Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

215 Excellent

About MartinPL

  • Rank
    Hi, my name's Martinz!

Recent Profile Visitors

606 profile views
  1. From a certain standpoint (that is, taking rank limitations on items into account) this suggestion makes sense. I've seen a similar system in other games - off the top of my head, Dirty Bomb (RIP sweet prince) had "Max Level 7" servers, which served to prevent veterans from stomping on newbies and players who may not have as much as them in terms of unlocked content. The suggested system also seems to take into account that a Rank 10 Silver will have a very different skillset from a Rank 10 Bronze - which is a big plus. I feel like one of the biggest positives of this type of matchmaking would be the removal of the first impression that some new players have - that everyone is stomping on them using mods they can't get for themselves just yet... though it does raise the question of what to do about R195 mod leases from Joker Distribution.
  2. So how would you rework it, then? You still haven't given us any ideas, y'know. What's the point of this thread then: genuine voicing of opinion or a half-hearted attempt at satire? 1) This is literally only a thing if you allow the other player to close the distance/get close enough. 2) So basically that (i.e. dealing finishing blows) is the only thing they're good for, whereas regular fragmentation grenades can be used in many more situations. I thought I had already said it, but hey, kudos for confirming that we're on the same page here :V There are several missions in the game which require a bit of looking into; Antisocial Networking is just one of them. I would worry more about things like The Hidden Menace, which to this day has a broken final stage where the winner is decided by who holds the point in the last second, not who controls the objective for the most time. Or... what about Bad Investment, where two consecutive stages happen in the exact same area, which takes about ten consecutive seconds for the Enforcers to stand in, but about three seconds for the Criminals right afterwards (and both teams have to keep the area clear for 5 minutes)? Not to mention the famous mess of a mission, The Fast and The Incarcerated, where the winner is whoever jumps into the truck along with a teammate with a Blowtorch. Get a second Blowtorch with Car Surfer on top and you're practically unkillable. What I'm trying to say is that this one specific mission is part of a bigger concern that you're barely scratching the surface of. Which you should if you want people to see your point. Without explaining why things are not balanced, you will not convince anyone that wasn't already sympathetic to your ideas. Your approach to the problem of a lack of balance is to just remove the outliers and "think of how to fix it some other time" without any concise idea of how to tackle the problem - or how to fill the void that would be created in the metagame upon removing one of its parts.
  3. Because if I just left my reply at the "everything you're saying is terrible" stage, it wouldn't be any better than saying "fuck this, this is bad" about parts of the game. I'd rather spend some time on constructive feedback than try to squeeze in a witty one-liner.
  4. You know, some of the things you try to attribute to your imaginary version of Little Orbit in this post sound really unprofessional (and a bit concerning in general) - but whatever; this thread is basically a glorified fanfic. Okay... rebalance them how? If you're proposing a rebalance of the weapons, you should have some kind of an idea as to what should be done about it. Saying that "it needs a rebalance" and not pointing to anything in particular is akin to saying "I don't like it, change it to something" and never specifying what needs a change in the first place. You seem really hellbent on insisting that some specific types of people are idiots. You also seem really confident that you would pass the same tests you want to impose on other people. (There's also the issue that IQ tests don't accurately measure for all types of intelligence and have been said to be fundamentally flawed since you cannot accurately boil down someone's intelligence to a number on a scale - but that's a separate topic that I don't want to get into here.) Devil's advocate here - percussion grenades are fine as they are due to their very limited versatility. They aren't practical when it comes to dispatching vehicles or getting rid of targets hiding behind walls - other grenades do that way better. Percs are basically only good when you're already in close range and are very desperate for that finishing blow. Same thing as with "rebalancing weapons". You're saying that these missions are flawed, but you're not really pointing to any flaws. You want to assure us that they are there, but you're not bringing up any of them, nor any ideas how to fix them, for that matter. In that case, why even have the mission be focused on an item in the first place? You might as well replace the item with an area to hold - in both scenarios, the target is immobile. That's 13 minutes and 20 seconds. For comparison, Explosive Material has its first stage last 8 minutes - or 480 seconds - and asks the Enforcers to raid three targets and deliver the items to the drop off. You don't need me to tell you why your suggestion is silly. All that being said, this thread isn't entirely filled with bad ideas. I, for one, support the removal or reworking of the Bounty system so that it can no longer interfere with mission flow. (I've already posted about it on the forums before.) Fixing car spawning spots so that single cars can't block the entire spawning area is a change that's honestly long overdue. Perhaps we (as a community) could assemble a list of places affected by this issue.
  5. This opening post isn't even a good debate starter. You are not trying to persuade anyone to allow naming and shaming; you created this thread to name and shame a specific player by trying to give specific details but not the name itself - sorry, but the end result is that you are still naming & shaming (and thus are in violation of the Forum Rules). My stance is no, let's not have naming and shaming back. Firstly, name & shame only gives the suspects/culprits easy publicity and makes them the talk of the town instead of punishing them for misdeeds. Secondly, even with (or perhaps due to) such a vivid description, I still will stick to the "innocent until proven guilty" mindset. I have no idea of who you're talking about, I don't know who you are - I see no reason to trust one person's word over the other. Mob justice is hardly ever the right thing to do. Thirdly, just forward the information to the moderation team through reports. They can exact much more punishment than you as a member of the community. If the offense is egregious enough, they can even ban the offender - the most you can do through N&S is make them more popular/known.
  6. ...we've already gone through this - it doesn't have to be literally spelled out word by word verbatim for it to be a rule. If something is banned on the game's forums, you should be able to extrapolate that the same behavior isn't wanted in the game. Again: do you really think LO would ban certain behavior on the forums, but allow the same behavior in the game? You're trying to cherrypick this really hard. The later part of literally the same sentence (which you conveniently omitted) refers to the fact that creating content (which includes sending any message in any shape or form) with malicious intent towards other players is forbidden. I'm afraid you don't get to ignore what I'm really saying and instead pluck your ears and shout "THIS PROVES I AM RIGHT!" (which I've noticed to be a disturbing trend in this community recently). Regardless of whether the person in question is a blatant cheater or just a suspect, publicly calling them out is literally meant to smear their opinion in the eyes of the other players. You are deliberately trying to cause damage to the reputation of the person you're accusing of cheating. By calling them out publicly, you give these people publicity instead of letting the company handle the situation and remove them from the game. Why is anyone supposed to trust your judgement? You are (rather thankfully) not the judge, nor the jury, nor the executioner here. I have no way of verifying what is your measurement of cheating, especially in a game where accusations of cheating are pretty commonplace. If confronted with your hackusation and the anticheat system's verdict, I'd be more inclined to believe that you're rage-hackusating before I'd consider the possibility that the system is wrong. (Disclaimer: inaction =/= verdict.) I don't even have the words to describe the inanity of the sentence about teabagging. Forums are, according to LO's ruling, PG-13 appropriate. This is done to prevent topics from turning into a mess where nobody discusses anything and instead everyone just hurls insults at each other all the time. It has nothing to do with age restrictions, it has everything to do with acting like a civilised human being. APB's ESRB rating (Mature 17+) has nothing to do with the rules laid out by LO. The most basic principle behind the rules, both in the game and on the forums, is "don't create a hostile environment" - and publicly throwing around accusations of cheating does just that. --- You honestly strike me as the type of person who will go to extreme lengths to skirt the rules given to them and will later claim innocence by saying that their way of breaking the rules was not explicitly described in exact wording - even though the Terms of Service we're discussing here take specific measures to disclose that the list is non-exhaustive and you can get banned for hostile behavior not included on it. I implore you - use common sense. If naming and shaming is forbidden on the APB Forums, why would it be allowed in the APB Game? If the rules forbid hostile behavior, and your behavior is hostile but doesn't match the exact words used in the examples on the rule list, is that behavior allowed then?
  7. Wrong assumption. === Wrong assumption. === Actually, allow me to ask: why do you think that something forbidden on the game's forums would be permitted in the game itself?
  8. Which they won't, because most end user license agreements are just a lot of lawyer-speak that protects the company from fraud and other damages that may incur from abuse from their consumers - if you don't act maliciously towards the company, you have practically no reason to fear anything from them. Expecting the company to just lash out one day and ban half of their consumers for no reason is... a bit silly of a thought, don't you think? Plus, as I've said in this thread already, this is normal in the industry. Most EULAs in the video game industry outright mention that the companies reserve the right to ban you for any reason or no reason. For example, Warframe does that, and Warframe is fairly big, and nobody is complaining about that in their EULA. I have to say, "the in-game chat is not part of the game" is probably my favourite take on the EULA at the moment. It's pretty fair to assume that the term "chat rooms" refers to the chatting feature in APB. When you are in an instance, you are connected to its District chat, which is only accessible to players connected to the instance at the moment - which is pretty much how a chat room works. EDIT: On that note... do you really think you're not generating content when you talk in chat? The term "User Generated Content" doesn't refer to customized in-game content - it literally refers to whatever is created by you in the game. It can be a shirt design, it can be an arrangement of sounds in the Music Studio, it can be speech you post to APB servers. Also, what about this part? In simple terms, "things listed here are not meant to be the list of the only things you can/can't do, because humans are assholes and they will look for ways to skirt any rules they find". I'm afraid it wouldn't be as easy to break the rules as harass someone and say "this exact type of harassment I committed isn't forbidden by ToS/CoC/EULA!". EDIT because I forgot: The section you quoted above this sentence says nothing about "offensive words". What it does talk about, though, are interactions between players. You really don't need me to tell you that conversations count as player interaction; it's not limited to clothes and cars you customize.
  9. ...but it is bannable*, as evidenced by those quotes. Even if you somehow assume that forum rules and game rules can prohibit something in one place but not the other, the End User License Agreement states that you are not allowed to use the game (so, among other things, talk in the game) to defame another player or incite hatred towards them regardless of circumstances. It is also left to Little Orbit to decide if the rules are being broken; they have the final say in terms of what is allowed in their game. Which is, y'know, normal for pretty much any company out there. *though how well this is being enforced is a different topic.
  10. Based on the copy of the APB EULA available on the GamersFirst site [ (link) ], the 9th section titled Rules of Conduct has the answer. Emphasis mine. Emphasis mine. I hate cheaters as much as the next guy, but the way I see it, turning into an angry mob helps no one. Inform LO, let them handle the issue, don't give the cheaters any publicity.
  11. ...how does one obtain the power of determining a weapon's sexual orientation just by looking at it? And do weapons even have sexual orientations? I thought all they did was spit out bullets. Also, the Volcano has the "story excuse" of being called the "Joy Cannon" in the description (hence the name, "Volcano JC") - it doesn't seem farfetched for a San Parite to want it wrapped in rainbow colours to spread love and joy and happiness or something like that. (Hey, as long as the other guys get blown up, you're gonna be happy, yes? ) Though ultimately I guess no one would lose anything if the guns got some less flashy optional skins - and net positives are always good in my book :V
  12. Tried my hand at making a RedHill IOT company vehicle to "celebrate" finishing Season 0 of RIOT. Nothing top shelf or super impressive, but I still feel like sharing!
  13. Some of the things may have already been mentioned by other community members in separate threads (shoutouts to @AlishaAzure for having probably the most organized post); here's my two cents. The engine upgrade really should have taken priority over RIOT. I respect LO's decision to give us new content despite still being limited by the old engine -- however, I still believe that the best choice would've been making a beeline for UE3.5 and only releasing new content once the foundations are there. That being said, I don't hate RIOT. Though I dislike the battle royale genre in general due to various reasons, I honestly enjoy LO's spin of the formula and I believe that, with enough improvements, RIOT could become a really enjoyable gamemode that I could honestly see myself playing more of once it's out of this beta state. The thing that I enjoy the most is the strategic aspect that RIOT brings to the table. I like the idea of coordinating with my teammates whether we're ready to arm the device in our zone or leave it be for a little bit more. Similarly, I find it fun to quickly determine if I can make good use of the weapons I find or if I should leave them for a teammate. Another thing I enjoy is evaluating what I can allow myself to do with my money (for example, in regards to respawn fees; "will buying my weapon set me back too much to continue?" and all that). This isn't a list of positives and negatives - these are mostly just disorganized ideas and things I want to mention (and which I could remember). The interface feels unintuitive, filled with unnecessary information. Also, for some reason "RIOT DEVICE ARMED" and "Zone Name" are split into two different messages showing up in the center of the screen; they could very well be merged together. The chat also gets filled with [Event] messages VERY quickly (I think picking up just one HazMat suit is two or three lines worth of text?). The whole thing with using zone names would've been better if people knew where each zone is by name. I only know some of the names (I have an idea of where Gresty is, where's Havalynd, The Needles, Border, Merchant Park...) but some of the people I've played with have openly admitted to not knowing what any of these names mean. (Though, who knows, maybe this gamemode could encourage the players to learn the names of the zones?... ) The respawn location algorythm is notorious for not accounting for the actual safety of a respawn zone. If a zone has been armed and is at 2 seconds until the toxic gas is released, it will still be considered safe enough to let you spawn in it - which often results in being put too far away from a safe zone to survive the run there. Insult to injury if the safe zone ceases to be safe at just an unfortunate enough moment to ensure your death in the gas cloud. Speaking of the gas cloud... it's VERY thick. I understand that it's meant to be obvious to the player that the zone is super unsafe, but as it stands, your vision is VERY limited when running out of the cloud, to the point where it's entirely possible to be shot to death by people outside of the cloud, who can see you clearly, but whom you could not even catch a glympse of. This is not helped by the HazMat suit cooldown being so long. In my opinion, changes should be made to the HazMat mechanic - just as a discussion starter: the "mercy HazMat" you get right after respawning should not count towards a cooldown, so if you manage to snag another one, you should be able to pop it right away, and then have the cooldown kick in, to prevent people from sitting the match out in the gas cloud, popping one suit after another. The gamemode likes to crash the game - but that's mostly the issue of the engine, I presume. All the more reason to get UE3.5 out. Minor nitpick: the truck at the end of the match is labelled as "RIOT Evactuation Team" :V EDITED IN: In my opinion, the ability to buy weapons from a Y/N prompt should be removed and only left possible through the fixed points in the district. I think making the weapons purchasable at theoretically any point (both in time and in the game's world) makes it a bit too easy to "smuggle in" the exact weaponry a given player will always feel the most comfortable with. My ultimate opinion is that I can't say the gamemode is perfect, but I don't hate it either. I actually quite enjoy it. ...but if you want my honest opinion: please put the Engine Upgrade as the top priority and come back to improving RIOT once UE is out. We've waited for years for new content, we can wait a bit more. Tidying up the code, unifying all the versions, and fixing the old engine's issues will streamline content creation, maintenance work, releasing updates, and will hopefully improve the performance for those players who can't run the game without stripping its graphics down to the bare essentials.
  14. I can confirm I don't have the skin on my account yet. (Not that I'm bothered by it too much though :V )
  15. You could achieve the exact same effect by having a literal real-life sheet of paper next to your screen which lists all missions and their final stages. You could achieve the exact same effect by holding your Shift key down with a clothespin. You could achieve the exact same effect by using transparent adhesive tape to attach a small paper dot to the center of your screen. Options currently available in the Advanced Launcher will be officially integrated into the game when Little Orbit fully releases the UE3.5 version of the game.
  • Create New...