Uke
-
Content Count
868 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Uke
-
-
23 minutes ago, sciaN said:Actually been maining concusion grenades for like a year now
Well I don't actually remember which nades you had. My point was there was this huge hate for low yields even though they were never really that much stronger than frags if at all. But now that frags are dominating the nade game, no one really seems to care. They're not really considered as cheap or lame, but they should be.
24 minutes ago, sciaN said:but here i am not complaining abt grenades in this game since grenades are occasional and just fitted for specific playstyles.
I wouldn't say they are occasional, with how much options of resupplying them you have, almost every fight starts or ends with throwing nades.
-
1 hour ago, sciaN said:Sorry for being one of those boring people but i was wondering are you the same person that was maining low yields when they were op and now percs?
Hey I recognize you, aren't you the same person that is maining frags now that they're op?
Sure I used low yields a lot. I have an aggressive play style and with more nades, you can push more corners. Doesn't change the fact that I thought both them and frags had too big blast radius.
I'm happy they nerfed yields. Now do it to frags, they could've get their radius cut by 1-2m and still be very good.
And yes I used percs recently, they get really bad rep from silvers spamming them at their own feet but they're not as easy to use properly as you may think (and somehow frags got the rep of "pro nade" even thought they're the easiest granade in game to use, as if holding G for a few seconds was that hard). The fact that you can't cook them is an advantage but also a big disadvantage in some scenarios. Not to mention very slow travel time and low damage.
Either way, I don't think that what I use is relevant to my opinion about balance changes. It's not my job to try and balance the game by not using op things and hope that my opposition doesn't either. All I can do is state my opinion on the forum and hope LO will listen.
-
1 hour ago, 404 said:frags are the default grenade type and as such need to fulfill a similar role as the star, an all purpose option
their wider radius allows new players to maybe still hit other new players despite poor mechanical skills...
Good point but I think if the easiest grenade is also the best grenade then some balance changes are overdue. It's a simple equation really, the easier to use something is the weaker it should be.
I don't think it would hurt new/low threat players much if frags were nerfed in either damage or range. Honestly most of them probably wouldn't even notice.
Concs require more skill but there's no much reason to use them since they don't deal that much more damage (does it really make a difference to you if someone is tagged by 750 or 990, he's fucked either way) but are much harder to hit, not to mention that you can't really damage multiple targets with them. Sure they are better against vehicles but with everyone driving around in vegases or one of the two tanks lately, they're just too weak.
1 hour ago, 404 said:...and lets veteran players use them as area denial tools against other veterans who know not to stand around for 10s and get killed by 2 frags
I mean that's kinda limited view of what actually happens in game. Just like you can change your position to avoid the nade so can a person throwing it change where they throw it.
1 hour ago, 404 said:not really sure what else to say since frags have remained unchanged since release iirc, why are they suddenly a problem now?
They were always a problem imo but back in the day a lot more people were using concs. Now that both yields and concs were either directly or indirectly nerfed there's no good reason to use anything other than frags.
And they're just not fun.
It's annoying to die to a nade that exploded 5m away from you, and it's not satisfying to get a kill with it either because it's just too easy to hit with.
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, 404 said:i thought i made my opinion pretty clear, but let me help out those among us who are a little slow
frags are fine, and have been fine for almost a decade
Your opinion means nothing if it's not backed by logical arguments Mr Big Brain.
hot take: "frags are fine" is not an argument.
Amazing how you have 12k posts but don't know how to discuss.
-
1
-
-
Just now, 404 said:hot take: people complaining about people not explaining their opinion are making even more worthless posts than the people they're complaining about
Says the guy who didn't say anything relevant to the thread yet. Can you just go away and let people have a proper discussion?
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, Kiida said:Pass.
Here's a thought. Don't talk if you don't have anything to say.
13 minutes ago, MrChan said:Okay, so we'll nerf the second least spammable grenade then.
Will we just take 'em all out apart from concs? Will that meet your desired skill floor?
What don't you understand?
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, Kiida said:No, can we stop with these ridiculous nerf suggestions already? Fucking hell.
How about you actually explain what's so ridiculous about this suggestion and stop being an a$$? Fucking hell.
He is right that frags are very strong and really easy to use because of their huge blast radius. If you haven't noticed, almost everyone is using them. There's a reason for that.
You can miss both nades by 5m and still kill the target, while with yields or percs you will barely scratch them (and concs obviously won't even hit).
I don't know about you but I would like it if fights in this game didn't revolve around spamming nades, or at least required you to aim those nades properly.
10 hours ago, WEISSDEATH said:you require skill to make sure you cook the nade long enough that it explodes before they run but not long enough that it'll detonate in flight and fail to reach the target
The point is it doesn't actually require any skill because you can miss by literally 5 meters and still deal over 500dmg.
I can say "nice conc" when I die to a nicely aimed conc, but have you ever said "nice frag"? I don't think so.
-
2
-
-
That's a really over complicated solution to a problem that could be easily fixed with a simple hp nerf for vegas, pioneer and especio.
-
2
-
-
11 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:CQC weapon accuracy is fine, they have good accuracy and are effective up to 15-20m where they can hit ttk easily. At 20-30m it gets a little more rough but they can still get kills. PMG is accurate and can do better at 20-30m, the S1na and such also. They have only ever been buffed in some form or another except for when they "fixed" the overbuffed the OCA, and made CJ actually have an effect on SMGs, albeit very little.
So apparently it's not obvious why accuracy is important in cqc...
Try overclocking that little brain of yours and maybe you will figure it out, because I'm honestly tired of explaining the most basic shit to morons.
11 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:When a weapon is too effective, it gets nerfed. If you havn't noticed this cycle the last few years from the C2, ATAC, HVR, and other weapons that deserved some form of nerf, thats on you.
This has nothing to do with anything I said.
-
test test test
-
14 hours ago, Lily Rain said:Precisely, LO didn't play the game enough and neither did you
Almost 10 years with 5000+ hours apparently isn't enough, ok, whatever you say buddy.
14 hours ago, Lily Rain said:Perhaps leave features that makes APB unique from other games out there untouched till the Dev-team is actually task-free & comes up with REAL plan(s) to improve upon said features in a timely, non half-@$$ed manner rather than just switch them off. Hell, half-@$$ed fixes for this one would be a million times better. Shutting down features with the false-promise of revisiting them months upon months later is nonsense since when the time comes, the abscence of said features would become the new norm.
In case you haven't noticed, APB has been borderline dead for the past few years. It needs to change things up if it wants to gain popularity. Also they didn't remove bounty completely, what are you even talking about.
14 hours ago, Lily Rain said:'omg, I am gonna cry to mommy and all my friends because I died just 1 more time "almost every mission" in a PvP game where dying happens to be part of the game' is NOT a sound justification to pull the plug on a feature that actually allows people to KEEP THE PVP FLOWING. Especially when the game itself has no leaderboards for missions that publicly shows mission win-2-loss ratio. With all due respect, any player who complains about being heat-5 is nothing but a crybaby loser. If you don't like to die, don't play. You are going to die anyways, whether with heat-5 status or without it.
You're completely missing the point. As expected from someone who probably barely ever gets H5.
And the hell is keep the pvp flow supposed to mean? Getting H5 and suddenly being able to shoot random players in their back possibly making them lose their mission is "keeping the flow"? Getting killed by some dude who just spawned 10 meters behind you is "the flow"? Let me answer for you. No it's not, it's just random crap that sounded good on paper to one of the developers over 10 years ago, they implemented it and didn't test properly how it would affect the game. It's one of the reasons why this game was never taken seriously by any good players.
14 hours ago, Lily Rain said:"Any decent player" doesn't get triggered when called an nfas-child, actually can get Heat-5 multiple times in a mission and more importantly accepts and rises up to the added challenge of heat-5. Try Less Than Lethal weapons for once in your life and you will understand exactly how quickly heat-5 can be obtained in this game (you would've understood had you actually read what was discussed before, but oh well). I personally challenge you and any poster who speaks about 'decency' to demonstrate how good they are with underpowered weapons, fragile and 270 ms latency. Post those juicy scoreboards the game doesn't record that proves feats you can pull with all of these handicaps combined before you speak of decency or @ing me saying "you don't know how to play the game". #LTLMasterRace
I don't even know what are you on about here tbh. But if you're playing with 270ms you should probably choose a server that's closer to you or not play at all. It's way too high latency for a shooter game.
14 hours ago, Lily Rain said:If you also actually read what was discussed in this thread, you would've spoken for yourself. "almost everyone involved" is a false claim as a lot of players actually find getting heat-5 pretty essential to the identity of this game and actually would rather it stay. Even this very thread speaks for itself. 12 different posters on this thread are unsupportive of this change and few of them asked about different ways of doing this while only mere 5 in comparison are happy about this sudden change... Shutting down a feature that makes APB APB without even holding an official poll is unquestionably a mistake, especially when it is advertised as a major feature next to its customization. Careless changes to APB that stem from players who rage in a PvP game that doesn't even care about winning/losing should NOT take place in this manner.
If you had any brains you would realize that this thread is biased. I can guarantee you that there's a shitton of both good and bad players who have quit APB because they hated bounty system, but they obviously won't be here to tell you about it. They've moved on and forgot about this game. Probably playing something that's actually balanced.
The game keeps losing players. It obviously needs to make changes or it will just keep dying. And believe it or not, simply updating the engine and making the game look a little nicer and run a little smoother isn't gonna be enough.
-
On 1/28/2020 at 12:46 AM, Sakebee said:- You can no longer get Heat 5 while in missions.
- Removed explosives from being able to be resupplied from large ammunition boxes.
Faith in LO +1.
More smart changes like this please.
On 1/28/2020 at 12:19 PM, Lily Rain said:This is exactly why feedback that originates from frustration should not be unquestionably implemented. The bounty system is a once-in-a-blue-moon rewarding feature for continued sustained excellence (e.g arresting NFAS children).
This is exactly why people who don't know how to play the game shouldn't try to balance it. Any decent player gets bounty almost every mission. It's not a rare thing at all and it's annoying for almost everyone involved.
-
1
-
3 hours ago, heelruby said:What about rerolls then ?
What about them? They're always gonna be there. You can't stop it. Any max rank gold can make a new account and play on bronze district in minutes. Even worse, they can dethreat and play against new players while using the best weapons, mods and cars in the game.
At least when matchmaking is done by rank it eliminates one of those things.
-
On 12/11/2019 at 6:19 PM, Havana said:And Population will always remain low until New players get a place of their own to play.
I already talked about this in a different post but simple sorting by rank would do a much better job at this than threat segregation.
-
1
-
-
34 minutes ago, CookiePuss said:Hmmm... I'm having trouble understanding how that is the case. Could you explain?
I think you may be confusing fairness with the outcome of the game. Fair match doesn't mean that both teams will win 50% of the time. It means that both teams play under the same conditions and better team will win 100% of the time unless something unexpected happens. Like who knows, maybe the worse team will learn something during the game that will make them equal or even better. Or maybe they were better from the very beginning but didn't believe it which made them play worse.
Anyway, so because of how APB works you may think that 3 silvers vs 2 golds is fair or maybe even unfair for the silvers, but it's actually unfair for golds. And who will win the game is irrelevant.
If you want to make a system where both teams win 50% of the time then well first of all, that's impossible, you would have to take into account a lot more factors than just threat and rank, and second why would you want to do that? Where's the fun in playing if you know that no matter what you do, you will win half of your games?
But most developers are still trying to introduce this scuffed matchmaking and it just doesn't work on so many levels.
If you play good, you win more games. If you play bad, you lose more games. No need to complicate things. And if someone can't handle that, maybe competitive games just aren't for them?
-
1 hour ago, CookiePuss said:Did you perhaps mean rank AND threat?
No. Threat has nothing to do with fairness. It's actually the opposite, threat is what often makes current matches unfair.
-
1
-
-
On 12/7/2019 at 1:22 PM, cheater said:No, Previous one until phasing in, getting 4 greenies against you is just stupid and makes new people to not want to play the game.
This is a problem with low population, not really the lack of threat districts. Most good players stopped playing this game because... well I don't think I have to explain that, and what is left are mostly average and below average casual players who probably don't play at even 60fps.
If population was bigger there would be much more variety of players in both teams and you would meet good players more often. And there could be some matchmaking mechanics introduced so people don't get bored of winning all the time, e. g. making teams who are on win streaks vs each other.
And if someone doesn't want to get "random noobs" on their team. Well, that's what groups are for.
-
20 hours ago, KawaiiAlice said:I can stay as a silver player skills and meet silvers if we have fair matchmaking .. simple ! .. Pro golds try so hard they play like machines ... if its fun for them this way it doesnt mean its fun for everyone ..
Ah yes, call the golds tryhards and dismiss their opinion. Just because someone is better than you doesn't mean they're sweating their patootie off every time they play. It just means it comes easier to them to make fast and smart decisions than it does to you.
And I don't think you understand what fair means. Assuming you both have access to the same weapons, mods etc. the match is fair regardless of your threats. The fact that you're more likely to lose because you're bad, doesn't make it unfair.
Truly fair matchmaking would be based on rank, not threat.
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, KawaiiAlice said:As i said before , i dont wanna get good , id like to play as a silver , and we have threats in this game to separate each type of player , why so hard for you to understand ?
why dont you go play vs golds only ? why do u kill silvers and bronzes ? i always see you playing in bronze district when you are a gold player , did you learn from your mistakes and got good and started playing in silver district against your threat x) ?
If you don't want to get good, be prepared to lose. You can't suck and win, that defeats the whole purpose of winning and losing. It can happen in this game because it's badly balanced in many ways but it doesn't mean we should strive to keep it.
-
23 hours ago, MeanBetsy said:For those who dislike fighting golds, I hope you know the legit bronze people would like a word with you. In fact, they are probably very happy that they can have gold players on their team against silver players that would normally stomp them constantly. But we don't talk about that - despite the fact that this matchmaking method works in every other game. In fact, the most enjoyable times I had with a game like early Overwatch, Counter-Strike, Call of Duty, Battlefield, etc. was when I was fighting a mixed bag of players... not just people on the same skill level. Overcoming the people who were better than me or just taking a some breather and stomping people - that was a nice appeal. This is why the old server selection in games like TF2 was interesting because you never knew who you were going to fight.
When I started gaming online there was no matchmaking in the game I played. If I sucked I lost. But it was still fun, at least I could learn something from my opponent. When I owned someone it was nice to see that I got better.
Nowadays all that is lost thanks to matchmaking. In games like Overwatch there's no sense of progression at all, it feels like you're always playing against people on the same level and that no matter what you do, you're always gonna win 50% of the games. There's no advantage for being good in a game with matchmaking and there's no disadvantage for being bad. I don't think that's a good thing.
-
21 hours ago, AlishaAzure said:Isn't a bug, they made they to not show
They plan to add them later so same shit.
-
On 12/4/2019 at 12:27 AM, AlishaAzure said:Quote from Matt:
"A couple caveats:
We are missing some network equipment and a bunch of district boxes that got stuck in customs for the new EU datacenter. This means all of EU will be temporarily running on districts in New York for a couple days till we get the new EU location online properly. And all platforms will be running Financial and Waterfront with no threat segregation for a couple days."
I thought they finally realized that threat districts are pointless but turns out it's just a bug. Yikes.
-
On 10/5/2019 at 1:38 AM, CookiePuss said:Then why do so many players choose to use the other ARs?
Considering the ntec is a free gun, that's an important question.
Are you like high or something, 9/10 ARs I see are ntecs.
-
3 hours ago, CookiePuss said:There simply is no reason to lose to an ntec with an SMG in cqc unless you get outplayed. Cover is fine, but your opp can use it as well. And I'm not sure why you think hitting part of a hitbox is hard anyways.
I'm gonna give you time to think about it a little longer.
Explosive range of Frage Grenade
in General Discussion Archive
Posted
Yes but they always had lower damage and radius as well iirc which meant you had to be quite a lot more precise with them. A lot of frag users conveniently seem to forget that when complaining about yields.