[PC] PATCH NOTES 1.20.0 (1161) DISCUSSION

[Cr0 328]

32 minutes ago, Kevkof said:

I could be wrong, but this should be the distance over which it goes from maximum damage to minimum damage (a.k.a. the drop-off) it would make sense like that

That's the mistake.

Minimum damage range is at what range it reaches minimum damage. Not how fast it drops.

Minimum damage range = dropoff range + dropoff rate (40+15 instead of 40+25).

Because there is no way it does minimum damage at 15 meters.

 

Edited September 5, 2019 by SilverCrow

[SkittyM 287]

2 hours ago, SilverCrow said:

"RFP:

...

Min Damage Range: 25m -> 15m"

 

Umm... I don't think that's right....

 

 

32 minutes ago, Kevkof said:

I could be wrong, but this should be the distance over which it goes from maximum damage to minimum damage (a.k.a. the drop-off) it would make sense like that

Kev is right, the current RFP drops between 40m and 65m which is a 25m gap.  So 15m means it drops much quicker.  Their choice of wording is a bit off but its supposed to be about the range drop from 40m-65m, not the actual min damage range.

 

[Kevkof 806]

20 minutes ago, SilverCrow said:

That's the mistake.

Minimum damage range is at what range it reaches minimum damage. Not how fast it drops.

Minimum damage range = dropoff range + dropoff rate (40+15 instead of 40+25).

Because there is no way it does minimum damage at 15 meters.

 

Fairly certain I know why that is, this is due to the internal naming of those stats. The value that's being referred to is listed as "fmindamagerange" (which is something that's been there for many many years). That's what caused the confusion.

 

 

Edited September 5, 2019 by Kevkof
Forum formatting is scuffed

[Cr0 328]

1 hour ago, SkittyM said:

 

Kev is right, the current RFP drops between 40m and 65m which is a 25m gap.  So 15m means it drops much quicker.  Their choice of wording is a bit off but its supposed to be about the range drop from 40m-65m, not the actual min damage range.

 

Min damage range is therefore 55 meters. Not 15.

Patch notes says: Min Damage Range: 15m.

 

@SkittyM Yes, Kev is right that they made a mistake, which is exactly what I said to begin with.

But you know, when I say things, nobody says I'm right. Someone else says the same thing, they're so right, even though I'm the one who said it fist.

 

People never f-ing listen to me. They're just determined to oppose anything I say, even if I'm right.

 

Edited September 5, 2019 by SilverCrow

[swft 356]

2 hours ago, Uke said:

That would just make them worse frags.

 

They still explode faster and travel further. It's just a different style of grenade, nothing wrong with it.

[CookiePuss 5378]

6 hours ago, crusade said:

This is something the SPCT members would've figured out if they realized the importance of numbers

Bro, we just test stuff.

Also, surely you don't think even the SPCT members agree on all subjects?

 

[TheMessiah 430]

Nobody testing sht.4 dist-all empty.Maybe if there was JT and weapon trials but is not the case

[ExoticZ 131]

Hey!

I figured I'd share my feedback regarding the changes of Low-Yield Grenades and OBIR/FFA.

 

Lets start with Low-Yields

 

Test B is in my own opinion the best change for Low-Yields. It changes how you would play Low-Yields on current LIVE districts and on Test B districts. With the new change it makes Low-Yields be used for "Area control". Because thats what Low-Yields should be used for, it should be spammy and it should be for taking over a certain area. Lowering damage and increasing the fuse timer is a really good change for Low-Yields.  They are still useful, just not as great as they are on LIVE districts.

 

The issue with LIVE district Low-Yields is that it has too much damage output and the fuse timer is lower which makes it easier to spam nades. Since this is already being nerfed, keeping three grenades for Low-Yields is fine.

 

Hope you'll stick with the Test B changes, LO!

 

 

OBIR/FFA Change

 

I've tested both A and B with the OBIR, and I dont notice a massive difference. Although, I do prefer Test B for nerfing the "quickswitching" of OBIR. It has a decent "delay" for swapping to your pistol while its not too long either. In other words, quickswitching is still possible. But its no where near as good as LIVE districts.

 

This is the excact same issue that the N-HVR "243" encountered. It used to be able to swap instantly, but eventually it got the "bolt" delay. The OBIR should behave the same way, considering the damage output of "49/50" each burst is insane.

 

As a player who used to main OBIR, I can safely say that OBIR is one of the most insane and ridiculous weapons for all ranges. It can be used for long range, medium range, close range, etc...

Nerfing the "insta-swap" of OBIR is hundred percent needed.

 

In my opinion, Test B is the best change out of them both.

 

I might edit this post later with a showcase of LIVE district and Test B OBIR.

 

- Exo

[crusade 89]

 

2 hours ago, CookiePuss said:

Bro, we just test stuff.

Also, surely you don't think even the SPCT members agree on all subjects?

SkittyM and SKay seem to agree. Perhaps it was reckless to mention the entirety of SPCT, but it seems I don't give a damn.

1 hour ago, ExoticZ said:

As a player who used to main OBIR, I can safely say that OBIR is one of the most insane and ridiculous weapons for all ranges. It can be used for long range, medium range, close range, etc...

Nerfing the "insta-swap" of OBIR is hundred percent needed.

At maximum it's 0.1 seconds faster to kill with an OBIR quickswitch vs straight FBW. I'd like to know how that much time makes the OBIR insane vs say the CR762, which can do the same exact thing the OBIR can but only 0.11 seconds slower (without CJ).

9 hours ago, crusade said:

0.1 + 0.4 + (0.2 * 2) = 0.9 seconds. And that is completely machine perfect execution. I think adding 0.1s of human error is reasonable, which puts the TTK to 1.0s, which is exactly the same as the FBW's TTK.

[Tenginima 74]

10 hours ago, crusade said:

I agree that most people in this community don't have the slightest clue about balance. Can't fault LO for it though, because they just kinda picked up the game. They can't really just leave stuff untouched, either. There are some things that legitimately need changing, and I'm glad they are finally looking at Low-Yields.

 

I've had some time to think about it, and I'm actually quite certain that adding the switch delay on the OBIR is pointless. Tenginima, you went a more theoretical route, I'm going to take the mathematical one.

 

So, the OBIR takes 0.1s to fire it's full burst (Fire interval of 0.05s, bullet #1 at 0.0s, #2 at 0.05s, #3 at 0.1s). FBW equip time is 0.4s, with a firerate of 0.2s.

Burst + FBW Equip + 3 shots (Only count firerate twice, first shot is fired immediately after equipped).

0.1 + 0.4 + (0.2 * 2) = 0.9 seconds. And that is completely machine perfect execution. I think adding 0.1s of human error is reasonable, which puts the TTK to 1.0s, which is exactly the same as the FBW's TTK. This is something the SPCT members would've figured out if they realized the importance of numbers.

 

So, with that math out of the way, we can conclude that OBIR burst into FBW is practically useless if you are fighting an enemy out in the open with no cover. This means that the quickswitch tactic is only really viable if you have cover to utilize before swinging wide with your FBW, which would then only need 3 shots to kill your target. Adding an extra 0.5 seconds before you can make this transition is silly, considering an Obeya CR762 could effectively do the same thing, except at 0.21 seconds to get the two shots out that amount to an OBIR burst (0.11s slower).

 

If you're good at this game, even if you're fighting someone who is also good, you're bound to get some cheeky kills on them with this. I would say landing a grenade + OBIR burst is significantly more likely to win you a fight against a Pointman weapon over quickswitching. Generally speaking though, the Pointman is going to win most of those engagements, and that's because the OBIR user is winning if he and his team are not allowing those engagements to happen in the first place.

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

[crusade 89]

1 minute ago, Tenginima said:

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

You're welcome. And yes, unfortunately I know exactly what you mean about the ignoring part.

[ExoticZ 131]

31 minutes ago, crusade said:

At maximum it's 0.1 seconds faster to kill with an OBIR quickswitch vs straight FBW. I'd like to know how that much time makes the OBIR insane vs say the CR762, which can do the same exact thing the OBIR can but only 0.11 seconds slower (without CJ).

You're thinking too much about what the numbers say. It does not matter what the TTK is. You're never gonna get "perfect" TTK at all given times, thats why numbers are irrelevant.

You need to look at how the game actually plays out.

 

The problem is how fast a player can sit behind a corner/car, tag you 49/50 with an OBIR. That way the player already has a huge advantage, and he can instantly swap to his Obeya FBW to finish you off. 

The other player can very rarely react to an OBIR popping out of a corner and tagging you 49/50. 

 

While on Test B, you actually have to wait for a little bit and it does not make it instant.

 

You need to stop thinking about it being a 1v1 wild west duel in the middle of the street. There is always cover, cars, shields, etc... that will make a huge impact on how the game plays out and how fast someone will kill each other.

[Tenginima 74]

2 hours ago, ExoticZ said:

 

 

As a player who used to main OBIR, I can safely say that OBIR is one of the most insane and ridiculous weapons for all ranges. It can be used for long range, medium range, close range, etc...

Nerfing the "insta-swap" of OBIR is hundred percent needed.

 

 

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.

2 minutes ago, ExoticZ said:

You're thinking too much about what the numbers say. It does not matter what the TTK is. You're never gonna get "perfect" TTK at all given times, thats why numbers are irrelevant.

You need to look at how the game actually plays out.

 

The problem is how fast a player can sit behind a corner/car, tag you 49/50 with an OBIR. That way the player already has a huge advantage, and he can instantly swap to his Obeya FBW to finish you off. 

The other player can very rarely react to an OBIR popping out of a corner and tagging you 49/50. 

 

While on Test B, you actually have to wait for a little bit and it does not make it instant.

 

You need to stop thinking about it being a 1v1 wild west duel in the middle of the street. There is always cover, cars, shields, etc... that will make a huge impact on how the game plays out and how fast someone will kill each other.

They are relevant, and even when you discard just numbers, you get my theoretical type of response instead, the result is the same.

[crusade 89]

7 minutes ago, ExoticZ said:

You're thinking too much about what the numbers say. It does not matter what the TTK is. You're never gonna get "perfect" TTK at all given times, thats why numbers are irrelevant.

You need to look at how the game actually plays out.

 

The problem is how fast a player can sit behind a corner/car, tag you 49/50 with an OBIR. That way the player already has a huge advantage, and he can instantly swap to his Obeya FBW to finish you off. 

The other player can very rarely react to an OBIR popping out of a corner and tagging you 49/50. 

 

While on Test B, you actually have to wait for a little bit and it does not make it instant.

 

You need to stop thinking about it being a 1v1 wild west duel in the middle of the street. There is always cover, cars, shields, etc... that will make a huge impact on how the game plays out and how fast someone will kill each other.

TTK does matter, because TTK tells us the damage output of a weapon. "Numbers are irrelevant." That's a bit superfluous, don't you think?

 

The part of my argument you ignored however, is that any other gun can practically do the same thing. My example was the CR762, two shots gives you an OBIR burst, then duck into cover while equipping secondary.

 

If you're cover popping with an OBIR, and the opposition isn't in a position to counter you in some way, then they've been out positioned and would die regardless if you are quickswitching with the OBIR or not. So, instead of 1 burst > swap to FBW, it would be to continue bursting with the OBIR. I'd say the switch to FBW needs to be made when you need to push or you are being pushed. If you need to push, the 0.5s delay is negligible and does serve to slow the push down a tad, but doesn't really change the situation. If you are being pushed, my argument is that while yes, you get damage on someone as they are pushing you with the initial burst, but that would be the case for any other weapon other than a sniper rifle which already has a delay.

 

I think the focus is on how short the burst is, but what I'm saying is that I can literally do the same exact thing with a CR762 if there is covered involved. The main difference is that I would have to peak twice to achieve the same damage (once per shot) to completely minimize exposure. And even then you could argue that it's less exposure than an OBIR burst, because you don't have to wait for the full burst to output.

 

And I think it is also occasionally appropriate to think about 1v1 no cover duels, because those do happen.

 

Also, you keep saying that the switch to your secondary is "instant" when there is an equip time.

[vsb 6171]

7 hours ago, SilverCrow said:

People never f-ing listen to me. They're just determined to oppose anything I say, even if I'm right.

yikes dude

 

 

4 hours ago, ExoticZ said:

Test B is in my own opinion the best change for Low-Yields. It changes how you would play Low-Yields on current LIVE districts and on Test B districts. With the new change it makes Low-Yields be used for "Area control". Because thats what Low-Yields should be used for, it should be spammy and it should be for taking over a certain area. Lowering damage and increasing the fuse timer is a really good change for Low-Yields.  They are still useful, just not as great as they are on LIVE districts.

test B low yields are neither spammy or good for area denial - im pretty sure 8/10 times i’ll just end up pushing through a test B low yield because 1) i now have extra time before each grenade explodes, and 2) it has such hilariously bad damage output 

 

tbh i have a hard time thinking of any situation where test B low yields would be the optimal choice, other than maybe if you want to get sweaty and hvr/low yield 

 

test A low yields are still better for area denial because although they have a smaller radius they deal an amount of damage that’s actually threatening and can be put downrange faster 

[Acornie 490]

While not having extensive testing done in actual PvP encounters, I think I have enough to do a  weigh-in despite it probably not being very informative
 

RFP: It feels like a double nerf, the less accuracy and quicker dmg dropoff is totally fine, but the less damage making it into a 4 burst is too much, why not keep it a 3 burst kill but take off some of the overdamage when all shots land?
 

OCA: I'm glad B was the option picked, it keeps the ttk just under .7 stock so it doesn't make it feel too much different
 

LYGs: these needed some sort of 'nerfing' for awhile now but I have qualms about both A and B. I don't like the longer fuse timer on B, so I like A but the dmg is too low. Why not keep the dmg the same or at least 550 because the small radius already nerfs them quite substantially
 

FFA/OBIR While I initially had no complaints about the delay to weapon switching, the more feedback against it piled up the more I'm inclined to agree that it does add too much 'clunkyness' to it, but I don't really agree it's a terrible idea. I'm assuming the delay put at is .5 seconds because that's the fire interval; but something less, such as half the fire interval (.25 seconds) would hinder QSing slightly without it even being noticeable, (also pls make the spring delay .5 to line up with the fire interval, thanks)
 

I try to look for more mild solutions most of the time because I think a more mild approach to weapon balance needs to be taken overall 

[crusade 89]

5 hours ago, Acornie said:

I try to look for more mild solutions most of the time because I think a more mild approach to weapon balance needs to be taken overall 

I agree with this, and I actually came up with an idea while I was at work today for the OBIR.

 

Instead of a delay added to the OBIR, how about we try lowering the damage from 165 to 150 (450 burst damage). It seems negligible at first, but it turns the FBW into a 4 shot off a full burst (450 +540 = 990). It also keeps the .45 as a better power option. If that still doesn't seem like it's enough, perhaps try increasing the burst length by a slight amount. I'm hesitant to suggest that, but if it's a very minor change it shouldn't affect the weapon too much.

 

I'm going to stand firm and say that I disagree with adding a switch delay for a standard rifle.

 

I'd like to know what you think of this idea opposed to the switch delay. @ExoticZ

[ExoticZ 131]

1 hour ago, crusade said:

I agree with this, and I actually came up with an idea while I was at work today for the OBIR.

 

Instead of a delay added to the OBIR, how about we try lowering the damage from 165 to 150 (450 burst damage). It seems negligible at first, but it turns the FBW into a 4 shot off a full burst (450 +540 = 990). It also keeps the .45 as a better power option. If that still doesn't seem like it's enough, perhaps try increasing the burst length by a slight amount. I'm hesitant to suggest that, but if it's a very minor change it shouldn't affect the weapon too much.

 

I'm going to stand firm and say that I disagree with adding a switch delay for a standard rifle.

 

I'd like to know what you think of this idea opposed to the switch delay. @ExoticZ

I have nothing against trying more solutions/changes for the OBIR. Decreasing damage to make it 4-shot FBW is a good idea.

I do believe this has been brought up before, never know why it didnt get discussed further.

 

Definitely something that LO could try do for the OBIR instead of switch delay.

 

At the end of the day, all we want is balance.

[crusade 89]

10 minutes ago, ExoticZ said:

I have nothing against trying more solutions/changes for the OBIR. Decreasing damage to make it 4-shot FBW is a good idea.

I do believe this has been brought up before, never know why it didnt get discussed further.

 

Definitely something that LO could try do for the OBIR instead of switch delay.

 

At the end of the day, all we want is balance.

Yeah, I agree. Balance is the goal. I also just want to let you know that even though I disagreed with you earlier, I do value your opinion because I'm aware of your experience with the game.

[vsb 6171]

3 hours ago, crusade said:

Instead of a delay added to the OBIR, how about we try lowering the damage from 165 to 150 (450 burst damage). It seems negligible at first, but it turns the FBW into a 4 shot off a full burst (450 +540 = 990). It also keeps the .45 as a better power option. If that still doesn't seem like it's enough, perhaps try increasing the burst length by a slight amount. I'm hesitant to suggest that, but if it's a very minor change it shouldn't affect the weapon too much

 

2 hours ago, ExoticZ said:

Decreasing damage to make it 4-shot FBW is a good idea.

 

give me my internet points please

On 9/4/2019 at 5:03 PM, Solamente said:

• if the bolt timer is canned - lower the obir's total burst damage from anywhere from 450-400 and increase its range (to make up for the loss of some overdamage), this would still technically allow for quickswitching with the .45 but limit the effectiveness of the fbw

 

also do this orbit, bolt timers are gay

[Shini 251]

2 hours ago, ExoticZ said:

I have nothing against trying more solutions/changes for the OBIR. Decreasing damage to make it 4-shot FBW is a good idea.

I do believe this has been brought up before, never know why it didnt get discussed further.

 

Definitely something that LO could try do for the OBIR instead of switch delay.

 

At the end of the day, all we want is balance.

 

3 hours ago, crusade said:

I agree with this, and I actually came up with an idea while I was at work today for the OBIR.

 

Instead of a delay added to the OBIR, how about we try lowering the damage from 165 to 150 (450 burst damage). It seems negligible at first, but it turns the FBW into a 4 shot off a full burst (450 +540 = 990). It also keeps the .45 as a better power option. If that still doesn't seem like it's enough, perhaps try increasing the burst length by a slight amount. I'm hesitant to suggest that, but if it's a very minor change it shouldn't affect the weapon too much.

 

I'm going to stand firm and say that I disagree with adding a switch delay for a standard rifle.

 

I'd like to know what you think of this idea opposed to the switch delay. @ExoticZ

450 sounds like a decent test but would you say that it might hurt the range on the OBIR more as a unintended side affect? This switch nerf attempts to make it less effective at cqc whilst not really hurting the range. The 450 burst will hurt both, maybe morso on the range maybe, especially if you miss a bullet or two on a long range burst.
Not against the suggestion though btw, just a thought.

 

Still, I think the sprint delay needs to either be almost non existent or at least less than the bolt timer so OBIR users can basically sprint as soon as they stop shooting (which is what the current switch to secondary was useful for). Not sure why its so high on the OBIR.

Edited September 6, 2019 by Shini

[vsb 6171]

34 minutes ago, Shini said:

450 sounds like a decent test but would you say that it might hurt the range on the OBIR more as a unintended side affect? This switch nerf attempts to make it less effective at cqc whilst not really hurting the range. The 450 burst will hurt both, maybe morso on the range maybe, especially if you miss a bullet or two on a long range burst.
Not against the suggestion though btw, just a thought.

45 minutes ago, Solamente said:

and increase its range (to make up for the loss of some overdamage)

:^)

 

[crusade 89]

6 hours ago, Solamente said:

give me my internet points please

Sorry brother, missed when you suggested the idea. At least we're both on board with it.

6 hours ago, Shini said:

 

450 sounds like a decent test but would you say that it might hurt the range on the OBIR more as a unintended side affect? This switch nerf attempts to make it less effective at cqc whilst not really hurting the range. The 450 burst will hurt both, maybe morso on the range maybe, especially if you miss a bullet or two on a long range burst.
Not against the suggestion though btw, just a thought.

 

Still, I think the sprint delay needs to either be almost non existent or at least less than the bolt timer so OBIR users can basically sprint as soon as they stop shooting (which is what the current switch to secondary was useful for). Not sure why its so high on the OBIR.

I'd say in regards to damage it's pretty minor, but you still bring up a good point. Current minimum damage for OBIR is 44% I believe.

1,000 / (165 * 0.44) = 13.78 (14 Shots to kill at min range)

1,000 / (150 * 0.44) = 15.15 (16 Shots to kill at min range)

 

So, it's 2 added bullets to land a kill in minimum damage. BXNNXD suggested raising when the actual drop off started, but perhaps raising the minimum damage % a bit higher would be better. Raising it from 44% to 50% would bring it back up to a 14 shot kill at min range.

 

And yeah, I suppose if there was no sprint delay then perhaps a switch delay might be alright, but I'd like to see something else tried first.

[AxeTurboAgresor 268]

OCA: ok its fair. It was just a matter of time when this happens

 

OBIR: I can understand why some people get mad over swapping, cuz they dont counter this very often, but honestly there was nothing OP or broken abou it, and numbers are the proof.

 

RPF: Many small unnecessary changes that would nerf this pistol bigly, while the only thing that this weapon needed was range nerf only.

 

Yolos: I wonder what veteran with at least 1000+h played find yolos OP. I always prefer frags over yolos unless I decide to go full mental mode with opgl and yolos. Maybe lower its effective explosion radius, but keep other stats as they are.

 

In conclusion Id like to say that non of the weapons tested need a big changes such as -1yolo + damage nerf + exp. radius nerf.

Small tweaks that all asked for such raising OCAs TTK to 0.68s are all whats needed.

All I see are nerfs that would ground YOLOs and RPF next to the uselesness.

Edited September 6, 2019 by AxeTurboAgresor

[vsb 6171]

11 minutes ago, AxeTurboAgresor said:

Yolos: I wonder what veteran with at least 1000+h played find yolos OP.

pretty much everyone i’ve ever been involved in a balance discussion with has agreed that loyos need a nerf, i think you’re the odd one out