Ashika
-
Content Count
60 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Ashika
-
-
Wanna be sure about cheaters?
Demand LO to add after-match stats to the report, like DICE does. Bullets fired, hit %.
Demand LO to to add chat command like "/stat playerxxx" which will show stats for missions played after login (join district) and last mission played - W/L, K/D, shots fired and hit %.
It will not save from smart cheater, but ... do you see all those super-skilled players which are staying with 566 and overshoot moving people with OCA+CJ3 on 5m distance? I saw them ... a lot ...
-
Mission impossible
Lot of toxic players, insulting each other during and after the missions. Don't know who are all those kids/idiots/etc but anyone will be tired looking on this sore ego. The P2W opinions is also going from this - districts are full of screams like "i'm god player and loosing only because of P2W/Teammates/Moon phase" ... noone is trying to teach newcomers, just insulting them, leaving with newcomers, etc... Add here dethreatesrs trying to cares their overblown egos, powder all this with aimboters and you will obtain very nice picture of the game. I really wonder when see someone new.
-
Oh, really ... it's not about rewards at all. It didn't work in the past and will not work now. Teams of R255 golds on bronze servers does not care about rewards, they are coming for easy wins.
-
1
-
-
On 10/31/2018 at 1:49 AM, Zvitatzki said:problem is these low or high servers are mostly underpopulated
as much i play this game already years ago im just a poor bronze player but i join other districts because of the higher player population
many servers have just like 4-8 ppl while other have 40 ofc i join the 40x server
the same may count to many other players as they want fun and action in the city not boredom silence
Sorry, but for sure: no, that's not the problem.
There are 2 reasons for current state:1. Silver servers are FULL of cheating kids. Really - after all those years I know how to find cheating players. And as the result of it - legit players de-threat and are going to bronze.
2. Toxic players which are "going for fun", they don't want to play hard, so they also de-threat and we have R255 Gold teams in bronze servers. -
The difference is that activity in last stage is totally different from previous stages. All stages are attack-defense when final is competition. So on my point of view the right is:
stage 1 - team a successfully breaks into obj
stage 2 - team a successfully burns a vehicle obj
stage 3 - team a successfully raids an objective
stage 4 (final) - team a successfully delivers loot and win.
as right attack defense.
Since what we see now:
stage 1: arson
stage 2: arson
stage 3: arson
stage 4: shoot-out ...
and I see a lot of situations when players even don't protect cars/buildings but just wait for final.
-
But lost team always has worse money and standing points. Just look on it from attacking side point of view (and take to consideration that it's always harder to attack then defend): they won all points except final stage and then have 2 times less reward. Attacking side must win ALL stages (including final) when defending side only ONE (any step or final) ... looks not fair and not balanced.20 hours ago, MrsHappyPenguin said:I see it as a chance for both teams to earn better rewards at the end of the match. It's not balanced from a win/lose perspective, but mission outcome has little affect on threat, and G1 did adjust the win/lose rewards so they're not as harsh to the losing team.
-
(sorry for post above - it's send by lag and I can't edit/delete it)
All I'm asking for is to give me possibility to not enter password every time I load the game or suddenly disconnect from the server. It's easy, I know several ways how to do it securely and I'm sure LO developers also know all them. I don't want LO to change password policy, force user to save the password, care about all security holes in this world or save the planet. Just OPTION (small checkbox, disabled by default) :
[X] Save password.
that's all.
If you have steam link, or brothers/sisters/cats/cockroaches using your comp - do not check it. It's easy. All I want to have is the possibility to not enter password every time. It's secure and easy to implement. -
How the option "save password" can lead to
11 hours ago, VickyFox said:You are online security aware but find long secure passwords an inconvenience...?
Sorry but there are player are underage and probably have siblings who also play, and I'm 100% certain that if passwords could be saved then it's going to throw up complications with people playing on other's account.
I can be cynical but I don't think anyone can say "no, this categorically won't happen".
While more scams, hacking and account theft could happen and it wouldn't be my problem. I know it would be more tickets to customer support and possibly more unnecessary forum posts asking for help.
If you want convenience then you have Steam account linking.
Sorry but security and convenience just do not go hand in hand in most aspects of life.
How the option "save password" can lead to
11 hours ago, VickyFox said:You are online security aware but find long secure passwords an inconvenience...?
Sorry but there are player are underage and probably have siblings who also play, and I'm 100% certain that if passwords could be saved then it's going to throw up complications with people playing on other's account.
I can be cynical but I don't think anyone can say "no, this categorically won't happen".
While more scams, hacking and account theft could happen and it wouldn't be my problem. I know it would be more tickets to customer support and possibly more unnecessary forum posts asking for help.
If you want convenience then you have Steam account linking.
Sorry but security and convenience just do not go hand in hand in most aspects of life.
-
1 hour ago, BXNNXD said:i don’t understand
if you remove the final stage, then whatever stage the mission ends on will become the final stage and it won’t matter - missions might as well just be one stage long and whoever wins wins
the final stage is intended as a balancing factor, since technically (on paper) neither team has the advantage of attacking/defending
Wrong
Final stage means that defending team lost all previous points and attacking has advantage and won all previous attacks, and now they also need to win the final competition. WHY?
Removing final stage is removing this competition, and moving mission to pure attack-defense. Defending team has a lot of changes to stop attackers but if they failed ALL previous stages they must loose! They should not to go to last stage, win only it and win the mission, what's the logic? In this case defenders don't have the real stimulus to make the effort and defend the points, can just wait the final stage and that's all.
And to save the drive of final stages - the new "competition" mission type are to be added, with 2 stages : gather all to starting point(s) and then competition phase (vip, keep the item, protect the graffiti, etc ...)
-
I raised this topic several years ago, and also I clearly understand that the chance that it will be changed is low, but anyway ...
What is the meaning of final stage? I played a lot of the missions when defending side just waited for final, not going to the points (yep, we all know what will be the final), also it sounds not logical at all regarding to the mission flow and logic ... no really - try defend some points, or then try to catch/prevent delivery of loot it's logical. But final shoot-out after this, which is really maters - how's related???
Maybe all those final stages are to be split to separate missions - kind of go to point (with no defense just who will come first) and then shoot-out, or break-in (for both teams) and then keep item, or multi-point break-in and then bring to team base ...
... and rework the standard missions to remove the non-logical final stage.
-
8-), trust me - I know what I'm doing ....2 minutes ago, NotZombieBiscuit said:
You shouldn't even have google connected to things. If possible all your accounts should be separate entities.5 minutes ago, Ashika said:+1
I more or less can believe google, but not steam/origin/sony, especially after origin and sony account leaked.
But anyway, copy long and secure password every time I started the game is annoying ... -
+121 minutes ago, NotZombieBiscuit said:Steam linking is less secure. The less cross account connections between your websites/game accounts/platforms the better.
I more or less can believe google, but not steam/origin/sony, especially after origin and sony account leaked.
-
Don't know ... maybe because I created account way before it came to steam ... or even to G1. Or I don't want to link it ...
-
no, really, it's annoying and totally not secure to force player enter password every time. Or copy-paste it from some password manager.
-
Restore russian server to help part of the russian players with high ping: yes
But it's not that topic started wants, and I have the question - how to separate the players? Move them forcibly? For sure no! Let them choose? Most of them will stay ... so what is that all about? -
I don't know how is available weapons list ordered now, but it can be useful to have ability to change positions in the list manually ( drag mostly used up, or sort manually by type whatever is more convenient for player).
-
3
-
-
Yep, you are right .75 and .5 ... anyway it didn't work.2 hours ago, Mightyena said:I thought it was .75 for 1 down and .5 for down back then? Granted, I was perpetually silver back then and now I'm perpetually gold (even though I'm not really good enough to be) so maybe I didn't notice that as much. Shit, nerf rewards to 0 in Bronze districts or make it so that Bronze players have to opt-in to be matched against golds (but can opt-out again any time, so long as they remain bronze). That could help stop it, maybe. Either way, the whole system needs changing -- we just need something in the short term to help for right now, that doesn't piss off people by splitting them from friends.
I think the alternate solution is something like - in Br. server mission always starts with Bronze player, then on backup some Silvers can be added (if there are no free bronze) and only then (if silver is already added and no more free silver) Golds ... so long waiting time for golds can cause to switch district.
But anyway it will endup with mass dethreat. -
7 hours ago, Mightyena said:TBH, I think instead of this they should severely nerf rewards for Gold players playing in Bronze districts. i'm not talking the small amount for golds joining a Silver district or Silvers joining Bronze, but like -- golds joining bronze districts get 75-80% reduces rewards per kill / arrest, as well as on mission finish.
This wouldn't STOP the problem ENTIRELY, especially for people who are gold but not really good enough to play against most other golds (like me lol), but it would make people have to think a serious minute about actually joining it. Added bonuses for joining districts above your rank: if you're bronze and join a Gold district, maybe you can get 75-80% more money and rep per kill / mission? People would still dethreat, but they'd probably dethreat with the purpose of going back in to a high rank district again.
The whole system needs reworking, but I think forcing people out outright could cause some problems with people being forced to split up from friends and could really piss people off.
It's not something new, we saw the reduction quotient of .5 for 1 threat difference and .25 for 2. It didn't work since players came to "farm noob and have fun" really don't care. -
Meanwhile at bronze server - really ... is any difference between instances now? -
Add one more column to after/in-match table - overall shooting accuracy. Why? Just in case, looks like very interesting information ...
-
1
-
-
If do not see something, it does't mean that it's not exist. If you don't see old 30 threat level, it doesn't mean that you really have only 4 levels. Anyway it's kind of elo rating behind and it's only question how to show it.
PS: ex G6 ... how young I was ...
-
21 hours ago, Skillzor said:If you want to fix this problem, all you have to do it's about balancing the districts with three threat districts:
1) Gold district for gold player - A gold player can't join in a silver district.
2) Silver district for silver player - A silver player can join in a gold district, but can't join in a bronze district.
3) Bronze district for bronze/green player (T is included) - A bronze/Green player can join in a silver/gold district.
You will see 2 full gold districts, 2 full silver districts and only one bronze district with 30 Criminal and 30 Enforce. I think.
And you will create more de-threating people. Golds who want to "have fun" will de-threat to silver, then tired silvers will go to bronze, then "fun seekers" also will go to bronze. Exactly what we have right now. And the only solution is to find mathematical/statistical way to calculate threat right, to make dethreat real hard. -
Honestly it's not an bad idea, but It will not work. Since people who knows about it will just keep their threat low.
Historically, as I remember, and I remember it from the beginning, de-threat first was the answer for cheating. Really when you continuously get the same opponents which overshoot your obeya with right perks on 70m+ with stock ntec, having 100% accuracy (and trust me that not because I don't know how to use obeya) you definitely want to have other opponents. I knew a lot of the players 3 yrs ago, including myself, who first dethreated and then left the game, since cheaters also started to dethreat.
I decided to give the game one more chance after read the news from LO, and found it really in sad condition. There is no reason at all to carry about the mission when you can't even evaluate the opponent. No really - bronze 255, most of players are silvers, some of silvers end up missions with 20 to 0 kills, others don't know how to deal with delivery missions, R255 with O-PGL and SMAWS against players who just did lvl 2 perk ... so matchmaking is looking ridiculous since there is no real threat anymore on the servers, and looking to all this I can say that matchmaking by rating looks not worse than the current situation.
Anyway, I have some sport approaches for this problem (did you see that in most sports lowest and highest results are not taken into consideration?) :
app1: Don't take to consideration one-sided matches at all. Only matches with close results by kills and points must affect the rating, at least in case of lowering rating. Something like: "big" win moves you up (not sure), "big" loose don't change anything, close game moves you up and down.
app2: Use k/d rating as base to threat. First of all - SHOW IT! make threat decisions on missions when almost-same K/D rating plays, also check what player kills what player - kills between players with big K/D difference should make no effect. If player doesn't have any kills in mission, don't change threat. Yes K/D doesn't show some details about situations when people win with right tactics, but in most of the cases the game is about kill and then make point. So K/D matters. Or, maybe, (K+A)/D for gunners and snipers.-
1
-
Weapon Balance
in General Discussion Archive
Posted
PMG now has less full damage range than OCA ... where is the logic? You are just killing PMG.