Jump to content

Tigrix

Members
  • Content Count

    673
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

75 Excellent

About Tigrix

  • Rank
    Executive of the Void

Recent Profile Visitors

453 profile views
  1. cmon cookie ... you make it sound like they can't add 2+2. If you release all the worst scums and your "hype train" is based on releasing all hackers and scammers... Then who are you gonna attract back to your game? ... yes, ofc .. the majority of the ex-banned hackers and scammers... Do cheaters stop cheating just cuz they get a 2nd chance, like rly? rly rly? has anyone ever had that experience? lol Look at population numbers... if their idea was to grow APB via releasing the worst ppl and advertising them to "come back", then you end up with a game where you can't even barely fill 1 fin and 1 wf district on a weekend evening..
  2. Tigrix

    IR3 Preset Refund

    Hell no I'm all for nerfing IR3. I'm NOT for adding -firerate, because it changes essentials of how the gun works and there are too many armas-sold modlocked guns for such a drastic change to be fair. So either they revert the changes until they can come up with a better solution. Or they could remove mods from mod-locked guns and allow them being replaced once. (as I already said prev' mod-locked guns was a terrible design choice from G1 anyhow, since it's obvious it presents a ton of balance issues, if anyone ever adds a new up or downside to an existing mod) Or they could for my sake remove all mod-locked guns and replace them with open ones. which would solve all headaches, including their future development. (and its not like they didn't already admit that armas prices were silly, so giving ppl who supported G1 via buying their guns, the benefit of a change that will also benefit the game + development, is not really something i think is a problem) I don't care if IR3 stays as it is... as long as it doesn't gimp all the mod-locked armas guns. So if he can come up with a solution for that, then i'm fine with IR3 nerfs. But until they can do that, they need to revert.
  3. Tigrix

    IR3 Preset Refund

    I was HAPPY that Matt posted they're reverting IR3 changes and coming up with a better approach.. Then I was unhappy when they seem to flip-flop really fast and now they're considering keeping the fire-rate downside but just reducing it .. It's like they don't grasp that the problem with IR3 changes WAS some of the mod-locked guns that are complete trash when having a fire-rate downside mod that no-one would ever use.... I wish they'd stick to their goshdarn decision to revert IR3 changes until they come up with a better downside that won't impact mod-locked guns in the way that a fire-rate change does! Or finally remove goshdarn mod-locked guns and replace them with open ones... it was a fkin terrible design idea anyhow selling mod-locked weaponry, basically locking your game into a certain set of balances that get screwed over the minute you make heavy adjustments to something like a MOD.
  4. Matt, how does a -10% fire-rate sound great suddenly -.- Wasn't the problem the pre-modded guns? where there are multiple cases that no-one would EVER stick a -firerate mod on that gun... but cuz' you added this new fire-rate downside and implemented straight, everyone who has locked armas bought guns were fked. So please don't consider doing the same mistake twice.. revert it as you said in your post and then find a downside that won't make your locked armas weaponry with IR3 suck or find a way to give people with those locked guns a -one-time- exchange of mods on the gun or money-back/replacement of the gun.. Or better.. delete all goshdarn mod-locked guns and replace them with open ones... It was a terrible design-idea by G1 to add mod-locked guns, as it restricts them into a certain set of balances that will get heavily upset by any development changing existing mods..... as so clearly seen by the IR3 example.
  5. The problem with the change was that it created a NEW mod. If you increase the current downside (bloom) or you de-crease the upside (the range buff), then sure np. But you CAN'T turn it into a new mod, when you for years have sold pre-modded weapons - not without having some sort of idea to either unlock the "locked sold guns" or allow players with such weapons to change the locked mod once. Because there were several examples of armas sold guns (with locked mods) that had turned to complete trash, cuz' of the NEW fire-rate downside to the IR3. --- and thanks matt, i'm glad you guys aren't stubborn when you can see something isn't working in it's first iteration/release.
  6. 1) Dude, a false assumption is a false assumption. There's no "degree" or "opinions". You simply ARE making a false assumption by claiming that because you decide to release some people, it means you "GOTTA RELEASE ALL" - again, no matter how you twist and turn it, it still remains a false assumption since there is no such universal law, forcing any company to release all cheaters if they release someone whom they believe was "unfairly banned". 2) It's quite a claim to make from you, to say that "almost everyone got manually banned" --- imho, that's total bs. If by manual ban, you define it simply by a staffer pushing the ban through AFTER a player has been caught by FF's slow but eventually effective server-side stat analysing, then wtf does it matter? If by manual ban, you define that G1 ran around and a staffer personally banned those thousands and thousands of accounts, then big lols @ you dude srsly=p That's not how it worked, no matter how much you wanna hate on the past administration or how blue-eyed you wanna be lol. 3) Perma-banning is a bad thing, without warnings and punishment escalations and almost all games have these things? What online games can you cheat in with 3rd party software such as aimbots or wallhacks and only get away with a warning or a temp-ban? I think you're reaching tbh and I don't see how there's ANY remorse to be had over a player getting perma-banned if caught. I will say it's different about lesser violations, such as abusing an exploit in an event or similar, but imo it's totally fine if a company feels like they issued enough warnings so that a player deserves a perma-ban, if he/she still decide to say fk the rest of the player-base, i'm gonna exploit to get ahead. Finally, the comment you make about spending money on ARMAS and in this way being of value to the community and should be treated with a different care? ... sorry, I'll obviously disagree, you're literally talking about favoritism based on financial efforts. It brings back bad associations of a certain player who got caught red-handed cheating on his very very very expensive account. If anything, i'd say that kinda BS is the only reason I could respect a new company allowing ex-banned cheaters to message my staff and make a case for themselves to have their account ban-reason checked and possibly reverted if indeed it shows up that their ban wasn't something categorically definitive, as those ones I listed in my previous message (here: . Imho these claims about "unfair bans" is a tiny a minority out of the thousands and thousands, but vocalized by very loud certain members of the APB community and instead of unbanning every damn cheater and scammer, they should have the patience to wait until staff has time to check their ticket and claims, even if it'll take a year, it's more fair to all of us, than releasing definitively caught cheaters and scammers right back into this struggling population.
  7. I'm only quoting your first line, because already there you're making a false assumption. Why would you need to sift through 15k bans? ... you only need to sift through the players who contact you and present what seems a valid case. The ludicrous fact is that they went ahead and released all cheaters and scammers, ... and only kept credit card fraud'ers banned. (So ok, you release all the worst community members that directly affect other players with negative impact... but the people that scammed your company for $$, those you deny to release humm okay...) Why would you release the players who got caught by undeniable FF server-side stat calculations. Why would you release people who spammed cheater accounts and then fucked up realizing they got IP-banned on their main account. Why would you release someone who got caught red-handed scamming other players. Why would you release people who got caught event-cheating again and again even after multiple warnings. There's plenty of categories, you would keep forever locked the f**k away from your community. Sorry but it's a total mis-conception that just because someone CLAIMS and perhaps few can even "PROVE" they got unfairly banned by a former staff... that then suddenly you should release EVERY friggin' SCAMMER and CHEATER ever caught ... wtf kinda of logic is that and how did the last remaining loyal players deserve to get that shit-wagon attached. (couldn't help it ) honestly i'd say LO's success or failure depends A LOT on what they do the next 3 months, cuz' these first decisions were really not what I think most people "hoped for" by a new company taking over. They need to start listening to veteran players that know objectively wtf they are talking about. (no not me, i'm just pissed off about my mod-locked TAS/CSG and ATAC being randomly fucked over by a decision they didn't think through and pushed out without any community influence what so fkin ever.) ggs
  8. I gave you a like, Tig. Not because of your post, but because it's good to see a little activity from you here on the forums. LOL! idk what to say to that... ok wait i do. just admit it, you couldn't read all that, but you liked the first phrase because it contained the word salt.
  9. Well, the problem is (and here's some salt)... they indeed could (and imo should) have worked on systems (aka match-making, dethreat issues/threat in general) etc... ... long before they started doing weapon balance changes. And the whole idea with unbanning EVERYONE ... ugh... terrible terrible idea imo, it just completely ignored the legit players suffering years of some of these a**holes and gave the cheaters an actual god damn reason to come back .... and sorry but everyone knows.. once a cheater, always a cheater - they didn't suddenly grow a conscience just because you let them all back in the game lol.... Did anyone think they'd return with some great epiphany to start thinking logically about time investment versus pointless cheating in games? - no, they just saw weakness and now continue exploiting it. I don't believe for a second that there were so many "manually unfairly banned by tiggs" players, that it could EVER justify letting the entirety of 15k banned cheaters loose in your game I believe LO did it because they wanted to come in and build hype on the "savior" type of welcome, with quotes like "we believe there has been some questionable bans" ... Yes ok, some questionable bans, then please investigate them.... don't release friggin' EVERY cheater&scammer ever caught back onto your last fkin population!? wth did we do to deserve that LOL. So yeah, those decisions has alienated and really pissed off a lot of otherwise old and loyal players/supporters imho. Ofc, I can only speak for myself and my friends etc, but also the whole IR3 change really pissed me off (and apparently quite a few others). No, not because I mind "new stuff" .. but because the piss-poor way it was done. It's ok to nerf or rebalance things.. but you don't completely fk-over something and don't answer for it afterwards or at least fix your mistake. (Yes i'm speaking of guns sold on armas that are LOCKED with IR3 mods that now make the guns TERRIBLE and worse than an un-modded version of the same gun.. because they decided to completely change how IR3 works, adding a slow fire-rate) ATAC with locked IR3 became a complete garbage gun after that change and there are more examples (guns with locked IR mods) .. I'm shocked they came in fresh off the boat and made such drastic changes to IR and didn't even THINK TO CONSIDER the side-effects or had any plan ready to let people at least change these locked mods which would be fair if you change something in such a drastic way that it changes how the gun works entirely.... that's not a nerf or a re-balance. You gimped several guns by completely changing a mod.... ATAC was always a fast shooting assault rifle.. that's why it takes more bullets to kill than an NTEC and similar..... now with 18% slower fire-rate mod, it's a complete garbage gun, you'd rather use it un-modded or not at all. No-one buying a gun with mods from armas could imagine you'd completely re-do the effects a mod has.... I could imagine u added a new mod with these properties or removed an old mod completely... but just waving ur magic wand and turning one mod stuck on thousands of guns in your game... into a different type of mod? lol ... rly. It kills my faith in development when someone does changes without having a clear idea of everything it affects and the less i believe in the developers, the less i'm inclined to spend any $$ on the product. The fact that i've not bought premium, nor spent a single $ for months now says it all - I used to never play without premium, now I just play less and refuse to spend even 1$ cuz' it pisses me off thinking about this upper stuff, every time I login and look at my TAS or ATAC with locked IR mods that now reduce fire-rate, making those guns worse than their empty/unmodded equals rofl .. so incredibly stupid.
  10. No word on all the armas-sold guns with locked IR3 mods? since you changed how that mod works, adding a reduction to fire-rate, you've completely gimped several of those armas guns to the point that they are worse than a blank/unmodded version of the same gun...
  11. 1) Let's be honest, you knew the gun being referenced Kevkof and could've simply quoted that. 2) quoting generic game ToS, present in literally every game ever to continue development beyond release. That's supposed to rationalize the topic? Can you explain why you think their way of re-doing IR3 is a good change? or if you don't ? You managed to respond my post, with nothing but 1) and follow up with nothing but 2), neither being arguably adding anything to the topic of LO's current development style.
  12. Yer a big meanie sometimes, Tigrix. not really. I just say things as they are. He has god knows how many years in APB. He wanted to "find a wrong statement" instead of acknowledging he knew exactly what was meant. anyways... on topic, they made any news on status of all locked guns with this new 18% fire reduction?
  13. No need to be rude, homie. Cause' Kevkof, after how many years in apb? of course he had no clue what gun I was referring to. No need to support bored forum trolls homie. Maybe he misspelled his entire phrase and meant to write "nah, you mean patroller m8". That's likely.
  14. The bodyguard doesn't even have IR on it, how would this have been affected? I think you kno' what I meant, unless you landed in apb 5min ago, but ok ty for pointing out my false reference: atac "patroller".
  15. Changing a mod that is LOCKED on many guns they SOLD for irl $$, is completely unaccpeable without a recourse as to how ppl can change the mod on those locked guns afterwards. They destroyed a lot of guns that are STUCK with IR3 locked to them. You can't just destroy X amount of guns in a players inventory and say "oh well, it might be revised down the road, just wait and let it play out." No, if you change such a core thing of the game, as how a MOD works, then u gotta fkin roll out a plan for how everyone stuck with this mod on locked armas rifles, can at least remove or change that mod once as a choice. I say it again, since they don't seem to listen. A bunch of weapons has become so so bad... temptress with 18% fire reduction... ughhhh.... ATAC patroller too, the silenced AR also and getting -range too (issr-b? i dont recall the name) Your attempt at giving people alternatives to the NTEC, has only made MORE people use the NTEC and ensuring the few alternatives there was are even worse now. It's every mission, shotguns and ntecs.
×