Weapon Prototype District Feedback 1.20.0 (1159)

[Zoriya 3]

Yo if you want us to test stuff make an event of it, give us joker tickets or something. Put it on a special fight club district or something. With populations as low as Jericho, you need to give people an objective.

[Lign 361]

6 hours ago, SkittyM said:

They want people to ACTUALLY TEST STUFF.  So no, we don't get numbers.

Would be funny if they make hvr 1stk afterwards complaining at players relying on paper stats and not playing in testing districts. Seriously, wasn’t it too obvious that rfp with 65m is too much

Edited August 21, 2019 by Lign

[TheMessiah 430]

You can't expect feedback about things the majority of playerbase dont understand(therefore dont care)LO have all the stats,info etc and they should know how to balance some weapons and how they fit with the rest in the game.Its not our business to make weapon balances-thats developers thing.Release this changes however you think is best and after that change it based on feedback.Dont be afraid to screw up.LO already made 1 big anyway(riot *cough)

[CookiePuss 5378]

1 hour ago, TheMessiah said:

You can't expect feedback about things the majority of playerbase dont understand(therefore dont care)LO have all the stats,info etc and they should know how to balance some weapons and how they fit with the rest in the game.Its not our business to make weapon balances-thats developers thing.Release this changes however you think is best and after that change it based on feedback.Dont be afraid to screw up.LO already made 1 big anyway(riot *cough)

I'm not sure how letting players test and give feedback is a bad thing. 

 

But whatever. 

[Nitronik 348]

Gave it a test run in 1v1 since no one else is around...


Test-B

The RFP doesn't really feel worth using in face of alternatives like the FBW or .45AP
The extra ammo in the magazine (and thus the added uptime) IMO don't make up for the added hipfire penalty , increased bloom per shot and 4-burst-kill

The marksmanship accuracy feels nice but the reduced base damage and (finally fixed!) drop-off (which seems rather sharp, adds two bursts to kill at 40m) result in really weak damage at range, to the point where it might not reliably finish wounded opponents off

The nerfed hipfire and bloom are a step in the right direction - but I'd like to see the accuracy be overall better so at least the gun stays reliable in CQC outside of marksmanship mode.

The nerfed damage really hurts the gun for its CQC purpose. I think it really needs to stay a 3 burst kill (even with less overdamage if you'd like) to be competitive with the two aforementioned sidearms.

I'm done I swear

[Sayori 311]

9 hours ago, SkittyM said:

They want people to ACTUALLY TEST STUFF.  So no, we don't get numbers.

Just stop.

Nobody is here to play guess games. How am I supposed to test the weapons when I don't know the stats and how to play them... really not going to do experiments with a teammate to figure out the range and stk.

[SkittyM 287]

5 minutes ago, Sayori said:

Just stop.

Nobody is here to play guess games. How am I supposed to test the weapons when I don't know the stats and how to play them... really not going to do experiments with a teammate to figure out the range and stk.

You're supposed to test by just simply playing?  It's not a hard concept neither a new one.  The only thing to test is B anyways since its clearly different and actually feels nice, but questionable. 

 

On top of that, Nitro posted his thoughts after, gasp, actually testing!

Edited August 21, 2019 by SkittyM

[TheVices 0]

Honestly, the new RFP Changes are nice.. It didn't feel like a pocket obir anymore and felt like a secondary. Hope it gets to make actual live patch

 

65m it didn't ttk in 3 bursts which was nice

50m it bursts nicely 

65m+ it's tickling which is a nice method

[❤ MonaSux ❤ 24]

Dunno, why change oca stats. There are tons of other weapons that need rebalance.

 

And in apb u realy dont need to test weapons. Give us numbers and we can tell you how balance the weapon is.

 

[TheMessiah 430]

1 hour ago, CookiePuss said:

I'm not sure how letting players test and give feedback is a bad thing. 

 

But whatever. 

i dont say is bad..rather pointless because same 10-15 people will test this guns like Shini,Kempington etc

[CookiePuss 5378]

5 minutes ago, TheMessiah said:

i dont say is bad..rather pointless because same 10-15 people will test this guns like Shini,Kempington etc

Those friggin nerds.

 

I do see your point though, while some players are testing, I wish more would.

[Iazer 204]

Right so after testing both the OCA and the RFP in both district A and B beforehand and after these are my findings.

 

Lets start with the OCA:

In the test variant A district the gun felt more rewarding for killing someone as the fire-rate was significantly slower therefore meaning that the player being shot at had to be tracked more, this however felt a little over done as even with Cooling Jacket 3 equipped it was significantly slower and was a bit over done.

In the test variant B district the gun did feel like it had a faster TTK due to its quicker bullet output putting it closer to the feel of live, this version did feel as if it could combat other weapons better and more closely compared to district A as in A going against other CQC weapons was fairly difficult as taking them down with a slower fire rate made it significantly harder than just reading the numbers would have made it feel.

 

Lets move on to the RFP:

In the old test variant A&B district the RFP felt good at taking down people at range due to the buff given to it but did still feel too effective in CQC even with the 4th burst being needed as it didn't bloom out much for being a Mid-Long ranged secondary.

In the newer test variant A district the RFP feels as if it wants to be more of a Close-Mid range weapon and isn't very effective at range at all due to the hard drop off therefore making it more of the CQC cannon that it feels like on live at the minute.

In the newer test variant B district the RFP feels significantly nicer as it can't be used in CQC to defeat every weapon and isn't going to beat primary weapons at range all the time due to its quicker bloom and 4 burst (10 bullets) to kill. In my opinion the only real change I would make to the RFP in this case would be that it could be slightly more consistent at range by lowering how quickly the gun blooms but other than that it is fine in my opinion and these changes suit the play style of the current game.

The Talon overall I feel should be treated as a normal RFP as nor the mod or the weapons description state that it has a lower base range than the normal RFP.

 

To conclude then I would say that Test Variant B is better for the OCA and The new Test Variant B is better for the RFP but could do with the tweak mentioned above to make it fit in with the category I feel it should be around being a Mid-Ranged Weapon.

[mojical 160]

2 hours ago, Iazer said:

To conclude then I would say that Test Variant B is better for the OCA and The new Test Variant B is better for the RFP but could do with the tweak mentioned above to make it fit in with the category I feel it should be around being a Mid-Ranged Weapon.

 

I fully agree and it's nice to see the Talon isn't being disadvantaged for no reason anymore. RFP Test A (aka reducing effective range) is not a good idea in my opinion, as it makes the Fang's advantage over the regular RFP much more noticeable. It would have to be accompanied by a downgrade of the Fang's Improved Rifling, as has been suggested many times before, but even so I believe B is a superior choice as the game already has plenty of 30m-capped secondaries.

 

On the other hand it seems like a bad idea to release the OCA nerf before something is done about shotguns, as even with the OCA being very powerful currently it still struggles against JG and NFAS at distances where a shotgun shouldn't have an advantage anymore.

[GhosT 1301]

16 hours ago, SkittyM said:

They want people to ACTUALLY TEST STUFF.  So no, we don't get numbers.

 

16 hours ago, Darkzero3802 said:

Go into a test district, equip a RFP and fire it.

 

So I have to rely on what I randomly feel and have to give feedback on mostly guesswork?

Alright, let me buy a flare gun I can whip out, hopefully survive, and then measure the range I just killed an opponent at to eventually find out what the new effective range is.

That argument makes no sense.

 

 

13 hours ago, MattScott said:

The lack of specific stats was not intended to upset anyone or force testing. This is just something we want to try this time because we all know that stats on paper can appear vastly different than actual in-game feel. Perhaps these notes were too vague, and we can work on finding a middle ground, but I want to reduce the amount of discussion from players who weighed in simply based on the stats but without getting into a district.

 

Thanks for reacting to the community that fast, really appreciated.

 

I think you guys should go back to listing all the changes you've done with precise numbers.

Yes, this will bait a lot of people into just saying things like "lol these changes are bad have a downvote" without them actually testing it, but it immensely helps those that actually do test the guns. Guesswork and roughly hinting at changes isn't a good idea at all.

Edited August 21, 2019 by GhosT

[CookiePuss 5378]

4 minutes ago, GhosT said:

Alright, let me buy a flare gun I can whip out, hopefully survive, and then measure the range I just killed an opponent at to eventually find out what the new effective range is.

That argument makes no sense.

Conversely, if you cannot judge range, how well can you judge any changes, known or not?

[GhosT 1301]

3 minutes ago, CookiePuss said:

Conversely, if you cannot judge range, how well can you judge any changes, known or not?

 

By not telling stats like that you'd have to do extensive testing until it slowly settles in, which can take a loooong time.

We don't have time in APB. The population is incredibly low and changes need to happen.

 

So giving us stats and allowing players to test them that way is the best way to go, even if it means a bunch of crybabies will throw a tantrum.

 

Though I gotta say the previous RFP changes were so bad that you could obviously tell that they're awful just by looking at the numbers.

[CookiePuss 5378]

24 minutes ago, GhosT said:

 

By not telling stats like that you'd have to do extensive testing until it slowly settles in, which can take a loooong time.

We don't have time in APB. The population is incredibly low and changes need to happen.

 

So giving us stats and allowing players to test them that way is the best way to go, even if it means a bunch of crybabies will throw a tantrum.

 

Though I gotta say the previous RFP changes were so bad that you could obviously tell that they're awful just by looking at the numbers.

Perhaps your u are right, I've not had experience with game balance before. 

 

But I think the idea was to remove bias imparted by knowing the stats beforehand. To force people to use the gun and decide if they did or didn't like it based on the changes alone, and not the influence of how they interpreted the stats. 

[GhosT 1301]

10 minutes ago, CookiePuss said:

Perhaps your u are right, I've not had experience with game balance before. 

 

But I think the idea was to remove bias imparted by knowing the stats beforehand. To force people to use the gun and decide if they did or didn't like it based on the changes alone, and not the influence of how they interpreted the stats. 

 

Perhaps give a rough hint at what has been changed on the forums, and then give players the actual numbers in form of an in-game notification upon joining the prototype districts.

[vsb 6171]

1 minute ago, GhosT said:

and then give players the actual numbers in form of an in-game notification upon joining the prototype districts

might be a little bit beyond orbit's capability tbh, iirc the description in chat when you load into a district is still the same one from the last time g1 used testing districts

[GhosT 1301]

3 minutes ago, Solamente said:

might be a little bit beyond orbit's capability tbh, iirc the description in chat when you load into a district is still the same one from the last time g1 used testing districts

 

Instead of creating something new they could implement a section in the tutorial menu with a tab for the prototype districts.

Though it doesn't really fit into "tutorial" either.

 

Then again they've put every info about RIOT in tutorials, so there's that.

[vsb 6171]

43 minutes ago, GhosT said:

Then again they've put every info about RIOT in tutorials, so there's that.

yeah they didn't manage to do that correctly either, the riot tutorial didn't update with all the relevant information from the following patches

 

the absolute state of the game when you can't even trust the devs to do text changes right lol

[CookiePuss 5378]

1 hour ago, GhosT said:

 

Perhaps give a rough hint at what has been changed on the forums, and then give players the actual numbers in form of an in-game notification upon joining the prototype districts.

As like a compromise? Yeah that could work.

[PitterPatter 139]

Last time I went in it was literally everyone using the rfp and killing people easily at sniper range. If we dont get anything from testing it I'm not going to sit through that boring hell again.

 

If we're going this direction with secondaries just say fuck it and let people equip two primaries. The rfp was basically an OBIR. 

[Nitronik 348]

5 hours ago, Signarly said:

Last time I went in it was literally everyone using the rfp and killing people easily at sniper range. If we dont get anything from testing it I'm not going to sit through that boring hell again.

 

If we're going this direction with secondaries just say fuck it and let people equip two primaries. The rfp was basically an OBIR. 

I guess this is why orbit didn't hand out stats

I did some research for you. The new drop-off seems to be around 30m

 

10 hours ago, Lyfeld said:

 

I fully agree and it's nice to see the Talon isn't being disadvantaged for no reason anymore. RFP Test A (aka reducing effective range) is not a good idea in my opinion, as it makes the Fang's advantage over the regular RFP much more noticeable. It would have to be accompanied by a downgrade of the Fang's Improved Rifling, as has been suggested many times before, but even so I believe B is a superior choice as the game already has plenty of 30m-capped secondaries.

 

On the other hand it seems like a bad idea to release the OCA nerf before something is done about shotguns, as even with the OCA being very powerful currently it still struggles against JG and NFAS at distances where a shotgun shouldn't have an advantage anymore.

I was wondering.
The RFP has been roughly the same thing for years. Completely changing it up into a different weapon is not a smart choice imo, especially when you've had plenty of ARMAS variants sold over time.

LO could easily make a new secondary out of all those experiments. Keep the RFP as the CQC burst powerhouse it's always been, make a new burst sidearm for 40-45m combat. Best of both worlds, and CONTENT!
What do you guys think?

[crusade 89]

16 hours ago, Sayori said:

Just stop.

Nobody is here to play guess games. How am I supposed to test the weapons when I don't know the stats and how to play them... really not going to do experiments with a teammate to figure out the range and stk.

This times three thousand.

16 hours ago, SkittyM said:

You're supposed to test by just simply playing?  It's not a hard concept neither a new one.  The only thing to test is B anyways since its clearly different and actually feels nice, but questionable. 

 

On top of that, Nitro posted his thoughts after, gasp, actually testing!

We're supposed to give feedback based on how something feels? Weapon balance is a science and based on facts. If you were to tell me that Test District C buffed N-TEC damage to 200 per shot, I wouldn't have to hop in district to tell you it's going to be broken overpowered. Some of these guys have countless hours. Yeah, some people don't give the greatest feedback, but if you're going to have us test stuff, you also need to trust us to a degree.

 

This being said, LO would probably benefit greatly from some sort of stat tracking. Like how many players are equipping what weapons, and how often those players are winning with those weapons as well as KDR and threat level.