Jump to content

speee

Members
  • Content Count

    130
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

88 Excellent

About speee

  • Rank
    THE DEATH DEALER

Recent Profile Visitors

759 profile views
  1. I think you are posing interesting questions. Asymmetry and random factors in competitive games is not necessarily a bad thing. We can usually mitigate the issues that these factors would introduce by increasing our sample size. Lets say we estimate based on skill rankings that team A has a 80% chance to win and team B has a 20% chance. If both teams play against each other for 5 matches, theoretically team A would win 4 of the 5 matches. However, in practice it might be the case that team B defies the odds and wins all 5 matches. If we can increase our sample size to a larger number such as 100, we can decrease the overall effect of the random factors, which would then favor team A (the better team). The chance of team B taking the win is still always there. But the idea is that there will never be a perfect game. The only way to get around imbalances in a competitive environment is to keep playing the game until enough matches have been played to clearly declare a winner. There is a good presentation given by Richard Garfield here which I would recommend. Also check out this video if you want something a bit more succinct.
  2. Screw the brand, it has a bad reputation. This is good news all around. Hopefully LO can make it happen.
  3. I don't care to discuss specifics about each gun change. But in general, every gun should reward good aim. What is the alternative philosophy? Shotguns are wildly inconsistent and NFAS is a gun that kills way too fast with little requirement from the player, for example. Guns do need to be changed and reworked. Most people tend to use the guns that are most effective. Therefore, adding new guns to the mix will just create more problems.
  4. Looks like we are heading in the right direction with the balance changes. Also, the EMP grenade is an interesting angle to balancing the car gameplay meta.
  5. If you are unable to give LO a few years more to work out the engine upgrade, then you are just an impatient pleasant fellow. I think it is time we see the bigger picture and stop whining about LO trying to make APB better for everyone. RIOT is just a small step in the right direction for the game. You will see soon enough.
  6. They did. Also, Maniac was an awesome series.
  7. Before RIOT mode, I thought the game was surely going to die. I am glad you guys have your priorities straight and released RIOT mode in a timely manner. I think now players will see the true potential of APB. Also, take your time with the engine upgrade. I do not mind waiting a few more years for it. Just make APB the best it can be. Thank you LO!
  8. I think its fine. Honestly, who wouldn't mind waiting another few years for the engine?
  9. still 120ms from a player who usually gets 50. what the hell is going on? thanks
  10. I cannot understand what is so difficult about setting a date later than expected, so you can either be ahead of schedule and impress us, or at the worst, be on schedule. This sort of delaying just makes everyone upset. Or just give us nothing and release it when its ready.
  11. As it is, if someone plays the game with a group of 4 high threat players, the opposition is little to none. There is definitely negative affects by not readying up in an action district. There is almost no purpose to be doing any of the activities in the action district e.g. ram raiding. And this is really just a flaw of the game itself. Lots of ideas the original developers had but did not flesh out. The reality is, these "protesters" are not doing any of those activities anyways. I am not directly blaming them for the issues the game has. I think the game does need to be fixed in many areas. But deciding to not ready up only compounds those issues.
×
×
  • Create New...