Noob_Guardian

sadly that's what it seems to be summing itself up as. Purple mods or a "special" mod that makes it different but not better.

It was a slight over-exaggeration. I get issues with star where i'll tap fire at someone standing still and not reg a number of the shots (within 20m), or seem to watch them hit the wall outside the reticule (for some reason?) Whereas the ntec or far will reg in the same situation. It's not something that happens all the time, but it was enough for me to use FAR or NTEC moreoften than star. The act has similar issues for me where i'll fire and it wont reg, or it won't shot hitmarkers/blood and still hit or wont at all showing it did. I sum both situations up to ghost shooting. i thought it was 1.05 rip it was less than lethal with open slots. They simply wanted to stay away from multi-mods on secondaries for balance reasons.

While it applies with every shotgun, its especially aggravating with the strife to fire and see every shot land behind the enemy in a circle. xD

i've never thought we'd ever agree on anything True, however most of the statistics they gather during such tests are things like average kill distance (and possibly average ttk?). While FC isn't the most balanced to do so, if they wish to get a number of people to test certain guns AND ensure that they get needed stats, it could be a better start. However, claiming that all guns should be balanced around FC performance is asinine as well. If anything it'd simply be a stat tracker. Asylum would be fine to test cqc weapons, and baylan mid-long range. Mission districts would be better, but since there's no incentive to do so, testing them in FC (with bonus jt?) might get more people in...

To be honest though, the act itself without hs3 is practically unusable, so i'm glad for the buff. Hopefully it doesn't overbuff the goldplate one, but since it's got a high ttk (1.5s), it'd be hard to claim it's op unlike the RFP which had the same ttk as an fbw (1.05). The act is already outclassed by all primaries due to ttk anyways. Hopefully it doesn't get touched since it's like the only T3 mod secondary aside from NFA? Which isn't broken and "somewhat decent". (even if behind a paywall, i'd be all for making it jokerstore if it isnt already) Tagger wouldn't be a bad idea honestly, and it would indeed be more gently than HS which would ruin the gun's cqc capabilities.

the act suffers the same hitreg issues as the star, so i doubt it. "aims 6 shots right on and misses" "bullets appear outside of reticule" wtf

Fang Discussion I own the fang and agree it needs reworked so here's my thoughts on what you've said. By the looks of it, the entire RFP line is getting accuracy and range changes. Now, we are talking about putting HS 3 on a now 15m - 30m pistol. I don't think that's a good idea. While I agree that it feels too strong because of its current range, you are already nerfing the range by 10m. I think the FANG, RSA, and ACT got accuracy buffs is that correct? (Though the fang got a worse accuracy modifier at 10m, which is now worse than the fbw's) HS3 may "then" be needed simply to counteract that modifier, but then it'll function as a worse current "base" rfp because of accuracy, range, and damage changes. It's a tough call honestly. Gimp its strafing accuracy and ability just so it resembles a decent in marksman "current" rfp? I honestly can't say that's the way it should go, seems counter intuitive to gimp it further like that simply so it can be "decent" in marksman mode. in which case ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I might suggest mobility sling or 3 point sling. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- - (I had not tested the RFP changes, so I'm only going off what I'm seeing stat wise and past experience with the weapon) -

uh no? because you're not going to be moving a heavy item 3 m/s even realistically (thats almost 9 feet a second) lol. I do understand that it is "essential" because the mission locations are broken as f*** but that should be remedied by fixing the locations, not by allowing glitches to remain in place.

it uses score from the last 20-50 missions to determine threat, pretty sure its 50. However, that may have been the last win/lose system, i don't know if it changed or not.

the gun itself is a situational weapon, however with the hvr changes it feels a lot nicer to use now.

"The situational part is simply not true, in FC even in Abington, you can dominate with an OBIR, OBEYA even a Oblivion and Dogear, most things really. That's why I pushed the point that great players in the top of the Hierarchy of skill, will outperform others, no matter what. And those are the ones that should discuss balance. But you admiting to the map being one of the reason for the difference in gunplay is simply proving my point more then what I already did. I said very clearly, that one of the big reasons that the gunplay and meta was screwed in missions is because of a map design that was intended for a much longer TTK and slower gameplay overall. Again, it's an issue of game design and specifically car and map design, not weapon balance specifically. The thing you forget is that Abington has several open areas where you can place objective at and snipe enemies going to it, easily. That's why those weapons can do well "sometimes". You normally DO NOT see them at the highest in the leaderboard unless the people put the obj where those weapons do well. Yes, but you also forget about ttk is that most assault rifles have HIGHER ttk's than the ntec, aside from the FAR which has slower bloom recovery, which automatically makes the NTEC BETTER, and needing to be brought into line "somehow" whether it be ttk, or ttk and bloom. / This is true, but again, as mentioned above, you still prove my point as the NTEC isn't even an issue here, the NSSW far outpeforms it, all around. And yet again, just like Abington, the weapon selection that you can actually do well with without being super good is massively increased, due to the map design. If nssw far outperformed it realistically, you'd see far more NSSW's in most districts. But that also, is NOT the case. (I even own one and touch it far less than the Euryale or shaw) True, most people aren't trying win FC, most are going for kills, however, it still does not change my point around weapon balance. You could make the theoretical argument that people could weapon stack a mission loadout, or a loadout for that specific map, Abington. But even if that was the case, you'd still have a map, that favours around 6 - 10+ entrance zones per room on average, making it so that you could very well still maneuver around and use the map to your advantage to nullify their weapon advantages. But if we look at it realistically, it's true that a lot of people play it for fun, but the majority of these players are already using meta weapons and or tactics that, while intended to kill more then win, still fulfills the same result. Thus making it so that what you have is a situation where it is eerlie similar to missions in that regard, yet due to the Map construction mostly, you are still able to overcome this when you know the map. And not to mention that even when you factor in the player that play for fun, you still have a sizable chunk of players at least playing somewhat to "win" in the sense to be MVP and whatnot, thus making the comparison and relevance to missions still a thing to consider. You seem to forget that most locations when heavily defended in fightclub, isn't generally won though "skillful" gun play, but rather zerg rushes of 3-5 people in a door location at once and lots of grenades. Something that normally doesn't happen in mission districts. As in missions you generally try from 2-3 flanks to ambush the attackers/defenders and get a location advantage, while grenades are used, they are generally thrown at locations you "know" an enemy is at. Something that fightclub does not really offer to the same degree since you can generally just spam nades for kills due to player density. What's meta does not = to what's the best, it's simply what is the most useful and rounded weapons, I.E weapons and load outs that can handle the most situation on a per mission basis. Again, the SWARM is one of the best LMG's in the game on a LMG basis, however that isn't saying much as again, the NSSW is and always will be (unless missions are changed drastically) the best LMG for missions, despite the fact that the SWARM will outperform all other LMG's in LMG v LMG battles. The NSSW has this advantage due to the fact that the gun is simply worse at LMG v LMG battles, but better at overall usage. And the NSSW is far from OP. You do realize that something that is the most "useful" and the most "rounded" weapon for the most "situations" is not only meta but also tends to be the best. There's a reason why there's a very close correlation to meta and "best" and why everyone strives to do what's "meta" because it's perceived as what IS the best by the majority of the population. I'd really disagree about the swarm being one of the best lmg's, let alone the nssw. Euryale is generally considered the "best" though NSSW is considered "decent", the Swarm is considered the worst by the general population. Arguing that the STAR should be worse due to handling is a very good argument, CS does this, but it does this via it's economy system. A Galil will always be worse then an AK, but it is cheaper, hence why it is is worse. APB has no economy system to speak of gunplay-wise, hence the only thing that decides how good a gun "should be" is it's handling and weapon class. If a gun is easier to control, it should be worse, period. And saying "just buff the rest" is far from asinine, it requires more work, but it is the best way to do things, if you want to do them "correctly". Technically the NTEC and the STAR should switch places, since the star should be remade with a large magazine, and make it into more of a mid/CQC range assault riffle /lmg hybrid with a faster firerate without affecting bloom more then it already is, and keep the NTEC as the true jack of all trades gun. Not really, we have a lot of weapons with very great handling, easy to use, and are great weapons. OCA for example great handling, great ease of use, same ttk as the NTEC. Atac great handling, easy to use, very little downsides, still better in a lot of situations than the star and same ttk as ntec. NFAS and shredder easy to use, not hard to hit ttk at all, extremely rewarding for low effort, and yet they aren't "worse" only "different". So that philosophy DOESN'T stand in APB. Then you have guns on the complete opposite, such as the IBSR? (I think thats the one) Every shot gets 2x worse recoil. 3 hit kill, and somewhat faster ttk, but terrible to use to the point noone will bother touching it, really it's recoil is unmanagable if you even try to hit it's ttk, and there's no reward for it, trash gun with terrible handling. Misery, terrible handling, still a meh weapon at best, same goes for Cobra and a number of other weapons. Simply advocating "star should be worse because it's easy to use" doesn't stand up because most other weapons are just as easy if not easier and STILL perform better. Star should have had the current bloom and a lower ttk (.7), or the ntec's ttk brought up to the STAR's, but even doing so for balancing sake is a "no-go" because NTEC is everyone's ez low effort win baby. It's true that you should never have to be forced to use a gun, that is why what you people need to understand is that, if you nerf the NTEC, the FAR and rifles will take it's place, and don't forget, the FAR isn't even close to being as easy to get your hands on as the NTEC. Which, ironically, would nerf the less well of players in the game, as one of the few competitive equalizers they have, will be gone, they will be forced to either use an inferior STAR, or use rifles, or cash up and or grind for tickets. Not a good solution. And that's the exact reason that so many people miss, is that if you nerf one thing it is in the name of "making more weapons available and usable" yet, it ironically doesn't achieve it, due to the fact of the core design flaws of APB's mission district structure, how this is so hard to grasp amazes me. And for the record, I use // because I dont know how to multi quote. Except FAR is better balanced than the ntec due to its slower recovery time, and while "rifles" may take its place, the reason rifles aren't used so much in the first place aside from waterfront is BECAUSE of how strong the NTEC is. Yes, far is harder to get, luckily you can get one from joker store, the yearly event, and armas now. Yes, not a great solution, but the FAR handles like the STAR does, aside from less ammo, .7 ttk (balanced by its bloom recovery), and being more accurate, you don't notice much difference between the two. I do prefer FAR simply because the ttk and accuracy competes against the ntec much better than the star does. If need be i'd be fine with increasing the ttk of the far slightly, so that all "mid range" assault rifles share a rough ttk (.75), while the cqc based ones (condor?, atac) stay with the cqc .7.

Fightclub is NOT a means for weapon balance. Just saying. In fightclub you can use whatever weapon works and go with it and "generally" do well if you're half decent and it's nothing like missions, but you will ALWAYS see a pattern with weapon usage. Not only that, but map matters for weapons as well. Hence why you generally see far more mid-long range weapons in baylan and waterfront, rather than asylum where everyone is using cqc to mid. Example: See a lot of ntecs, joker carbines. Someone goes nfas, then more go, then everyones running cqc and nfas in asylum. Now, why isn't fightclub a good representation? Because it's too situational. You don't see people using ntec too much in asylum because its a cqc based map, where cqc is just plain better. Ntecs don't ofc dominate this, but they do also do rather well. You're more than likely to facepalm into a ton of shotguns and oca's in the 15-30m ranges, rather than other rifles and weapons that the ntec easily dominates. Why? Because that's the map. And that's not something the ntec is "incredible" at doing... well, most rifles actually, which is why you generally don't see them as much in comparison to more easily sprayed cqc weapons. Then we can look at baylan. Ntec does rather well here, and you tend to see a lot more of them, because of how open most of the map is, and how the ranges vary so much. It also explains why you tend to see a billion snipers and obeyas here as well. Ntec is still used heavily, but people will generally play "other" weapons for fun. But most people are NOT trying to "win" in fightclub per say. Some are, but most, like me, just run around trying to get kills. This heavily lowers the need for people to run an ntec in fightclub. Especially when you run it all the time and find that it gets somewhat, stale, to play with. This is where it's different from mission districts. In mission districts you ARE generally trying to win, the easiest and "fastest" way possible. Which is not only why people use N-TEC, NFAS, and Carbine heavily in financial district, but why it's almost needed to be done just to compete effecetively. Yes you tend to see people use other guns. but here's a question, the "best" and most "competitive" players, what guns do they use most? Star? no, far? no, pmg? maybe but probably not. Ntec? definitely, oscar or carbine? yup, hvr? likely, maybe an obeya, and most won't stoop to using an nfas, but they will if they are getting dominated. What's that mean? well, we already know which guns are the most powerful, easy to use ones. Just look at the "meta" and what people claim to be best. Arguing that the star is easier in handling and thats why it should be worse, is a null argument. Every gun in APB should compete in pretty equal terms for its niche, we have seen this over and over and OVER again with every single weapon balance patch so far. They buffed the star, dmr, and half the other guns, and reduced the power level of the other half over the last few years in an attempt to make the game more fun to play with more varied weapon usage. They know that there will always be weapons that shine about the rest, but they don't want ONE weapon outperforming everything else. Saying "just buff the rest" is asinine, when the primary problem is X or Z weapon and can easily be remedied by nerfing that weapon. This is ALSO why the STAR got a buff, because it plain sucked especially against ntecs. Now it functions similar to a FAR (thank god) but still most people won't use it, because why? NTEC will still more assuredly get the kill in a pinch, and still has better viabilty, and quite frankly, it's still what is needed to compete against other "competitive" players. If you aren't using it while using assault rifles, you're gimping yourself HARD. THAT is why it's getting nerfed. You shouldn't be FORCED to play a certain gun to be competitive.

i don't doubt it, they finished parsing all that EU packets and are testing them, ontop of current weapon rebalance data gathering and new items/cosmetics. They seem to be doing a lot recently, its a shame that the population has died so badly on US servers.

i play it over any other shotgun honestly except for the shredder (when i want range shotgun). People will play what they are comfortable with. I've done really well with the strife against competent players, but it normally depends on map and mission.

would be cool for it to "zoom" in and out from lets say 7.5 to 15 mag

i mean, that's because cqc weapons are fairly balanced, but it hasn't always been like that either. *glares at 2012 csg supreme days*

(every ar is outplayed by an ntec)

The effective range is being reduced, which will effect damage drop as well as the jump shooting accuracy nerfed. They are testing the bloom recovery and ttk nerf vs the ammo nerf. Personally I feel a .75 ttk and the current test B bloom for it (if not "slightly" faster) would be fine. But the test is showing .85ttk which is far too high for a weapon that got into 45m range.

The reason it can easily compete against the oca per say, is it's ttk and spray, and obeya, because of its bloom recovery speed. Both of which have been adjusted in test B. Now, I agree that the TTK nerf is a bit too rough, it should be leveled to .75 imo, however they obviously have thought of fixing it's competition against its border range weapons. Ironically, doing so also fixes the issues most other AR's have while facing the ntec. There's only a few one trick ponies in the AR class, (Misery, aces rifle) and the only real F2P "competitor" aside from FAR (from the event) is the STAR, which is supposed to be the "jack of trades" but ends up falling short even of that title because the ntec does its "jack of trades" better. The other issue is balancing like 8 weapons instead of fixing one, is a statistical nightmare. You not only have to adjust each according to the niche you want them in, but ensure such changes do not make them too powerful for the niche and also push it into another niche as well that you don't want it in. Also reworking the feel of each weapon changes the entire class outright instantly and causes everyone to readjust to sweeping new changes. Which aren't needed if you fix one weapon, hence why it makes no sense to rework 8 weapons instead of 1. Plus if the gunplay still needs adjusted and weaker assault rifles still need adjusted after the changes and the meta settled etc, then such changes can STILL come at a later date, but not nearly as sweeping as you can better see what needs changed. Remember, we did get a star buff, misery buff, aces? buff, and i think an ISSRA buff, but they are still "outclassed" because they were never made to be capable of competing against the ntec. They didn't want anything to be as strong as it.

and their niches are star - cqc - 40-45m ttk .75 far cqc -55m ttk .7 atac 0-35m ttk .7 raptor cqc .7? aces rifle 0-35m ~.7? issra 20m-midrange over .73 misery - unsure ntec 0-65ish .7 The problem is that the ntec isn't "viable" in the same sense. Star isn't nearly as effective at longer ranges due to ttk, even with it being easy to use, it still loses to most mid-far range weapons and cqc weapons despite it supposed to be more "cqc". Far can compete better than the star with more accuracy but will still lose out due to bloom recovery at range against ntec. Atac is meant for more cqc with a touch of midrange, mostly oca range. raptor is primarily cqc to slightly midrange. Aces rifle is mostly cqc but a little midrange etc mostly oca range. NTEC goes cqc to a bit further than midrange, and generally dominates most other AR's in that range due to ease of use, forgiveness, and easily harasses obeya users in the obeya's 0-60m range "base" range excluding damage drop range. you mean that they should buff all what? 7-9 assault rifles because of one weapon? LOL that's a logistical nightmare, and they even buffed like HALF of that roster already TO NO AVAIL.

you mean that the star and far aren't versatile? They are, and can compete fine against other weapons in their ranges, but the ntec downright beats them hands down. There's a number of weapons in the rifleman role. Most of which won't or can't be used because using them severely gimps you against an ntec. They are fine to use against most other AR's, just not that one which most people use because its too versatile. if you get used to the recoil the ntec ursus is generally better than the normal ntec. The only thing keeping it in some check is the recoil, bloom, and akward reticule

oh don't get me wrong, its extremely useful. However, i still would like them to add actual mechanics and animations to opening doors, where you DON'T get shot while opening it. you mean the glitch which they took years to fix where they finally decided to fix it because people learned to use and macro it to move roughly 6m/s with heavy items? Or the f and x move a slightly faster one? There's a difference between gameplay improvements, and glitches that benefit existing gameplay because lazy game devs didn't feel like fixing the actual problems with the game.

N-tec often is just downright better than most other mid-range guns in a lot of situations. You shouldn't have to buff 6+ weapons (which would be a statistical nightmare to get right) when you can nerf a single one and do minor changes to the developing meta. did you mean nfas?

ikr

I must've been timing it early then, rip. That's far too high of a ttk imo without a range increase of sorts .75 or so would be almost perfect. I do wish they would have given actual numbers to the test, changing the ttk by .15 isn't "little" at all.