Revoluzzer
-
Content Count
18876 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Revoluzzer
-
-
On 8/24/2019 at 5:06 PM, MattScott said:EDIT: This move is a prerequisite for Phasing, which eliminate the need to spam click in an effort to join a district with 79 players. Instead we will match across all online players in the same district type and move those players to the best server for them.
Will you remove manual district selection (i.e. the list view) in the process? I think you really need to get people out of the habit to try and join "the best server" by joining the fullest one (which might not even host players of similar threat). Even as an interim solution before phasing.
Also, do you already know how you will manage servers with phasing enabled? Given that large numbers of players were always a weak point in APB's server performance and hosting a lot of players in one single district won't be necessary anymore then.
On 8/24/2019 at 5:26 PM, Nitronik said:Hopefully this will be the best of both worlds type solution
Although I can't help but take this merger as a sign the times are direFor all intents and purposes this is how APB's server structure was originally intended. The times have been dire for several years, this is just a move back to the roots.
-
"So if you want to keep your name, all you have to do is log that character in, and you'll be fine."
Logging in with any character won't secure all names on that account, then?
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Lign said:In my experience how an average russian thinks in english he meant that what the point is of cheating when he donated a lot into his acc
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that this is how Westerners think. The farther beyond the former iron curtain you go, the more purchasing stuff on Armas is considered a bribe that allows you to cheat.
Just like crossing a border is usually impossible, until you pull out a carton of cigarettes.
-
On 8/22/2019 at 9:27 PM, Solamente said:that and getting put into an empty district
15 hours ago, Darkzero3802 said:And not having the ability to choose districts means that your automatically thrown into a low pop or dead district
This was not an issue when most players used the automated distribution system, because it put players of similar skill into the same districts.
It wouldn't be a problem today either, because the system still works fundamentally the same. It would simply throw everyone into the district of their threat colour. And since people of similar threat end up in the same districts the matchmaking system wouldn't struggle so much to find appropriate opposition.
-
17 hours ago, 6a6ka_HAPKOMAHKA said:Even if you look at the player base with innova systems ,you can make sure that the players there did not receive locks for third-party software
17 hours ago, 6a6ka_HAPKOMAHKA said:What is the point I get banned for cheating given that I have invested money and time ??? What I profit from this ?
I know online translation is pretty rough (and you probably get the best results from deepl if the incoming text is comprehensive), but this just sounds to me like you guys are surprised you get banned for cheating, despite having bought some stuff for real money. Apparently this wasn't the case on Innova, which isn't entirely surprising.
-
On 8/23/2019 at 12:33 AM, SkittyM said:I wanna guess this is about accuracy? Cause the actual fire rate between all RFP variants are the same. I'm trying to figure out if the Test B has a placebo or not though. It certainly feels slower but there's no mention of a fire rate change and i know you can shoot it MUCH faster than it feels like it shoots.
Rate of fire and burst interval are the same, I wager. I'm not entirely opposed to make it 10 hits to kill at 30 rounds per mag and 120 capacity. But overall TTK wasn't the issue with the gun, so adding another burst to deliver the minimum damage for a kill should come with a shorter downtime between bursts. I wouldn't increase the speed of a burst itself for accuracy reasons and because it's very short already. If the gun feels more like this at the end they did a decent job.
-
On 8/21/2019 at 12:39 AM, Solamente said:80 players is a low population pool for matchmaking to choose from, without phasing that population pool will never change no matter how many active players there are in total
On 8/21/2019 at 12:44 AM, Darkzero3802 said:Uh, back in 2013,14, 15 we had 100 players to pull from and this same thing happened.
Since players could always manually choose districts instead of using the automated, threat based sorting mechanics, they constantly broke matchmaking. Phasing is, probably, the end-all solution to this issue, because it will finally not matter if players manually select a district.
Off course the easier solution would've been to simply turn off the "Choose district" window years ago. Then, depending on which threat system existed at the time, players would've been assigned to a district which mostly fit their level of skill.
The only downside to this system was that districts wouldn't adjust their average (or median) threat level as players joined and left. So the longer a district existed the more likely it would host some players outside the intended skill-range. For example high-threat players who joined with an average-low-threat group, but eventually continued solo or even started inviting other high threat players into the district. At this point they would actually circumvent automated player distribution and break the system; some did this intentionally back during early beta (or maybe late alpha) days when manual district selection did not yet exist, wasn't prominently displayed or was not well known.
-
13 hours ago, PgawExSquad said:Report racism.
This will work. There are no cyrillic letters in 'racism'.
-
On 8/21/2019 at 12:14 PM, Zoriya said:Yo if you want us to test stuff make an event of it, give us joker tickets or something.
Definitely Joker Tickets. Since those are actually meaningful now players will flock to test districts more likely. Have them as a mission reward (50 for winning an opposed mission, 25 for losing).
If you want to make the current B variant of the RFP usable you need to
increase the burst-fire speedlower the fire interval, imo. Keep the bursts the same length, but allow the gun to be fired more rapidly. -
On 8/17/2019 at 10:09 PM, Tiana90 said:also who will use low yield grenades when you no longer get 3 of them and still get 2 of every other grenade?
Lower fuse time, higher flight speed, better throwing arc. Overall they're easier to use than Frags and Conqs.
-
Do you think Google Stadia will manage to run APB without microstutters?
3 hours ago, Microtea said:APB on Stadia - instant meme.
FYI even 100 megabit is NOT enough for lossless 1080p60 and above. Technology isn't here yet.HDMI 1.0 runs at up to 3.96 GIGAbits per second, which allows 1080p60 without chroma-subsampling. Just to give some perspective for lossless video signals.
HEVC encoded video at 20-30Mbit/s would probably look good enough to even a trained eye as long as there isn't too much detail or movement in a scene, though.
-
1
-
-
On 8/18/2019 at 11:29 AM, Lord Cashpoint said:I was under the impression that Obeya is already fairly popular. [...] I may be biased when it comes to the N-tec, but if you were to nerf it before looking at other very powerful weapons (Such as HVR) you'd further accelerate the polarisation of combat ranges in this game, where people elect to either go for the very close range weapons, or the very long range weapons, as those two categories seem to be the only reliable options.
I have to admit I barely play the game currently (this isn't exactly news to you in particular, I assume ;) ). But over the few hours I spent in Baylan Shipping FC recently the number of Obeyas I saw was negligible. The number of N-Tecs and its derivatives was more than expected.
Balancing the N-Tec doesn't have to leave the N-HVR untouched either. Both are - or should be - well known as problematic. And as far as I'm concerned both were also fairly easy to improve (N-Tec TTK up to 0.75; N-HVR damage down to 750). They should also revert the awful curve-based accuracy-kerfuffle which attempted to fix the N-Tec.
On 8/18/2019 at 11:29 AM, Lord Cashpoint said:I have a hard time believing that the maps were designed with any sort of combat specifically in mind - there are certainly areas where a longer TTK would make far more sense, but there are also parts of the map where along TTK would make gun fights overly drawn out affairs.
In any case the intended design is probably redundant anyway - I couldn't see the original RTW design team knowing that vehicle heavy gameplay would become a sort of norm, otherwise they may have made more areas inaccessible to vehicles. Additionally, mission design often forces you into one of two situations:
- The objective is in an enclosed area where the maximum combat range is scarcely above 15m - playing very aggressive with close range weapons are required
- The objective can be seen for miles around in at least 3 different directions - taking long range weapons will be a priority (but even still close range weapons are useful for rushing the defenders)
The maps were certainly designed with lots of combat in mind - if I remember correctly the designer of de_dust2 was on RTW's map design team?
Longer, more drawn out gunfights helped alleviate the poor respawn-system. I remember the game was originally more fun because more time was spent fighting than running back into combat. (Still at a very poor ratio, but better than now.)
Objectives were more regularly completed over the course of a constant back and forth, rather than during the time the entire enemy team was on their way back from the respawn area.
As Hexerin already mentioned player vehicles were originally not quite as common as they are now. But iirc they also had less health, which Gamersfirst later "fixed" because some players complained about it.
I agree that objectives are less than ideal and sometimes outright terrible and unfair (in fact I made lengthy, elaborate posts about this topic way back). But this was somewhat less of an issue when players didn't go down within a split second, unless they were subject to a coordinated attack by more than one enemy. And changing weapons to adapt to the current environment was much more common, unless you carried a N-Tec or N-HVR (with quickswitching from HVR to your secondary, originally!).
-
6 hours ago, NotZombieBiscuit said:Rank is not an indicator of skill.
A high rank player should be good enough at the game to compete with the average Gold player, though. The bar is low enough.
Restricting high ranking players to their own districts wouldn't solve anything anyway. You can just stop ranking up avatars below R255 by pledging to a maxed out contact. Or create a new avatar, as others have suggested (although you'd lose a bunch of customisation, then).
-
On 8/15/2019 at 3:56 PM, killerskull said:The problem Ive alwys found is that oca/pmg and others for close range are king, cqc to medium is the joker and ntec and then long range is just the hvr. Obir and obeya are weak. I think the entire map design and weapon ranges dont leave much room for obir and obeya.
The maps are designed incredibly well - for a higher average TTK. And the Obeya and OBIR would be more popular if the N-Tec didn't poach in their territory.
7 hours ago, Nitronik said:My issue with the OCA nerf is its accuracy. Due to its nature, the TTK will always fluctuate upwards a bit - which is why I think a full revert to .7 is a bad idea (and would much prefer the .686 of the other dist)
A TTK of 0.7s with a relatively stable accuracy is perfectly fine. That's how the gun worked originally and that's when it was most balanced. Gradual accuracy loss with CJ3 equipped did balance that one out fine, too.
7 hours ago, Hexerin said:Imagine if every gun in the game had good accuracy as a baseline.
This would reduce the variety you can have. The N-Tec and STAR should be very similar and mainly distinguish themselves by initial precision (i.e. N-Tec: high; STAR: low) and accuracy over time (i.e. N-Tec: low; STAR: high). But for some reason the N-Tec also got a better ROF and slightly more damage on top.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Late to this party, so I'll go with a meme answer.
I'm stumped how you've come to this complicated "solution" for the RFP. It makes so little sense. Range is a very small issue if accuracy or precision are low. Given that there is nothing wrong with the RFP by being precise (i.e. able to land one shot down range), just have its accuracy degrade rapidly within a single burst so the second shot will most likely and the third most definitely will miss beyond 40m.
7 hours ago, Hexerin said:Also, did you learn from the last time and disable all non-testing weapons in these districts? Cause if not, no actual testing is going to be getting done as the districts will be filled with premade groups trolling matches with meta guns like every other time.
What's the point about "testing" weapon changes, if you don't go against existing weapons, though? You need a natural-ish mix in a testing environment to get satisfactory results.
-
If it still follows the original stats, it differs from the N-Tec by:
a higher effective range (originally a flat value, now a different curve?)
lower zoom FOV (i.e. more zoom)
less recoil (to offset the higher zoom)
lower accuracy when moving
-
On 8/8/2019 at 2:15 PM, Alani said:I'm pretty sure the special clothing the contacts wear can be turned into player character clothing items. just depends on whether or not people will actually work on them or not
The outfits worn by Action District contacts are created with "player"-clothes. The outfits worn by the Social District faction fixers are supposedly part of their model, i.e. one single asset. Turning them into individual, usable items might not be an oh so trivial task.
-
23 hours ago, Glaciers said:i doubt it, considering there wasnt even a day/night cycle rtw probably would have had to code weather effects from scratch
Pretty sure APB was one of the earlier games which did in fact feature a day-night-cycle. Even though it was only a rudimentary, custom implementation made by RTW.
I'm not sure if G1's fog implementation was tacked onto the time-system, but it could be considered a very simplistic weather-system.
-
4 hours ago, Mitne said:They do to this day. Try being shot or dropping from height.
I actually try to avoid these things.
But that's only my avatar doing it, not others.
-
Leaning pushes the camera away from your character, creating a larger field of vision. I believe that's why a lot of people do it.
23 hours ago, Snubnose said:pretty sure it makes the hitbox a little bit shorter from the top, but wider to the sides.
This is my state of knowledge as well. Leaning does widen the hitbox to accommodate the shifted upper body position, but also the unchanged lower body.
Of course this might have changed at some point (especially during the crouching hitbox time).
3 hours ago, JazzLand said:A good number of players don't know this but you can actually tag players who are leaning and shooting while in cover. Your crosshairs have to find that area in the corner where you can still see "red" even though the leaning shooter's character can't even be seen.
Fun fact: Even if you can not visibly target their hitbox anymore (i.e. red crosshairs) you can oftentimes still hit them. I don't know what the technical implications are, but my theory is that the bullet-spread-system has to do with it. Or maybe hitboxes extend slightly beyond the point at which the crosshairs detect them.
Or it's bad netcode. But I've found it too reliable to blame that one.
-
On 8/4/2019 at 5:35 PM, GhosT said:Variation in gameplay.
I miss seeing different weapons and cars every mission.
I wonder at which point you might have experienced this.
At no point in APB history, which I can remember, were the N-HVR, N-Tec and JG/CSG not the most used/popular weapons, going all the way back to RTW beta times.
Unless you count short-lived outliers, when certain weapons became notably overpowered for a while (e.g. Obeya, Nano, Trouble Maker ...).
Arguably there was a little more car variety when the Pioneer was Enforcer exclusive, because Crims had to use the Espacio as their heavy duty vehicle. But besides that vehicle popularity hasn't really changed.
There were a few light-roleplaying clans who would almost exclusively use Broadwings, Moirais and Fresnos in "authentic" police cruiser fashion, but those were a fringe group. In the grand scheme of things it was always all about the Vegas, Bishada, Mikro, Jericho and Pioneer.
On 8/4/2019 at 7:44 PM, Mitne said:That I actually enjoyed playing that game.
And way less try-hard pop. Try-hards were small minority then.
Try-hards were never a small minority. Intentionally losing to keep a low threat level or trying to reach TL15 using any given dirty trick were common in earliest days. With dwindling play numbers it merely became more likely to meet the same try-hards over and over, without a way to evade them.
Unless you were willing to play tough, but fair opponents when the population was healthy, you were bound to face try-hards in other districts.
These two issues really boil down to low population, which reduced the factual, but also the perceived variety in the game.
I miss large clans and their rivalries the most. Clans in particular could've been so much more, had the necessary tools existed in the game. I think they uesd some of them (e.g. WASP, Resistance) for game promotion before one of the larger shows (probably Gamescom)?
Also, because I just went on a minor tour through old APB stuff, it seems like players made sounds when getting hit, way back in the day. They should bring this back.
-
2
-
-
On 8/4/2019 at 5:47 PM, SkittyM said:With the current system. I never quite understood how something was a 3 slot weapon despite 1 slot already being taken.
Doesn't really matter how many slots are taken, the weapons were only (supposed to be) labeled for how many upgrades they could carry in total.
If the new system labels slots individually, as @Hexerin says, names would get more confusing.
Is a STAR R&D III better than a STAR SD R&D II? And where does a STAR JT2 PR1 stand, in comparison?
Is a STAR R&D II PR1 the same as a STAR JT2 PR1?
-
Did old mail get wiped at some point? I just checked on my main and everything that doesn't carry attachments (or did, at some point) has been deleted, it seems.
Would surprise me if I did it myself, I had some vintage-bugged-contact-mail™ in my inbox.
4 hours ago, KnifuWaifu said:And damn I thought I could stretch my epeen a little longer by being the oldest account here but Aero beat me by 6 months.
Would this count, tho?
-
2
-
-
On 8/1/2019 at 10:23 PM, SkittyM said:If you read that sentence slower, there's a preset mod ALONG WITH the silencer. so basically something like Mag Pull 3, Integrated Rifle Suppressor, and an open slot. So it would include SD and PR because it has both. So STAR 556 SD R&D I PR1 would be correct, but a mouthful. The order of the tags can be whatever but the point is to reflect how the gun is setup.
Technically that would be a R&D II then, because it has two mod-slots.
9 hours ago, SkittyM said:God damn they really should revert the PDW 57 back to being an ACES Rifle, or an ACES. Way more fitting.
They really should. Turning it into an OCA was a nonsense move.
You going to re-look at overtime?
in General Discussion Archive
Posted
I think this was somewhat intentional originally, because Crims were supposed to be the bigger faction (i.e. more players should play Crims). Originally matchmaking would put Enforcers against Criminals and Criminals against each other.
Unfortunately the player cap was not adjusted for this, so oftentimes Enforcers would be idling unopposed while Crims were going at each other. But instead of fixing the population limits they disabled CvC matchmaking.