Ydiss

After an initially good impression for my first couple nights playing again with a new account, it became apparent quite quickly that these first few nights were the exception rather than the rule. Since that, I had 3-4 sessions in a row where I ended up against blatant (to the point they admitted it freely, even proudly) de-threat/re-roll players on bronze districts that bounced between silver and gold (or were just gold and obviously hadn't left the district in hours). The majority were well over 200R. Some weren't that great but enough of them were obviously extremely experienced compared to the true bronze/silver players. I don't mind losing a match, particularly when the opponents were actually playing in the correct district, but these sessions were enough to turn me away from the game and I think I'll wait until the EU happens and, maybe, this issue goes away or is mitigated. Though, so long as someone can game the threat system, I doubt it'll ever really go away. Which is a shame; the handful of matches I played in where this wasn't happening really reminded me how amazingly fun this game can be. Some of the comments are suggesting this is "normal" for PVP games and to be expected. Not in my experience, it isn't; I've experienced toxic PVP communities before but never one quite so obviously intent on destroying itself as APB's. And that's probably been somewhat true of this game since the early G1 days but as the population has fallen, it's become a whole lot more apparent; there is undoubtedly a core of the community that is great but the trolls have become a much greater percentage and now they have a signed-off method to seek out new players and annoy them and it works. And then there's the other side of the coin... the games that I've played that are highly competitive yet have really great communities, communities that support new players and engage with them properly. There are quite a lot of these games but I just recently began playing Natural Selection 2, which is another very old game, has very complicated mechanics and is very competitive yet my experience there has been overwhelmingly positive; the rookie servers actually have rookie players on, no experts trolling them; anyone who isn't an obvious rookie is always talking over comms to give advice (friendly advice, not patronising advice) and everyone seems to be having fun even when losing, from my perspective. I'm having a blast with it, despite it not being a casual game and me being a casual player. If APB had that type of community... What a game it would be. But it doesn't. And it's nothing to celebrate whatsoever.

Sounds like someone missed their opportunity to be elected to European Parliament last week. Arguing the wrong points with the wrong people for the sake of arguing.

Sorry for the necro, this thread is three weeks old now but I was reading through and saw this. This is amazing I remember that thread. I even posted in it, partway down that page. I also remember a lot of those forum names and recall playing with a lot of them in RTW and G1's version. And yes, it's a massive shame the old forums are gone now. Good times.

It does seem a messy situation to pick apart, doesn't it? I'm definitely not the right person to answer all of these questions, nor am I particularly that bothered about the outcome of this story but I'm going to suggest that 25p sticker packs with a stick of gum included that you buy at the local corner shop don't likely pop up on the radar of those against children gambling compared to online game cash shops that people plough over $400 dollars into in one hit just to get the Legendary weapon they're after. The former is never likely to result in children getting their parents into masses of debt; the latter potentially is (and does; it is really a problem irrespective of whether I care about it or not). I'm also not an expert on APB's current legal standpoint relating to whether access is limited to adults, to a regulatory compliant standard. All I know is that, if activity A is classified as gambling then the company offering activity A must legally prove their signup process restricts access to adults only; I'm equally sure that actual gambling websites don't accept "just say you're an adult and we'll all just agree to turn an eye if you turn out to be 10 years old" as validation. I once signed up to loads of gambling sites (I did a spot of bonus bagging way back when it was lucrative) and almost all of them required scanned photographic proof of ID to sign up for (like a passport). It's all theory crafting, I really am not an expert nor do I really want/need to be. It is, however, an interesting point to ponder upon, particularly considering how proliferate this type of "game play" is in the industry on the whole (more so on the mobile platforms, where it's bloody rife and, in some cases, forms the entire basis of the game itself).

The funny thing about the "Come back when you're R255" comments is that it's literally just a matter of time before you'd get that. I imagine you probably enjoyed getting R100 so this is as "challenge accepted" a situation as you're going to get. I'll look forward to when you do get R255 and then see what the detractors say then... "Come back when you did it with the PIG" perhaps. (Challenge accepted?)

Haha "pay to win" elements. It'll be fun if only to see US Congress try to empirically define what that actually means. The gaming communities the world over have been trying and failing to agree on what it means for well over a decade

Isn't it solely targeting the randomised loot boxes because they're essentially gambling? I imagine the best solution for LO would be to just change the Joker store so there's no random element, but different prices. I've got to be honest, I don't think this is a bad thing. I really dislike the whole mobile games random loot box thing. It's a blight on games in general. Obviously extremely popular. But I personally think it's gash and won't miss it if it's obliterated.

I don't know a lot about the bill itself but if it is restricted only to minors (i.e. it's not a blanket ban of loot boxes for any game) and LO want to keep loot boxes, then they'll probably need to prove their gateway restricts minors from playing (like any gambling organisation does, for example). Which I doubt LO will be able to do (or be willing to do, to be frank).

So glad someone got that reference. And so quickly. Faith restored.

The best you can hope for is that LO further develop the out of mission activities for solo players to engage in. Way back when RTW first released the game and then G1 somewhat enhanced this aspect of the game, we put forward a lot of suggestions as to how it could be improved. And I think it could be improved. Engine Upgrade is required (to make shared instancing possible so match making isn't restricted to one district). Shared instancing needs to work (so LO can do away with the manual instance selection and players are automatically placed into districts, meaning the idea of "empty district farming" isn't a thing any more). Develop the off mission activites significantly so they're fun for both sides. How to do the latter? Criminals: Don't need a ton of enhancement as they already have a few ways to make cash. In addition to these (still relatively mundane) activities, the criminal could get insider information fed to them as they progress up through notoriety levels. They start at zero, needing to do ram-raiding, mugging and boosting cars but as they rise through the notoriety ranks they unlock "insider tips" about the activities of more lucrative marks, such as: You receive a tip that an armoured truck carrying gold bullion is making its way through the district. Find it, jack it and take the goods to your launderer to cash in. A well-known fat-cat has been spotted in "insert establishment here" and is soon to leave. If you get there quickly enough, you may get a chance to mug them for a fatter payout. A gold-plated Cisco has been sighted in the district. Boost it for a massive payout. The frequency of these marks occurs more the higher your notoriety. At rank 4 notoriety, you get an indication on your map as to the rough location of the mark. At max rank (bounty), you get the exact location. Maximum risk (other criminals may be after it as well, everyone will be after you), easiest route to locating the mark quickly. But you can, of course, get clean to avoid the risk and continue seeking the mark manually. You do lose your notoriety when you hand in (as currently is the case) so you can't just constantly do insider tips and will need to raise your notoriety again. Major change: Any criminal activity committed by a criminal off-mission (including killing civilians) that is witnessed by another NPC civilian (or enforcer player), is marked on the map for off-mission enforcers to see. More importantly, the value of the current stash that criminal is carrying is shown when hovering over the blip. The blip remains in place for a short while only. Enforcers: Need a ton of work for this part. Currently, all you can do is randomly witness the odd criminal hoping they're out of mission, kill them and take their ill-gotten goods back for reward, or find stolen cars and repo them (the latter is really slow cash). The latter is the only "single player" part of it. What I'd propose is that the Enforcer can follow up on any reported crime on the map, as per the above major change. When they arrive at the location, they receive a small amount of cash for their report (stashed) but they will then get a very brief blip on the map showing the current wearabouts of the criminal that committed the crime (rough area for prestige 1 to 3, pin point dot for 4 and 5). Additional design: off duty criminals can witness Enforcers as they chase leads (exact same mechanic as witnessing criminals, perhaps with a camera icon instead of handcuffs). This serves the same function, give criminals the chance to stop snooping detectives, steal their cash and turn it in. For enforcers, when an insider tip is spawned for a criminal, if you have a high enough prestige, you will also be informed of the mark! Same rules apply as for the criminal. At this point, the enforcer can ignore these tips and just continue following up on crimes to receive low to moderate income (as their prestige increases). The same current rules apply for witnessing (if they witness an off mission criminal, they're entered into a 1v1/group v group mission to kill that criminal). So, they can follow the breadcrumbs of the criminal's crimes (but a crimnal can be more careful and avoid detection, making this harder) and, eventually, witness them - forcing them into a death match for the stashes they both carry (just as it is now). Backup rules still apply (allowing the event to turn into a mission for anyone to join when ready up). The insider events will be more lucrative for both sides (I'd suggest the final payout should get multiplied for larger player volumes). I'd say this is the only way the "single player" content is going to get developed; it needs an element of multiplayer tie-in as well; that said, the above design would make it possible for you to play completely solo, so long as you enjoy the idea that you can be opposed at any time that you're not careful.

Some things never change in APB. Such as the subjectively false perception that one side is globally better than the other. If it were measurable and demonstrably provable, it would take more than a single point of reference (your experiences) to confirm what you think is true. It could be technically possible to measure, if APB records stats for wins and losses, scores and so on. I doubt it does though. Even if it did... You can play on both sides. This immediately invalidates any measurement if one side has "better players". But maybe it would confirm "which side the better players play on more".

I watched it (first time, obviously) and thought it was OK; definitely had some cringe (no more than I've seen posted here, mind). Had some funny moments in it as well though. Didn't take itself seriously at all. Showed off some examples of why the game's pretty unique. Seems the suggestion here is it was "disliked by the community". It would take some weirdly introvert, self-destructive "Royston Vasey" kind of gaming community to actively discourage someone who is/was out there positively promoting the game they play. Unless the streamer is massively misrepresenting the game or promoting trashy, exploitative tactics, you should want your favourite game being advertised even if you personally dislike the videos.

Your artwork is really good. Hope you don't lose anything.

Without using Google, "I'm sorry, I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask but I have one question. If I usually play on PC, is it possible to connect on my PC account on Xbox? and "OK, thanks for your response" Bienvenue a la maison folle, Clarkykent. (Welcome to the nuthouse)

Well done

I can count on one hand the number of things I've seen said in English in /d that was worth reading in the last week. The vast majority of chat is gg ez or hackusations. It's a blessing that Russian text is unreadable. I can't imagine much of what is said is worth reading.

I'll buy you GTA V. Then we're all happy.

Ignoring your last couple lines (will be nice to have a discussion without agro here, let's see if it's possible), I understand that single player content is desirable for some and apb isn't supportive of that. Just bear in mind that it was never supposed to be so it's incredibly unlikely you'll get what you're asking for. I think the single player activities (criminal ram raiding, car theft, enforcer witnessing and repo) could be enhanced but only if it can be tied into multiplayer activities (and not be cheesed in empty districts, you really need to be careful and avoid attention). This can only come after the EU though (ie, when instances can be shared for match making so no need to select instances). I've thought about it and the best option I can think of is a "request replacement" option, like request backup but where your spot is given to someone else who maybe doesn't care about the reason you wanted to quit (they're given the option to take your place if they want). That would have minimal impact compared to just quiting or going afk. Again though, EU is a prerequisite for this.

Considering you've asked for a single player mode in the suggestions forum because you've admitted you aren't a team player, and you're asking why abandoning opposed missions isn't a supported option in game, the question that's prominent is do you really think APB is the perfect choice of game for you? The answers to your question would be obvious to someone who is looking for a meaningful multiplayer experience. Whilst it's understandable that sometimes players get frustrated or wind up playing with really bad team mates, or worse... Someone who "isn't a team player", leading to them wanting desperately to quit the mission (I've been there!), enabling this knee jerk reaction isn't beneficial for the health of the game. Sadly, players still do what you are apparently considering. Quit by any means necessary. But I prefer that to the weak "I'll just go hide and afk until the end of the mission because my opponents are using an ATAC" types, that really messes the game up for their team. This is a team game primarily. It can feel harsh a lot of the time. If losing really hurts you enough to want to quit frequently and you've got no interest in playing as a team, it may not be the perfect game for you.

LO answered my ticket in about a day or two. Maybe my ticket was a quick win, not all tickets will be, but I think that was pretty good going personally.

If this game has already had anything then it's new content. The biggest difference between the game now and the game I left in 2012 is content. New map, new weapons, clothing, mods (lots of them), new vehicles and contacts. And an additional 60 ranks to work through. The majority of the new content is consumable (progress through, obtain, complete) or divisive (new map is not a mission district, so divides the player base). The benefit of all that is it keeps some players around for a while longer and brings some players back. The obvious detriment is most of those players will blow through the content fast and then be bored again and new game modes don't really help after those players then leave. Content volume isn't a major issue. The value is. The quality of it. The missions that still remain from RTW days that heavily favour one side or the other. The highly restrictive spawn system that can severely ruin the experience when, in reality, it should be possible to code an intelligent system that dynamically validates a possible list from hundreds of potential points, not 50, the stale mission types/events and activities that haven't changed since the time I played, the threat segregation, the limit of 40 opponents to draw from at any time, a threat system that displays itself in a highly divisive and the most angst-inducing way possible... The list goes on. A lot of that requires the EU first to be improved. The last thing the game needs now is additive content. That's pretty much all it's had for 7 years. That's not to say it doesn't need content changes; it does, a lot. What needs to change is the content most players engage in... Mission districts, missions, tasks and matches. New missions, fix the existing missions, new activities for both sides to do, new interesting mission stages. Allow us to match against the whole player population, match us better, remove visible threat once this works properly. Perhaps even some dynamic, District-wide events that add something new to divert everyone away from the same old things once or twice a session. More things for both criminals and enforcers to do with the off mission meta. Combine the off mission activities with the missions, starting with a criminal and an enforcer witnessing them and snow balling up into a multiplayer mission to protect/arrest the criminal that started it all. So much could be done with the meat and bones of the core game to enhance it for so many players, without adding more weapons or contacts to grind through, or new mods that just further imbalance the game or new colourful legendary weapons that, whilst pretty and oh so "MMORPG-must-have", do bugger all to draw in new players or bring back old ones and serve only to keep the already unfailingly-loyal players distracted for a week or so. EU is essential. First. Then a massive focus on making the mission districts really fun and balanced with new things to do and interesting, dynamic content to play through.

Thanks for your input.

Only if the government limit it. Do you think you can say whatever you like where you work, without consequence? Swear at your boss every day and not be disciplined? You should read up on freedom of speech. It's not what you think it is.

My opinion of what went wrong with the game is many orders of magnitude more useful in a topic asking for people's opinions of what went wrong with the game than your multiple opinions on my worthiness to even post at all and your insistence that CS needs to be compared with APB But thanks for your input and I'll take that as a stand-down from you. I can agree that our discussion has run its course. I'm pretty sure Russian players were prolific on our EU server back when the Russian server was active. I'd say the perception that Russians ruin the game is maybe skewed by the fact that you don't understand what they're saying but they stand out because of that. For every unintelligible pm or /d you see, there's probably 5 equally annoying ones that you can understand perfectly. For every Russian team mate you get where lacking communication causes issues, there will be five English speaking players who don't communicate anyway or are useless. I noticed a lot of Russians last night when I was facing obvious DTs. But I doubt the DTs were all Russian. I just noticed the Russians more. Because they spoke Russian. One was on my team. We didn't talk but he was a better team mate than several others that night.

First time since I came back this reared its head but the financial bronze I was just in, every match there were R200+ silvers (on both sides). It's OK, I just dealt with it but it really wasn't much fun. Actually managed to just hold my own occasionally but for the most part I was facing max slot vehicles, clotting 3, maxed weapons. A couple of them turned gold after wins. It's pretty obvious what they're doing. It does spoil the game for new players. Hopefully the EU will enable this to be a thing of the past.