Hexerin

I would put forth a formal request that you guys consider taking one or more of the following actions: Provide the staff of APB Database (APB:Db) with whatever they need to update their site to properly show Curves values on related weapons. Create a post that contains all of the Curves data sheets, and pin it in one or more of the main forum sections for easy reference. Just revert the system entirely, so that all weapons return to using the vanilla range system with its linear values. This has been an issue for far too long, and it makes it impossible to easily reference the stats on any weapon that uses it.

As we continue to ask "Why are you removing this?" while you refuse to give an answer. There's still no reason to remove this. There's also still plenty of reason to add LCR PR1/PR2 and ACT44 Last Stand back in, since there was also no reason for them to be removed. They're literally just removing stuff, there's nothing new here.

If the JMBs were implemented in a way that was less anti-consumer, they would have a system that ensures that, yes. However, the JMBs are as anti-consumer as you can be, and have no such systems that prevent infinite loss.

Highly doubtful, and that would open a can of worms best left closed.

Yea, they removed censorship on a handful of words. Some are still censored though, and they did add a couple new ones.

They probably have some sort of arrangement that got them a bunch of cash for implementing it, it's pretty common for such things.

Like seriously.

The recoil reduction wouldn't have any effect for those that are experienced with the gun, but reducing it's bloom per shot would be interesting to see in gameplay. Well that would be because fuck isn't censored anymore.

They're the same gun, and it's not hard to check that. PMG CBMP

Can't be having that gun be competitively viable, now can we though?

Why though? There's literally no reason that is an action that needs to be taken. If anything, you guys should bring back the two base variant LCRs as well as the retail ACT44, as those also had no reason to be removed from the store.

All they need to do to balance the current live shotguns is adjust numbers. The rayscaling implementation is exactly what shotguns needed, the problem is that they're just overtuned a bit atm because the rayscaling was implemented without adjusting the existing stats (for the most part).

Honestly at this point it's probably the only way to make things work right for NA. Now that threated districts are back, we have that basic barrier between the top and bottom ends of the spectrum. Opening up matchmaking to ignore a player's faction would improve the situation further, even if only a bit.

I wonder how long until all you who bitched and whinged for this reversion start begging for a reversion to the reversion.

You do realize you can turn off the chat notification sound, right? It's even possible to do on a channel-by-channel basis.

This is something I can support you on. Considering shotguns don't even have rifling, I'd honestly be in support of Improved Rifling losing any effect on shotguns period. Would make balancing them that much simpler/easier as an added bonus. Welcome to shotguns as they were pre-rayscaling. I told you people this would happen, but of course like always you waved me off and ignored me despite my warnings always showing themselves to be what ends up happening in the end...

The gun's ingame display name is Strife (this is what the player sees), but it's listed as ApocWar in the actual game data (this is what the devs see).

Only if all of the following also happen: Players with the RAF CAP40 are retroactively granted account-bound copies of the 3-slot CAP40. The 3-slot CAP40 is added to ARMAS for players that joined after the RAF program was shut down. The CAP40 Sergeant's third slot is opened. It's only fair.

That's actually hilarious as hell.

One of the first things you learn when holding a position such as a forum moderator or a GM is that you never, ever, give out info that could lead to the general userbase figuring out your personal account. It leads to nothing but bad things for you. People will contact you on your personal account as though it's your official account, and will turn toxic real quick if you don't cater to their every whim. Just look at the SPCT tagged people on the forum, and how others commonly treat them, for an example.

The problem is that if Little Orbit (or anyone else for that matter) were to pick Firefall up, they'd be picking up the garbage heap version of the game. The version of the game that had so much potential is no more, and will never return. There's no future for that game.

That PR trick works in games that have massive playerbases. It doesn't work here, where everyone knows everyone else. Anyone who takes even a moment to keep tabs (as I do), can very easily see that /report is either ignored or a fake command. Even manual reports to support, and direct DMs with MattScott himself result in literally nothing. It's honestly a pathetic joke at this point.

What's the point of hiring GMs if you don't take action on reports anyways?

The rest of that is whatever, but this part resonates with me. @MattScott Why is this still a thing? There's literally no excuse for it, especially considering you've already revamped ARMAS twice before.

Different situation. Both the OSCAR and M-1922 were added to contacts to give players a taste of them, to then incentivize their purchase on ARMAS. The contacts gave 2-slot versions for 10 day lease for APB$, whereas ARMAS offers 3-slot versions that can be purchased as permanent account-bound. It's typical predatory and anti-consumer greed tactics. The new contacts will have the full Temptress and CAP40 as they exist from the RAF program. There's no reason for them to be added to ARMAS. Also, as Little Orbit has already proven, they have no interest in filling out the ARMAS library just as Gamersfirst/Reloaded didn't. There's plenty of guns that were already in ARMAS, that aren't back there still.