Jump to content

KnifuWaifu

Members
  • Content Count

    943
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

488 Excellent

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

1607 profile views
  1. I think Backup should always be available, I mean that's what Back up is? You make a decision that you need B so you call for it, there's no arbitrary sky fairy floating over keeping you from reaching for the radio irl. They could put it on a cool down to stop people spamming it and of course this will be with a more tweaked Matchmaker so it's not the scenario where 1 Team gets a Bronze while the other gets 2 Gold but then the cool down could be tweaked so it depends on how "unfair" the teams are idk, I just like massive battles.
  2. Hopefully one day we can get more options for queuing/missioning because I totally get that sometimes mood/need changes and you want just 1v1s or just 5v5s, even adding other things like "vs solo players only" to avoid 3-stacks. I'd even love an option that's like "x minute until mission finish" or "only join new missions or missions in progress" to avoid or even want those times where you're called in as Backup 900m away from a Final Stage Mission with <60 seconds remaining. I mean at some level the Matchmaking System is making decisions (and more) for us, so why not let us tweak them a bit? All we need is a "restore default" option so if we do mess it up enough to render us effectively missionless we can just undo that. Or rather even better (now I'm into Genie wish territory if I wasn't already) a way of seeing what Missions are available/being played so we can match our preferences or give up trying because the ideal Mission Scenarios aren't being played, idk I just want endless options and sliders. It also sucks that Witness Missions ""don't count"" because that's currently the only way to "force" a challenge against a particular player but I get how forcing/being allowed create your own missions can be exploited.
  3. I was very much for the Muting of Death Themes and very glad the option has been added. Ultimately I would have preferred a Volume Slider, because I really agree that Creativity shouldn't be completely blocked, but I'm guessing the way APB was made doesn't allow for some sounds to be separated from others and also that they can't give us an unlimited /ignore list either to just mute those toxic players (even though I disagree with this tactic because unlike toxic chat/cheating/hacking/scamming/bad behaviour listening to a Toxic Theme has a chance to damage us before we can decide to Mute it.) Other than a slider, there could be protections built into the Music/Theme Designer to detect continuous tones, high volumes, or repeating notes, but again Toxic Players are gonna Toxic and much like hackers and anti-hacking software, they'll be constantly looking for ways to bypass those protections and it'll just be another battle for LO to spend resources on fighting. So a global Mute was the only option as it was proven time and time again that the toxic players of APB don't want us to have nice things and so the Theme Mute was added to protect us from that toxicity and I think that is what Vnight is getting at - Mute Themes aren't bad but the toxic player who are the reason it exists is bad.
  4. I'd love matchmaking to take ping/fps into account, but I was pretty sure that the Threat System did a pretty good job of sorting those things out.
  5. and make the griefers pay for it! will this wall also be invisible and immaterial? ooh even better - keep the original /ignore command, and then add a new /wall command.
  6. and yet i wrote so much in response. are we politics now?
  7. I disagree. in my experience the amount of hackusators and griefers/trolls/undesirables isn't in the above average range. It's more the noisy/annoying minority and a reasonable player that learns to just chill would only have a handful of bad eggs on their list than over half the district. But it doesn't matter because it is customisable, it can be undone and it leans towards teaching players to become more chill - if someone is finding that their matchmaking times have skyrocketed they've either put too many on that list or they are exhibiting behaviour which puts them on other people's lists. The first is easy to fix - just chill and remove names, maybe that player who t-bagged you once isn't such a bad OP, maybe that rank 255 Silver wasn't aimbotting and just got lucky/was better than you, maybe that friendly-fire incident was actually an accident. The second scenario not so much - it means you're toxic and no one likes you, so you gotta 180 that behaviour or just not play anymore. That all said, again in my experience, I've found very few players are outrightly toxic, there are a noisy few and I can think of maybe 1-2 names I'd put on the /ignore+ list off the bat, but most who are intentionally toxic tend to be those with names like "lkadslkjald" or "nagger6969420" people who really didn't make those accounts with the intention of become long-term players, so putting them (or them putting themselves since it's their behaviour) in perma-timeout really doesn't seem like a bad idea.
  8. I think our UndeadConfection is making a point that invisible does not mean immaterial. Canonically something that is invisible is still a solid object, only light passes through it, but it will still interact with material objects. But I understand that you mean they'll basically turn into ghosts, so they can't be seen, heard, or interacted with in any way once they're on the /ignore blacklist. Some games have a thing where they just turn immaterial but still transparent, this stops physical griefing but those pesky players still find ways to make their ghostly visage an annoyance, so really just having them disappear altogether is the best option. This is true. I mean letting us Mute Themes was a step in the right direction and that still before and after got some push back from those cool kids so hopefully it's just a matter of time for making APB a safer place to play. I have no idea what that means for Fight Club though - Missions and Open World is easy because Matchmaking can just keep them separated and in Open World there's not really any significant interaction for it to be too much of an issue. Fight Club though? Like will you or they be blocked from joining the District because there are ignored players there? I guess if you're both completely disappeared (I'm assuming that /ignore blacklist will make you invisible/immaterial to each other) then it wouldn't be that big of an issue, but it sure would confuse other players to see two enemies completely ignore each other, also for those using the /ignore blacklist they'll be seeing friendlies and enemies open fire at "nothing". I mean that's not completely game-breaking imo but it sure would take some getting used to, especially on this nights where the FC numbers are barely enough to start a match. Ah what about Events and an ignored player becomes the Horseman?
  9. I had an idea similiar to this but it just blocks those on your /ignore list from ever being matched with you on missions (both as a friendly/enemy) but some seem to think that giving us the power to tailor our gaming experience this way will lead to everyone being blocked ala that one episode of Black Mirror and no missions ever happening again. I think it'll just quarantine the toxic few into this purgatory and make for a better experience for all, especially since you can /unignore players, so those who are really keen with that command might see the light and not /ignore every player that ever so much as does anything remotely displeasing. Having them go invisible however is going to take a fair bit of code-fu beyond my understanding.
  10. There's also that equally super effective Compare option when sorting through your Weapons Locker...
  11. This is true but still need to retrain my brain to not panic when I hear a passenger start "psss, psss, psss"ing at my car. Just like the DMR AV and ALIG, you become afraid of certain sounds when "safe" inside a vehicle. I really wished that was a thing, they had me excited for a minute there. Although I have the barrel-mag version but I'm assuming since I haven't seen the banana-mag version leaning out of any windows I'm going to go with that version can't be used as a passenger either. Now the Rabid - I think that's the only LMG that can be used out of a window - it's Hard Damage is pretty weak, but like the NSSW, you're equipped to put more lead down-range than the CR762, but considering the speed of most car chases - I'd go with the CR over LMG, most vehicles aren't in shot long enough to take advantage of a 50+ round mag. HOWEVER I'd like to take this opportunity to once again shamelessly plug my fantastic idea to turn the poor Espacio into Gunships! - now use of the poor Espacio didn't come up much in the event, not nearly as much as the Vegas or Pioneer, but they were around and it would have been really awesome to have had them given an advantage about those other two reigning champions because being a rear passenger in a van is pretty lame except for those few circumstances where your side of the vehicle is facing the enemy. With the growing hatred of Car Surfer and calls for CA3 to be standard, maybe a Player Mod Revamp/Redesign is on the horizon, so I think gunships would be a good solution to us Heavy Weapon users who sometimes feel the need to stop camping corners and venture outside a bit. That said, I do like how the front passenger is higher than the rear door dweller - this made for no friendly fire incidents between passengers, although a few times my shots seemed to go through them so I'm wondering if FF was just not turned on which was probably more likely the case than the Espacios actually been advantageous to use in these (too frequent) arenas where my beloved Car Surfer is disabled.
  12. True. They'll always find a way and like I said it'll then be extra code and patches and constantly tweaking the system to stop them as they find more and more ways to avoid any anti-griefing system so they get to grief. I totally agree that this issue isn't big enough to go through all that trouble and add more headaches to the developer's list of headaches. I think that's where my second part was going - I'm assuming that this anti-griefing system defines griefer as "anyone not in this mission right here" as opposed to people who just haven't K'd up. So two groups on separate missions can still get caught in the trap since, although they are missioning, they're not this missioning so they'll become attackable by members of the other mission. I mean, it sure stops your scenario where people are joining missions just to be immune to the anti-griefing thing but it opens up a whole scenario where the whole server could potentially stack objectives in the one spot just to have a massive free-for-all at Double B, now that sounds fun to me, but probably not to everyone, so best to leave it alone and just /report those that do it intentionally enough to rustle our collective jimmies.
  13. You just, you just described my whole existence... I'll try! I think for the HP not mattering thing - we're suggesting that if a out-of-mission player/griefer enters the "mission zone" (so far it's <10m near an objective) the griefer will become hostile/attackable to both factions in that mission. This obviously includes their vehicles too. Reducing them to 10% HP while in this zone/attackable phase is probably to counter them parking a APIII or Dump Truck over a point and still managing to grief/disrupt a mission for those crucial few seconds. I'm guessing also that the change into attackable would be until the griefer died, so not just while they're in the zone because another exploit is to sit at 11m to objective, jump in and be a banana but an attackable banana, and then jump out to be immune again. So to stop that the phase change will need to be permanent until death. But then what's to stop them just respawning and keep doing it - I mean even being attackable and at 10% some really dedicated griefers can still cause a lot of harm, so do we respawn them >1000m from that zone? Put in a kick rule, like with friendly fire incident? if they phase-change too many times they get booted? Now it's getting complex and needing exceptions and added content just to counter what again I still agree with isn't that big of a deal in the greater scheme of things, it's a shitty thing to do to players but at the end of the day unless this solution can be very easily implemented with little fuss and lots of foolproofness, it's probably not worth it to stop that <1% of griefers out there. Easier to teach players to just chillax and press K again than to combat this - I mean being chill in game helps with so many other circumstances than just dealing with griefers, so it's win-win really. Totally. Like with DoubleB's Stabba fiesta, which I love, it seems like those accidental griefers or those """forced""" into being griefers will get the worst of it. I am def more guilty of accidentally booping into another's objective more times than I've had it done to me intentionally. Oh and what about those in a different mission entirely? It's again not uncommon for missions to have overlapping areas of play, imaging having your mission destroyed because you took a shortcut through someone else's objective? Objectives dropped on other objectives? Now there's a 10m zone of "everyone gets fucked". Yeah as much as I love the idea of combating griefers by making them attackable, it seems a huge risk now to solve a little problem.
  14. I like this idea the best. Maybe even have their/vehicle hp tick down while they're blocking mission things instead of just a blanket 10%, that way it'll stop those rare times someone is unintentionally blocking/disrupting a mission. Not sure how it'll work with item/object carry missions - will the killzone move around with the item? Because that then opens up a whole new world of reverse-griefing - players in missions (now with extra time added) running around murdering those afk/not in mission. Imagine plonking a brief case outside of DoubleB on a busy day - mayhem. I mean I like the sound of this mayhem, but yea sounds messy and some might not enjoy it. These are both my experiences - I mean out of mission players griefing those isn't unheard of, but it's maybe one or two a session and oftimes it's either someone crusing for a ban/warning/theydontcare or they're butthurt from a previous mission or a newbie fresh from another game and doesn't realise that they're no in on the mission, see other players, and just start going ham. I do enjoy the chaos in open world APB - they definitely shouldn't remove that and I think griefing is such a minor thing it doesn't need to completely change that chaotic atmosphere just to stop what really doesn't hurt missions all that bad - yes you might lose 1 mission if they're lucky, but losing is OK, just K up and do another - if they keep it up - well look at that ToS violation and /report them and go chill out for 5 minutes while they tire themselves out.
×
×
  • Create New...