purpleHorizons

"True fullscreen" (HW: Legacy Flip) with a Bitblt or Flip swap effect isn't removed from any Windows release. It's not related to the Windows release. I can get other games into FSE fine using the above methods on both W11 and W10. APB, seemingly since GFAC got implemented, isn't able to be placed into the FSE mode. The game should be placed in HW: Independant Flip as soon as I use the "Fullscreen " or "Fullscreen Windowed" setting. The fact that GFAC broke MSI AB & other overlays also confirms this software regression somewhat.

https://wiki.special-k.info/Presentation_Model Tested on W10 22H2 and 2 different GPUs (Nvidia & AMD), each running on 551.86 and 23.8.2 driver versions respectively. Using the common methods of toggling True Fullscreen: 1.) "Disable fullscreen optimization" checkmark on APB.exe 2.) Finding the appropriate registry key in GameConfigStore (setting it to 211 hexadec) When setting the game to "Fullscreen", the game uses “Hardware: Independant Flip” (which shouldn't be the case, it should be Hardware: Legacy Flip) When setting the game to "Fullscreen Windowed", the game uses “Composed: Copy with GPU/CPU GDI” (which shouldn't ever be the case) This implies that APB is using the BitBlt swap effect, as per the sankey diagrams in the link above. I am very certain that pre-GFAC, this wasn't the case, as I have FrameView data of APB during SARD era where Hardware: Legacy Flip was working fine. FSE (HW: Legacy Flip) is still a desirable presentation model to include in D3D9 games such as APB, as it leads to less CPU overhead than FSO (HW:Independant Flip) on higher frame rates. As a side-note: I've also checked DGVoodoo2 compatibility with APB. Surprisingly, it works!... Sort of. I managed to play for 2 missions without an issue. Until GFAC decided to kick me out with the message “GFAC: Disallowed File Modifications” D3D11 works fine. D3D12 crashes on district selection (I am able to login however) Funnily enough, depending on which swap effect I choose in DGVoodoo, I can invoke FSE (HW: Legacy Flip) or FSO (HW:Independant Flip) just fine. Of course, since it's a translation layer, it's still less maximum performance than native D3D9. Practical implications: DGVoodoo2 translating APB into D3D11 would allow you to use Nvidia Smooth Motion

https://www.gamersfirst.com/apb/news/2026/8/22/summer-nights Premium code: Summer_Nights Once again, no new thread on the forums in regards to this event... one has to be in LO's Discord or find this information on the news page to be alerted. Why are the forums being relegated again?...

Well, at least one doesn't have to suffer through a dreadful AMA at 2x speed filled with "it's on our priority list". Now, one can CTRL+F through blog posts.

It's a mystery to me how this type of content is a bannable offense, while nude pornographic symbols, cars & clothing are prevalent in-game. “Specific historical symbol is where the lines are drawn, but porn? Sure, go ahead! Feast your eyes in degenerate media!”

This is hillarious. The same company that started advertising the game again to a newer, fresher audience... while repeating the same mistake the old management had. Comedy. UPDATE: From LO discord... Matt's reply:

Questions locked down to Discord only? Why is this forum being relegated to this extent?

Bump. Great post.

You're talking about the end-user problem, not the actual reason why this is occurring. Which is what my question was asking. Especially the fact that they've seemingly nerfed the RoF twice on 2 guns to "reduce ghost shots"? This would imply that the .45 AP was ghostshot gallore pre-nerf. Is it because specific RoF values (being below or above a certain threshold) are "incompatible" with some network-related construct? Is it because of the low tickrate? Is it because of insufficient server hardware? These are questions which I'd like to see answered. How are you evaluating whether a shot was registered on client-side or server-side? Do you have the tools which would enable you to have such insight? If not, all of what you're mentioning is just your guess. For instance, such as the game designer's developer tools, where you see the client-side and server-side bullets. https://imgur.com/a/apb-bullet-spread-change-26th-july-2025-XzaFFL0 This was to showcase the supposed hit registration fix applied around July 2025 (the game was "broken" for +3 years prior to that) The more you write about this though, the more it seems to be tick rate related....

How has adjusting the fire rate to a lower value (slow-down) supposedly increased the amount of ghost shooting on the .45 AP? By that logic, the .45 AP must've "ghostshot" a ton pre-nerf for the duration of it's existence. Not only that, if you've lowered the RoF even further, that implies that the TTK has been changed again. How is this the fault of the rate of fire of a weapon, when what you're describing reads like a server/networking related issue? Can we know what causes the increased amount of ghostshots and whether other guns in the game are prone to this issue in some way? Having another point of RNG into the mix with the already large bullet spread of most guns is concerning.

Agreed. The tick rate is dreadfully low in this game. However, I don't understand what "ghost shots" are meant to be. In my PoV, it's simply the bullet spread of the guns not playing well with how networking is handled in this game. Perhaps even the former alone... I don't know how the claim of "reduced rate of fire" (even further than what they've done in previous patch) will lead to less ghost shots? This would imply that AP .45 pre-nerf was constantly "ghost shotting"?

People like him & others in this thread are the reason why the secondaries got nerfed... bronze & silvers players are at the weapon balancing wheel by peer pressure

I don't need to log in to know that the trivial TTK difference still makes it one of the lowest TTK's in the game and that the lower recoil & increased ammo size is just a benefit. Sadly, now it's higher TTK than the OCA with CJ3. The NFA9 was capable of shredding OCA with CJ3 relatively easy when played correctly (crouch and ADS, never hipfire) In terms of where it stacks up now: 1st – SHAW 0,56s TTK [CJ3 possible] 1st – NFAS 0,56s TTK [CJ3 possible] 2nd – AMG 0,585s TTK [CJ3 possible] 3rd – S1-TIC RABID 0,6s TTK [CJ3 possible] 3rd – DOW 0,6s TTK [CJ3 possible;] --previous NFA9-- 4th – VAS C2 0,63s TTK [no CJ3 possible] 4th – ACES 0,63s TTK [no CJ3 possible] 5th – VBR HUNTRESS 0,65 [no CJ3] 5th – JG 0,65 [CJ3 possible] --NFA9 new, live-- 6th – M1922 0,675s [cj3 possible] 7th – NTEC-7c 0,68s [cj3 possible] 8th S1-FA 'Frenzy' 0,69s [cj3 possible] 9th CAP40 0,696s [cj3 possible] 10th PMG/OCA 0,7s [CJ3 possible, went to ~0,65s afterwards] It was the 4th fastest TTK in the game. I don't see a point of them changing it. Barely anyone out of the 300-500 people still playing the game used it during the last 4-5 years. In fact, I don't recall the NFA9 being touched in years at this point. I assume the game designer got some complaints of the lower skilled players in this game and succumbed to their requests Sad how simple peer pressure impacts weapon balancing decisions. I'd have rather seen them buff the "Crouch Modifier" & "ADS Modifier" or change the "Accuracy @ 10m" statistic, while keeping the TTK unchanged.

Bump, because the maps are the worst part of this game for 14 years now. It's one of largest QoL changes LO can do which will drastically affect UX for the better.

Balancing TTK by changing rate of fire (affecting tapping muscle memory) is a large mistake. - Why would they nerf the S-AS PDW?.... It was completely fine. I would have lowered made these changes: Run Modifier=1; ShotModifierCap<1,01; CrouchModifier≤0,7; Maybe even adjust the "Accuracy Radius @ 10m" statistic. - The .45 got a indirect buff.... why? Why would they change SprintModifier=1,5 to something lower?.... You are indirectly buffing it's total accuracy during gameplay. The 60ms difference in TTK is not enough to offset it... - RFP & FBW buffs are going to be a good buff. I don't see the necessity of it though. - NANO got unnecessarily buffed, but it'll still be mediocre. It's close to FR0G Kokoe levels of Equip Time - The NFA9 got a buff... regardless of this trivial +45ms TTK difference. I'd have rather seen them change the "Accuracy Radius @ 10m" statistic to ≤35cm and buff the CrouchModifier<0,8, set WalkModifier=1 & RunModifier=1 and set Marksman Modifier<0,9 - Buffing FR0G to the extents mentioned in this patch are going to be a slight issue, as it's already top 3 in terms of bullet spread secondaries while hipfiring or walking. Changing the values from WalkModifier=1,2 & RunModifier=1,3 is bound to create even more issues... I dislike the fact that they're omitting exact weapon stats again on some of these weapons. A overall trivial weapon balancing patch, but better than doing nothing I suppose... I'd rather see them balance the districts, add a internal frame rate limiter, get away from Scaleform & add a map notification pinging system (without entering the map for it). What's also hillarious to me is that ARMAS still isn't account lifetime only, which is the vision Matt has for ARMAS as per the last AMA. What's the point of sales if the interface of ARMAS, the main income source of this game, still isn't solved?