Jump to content
Forum rules

Fortune Runner

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    4844

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Fortune Runner

  1. Posted · Edited by Fortune Runner

    53 minutes ago, IndustrialCat said:

    Believe it or not that actually would be better.

     

    It'll prevent freeloaders from joining.

     

    Attract people with zero knowledge of the game.

     

    And provide financial support to LO.

    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

  2. Posted

    On 5/22/2020 at 4:26 AM, Resine said:

    Yes, that forums are filled with low skill players that would be in trouble if they couldn't miss their grenades by 5 meters to kill their opponents anymore.

     

    What a noob that Resine has to be, to expect of people to actually aim their nades, such an outrageous idea. Let's downvote, together with our Silver Brothers in arms we can protect our ways.

     

    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

  3. Posted

    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.

     

    Merged.

     

    On 5/25/2020 at 1:32 AM, Jacksporrow9 said:

    They should sell the game back to the real maker of it

    Impossible. RTW went bankrupt from major mismanagement and no longer exists.

    And as a player of both APB and Fallen Earth , I can honestly say that APB has never been in better hands.

     

    I suggested it o a different thread  that if Little Orbit needs funding for  Fallen Earth to start a kickstarter or something for Fallen Earth since it is a complete rebuild / new game being made to fix  Fallen Earth.

    Perfectly valid an d honest to do so because of it.

     @MattScott What is your opinion boss ?

  4. Posted

    1 hour ago, Byona said:

    @Fortune Runner I want my ingame face as a symbol 😅

    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!

    • Like 1

  5. Posted

    On 5/22/2020 at 1:52 PM, CookiePuss said:

    I too like having a cisco blown up, then racing to another cisco thats pre damaged to the point of smoking, have the cisco blown up, race to the next pre damaged one etc etc etc

    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.

    • Thanks 2

  7. Posted

    1 hour ago, Abduct / Devote said:

    I also did talk about the ATAC and how I think it's fine currently, and doing what it was designed to do, therefore yay, it's balanced as far as I can see. Cool good talk!

     

    27 minutes ago, Abduct / Devote said:

    That's what I thought, you didn't read anything

    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.

     

  10. Posted

    2 hours ago, Abduct / Devote said:

     

    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.

    2 hours ago, CookiePuss said:

    Im not sure what you mean by "data".

    Is there some metric that can be used to see if a mid ranged weapon is too effective inside of 10m?
     

    I don't think LO employees, for the most part, play much APB.*

    So all that leaves is listening to player feedback and hoping you've chosen the correct path.

     

     

     

    *This is an assumption, and only that

    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.

     

     

    54 minutes ago, CookiePuss said:

    This this a thousand time this.

    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.

     

     

  11. Posted

    5 hours ago, Flaws said:

     

    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.

     

    11 minutes ago, Abduct / Devote said:

     

    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.

     

    21 minutes ago, Abduct / Devote said:

    Keep talkin data, why don't you source this? You cry "data data" but I haven't seen any to back these claims up. Leme guess you can't see because the company isn't supposed to share them? Imagine having blind faith in something you have no clue about. 

     

    I have "tested" the data for them for years, why is my input not taken? Oh because that's how you all roll. 

    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.

     

  12. Posted

    1 hour ago, Abduct / Devote said:

    You have stated that the data showed it should be nerfed so therefore it should be nerfed no? Your words not mine.

    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.

    1 hour ago, Abduct / Devote said:

    You said I should stop whining it's now "balanced" implies you agree. That's a fact. So yes, you DID tell us your personal opinion. Thanks gg this was a fun argument about how you finally realized how to come full circle and realize how silly your lil argument was. Maybe next time you can learn to type regular English. 

    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.

     

     

    1 hour ago, Flaws said:

     

     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.

    1 hour ago, Flaws said:

    Now let me explain why the ATAC needs a nerf because apparently that's also beyond people here.

    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.

     

     

     

     

    • Like 1

  13. Posted

    1 minute ago, Abduct / Devote said:

    You're really set on this "data" so much that you have such blind faith in it. Amazing. So tell me how the Ntec "dominated" CQC? You sure you don't mean "was able to have a fighting chance if the enemy misplayed?" Because that was the reality. In CQC, the Ntec did not "dominate" anything (nor does it now). I am talking past tense because we're talking prior to nerf no? That's the whole reason I had past tense, which you wanted to call me out for. The Ntec required you to play perfectly in CQC to have a fighting chance on a CQC weapon like the OCA. OCA would win 8/10 fights if I had to estimate based on personal experience, among 2 similar skill leveled players. The Ntec required a lot more skill than the OCA too. 

     

    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?

    11 minutes ago, Fortune Runner said:

    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.

    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.

  14. Posted

    4 hours ago, Abduct / Devote said:

    Yeah, you really do lack understanding, because you're swapping the topic to past or present now since you lost the argument. Typical 🙂 

    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.

    4 hours ago, RespectThis said:

    He isn't just talking about you. He talking about players like yourself.

    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.

    4 hours ago, Flaws said:

    Basically, the whole reason the N-TEC was so complained about was the skill gap and players who are better playing it good enough to outskill silvers who can't hit the broad side of a barn with an OCA in CQC

    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.

  15. Posted · Edited by Fortune Runner

    23 hours ago, Abduct / Devote said:

    No, they don't struggle

    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*

     

    5 hours ago, Abduct / Devote said:

    Are you that incompetent to understand past/present yourself?

    sure must be me even though you mixed it up.

     

    2 hours ago, Flaws said:

    No offense, mate. But its exactly thanks to people like you on the forums that weapon balancing has taken such an insane downfall

    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.

  17. Posted

    2 hours ago, Abduct / Devote said:

     

    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.

     

    • Like 1

  18. Posted · Edited by Fortune Runner

    7 hours ago, Kirsikka said:

    Uhm, hello 😄

    I thought about starting to play the game again and wondered if its still allowed to use the advanced launcher >_<

    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.

  21. Posted

    2 hours ago, RespectThis said:

    You seem to make strange assumptions. 

    questions are not assumptions but questions. tsk tsk

     

    2 hours ago, RespectThis said:

    "thinks a gun that is versatile is balanced"

    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.

  22. Posted

    5 hours ago, RespectThis said:

     

     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.

     

  24. Posted

    2 hours ago, RespectThis said:

     

    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 )

    4 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

    Any weapon that got even remotely close to how powerful or versatile the NTEC was got nerfed. The problem is you can buff all the weapons you want, and it'll lead to worse gameplay. APB was never made to have this fast of TTK with weapons. Buffing them to do just that would be worse than making a handful of nerfs, buffing weaker weapons, and tweaking out the problems from there. Only buffing weapons "feels good" but ignores some of the core issues with doing so in APB and with game balance. You can't power-creep yourself to a balanced state.

    agreed.

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...