Drischa

I mean, my point was assuming that the players are already lost, playerbase going down is a natural thing for all but the luckiest of online games. Players leaving would be the cause not the effect.

A few years ago I'd agree with this post, but I feel the playerbase has been shrunk down enough to such a dedicated base that it's harder than it used to be. Could just be that my coordination is shot from not playing for years though. Now that I think about it, could it be that silvers are more of a true representation of what silver should be now that they can't hide in bronze districts and actually have to fight to maintain their rank? Feels like I've seen quite a lot of rank changing compared to what I used to as well, even in my short amount of recent playtime. In my post I didn't mean the system changing the percentages etc - I more meant that if you remove a portion of the playerbase then there are still going to be higher and lower players, and the lower players will eventually lose enough to the higher ones that they wouldn't be able to maintain gold, even if they could before, so you'd never truly "lose" silvers like the OP suggests.

I understand that the threat system doesn't change, but let's say hypothetically that all non-gold players quit the game, the less skilled gold players would on average lose more than they win against the higher skilled golds, so wouldn't they eventually become silver? even though compared to all the players who aren't playing any more they're gold. If all the lower players came back they would suddenly win a lot more and be gold again. Do you see what I'm saying? I imagine most golds are high enough in gold that even with the losses they wouldn't drop out of gold, but for someone like me who's on the edge I think it makes a difference, and also demonstrates how middle threat levels will still exist even if the popularity falls. edit: I also just went silver again, then next mission won quite comfortably but remained silver. I imagine it specifically tracks where on the scoreboard you land rather than a simple 50/50 split

I've returned to the game recently and found that my threat has been bouncing between gold and silver like a yo-yo. I have found that the system does seem to consider me around this rank rather than just binarily gold or silver. For example, I might be gold and get matched alongside a gold against a gold and silver, for the enemies to win and my threat to change to silver and the enemy silver's threat to change to gold, showing that both of us were about even, and I can only assume the other golds were about equal as well. Something I assume is that threat levels balance themselves to the active population. Let's say that all the non-gold players disappeared from the game, and only gold players were being matched. The lower half of the gold players would lose to the higher half, so would their threat eventually become silver and then bronze to represent where they are in the current mix of players? Or would they all remain above the non-playing playerbase as golds? Yes this is a thinly veiled excuse of "but players are more hardcore now!" for me going silver lol

I like the DMR-AV way more than the silenced one just because it looks and sounds way more powerful, the hard damage is just a little bonus that I can sometimes use to funny someone in a weak car I mean uhh heheh eol deep impact go thwump BOMF

The initial post seems like your main problem is that new players have to face experienced ones because there is little to no separation in the matchmaking to account for the different skill levels in the game, and you have put this down to LO's decision to make the game run on no-threat districts where all players mix. While this is true, I don't think it is fair at all to place this on LO. The game simply does not have the population to support multiple districts or a wider array of skill levels in matchmaking. If the game's popularity picks up in the future then it might be possible to look at other solutions to this such as returning to threat-based districts or MM, but with the population as small as it is (at least when I've been playing recently) I think it's the only solution for now. The problem you described is not one with LO or Matt - it's one with old low-population pvp games such as this.

omg finally I have peace of mind that I'm not the only one who find random newbie more deadly than gold sometimes. I don't really hackusate any more unless its really obvious, like an R10 insta snapping SHAW user

For me it's the OSCAR I just could not get the hang of that thing and everyone who uses it obliterates me. To be fair I used to run fragile a lot which didn't help, but the memories are still with me. HVR-762 gets an honourable mention but it was my bronze noob phase crutch so I have a soft spot for it.

honestly sounds like you're just facing better players

Just watched the VOD on youtube, really great stuff and thank you to Kemp, Matt and everyone else who helps with these streams as they give me great hope for the game and faith in the team. I think that this transparency with the community via regular broadcasts really brings the community into the game and creates a fantastic opportunity for immediate feedback. An example can be seen with Digital Extreme's bi-weekly dev streams for their game Warframe, speaking for myself these keep my friends and I very engaged as we always look forwards to what might be on the horizon! Seeing Matt be open to communication is a wonderful feeling after so many years of issues on the communication front. You've genuinely re-interested me in the game, thank you,

re: Hitboxes This could probably do with something in the tutorial screen perhaps, as the system used in APB is a little different to most shooters... the hitboxes should definitely should not be changed though, APB combat tends to take place at longer ranges than a lot of shooters and with relatively inaccurate guns, so the larger hitboxes make it simpler to hit things. re: Talk of the tutorial system being revamped... I don't think people have a clue just how much work that would be for a team like LO. They're already focusing all their effort on unreal 3.5 (as shown by the rather below par event they've released) re: loading screen hints These are usually pretty useful, except the fact that they are clearly outdated - I still see advertisements for the STAR 556 'LCR', which is no longer available from ARMAS. It would be nice to have them listed somewhere but that is extra work that could be put into more impactful things.

Got any examples? footage? scoreboards even? I've seen like one person who was suspicious since I started playing again a couple of weeks ago. The cheater problem is handled a lot better than it used to be from my point of view.

It would be nice if the event wasn't locked to only one district that filled almost instantly so now I have no way to actually play it.

I want to agree with ntec balance changes. It's the weapon I most consistently have trouble dealing with, and I feel it does remove some variety and fun from the game by being so overbearingly popular. I feel that the extremely good marksmanship modifier (especially with HS3, just 0.2!) coupled with very good bloom recovery and dropoff range make it too consistent at further ranges. You may argue that removing this would be removing 'skill ceiling' by introducing more RNG to the game. I feel that the bloom/weapon inaccuracy is a big balancing factor in this game and should be respected. I feel there are three ways that the gun could be changed to reduce some of the feelings that have been shown to be relatively common in this thread: Increase the marksmanship modifier, making the gun less accurate at longer ranges (and thus reducing the effectiveness of HS3). Decrease the effective range (Or introduce a harsher dropoff once the range has been met) to make the gun able to still do dmaage at longer ranges but require more shots to kill. Increase the bloom recovery delay, making users take more time to ensure their shots are accurate. All three of these would be overkill - I feel the second or third option would be best. Apologies if I just need to 'get gud', I'm just speaking from recent experience and observations of others opinions.

It's perfectly usable. I find it best to view it as a mixture between the N-Tec and the STAR 556 - compared to N-Tec it has okay marksman accuracy, good RoF and tapfire but poor hipfire, but has the really low recoil of the STAR and a bit lower damage-per-shot. It also doesn't have the accuracy curve of the ntec so the tapfire can be a bit more reliable for new players who haven't got the timing down. It's more beginner friendly than the Ntec but is less powerful as a result. I got mine from the christmas event a few years ago though, I don't know if I'd want to buy it from ARMAS.