Fortune Runner

you forgot to mention in a day and age of free to play games , and with how APB lacks content compared to other games , not to mention the major problems with APB including but not limited to : bugs , gun reworking , phasing and matchmaking , car physics of handling and car windows unbreakable , that not only wold new people not pay to play here , but us players here wouldn't either so it would absolutely kill APB No thank you

its a grenade that has a timer , unless its a perc which explodes on contact of something. low yield allows 3 to be carried the rest are 2 grenades. it hardly unbalances the game for players to die by a frag grenade that you want to nerf. if you die by it when it must be timed , then don't blame the grenade for you standing there. I mean what the heck were you looking at then? butterflies? by the way here is my list of how i die by golds throwing grenades at me number one reason by far : me driving at opponents. ( pretty much anyone dies this way by a grenade ) number two : me taking cover and a grenade gets used on me. ( pretty much this way for anyone as well ) number three : if I'm dumb and hurt myself with my own grenade somehow number four : cant think of any other way I die from them. so no thank you to nerfing grenades

I know of 3 to 5 people not including myself waiting to play when Fallen Earth returns who do not post on the forums. We are waiting patiently.

I thought it could be that its done by some people on Jericho lately. This gave em an idea but its not a good one : if someone happens to make a video how to do it from a screenshot of yours and then you imitate what is in the video. i believe it can work since we all have premium and as long as the video is done slow and clear to view then you could copy their style and make your own it would still be easier to have someone make it for you - its not easy to make symbols or we all would be doing it - but if someone makes you a tutorial from a screenshot of yours thenit may work as an option for someone from Jericho to help as well.. good luck!

call me crazy but i actually do. the rush of trying to get there before ops and/or tying them down for team members to get the job done is a bit exhilarating. hmm i guess that falls under adrenaline junkie.

they may need to know what type of symbol you are looking for. military? anime ? a new symbol for your clan ? someone may know how to do something but be hesitant from not knowing details. good luck !

doesn't that imply you are done talking about the atac which is what this thread is about? What is there to say then? seems like you didnt read your own post , which is what i went by on the matter of any discussing atac more , which you implied that discussion of atac is over and done. and as i said , if you want to discuss the ntec discussions we had more then message me. this thread is not for it.

personally i believe any way of making income is good for apb including premium. as for new rewards to be added to premium i do not know what could be done for that.

if someone doesn't agree with you based off of their opinion then they down vote you and i see you have a few posts with multiple down votes on posts now that you pointed that out. . that's not reporting either though. Also if you actually thought a little about what I did say , you would know it is valid for Little Orbit to gather data from testing to make better adjustments for gun balancing , rather than trying to find ways to insult again. Instead you tried to twist words to say its on me to provide any of that to you to dodge what i said about it so that you could argue against it , which you did repeatedly. and how does Little Orbit gathering data = me having to provide you with their data again? that's their data they gathered as i said numerous times. i never claimed anything on how I used the data , which i never said i used like you suggested. i said Little Orbit gathered data with testing and used what they had for gun balancing. I also said if you didn't like the results to go make a thread asking for retesting and that i wouldn't mind. and then there's you assuming I'm upset read into it what you will , but that's coming from you not me. I already said I'm not so assume what you want then. for you to think you know how people feel or read minds etc. is a bit much. i do like to clear up misunderstandings though , which is why I'm willing to discus this with you since you keep replying. please just stop assuming things about me though. its kind of creepy of you. if you wish to keep discussing this pm me. this thread isnt for it and id rather talk about this thread's topic instead. there was multiple testing districts for gun balancing , and i believe the free for all enforcer vs crim district may of been one as well. ( that was so much fun!!! ) I do not recall if Little Orbit also used data gathered from mission districts , but it would not be surprising if they used that as a base data standard. extensive testing is why i keep saying the community needs to be involved in testing to gather data , for Little Orbit to have more accurate data to use. if people do not vote do they have the right to complain over who won? shouldn't they of voted? if people do not test do they have the right to complain over the results? shouldn't they of helped with testing? i do not recall if any more gun testing is expected soonish but we do need more testing done and adjustments made. since some believe the atac needs adjustments i want to test it too with everyone. I can only hope as many as possible , if not everyone in the community , helps with the testing to gather data for gun balancing. with phasing expected to come , the gun balancing will be needed as well for more fair game play.

gun testing by players making a gun go bang and the server gathering input data is not the same as peoples opinions. sorry flaws you are a bit wrong on that part since its not based on what people think but performance numbers by the server itself. If you don't like the ntec results make a new suggestion thread and call for retesting. I already said i would welcome it and would go do more testing. I have been saying the same thing the whole time. The data showed the ntec needed change so Little Orbit changed it. and no im not even upset in the slightest but you name calling people what seems like most of your posts on this thread... yeah. reporting you? who needs to when Little Orbit reads the threads. reporting you didn't even cross my mind. please stop assuming things with paranoia like this. not sure about anything? anyone can be sure and still be wrong. we are only human and these things happen. once again if you dont like what the data showed and how Little Orbit made decisions on it , make a new threads in the suggestions and specifically call for retesting. but me saying that companies rely on data to make decisions is pretty much common sense to do rather than a blind leap. decisions a person can make is based on experience data gathered and what would be preferred for an ideal solution. you do understand this is not G1 who was here for years don't you? Little Orbit made public calls for testing because they needed to gather data , and you still have not answered if you went in to test or not but with how you keep dodging that i suspect no. playing for years does not equal anything in the testing if you don't go in to help gather data. that's only on you then if you didn't. If you don't like the ntec results make a new suggestion thread and call for retesting. I already said i would welcome it and would go do more testing. in the meantime THIS IS THE ATAC THREAD and i do not believe it needs to be nerfed and have not had an unfair battle killing people who use it. the atac seems fine to me but that's just an opinion of mine. if you would like to do some testing then say so , and if you believe the atac needs changing or not say so. its what this thread is about. as for me I wouldn't mind doing testing on the atac to gather data for Little Orbit so that they have more information to gun balance with.

name something in life for any company that does not rely on data for important decisions. The data received is always relevant. and yes with how you are dragging this on it is you throwing a fit. not to mention you accused people of whining on page 4 long before I posted anything on that and that was only a post ago after you kept on about the ntec on a thread about the atac. you do realize you've been off topic for quite some time now don't you? not my fault if you don't accept that the data showed Little Orbit information and that they made changes from it in the direction they did. I said numerous times Little Orbit did the balancing on the data received. No idea why you cant comprehend English as you suggested. Also said about the community doing the testing to gather data , which is where the data came from. You never did answer if you helped on that or not but with how I brought it up multiple times , you are making it sound like you didn't help with data gathering and are only complaining that changes were made with no effort given to contribute. You still haven't made a suggestion thread on the ntec and are still here on the ATAC thread instead. there's been gun testing for quite a few times. do you not know anything about it at all? your opinion is the ntec didn't break the cqc , and others said it did . both would be considered opinions by the opposite side of that discussion. as for the data , Little Orbit is known for announcing gun testing and the data they received is what they went with. and yet again , if anyone has a problem with that they should make a suggestion thread , and to detail that suggestion should be to retest the ntec. id be game for testing again to make sure the data is accurate. wouldn't bother me at all. the atac doesn't feel like it to me ( what you posted )whether being used against me or if i was using one. just an opinion on the atac. a gun test will be more beneficial than opinions though wouldn't it? its kinda obvious i prefer for real factual data to be used for gun balancing rather than community opinions. otherwise it like talking about personal preferences about pineapple on pizza or not. ( you know who you are lol ) any company in the real world rely on data gathered for proper choices to be made. so once again , the community needs to be involved in the gun testing.

still not what i said. you are still implying that I called for the nerf even though i said the data showed it dominated cqc. did I ever say a personal opinion of nerfing the ntec? I also never once said anything about ntec today and cqc which is what you mentioned earlier saying I did about today's cqc , when i did not. ( which is what i commented on in reply to you about your confusion of past vs now ) did you help with testing that data? did you suggest to retest the ntec data since you are implying you want to revert it? I put that for a reason. if anyone doesn't help with the data testing , then they don't really have room to complain , when Little Orbit already said in the past they need the community's help on testing. the data is completely relevant to choices made for any changes. instead of throwing a fit , go make a suggestion for retesting the ntec. and once again the topic is about the atac not the ntec . I already repeated again I do not believe the atac needs a nerf , so do please stay on topic on if you believe the atac needs a nerf or not.

no that is what you did to me and i mentioned you did that lol * pats on head * like i said again and again , the data Little Orbit went by said the ntec needed a change from cqc being dominated so they changed it. the past already happened. how is that losing an argument by me only mentioning that data and what they changed? you said it didn't dominate cqc but the data they used said otherwise so they changed it. its a rhetorical question. no need to answer since it already happened. talking about me is talking about me yet i never said anything about opinions on what i thought about it , but that they changed it from the data saying they needed to. ntec is supposed to kill up to 70 away that's fine but cqc it was never meant to dominate so they changed it from the data so that it didn't do that in cqc. i suppose I have to word things exactly since you couldn't understand that the first time that i was referring to cqc and why they changed it and how the wording could be mistaken even though i was talking about the cqc data over and over. clearly how i worded it can be mistaken. ntec was not meant for cqc. of course people complained. and since the data said it needed a change then Little Orbit did so. you three can complain but in the end the ntec needed to be rebalanced because of the data , how it dominated cqc , cqc and how it wasn't supposed to do that role like that. thats what made it a crutch gun. since when is it fun to use any unfair way to win unless the person is involved doesn't like fair play for the community's enjoyment to begin with? ( some of which flat out use a cheat to win ) as for the atac ( the topic of this thread ) I said I do not believe it needs a nerf because it seems fine ( its been used a lot against me lately ) and that the pmg I am not sure about because of the high lag on the servers from more people playing. Little Orbit has made it clear they need data on gun balancing changes so of course I expect the community to help with gathering data and if someone didn't , then you who did not should look to yourselves for being unhappy.

Ive talked about the nerf (the past) and how the data said they should change it so they did. you posted this about today instead of the past. *facepalm* sure must be me even though you mixed it up. I referenced how they used the data. I never said anything else did I ? a bit judgemental there on your part. by all means blame me for what Little Orbit did with the data the received.

@Kevkof thank you so much for that. firefox ate my bookmarks again a few months ago so i lost a lot of everything bookmarky. so many recipes gone. thank you again.

and yet again the ntec was changed to balance it because it failed at being balanced - it wasn't supposed to cqc like that since its not its field yet it did. why you keep talking about the present when its the past that was changed to the present to fix balancing is beyond anyone. like i said. its a fact about the changers and why. you can stop now. like seriously. stop. its done.

if it is from the Little Orbit advanced launcher page directly then yes it is fine. can I have a link please i do not have it bookmarked sorry.

you seem to misunderstand the present with the past and why it was changed. you can stop now please.

which is why the ntec was changed. fact. now its more balanced as it should be.

questions are not assumptions but questions. tsk tsk nope i said it how i said it for a reason. just like the gun changes happened for a reason. you seem to be veering off too far. like i said ntec wasnt supposed to be able to dominate at cqc and was unbalanced from it so they changed it. you wanting those features back that made the ntec a crutch only shows that you don't truly care about gun balancing.

thinks most of the players are on the forums? thinks a gun that is used in a way for other guns and being too versatile/too unbalanced is balanced? says doent use crutch yet wants the features that made it crutch guns which is why changes were made? last argument against me is actually contradicting. the data showed otherwise. arguing about wanting ntec changes reversed on an atac thread? *facepalm* as for me I do not own an atac and I play against it fine. I personally see no issues with it needing a change just as i already posted and why i believe that.

it would be nice if more if not all of it was able to be seen through. who can miss an eye sore like that anyways? lol

You posted a lot of what was talked about by some yet the number one complaint was always the ntec. There's a reason why it was known as a crutch gun for mostly all situations and why Little Orbit changed it. now you guys don't have that ntec being too out of balance so you complain about another gun that seems fine ( still a decent chance to lose with an atac ) agreed.

And yet the number one complaint back then by most of APB players was exactly that