Jump to content
Forum rules

Cr0

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    1368

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Cr0

  2. Posted · Edited by Cr0

    It's not a big deal but the descision to do this is a mentality which is pointing in the wrong direction.

     

    Some times it's like they balance some stuff around feedback from old veterans who have soured over time like an old grumpy person complaining about things like that the neighbour's cat is staring at them from a window and stuff. "Blinds should be down my default!". Most death themes are not made to be annoying, so then the on by default should win over off by default.


    APB is so much about customization and creativity, but you have to yourself turn death themes on. That's counter intuitive. Imagine if symbols was off by default. I think what should be an extra in a creative game is to have something which is a creative element turned off, not on.

    • Like 2

  6. Posted

    Just my two cents...

    The recoil on the Tommy gun is brutal. Maybe slightly too brutal. About the TTK and that, it has a lot more ammo than the OCA. You can get several kills per mag. But it'd be really cool if the Tommy got some love.

    Alig kills vehicles very fast within its maximum damage range though.

    I was fine with scout before the damage increase, but with the increase also came the heavy hvr damage decrease, so the result is we see a much better sniper balance with the scout and heavy HVR in terms of the weapon choices people make now. That's really good. The Heavy HVR was a bit annoying before this.

    Shaw is actually useless if you have Euryale, yes.

    OCA... well it's super good. Borderline too good, but something was needed against the boring shotgun meta.

     

     

     

    • Thanks 1

  7. Posted · Edited by Cr0

    I have to say I've noticed a slow growth of the number of cheaters, at least in fightclub, since BE was reintroduced. Often there are multiple on each side, sort of triggering each other to toggle harder and harder until they are just being ridiculous, on both sides. I do not understand how it's possible that veteran players say they hardly ever see a single cheater anymore. I literally don't understand why they are saying that, because the situation is so clear.

  10. Posted

    On 11/3/2020 at 5:20 AM, Noob_Guardian said:

    Rules are just invisible social constructs, you must've missed the part where I confront the people, ask why, and they respond "it's possible so it's okay".  The crowd exists they use the same "it's possible so it's okay" argument. BTW why are you even mentioning "rules"? People play this game to do whatever they want remember?

    Your rules are invisible social constructs, yes. The real rules are in the EULA and glitching through the map is actually against those rules. I wonder if you know the difference between the two.

    Please show me a single person ever who said it's not against the rules to glitch through the map. Until then, this "crowd" of yours is another figment of your imagination. Maybe you see this group in your room right now?

     

    • Like 1

  12. Posted · Edited by Cr0

    9 hours ago, n0vaxp2 said:

    The fact that you consider having to fight people of an equal skill level "ruining the game" is beyond telling. Have you ever even taken the time to consider what it's like to be on the receiving end of being curb stomped? Judging by your attitude on the matter, obviously not.

    Yeah so now I'm a person who thinks playing against equally skilled players ruins the game? Who would even think that?
    Such and obvious deliberate misinterpretation of what I wrote.

    I said a player who is not allowed to play his best because he's risking stepping over some rule about "farming new players" has his game ruined, always having to think about how he's playing and if the other guy is new or not, that is now his problem, and where the line goes between stomping and farming. "Oh look out, you're close to farming these people".... That truly is ruining the fun. You and Mr KooKoo there wants to put players like that at risk for getting freekin banned. You think that is a good idea. You think there's an easy lineto draw between farming and stomping/owning and who is new or not. You don't understand. It would be impossible. There are a million things which makes that impossible to enforce without major problems, which I've described clearly, but none of you two understand it. Let's see how you can misinterpret that this time. Or actually it doesn't matter because this is my last post on this thread.

     

    3 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

    There's a stark difference between farming players, and destroying them in a fair match. No-one is saying you can't be a "skilled" player, nor that you can't win. Only that you don't FARM new players. You've been playing for at least 7 years, learn the difference.

    Here you go again "you don't farm new players" ... those are YOUR rules. They are not real rules! Hello? anyone home? It's like you're stuck inside your own little box.
     Why are you saying I've played the game for 7 years (it's more) like that's some kind of a good point when you have almost 10.000  posts on this forum and still make no sense.


     I'm allowed to farm. Deal with it. You can't get over that obviously. I've explained why it couldn't be correctly enforced, thus why it hasn't been an actual rule ever. But you don't understand. You truly can not understand what I'm saying and what a disaster such a rule would be and the problems it would cause. You don't get it. The wheel is spinning but the hamster is dead.
    Imagine having you, a guy rambling about "trash humans who deserves pain and suffering" deciding the rules. Raging out bans left and right, worse than G1 under FF.

     

     OK, that was my last post on this thread.

  13. Posted · Edited by Cr0

    28 minutes ago, n0vaxp2 said:

     

    Destroying new players to feed off of easy kills ruins the fun for new players. No new players is why the game's population is struggling, ruining the fun for everyone else. It's okay though, because you're "technically allowed to do it". Say what you want about that other guy, but at least he has a concept of sportsmanship and common decency, which is more than I can say for the majority of this community.

    If someone is good enough that he can destroy another player but he's not allowed, because it'd get him banned, then how the heck doesn't that ruin the game for that player? Not being allowed to be "too good". You've gotta be kidding me.
    That's what the guy wants. Then he starts rambling about how "trash humans deserves pain and suffering" and you say he has common decency.

    You're both nuts!!!
     

     

  14. Posted · Edited by Cr0

    8 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

    No, my point was simply to make you look like a prick who gladly chases away new blood for their own benefit, and you gladly walked into it.  

     

    A) They say they have and will ban players griefing, dethreating, mission afking. Don't pretend that "farming new players" can't easily be placed on the list.

    B) It'd be dumb by your standards

    C) Trash humans deserve to be pissed off

     

    No, the socially acceptable point was to show what kind of playerbase you and others are. If for example the game is to succeed with new blood, then players like you will have to suffer. Social standards in games exist for a reason, you can complain about people pointing out how trashy you are all you want.


    A) I'm not pretending. It can't. Why do you think they're not doing it and never have? Because it's not a good idea and it wouldn't work. I've explained exactly why but you can't seem to wrap your little head around it.

     

    Meanwhile, you've started seeming obsessed with calling me a "prick", started absurd ramblings about "trash humans" who "deserve to be pissed off", "trash humans deserve to suffer" and "how trashy you are".... I mean... you don't seem okay.

     

    So I'll just not write any more to you I think.

     

     

     

     

     

  15. Posted · Edited by Cr0

    Well, it's not exactly that it's "OP".... but there actually is something to it, in a way. See, new players don't have access to it so they are at a pretty big disadvantage facing higher ranks/experienced players who has it. Being new and low rank is hard enough and then having much slower health regen on top of that makes it even harder. It's so strong that you sort of have to use it.

  16. Posted · Edited by Cr0

    14 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

    You've proven nothing honestly. All you've said is that you believe it's stupid to not be allowed to farm newbies intentionally. I consider "newbs" players under rank 50 or so. I also clearly defined what farming was, the total kills doesn't matter, if the objective is to extend the mission as long as possible to farm another player to level roles.

     

    New players don't generally even know how to /g or /t let alone /d chat, so i don't think you even have a point there about "they never complain. I've had a number of R50's that I had to inform how to reply to /w, /t, and /g, so again "no-one complains" because newbs have no bloody clue how to even say shit.

     

    You also falsely assume that it's based on kills, or that you should intentionally lose. In which case you're strawmanning, so allow me to explain.

     

    Extending the mission when you could win that round, to intentionally get more kills/arrests, aka level roles on new players, is farming. Playing normally, and trying to win, and actually failing to protect the obj, or w/e is fine. Key difference there. If you can't figure out which one is which, I suggest learning how to play APB reloaded after 7 years of game time.

     

    So, I want you to very clearly, explain "why" intentionally farming new players for roles, is acceptable. Without saying "it's possible via mechanics so it must be okay". Why should it be socially acceptable to do so, when the population is low enough as is due to chasing away newbs by doing such tactics? Do you believe that doing so "is in the spirit of the game"?

     

    Can you give me an honest reason as to why the APB playerbase should simply "accept and encourage" farming of new players? Without first ignoring the negative repurcussions of doing so?

     

    I highly doubt you can give me honest answers to any of these questions without first looking like a prick.

     "newbs are under rank 50 or so". ... yeah, there are totally not a billion things which can break that assumption.

    You don't want people to be able to play the way they want just because the enemy is below rank 50 or so and you don't even see the problems with that for god's sake...
    How am I supposed to explain anything to you then in a way that you'll understand it?

     

    I play the game the way it is. But You ... you make up your own rules with vague concepts and complain that others don't play the same way! That's your problem. Like everyone is supposed to do like you, or it's "wrong".  Others don't have to comply with your rules. Do you understand that?. You use vague notions like "socially acceptable" and try to implement rules for it. I don't care what you find socially acceptable. That is a world in your little head. I play the way I want, and so do you. The difference between us is I'll let you do that while you'll complain in chat (as you described it yourself) if I break any of your ideas of what the rules should be. The world doesn't revolve around you, you know.


    Nobody has ever in the history of APB been penalized for "farming new players", probably because A) It's NOT deemed not allowed by the EULA,  B) it would be really dumb and C) People would get pissed off.
    You call it farming, I call it ... farming, yeah. I'm allowed to do it. If you think it's "socially acceptable"? Who cares?...  I think it is, You don't. What are you gonna do about it? .. oh... what you're already doing, that being "bitching in chat". Well you can be annoying like that forever, or you could just leave people alone about it, realize you're not the center of the universe, and play the game while you send your complaints to LO instead. Your choice,

  17. Posted · Edited by Cr0

    7 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

    Pretty sure banning dethreaters and mission AFKers is part of Rule 2. Just as mission griefing/blocking. Why "shouldn't" intentionally farming new players fall under it? They won't ban anyone who's clearly playing fair, not cheating, not breaking CoC, and playing "in the spirit of the game" as per LO has stated. Is "Farming new players" in the "spirit of the game"? I'd argue that farming people in general, actually isn't, is gameplay enjoyability for the community a "bad thing"? I think you have either taken what I said wrong, or you strongly believe that farming a bunch of newbies for 35 kills a match+ (not talking fight club) is permissible.

     

    Do understand, I'm not saying one cannot camp items in tough spots, nor that they cannot/should not "run" in missions. That's fair game. I'm simply saying that bypassing design loopholes/glitches (medium item ms exploit), farming new players, and such, are things that are defined by the CoC and EULA, as things not permissible. If you wish to object, feel free to, but also understand, the game's CoC and EULA are pretty clear.


    I have intentionally kicked the patootie of new players many times, dragged out the mission to get more kills, or "farmed" as you call it, and guess what? they very rarely complain about it. But you do.
    Let's say that stupid rule of "farming new players" not being permissible was actually a real thing, against everyone's will but yours and a couple of losers.
    Let me show you how dumb it would be:

    How long is someone a "new player"? Until what rank? How many hours? What about rerolls? is it per account? how many kills would be considered "farming"?
    What does one do when reaching the limit for when they start farming? Stop playing? Hand a walk-over? is it just for kills? arrests too? same number arrests as kills?
    Do you want GMs wasting their time going around making sure nobody kills the new guys too much? Or should it be auto enforced against the "farmer" once they reach too many kills against new players? Auto ban? Auto kick? Auto end mission? Auto Walk-over? Kicked from team? demerit? What about if a new good player "farms" another new bad player? I'm sure everyone would love getting penalized for beating new players too much......
    What if we kill them more than we are allowed to by accident then?

    Do you get the point or should I pose more stupid questions?

     

    Nobody on this planet would even think about checking the rules if killing new players too much would be against some rule, in any game, ever. Well, you did so you're the exception.

    Your whole idea about "farming new players" being not permissible is an absolutely ridiculous idea. I've proven that it in this post.

     

     


     



     

    • Thanks 1

  18. Posted · Edited by Cr0

    2 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

    If you can't see the correlation of a fair and equal playing field and such "invisible rulesets" it's either you're too ignorant to give a fuck, or too stupid to know them in the first place. I'm not obligated to inform you of such correlation, because you honestly don't care about it in the first place.

     

    So farming new players is socially and permissible by GM's because the game mechanics allow it to happen? cool, i'll mark that in my "tacticool notebook" of things to follow when I wish to destroy the game population further.

     

    "2. Player may not engage in any conduct or communication while using the APB Reloaded Services which is unlawful or which restricts or inhibits any other Player from using or enjoying these Services."

     

    hmm....

     

    Every game glitch and exploit that exists, game mechanics allow you to do. Everything from farming new players to other unsavory things is capable in game. Saying that "mechanics allow it so it's permissible" is too broad a statement to be taken as a serious game play tactic It's also why the COC exists, as despite such things being "mechanically possible" it also means that you as a player have the obligation not to do so.

     

    "15. Abuse or exploit bugs, undocumented features, loopholes, design errors or problems in the game. Player acknowledges and agrees to report all problems, errors or bugs in the game to APB Reloaded as soon as they are found as their continued use can damage the enjoyment of the game for all its players. Those users caught cheating may suffer suspension from the APB Reloaded game, or manipulation of their character to remedy the game abuse. Please be considerate at all times of other members playing APB Reloaded. APB Reloaded will use diligent efforts to fix these types of issues in a timely manner, and will give all customers the benefit of the doubt when dealing with these problems."

     

    The CoC also means that you as a player also have an obligation to attempt to not to bypass any ingame mechanics. Such as bypass speed limitations, and items in walls, players in places they shouldn't be, etc.

     

    It seems that people who say "it's possible so it should be done" reaaaally don't understand what they agreed to in the EULA/CoC. Said "limitations" have some form of backing, and those against them, don't actually care about their little "I accept" agreements to play.

    So you're saying you can kick someones patootie so badly in APB that it's considered breaking the EULA because it's restricting the other player from enjoying the game. Incredible.

    Everyone who ruins my fun is "restricting me from enjoying the service" (game). Kick em out!

    Never become a GM. PLEASE.

     

     

     

     

     

  19. Posted · Edited by Cr0

    3 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

    "Veterans" are a broad range of players. Most of them that I know actually have Killer Rabbit's mindset of "if it's possible it's permissible". For example, i know i've bitched out plenty of "veterans" for literally farming new players (killing them until near end time of round, leaving/dying on purpose and continuing on in the match) but you know, it's possible so it must be okay???

    Because people do not agree on what is okay or not, all you can do is abide by the same ruleset, which is what the game mechanics allow you to do.

     

    You're playing with self imposed restrictions which you chose and are blaming others for not following.

     

     

  20. Posted · Edited by Cr0

    There are so many reason to why an engine upgrade was and is a must for APB to become what it has capacity to and that was a task so large that most probably would never have bothered. But 100 years later now and it's actually almost ready for release, from what we hear. With a new (updated) engine you can get all the things you're asking for.  On the old engine (current), every larger new content update would take an incredible amount of time and effort to create and then it'd break here and there, basically guaranteed. It'd be fixed with glue here and there and then some other things would break in an almost never ending circle. Just a mess. And then if you want really large updates like new maps etc... you could basically just forget about it. Correct me where I'm wrong, but that's basically what I've gathered.

  21. Posted · Edited by Cr0

    3 hours ago, DeadPixels said:

    Yeah they got fixed, but only because players complained about it on the forums over and over again.

    What do you mean by "but only because" people complained? that's how balancing works. We are supposed to give suggestions ("complain"). We tell the dev what we want and what is wrong and if enough people agree then it happens. It's useless complaining on the ones using whatever mechanic we don't like. What good does that do? Nothing.

    So this way the mechanics are the actual rules based on our input. There is just a little delay. We can't have what we want right away.

     

     

  22. Posted · Edited by Cr0

    On 10/20/2020 at 3:24 PM, Frosi said:

    This is an extremely good point and is exactly why I personally feel like even the 2.4 Modifier cap wasn't as bad as people made it out to be, it wasn't useless in CQC but rather required more skill and a different approach that wasn't holding mouse 1 anywhere within 15-20 meters. The N-tec was still extremely good and was still the most used AR in the game but players often felt a little too stubborn to adapt to the new best way to play CQC with the N-tec.

    This ^ , so much.

    When the n-tec got the 2.4 modifier cap, I just adapted and started burst firing at the right ranges. 3x3 shots still killed people really fast if you do it right. I was perfectly fine with it.

    Then they buffed it and honestly, that wasn't needed as it was putting it back towards the full spray style play which is what made it too strong to begin with, which I guess is reflected in this very slight increase from 2.0 to 2.1, which sounds like it will hardly be noticable, but I'd have to test to see of course.

    IMO... could have stuck with 2.4. N-tec mains whined because their favourite easy weapon was changed, but it was honestly too good and they know it if they're being honest.

    • Like 2

  23. Posted · Edited by Cr0

    Since people insist on putting the item in those little rooms where OPGL works great to clear out the masses of people who sit in there around the corners waiting for the enemy to rush in so they can get easy kills, then I'm gonna use it. If you don't want that, then put the items somewhere else instead of asking LO to disable a weapon made for those types of situations.

    What they should disable though is P5 in fightclub, as they did in mission districts. P5 (bounty) is made for when people are ramrading and stuff.

     

    • Like 2

  24. Posted

    On 10/19/2020 at 4:15 AM, Noob_Guardian said:

    There's running, which is "okay normally" cheesy yes but w/e. Not an issue right? They have a built in speed and acceleration limiter which makes running harder to do? Cool, now lets bypass it by vegas pushing a vehicle. It can be done, so it must be okay! (it's really bullshoot and needs fixed, but they want to be lazy)

     

    Here we now have medium items, they have a base speed limit right? Cool, now lets just do this glitchy looking jumpy thingy to bypass that! Cool, it's possible must be okay! (again, needs fixed but lazy)

    See, your sort of reasoning is what changed my mind about this whole thing with "tryhards".

     

    Veterans are trying to impose an invisible set of rules based on about a decade(!) of APB experience onto everyone else as though they are the center of the universe and decide what is allowed. You don't see a problem with that mindset?

    How are players (especially new players) to know and follow all the time exactly what is meant/not "meant" to be possible to do, what is labeled lame etc?, especially as that is ever-changing. Maybe what pulled them into APB was exactly that they can do whatever they want in the world of APB. But then some cranky veterans came along and went "you can't do that". It's actually ridiculous when I think about it.
    The only actual framework is the mechanics. Complain to the developers about whatever mechanics you want fixed instead of looking down on people for playing the game the way they want to.

     

    Merged.

     

    On 10/19/2020 at 9:19 AM, DeadPixels said:

    No matter how much they test things, people may still find a way to abuse it. Perfect example was N-HVR qs, Scout jump shooting or when they added Vegas 4x4 and players started jumping on roofs. I am sorry sir, but i'm sure this is not how the game was meant to be played

    and all of those things got fixed. The mechanics will get changed if it is decided to do so. Some people wanted to keep for example the scout jump shooting but a final decision was made about removing it. So if it would have been kept, would the people who had been using it then have been abusing it in the past being called tryhards, but then no longer labeled tryhards when it was decided to be kept? It's impossible to juggle the unwritten rule balls like that all the time. That's why we should let the mechanics dictate, and if we don't like something then see if it can be changed, instead of looking down on those just playing the game they are served.

  25. Posted · Edited by Cr0

    2 hours ago, Killer Rabbit said:

    As long as it's not an exploit, like getting the item stuck inside a wall or something.

    Otherwise, if the game mechanics allow you to do it - it's fair game.

    That's a point of view I always could relate to actually.

    Sort of:  People make up their own ideas of "rules" which others are "tryhards" for not following, which is actually a super egotistical approach. But of course, it's the others who are the egotistical ones....

     

    Hm

    I might have changed my mind a bit.

     

     

     

     

     

     

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...