gypexa cynepcmap

Here’s the situation: The skill-based matchmaking system moved me to a district with a 35/40 faction population. Then, a mission popped up to prevent enemies from reaching the objectives (the blue mission marker); the enemies never showed up—so, essentially, I won the mission. Yet, I got moved to a different district—to players who turned out to be higher-level—simply because I hadn't killed anyone (or hadn't been killed myself). What is the logic behind your absurd system if it doesn't work correctly? And why am I the one getting moved, rather than the person who couldn't care less about their mission? If the skill analysis is based on all district participants (perhaps using average stats), what is the point of it? After all, I’m competing against *specific* opponents, not some "elite" players who might not even be facing me in the match.

It’s the "soup and two cooks" scenario: one oversalts it while the other keeps diluting it with water. The result? To the first cook, it always tastes bland; to the second, it’s always tasteless. The concoction just swells to absurd proportions without ever actually cooking, while the person waiting to eat just wants to walk out of the café.

Let me clarify and repeat (I’m using a translator, and it seems to be phrasing my answers imprecisely): right now, I’m being bounced from a region where I don’t fit the criteria to another one with very similar players. As I understand the algorithm's logic, there are two possibilities: either the game moves me to yet another region because my level still doesn't fit, or the players who didn't fit the criteria in the previous region moved to the new one along with me—but our levels still don't match, And—I don’t even understand how the game decides who stays in the zone when players are at different levels—the very same people who were with me move on to the next one, while I get sent back to the start; we’re all just spinning on this carousel that never balances out, thanks to the algorithm’s flawed logic. What's the principle behind keeping people in the region? Are the majority of them a certain skill level? Donation amount? Account creation date? Server login time? Combinations? So, the situation, ignoring the above assumed conditions, I'll point out a moment: in District A, there are four players of different skill levels, ranked 1, 2, 3, and 4, where 1 is Gold, 3 is Bronze, etc. Player 3, who lost a battle against 1, is kicked. He moves to District B, where there are three level 4 players who are losing to player 3, or three level 2 players to whom he loses. Player 3 (or 4, it doesn't matter) is kicked from one district to another. If there are only two districts on the server, this process never ends. So what's the point of this system compared to the previous one? On the Admin's side, it's understandable to pretend that cheaters or strong players don't interact with weaker players, but what about the weaker players? Besides constantly losing, they're also endlessly moved around. This is crazy.

You shouldn't do that; some people might want to play without sniper rifles or machine guns—or, ultimately, play without you. Always, and for everyone. You’ll never be able to assemble an opposing team for a match. It’s still possible today; I’ve made a habit of staying in the match when faced with those "golden boys" marked with "X"s (teammates who quit right after the match started). This doesn't happen because of the current system itself, but—I suspect—due to the script, courtesy of that "beloved" Artificial Intelligence (as I mentioned in another thread). One thing makes me happy here: like you, I resort to a war of attrition—going AFK and ignoring the opponent while sitting in a truck (the Balkan Kolva, "Killva", ...which became a particular favorite (with the morons riding on the roofs of their Mustangs all over the neighborhood—they explode so beautifully) during the Zombie City event) beforehand (sometimes even winning). I just run the scumbags over without wasting bullets on them (I’m no cheater and don't have 100% accuracy, heh-heh). Of course, an opponent's patience isn't infinite, and a player's reputation tends to spread via word-of-mouth among those who face off against them.

Oh, that kind of talk sounds all too familiar to me from *GTA Online*, with its massive open map and countless spots for tactical maneuvering. In the user's defense, that phrase makes sense within the context of "stereotypical" psychology—what some here called "newbie" thinking. But even newbies vary; they might come to *APB* from other shooters that don't rely on such cramped, trap-filled combat zones and spawn points. I’ve spent a long time playing solo against teams (1v2, 1v3, 1vMany), relying on my own logic and tactics, yet today’s "legit skilled players" somehow know exactly where I’ll be, when I’ll be there, and even how much ammo is left in my magazine... STOP TALKING NONSENSE. You don't seem to be part of the "interested parties" crowd—or maybe you're just hiding it really well while playing the "good cop" (which is a shame).

A sad reality of our times is that Artificial Intelligence has suddenly crept into the online sphere—sneaking in through seemingly harmless pathfinding algorithms and the kinds of mechanics cruel children enjoy in games. It is what makes such nonsense—like the automated selection of teams and the like—possible.

And just to set the record straight—dispelling any notion that I’m some greedy noob constantly getting fragged by "guys with gold guns"—here is my purchase history; I’ve been showered with various weapons for leveling up, yet I don’t even use them. The point I want to get across is this: even though people here might say, "Hey, you broke loser, you have no right to want anything," I *do* have that right.

As for the money—I was never interested in the so-called "dominating" of other players; I spent it to enhance the aesthetics of my character—my virtual projection. I think there are quite a few people who value in-game aesthetics. In fact, I believe many players joined and stayed precisely because of the features available *at the time*—such as the image editor for clothing and vehicles (even if it was somewhat limited, which actually added an incentive to get creative) and the really solid character editor. Even many modern social games—like *Second Life*-style projects—don't offer the same level of customization for height, body width, and so on. Someone is composing music, creating themes—in short, like many others back then, I hoped this game would be more than just a shooter; I hoped it would be a *stylish* shooter. Nowadays, as you’ve probably noticed, we can’t even chat in the district lobby between missions; the game kicks us to a different one, and after a couple of rotations, it dumps us back—only for the people we were talking to (who might have become friends) to get booted off somewhere else entirely. If such an award existed, I’d give this game the prize for "Best Asocial Project of the Year" (or ever). Knowing the kind of people who add these sorts of features to projects—and having served as a tester for several of them (specifically the kind of tester who analyzes the game’s adaptability at "level zero," so to speak—viewing it through a newcomer's eyes)—and having witnessed their collapse either right before or shortly after release, I don't just doubt it; I know from experience that such games simply get stolen or bought up after going bankrupt (having failed to stay afloat amidst the demands of marketers who frankly couldn't care less about the game's future). I increasingly suspect that APB is one of these cases; none of the original owners or team members remain involved.

Unfortunately—I’m afraid it’s a global conspiracy by marketers—I only have faith in games released on CD (With very rare exceptions: I happen to know a game designer from a long-running Russian-language project whose team—including outside volunteers like programmers, artists, and so-called alpha testers—truly "polishes" every single change. They test for suitability—including the psychological impact on the player—and, to put it bluntly, for how engaging and playable it is, and how it affects the feel of the game compared to previous versions or—in the case of new features—the original, initial experience that is so crucial for a newcomer), —back when it was very difficult to burn copies, and when every link in the chain (developers, designers, artists, and those handling physical production), as well as suppliers and retailers, faced real financial losses if a game flopped; errors hit the organization right in the wallet.

I understand the underlying reason for the changes: people were used to playing without spending money, but now they’re being forced to use weapons that "forgive mistakes" and offer a chance to hold your ground thanks to guaranteed damage against *any* opponent. BUT, I feel that players like me—who actually utilize the game's intended tactics and weaponry—have the right to play how we want; we might lose, sure, but we get to experience interesting gameplay situations rather than just a *Counter-Strike* clone. It would have been far more honest to just come out and say it: "Folks, the only way to play this game is with an assault rifle; otherwise, you'll be hopping around different zones"—kind of like those mobile games where you have to pay to remove ads or else you're stuck watching garbage between levels forever.

I’ve never liked easy games; what I loved about this one was the chance to take on multiple opponents at once while using a weaker weapon—that was the fun of it. First, they removed that option, and now they’ve taken away the ability to "get to know the opponents" on the server (or district) where I play; instead, I constantly find myself dropped into random locations against unknown players, often right in the middle of hopeless mission situations. If I get "killed a lot" (according to the admins), that’s my problem—if I get fed up, I’ll just leave or switch servers. If an opponent sees I’m a weak player, they can move wherever they want, too. THAT WAS THE WHOLE POINT OF THE DISTRICT COLOR SYSTEM. WHAT WE HAVE NOW IS TOTAL NONSENSE.

wtong chat..

this is only visible thinks

1. If there are two districts on the server—both filled with pro players while I’m weaker—the game keeps bouncing me back and forth between them after every mission. What is the point of this masochism, admins? 2. Moreover, towards the end of the mission—where there’s nothing left to do and all the enemies are just sitting in their positions—it stands to reason that your skill rating (stats) will drop further by the time the battle ends. 4. Do you even grasp the point of games like this? A weaker player competes against stronger ones and learns in the process; but if—ideally (though in reality, it doesn't work that way)—they get moved (as the system dictates) to a location matching "their skill level," how are they supposed to learn when pitted against even stronger opponents? RESUME. BRING EVERYTHING BACK THE WAY IT WAS; YOU GUYS HAVE NO CLUE WHAT YOU'RE DOING—SERIOUSLY.

Then there’s the issue—let's call it "0" (or maybe "29," I'm not sure which fits better)—of being abruptly dumped from your current server into a match on another one (filled with 100% pro players or cheaters). You spend about two minutes running around "in the fog"—unable to see targets or other players due to the game's mechanics—only to get instantly killed by campers guarding the spawn point. This happens once per mission, or even every few minutes, whenever you happen to land a hit on a cheater or pro player, causing the game's "balancer" to suddenly perceive you as an elite-level player. Another scenario is when you’re using a long-range weapon and accidentally hit a teammate who’s darting across your line of fire with their little minigun—resulting in you getting kicked from the match.

I was playing Fallout once, and they talked about the President—he even broadcast over the radio about how great things were in his state—but in the end, it turned out to be a massive, soulless computer. Why am I bringing this up? I honestly don't know.

Just revert the game state to how it was 10 years ago and never touch it again. And bring back the option to play solo WITHOUT a team; I play with a sniper rifle, and I don't want to end up on a team full of guys with automatic weapons who spend 24/7 running around the toilet in some abandoned house... and who send me nasty private messages and try to kill me just to get me kicked.

Cheaters are only half the problem; the real issue is being automatically dumped every minute into a zone full of other cheaters and addicts—it completely ruins the fun. I started a thread, but it looks like nobody’s watered the field here in ages, and coyotes are roaming the topics...

Hello, I’ve returned to the game after a long break and started over; to put it mildly, I was confused, and as a result, I’m feeling a bit disoriented. I entered the district (which is no different from the others) but couldn't select a threat level—Silver, Gold, etc. So, I saw some new levels (290) with stun grenades and shockers—like the water cannons police use—being wielded by the criminals(?). Obviously, I didn't stand a chance—well, it’s not the first time—and then the game kicked me out of the district. This happened about 10 times, and in the end, it moved me to the same Level 290 opponents. I have a question: why was this done, and by what brilliant logic do YOU decide for the players where they should go? Are strong players going to prey on the weak? Don't the weak have the brains and the hands to switch zones themselves? There used to be a choice, but now there isn't; you just get dumped right back into the same spot where, a second ago... Strong players would "reset" their momentum by killing their own teammates, making stupid mistakes, and so on. And really, how does the system work when it drops me against a Rank 290 player who—just a couple of missions ago—killed me five times? You haven't done anything "good" for the players; instead, you're mindlessly driving away newcomers—who, for the time being (while they're still getting the hang of things), don't intend to spend money and can't compete with the game's veterans. In other words, you're tossing out the "dead weight"—the very people whose presence in battles kept things interesting for everyone else all these years. Right? Correct me if I’ve left anything out, or refute it (provided, of course, that you actually care about players in my category—even here on the forum).

look at the experience of GTA5online, if the player WANTS, he can set immunity to interference from inactive parties in the mission, BY CHOICE, but not by force. I am against any imposition, it’s even more interesting for me when they interfere (I don’t lose much if it ruins the mission, this, in any case, is ATTENTION to me as a player, which is STRONGLY lacking in the era of autism in the game industry). In general, you need to be able to lose, and less people will be “driven” because of the game. Fans everyone.

I am in favor of adding colva to some contact

Now the cheat has moved to the elite stage, the team first understands that you are playing without, and just leaves, making your game 1 against 3 cheaters, this is interesting, for cheaters, probably, to rest between serious skirmishes.

I will say from the experience of another game, a complaint about a cheater is a sign to create a new account for him (leveling up for 5 minutes), and put you on the pencil (as an informer), I am sure that such a player (cheater) will be happy to transfer all the money spent to a new one (I I asked to return only clothes from the store, when I realized that level 255 had become unplayable against cheaters, they refused me, no point), although, in this game, I think, only demonstrative players, twinks created specifically for the ban, are banned. This game, unfortunately for all veterans, has outlived its usefulness.

to remove non-playing players from the area, you would put a check mark on keyboard/mouse activity, for example, camera rotation. It’s hard to think of anything more crazy than sending off a player when he runs after an enemy, or for cover, and logically doesn’t shoot.

I entered an event, tried to hit someone, they killed me in the back, and in other ways, logically, I appeared in a bunch of opponents, and everything repeated, then I was kicked off the map for inactivity. Maybe someone in charge will already come into the area, test it (at least once) and correct this nonsense? Or is the goal of the game to make money from cheaters at the expense of the usual players who are having a holiday and have been turning them into a safari for a year now?