Home » General Discussions » General Discussion » An opinion piece - Donating
| An opinion piece - Donating [message #264145] |
Fri, 08 June 2007 02:20  |
 |
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
so, today's opinion piece relates to the !donate command.
Why is this wrong? Simple. Long-winded, but simple.
Renegade has many RTS elements to it, and that's no accident. It was designed by the company who literally invented real-time strategy.
Economy is a huge part of Renegade's gameplay, just as it is in an RTS game. Go watch a replay of a top RTS player. Do they stay in base until they can afford the most powerful units? Hell no, they go out there and perform what is known as harassment. In most RTS titles this is done by attacking your enemy's resources, and if done correctly, the end result is this: you get your powerful units out there before your enemy does.
Renegade has a direct equivalent of this. Depending on the map, it's any or all of the following:
- killing the enemy harvester
- protecting your own harvester
- C4ing or grenading enemy structures
- money crates
- the !donate command
Look at this list.
Which of the five did Westwood not specifically choose to implement?
Which of the five is physically impossible to stop your enemy doing? (in other words: uncounterable)
Which of the five does not require you to leave your base and fight for it?
What a surprise that the answer to all three questions is the same.
The economy system in Renegade is remarkably well-made and surprisingly balanced. If you were to remove the donate option from that 5-item list, then the following statement becomes true:
'The team with better infantry skills and better co-ordination is able to obtain money more quickly than their opponents'.
City Flying, for example. Let's say team A has very good shooter and pistol skills, team B doesn't. Everyone goes out to the field... and what will happen? Team A's infantry will slaughter team B's infantry. What happens as a direct result of this? Team A is able to kill the enemy harvester, save their own, and get money crates. Therefore, they get cash faster and are able to secure a good advantage as a direct result of the fact they harassed better.
So what's wrong with donating? Firstly, Westwood didn't intend it, and understandably so. They didn't MEAN for you to have to contend with an orca, apache or APC faster than it is legitimately possible to afford.
Secondly, it is perhaps the only thing in Renegade that it is physically impossible to stop your enemy doing.
The enemy's trying to kill your harvester or get boxes? You can stop that if your team's better than theirs.
They're trying to sneak into your buildings and get C4 off? You can stop that if your team's better than theirs.
They're sitting in their own base and typing a line of text in the first 10 seconds of the game? If you were the best team in the world and your opposing team was the worst team in the world, you still couldn't stop it.
Therefore, the cash race which is a huge part of Renegade's strategy (INTENTIONALLY, I repeat) stops being about which team has better infantry and better co-ordination, and becomes about which team has a couple of people willing to simply give some credits to another player. Granted, you MIGHT regard this as teamwork, but that minor point doesn't change the illegitimacy of the strategy.
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - Donating [message #264147 is a reply to message #264145] |
Fri, 08 June 2007 03:04  |
StealthEye
Messages: 2518
Registered: May 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
 
|
|
The crate isn't always counterable, for example on city it may spawn so much closer to one base than another, so one team obviously will be first.
"Westwood did not intend it". There is partial netcode for it, and don't say that's "because it wasn't a good idea", because there are a lot of other things cancelled as well (like other game modes etc.) I don't know, it could ofcourse be the case, but I don't think there is any reason to assume it was not implemented on purpose, nor the other way around. Renegade was quite unfinished is some aspects, this might be one.
Even if the other team stays in base and types this line of text, as you describe it. Then the other team probably kills their harvester/gets more points&credits out of attacking structures, and as a result will have (by donating or not) more credits.
The "which of the five" questions are a but useless, I could ask other of these questions matching other options. (Like: Which of the five are (atleast a bit) influenced by luck -> Money crates).
Donating can be done by both teams, it doesn't unbalance anything, nor it balances it.
Apart from all these, I prefer to have donating on in public games, but in clan/comm wars I agree that donating should be disabled.
BlackIntel admin/founder/coder
Please visit http://www.blackintel.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - Donating [message #264148 is a reply to message #264147] |
Fri, 08 June 2007 03:09 |
|
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
| StealthEye wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 05:04 |
The crate isn't always counterable, for example on city it may spawn so much closer to one base than another, so one team obviously will be first.
|
That only accounts for one crate, not all subsequent crates. The better harassing team will get subsequent crates no matter which side they spawn.
| StealthEye wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 05:04 |
Even if the other team stays in base and types this line of text, as you describe it. Then the other team probably kills their harvester/gets more points&credits out of attacking structures, and as a result will have (by donating or not) more credits.
|
It's unlikely, and either way: one team earned it through effective strategy and superior skill, the other didn't.
| StealthEye wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 05:04 |
The "which of the five" questions are a but useless, I could ask other of these questions matching other options. (Like: Which of the five are (atleast a bit) influenced by luck -> Money crates).
|
see the first bit
| StealthEye wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 05:04 |
Donating can be done by both teams, it doesn't unbalance anything, nor it balances it.
|
The fact both teams can do it doesn't mean it should be allowed and doesn't mean it's balanced. Say the team clubs together for an orca - there is only one way to counter that, and that's for Nod to do absolutely exactly the same for an apache.
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - Donating [message #264156 is a reply to message #264145] |
Fri, 08 June 2007 04:12 |
StealthEye
Messages: 2518
Registered: May 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
The first crate is usually the most important one though. And gets collected at the time where donating usually matters most (At the game start).
One team had superior skill and what not indeed, and they got more money because of it. Seriously, if they lose the harvester, no matter how much they donate to each other, they will have far less credits than the other team. The other team can ALSO donate, so they have more credits to spend and thus still have a huge advantage.
The first bit doesn't state that these questions are the only ones that can be asked. I already proved that the westwood thing was false anyway.
'The team with better infantry skills and better co-ordination is able to obtain money more quickly than their opponents'.
This statement still applies with donate on.
The fact both teams can do it doesn't mean it should be allowed and doesn't mean it's balanced.
Correct, but the following is true too:
The fact both teams can do it doesn't mean it should NOT be allowed and doesn't mean it's NOT balanced.
There are more ways to counter this orca. Note how the other team has no money left! You can kill the orca with a sniper or whatever you like, you have more money to spend and can probably (with donating or not) get multiple apaches's due to your superior start. One way or another, you will have an advantage.
Carrier, there are many of these small differences that are quite nicely balanced in renegade imo.
BlackIntel admin/founder/coder
Please visit http://www.blackintel.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - Donating [message #264158 is a reply to message #264152] |
Fri, 08 June 2007 04:28 |
|
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
| CarrierII wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 05:34 |
What about the fact that GDI soldiers do more damage than Nod ones? That lends a small advantage to GDI (I know it allegedly counter-balances with Nod having the cheaper tanks, but if Nod can't secure their harvester due to the inferior weaponry, Nod can't afford their cheaper tanks anyway)
|
It does balance it out.
| StealthEye wrote |
The first crate is usually the most important one though. And gets collected at the time where donating usually matters most (At the game start).
|
One crate doesn't come anywhere near compensating for a team donating for an orca.
| StealthEye wrote |
The first bit doesn't state that these questions are the only ones that can be asked. I already proved that the westwood thing was false anyway.
|
No, you didn't.
| StealthEye wrote |
'The team with better infantry skills and better co-ordination is able to obtain money more quickly than their opponents'.
This statement still applies with donate on.
|
No, it doesn't. In a public server with donate on, a team without the slightest skill can donate for an orca, APC, whatever without even having to leave base, whereas a team effectively harrassing is virtually guaranteed to get screwed over unless they donate as well.
| StealthEye wrote |
The fact both teams can do it doesn't mean it should be allowed and doesn't mean it's balanced.
Correct, but the following is true too:
The fact both teams can do it doesn't mean it should NOT be allowed and doesn't mean it's NOT balanced.
|
Totally irrelevant point, since nobody said the fact both teams can do it is a reason why it shouldn't be allowed.
| StealthEye wrote |
There are more ways to counter this orca. Note how the other team has no money left! You can kill the orca with a sniper or whatever you like, you have more money to spend and can probably (with donating or not) get multiple apaches's due to your superior start. One way or another, you will have an advantage.
|
If one team immediately donates for an orca, the only conceivable way to counter is for the other team to do exactly the same thing and donate too. The other team won't need money, they have a fucking orca
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - Donating [message #264167 is a reply to message #264145] |
Fri, 08 June 2007 05:35 |
 |
Crimson
Messages: 7429
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
I don't think it's unfair. Each team still only has X dollars. If one team is pushing the other team back and prevent harvester dumps, the total finances for the other team will still be significantly reduced, making players significantly less likely or able to donate.
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - Donating [message #264180 is a reply to message #264145] |
Fri, 08 June 2007 06:34 |
 |
m1a1_abrams
Messages: 375
Registered: August 2003
Karma: 0
|
Commander |
|
|
I agree with Spoony. A first minute aircraft on flying maps is a huge advantage. It doesn't mean the other team can't win, but it makes a lot harder from the start. Instant map control for one side can be very difficult to overcome and they get points headstart also. It's a bit easier to counter on non-flying maps, but something like getting Arties out on Mesa is still very difficult to come back from.
Unless the other team wants to rely on being able to still win from an disadvantage, they should also donate, which can be countered by the other team donating to two people, etc. If you follow that through to it's logical conclusion, you have one half of the team donating to the other half at the start of every game. Also, it's just a bit distasteful when you see the same people begging for their donation at the start of each game, because they know how big an advantage they're getting.
Other than that, games on most servers only last about half an hour, so donations mess with the mechanics of destroying the enemy Refinery and starving them of credits. A few rich players can keep a team going long enough to close out a game, when they should be at a more serious disadvantage. In my opinion, if you lose your Refinery, that should be it, no more credits unless you already had them yourself. The economy is forgiving enough, because losing the Harvester isn't as big a deal as it should be.
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - Donating [message #264182 is a reply to message #264162] |
Fri, 08 June 2007 06:46 |
|
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
| StealthEye wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 07:03 |
Yeah, the team with an orca wins the game, that happens ALL the time... Dream on.
|
...seriously, how long have you been playing this game? How can you not see what an astronomical advantage an orca would be when your opponents can't afford an apache or ramjet for a good five minutes?
| StealthEye wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 07:03 |
There is no point trying to convince you about the false/bad points you showed.
|
You could start by actually refuting them...
| Crimson wrote |
I don't think it's unfair. Each team still only has X dollars. If one team is pushing the other team back and prevent harvester dumps, the total finances for the other team will still be significantly reduced, making players significantly less likely or able to donate.
|
I guess that explains people donating for an orca at the start of flying maps on the N00bstories server before the harvesters are even on the field?
Here's the point: when the enemy has an orca and all you have is basic infantry: you can't kill the harvester, you can't save your own, you can't get boxes, you can't grenade buildings, you can't buggy/APC rush... you pretty much can't do anything except wait until you have an apache and/or ramjets.
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
[Updated on: Fri, 08 June 2007 06:47] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - Donating [message #264188 is a reply to message #264184] |
Fri, 08 June 2007 07:15 |
|
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
| warranto wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 09:11 |
Basically it goes like this.
"Oh no! The enemy donated cash and now we have to deal with an Orca! THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO WAY TO COUNTER THIS!!!!"
|
Besides donating too, there isn't other than simply waiting for money, which gives your opponent the massive advantage of having a completely unchallenged orca in the field for five minutes...
| warranto wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 09:11 |
I'm starting to get sick and tired of all these "opinion pieces" just because some servers decide to allow something you don't like.
Get over it.
|
Or respect the fact that I'm entitled to an opinion? You don't agree with me, fine... but try not to cry just because I express it.
| warranto wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 09:11 |
There is no balance issue as if one team donates for an Orca, the other just has to donate for an Apache or something else to counter it.
|
see the first part
| warranto wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 09:11 |
Stop crying about it and learn to play the game.
|
Damn, you got me  I guess I need to "learn to play the game" if I make a completely logical argument against a strategy I think is unbalanced.
| warranto wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 09:11 |
You are the one who is always going on about things that can counter aircraft just as effectively as a Ramjet, GET on of those other things and USE it. Problem solved.
|
What the hell are you talking about...
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - Donating [message #264194 is a reply to message #264145] |
Fri, 08 June 2007 07:55 |
 |
warranto
Messages: 2584
Registered: February 2003
Location: Alberta, Canada
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
You just gave your own solution to the problem
Use the !donate command yourself. There is a reason BOTH teams have it.
Your teammates won't donate? Guess you have to put up with it. Why should the other teams willingness to work together suffer for your teams lack of ability to work together?
"Entitled" to an opinion? Says who? You are no more entitled to an opinion on these forums than I am.
The strategy is not unbalanced, the team you are with just sucks and unwilling to donate themselves. I'm quite sure if you were with a team that would donate to counter it, you would not complain. If you expect them to get aircraft at the beginning of the game, don't wait to see it before you ask for a donation to counter it.
Unlike that whole "flaming APC" thing (which both teams have access to), there is a way to take away that advantage with ease.
As for that last "what am I talking about", see above. You are claiming it to be unbalanced. Rather than crying about it, ask for the donation, get any unit that can counter it, and deal with it. As you always say, you don't need a Ramjet to deal with an aircraft, so there is no excuse about unbalance because you don't have to wait for 1000 credits to get an effective unit to counter the aircraft. There is no cost imbalance (ie. player total allows for enough credits to be donated for an aircraft, but not for a Ramjet)
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - Donating [message #264202 is a reply to message #264194] |
Fri, 08 June 2007 08:10 |
|
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
| CarrierII wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 16:55 |
5 soldiers attacking an orca will bring it down, auto rifles are suprising lethal in numbers.
|
so let me get this straight: 15 soldiers > 14 soldiers and one orca?
| warranto wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 16:55 |
You just gave your own solution to the problem
|
No, I proved it's unbalanced simply because the only counter to donate is more donate. It wasn't always there, and the only counter to this thing the community introduced is to do exactly the same? How can you not see the problem here? That alone proves how much it's changed the game.
| warranto wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 16:55 |
Your teammates won't donate? Guess you have to put up with it. Why should the other teams willingness to work together suffer for your teams lack of ability to work together?
|
| warranto wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 16:55 |
The strategy is not unbalanced, the team you are with just sucks
|
Read the first post in the thread again, it seems to have gone completely over your head.
| warranto wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 16:55 |
I'm quite sure if you were with a team that would donate to counter it, you would not complain.
|
I'd still see it for the bullshit it is. Some of us are capable of thinking objectively in terms of fairness instead of how it personally benefits ourselves, as alien a concept as that might seem to you.
| warranto wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 16:55 |
As you always say, you don't need a Ramjet to deal with an aircraft
|
Uh... what the fuck? Stop making stuff up, please. It's OK to admit you have no valid argument, but kindly don't make stuff up.
| warranto wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 16:55 |
there is no excuse about unbalance because you don't have to wait for 1000 credits to get an effective unit to counter the aircraft
|
or 900, as it were, since the only effective counter to a good orca pilot is an apache or a ramjet.
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - Donating [message #264204 is a reply to message #264145] |
Fri, 08 June 2007 08:13 |
 |
futura83
Messages: 1285
Registered: July 2006
Location: England
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star)
Viva la Resistance! |
|
|
I have mixed feelings about donate.
While at the start of the game, it could tilt the balance for one team, i like what some servers have done:
Stop donating for the first X mins...
This is a signature. Reading this is wasting your time.
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - Donating [message #264217 is a reply to message #264204] |
Fri, 08 June 2007 09:15 |
 |
EvilWhiteDragon
Messages: 3751
Registered: October 2005
Location: The Netherlands
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
Spoony, nofi, but seriously, if the enemy can get vehicle X, then you should be able to get more or less the same vehicle, so that's in no way an advantage/disadvantage.
Also, in public games, you generally dont have 15 players moving out at once, thus 15 well organized soldiers would be able to take out 1 unorganized orca, and 14 unorganized soldiers.
Unless you totally suck, but I don't think you do...
BlackIntel admin/founder/PR dude (not a coder)
Please visit http://www.blackintel.org/
| V, V for Vendetta |
People should not be afraid of their governments.
Governments should be afraid of their people.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - Donating [message #264218 is a reply to message #264217] |
Fri, 08 June 2007 09:22 |
|
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
| EvilWhiteDragon wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 11:15 |
Spoony, nofi, but seriously, if the enemy can get vehicle X, then you should be able to get more or less the same vehicle, so that's in no way an advantage/disadvantage.
|
uh, are you paying attention to the part where the only counter to donate is donate? You aren't disproving me by agreeing with me...
| EvilWhiteDragon wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 11:15 |
Also, in public games, you generally dont have 15 players moving out at once, thus 15 well organized soldiers would be able to take out 1 unorganized orca, and 14 unorganized soldiers.
Unless you totally suck, but I don't think you do...
|
So your reasoning is you just need to hope everyone other than the orca sucks?
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - Donating [message #264222 is a reply to message #264145] |
Fri, 08 June 2007 09:46 |
|
warranto
Messages: 2584
Registered: February 2003
Location: Alberta, Canada
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Quote: |
No, I proved it's unbalanced simply because the only counter to donate is more donate. It wasn't always there, and the only counter to this thing the community introduced is to do exactly the same? How can you not see the problem here? That alone proves how much it's changed the game.
|
Gasp! Did you know that the only way to counter a unit is to use a unit as well?
Just because something has a "hard counter" does not make it unbalanced, it just means you need to change the way your tactics are done. "Unbalanced" means that there is no way to balance it out, and that nothing can be done to counter it. With this, there is a way to counter it without giving something else up in return.
| Quote: |
Some of us are capable of thinking objectively in terms of fairness instead of how it personally benefits ourselves, as alien a concept as that might seem to you.
|
So am I. It IS fair that BOTH teams have it, and can use it when required. I also fail to see how having the !donate command personally benefits me. Considering I rarely do anything to benefit myself, I don't see how that would even apply to me.
| Quote: |
Stop making stuff up, please. It's OK to admit you have no valid argument, but kindly don't make stuff up.
|
Sorry, but I have no time at the moment to search both the N00bstories forum and this one for the numerous posts you have about how overpowered the Ramjet is, and countering peoples arguments over it's anti-aircraft potential by stating that other units can be used. I'll do that later if you honestly can't remember stuff you have posted.
Oh, wait.. I guess that was "spoony" who posted those, wasn't it?
| Quote: |
or 900, as it were, since the only effective counter to a good orca pilot is an apache or a ramjet.
|
I can take out an aircraft with a 500 sniper just as easily as I could with a Ramjet. Even if the aircraft retreats, your job is a success as you've held off the "unbalanced" tactic from doing the damage it was intended for.
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - Donating [message #264228 is a reply to message #264222] |
Fri, 08 June 2007 09:56 |
|
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
| warranto wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 11:46 |
Gasp! Did you know that the only way to counter a unit is to use a unit as well?
Just because something has a "hard counter" does not make it unbalanced, it just means you need to change the way your tactics are done. "Unbalanced" means that there is no way to balance it out, and that nothing can be done to counter it. With this, there is a way to counter it without giving something else up in return.
|
Do you have any idea how ridiculous you sound?
The only counter to donate is donate and you don't see what's wrong with that?
| warranto wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 11:46 |
Sorry, but I have no time at the moment to search both the N00bstories forum and this one for the numerous posts you have about how overpowered the Ramjet is
|
I might have said the ramjet is overpowered, but I don't think it should be disallowed - the only change I think is realistically implementable without totally changing the game is reducing their point gain
| warranto wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 11:46 |
and countering peoples arguments over it's anti-aircraft potential by stating that other units can be used. I'll do that later if you honestly can't remember stuff you have posted.
|
I think you're going to have to.
| warranto wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 11:46 |
I can take out an aircraft with a 500 sniper just as easily as I could with a Ramjet. Even if the aircraft retreats, your job is a success as you've held off the "unbalanced" tactic from doing the damage it was intended for.
|
Can we for a moment assume the orca pilot is a skilled player and not a total scrub?
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon Jul 22 16:06:59 MST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01165 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
