ForumUser

I don't see the need to nerf the DMR-AV. The main issue is mission balance, but I think LO is stuck in a tricky spot. What is easier to "fix"? Completely revamping missions/creating new ones or changing numbers on a weapon. As a mostly soloq player who frequently uses the DMR-AV and other ranged-specific weapons, the DMR-AV really only shines when you are uncontested, 95+ m away from the objective or what type of mission, specifically the heavy item ones or paper thin vehicle drop offs come to mind. Against premades/good players, there is rarely a chance you will be uncontested the entire time. So what exactly would be accomplished by nerfing the DMR-AV? You would only promote the use of meta guns rather than variety even more.

But they are just waiting for the engine upgrade... ^ logic of biased name hoarders

I am not surprised by #2, name hoarding has always been a thing in any video game since there is RMT market for them. It is good that you are trying to prevent abuse, but I believe that the system is going to be abused unless you put some strict limitations on creating new characters/accounts and I do not see that happening. If my understanding is correct, you are going to implement the identifier system that would allow 2 players to have the same name after the merge. So essentially there would be 2 players with a name like "Bum" after the merge, correct? If so, how would name changes work? Lets say that I owned a name on EU prior to the merge and wanted my NA character to have my EU name, is that possible or are name changes strictly based on the server that the character and names originated from? Also, account wide clothing upgrades when?

There is a reason why name hoarding is a thing in every game, including APB. I have pretty much done everything there is to APB, max rank, max roles, designing, etc. Once my friends are gone and if I lose my name, I see no point in continuing to play APB. Sadly I joined APB in 2014 and my name is held by a person on Jericho who may, or may not, have more gameplay hours than me, but they have not been active besides the rare once a year moment. My September's worth of gameplay hours beats their gameplay hours in the past 2 years. Is it fair to give my name to this very inactive player who will probably never touch APB again? Lets see what LO does with names. I am somewhat hopeful that they will do the right thing and base their decision on who has contributed the most recently like recent gameplay hours and g1c purchases.

Names mean a lot to people and not so much to other people. My name is probably one of the only reasons why I still continue to play APB as much as I do. The moment LO strips it from me, I won't be playing APB as much, if ever, and I will definitely never buy g1c ever again. I am sure there are several players that share the same sentiment.

Is the free account lifetime clothing bundle a specific bundle or are we allowed to choose which clothing bundle we want? If it is the former, which clothing bundle is it or what does it consist of?

During LO's management, I have yet to see the Valentine's weapons go on sale outside of Valentine's Day, or the standard couple of weeks in February. During G1's management, these weapons have gone on sale randomly, specifically for Breast Cancer Awareness month, which is October, and Tiggs's Black Friday event where the community can request certain guns to be put up for sale for a specific time like 2:00 AM to 4:00 AM. Perhaps you have a shot at buying these earlier than February.

Based on the answers MattScott has given us on the recent Q&A session about name priority, the name priority is based on a number of factors. Does the player have a 255 on the account? How many total gameplay hours are on the account? This is good because not everyone plays on one character and name priority should be based on total gameplay hours on the account. What I am unsure of, but have a hunch is that the amount of hours recently played on the account may influence the decision for who gets priority for a name. This is a win in my books. The account that has the most hours and the most recent gameplay hours should have priority for a name. If it were me, I would have given name priority to who spent the most g1c in addition to the current factors, but I am satisfied if my hunch is correct.

Any response @MattScott? I am waiting to see if I should bother buying g1c now or never.

This still doesn't answer name priority. Who gets priority for a name if both characters are 255? Does the person who created the name first get priority? Does the person who has the most gameplay hours get priority? Does the person who has the most recent gameplay hours get priority? Does the person who spent the most g1c get priority? @MattScott You need to list the requirements for name priority. I don't want to spend an egregious amount of hours and g1c for a name if I cannot retain the name.

We shall see how many players stay after the engine upgrade. How much of an advanced notice does one need to log in the game once? 3 months? 6 months? 1 year? If you ask any reasonable person, 1 month is plenty of time for a person to log in a video game and log out. Most of the games that I have played don't even give a months notice for name wipes. The holiday or whatever excuse only falls under a very small minority, if any. As for the last statement, that is not a valid excuse to not be connected to the game in some form, whether it would be through social media or friends. It is not LO's fault for wanting to improve the game for its current playerbase. A company should not base their decisions on players who can't be bothered to check up on the game once in awhile. It is similar to how the law works. Being ignorant to the laws does not excuse one from the consequences of said law.

I think it is pretty stupid to cater to people who no longer support the game. All a person needs to do is simply log into the game once before the deadline and they get to retain the name. If a person can't be bothered to log in once then they deserve to lose the name. What bothers me is the lack of information regarding names. Who gets priority for a name if both characters are 255? Does the person who created the name first get priority? Does the person who has the most gameplay hours get priority? Does the person who has the most recent gameplay hours get priority? Does the person who spent the most g1c get priority? @MattScott You need to list the requirements for name priority. I don't want to spend an egregious amount of hours and g1c for a name if I cannot retain the name.

Those players already chose to quit and will most likely continue to quit once the engine upgrade occurs. What is the point of catering to players who do not currently support the game? The company does not gain anything with them being inactive and the current playerbase will not spend any extra money since there is no reason to. Yes, you are right that a person can do whatever they want, but you are either misunderstanding the point of accumulating recent gameplay hours or completely biased about this issue. The point of afking for hours is to show that a player with a certain name cares about that name and shows the potential to play the game in the near future. If a player does not bother logging in, play the game, or going afk in social then the player does not care about their name in the first place. Going afk in social benefits the game more than you think. It shows that the game is somewhat lively, which can attract new and old players alike with this new sense of population. By not going afk in social, a new and returning player will log into social, see an empty or not as active social and probably never log back into APB. Simply put, having an afk body in social is better than having no body in social.

I am also doing the same. It does not stop me from playing the current APB. Players could also afk in social while they sleep or go afk if they wanted to get gameplay hours. You do not have to play the game to accumulate recent gameplay hours. You call it being a jerk to them, I call it a benefit for the majority involved. LO gets money from the potential name changes and the active players get the names that they want. The only loss here is the old inactive veteran and that is assuming that they completely quit APB over a name. Catering to those who are currently the most active will help APB more than catering to those who are inactive.

If people are "waiting" for the engine upgrade then what is the harm in accumulating gameplay hours prior to a merge and engine upgrade to retain a name they care so much about? Players know that there will eventually be an engine upgrade. This is merely an excuse to not play the game. The engine upgrade is not something that will magically retain those inactive players. The gameplay is not suddenly better after the engine upgrade, it will continue being the stale third person shooter where corner camping and nade spamming are prevalent. The most likely scenario for these types of players is that they will log in once and then never play APB ever again. The previous mergers are proof of this, Jericho & Colby and Obeya & Patriot. You have also proved my point that catering to inactives is not the way to go. Sure the inactives came back when LO was announced as the new publisher and developer, but they also went back into hiding shortly after. Do you really expect these players to play APB more than the players who are currently active? Sorry for not understanding illogical perspectives that do not benefit 2/3 entities involved.

It is LO's right to do whatever they want as they own APB. In my previous WoW example, I do not expect Blizzard to cater to me, an inactive player who would probably never return and purchase any services from them ever again. I do not understand why players feel entitled to a name they did not care about in the first place. If I had a name that I cared about a lot, I would find the time or do whatever it took to retain that name. Players who do any less than this are making excuses.

I have seen some new faces in APB, but it could always be rerolls. Based on my most recent gameplay, I would say that the population is a 50/50 mix of new faces and old vets. I wholly agree that the current active population is what most people would consider a failure. One thing that astounds me is how this game is still running off of ~1000 overall players. Regarding your scenario about being away, I would say that this is type of event is unusual and rare. This is also not a valid excuse to allow a person to retain a name. Businesses rely on current income, not past income to continue running. So yes, the person should expect to lose their name. Your argument is like expecting Blizzard to allow me, a WoW player who played from Vanilla to Cataclysm, to keep my old character name to myself just because I played an egregious amount of hours and started the game earlier than another player instead of giving it to a currently paying customer. That is entirely unreasonable and does not benefit the company and the active players who care about a certain name. What I am trying to say is that if a person truly cared about their character names in a video game, they will find a way to be active in said video game. One way of accumulating recent gameplay hours is afking in social. You do not have to play the game at all and you are free to do whatever you need to do in real life.

You are basing your opinion on loyalty, which is not a bad thing, but not always the best case from a business perspective. Let us use your scenario, 17k hour veteran with the name "Bum" (Citadel) and 1 hour of recent gameplay and 1k hour veteran with the name "Bum" (Jericho) and 40 hours of recent gameplay. Out of the two, who is more likely to spend money on the game? Who is more likely to promote the game? The user who currently plays the most. As you have stated, there is the possibility for an increase in population, but data from past merges refute that. Our previous merge with Joker and Colby proves this. There was a brief increase in overall population, but overtime it died down to what we currently have now. From a realistic perspective, what exactly do you think will prevent those inactive veterans from leaving again? The engine upgrade? New contacts? The gameplay of APB is cut and dry. An engine upgrade would not magically hold players' attentions and new contacts are another way of saying boring grind. I understand your perspective, but the past has shown that the inactive players will continue being inactive. The choice to cater to those who are currently active is the safest choice out of the two.

I play the game on and off regardless of its shortcomings. Simply put, if they cared about their names they would have played "x" amount of hours to at least retain their names. I have played a lot of games and whenever a merge comes up, the publishers or developers usually cater to those who are currently the most active within their video games. Catering to those who do not play your game is not a good way to show how active the game is.

Are those the only requirements? People are going log in and then never play again. I believe that any conflicting name should be based on recent gameplay hours prior to the merge. For example, if "Bum" on Jericho has 40 hours of recent gameplay before the merge and "Bum" on Citadel only has 1 hour of recent gameplay, "Bum" on Jericho gets to keep the name. In order for this to be fair, an exact date for the merge should be publicly mentioned. If the merge were to happen on September 25th, this would give us ample time to prepare and accumulate gameplay hours to keep our names. I am sure a few people would be mad about this stating that it is unfair to veterans, especially the 255s holding these names. My argument is this. Why should inactive players be able to hold names that they do not use? If you have not played APB in awhile, you did not care about the names in the first place.

After reading this thread, I am going to devote 2-3 hours everyday doing nothing but dumptrucking and bounty hunting during prime time. If you want to do missions either suck it up or join the gold district.

I find it odd that this has suddenly become a major issue that needs to be dealt with. People have always "loitered" in mission districts. I remember being in dumptruck sessions with others for 1-2 hours in a Silver Mission District without anyone complaining. With that being said, I understand the frustration of not getting op because of how matchmaking works and the amount of people allowed in a district, but who's fault is that? The toxic community is at fault. When I used to play APB for long periods of time, there would always be drama or shit talking in district chat. You could literally say anything you want in district chat without repercussions. I do not know if things have changed now since I haven't needed to report anyone recently, but I assume it's still the same. Combine this with antisocial behavior when grouping with randoms and you have a formula for disaster. What I find funny is that the players wanting this streamer + following to not have fun in a video game are the same ones who are toxic to other players. You guys do waaaaaaay more harm to the community than this streamer + following.