LaQuandra

I am dying to see you do this. You claim it's a huge advantage and I'd love to see your skill increase because of these "mini cheats." Maybe it will help you throw percs around corners.......maybe. Show me. Show me your OPGL with and without a dot. I'd love to see the huge skill increase.

Rather than assuming stuff I want hard data. Fair? I am not interested in what you think might happen and that you might improve, rather I want you to actually do it and show some proof of your much improved game play. The crying over the years about these things should be vindicated by a large increase of skill. If the skill increase is not measurable why are you and your crew complaining about it so much?

How exactly would a dot help a weapon that doesn't shoot in a straight line? Wait....you're unable to hold down sprint and use the OPGL? You know that holding down sprint and using always sprint is the same exact thing right?

Take a little risk......Matt Scott would see it as a failure if you got banned so most likely won't ban you. I really do want you to do this for me because I'd like to prove to you're the same player regardless. In fact, I bet you will say "I found the cross hair distracting and removed it." I've played both with and without a cross hair. I am the same player regardless.

I present the same challenge to you. I'd like to see your skills dramatically increase because of a dot like you claim it does for others.

Are you willing to test this out for me? Can you play for 3 hours without a cross hair and then provide me footage of 3 hours playing with a cross hair. We can then analyze your videos and pinpoint the deaths and missions losses because of a lack of cross hair and we will pinpoint the kills and mission wins because of the cross hair. We can then determine how much a better player you are with the cross hair and without and maybe we can quantify just how much of an advantage it is numbers wise. I have a feeling you'll quickly realize you're the same player with it as you are without.

I prefer mini donuts over mini cheats. The only thing remotely close to cheats that I like would be Cheetos. Puffs in particular. What are you going to complain about? People who have more comfy chairs play better because their butts don't hurt as much? I am going to blame non drinkers in this game for having an advantage over me when I decide to drink too much and play. If the always sprint users physically taped their sprint button down are you going to call them a cheater also?

No, you're actually using your brain now. Just because you have an aimbot doesn't mean you're going to be a better player. There are tons of brain dead hackers that are very beatable. Tons of brain dead gamers who use a cross hair. Tons of brain dead gamers who use cross hairs. Worry about how you are playing. Worry about yourself and improving your video game skills and how you deal with adversity in the game. Anyone going full blatant is an obvious cheater. Why would it upset you that you lost? I've played the game for 8 years and rarely encounter rage hackers.

A cross hair isn't going to make you a better player either. It doesn't enhance game sense and aiming which are the two factors that will make a successful APB player. G1 only said no to the shaders and cross hairs to appease the misguided vocal forum community like yourself. People still openly streamed with their shaders and cross hairs and were not banned. Do not think for one second that G1 "disallowed" them because of a competitive advantage. Be honest here, the old team never played and had no idea what the shaders or cross hairs did. How come I have beaten players with custom shaders and cross hairs? And when I lose I don't blame others. I wonder why....

This was brutal to read but I read it anyway. I am very fun at parties. I don't stand against the wall and complain that the girls don't talk to me because other dudes at the party have nicer pants than me and why can't we all just wear the same raggity pants? Sorry, I don't consider someone using "hold to crouch" as an enhancement. I don't consider someone who prefers to use "hold to crouch" to be insecure for their reason for doing so. It is very common in many games and was overlooked by the development team of APB. The simple fact is there are too many people in APB who are extremely insecure. In my 8 years of playing this game I have been told to kill myself, get cancer, hope my kids die, hope my family dies, hopes I am banned forever and forever, hope my wife gets raped, and whatever other foul comment they can think of. All because they think I use hold to crouch? Why would that make anyone that upset? The insecure players are what makes all gaming communities toxic. Honestly though, learn to brush it off rather than putting others down to make yourself feel superior. Last piece of advice for those who receive whispers like the ones I shared....simply reply "k" to everything they say. Of course they do. Dude used caps to make his point man.

I am the self proclaimed APB psychologist for a reason. Next time we will discuss why you shouldn't spawn out in the open 3 times in a row and call the guy with an obeya a hacker. As my friend Jerry Springer used to say (or maybe he still does) "Till next time, take care of yourselves and each other."

None of those things are the reasons why you lose missions or a gun fight. Seems like many of you simply assume people are "cheating" or using some advantage over you when in reality you're just insecure. Work on making yourself better rather than blaming others for your short comings. This is true in all walks of life....just not video games and APB.

I bet you use a monitor huh? Over the past few years I have learned to play with sound only. I turn the monitor off. Stop being a visual noob and play like me. I've been playing since 1870.

But max rank doesn't necessarily mean you have insane skill. People can be carried to max rank/gold status now. Winning missions requires team coordination as well. If you get a group of 4 skilled players with excellent teamwork it isn't hard for them to go 30-0 in missions against public groups. It would be unfair to flag them because they know how play the game and use teamwork. Team coordination in this game is really underestimated.

The current system is 1-10. RTW was 1-15. OP is talking about the original threat system. The current system you go from Gold level, to silver, to bronze, to green. Over 30 different levels (40 if there is green 1-10?). Of course any threat system will be comparable. We can have 100 different levels and could still "group" them into a "bronze (1-33), silver (34-66), and gold (67-100)" category. I feel going back to the 15 levels will make it easier for matchmaking for the fact people will fluctuate more based on how they are playing that particular day and who they are grouped with. Right now the threat levels seem fairly static and restrictive when it comes to district population and matchmaking. Can and would the 1-15 threat levels be exploitable? Of course, but I am not sure how you can prevent that except doing away with matchmaking in general and going more of an open conflict system. In RTW APB I don't recall people losing on purpose. We were all grouped in the same districts and got matches without having to stand around forever (after they moved to the ready up system). Of course they had leader boards so people cared a little bit more. While leader boards create a whole other issue, why not leader boards for the current players in the district. Who currently logged into distinct has the most kills, which team has the longest winning streak, etc? Once they log off/leave district they are removed from the board.

Pros and Cons to the old threat system. I like the fact that your threat will change often with your wins and losses. If you're on a roll you will threat up and play against good competition. If done well, you won't need to segregate the districts because matchmaking should find something for you in every district. The negatives though is it will increase cheaper game play and encourage people to win at all costs (run with items, running after 1 kill in takeouts, etc). Also people can lose on purpose and "dethreat" faster to stomp lower threats and then just purposely lose against higher rank competition to go back to their "lower" threat. People will find a way to exploit it. I am not a big fan of the current system and segregation however. If I had to choose between threats 1-15 and the current system I'll pick threats 1-15. If anything, get rid of the stupid scoring system or redo it completely. The winning team's score shouldn't be doubled or whatever because they won. Going 19-5 in a loss can produce the same "score" as someone going 4-8 in a win. While it's not completely uncommon, it's hard to be the "MVP" when you're on the losing side despite carrying your team or being the best player on the mission for both sides.

Didn't G1 say you could reroll but still banned rerollers at their own discretion whether they cheated or not? Considering it is a free to play game and there are numerous ways to hide your true identity, who cares if a "cheater" wants to reroll as long as they aren't cheating? If they cheat again shouldn't the anti-cheat catch them? Seems like tracking said cheater would be impossible if the reroller wanted to stay anonymous. Obviously cheaters do not value their accounts as much as legitimate players considering they put their accounts at risk each time they log in. I never got the impression that LO was lenient on cheaters or had any positive attitude. He just stated that the old anti cheat system was heavily flawed and didn't have much faith in it. Not sure where this whole idea that he wouldn't perma ban anyone came from.

Yeah, failed for the fact people were able to cheat in the game so therefore he doesn't want to broadcast it. You make no sense but that is par for the course so carry on like usual.

Again. How does that mean he is against banning? You think he supports and encourages people to continue to cheat in his game because if he bans them it's a failure? You took what he said out of context. If someone is cheating in their game he sees that as a failure on his part and no longer wanted to use name and shame policies because of that. He doesn't want to celebrate the fact that people were cheating in his game and were banned for it unlike the previous company.

Since when did he say he is against banning? He simply stated that he was against name and shame because banning players shows a failure on their part. Lots of things seem to shock you. I wonder why.....

How exactly does it know if you used the GUI or manually changed it? Isn't the GUI just a way of automatically changing the same file? Please explain.

Guess if you changed your key bindings you're gonna get banned for altering files. Don't change your resolution either. Gonna get banned.

No. You're still wrong. The developers do not add every option into games for whatever reason but it doesn't mean they are against "always sprint" or "hold to crouch" or whatever else. Sometimes it can be an oversight. Again, if they truly didn't want you to do it, it'd be locked. Obviously they don't care if you edit your APBinput.ini. Why would they?

You are incorrect. The developer can lock anything in the ini file to be edited. I've played games were the key bindings cannot be in change in the GUI and if you go to the ini edit, you're unable to change the key bindings there as well. If it's in the ini, it can be altered. If they really didn't want you to alter it, they'd lock it. Seems pretty simple to me.

1. You realize when you change your key bindings it changes that ini file correct? What difference does it make if you change it in game or through the text editor. it's the same thing. 2. Really? So I can only play the game and have nothing else running? 3. Wrong. Send them a support ticket with specific questions. They will answer them. Why wouldn't they? Many programs hook into games for people to capture. Streamers use overlays all the time. LO cannot even say for sure what BE will pick up and what it won't. They cannot test every obscure program that people use for legitimate purposes.