Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

54 Excellent

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. -It does give you a significant advantage, as it brings out the strongest aspect of gunplay in this game, corners. OBIR is a de-factor Corner popping weapon, it is by design (either intentionally or not) 1 of the strongest weapons in the game when you have a solid corner, and even without a corner, your burst potential will damage an ntec user so hard, that even if he wins, he will still be 85. - The problem with those top players is that just like in missions, they go for what is easiest, like the PMG in abington, rather then actually using what's best. they'd get more or less the same results with a FAR, the difference? FAR is a much less accessible weapon due to it being a event, armas and joker store weapon. It should be a regular stock gun, just like the NTEC. Secondly the Misery with CJ3 is stronger then the NTEC, as with the massive buffs it received, you can literally 4 shot people without pausing, and make them 85, then wait around 0.05 secs and shot again, and they are dead. It isn't used as often, because it is much harder to use. And what you just mentioned proved my point, the ntec is simply a tool for its environment, add more cover, cars and better attack spots around the action districts and the NTEC would not be as dominant. -The ntec doesn't excel at long range, it simply can do the job decently well, if it excelled then any scrub would be able to dominate competent long range weapon users. it is a made up fallacy that the NTEC is this "be all end all weapon" for everything and anything. Bringing down the TTK isn't true at all, you can bring down the effective TTK, not the literal TTK. By reducing RNG. The issue that plagues this game the most is its inconsistency, I would rather have longer TTK's, but TTK's that are much more reliable. Secondly, if you are that tagged so often, you need to take more cover and not be as aggressive, if I am able to pull Killstreak 2's out of my patootie in abington with almost any gun extremely often, then it is much more up to the driver, not the car. Secondly, it's a fallacy that you need to buff a lot of guns, as a lot of guns already beat the NTEC in their niches. Even if you disgard their niches, they'll only lose to an NTEC in the NTEC's territory (jack of all trades), and those guns that need buffs against the NTEC specifically, are far and few inbetween and the buffs they need are tiny, and frankly, they shouldn't even be buffed to specifically fight the NTEC, they could just be slighlty buffed outside their niches, which sure, would make them more like "every other gun", however the magic in numbers is that, tiny differences in said numbers can make massive differences. The SWARM is more or less the strongest midrange LMG WHEN you have a corner and defensive opportunities. But it can still do "fine" outside of it's niche. And frankly, this whole "the ntec kills everything" has been blown out of proportions, as true, no gun in the game is as good at being a jack of all trades, but just like that, the NTEC will NEVER win against a competent player that uses a proper "counter", SWARM behind cover, OBIR with QS-ing and popping, NSSW at 30m+ OCA, PMG, CSG, JG etc at 10 -15 M. The ntec shines at it nice 15 - 30 M niche, outside of that it will, mathematically lose towards other more suited weapons. That those weapons are to niche is a fallacy, as they are perfectly able to fight other weapons outside of their intended roles. FC represents the pinnacle of individual skill, it has a direct correlation towards personal performance in missions, not team-based performance mind you, but personal, and all bets are far from off, if they were, there would not be a meta at all, and everyone would just jerk off and use all kinds of weapons over and over. This is frankly my last post on this subject, work started 1 month ago hence why I replied to late, as I could not be asked to do it. I will only respond to this as this one last time, because frankly, now money is on my mind, and the balance of this crap game isn't super important anymore.
  2. My argument just as my logic is flawless in this instance. It is the most balanced weapon, as both those maps prove that, missions prove this, everything points to this. I've stated all the reasons plenty of times before but let me ask you this then, why is it so. that in the top hierachy of players, in terms of skill. They all (except me) think that the OBIR is stronger then the NTEC? It's pretty simple really, the OBIR is stronger then the NTEC, once you get good with it. Because of reverse QSing, and because of it's massive burst damage. I disagree that it is OP, but what you will see in the case of APB, is that everyone will flood the NTEC bandwagon and hate on it, while those that are enlightened, are those that truly understand what beats it. You can look at it like this, NTEC = Easy, can do most things. OBIR = Harder (not hard, but harder then the NTEC), can do most things, even slighlty better then the NTEC, if you are good enough. Besides, what's your proof then? you say that my way of looking at it makes it so that everything else is broken while the ntec is the epitome of balance. What do you say then? Give me 1 reason, too why the NTEC is actually OP, and why you think so. I can assure you, the reason why it seems OP to you is a lack of skill. But, I still want to hear it. I can't belive you'd be so sad enough to actually take one of my quotes, edit it, and then post it to make me look like an idiot, that is the proof that you lost the argument. It has nothing to do with reason, it has to do with what is factually correct, and what's lazy. Nerfing the NTEC is the lazy way to do it.
  3. Name 1 The core of an older game, with slower TTK and overall gameplay. FC is for the "new APB", hence why it works better there, the proof is in the pudding. I deny it being OP, as even you agree with my logic, the gun is not the problem the gun is the Symptom of the Disease that is missions. I keep on giving reasons to prove my point that it's the current "core" (aka missions" of APB that is balanced improperly, and that more pressing issues should be pursued instead, such as nerfing car gameplaying. The other reason why the NTEC should remain untouched, they touch it, chances are it won't be changed back. So even when you consider that "it's currently not the case", it still doesn't change the fact that nerfing the NTEC is technically wrong, as it's simply lazy.
  4. Fightclub is the most raw balanced form of APB as you can get when it comes to pure weapons balance due to the map structure primarily. Sure, is it perfect? Ofc not, but it is the closest thing that we have to an actual testing district that isn't purely terrible. Which is why I primarily used FC as an example to demonstrate that the NTEC is simply the symptom of a disease, that disease is the current state of APB (mostly mapwise). Simply nerfing the NTEC does not solve the issue, as the FAR will take its place and rifles will be even more dominant, and car gameplay will be even stronger. We treated the Symptom, not the Disease. This does not prove that the NTEC is op, it does however point to the fact that missions are simply require to many variables at once for you to factor in gun-wise, which makes it so that you need a jack of trades gun. People don't realize that the FAR already beats the NTEC fully auto, and is overall a "quicker" weapon in it's gameplay. However, the FAR is weaker at longer ranges, hence why the NTEC gets picked over the FAR when it comes to missions, not due to relative strength of the 2 guns, but due to the fact that you need to offer up some spray and pray ability, for range consistency. you're miss quoting me, I did say that due to car gameplaying (one of many reasons) the ntec is strong. It is cute that you are trying to defame me and put things that i didn't say, this is the quote of my first post, it is still there. And I have obviously not changed my mind in 2 days time. It was a nice try though.
  5. What's your proof that I had nothing better to do with my time? I did say why it's wrong, if you read my post I stated very clearly what's wrong with missions, because of how APB is currently structured I also said that in order to fix it, APB needs a major overhaul. But to state it more clearly. We could start by adding more cover to the ingame world, more in and out cover in order to approach some situations easier. Nerfing cars, making sure that health can't regen in them while hurt. Those are some of the things that can be done. Fix weapon inbalances, by balancing the map. I've stated why their opinion is wrong with my post, hence why I went through FC as an example and how that ties in with missions, and why nerfing the NTEC does not solve the problem with the game. The fact that FC is more balanced is just because cars is a non issue, car gameplaying is not a thing. And you fix car gameplaying with one of the suggested solutions that I made in the 2nd paragraph. You do protect objectives in FC, atleast in Abington, that's where all the kills are. Sure, you protect them because of kills, while in missions you protect them to win, small difference, but makes for a pretty big gameplay difference. I also did go over the teamsize, and how it's ironically making it more balanced, because of the size. This is not true for missions because the size of the mission does not scale with the amount of players, hence why anything above a 4v4 can be really badly balanced, aswell as certain 2v2's. The skirmish aspect is relevant though, because the maps are more balanced. The amount of information is relevant, as it proves my points, by giving examples, few people even bother to give a proper response, because they are wrong, but don't want to admit it and rather do a "TLDR" thing. And I am not even sure why you want a thanks, why is this important? You simply corrected me, and that's that, I appreciate the help, but felt no need to say thanks, is this even an issue lol?
  6. Man, I don't have anger management issues, I have ego issues. And yeah, i've fought you plenty times in fc, you're good, compared to the rest of the game at least, but compared to the top dogs you aren't even close. And I didn't pick you 2 out randomly, you 2 are just the ones that bug me the most. And about the FC stats, I mostly use niche or non-meta weapons, SWARM for instance, is just an easy way to the top because I like the gun, same with SHAW, which is far from op. Meta guns makes it easier yeah, but even with that logic, I still ruthlessly beat most players in FC no matter what their weapons are. And again, if we use that logic, let's say in Abington ,16 out of 20 players on your team uses Meta weapons, and you use them as well, and consistently outperform them all, even when they are good. That, no matter how you put it is skill. That's great if you can hold the ground, you're still outplayed however, that is my point. And I can speak for Revo, which, if you read my entire post, my opinion is already clear on that. The "git gud" argument from my side still holds ground, because just like how CSGO pro's are the ones that should decide what is changed and what isn't in CS, the same principle applies here. Fact is, a vote should be made by the defacto best players, to clear up this mess. Again, you're good, you're just not at the top of the hierarchy, which is OK in the sense that I won't tell you that you're a worthless human, you just don't know enough of balance. And untop of that, I could say the same about the SWARM, i'm able to outgun must guns in the game with that gun, but it's far from OP. So you playing a gun a lot does not make it OP, simply you got more experience with it, ofc it will seem strong then. But even if that wasn't the case, unless it is blatantly OP like the AMG, then your words have no merit, because you are you. And for the record, I am super full of myself, because I am tired of people not talking sense and I think that a "because I am this and that" is a good way of talking, especially when you got a damn good track record, as I said to the person that said that my post was a dumpster fire, I am not here to change your minds, I am simply here to stroke my own ego, and to tell people they're wrong and do that task with facts and reason. And I do it like an pleasant fellow because it's like therapy for me.
  7. My approach matters not, for I am not here to change the opinions of those that are wrong, I am simply here to state facts because I had nothing better to do at the time. And FC stats are very relevant, as a weapon sandbox environment it is extremely relevant. I've already stated why the game is the way it is, and about what you mentioned about the game not being balanced around a lot of players in 1 missions is more true for missions. However smaller skirmishes in FC are very close to missions. And about the "ammo is essentially irrelevant" point, you all have ammo boxes, which, effectivly leads to infinite ammo. And there's no excuse to not at least have Medium ones. This dumpster fire of a post of mine is simply the truth, and I didn't tag them because I did not know of that function.
  8. I love how you won't even try to dispute my claims, and the wall of text is to highlight specifics and details, kinda hard not to do a wall of text if you want to be thorough. But as I expected, you wouldn't even try because you are wrong lol. And yeah, it means that my wall of text is more valid then others. Ironically, I am saying those exact things because the NTEC still is not OP, if it was, then it would be as good if not even better in FC, which it isn't.
  9. NTEC is fine, has always been fine, will always be fine. What people get wrong with it, especially in arguments about it, especially like Revoluzzer and Ghost is that the "git gud" argument is actually a much stronger argument that what people give it credit for. There's a reason why a captain decides where a ship goes and why it does so, much more experienced players such as myself know a lot more about game balance then the majority of others in this game. The prime reason for why the "git gud" argument is strong is because when you compare 2 weapons such as the Star and the NTEC and put them against each other, while it is true that people overhype how "difficult" it is to use the NTEC, it is, relatively speaking to the Star, "difficult to use", for the simple fact that the NTEC has recoil, the star does not, and I am talking about realistically recoil, not technical recoil. The Star can't be, in it's current state as effective as the NTEC, due to the fact that it is 1 of the easiest weapons in the game by design. You see, there is a balance in having guns that aren't created equally, if 1 gun is easier to use, then it should be less effective then its counterparts. The Star is less effective then the NTEC, and the NTEC is superior in most ways, because the NTEC has, albeit a not very big, skill curve comparatively. Some would argue that the NTEC, doesn't represent a big enough power curve due to how "easy" it is to use. The problem with this argument is that you can bring out hundreds of examples of similar situations in APB, how the Raptor 45 is just a 50M primary Nano, or how the AMG is just a straight upgrade to the shaw, with nothing to make it more difficult to use, and you'll be stuck in an endless loop of constantly rebalancing, for the sake of rebalancing. Secondly, it's loosely based on the assumption of what is hard and what isn't in APB. Like what decides what is a "hard" gun to use? Is it recoil? Spray pattern? etc etc. People don't agree on this front, people say that it's too powerful for its intended role, making it way too powerful for other guns in their classes, the problem with this argument is that this is where the "git gud" part comes in. If you lose, to an NTEC, CQC with OCA, JG, CSG, PMG and whatnot, you are to blame, if you lose to an NTEC when you have a rifle at 60M range? You are to blame, and what's the ultimate proof of this? When you consider some of the people that use the "git gud" argument, like myself, they are at the absolute top of the hierarchy of skill in this game. AKA the people that are able to play around practically every situation, this is why our "git gud" works, and your "anti git gut" doesn't. Gametime and years spent in APB isn't the biggest factor in knowledge of the weapons sandbox, compared to skill. Skill is the biggest factor when it comes to knowledge, specifically about the weapons sandbox. What does all this mean then. It means that even if you were to nerf the NTEC, you're treating the Symptoms of a disease, not the root of it. Fact of the matter is, nerf the NTEC, as Flaws said, will simply mean that rifles, and other guns will be pushed into meta, nerfing the NTEC does not equal to a more balanced and "large" meta, it will simply mean that guns such as the OBIR, OBEYA, FAR, NSSW will be used instead of the NTEC. The problem remains, the Symptom was treated instead. And what is this problem? It is the core problem with APB's whole design. At least mission district-wise, because you see, why is the NTEC so dominant in missions? It is because of the fact that missions in themselves, favour a very specific meta, due to low TTK weapons, and little cover, that is Car gameplaying and long range rifles. APB was never designed with a quick TTK, and while raising it would be more work then it would be worth, the fact of the matter is that NTEC's and Rifles and their equivalents are so powerful because of the sole reason, that the map and certain game mechanics was never designed for quick TTK's. This is why the NTEC is chosen above so many alternatives, because when you have this meta, Car gameplaying, Rifles, Consumables (shields), Spotter, High burn fuel, Weapon Stacking, and low TTK. You end up in a situation where you either pick a really good gun for a specific situation, and eyhier do super well, or fuck all with it, or you use THE gun of choice, to be able to handle all situations, moderately well, you'll still lose to rifles at long range, you'll still lose to SMG's close, but you'll at least be able to put up "a fight" rather then nothing. Also consider teamwork, since not everyone are willing or have the capability too play in a 4man or premade team, the NTEC ofc becomes a natural choice, beacause it reduces the amount of teamwork needed and coordination, it's a natural phenomenon, when you consider missions, and their dynamic nature, which, due to their dynamic nature, ironically enough, is what is causing such a stale meta. Case and point to prove what I am saying. Look at Fightclub, specifically Abington, sure the NTEC is good there, but you'll see a lot more weapons being used, and loud out combos being used WHILE also being effective. There the NTEC is a true "jack of all trades", because of the map, all its features, powerpositions, counter powerpositions, having 1 room with around 10 different approach zones, a lot of cover at many areas, means that you can fully negate a lot of the NTEC's strengths, by using weapons that are better suited for the current room, zone and combat area. This is why I will always say this Fightclub was and always will be the NR1 PERSONAL SKILL mode for apb, as it is holy dependent on your personal skill, way more then your team. Missions on the contrary are Team based, hence why you can have a subpar team with great individual players, lose to less skilled individual players, but that are more coordinated and work better as a team. Secondly, Fightclub is the true playground and testing ground for APB's gun sandbox. In FC, almost, everything is viable, due to the nature of the maps, and the skill involved with each player. Ofc there will be exceptions to the rule, such is always the case, but the large majority of weapons do find some success in FC, due to the fact that FC is just simply a more balanced version of the "New APB" (New APB as in when G1 took over, made the game quicker by adding the sprint shooting, lowering ttk and whatnot). This is why FC, and the gun knowledge you get from FC is a lot more relevant to the "disease" of APB, because it shows that, the reason why certain guns are picked over others, are more or less because of the current structure of missions, which again, proves the fact that nerfing the NTEC is not the solution to the problem, when in FC, the NTEC isn't even a problem. And lastly when it comes to FC, which also ties into the "git gud" and why some people can use it as a strong argument and others can't. Take me as an example, for years now in a row, i've been the absolute top dog in FC, there is almost not a single time where I do not perform at least great compared to the majority of players in FC. I am literally MVP or at least at the top 3 almost every single game, no matter the circumstance, no matter the opposition, and no matter the match. There are OFC exceptions, i'm only human, even I can make mistakes, and sometimes I just want to goof around. But the proof is in the pudding, my consistency in FC is extremely rare, there are very few players that even come close to my consistency and even fewer that reach it and surpass it. Point i'm trying to make? Time spent in a game does not equal skill, that's why people like Ghost and Revoluzzer are sadly, out of their league when it comes to this game, veterans yes, at the high end of skill? No. Relics of the past as I like to say, their feedback is good, but with all due respect, neither of you 2 stand a chance against many of the players that are even bellow me skill-wise, in FC, missions, I can't comment on, but in FC you are out of your league. This is why while you are still allowed to have your opinion, you are factually wrong, your arguments are wrong, when people like me can even make the SWARM seem like an OP weapon, then the fact of the matter is that my opinion, and my words carry more weight. I'm saying this both to stroke my epeen, cause i'm that mood, I don't feel humble today, but I will also be honest. I'm coming after you 2 specifically, because you 2 are the 2 people that I see talk about the NTEC the most, and your arguments are invalid.
  10. Problem with maining certain weapons does not equal to you being good with them or know how to counter said weapon well. The people that use all of APB's tools at hand are the ones that will know a lot more about how to counter x y and z. Sure, OBIR is a beast, one of the strongest guns in the game, strength however, does not equal being OP. SWARM is one of the best LMG's in the game, yet no one use it? Why because people refuse to leave their comfort zone. Funny thing is, if it wasn't for the hilarious OPness of the AMG, then the SWARM would be at the absolute top, due to the fact that it has a predictable recoil pattern, meaning that you can effectively shot it with little - no recoil. And at the end of the day, what goal will nerfing the OBIR accomplish? Making it more in-line with what it was intended to perform at? Long range? We had that remember? Way back when, when g1 changed weapon ranges and added the way stronger weapon drop-off. Annnddd what happened? The HVR and NTEC with IR3 became king, because way fewer guns could compete, which also ironically, made long range rifles such as the OBEYA and OBIR a lot stronger, since yet again, Assault rifles, just got outclassed at those ranges. What am I getting at? That when you streamline weapons so hard into very specific roles, the one gun that has more utility over others will ALWAYS be picked. This is where the damn NTEC craze started to begin with. because it was just good enough at most ranges to be The top dog for almost all guns. Almost every gun should be somewhat viable outside their intended role, it adds to the dynamic of the game and reduces clunkyness, also somewhat reduces minmaxing. So if you do this for the OBIR, it will be a similar effect but reversed, and again, let's keep it f ucking real, how often do you really get killed by an OBIR at every range, compared to other guns more suited for said task? It's fewer then you think, but salt, as always, will be a much more deciding factor then what's actually correct. Basically, if you touch ranges or nerf (most guns) rangewise (i.e how they perform outside of their intended role, not just max range) you will, more or less just promote guns like the NTEC and its versions really. At the end of the day, that's exactly why we have this current meta, the messed up range system from way back when. They are relevant, and even when you discard just numbers, you get my theoretical type of response instead, the result is the same.
  11. Indeed, thank you for putting it through this way, way better then what I did really. But yeah, you know how it is, ignore all the people that actually know how to play the game ; P
  12. Incredibly busted changes, yet again, both the community and currently LO does not understand the balance of APB and why a lot of it Should not be tempered with. The 1 good thing from this is ofc the idea of the Low yield change, i've always said this to people around me, Low yields are fine on all aspects EXCEPT blast radious, they are suppose to be Low Yield afterall, the damage should not be touched due to the fact that honestly, it would just gimp the nades when you consider CA3. Blast radious is the only change needed, so test A is far superior compared too test B. Now now now, the OBIR changes, right, where to start? Firstly, I find it so funny, that a gun that is barely used compared to other meta guns, NTEC, JG, OCA, etc, is being nerfed. First of all the OBIR already had a nerf way back when with it's firerate nerf, (which in itself was a crap nerf, but that's a discussion for another time since APB was a different game back then). Which coupled with the OBEYA nerf put them both on par with eachother and other longrange weaponry. Now firstly, the change to secondary switching is a baffling nerf, as it not only makes the game more clunky and unresponsive, and with lag, WILL increase the current 0.5 to more time while playing due to latency. Firerate nerfs, and nerfs overall to mobility (in most cases) aren't proper well made nerfs, as they make the game more clunky, and god knows how clunky APB already can be at times, if you really want to nerf the OBIR, something very trivial like jump accuracy is a lot more relevant, everything else is just bizarr. Why is this you might ask? if you shot someone with 1 burst and then switch to your secondary, you cut your TTK in half basically. Well, that's the argument at least, usually coupled with "well the same applies to the scout so". The problem with this line of thinking is that, while yes, on paper you're clearly cheesing something that the gun balance didn't think of, making a long range rifle into a viable CQC weapon, you are missing vital, critical points about other things AROUND the gun. APB, like many games, aren't just black and white, just because A gun has X Y Z that is on paper "OP" doesn't make so in practise. So let's take an example, we're assuming that both players are equally good here, and that RNG is relatively low, for each gun's intended role. So if player A) uses an OCA and let's say FBW, and player B) uses an OBIR and FBW. if both of these players, are playing in CQC, Realistically speaking, if the OCA player knows his opponents gun, and knows what it is capable of, he will either expect a jumpshot out of cover switching to his FBW, or a corner pop FBW combo, wwhich would be the 2 most likely combos. Alright, so how realistically speaking, how will the OBIR win this victory over a CQC monster? Well he really only got corner popping as and option and as mentioned jumpshoting, Jumpshoting at this range (5 - 10M) with HS3 will be harder, not impossible, but harder, that coupled with him having to land 3 perfect shots from his FBW in a row, is very, very unlikely to win, unless the OCA user chokes real bad, or is just overall bad. Corner popping then? Well that can be mitigated by simply tossing 1 uncooked nade at his cover, wait a little till the timer closes in to 0 and push. The biggest chance of victory for the here for the OBIR user is to cornerpop, which in itself is still a disadvantage at such a close range against an OCA, the OCA user will have to do something really bad or stupid in order to lose a fight like that. As a matter of fact at that range, it would be more beneficial for the OBIR user to use a more long range supporting secondary instead, like 45. FBW, Thunder and stock showstopper. What about 15 - 20m? Well here the OBIR has a much bigger chance at winning, but again, it comes into how to play around a corner rather then the OBIR itself (Just like every gun in the game). Which is also a factor most people forget about, Corners. Corners is one of the biggest defensive advantages a person can have, ANY gun will be far superior behind corner, Long, short or medium range, it is all the same. However, if the guy is out in the open? at 15 - 20m - no chance of winning, ESPECIALLY if the OCA user switches to a secondary. And what about the corner at 15 - 20m? Cooking nades and throwing cooked nades, combining them both is the best combo, while running between bursts effectively. The times the OBIR wins over CQC weapons is when the OBIR gets the drop on them first, which due to its burst nature, will OFC make it a very competitive weapon in such instances, but the same can be said about the JG, OSCAR, Carbine, hell, even the damn CAP 40 is good when that is considered. Just like all guns, the OBIR is a lot better at a "first strike" scenario due to its burst nature, which can give the illusion of being "OP" due to the secondary switch. Funny thing is, if you really die a lot to that combo, ESPECIALLY if you use CQC guns, sorry to say it bud, but you're just really trash. APB was designed as a game where teamwork is a large part on solving "gun problems" but even when playing a lot of solo, taking care of CQC OBIR's is a lot easier then let's say CQC OSCAR's, Carbine users, OCA's etc etc. Point is, sure, you can cheese the OBIR's TTK with a secondary, truth is, the time it takes from the burst, to the switch, to being forced to land 3 perfect shots to reach maximum efficiency is super hard (compared to just using a gun optimized for CQC). Point is? Sure, OBIR can be used very effectivly CQC, but CQC weapons and even mid range ones will outplay it, just like everything, it's up to the player, there's a reason you don't see silvers just owning everyone with a modded or stock OBIR, and even the really good players with it, will STILL not win against an equally good player using a CQC gun, so no, OBIR's CQC ability is far from op. And while we're at it, what's the deal with the NFAS eh? Complaining about the OBIR's CQC capabilites, yet, the NFAS still stands as one of the best CQC weapons in the game currently, for all the wrong reasons mind you. You can't apply rayscaling to an automatic shotgun, or shotguns at all for that matter, it makes IR3 to powerful on them. So yeah, nerf the OBIR's secondary switch, compare to how many times you die by that compared to a 15m JG 2 shot
  13. Hmm, fair enough, that's a shame
  14. Have you tried just "whispering" them via the scoreboard, but instead of having /W you just replace it with /report. Or did I missread it?
  15. To be frank, I like the gamemode, despite its flaws, I just wish stats were tracked in the event districts
  • Create New...