Someone

Aside from reducing the number of loading screens the crime/witness element of APB isn't being leaned into enough to actually justify having the financial/waterfront districts as a matchmaking lobby. Imagine if APB wasn't "open world" in the sense that logging into a character meant a player immediately spawned in to the social district, Where the matchmaker would only move players to the financial/waterfront districts when it has a mission with opposition and when the mission ends it kicked all players back to the social district. This would make APB like many other games where players see a loading screen before and after every session, But as far as gameplay is concerned the only thing this would change is eliminate the crime/witness gameplay loop that players hardly delve into anymore. What this clearly shows is that to actually make the most of cross-district matchmaking is to allow players to start/search for missions while in the social district and to make the crime/witness gameplay more important and fun.

What is with the absolute refusal to make the other green mods as useful as Clotting Agent 3? What else besides 98% of players only ever using CA3 will it take for the devs to realize that they need to rebalance the green mods?

I can't be the only one who never really got a chance to play enough of the holiday event to unlock everything. Also what is it going to take for you guys to make the Dolton Montane RWD?

It wasn't perfectly balanced but that doesn't mean it wasn't an interesting and unique aspect of the game.

WTF are you talking about? People can still spawn in fast cars actively being driven around, They just can't do it while it's being chased by an enemy which is what this suggestion is about.

A health buff but not a change from FWD to RWD? Whyyyy?

Why even have an economy mechanic built into using weapons and vehicles if it's not going to be used as another means of balance? The vehicle spawn and ammunition cost factor for nearly everything is off by a whole digit I.E. Vegas and OSMAW rockets should cost $1000 instead of $100. Non-mission activities such as mugging, ram-raiding, chop-shopping, witnessing, and impounding stolen goods/vehicles might need the profit per-item/action increased as well but I don't have the numbers for how much.

Imagine trying to make sense of a borderline incomprehensible argument. What part of "Invalid if enemy within 55m when under 55% of top speed" do you not understand? What?

When Mobile Spawn Points were first added, The game seen a huge increase in the number of gunfights between vehicle passengers and it was a really refreshing change to combat. Now due to the spawn becoming invalid if an enemy is within 55m of the vehicle, The game is back to the boring state of passengers rarely bothering to shoot at each other. It even reduced the overall amount of organic teamwork as dead teammates now are once again split up from living teammates when driving to an objectives with an enemy in proximity. In short, The "Invalid if enemy within 55m" rule should be changed to "Invalid if enemy within 55m when under 55% of top speed".

I recall using macros to make semi-auto weapons shoot at their maximum rate of fire being made a ban-able offense many years ago.

Glad I am not the only one who recognizes that the vegas is unbalanced.

It's good that they added the 4 slot version of the montane to contact progression but they really should have changed it from FWD to RWD while they were at it.

Nah it's the lack of willpower and manpower on part of the developers and its been that way for years.

Quake Live tried this and it was deemed a failure as advertisers pay for view time and players only spend micro seconds looking at in game environmental ads. Vehicle kits draw players in as they are applicable to player tradeable vehicles, If clothing kits could be trade they would have further appeal. Vehicle kits would be even more profitable if vehicles in general were so balanced with each other.

If your semi-automatic weapon can shoot as fast as an SMG, Why is it even semi-automatic in the first place?

Is it just me or is everyone miscalculating DPS? The usual formula of “attacks per second * damage per attack” does not conform to reality. It took making my own game and expericmenting with TTK as an idea to eventually figure this out but it's quite simple. Take two weapons: Machinegun vs Shotgun Machinegun rate of fire is 100ms, Damage is 10. Shotgun rate of fire is 1000ms, Damage is 100. Standard DPS of MG is calculated to be 100. Standard DPS of SG is calculated to be 100. I argue that that in reality the time between attacks starts exactly at the same time as damage is dealt. Meaning any weapon with a fire rate that is a factor of 1 second will have fired when the timer starts and when it ends. Therefore in the span of 1 second the Shotgun will have fired twice and the Machinegun will have fire eleven times, Making the true Damage-Per-Second of the Shotgun 200 and Machinegun 110.

It's very often that when a player types abandonmission, The active mission will find and match opposition due to the sudden change in team composition.

One value people keep forgetting about as a balancing mechanic for weapons is ammo cost, Sure many weapons share the same ammo but that is easily changed. Why can't weapons which are disliked for being too good become balanced by excessive ammo cost and weapons which are underwhelming become valuable for their profitability? Essentially what would happen is that good players gain a reason to handicap themselves against bad players who retain a means to level the playing field.

Maybe if ammo cost was used as the balancing mechanic its clearly intended to be, Players would feel great about forcing their opponents to burn money in order to win.

I agree that all weapons should just shoot at their maximum rate if the fire button is held down, Nothing would change except the steep learning curve being smoothed out. Any weapon which is only balanced due to the required skill to perfectly time manually firing each shot is too easily exploited by automation. Likewise any semi-auto which isn't good despite firing automatically is severely underpowered.

Those vehicles could be viable for player acquisition if spawn cost was actually used as the balancing mechanic it's clearly intended to be. If a slot-less and rent-only Benkz Mhuller M1, Balkan Kolva, and Balkan Ambulance respectively cost $500; $10,000; and $3,000 dollars to spawn then most players would look elsewhere even if all other vehicles spawns was multiplied by 10.

Randomness is the only thing that eliminates personal skill from the equation, Fighting when the odds are stacked against you doesn't eliminate personal skill from the equation. The mechanic already exists! Are you going to tell me that money serves no point in the game and there is currently no relationship between the cost of equipment and its relative performance? How have your issues not included XP? By your definition APB as a competitive PVP game should pare everything down to personal skill which would include access to every piece of equipment. What weapons currently in the game would give a player enough of an advantage to consistently win against an equally skilled but differently equipped opponent? Are those weapons ARMAS exclusive? How does making these superior weapons more expensive to use make them better? Why should gameplay around Crime and Enforcement be so pointless? It's been a core part of the game since the games inception, before it was a F2P game, and before the current dev team touched it. Why shouldn't it possibly matter how much time a player spends doing non-mission activities? Social doesn't print money, You had to do something well enough to make a player part with their cash. That would become even harder if money was more important to gameplay. Unless you were just saying that my words were illegible, The criticism that an idea "makes no sense" is ambiguous and nondescript without anything to specify it. You didn't/haven't explained how this is a problem. What reason do players currently have to use ISSRA over the NTEC? How will those reasons go away when the ammo they use suddenly costs 10x more? No it hasn't, The game couldn't have moved away from that "ethos" when it hasn't been able to move at all. The cheap vehicles wouldn't be considered underperforming if the more expensive cars didn't always give you their moneys worth of performance. Buffing the the "bad" vehicles into usefulness is impossible without harming gameplay dynamics and making everything feel and play the same. This is just mathematically wrong. Adding an ammo type for every weapon and balancing each with unique ammo costs is less work than balancing every weapon's equip time, magazine size, ammo count, reload speed, range, damage, rate of fire, recoil, damage fall off, running hipfire spread, walking hipfire spread, standing hipfire spread, crouched hipfire spread, crouched moving hipefire spread, standing aimed spread, aimed walking spread, aimed crouched spread, moving aimed crouch spread, and probably more I am forgetting. Which method is easier and which is more sustainable? Buying consumables outright so you can use them at will or altering how you play the game so you never run out in the first place? Would you say one player is being rewarded and the other punished or are these just equally valid ways to play the game "competitively"?

It seems like an obvious thing to have had in the game since the start. However, No one agrees what combat in APB should be like which means no one agrees what the balance of area denial weapons should be.

Competition does not equal equity of equipment and certainly not in a game like APB. XP is not irrelevant in a game with progression, Just because its been so long since you had anything to unlock doesn't mean its not a core principle the game is built around. No metaphor, I am pointing out that the correlation of increasing difficulty between "duration of effort" & "intensity of effort" is a natural consequence and not an imposed punishment. A player skilled enough with cheap weapons to overcome an enemy's skill with expensive weapons is rewarded with significant gains in profit, How is that not skill rewarding mechanism? So you think new players should get access to OSMAW and OPGL? According to what you say there is no point to PVP when the game actively prevents new players from playing exactly like old players. Why does an idea need to "make sense" and what exactly is the problem with the weapons you stated? That ammo cost from weapons of the same type but of different characteristics would influence player choice? My bad I had thought of the Packer Vaquero and not the Nulander Pioneer, I never thought to compare these two completely different class of vehicle. Within 300 meters the Mikro and Vaquero will win any race against any other vehicle, Their acceleration allows drivers entering the vehicle to escape grenades before they explode. Buffing all of the underused vehicles so that players choose to use them is pointless in my book because that would make them all equivalent and thus boing to drive. The only way to balance all of these vehicles without removing all the characteristics that make them unique is to make the price-to-spawn an important characteristic. Its not a leftover feature of the game, Its an underdeveloped core principle of the game. If they are meant to underperform then why do you want them buffed into equity so that players use them? Most weapons are already mostly balanced through their other characteristics, Making ammo cost an important factor just balances the difference that remains. Players don't earn enough free consumables to make it a self-sustaining process, They have to buy the consumables to make them a staple in their gameplay.

Why should it be convenient for players to utilize the best weapons and vehicles all the time? Why should we assume what it does for the game is good? Players still earn contact reputation even if they lose, They would only lose money if they chose to risk outspending their earnings for winning/losing the mission. Playing for performance is to sprinting as playing for sustainability is to jogging, Its hard to win a marathon by sprinting just as its hard to win a dash by jogging. Losing a race against someone who has the skills to sprint through an entire marathon when you can only jog is only punishing when you chose to wager money on it. OSMAW and OPGL are very good at what they do and which no other weapon can even emulate, New players have long complained about having to fight players with these weapons. A weapon's type doesn't just determine how viable it is in any given situation but also how it changes the performance of your teammates and the map's meta. Rifles are tier 2 because they can compete with weapons that can potentially outclass them while outclassing weapons not as flexible as them. Submachine guns are mostly tier 1 because they can't compete outside of short range, The Submachine guns that can use tier 2 Magnum ammo instead. As CQC weapons Shotguns have many inherently large advantages over Submachine guns, Which is why Shotgun ammo is tier 3 and most SMGs use tier 1 ammo. High-velocity Rifles are tier 3 ammo as they outclass anything they can outrange and their shorter range pitfalls are more easily compensated for from a players sidearm. Machine guns such as the SHAW and its like use ether tier 2 Rifle ammo while the ALIG and its clones use tier 3 High-velocity Rifle ammo. I don't understand the supposed performance differences between the Pioneer and Mikro, They drive differently but not enough for me to say one was better than the other. Do you think players should have a reason to consider using lower tier vehicles, Or do you not care that conservatively speaking players never buy and use 60% of vehicles in the game? Outside of pointlessly buffing every vehicle into equivalency, Increasing the cost to spawn is the only way to make lower tier vehicles viable choices over the popular high vehicles. Most low tier vehicles perform quite well even compared outside their tier, But the cost disadvantage for using a high tier vehicle is too low to affect the player's choice when it should. Making new types of ammo for every weapon and balancing each with its own price would be less work than adjusting every characteristics of every weapon until they're all "balanced". Imagine what problems the game would have if consumable items like Med Spray cost $200 instead of $2000 and you get an idea of the effect cheap ammo and vehicle spawn has been.