Jump to content
Forum rules

vsb

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    14272

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by vsb

  2. Posted

    advertising current apb is worthless, the game is already infamous for being a flaming trainwreck, and any unfortunate new players who didnt already know about apb wont stick around for long enough to significantly affect the population anyway

    • Like 3

  11. Posted · Edited by glaciers
    typo

    3 hours ago, Wizard1111 said:

    I know there is an kit for packer ceraso but i cant find it i have checked

     

    Armas Store

    Joker Store

    Internet (Only gave me what types of packer there are)

    Mission contacts (Suprise they dont sell kits)

     

    Ive been looking for 2 days but cant find it. I know they are here since i have seen an shit ton of a-team vans. Anyone knows please reply! 
    Have an good day!

    chiro in waterfront (criminal, levels 4 and 7) and mirri kent in financial (enforcer, levels 4 and 7) unlock ceresco parts, if you've already completed those contacts then you already own the parts

     

     

  12. Posted

    3 hours ago, Todesklinge said:

    No money, no new contend!

    Most people dont know, development of a game cost money.

     

    Start your calculator.

    0 $ in = 0 contend out?

     

    Or pay to win mechanics to compensate the missing monithly income.

     

    Thats an missunderstanding of the community by an wrong point of view.

    most people (actually probably just todesklinge) don't know that a game can make money via microtransactions without selling items that affect gameplay

    • Like 2

  15. Posted

    17 hours ago, Someone said:

    Competition does not equal equity of equipment and certainly not in a game like APB.

    of course it does, especially in the context of pvp games, the entire point of balancing is to attempt to eliminate as many factors as possible to pare competition down to personal skill

     

    if equity of equipment doesn't matter when it comes to apb then why are you even suggesting mechanics intended to balance different levels of equipment?

     

     

     

    17 hours ago, Someone said:

    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.

    xp is irrelevant, neither your suggestion nor my issues with it are about xp

     

     

     

    17 hours ago, Someone said:

    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?

    one of the problems i have is the reverse situation, when a player with expensive weapons "overcomes" an enemy with cheap weapons because he spent more money on armas, or more time ramraiding, or more time in social

     

    cost based balancing stops being a skill rewarding mechanism when it no longer rewards purely for skill

     

     

     

    17 hours ago, Someone said:

    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.

    yes, i do think the progression system needs a significant overhaul to accommodate a fairer playing field when it comes to loadouts

     

     apb has consistently had a problem with balance and fair competition, stemming from multiple issues beyond just weapon or vehicle balance, and it shows in the population numbers - people don't like playing a pvp game when the pvp isn't fair

     

     

     

    17 hours ago, Someone said:

    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?

    why does an idea need to make sense? how is this even a question?

     

    the problem with the weapons i listed is you've listed each pair as being in the same tier, yet they have significantly different places in the meta

     

    if the intent is to influence player choice then its a failure, if a player is going to pay t2 ammo cost there's no reason for them to choose the issra over the ntec

     

     

     

    18 hours ago, Someone said:

    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 a bit silly to assume that just because all vehicles would be useful in some way that they'd all be exactly the same, its not like all the meta weapons play the same despite all being top choices for pvp

     

     

     

    18 hours ago, Someone said:

    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?

    its a leftover feature because its part of a different design ethos that apb has been moving away from, albeit slowly

     

    just because the people who ruined apb intended for lower tier vehicles to underperform doesn't mean they need to continue underperforming

     

     

     

    18 hours ago, Someone said:

    Most weapons are already mostly balanced through their other characteristics, Making ammo cost an important factor just balances the difference that remains.

    its extra work to reach the same place then, even ignoring the other problems cost balancing may introduce

     

     

     

    18 hours ago, Someone said:

    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.

    this varies wildly depending on consumable use and player progression level, but its entirely possible to only use free consumables without worrying about inventory management

    • Like 1

  16. Posted

    12 hours ago, Someone said:

    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.

    it should be convenient because the entire point of the game is competition? if players are actively discouraged from playing their best, i'm not really sure what the point of pvp is

     

    contact xp is irrelevant, the issue is cost/money and its effect on mission performance

     

    the race metaphor doesn't really make sense because everyone is not starting from the same place, nor is every mission a self contained competition

     

     

     

    13 hours ago, Someone said:

    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.

    new players complain about explosives because they don't have access to explosives, preventing them from learning the strengths and weaknesses

     

    the tiering just doesnt make sense imo, even narrowing it down to weapon categories - nfas and jg are both the same tier? shaw and euryale? ntec and issra? opgl and eol? how are legendaries in general supposed to be tiered?

     

    if you dont understand the differences between the pioneer and the mikro or the resulting effects on the meta im not sure you should be discussing balance

     

    i do think its an issue that a large majority of apb vehicles are essentially ignored, but i disagree that buffing the unused vehicles is "pointless" and that making 3 pioneer spawns negate mission profit is the right way to balance things

     

     

     

    14 hours ago, Someone said:

    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.

    most low tier vehicles do not perform well nor were they intended too, its a leftover from rtws attempt to force rpg progression into a pvp shooter

     

    its just more work, even if ammo cost is increased as a balance mechanic weapon stats still have to balanced as well, cost cannot be the sole balancing factor

     

    consumables have been free as mission rewards since they were implemented iirc, adding an additional way to get more didn't really do much either way for consumable issues

     

     

    • Like 1

  17. Posted

    On 12/13/2021 at 11:51 PM, Someone said:

    [text]

    a lot of this boils down to making players choose between mission performance and saving money, but choosing mission performance can (and likely will) lead to it being impossible to continue to choose mission performance without being funneled into other activities - essentially punishing players for consistently performing at their best

     

     

     

    On 12/13/2021 at 11:51 PM, Someone said:

    Again, In the very first post I stated that creating more ammo types would allow further refinement of balance issues found with specific weapons.

    Though that might not be at all necessary as one might think, Ammo could already be for guns what tiers stand for when spawning a vehicle. 

     

    Even based on current cost-per-round basis weapons could be split into tiers like vehicles:

    Pistol ammo and Machine Gun ammo is the cheapest meaning any weapon that uses it is tier 1 ($0.09/$0.13)

    Weapon that use Less-Than-Lethal Pistol ammo would be tier 2 ($0.25) 

    Weapon that use Rifle and Magnum ammo are both tier 2 ($0.33/$0.40)

    Weapon that use Generic Less-Than-Lethal ammo would be tier 2 ($0.50)

    Weapon that use Shotgun shells and High-velocity Rifle ammo tier 3 ($0.80/$0.87)

    Weapon that use Flares, 40mm Grenades, and Hand Grenades make up tier 4 ($5-$15)

    Rockets are their own tier like how the Mhuller M1 is when chop shopped/impounded. ($100/$50)

     

    Machine Gun and Pistol ammo should be renamed to "Long Pistol" and "Short Pistol" ammo respectively, Many weapons that use it should be changed to use another ammo type.  

    Even if ammo prices increased 10x I don't think those weapon would break when they switched ammo type because its another means to balance these various weapons. 

    tiering categories like this doesn't make much sense for performance-based cost (opgl/osmaw being t4 despite not even being meta?), something already seen with vehicles, with the pioneer and mikro in the same tier despite significant performance differences

     

    i think you'd need each weapon to use its own specific ammo and each vehicle to have its own unique spawn cost for this kind of balancing to work, which is too much extra complication imo

  18. Posted

    58 minutes ago, Vulyus said:

    Of course not, this thread has gained way too much of you cheaters approval on it already, they have nothing to censure about it, they are doing it for you so why censure something nobody stands against lol.

    i think we both know thats a pretty flimsy excuse, but im flattered you think i have so much pull with little orbit

  21. Posted

    12 hours ago, Someone said:

    Making weapons in APB a potential moneysink as a means of balancing them is not comparable to Counter Strike in any way. 

    A match in Counter Strike is zero-sum because it has no persistence while contact missions in APB are not zero-sum. 

    Losing the "match" but making money is a viable game choice in APB because there is persistence with money and contact reputation.

    Witness missions on the other hand are zero-sum because the only thing on the line is money earned within the district.

     

    If a moneysink was a bigger part of gameplay meta then there would be more competition in the marketplace for such easily made items and people would be less willing to spend so much for them.  Not that it matters if you happen to successfully make huge profits selling infinitely duplicatable things on the market place, Nobody forced the other players to give you their money and time.

    both mechanics are definitely comparable, the intention is the same even if the specifics are different

     

    players not performing to the best of their ability in order to save money should not be a viable option in apb 

     

    i dont like the idea of making players choose between having cool stuff and playing the game, or the idea that a balancing mechanic can be completely negated outside of its intended influence

     

    more prominent money sinks mean more prominent RMT, and a larger gap between f2p and paying players

  22. Posted

    11 hours ago, Someone said:

    #1 and #3 are contradictory.

    If it's too easy to make money outside of missions then how does it punish new and low skilled players?

    1 and 3 aren't contradictory, a new player is going to be just as bad at customization as they are at shooting enemies

     

    ramraiding and mugging are not only skewed almost entirely in favor of criminals but are also not engaging at all for most people, funneling new players into these activities so they can continue playing missions leads to a poor game experience imo

     

    there are some smaller issues as well like new players starting with no money, or new players being much more likely to waste ammo in and out of missions

     

    11 hours ago, Someone said:

    Players can always profit during missions despite being new or bad, The default guns are free and use the cheapest ammo while the default car is free to spawn.

    players do not always profit from missions, sometimes even when their team wins

     

    you've only given the ammo costs for 2 ammo types, so its impossible to determine that they would be the cheapest

     

    the starter weapons and vehicle being the easiest to maintain encourages or forces, depending on how able a new player is to keep up with costs, new players to continue using them, again widening the gap between new players and veterans

     

     

    12 hours ago, Someone said:

    #2 is merely a difference in perspective.

    Most cars in the game have had no place at all in the meta because there is no reason to not always spawn the best-in-class vehicles.

    Players currently have no reason to not always buy and use the "best" weapons in the game even on lesser skilled or equipped players.

    i suppose it does come down to perspective, you see increased cost as a reason to use cheaper items where i see increased cost as a reason to only use the most effective items in order to maximize gains - i think a large portion of the community would also share my perspective, and so many people using strictly meta loadouts will naturally push their opponents to do the same

     

    im also unclear on how this would actually affect weapon use, an ntec and a misery both use the same ammo type, so how does cost enter in to the decision to use one or the other?

  24. Posted · Edited by glaciers
    typo

    57 minutes ago, Someone said:

    I think weapons could have been balanced through other means already present in the game besides adjusting every weapon's characteristics over and over.

     

    Jumpshooting was garbage though and made the game worse off.

    aside from this suggestion punishing new players, it also really only works in a closed system like csgo where money is only gained/lost within the match - no need to worry over shooting money when i can infinitely duplicate a half-assed anime symbol to sell on the marketplace

     

     

×
×
  • Create New...