Jump to content

Lyfeld

Members
  • Content Count

    173
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

59 Excellent

1 Follower

About Lyfeld

  • Rank
    Loremaster

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I agree about the 3.5 update, pretty sure it will give us at least a period of cheat-free APB like the release of BE did in its day. What LO seems to be doing right now is having GMs manually freeze players who are either blatantly cheating or attempting to troll others by pretending to be cheating, which is also detrimental to new players' impression of the game. This is more or less a band-aid fix but I expect the serious crackdown against cheaters to happen in tandem with the 3.5 rollout. However OP has a point about the recent increase of cheaters, it seems they sometimes also advertise their cheat sites in game. I'm not sure if it would make sense to implement a word filter in the chat to make this impossible or difficult, such as the one that already exists for names. As for cheaters mainly being an issue to high threat players, I disagree there. Cheaters won't have an easy time winning against a full team of top tier players unless the mission is heavily in their favor (such as them defending in Antisocial Networking), especially without using speedhack and/or lagswitch. Also while this might be an unpopular opinion, I'd rather face cheaters than some newbies that just got the game off Steam and are simply going to get frustrated and uninstall. It is solo players, and newer/more casual players, who LO's matchmaking and anticheat needs to protect the most. Of course I'm not saying that cheaters are beneficial or necessary in any way, quite the opposite. The idea is that the shortcomings of the current matchmaking system exacerbate the cheating problem by allowing cheaters to play even against those least prepared to deal with them.
  2. @MattScott I don't want to seem impatient or anything, but is the LO staff aware of this issue? Players are potentially spending real money for an item which is inferior to the free-to-play version with no description or anything indicating that this is the case. This is a bug rather than a balance issue. I messaged GMs during the Autumn Assault and holiday events about it, expecting to find it in the patch notes at some point. Surely some will think "well duh, don't buy/use it then", but being my favorite RFP in terms of aesthetics and one of the better looking pistols overall, it's a shame that it's weaker for no reason.
  3. Lyfeld

    Car Play Balancing

    I'd go ahead and say that High Burn Fuel is a worse offender than all of the above, but it "disguises" itself as a quality of life mod pretty well. It takes out the risk of relying too much on one's car for cover, and some cars' huge health pools don't exactly help.
  4. Lyfeld

    Car Play Balancing

    I can agree with this. "Car gameplay" wouldn't be as much of a problem if Pioneers, Espacios and 4x4s were brought in line with the rest of the cars rather than outclassing them.
  5. Lyfeld

    New SPCT team

    I hope that when it comes down to testing the EU, there's at least one SPCT member with a Radeon GPU or Ryzen CPU to iron out any possible bugs appearing on that hardware. AFAIK most of the SPCT players listed are using the widespread Nvidia + Intel combo (like I am currently), so if new testers have to be added, having more diverse hardware to test with would be a good criterium.
  6. Lyfeld

    R-2 Harbinger suggestions

    While secondary weapons focused on close range fights (<30m) are plenty and usually perform well, more range-focused sidearms (except of course the RFP, which is in a league of its own) such as the RSA, ACT 44 and Harbinger are seldom seen in game. Since I'm a fan of the looks and basic concept of the latter, here's what I think would make it at least a consideration over the ACT GM or even the RFP: - Increased damage. I don't mean that it should 3 shot, but since the fire rate required to maintain the Harbinger's great accuracy is extremely low, the weapon suffers a lot against players who are using Clotting Agent 3. Having zero overkill damage makes the weapon too easy to counter. Putting it up to par with the ACT would probably be too much, but a solid 275 damage would make it less frustrating to use in fights where both players have cover. - Equip time. While I understand that being a heavy revolver should translate into having a long equip time, 1 second is excessive, with 0.80 being a more sensible value for both it and the RSA. The ACT is also "heavy", and has a similar niche, but is equipped in only 0.60 seconds. The RFP and .45 would still have a clear edge in terms of equip time. - Redistribute its accuracy. While its marksmanship modifier is great, its base accuracy and equip time are really not, and those two conspire to make it really difficult to line up a shot quickly. Also the low base accuracy causes the weapon to be near useless in close range fights, where it should at least get a chance with its rapid fire gimmick. I would change the base accuracy to 25cm from 30cm, and the marksmanship modifier from 0.20 to 0.24. This would also give it reduced bloom, albeit only slightly, while keeping the same initial scoped accuracy. I was a bit sad to see that this weapon caused plenty of frustration for those who gut stuck on it during the Autumn Assault gun games. Hopefully it can one day live up to its potential.
  7. IMO a great idea. If LO had to go back to the drawing board to make sure the Butcher skin keeps its exclusivity, why go on to ruin the (relative) exclusivity of the new skin? It wouldn't be consistent. Alternatively, those who won it could perhaps receive a skin selector (as received in previous events) to choose one from several ARMAS/Joker Store skins, if it's possible to retroactively apply such a thing.
  8. Lyfeld

    Colby SNR Range and Accuracy

    I agree with the accuracy buff suggestion, it won't make it meta but the RNG it has currently makes it frustrating to use to say the least. Though whatever niche it might have had is mostly gone with the Thunder being a thing, which feels a bit like a pre nerf SNR on steroids. At least the SNR is uncontested in terms of equip time and per shot damage combination.
  9. You're right in that the ACT and RSA have more range than the RFP... however they don't even have close to the accuracy required to be reliable at 70m (or really any range that exceeds the Fang's dropoff). So that range is basically useless unless the enemy is in a completely open space and the RSA/ACT user is safe enough to be able to stand still and crouch. Better competition from those two (ACT and RSA) would help the RFP shed part of its overpowered image and gain real alternatives as a secondary for SMG players. Both the ACT and RSA need substantially improved marksmanship accuracy in my opinion, even if it has to come at the cost of some range. For example, a 60m ACT with the marksmanship accuracy of the RFP would be far more usable than the current 70m RNG cannon. And let's not even mention the Harbinger...
  10. The regular RFP is still somewhat fine. It's the Fang that's a problem, but since one's stats derive from the other and the base RFP is far from underpowered, lowering it makes sense.
  11. APB DB seems to be accurate, only the regular RFP (and Fang of course, but that is beside the point) is able to 3 burst kill at 40m range.
  12. So is APB:DB just wrong like lately with the Whisper? It states 30m dropoff/50m minimum as opposted to 40/65 for the F2P model. And let's not even talk about the Armas stats... It does feel like the Talon's not as consistent at range, but partial hits are a possibility too.
  13. According to APB DB, the RFP Talon seems to have a dropoff start range of 30m, whilst the regular RFP and the Fang have a base dropoff range of 40m (IR3 not factored in). This issue was raised in some threads about weapon balancing back when the prototype districts were rolled out, but AFAIK there was never official confirmation on this. The Talon's mod doesn't give it any advantages over the regular model, nor does its description hint at a range decrease due to the silencer, so it shouldn't have lower range than the regular RFP models. My theory is that the Talon and Fang/RFP use different base weapons internally rather than being reskins, and the Talon got ignored when the RFP was silently buffed by G1 at around the time the Yukon was released. The buff was fairly recent since it wasn't in the original APB DB (apbdb.com). For comparison, here are the stats of the regular RFP: https://db.apbvault.net/items/Weapon_Pistol_RFP9 Here's the Talon: https://db.apbvault.net/items/Weapon_Pistol_RFP9-SD_PR1_Armas And here's the Fang: https://db.apbvault.net/items/Weapon_Pistol_RFP9-Sight_PR1_Armas
  14. Indeed, something isn't right with Rifling. I tried the Scoped N-Tec (PR2) and it hardly does any damage at 50m and above. Even worse, on some weapons it completely ruins the damage even at point blank range.
  15. This affects only the newest patch (October 30). Summary: The N-SSW and its reskin, when equipped with Improved Rifling, will do extremely low amounts of damage even at close range. Steps to reproduce: 1. Obtain a N-SSW or VAS SW2 and equip it with the Improved Rifling mod (tested with Improved Rifling 3) 2. Shoot an enemy without Kevlar at close range and either obtain 6 hitmarkers or an assist. Results: The enemy survives 6 hits, and if an assist is obtained, the damage per hitmarker amounts to about 5% instead of the 19% that the N-SSW should deal per shot. This does not happen without IR3 equipped. Expected results: Enemies should be taken down after those 6 hits, and the score given for an assist should either be (19 * number of hitmarkers) or 85, whichever is lower, provided the weapon is used at distances shorter than its dropoff range. Video: Note the amount of hitmarkers and assist received.
×