Eyepop

Shadow maps do rely on lighting. AO does not. So even while they're working on lighting, they ought to have AO baked so that they can make sensible lighting decisions. As is, they're going to need yet another lighting pass when they bake AO and suddenly the interiors of buildings are in desperate need of more light.

In the latest engine post, you showed off some images comparing Live to 2.1 The bottom picture is 2.1. You're noting that character models don't jump out, but that's not the only issue that this picture shows. Observe a variety of places in these two pictures: the undersides of the wooden platforms and the bridge; the corner between the buildings on the right; the hole in the wall on the left. All of these are considerably darker in the live version, and are way easier to read. Especially the hole in the wall: if I didn't know that was there, I would not be able to see it at all. That has pretty big playability issues. I mocked up the scene in Blender to show how Ambient Occlusion would fix this issue. https://imgur.com/a/dLRxhxO Please get your engineers on this, as the engine upgrade really should not be a downgrade in visuals/playability.

Given this some thought. Might as well make some suggestions while whining about balance. Core idea: Keep long TTK, but increase gun consistency. This seems to already be the intention with Strife (more consistency due to over damage) and S-247 (consistency due to strafe accuracy). Let’s assume that these guns are fine (as pointed out, the Wisp is more of a balance problem than the S-247), and bring the other guns in line. R-2. Make the weapon consistent in a “useful in every case” way, as apparently intended. Dropoff Range: 70->50 Minimum Damage %: 30->50 Shot Modifier Cap: 3->2 Recovery Delay: .450->.15 Reasoning: Weapon maintains TTK at long ranges, but does so by trading per-shot damage for better accuracy. The improved accuracy makes it more usable in close range combat. Still blooms to maximum in 3 shots (out of 4 shots to kill), but maximum significantly reduced from 120 cm-> 74.25 cm (not 90 cm, due to recovery between shots even at full cycle rate). H-9. Make the weapon consistent in a “minimal bloom/recoil” way, providing reasonable TTK out to a decent range, dependant on good tracking Dropoff Range: 30->40 Per Shot Modifier: .2->.03 Shot Modifier Cap: 1.50->1 Recovery Per Second: 7.5->1 Marksman Modifier: .98->.68 Marksman FoV: 65->70 Reasoning: These numbers are pulled mostly from the Raptor 45, the “no bloom/recoil” gun I would most like to emulate. VS the Raptor, the H-9 would have longer TTK and shorter range, but within that range is pinpoint accurate for the first 10 (one kill) shots. Broadening the Marksman FoV as the gun is meant less for sniping, more for hitting targets from range (if that makes sense). AR-97. Make the weapon consistent in a “the rounds keep coming and keep hurting” way as said in the description. Hard Damage: 36->72 Reload Time: 2->2.8 Magazine Capacity: 20->40 Shot Modifier Cap: 1.10->.5 Reasoning: Hard damage provides an anti-vehicle niche. Magazine capacity keeps the bullets coming. Match capacity with a longer reload. Max bloom down to keep bullets on target.

What makes it worth using?

Even with CJ3, it still has a longer TTK than the stock OCA... which you can also put CJ3 on, rewidening the gap.

You mean the extra accuracy while walking? I haven't found a way to use it, combined with the long ttk: all snipers have great accuracy in marksman, so the only time you would need great accuracy outside of it (while walking) is in close combat fights... except with such a long ttk, it doesn't really matter how accurate it is, you still die to anything other than another sniper.

For all of the things that LO has touched for rebalancing, why haven't they attempted to fix the terribleness of all of the weapons in the Apocalypse pack? These weapons baffle me, as all of them, except 1, maybe, are worse versions of other guns. Strife The Strife is the one maybe-acceptable weapon in the pack. It takes nearly twice as long to kill as a CSG, but it does have that 900 frontloaded damage, which might be worthwhile in some cases maybe. But it has a smaller magazine, worse spread, that horrible greater-than-1-second-before-you-can-switch-guns lockout... and this is the best gun of the pack. R-2 The R-2 is the next least terrible. Not because it's not an awful gun! Oh no, it sucks. But at least it's interesting? Gun might be worthwhile if it were decent in close range, but with the bloom, it's nearly impossible to use it in that state. It opens up to 120cm after three shots! Good luck landing the fourth, killing shot, with that sort of accuracy! Or, they could make the marksman part better. After all, it slightly outpaces the RSA in accuracy. But you have to fire it at a rate of one shot every half second to not bloom out of control, bringing it to a 2-second TTK, the worst of all long-range pistols. AR-97 Ah, my good friend. A .920-second ttk assault rifle with worse everything (except magazine size) than an ISSR-a. The ISSR-a being, in case you did not know, a rifle that people running away from screaming, not because it's going to kill them, but because they would rather snipe people with an OCA than use it. H-9 In line with our brilliant idea of giving all these guns terrible TTK, how about this one! A SMG coming in at .765 sec! "Oh, it says it's highly accurate, so that's why it's good!" Except damage falloff starts at 30m! You could instead take, I dunno, a Manic, kill in .125 sec less, at higher range, with better marksman performance and less bloom. S-247 Is it any surprise that the Oblivion is worthless? Just take a Wisp. Same shots to kill, kills half a second faster. Oh, but I guess the S-247 is a little more accurate between 83-95 meters? I dunno, man. Every one of these guns suffers from terrible TTK, bad ammo economy for their class, terrible hard damage (seriously, the AR-97 does half the hard damage of the ISSR-a... which is silenced)... why haven't they been buffed?

I wouldn't be too worried. If they haven't implemented instancing yet, there's tons of performance to be had there.

Alonso's guide to earning respect: 1) Lie 2) Get called out for lying 3) Claim you would never lie and demand an apology or you won't play the game ever again 4) Have the CM verify that you are in fact a liar 5) ... 6) RESPECT!

Am I missing something? I don't see anything for 50% off. It's all 40%

Bluch. Guess I'll contact support, then. Thanks!

If these have been sent out, I have still not received mine either in email, or in a code in the Redeem Code section of the market, or as a bonus applied to my G1C balance.

Woah, didn't expect Tier 1, but thank you!

There have been lots of posts about the ongoing engine upgrade. The latest news is here: https://www.gamersfirst.com/apb/news/2019/3/22/end-of-first-quarter-review

Ah, now that the "scoring" is out, I'm happy with that! So long as it's not just "whoever used Eyepop's script first wins!" I don't feel nearly so bad for posting it xD Thanks for the fun ARG! I actually find myself looking forward to RIOT without actually knowing much about it or being into BR games!

I see that in the Discord my code has had the opposite effect that I expected. I apologize if posting the code ruined the fun for anybody.

Log in, go into the drafts folder, and send the email. You then get an email with the code.

So now that that's out... how are they going to know who to reward with it? xD Would be really annoying if people who worked hard the whole time don't get the "top tier" reward. We're all "standing on the shoulders of giants" here.

For those wondering, the brute-force script I posted gets the answer in less than an hour. I was not sitting at my PC to see how far it was before it found the answer.

Have built a script to brute-force the password with the letters from the spectragraph // ==UserScript== // @name New Userscript // @namespace http://tampermonkey.net/ // @version 0.1 // @description try to take over the world! // @author You // @match https://www.redhillinstitute.com/login/ // @grant GM_addStyle // ==/UserScript== var run = false; var timeout = 10; var block1 = ['W','E','C','N','T','D','O','H','I','S','A','L','R','X','J','P','G','V','Y']; var zNode = document.createElement ('div'); zNode.innerHTML = '<button id="myButton" type="button">' + 'For Pete\'s sake, don\'t click me!</button>' ; zNode.setAttribute ('id', 'myContainer'); document.body.appendChild (zNode); //--- Activate the newly added button. document.getElementById ("myButton").addEventListener ( "click", ButtonClickAction, false ); function ButtonClickAction (zEvent) { /*--- For our dummy action, we'll just add a line of text to the top of the screen. */ if (run == true){ run = false; }else{ run = true; onStart(); } } function attempt(password){ let username = document.getElementById('username'); if (username){ username.value= 'apartridge'; let passwordform = document.getElementById('password'); if (passwordform){ passwordform.value = password; console.log(password); document.getElementById('submit_login').click(); } } } //--- Style our newly added elements using CSS. GM_addStyle ( ` #myContainer { position: absolute; top: 0; left: 0; font-size: 20px; background: orange; border: 3px outset black; margin: 5px; opacity: 0.9; z-index: 1100; padding: 5px 20px; } #myButton { cursor: pointer; } #myContainer p { color: red; background: white; } ` ); function RecursiveGuy(outputstring, depth, inputdepth){ setTimeout(function(){ var outputstrings = []; block1.forEach(function(entry){ if (!run) {return;} outputstrings.push(outputstring + entry); }); if (depth + 1 < inputdepth){ outputstrings.forEach(function(entry){ if (!run) {return;} RecursiveGuy(entry, depth+1, inputdepth); }); } outputstrings.forEach(function(entry){ if (!run) {return;} attempt(entry); }); },timeout); timeout += 300; } function onStart() { 'use strict'; let username = document.getElementById('username'); let passwordform = document.getElementById('password'); if (username && passwordform && run){ RecursiveGuy('',0,8); } console.log('Did it'); } onStart(); Will report back if it comes up with anything.

Physics. Or magnets, one or the other.

All numbers you see of "estimated total APB owners" aren't actually owners, it's people who have booted up the game once. For a f2p game, there's no investment there, and so lots of people boot the game, immediately decide they don't like it, and never do so again. And the actual number for that stat is 5,874,946. Nice. But, I object to your assertion that there is a flaw in my previous statement. You said that these people have created 20 accounts, cheated on them, and been caught on them. These are people dedicated to playing this game. The likelihood that they're going to be part of the active population at the start of APB's revival is really high. Do I think that 10% of current users have cheated at this game? That sounds like a really high number, and I don't really want to believe it. I'd personally put it at ~5%. There's probably a couple cheaters for every full Fight Club instance. But to answer the question: the cheaters are in your games, if you're playing against high-rank golds. If you're a bronze, you probably don't run into them much.

Let's assume, for giggles, that half the bans are false. Leaves us 8.5k bans. Let's assume... a third of those people are on Jericho. 2.83k bans. Let's assume 20 accounts banned per individual hacker. Leaves you more than 100 hackers on Jericho, with plenty of wiggle room. Which means you're looking at ~10% of players being hackers. Sounds like we need anticheat.

Perhaps you don't realize, but the game has about 1k activish users on Jericho. If you're going to admit that the majority of FF bans were legit, then that ratio definitely means that having anti-cheat is a necessity.

I think that the OSCAR is too good at all the things it does for the number of things it does: trades with shotties in cqc, trades with NTECs in mid range. For a jack-of-all-trades, it does them too well. Same problem I have with the NTEC, actually. I feel we need more specialization in these guns, or if they're going to remain good at so many things, they should only be as good at them as, say, the STAR (the most jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none gun in the game).