R3ACT3M

Last time they tried to do that we waited years to not get it

idk about you but i never see anyone play the manic

congrats team!

Yea we need some kinda of massive revert to stat based stuff in the game. The game is just not fun to play because of their stat changes.

I feel like this discussion is only digging up that this game has more balance problems than just guns.

I have a hard time getting feelings down over this. Re-writing this post too many times. But I find it becomes less about winning when you have matches as large as 10vs10 It's more about enjoying the all out war unfolding within a city block and trying out new ideas. Ideas that would never work in a 2v2-5v5 match. I understand it's not everyone's cup of tea. I'm sure a lot of people enjoy going head to head and being competitive. For me though, 10 vs. 10 allows for me to play APB casually. I'm allowed to take risks and be creative. Small matches don't allow this without it being extremely punishing if I fail. Then, due to how punishing it feels to fail in APB, there is no real choice but having to pick guns that can actually have a chance at winning. Make no mistake, my thoughts aren't trapped in a vacuum. Large matches don't magically fix: bad weapon balancing, stuttering, and map design. But these large and chaotic matches are just what makes my brain tick. No matter if I end up winning or losing.

make it the last time

This is the huge thing. When matches are so "personal" 3v3 and less this game gets extremely competitive. To the point of extreme toxicity. 10v10 matches are the breath of fresh air this game needed for ever ago. Still I recognize people like their 3v3 matches. But if I had a choice I would go 10v10 every day of the week.

With an idea like 50vs50 there technically isn't any matchmaking. It would be like the event districts like on halloween but with missions. I think occasional events where all districts are closed besides a couple and just call the event all out war. Offer extra XP and cash for missions during this 50vs50 event.

I love escalating the missions to 10vs10 these matches are the most fun for me. At this stage I don't care if I win or loose as I have fun no matter what. But I get missions where players only escalate to 3 or 4 players and these make me want to stop playing again. In terms of balance, at first escalation was great. But as it's progressed the matches have been getting weird. Escalating has sometimes ended up in a weird 10vs4 state where the the match wouldn't fix itself. Kinda on the rarer side but it would happen. That being said I personally LOVE to death the bigger matches. And would find it interesting to see it even higher. But 10vs10 is comfortable. I just wish matches started with more players instead of this 2vs2 3vs3 4vs4 crap. In my time playing escalated missions I never really felt attacking or defending were at any advantage or disadvantage. If they are it's certainly not because there is 10 people now, it's because of the map designs not having good attack routes and flanks. That and way too many camping spots. That's not a 10vs10 problem that's a map problem. But reading some of the other comments a system for choosing what to get queued up for seems necessary. Escalation is gimmicky at best. Just have like 2 options to queue for: Large match (12vs12) or Small match (3v3-4v4) I would say remove escalation and just have the matches repopulate if people leave the match. This is what literally every game besides APB does.

Ultra rare guns are okay in my book.

I bought just about everything in the armas market when LO took over. I would be sad if they shut the game down. Can't be expensive to host servers for 300 players in 2024

Sir I salute you for braving these forums. May god have mercy on this post. But otherwise I agree

when your arch nemesis has been defeated and you realize you have no purpose in life anymore

during the ama it was heavily implied the blame was more on epic. but both shared some blame. Just the reality of having only a dev or 2 working on the game im afraid