Jump to content
Forum rules

RovingFox

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    40

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by RovingFox

  8. Posted

    I personally do not agree in mixing high skilled players with low skilled players, even if the team is balanced. For low skill ones its crap cuz he hardly has any 1v1 chance against anyone resulting in unsatisfying gameplay. And the high skill ones will whine about their crap team member and how he is the biggest noob. I believe this suggestion might bring even more toxicity.

  9. Posted · Edited by RovingFox

    As I said before, just open conflict is not the answer, it will become a massacre from the perspective of low skill player. Also its not recommended to hurt that player base because that player base its mostly made of new players. You need those if you want to revive the game. That is why I suggested another type of matchmaking when you join the district.

  10. Posted

    19 minutes ago, YooD said:

    the thought is correct. there is a discrepancy between the title of the topic and the specified application.

    Thank you for the observation, I hope its more clear now.

  11. Posted · Edited by RovingFox

    I personally have no problem with open conflict but that is because I can handle the majority of the player base. But I think you guys over estimate a low silver and underestimate a high gold. Open conflict will be a massacre.

  12. Posted

    2 minutes ago, MurkTheMerc said:

    Is English not your native language because the system you're asking is pretty much what I said. How you said it, is how the mechanics would or should work.

    Threat is distributed weekly, based on the active population of that week, so if the Gold percentile is 15 and the population is 100, then the top 15 players of that week will be Gold. "Might actually hurt it", is a big ways off considering how Matt explained in the Discord he visits often, after me asking it, it would be a complete involvement of that action districts populations, not just those in ONE instance.

    Like you said your self, you're not very familiar with how threat works but you're saying your own idea would hurt the game?

    I understood your suggestion, no, english is not my native language (if it matters anyway), no, this is not what I am suggesting,

  13. Posted · Edited by RovingFox

    16 minutes ago, MurkTheMerc said:

    Is what you're asking for is a percentile?

    I've thought over the past year our threat should honestly be distributed weekly based on an active population percentile. Anyone not matched with a threat yet, could just play among themselves with unthreated players or fill the gap for backup when needed.

     

    This way people know if they're, say Gold, they're at the top of the chain in that server and not just an easy Gold obtained.

     

    I don't see the link between my suggestion and maintaining the threat percentages. Regardless, I don't see how this improves matchmaking. Might actually hurt it, depending on how it is implemented. Scratch that. It makes a nice visual effect but no matchmaking effect.

  14. Posted

    1 hour ago, MurkTheMerc said:

    Matt Scott already said they plan to implement phasing for missions. You ready up in a action district and you pretty much are readying up against the entire population of that action district. i.e, you're in Financial, you ready up, you're readied up against every person in every Financial.

    He said this more than likely will not happen till 3.5

    Yes, I know they are planning to add phasing, and I can't wait for it, but it will require a lot of work. I am hoping for my suggestion to fit somewhere between this pile of crap and our salvation. A quick fix and easy fix until we get a better matchmaking.

  16. Posted · Edited by RovingFox

    On 7/7/2018 at 3:38 AM, cyral said:

    RovingFox, I've been a very loud voice in asking the same thing you just did for right at 6 months now.... the advanced options, at this point in APB's time, will not change... theirs too freaking many pussies here who need it in order to keep their kill count high as FUCK... while very low skilled players constantly get screwed... all's these certified idiots will tell you is this " quit complaining and get good" I do tell the same idiots the same thing.... but I'm more hostile on that subject... my favorite is I call em coward as hoes who abuse the advanced district selections.... and to the idiot's  that want or need 2 play with "friends" they need 2 use the "OPEN CONFLICT " Districts  as their turf.. not the Bronze Match Maker On Districts...

    Yep, its a requirement to be on any forums: whine like there is no tomorrow. But I'm looking forward to flaws in my suggestion.

  17. Posted

    1 minute ago, NecrophileChick said:

    lol ok, but you have to admit that this basically equals to a free district choice, if you have enough friends on the list. Especially because APB friendship is not necessarily symmetric, i.e. you can add whoever you want without them even noticing.

    Yes in a way is free district and in case it is abused they could change from the current "stalker" like friend system to a one that requires both to accept. I don't say the system I'm proposing is perfect, doubt there is a perfect system except for the phasing one which requires a lot of work. But it sounds better and less abusive then the current one that contains dethreaters and silver districts filled with golds.

     

  18. Posted

    3 minutes ago, NecrophileChick said:

    Problem:

     

     

    > You're gold.

    > Your friend's not.

    > GL joining the same district without the Advanced tab.

    Join your friend from Group&Friends tab.

  19. Posted

    8 minutes ago, Slickmund said:

    Dealing with customer support is much like clearing a growing elephants droppings on a daily basis. It is not a whole lot of fun to do, though the tidyness of having cleaned the join can be somewhat satisfying of course. But as you are swinging those lumps on a weekly basis, you will notice it will become more by the day, it doesnt get any more fun to deal with and there is no end to it in the long run. Please consider this when bashing on customer support, or take a job at a zoo to be able to relate more to the issue they are dealing with.

    In any business, dealing with clients it's like cleaning droppings.

  23. Posted

    5 hours ago, NecrophileChick said:

    No, not just like that. You should be able to group up with whoever you want to. A solid matchmaking strategy should ensure fairness even while dealing with teams of mixed skill level.

     

    I am not sure to what you are referring but I don't see a problem to why not to play with whomever you want.

  24. Posted · Edited by RovingFox

    Regarding the current matchmaking issue. Would it be a good idea to remove the Advance tab in district selection and let the game choose a district for you with people of equal threat?

     

     

    I am not very familiar with how the threat level works but from what I know, there is a number behind that color(a skill number, MMR). The game can use that to put you in a district with equal or similar skilled players. And if that's not enough it could take into account even district pop or the gap between the lowest skilled player in that district and the highest.

     

     

    Edit: Friends can still join each other through the Group&Friend tab.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
×
×
  • Create New...