\Sakura on Ramjet Rifles - Final Word [message #127945] |
Mon, 20 December 2004 18:43 |
 |
Aircraftkiller
Messages: 8213
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars) |
|
|
| dal11 |
I'm sorry but CS was and still is geared to DM people. Run, shoot, kill, dearm bomb\plant bomb, kill the hostage\save the hostage, wash rinse repeat. And you talk about a game being boring? So please stop with the "CS is better game cause it has more people playing it" syndrome.
One reason I still play renegade and sometimes BF1942 , is the vehicle warfare part of it. Add building kills and it adds another level of uniqueness NOT found in the suppossed uber leet CS. Is this a knock against CS? From me personaly, yes I don't like FPS DM games with the exeption of Ureal Tourney, a knock against the game it self? No, it remains popular because of one reason, It was designed by fans for fans and Seirra was smart enough to not mess with its formula when they started publishing it.
And remember this when you talk about how ugly renegade looks, CS looks ugly because it used old tech when it was made. But you still like to play it right? Or are you playing just because it looks pretty now?
|
Did I say CS was better? I said it has 500x the amount of players that Renegade does. CS is not a deathmatch game. It's tactical strategy in close quarters combat. Deathmatch is HL2DM, running around killing people while respawning and having no objective but to kill.
CS requires you to do more. Be it rescue hostages or plant bombs, it's not deathmatch.
CS:S is just like CS, except it looks amazing and plays great. Something Renegade doesn't do.
|
|
|
|
| Havoc\Sakura on Ramjet Rifles - Final Word [message #127946] |
Mon, 20 December 2004 18:55 |
dal11
Messages: 67
Registered: December 2003
Location: St. Louis
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
Ok I should have said geared twards FPS people.
Renegade was designed as a treat to C&C fans nothing more, it was never meant to be "gotten" by everyone or be the next Half Life.I remember an interview a site had with Sperry and those were his words basicaly.
As for saying its better? Shitting on the game and those who still play, enjoy and support it, at the same time going on constantly about how good CS\CS:S looks has 500X more people yadda yadda.
"Implied" mean anything to you?
O_o
|
|
|
|
| Havoc\Sakura on Ramjet Rifles - Final Word [message #128010] |
Mon, 20 December 2004 20:38 |
Hulkcore
Messages: 64
Registered: April 2004
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
|
and ACK, seriously, no one cares that you don't play ren anymore, no one cares about your reasons, you're not going to "win" any "converts" to CS here...so why do you keep posting pointless crap? Do you feel you need to compensate for the small size of you genitals by posting in a forum dedicated to a game you "hate" and no longer play, trying to make yourself feel bigger by thinking that you are a better person because you have all this "expert" knowledge on why Renegade is such a crappy game? I think that you actually just feel like all of us do, Renegade is an great game, with a great concept, that got screwed over by stupid industry politics and will never be everything that it could have been and should have been. If you really hated it as much as you claim than you never would have spent 3 years playing it, you wouldn't still concern yourself with what you view as its glitches, and you wouldn't keep posting in forums about it. So why don't you either admit that the reason you care is because Renegade is an incredibly great and underappriciated game, or just actually leave Renegade to us and stop posting in these forums?
|
|
|
|
| Havoc\Sakura on Ramjet Rifles - Final Word [message #128051] |
Mon, 20 December 2004 23:33 |
 |
smwScott
Messages: 225
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
Eh ... CS is a horrible game. I mean it's a great mod but to receive the amount of hype and recognition it has over the years is ridiculous. The formula is so outdated and so repetitive ... I just don't understand why people enjoy playing it so much. I admit that I enjoyed CS for a few weeks when I first played it, then CS:S for a couple more when I got that. But I played Renegade for three years, kinda hard to compare. I even got a lot more play out of Americas Army, which actually requires a brain to play. The amazing thing is that most games which sell as mediocre as Renegade did would have completely dead online communities right now. Games like NOLF 1/2 sold considerably better and you can't even find a server for them now. Even Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow is dead in the water (ashame too, great online).
Although Renegade didn't appeal to a very mainstream audience, the people who did buy it obviously liked it a lot, as they're still playing. The reason CS did so well is because of Half Lifes enormous install base, which admittedly grew even larger because of CS. If Renegade had been given the proper treatment upon release (as in a far superior graphics engine and much more polish) it would likely be far more successful than it currently is.
-smwScott
47% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
|
|
|
|
| Havoc\Sakura on Ramjet Rifles - Final Word [message #128053] |
Tue, 21 December 2004 00:12 |
|
Aircraftkiller
Messages: 8213
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars) |
|
|
So you're saying an average of 900 people are all that bought Renegade, because that's about all who's playing? Renegade sold close to a million copies, and we have maybe 1% of those players now.
| Quote: |
and ACK, seriously, no one cares that you don't play ren anymore, no one cares about your reasons, you're not going to "win" any "converts" to CS here...
|
My name isn't ack, and you obviously care because you respond. I'm not trying to convert anyone to CS:S, I'm pointing out the simple fact that CS is played by 500 times the amount of players Renegade has... CS has something that Renegade doesn't, the ability to appeal to a lot of people instead of just a few hundred people. C&C players mostly dropped it and don't consider it a real C&C game because it fucked up the story, gameplay and damage structure.
| Quote: |
so why do you keep posting pointless crap? Do you feel you need to compensate for the small size of you genitals
|
My penis is reasonably large and has little or nothing to do with this thread until you brought it up. Do you have to compensate for your imaginary penis by posting worthless crap?
| Quote: |
stupid industry politics
|
Correction, a stupid game development company. Westwood Studios was only good before it developed Tiberian Sun and got new employees. At the point that TS was released, everyone knew it didn't live up to the hype. Neither did Firestorm, RA2, Pirates: The Legend of Black Kat, Earth & Beyond, and Renegade.
This is what happens when you have incompetent management who doesn't see the value in supporting games. C&C95 and Red Alert got lots of support. Red Alert had two expansion packs and even made it to the 3.03 state... No other WS game has gone above version 3.0 that I know of.
| Quote: |
So why don't you either admit that the reason you care is because Renegade is an incredibly great and underappriciated game
|
If it were actually good I would say so.
| Quote: |
If you really hated it as much as you claim than you never would have spent 3 years playing it
|
People can be wrong. I certainly was.
|
|
|
|
| Havoc\Sakura on Ramjet Rifles - Final Word [message #128055] |
Tue, 21 December 2004 00:50 |
knight1b
Messages: 70
Registered: August 2004
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
|
You know who cares what the pitched the game as that was a few years ago and it didnt come out like that well Boo who get over it and move on stop gripeing about it. If you like it play it if you dont leave the rest of us alone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Havoc\Sakura on Ramjet Rifles - Final Word [message #128074] |
Tue, 21 December 2004 04:30 |
 |
m1a1_abrams
Messages: 375
Registered: August 2003
Karma: 0
|
Commander |
|
|
| Javaxcx |
Frankly, what you and everyone else seem to be whining about with these sniper's is that they can in fact... shoot long distances. We're all agreed that the points given per sniper bullet are way to high. So that should be changed for the sake of balance. However, when it comes to the damage the Ramjet and the basic sniper rifle do against vehicles, all of you use your brains and stop thinking on an all-or-none basis.
|
OK, forgetting aircraft and artillery for a minute, since good arguments can be made for why both have sufficient unique advantages to remain perfectly usable even though they lack staying power against 1000 credit snipers... what about Buggies, Humvees and Transport Helicopters? Aren't they almost completely redundant units once the snipers arrive in the field, since in all circumstances barring lack of funds you would be better off using an APC? Isn't it that the Ramjet Rifle is solely responsible for them being redundant? I don't want any redundant units in the game and since there are better ways of balancing the flying maps, which I will come to in a second, the excessive damage that the sniper rifles do to light armour would have to go in order to achieve this aim.
| Quote: |
What I find entertaining is how much you nay-sayers are trying to balance the game to be exactly like the original Command and Conquer. All the while forgetting that just about everything you're striving for would result in a game far more unbalanced then you claim it to already be. Last time I checked, TD starred Orcas which didn't have machine guns. That's fine. But then again, the only infantry that could hit it were rocket soldiers, certainly not any vehicles that I can recall off hand. So what does that mean? When you lose the Hand of Nod, you lose your ability to destory Orcas? Or what about APCs? Couldn't a set of 5 or so GDI or Nod soldiers wipe out an APC in under 30 seconds? Doesn't that kind of firepower render base defences all but obsolete? The list goes on and on.
|
Orcas would have missiles that are primarily useful against tanks and buildings. Apaches would have a chaingun that is primarily useful against infantry. I don't see a problem with this myself. It works fine in RenAlert and the two sides have never been equivalent to begin with.
Orcas would not be able to stay in the field indefinitely without needing to return to the Helipad to rearm, so they wouldn't be the all powerful units that they are currently once the Hand of Nod has been destroyed. They would also not be able to destroy a typical armoured vehicle at full health, making them less of a threat one-on-one to units in the field, and more of a weapon designed to take out fixed targets in packs of more than one aircraft. This would not make aircraft drastically less useful as the ability to move fully in three dimensions is already a huge advantage over any other unit, and we already know that the skilled player can use this ability alone to great tactical effect.
Rocket Soldiers for both sides, Stealth Tanks, Mammoth Tanks, Recon Bikes, MRLS and stationary SAM Sites plus the AGT would be the primary counter to aircraft. That's two vehicles for each side if Recon Bikes were to be reintroduced, and they should be. The homing rockets sported by these units would be the most useful in dealing with a fast moving target that can fly, since you wouldn't have to lead like you would with a conventional projectile. Of course, all weapons would still be able to damage aircraft if they hit, with varying degrees of effectiveness depending upon the warhead used and the armour type it's penetrating. Although it wasn't possible for non-rocket-armed units to hit aircraft in the RTS game, you might argue that they weren't incapable of hitting aircraft, it's just that in the simplified game engine they were assumed to be missing the target all the time (since it would be difficult to hit an aircraft with anything other than a homing rocket). This is a similar concept to the way that the APDS/HEAT shells fired by the tanks in the RTS games did minimal damage to infantry. A direct hit would kill instantly, but they were assumed to be shooting at soldiers in cover and thus were very rarely scoring a direct hit. This is actually stated by the developers in the .ini files of Tiberian Sun.
Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, all weapons would have to be capable of causing damage to aircraft since they logically should be able to hit a stationary, grounded aircraft (and all units could damage grounded aircraft in C&C). I can't see of any way that you could limit their ability to hit aircraft to only those on the ground, given the limitations of the Renegade engine. Luckily, this actually helps to balance the game, as you pointed out with your misgivings about the idea that regular units shouldn't be able to hit aircraft at all.
Soldiers would be able to do some significant damage to armoured vehicles (even buildings) if they were able to keep their weapon trained on the target for the length of time that it would take to do so. However, if you were balancing the game after the RTS, infantry would have less health than they do currently, and would take more damage from certain weapons, so I can't see this being a problem in the long run. It works this way in RenAlert and tanks are by no means useless. You can't even repair your own vehicles without a Mechanic or a Service Depot and tanks still dominate the game for the most part.
|
|
|
|
| Havoc\Sakura on Ramjet Rifles - Final Word [message #128076] |
Tue, 21 December 2004 05:50 |
PiMuRho
Messages: 494
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
Commander |
|
|
| Quote: |
Correction, a stupid game development company. Westwood Studios was only good before it developed Tiberian Sun and got new employees. At the point that TS was released, everyone knew it didn't live up to the hype. Neither did Firestorm, RA2, Pirates: The Legend of Black Kat, Earth & Beyond, and Renegade.
This is what happens when you have incompetent management who doesn't see the value in supporting games. C&C95 and Red Alert got lots of support. Red Alert had two expansion packs and even made it to the 3.03 state... No other WS game has gone above version 3.0 that I know of.
|
All of that can be summed up thusly:
"Westwood Studios was only good before EA took over"
It was EA that imposed the deadlines that caused the games to be released before they were fully ready. It was EA that mandated how long the games were to be supported for. It was EA that sanitised the games so that they weren't as good as they were supposed to have been.
Dev Diary
|
|
|
|
| Havoc\Sakura on Ramjet Rifles - Final Word [message #128078] |
Tue, 21 December 2004 06:13 |
 |
Javaxcx
Messages: 1943
Registered: February 2003
Location: Canada, eh?
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Aircraftkiller |
No, he's not. Mobius is only good at close range and takes more time to destroy a Buggy or Hum-vee than a n00b cannon does.
|
Comparitively speaking, the damage Mobius inflicts on infantry, vehicles, and buildings DOES in fact make Mobius good at everything.
| Quote: |
The n00b cannon does not need to damage vehicles anywhere near as much as it does now. Maybe 5% of its current vehicle damage is acceptable, but not what it is immediately.
|
Why? For the sake of realism? But didn't you say blantantly that the realism card is bullshit in this argument anyway? If what you're looking for is justification for driving your buggy out into a sniper infested field at a point in the game when everyone CAN afford a sniper, then you're grasping at straws. Or what about your Orca or Apache? Didn't we already discuss this in another thread? In both flying maps (excluding Glacier) there are MANY strategic routes that one can fly in order to evade snipers. But then again, if you're stupid enough to fly into a nest of them, you deserve to have your vehicle destroied. One or two snipers are easily evadable, and you know this.
| Quote: |
I've been following Renegade since 1998. It was pitched then and was pitched in 2002 as being C&C95 in first person.
|
I would definately like to see some official proof of that.
| Quote: |
Both "snipers" destroy all of these units:
MRLS
Artillery
|
That's right. But in just about every instance, it is possible to take cover and repair. Think strategically.
Remember, buying these things when you know there are snipers, PICs, Railguns, or VAR units out there is the poor choice on your part.
| Quote: |
Orca
Apache
Transport Helicopter
|
All of these units can effectively utilize their cover in the maps they star in.
This is moot because all infantry have the potential to kill all other infantry well. At least, short of the Tiberium Rifle Sydney, but that is another discussion.
| Quote: |
What does that leave undamaged, but getting horrible points off?
APC
Mammoth Tank
Medium Tank
Light Tank
Stealth Tank (which literally gives off like 23 points a shot)
Oh yes. Lets get those units so they can shoot my Light Tank for 10 points a shot. By the time I drive across the bridge on City Flying, assuming I haven't been shot up already, they can have 100+ points from just shooting at my tank. By the time I destroy one, I made no point profit. I gave the enemy more points by just getting a vehicle than I did killing the soldier that did the damage to my vehicle.
|
We've already agreed that the points are a problem. So this argument is irrelevant.
| Quote: |
OH LIKE IT'S THAT HARD TO HIT SOMEONE WITH A WEAPON THAT HAS FOUR SHOTS PER MAGAZINE AND HAS NO RECOIL, AND FLICKERS SIDE TO SIDE WHILE SCOPED TO MAKE IT EVEN HARDER TO TARGET THE ATTACKER.
|
I, and many others don't find it all that hard. Why do you?
| Quote: |
By the time they finish taking my armor off my tank with the n00b cannons, I'll have probably 200 points from attacking a building. They'll have more. It's useless to get a tank, you lose anyways.
|
The point argument aside, you're assuming that your tank will only last for 200 points. Those snipers can only unload so many shots into you before your point intake overtakes anything they can do to you. However, it's not the sniper's fault if you drove your tank into a heavily defended base and you only got 200 points.
| Quote: |
The reason why tanks couldn't aim at aircraft was that they moved so fast, which makes it futile for them to attempt firing with unguided tank shells. Obviously this can be done in first person but takes a lot of luck or skill to pull off.
|
But that doesn't matter, remember? In TD you couldn't hit aircraft will anything except the rocket soldier and the Mammoth Tank, I believe. Realism arguments are moot!
| Quote: |
As I said earlier this game was pitched as being C&C95 in first person. The Commando is meant to be Havoc. Havoc's gun is supposed to be useful against infantry only.
|
See above, somewhere.
| Quote: |
The game has not been fine. People don't stop playing games because they're fun. They stop playing them, like this one, because it sucks.
|
"Fun" is a relative term. I happened to like the concept of this game, so I played it, and it has and is fun. Some people get bored, some people move on, or others get lives outside video games. Because people leave an otherwise dying game doesn't mean the "cause of death" is definately the sniper rifles.
Sniper Extraordinaire
Read the FUD Rules before you come in and make an ass of yourself.
All your base are belong to us.
You have no chance to survive make your time.
|
|
|
|
| Havoc\Sakura on Ramjet Rifles - Final Word [message #128079] |
Tue, 21 December 2004 06:24 |
|
m1a1_abrams
Messages: 375
Registered: August 2003
Karma: 0
|
Commander |
|
|
I don't think EA was responsible for the problems during Tiberian Sun's development? Didn't Greg Hjelstrom or someone similar write an article about how the game was released in an incomplete form because of all the problems they had with the game engine... that they had to keep redesigning it over and over until they had no time left to fix things? From what I gather they had more than enough time to complete the game as it should have been, but they spent most of that time trying to fix a broken game engine at the expense of the finer points of the gameplay. I think a lot of the original features had to be left out because of time constraints, but that's not because they weren't given enough time to develop the game. Apparently the engine they developed wasn't even capable of most of the stuff that was left out. If they had taken the time to develop a new engine, the game would have been even more obsolete than it already was when it was eventually released.
That said, I must be one of the few people who thinks that Tiberian Sun turned out pretty good. It wasn't the ground breaking trend setter in the world of RTS games that it was hyped up to be, but as a C&C game it was fine.
Edit: for those interested, here's the excerpt from Tiberian Sun Rules.ini that I mentioned before
| Quote: |
; ******* Warhead Characteristics *******
; This is what gives the "rock, paper, scissors" character to the game.
; It describes how the damage is to be applied to the target. The
; values should take into consideration the 'area of effect'.
; example: Although an armor piercing tank round would instantly
; kill a soldier IF it hit, the anti-infantry rating is still
; very low because the tank round has such a limited area of
; effect, lacks pinpoint accuracy, and acknowledges the fact that
; tanks pose little threat to infantry that take cover.
|
This does help shed light on why many units take less damage (or can't even be targeted in the first place) from weapons that they should be blown apart by if a direct hit was to be scored. What it's saying is that the RTS game is not to be seen as directly reflecting what's really happening "in the game world". The infantryman being fired upon by the tank is not really standing in plain sight and he isn't really being hit directly by the tank shell... it's representative of something else in this case, rather like a tabletop wargame. The same thinking will apply to why certain units can't fire upon aircraft. You see, the C&C games do follow a certain kind of realism, but it's representative and not directly obvious from what appears to be happening on the screen. With that in mind the "realism argument" does bear some weight, as long as you are talking about the rules of engagement drawn up by the developers to represent real life in the game.
|
|
|
|
| Havoc\Sakura on Ramjet Rifles - Final Word [message #128087] |
Tue, 21 December 2004 07:00 |
|
rm5248
Messages: 1156
Registered: November 2003
Location: USA
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Quote: |
This is what happens when you have incompetent management who doesn't see the value in supporting games. C&C95 and Red Alert got lots of support. Red Alert had two expansion packs and even made it to the 3.03 state... No other WS game has gone above version 3.0 that I know of.
|
Technically, the 3.03 patch was never officially released.
| RA Archive |
For some reason, Westwood have decided not to officially release the patch. Apparently there were some major bugs in it which could not be fixed so they abandoned the project. If you want to try it out feel free (although remember it's unsupported by me and unsupported by Westwood).
|
w00t?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Havoc\Sakura on Ramjet Rifles - Final Word [message #128094] |
Tue, 21 December 2004 07:45 |
flyingfox
Messages: 1612
Registered: February 2003
Location: scotland, uk
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Javaxcx |
Remember, buying these things when you know there are snipers, PICs, Railguns, or VAR units out there is the poor choice on your part.
| Quote: |
Orca
Apache
Transport Helicopter
|
|
But nobody would care if they were destroyed by a PIC, railgun, seeking rocket, laser chaingun, rifle soldier, bad man mobius or the like, if they drove their susceptible vehicle into exposure from such. it really isn't because of dying, it's because of the BS the ramjet is allowed to pull off. Remember, we've all used them as well as been the victims.
Since mobius is good against everything but is limited by his range, he could never do the same thing the ramjet does. do you see any other unit in the game hold it's own as well? (bar the orca when they've no hon/bar because Nod rifle soldiers need the same as GDI's against light) you can murder anything except the ramjet with a standard soldier. apaches and lights can also be taken on by normal characters, if not medium levels like gunner/laser chaingunner. the way I see it, with any other unit in the game you don't have to use the exact opposite to win (in plausible terms).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Sep 28 22:29:05 MST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02444 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
