Jump to content

Noob_Guardian

Members
  • Content Count

    9926
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Noob_Guardian

  1. Hmm its been ages i forget how to embed images... But i appear to have the same glitch on my account as well. My character with 2 max 16 roles, and 3 max 15, appears to have lost all his max equiptment roles... xD
  2. I said i have, but it's in cases where the player is consistently in the bottom 50% of everyone in the match score wise. I doubt it. If you barely break even, and still get a win, you still gain score worth 5 kills over the other team. Unless you mean total. In that case, you're still 1st, you should not lose threat in that case as if free for all, you'd still be first on top. I've NEVER seen a "top scorer" who lost and was above the 50% mark dethreat -ever-, have you? I've seen the scorer on the enemy team or my own that is bottom 1/2 of 3/4 dethreat, even on a win. But i've never seen anyone who appeared to be top 50%+ dethreat. But I also never put that much thought into -that case- specifically, because the few times i recall the top scorer ever did dethreat as an enemy, was they had less score than even the worst player my team did overall. Which would have put them ~below the 50% mark.
  3. It's hard to say that it was done more towards "clarity" rather than to be more tight lipped on how to effectively dethreat. Even if it pits -everyone- against the other as if it was a free for all. There still has to be a determining factor with score, by points and where each person places, that influences whether someone went up or down and by how much. You are free to assume then that the top 50% which would likely be the winners, would likely gain threat, and the lower ones lose it. This percent ofc could be different, it could be top 40/30/20% of earners go up, have a no change, and then -reduce threat- percentage. With the percentage simply being the number of players that scored lower. - With it at 50%, even with the losing team, they could still gain rank to some degree, as they would have performed better than at least 1/2 the winning team if they did well. If it's you need to be top 40 or 30% of earners to go up, that's fine as well. But it certainly does NOT seem the case by any means. If it's a different percentage that gains threat based on the "free for all", that's fine. But for simplicity sake, (and lack of knowing the further intricacies and possibly seeing a few posts about it at some point) 50% is a good median number to indicate how well you -need to do- to -not lose threat-. If you are second from top score consistently, but not the top, you should - not lose- threat. It would be dumb to assume you did, considering that wouldn't be fair especially when on the winning team consistently, imagine going silver by winning games but still being 2nd from top like that. The only times i've seen people lose threat in this system (even with a win) is when they are consistently bottom 50% low performers, even among the winning team. (won, but provided nothing, compared to the other team and their own) Even if it's a "misread". It's still a fair assumption, and with how G1 was handling things back in 2013, it's likely they wanted to limit knowledge on "how to dethreat effectively" by being vague and editing it. (We had a massive dethreat problem back then.) Remember, you used to need negative score with 1 kill to dethreat a -lot-? They fixed it so you negative shouldn't count it towards dethreating. Which means you still need to score, but score -lower- than some amount of players. If placing bottom 50% is wrong, that's fine, but it's still more accurate then pretending that there isn't some % of players in the match you have to do better than, to not lose threat. We may not know that % completely, but it's definitely there, if each players score is weighted against the other to place who gains and who loses.
  4. The gun itself is a slightly better feeling star/ntec hybrid. So typical Bando/Extended mag, and Hunting sight 1-3 (depending on preference for cqc to ranged accuracy) and CJ/IR for preferred engagements. I normally ran HS3/Mobility Sling EM3, CJ, or IR3
  5. That's how it was a year or so after gold lock when they changed to the Win/Loss top 50% bottom 50% system where score in a match became the determination for threat level rather than just straight win/loss that it used to. There may still be tiers and the like, but there is definitely a "match number" limit that determines rank (which I never heard they removed) you are based on the last x matches, and they still should have the top bottom 50% rank increase decrease based on match score. Because they never said they removed it. I know they made changes since it's been 5-6 years since that implementation, as i haven't been nearly as active as i used to keep tabs. But i also never heard of them changing from the score based and past x match system combination, even with the glicko tiers likely still in place.
  6. There used to bel a background 1-10 system, not sure what it is now. Your threat and rank is determined by the last like 20-30 missions you've played. If you're top 50% in the match it goes up, bottom 50% in score it goes down. Losing with a good score prevents threat degradation. But that's all I know anymore.
  7. That depends, if it's an actual GM such as Mattscott or game dev, they would have the power to do so. If it's a "player gm" who went through the open application process ages ago (i don't even know if that is still around or not) they I believe don't have that kind of power to ban, maybe kick, but not ban.
  8. True, During "gold lock" i was a consistent sub 30fps and was still gold, and went on a like 21 mission win streak around the time of that that gold lock event thing. The amount of sweat that required though xD Yeah you've been around for a while. I had issues with my OBT title, I had to email G1 ages ago and ask about it, they checked the system for my account age, and got me it. If LO still has access to the stuff, they might be able to assist if you open a ticket and they look at the account ages. Not at all, you see, how the system works, is that if you score in the top 50% of the scoreboard, you go up in threat. If you score in the bottom 50% you lose threat. If you win, you have a good 25-50% chance of the entire team, having more "score" than the enemy team. If you carry hard, and ensure that the other team, except 1 or 2, get little to no kills, or fail the objectives. They end up lower on the scoreboard than your "silver group" then that means 2-3 players on your team is "in the top 50% and goes up in threat. Some missions you can get 2-3k score on a win, and generally, only 1-2k on a loss unless you got a "ton" of kills while losing. Which means by winning, you're inadvertently ensuring your team goes up in threat. So to basically, "carry" someone to gold, all you have to do is carry them, and hand them an HVR, or teach them to tapfire an ntec properly along with range increments in general and get them 1-5 maybe 7 kills a match if possible. Boom they hit gold within a few days to a week or so. Has nothing to do with making them do all the work, all they have to do is exist on the same team as you as you simply "play the game" and if you do really well against facing other golds even "alone" boom they hit gold. If you mentored them well, they'll outperform the silvers and bronzes with some but mild issue, and they'll go up to gold simply based on that as well. (One of the biggest things I always start with is to have them lower their sensitivities in-game. The base ones are atrocious) And yes mack, I've "mentored" new players, given them mods, vehicles, and tips and tricks for how to play APB:R. I might have an "elitist" attitude when it comes to APBR after playing for years it tends to happen but even I recognize that new players need to be mentored and helped for the game to survive. There's a reason I took the name "noob guardian" as a handle. I've also probably blown over 1-3mil in game giving away things over a few years of off and on playing as well. Not that you'd believe me anyways.
  9. Old G1 back in 2013/2014 changed the threat distribution and reduced the requirements to be gold from like the top 10/15% to 20%. It's something people don't talk about much anymore, but it had been somewhat complained about mildly by certain members for a short while, as it happened around when threat segregation by reward loss occurred, ^ basically this I started back in like Sept-Nov 2011. I have literally mentored and carried R50 silvers to gold threat within a day, and have had bronzes hit gold within a week. Can you like... not pretend that it's that hard to get? It's really not xD
  10. gold is exceedingly easy to get if you aren't a newbie. I have been perm gold since they made the top 20% rather than 10% gold, and i've never managed to dethreat - even when I had tried intentionally during "gold lock". I can understand not being gold if you're always drunk as a vet player. But holy damn its piss easy to keep and get. You almost have to -try not to- get gold to not get it,
  11. hehe, i feel yeh, but it's not naming anyone specifically. Half the Americans cheat in APB, and West Coast Colby players are the worst offenders. :trollface: I'll never forgive LO for removing the :trollface: emote D:<
  12. the .45 has the same ttk as the Fr0g series. Its got a .8 ttk, and fires faster than the FBW which has a 1.05 ttk. I assume you aren't firing it at the correct ROF. NFA kills the fastest for pistols. Unless you mean PDW for mahcine pistol, which is still higher and less accurate. That explains it
  13. I meant the macro itself failed, as i was expecting it to work within the proper -ms- ratio to time but it didnt lol. But it did work otherwise for getting a rough estimate using the lap/timer, and thank yeh.
  14. unless my macro is broken on my keyboard.... Below- my test failed - somewhat I did a -clock lap- on my phone timing with the sound while using my macro, and the average i got was .22-.25s which equates to about a 1.1ttk with perfect accuracy, which aligns much closer to your calc, if we add in human error. I dunno but it appears my macro is unreliable af xD. Not that I use it for anything other than copy/paste and work stuff. But it's good to know.
  15. Noone is going to notice even half the bloom changes if they started. Older players would, but most left so you can discount most of them. G1 had plans to rework the maps to be better once the upgrade which ironically never happened. Maps were meant to be reworked, and the animations were all but removed by g1 leaving a ton of abusable glitches around.
  16. I actually like most of the current gun balance. The issue isn't so much gun balance anymore, as it is skill cap - lack of cover/unprotective cover, and the like. Though I will be honest and say that with most jump shooting removed, gameplay feels more clunky at times. They had done some cqc weapon reworks that weren't necessary (buffing oca, then nerfing it back to where it should have ben) and other things which made it wierd. Add in the wierdness of shotguns and lol...
  17. I mean, i have figured it out using a macro to test the NTEC, i didnt care about the other weapons. Lily, the NTEC stat i believe is incorrect. It should be like, 1.26 or 1.28s, as I had used a macro in game to adjust firerate until it was perfectly accurate without any "shots fired with minor bloom". Unless your test was more recent than mine.... Sadly this information also is great for those who like using macros to set weapon firerates. Which ironically, people have done before. Removal of bloom would be horrible. You'd have to heavily rebalance recoil, or you'll end up with Modern Warfare 2.0 where every gun litterally -handles exactly the same-. That's not the goal of APB, ALSO, if you remove bloom, you ALSO, have to hard -remove- damage passed the "max weapon range". Making bullets -disappear- midair like in 2012/2013, to even think of balancing anything, because you'' then have everyone running ATACs to melt everyone because who needs bloom to make it inaccurate so it -doesn't- melt everything at range? G1 blew any chance of a mass TTK increase out the water. Sadly, that would also require a lot more work to even think of rebalancing any weapons, as the entire gunplay for the game, would slow down drastically, unless you're making everything a free kill laser which seems like your intent. Balancing mod suggestion is bad. While I agree making other green mods than CA more viable, and less situational, the only one that can really be said to suck is fragile. Removing red mods is dumb, every game has ways to increase ROF and TTK, and you want to remove the only way to do so in this one to balance your broken perceived perfect balance. Hunting sight is fine, and no weapon should guarantee a first bullet hit. Imagine sniping 35-45m with IR3 with an OCA just because you put a dot on your screen and tap fire fast enough. ROFL Yeah no. Snipers are fine as 2 shot, shotguns really could go with 3 shot though. The HVR mechanics are there explicitly because "3point sling" exists, Unless that gets heavily nerfed, then it won't be going away. Thank 3ps3 quickswitching and using fbw/.45 then sniping cqc with it before you can get killed from the -cqc- based weapons. It forces pistol use in cqc. (though it feels glitchy at times) Tommy mechanics should be re-worked to pre-nerf. It's just dumb that they ruined it. Even if they rebalance it after. Crouch movement is fine, unless you're asking to crouch run/job, which may be cool but also be broken. Only testing would really tell. (new blue mod anyone?) Maps got one or two balance patches and then they didn't touch em anymore citing APB 2.0. So i hope they actually go and fix some of the stuff, because it's honestly broken otherwise. Headshots are broken AF. I'm surprised the UI hasn't fully switched yet, but i guess that's coming with upgrade? Increasing vehicle speed would be a bit broken. Just come flying through at 75-90m/s and run someone over? Car push and break those missions? Rework explosives to fire faster because you just broke something? Yeah no lol. We don't need any more vegas speed monsters running around lol. But i do agree on fixing handling or doing something cool with the camera. Movement mechanics would be cool - depending - on what they are. Headshots? Forever broken, in APB, and can be dumb AF in most other games no thanks lol. You're asking to add headshots in a game where you can hit the -head hitbox- while the enemy is crouched behind 85% of cover that exists, without actually seeing the head. They're some of the dumbest things in most FPS games, especially due to where they place their cameras to shoot back. -see tip of head but no gun- -headshots you- wtf? No need to have that but to a worse degree in APB, unless they increase the size of every cover and railing by like 5 inches, and THEN, they are going to have to increase the jump height as well. lol
  18. They changed things years ago so you can't get to that super low detail by altering UPK files. I'm not sure how to go about it anymore or if possible in .inis. I'm not sure, are you still allowed to alter the .ini file that USP style does but to a further degree? Or are you only allowed to use the configs given... I remember doing a lot of things by lowering things manually beyond what USP originally did, but that was years ago and i'm not sure the stipends anymore. Muzzle flash removal is permitted, and it's in the config link shared by cookie. It's the removal of the explosions and other effects that are still not permitted. (I blame the halloween event fog ) I doubt no fog is permitted if it effects the event but it's probably different?... otherwise they just banned shader changes then let the primary issue that caused it get off scotch free... I loved shaders that made the game look more vibrant, i still miss them (even though I understand "why" they were removed, i.e. borderland shaders/halloween no fog)
×
×
  • Create New...