The hell did you do to the bounty system

[Noob_Guardian 417]

19 hours ago, illgot said:

I have been shut down like that by some of the real golds on NA.  I do well enough against silvers and low golds, but take a hand full of the real golds that group... I'm just basically a meat shield and my N/P drops real fast.

 

But without a large population the extremes are more common than when the servers were alive with multiple districts.

What other enfs are even remotely good enough to do that though? I know plenty of crims that are good enough for that, but finding enfs like that are reallllyyy haaaard

[vsb 6170]

2 hours ago, Lily Rain said:

The bounty system didn't prevent players from pressing k to run missions nor it prematurely ended ongoing missions so there is no connection here. Enforcers were affected more positively as they are meant to have high prestige. Those not wanting to have prestige were not the focus of this entire design.

nowhere did i say that the bounty system prevented players from playing, in fact you were the one that stated that someone who doesn't like the old bounty system shouldn't play enforcer 

 

 

2 hours ago, Lily Rain said:

Stabba-PIG is a powerhouse with unmatched stopping power. APB is a game where players can easily and almost always get 50/1000 stamina damage from various sources. This secondary can finish the job with 1 shot after that, so no. It is objectively and effectively beyond correct.

ltl is always objectively worse than any lethal weapon because opponents have to be "killed" twice, even in the case of a 1 shot pig stun

 

 

2 hours ago, Lily Rain said:

Even better. It is time for said players to see reason and play the game the way it was meant to be played rather than have it play like different, stale games that the world has plenty of already.

i'm confused, players are meant to afk during missions to run over hundreds of signs? or enforcers are supposed to hit every civilian they see?

 

neither of these seem like "the way the game was meant to be played"

 

additionally, because little orbit has removed bounty interaction in missions i'm pretty sure that not having bounty interactions in missions is the way the game is intended at this point

 

 

2 hours ago, Lily Rain said:

Nor is getting bounty mid-mission.

i don't remember saying otherwise

 

 

2 hours ago, Lily Rain said:

Spotter's visibility is leagues beyond that of a map indicator. Adding to that the beautifully short cooldown of spotter, Spotter is also far more frequent than bounty. Spotter is in fact more frequent than getting bounty via arresting, it is that much broken. Spotter is just superior to bounty in every way when it comes to revealing players. It was already established that R195+ mods are ridiculous and this is one of them. One simply does not defend these mods in any shape or form.

 

"Spotter is a reward for successfully using basic tactics and game skills"? Spotter tags opponents the instant they land on the camera indicator.. it doesn't even require tracking for a short duration. To make it even more brain-dead, it tags those in a vehicle as well. It lasts long enough for either the user or another team member to move in and finish the job. Where is the skill in using a borderline wallhack that requires no effort to function? Spotter mod in APB is simply 1 step short of a game called Blacklight Retribution.

 

My argument entails that spotter-mod is a million times more revealing and frequent than earning bounty status. I stand by the fact that spotter is cheap and not equivalent to getting bounty. It is cheap, broken and should have been looked at before the bounty system to be frank. I do not believe in any way that they are "equivalent".

both mechanics are braindead wallhacks, altho spotter at least requires player initiative - its just that people are arguing one is balanced

 

 

2 hours ago, Lily Rain said:

"less desirable" pertains to personal-taste so you should only speak for yourself in that regard. But alas, driving people away from said activities rather than bringing focus to them in hopes for them to become attractive again is wrong in every way. Discussions in the forums are used (actually mostly ignored) to better prepare the game to the world for when LO re-advertises it again later. You should drive them into making things more attractive and rewarding rather than throwing them in a store-room.

i think i speak for most people when i say that removing features, making mechanics more time consuming, and making mechanics riskier/more difficult for no extra payoff all mean open world activities are less desirable

 

i've posted my suggestions for the bounty system (and n5/p5 specifically) several times, imo they were far less drastic changes than straight up deleting n5/p5 from missions but i have no issue with the temporary removal little orbit decided to do

 

 

2 hours ago, Lily Rain said:

30 minutes is way above the average time for missions in practice. The first stage gets done instantly and that is assuming the offensive-team was waiting for opposition. Additionally, players /abandonmission long missions. Realistically, 30+ minutes per mission is way off the mark.

"up to 30 minutes" doesn't mean the average mission is 30 minutes long, and there are 30 minute missions

 

frankly mission times don't even matter since you've claimed that "good enforcers" will hit p5 every mission, so this is now a failure of a mechanic affecting 100% of missions

 

 

2 hours ago, Lily Rain said:

Having n5/p5 players interfere with your mission is free role-progression.

assuming you can kill them

 

a random player involving themselves in your mission regardless of what's happening is not a balancing mechanic, no matter how you spin it

 

 

2 hours ago, Lily Rain said:

APB is a somewhat tanky game where a 2v1 situation usually guarantees the latter, lonely person's death.

yes which is exactly why i imagine most people against the old bounty system found it frustrating when they were fighting an opponent and a random bounty decides to join in against them

 

 

2 hours ago, Lily Rain said:

If needed, a mid-mission stage in APB lasts to plentiful 5 minutes.. Last stages could also last 10 and 15 minutes... there is plenty of respawns within these time frames and the bounty has 1 life in that state.. So if your entire team is bullied to the point where that bounty single-handedly "wrecks" your team's mission.. if your entire team can not deal with 1 bounty, the problem is then clearly in your team members underperforming and with performance like that, chances are you are going to lose the mission anyway. Don't blame the game for your own shortcomings and misplays.

nowhere did i state that a bounty had to hang around to cause damage, a bounty killing your vip and forcing them to respawn away from protection or a bounty taking out one player in a stalemate tdm are just the two easiest examples i can think of where one unnecessary death instantly puts your team at a disadvantage 

 

having issues handling suddenly being outnumbered , either because you're a bounty and have potentially 40 other people to deal with or because a random bounty decided to shoot at your team, is a "shortcoming" that only the very best players can coast through - and the bounty system doesn't affect only the very best players

 

 

2 hours ago, Lily Rain said:

It doesn't fail at that balance because those lesser players could all target the bounty who is playing too good at once.. with APB's sub-par, high-ttk constraints, those aren't playing too good still have the advantage of outnumbering the bounty.. The system doesn't negatively affect these players as it is actually in their favor.

players who are not performing "too good" in their current mission can go n5/p5, a system intended to punish players playing "too good" is a failure when it affects people its not intended for

 

 

2 hours ago, Lily Rain said:

And disabling the system enhanced the open world feel...? It doesn't fail at enhancing the open world feel whatsoever. You say the difference is negligible but your view on the bounty system in its entirely stems from it being too frequent to your taste.. Kindly affirm your stance as you are contradicting yourself.

affecting the open world feel and the frequency of bounty occurrences are not mutually exclusive

 

 

2 hours ago, Lily Rain said:

It doesn't fail at engaging in high risk/reward gameplay. Rewards stack as players continue to play so the bonus will be seen in the long run. One simply shouldn't expect $5,000 from a single kill or something ridiculous like that because 'people can shoot me in an open world PvP shooter mid-mission'... Buffing rewards is not difficult anyways as all it takes is some values to be changed in the game's code, so it isn't a valid point of failure. It is simply something to be tweaked like many other things in the game.

it fails entirely at high risk/high reward - competing against 1-4 enemy players that are intended to be as equal to you as possible for up to 30 minutes awards a set amount of apb$ and joker tickets/consumables but competing against potentially 40 players forever awards less apb$ and no joker tickets/consumables

 

there is no "over time", you pop a bounty, get 10-15 kills, and then die and that 150 extra apb$ is your "high reward"

 

this is a valid point of failure because this is how the bounty system is currently implemented, how easy something could be to change has no bearing on how bad it is without being changed

 

 

2 hours ago, Lily Rain said:

One simply shouldn't expect $5,000 from a single kill or something ridiculous like that because 'people can shoot me in an open world PvP shooter mid-mission'

yeah higher rewards for a single kill just because "open world pvp" is ridiculous hahahaha

 

 

Edited February 16, 2020 by Solamente
typo

[Salvick 248]

3 hours ago, zekter said:

Jesus, this is pure cancer at this point. Bounty system wasn't made for the current game's state, devs didn't think 10 years ahead when players would be mastering the game. There are infinity situations where it would end up fcking you up. Matches aren't always unbalanced; sometimes you get good opp and this means the match will keep going until the last stage almost 100% of the time, getting N5/P5 can mean how it'll end and it's too RNG to be a decisive factor. 

 

Stop saying it is a balance factor, in this case bad matchmaking is what should you should be arguing about. You never doing well or getting close matches matches doesn't mean everyone is in the same situation, some people are actually getting close matches. I don't even fall into the "good player" category as you've said this entire thread, but still I get alot of those close matches. Also, can't see a reason why bounty wouldn't be a punishment for y'all too, unless you were playing all day on bronze servers to boost your ego.

 

Besides I'm not one of these saying that the bounty system is a balance factor I want to say one more time that there's a contradiction when stating "players mastering the game" end up "fucked up by an RNG mechanic" because if it is supposed that someone mastered the game, well, they had like 10 years to master the bounty system too.

Also telling others how they should play the game or assuming they are silvers or that they only play on bronze servers and anything such like that when the threat system is totally broken and exploited to death and people dethreat for multiple reasons including to by-pass the useless threat lock currently in place is a vague argument to say the least. Indeed since a bunch of players that reach the gold threat actually move to bronze districts, we could argue that actual golds playing in silver/gold instances are lacking of a big portion of the current population of the game to consolidate or lose their threat. Threat doesn't mean anything anymore tbh, except to be the bully of the day on forums ofc.

 

So it seems the philosophy on APB now is "master it or remove it", such a way to develop skills and adapt to a game.

[vsb 6170]

24 minutes ago, Salvick said:

well, they had like 10 years to master the bounty system too.

you can’t “master” the bounty system, unless you’re a crim who can pay off after every mission (and even then you might still get a bounty) it’s just a straight disadvantage that lasts until it inevitably helps you die 

 

 

Edited February 16, 2020 by Solamente
typo

[zekter 11]

1 hour ago, Salvick said:

 

Besides I'm not one of these saying that the bounty system is a balance factor I want to say one more time that there's a contradiction when stating "players mastering the game" end up "fucked up by an RNG mechanic" because if it is supposed that someone mastered the game, well, they had like 10 years to master the bounty system too.

Also telling others how they should play the game or assuming they are silvers or that they only play on bronze servers and anything such like that when the threat system is totally broken and exploited to death and people dethreat for multiple reasons including to by-pass the useless threat lock currently in place is a vague argument to say the least. Indeed since a bunch of players that reach the gold threat actually move to bronze districts, we could argue that actual golds playing in silver/gold instances are lacking of a big portion of the current population of the game to consolidate or lose their threat. Threat doesn't mean anything anymore tbh, except to be the bully of the day on forums ofc.

 

So it seems the philosophy on APB now is "master it or remove it", such a way to develop skills and adapt to a game.

You can't master randomness. I'm not bullying anyone though, I'm barely average and I'm pretty much aware of it. I just can't see the point on people defending such system; this leads to the only thing I can assume which is the fact that they aren't getting challenged enough, otherwise they wouldn't want a random-based mechanic to be their's mission decisive factor. That's all. I also agree with gold not meaning anything, but if you're running away from your original threat you're just a loser making new players suffer on bronze districts to boost your ego-- not aiming at you, just saying what some people can't accept.

Edited February 16, 2020 by zekter

[Salvick 248]

10 hours ago, Solamente said:

you can’t “master” the bounty system, unless you’re a crim who can pay off after every mission (and even then you might still get a bounty) it’s just a straight disadvantage that lasts until it inevitably helps you die

 

Yeah well, as a crim I always try to payoff so as a main crim I used to enjoy it. As an enf I've found out I earn much more money by just playing regularly so the bounty status didn't pissed me off as much.

Just for the note, yes it pisses me off a lot when I die in the middle of a mission and specially when my team end up losing that mission because of this. But I still like it, the amount of frustration for failing is proportional to the satisfaction I get if I survive long enough while killing a couple ones.

 

Though many of the aspects pointed out by the ones celebrating the removal of the bounty system are quite valid to me too, like the little cash rewards and the high risk you're put on. The radar was ok and I think some times I spotted a player clearly wallhacking thanks to it too, but that's irrelevant at this point.

 

Being killed by your own faction and the frequency you turn on bounty were also two things that I always considered badly implemented, specially as enforcer because I turn on bounty more often and getting killed by another enforcers was immersion-breaking to me.

 

I hope a good rework takes place in the near future, maybe some community brainstorming would help now that this thread have prolonged a while enough.

 

 

  

9 hours ago, zekter said:

You can't master randomness. I'm not bullying anyone though, I'm barely average and I'm pretty much aware of it. I just can't see the point on people defending such system; this leads to the only thing I can assume which is the fact that they aren't getting challenged enough, otherwise they wouldn't want a random-based mechanic to be their's mission decisive factor. That's all. I also agree with gold not meaning anything, but if you're running away from your original threat you're just a loser making new players suffer on bronze districts to boost your ego-- not aiming at you, just saying what some people can't accept.

 

Yeah I get it, although I still think this feature of the game was just an additional factor to take into consideration when playing the game. Neither was I pointing as you saying you are a bully, that was just in general terms that I said it. Also I'm saying the whole threat doesn't mean anything, not just gold, bronze and silver are also not representative of current experience, skills or game knowledge.

 

Dethreating is a different discussion that has been talked a lot already anyways, but for the bounty system, although I'm not playing the game since a while, I really liked it tho.

 

 

Edited February 16, 2020 by Salvick
Adding another quote and reply

[Queen of Love 449]

7 hours ago, zekter said:

You can't master randomness. I'm not bullying anyone though, I'm barely average and I'm pretty much aware of it. I just can't see the point on people defending such system; this leads to the only thing I can assume which is the fact that they aren't getting challenged enough, otherwise they wouldn't want a random-based mechanic to be their's mission decisive factor. That's all. I also agree with gold not meaning anything, but if you're running away from your original threat you're just a loser making new players suffer on bronze districts to boost your ego-- not aiming at you, just saying what some people can't accept.

the people asking for this "amazing" p5n5 removing are the same that dethreat for stomp in bronze.

not your case but if you check COD features, you can see how unfair was give a bonus for kill more to people that doesnt need it at all (airstrike, helicopter,nuke and other demential ego boost)

P5N5 is a nice opposite to this. It allow also the weak/noobs to have a chance to have fun.

 

Yes, having fun is at least put an hit to score, not necessary have 32498230984kill and zero death as tryhard wish.

[zekter 11]

1 hour ago, Queen of Love said:

the people asking for this "amazing" p5n5 removing are the same that dethreat for stomp in bronze.

not your case but if you check COD features, you can see how unfair was give a bonus for kill more to people that doesnt need it at all (airstrike, helicopter,nuke and other demential ego boost)

P5N5 is a nice opposite to this. It allow also the weak/noobs to have a chance to have fun.

 

Yes, having fun is at least put an hit to score, not necessary have 32498230984kill and zero death as tryhard wish.

It's unfair to give good people rewards? Ok. Weak/noobs shouldn't be playing against good players, it's matchmaking fault. You don't seem to understand that the death number isn't the issue here, getting N5/P5 can determine how a mission will end if it were close in scores. Why would dethreaters ask for this to be removed? I'm not an old player, I've played on bronze for a few months before I stopped oscillating between silver - gold, but I amost never had played against new or even silver players there. All I remember from bronze server is a bunch of bad 255s abusing explosivees and trying to stomp newcomers.

Edited February 16, 2020 by zekter

[Queen of Love 449]

28 minutes ago, zekter said:

It's unfair to give good people rewards? Ok. Weak/noobs shouldn't be playing against good players, it's matchmaking fault. You don't seem to understand that the death number isn't the issue here, getting N5/P5 can determine how a mission will end if it were close in scores. Why would dethreaters ask for this to be removed? I'm not an old player, I've played on bronze for a few months before I stopped oscillating between silver - gold, but I amost never had played against new or even silver players there. All I remember from bronze server is a bunch of bad 255s abusing explosivees and trying to stomp newcomers.

good rewards should be active After and not During the game expecially if reward is a boost for have more kill.

 

Every 3 goal Team winning gains a free penalty kick, ehy !!! should be the opposite in a friendly match.

[illgot 379]

12 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

What other enfs are even remotely good enough to do that though? I know plenty of crims that are good enough for that, but finding enfs like that are reallllyyy haaaard

I usually play enforcer.  Lol, not many good enforcers to carry me.

 

Merged.

 

14 hours ago, zekter said:

Jesus, this is pure cancer at this point. Bounty system wasn't made for the current game's state, devs didn't think 10 years ahead when players would be mastering the game. There are infinity situations where it would end up fcking you up. Matches aren't always unbalanced; sometimes you get good opp and this means the match will keep going until the last stage almost 100% of the time, getting N5/P5 can mean how it'll end and it's too RNG to be a decisive factor. 

 

Stop saying it is a balance factor, in this case bad matchmaking is what should you should be arguing about. You never doing well or getting close matches matches doesn't mean everyone is in the same situation, some people are actually getting close matches. I don't even fall into the "good player" category as you've said this entire thread, but still I get alot of those close matches. Also, can't see a reason why bounty wouldn't be a punishment for y'all too, unless you were playing all day on bronze servers to boost your ego.

For NA the bounty system does act as a way to balance missions.  But then again we are lucky to fill one silver district with bronze to gold players.   Even with segregation it isn't uncommon for an all gold team to go against a team of bronze noobs and silvers.

 

Having other players randomly take out the golds that are wiping out the opposing team may help advance a round, but usually not win when the odds are that lopsided.

[LilyRain 669]

10 hours ago, Solamente said:

nowhere did i say that the bounty system prevented players from playing, in fact you were the one that stated that someone who doesn't like the old bounty system shouldn't play enforcer

You... actually did..:

 

According to you, the disadvantage is theoretically INFINITE towards 'normal mission gameplay' (whatever normal pertains to). So yes, you DID say it through extremism.

 

And no:

 

I stated that those who dislike having high prestige shouldn't play on the Enforcer side if they wish to achieve their confinement more easily. This in no way completely phases them out of the Enforcer faction. You need to understand that "shouldn't" does NOT equal "mustn't". I in fact brought attention to a method in which they can play as Enforcers and achieve their goal of suppressing their bounty status without inevitably dying as many claim. I went out of my way to give an effective method regarding this. This was a positive effort towards a negative ideal and in no shape or form is bad to require such an empty quote.

 

10 hours ago, Solamente said:

ltl is always objectively worse than any lethal weapon because opponents have to be "killed" twice, even in the case of a 1 shot pig stun

Your conclusion does not consider the entire picture, not even close.

 

Your argument is false on both of its fronts. On one hand, with how plentiful the stun-timer is, there exists all the time in the world there is to take action.. There is enough time to even stun other criminals then come back to take action on the first. Whether the Stunner, a teammate or an enemy finishes off the stunned criminal (because I don't want you to get the arrest).. the fate of the stunned criminal is already decided. On the other hand, on its worst (without aid from a primary, grenade, a teammate or opposition fault), the PIG can effectively end a fight within 1.25 seconds. This is already faster than a wide variety of lethal weapons (e.g RFP, RSA, ACT44, Snipers as a whole, and more)... Refrain from false extreme claims, please.

 

Moreover, with the exception of a special case that is Strife vs Fragile (and I already implied that R195+ mods weren't well thought out), all non-projectile weapons in APB require the opponent to be "killed twice". For instance, even a seasoned-sniper must head-shot twice to kill, since head-shots aren't a thing in APB.

 

Your argument is a global variable in APB that applies to all non-projectile weapons, not just to LTL. This doesn't make the weapon "objectively worse".

 

10 hours ago, Solamente said:

i'm confused, players are meant to afk during missions to run over hundreds of signs? or enforcers are supposed to hit every civilian they see?

 

neither of these seem like "the way the game was meant to be played"

 

additionally, because little orbit has removed bounty interaction in missions i'm pretty sure that not having bounty interactions in missions is the way the game is intended at this point

How do I say this in a gentle manner..:

 

 

You are confused because you are either unable to read or pretending to be confused. I stated that the complete opposite is what was intended based on existing game mechanics that compliment bounty for Enforcers..

 

And no.. because Little Orbit did so and so is a false argument.. Using your own argument against you I ask: Was RIOT intended? Was LO messing with shotguns after them taking over also intended? Was LO patching in xmas contacts outside of xmas also intended? I mean they did all of these so they had to be intended, mhmm mhmm!

 

No... LO took over APB. LO is not the original creator of APB and thus, their actions do not reflect what was originally intended by the original makers of the game. Your approach is completely misguided.

 

 

A gentle reminder that you did through extremist direct implication:

 

 

When you say the challenge of being bounty is impossible and theoretically infinite, then in your eyes, nothing can be done about it. Your extreme statement applies to both last and mid-mission stages. As such. according your own statements the outcome of a mission is already decided upon earning bounty status and this is how you said "otherwise" through direct implication.

 

10 hours ago, Solamente said:

both mechanics are braindead wallhacks, altho spotter at least requires player initiative - its just that people are arguing one is balanced

You started off by arguing that "additionally spotter is a reward for successfully using basic tactics and game skills" and now you easily say it is braindead. Again, your stance is weak and shifts back and forth rapidly..

 

No.. bounty is not a wall-hack as it is not visible outside the radar. You can't see bounties THROUGH WALLS.

 

This quotation alone implies that you believe spotter is balanced compared to bounty.... Dear heavens.. what is so balanced and rewarding about earning a wallhack by simply pressing 5? How is that skillful? Come back to your senses, please.

 

10 hours ago, Solamente said:

i think i speak for most people when i say that removing features, making mechanics more time consuming, and making mechanics riskier/more difficult for no extra payoff all mean open world activities are less desirable

Seeing that this thread exists alongside a poll that doesn't favor its complete removal, you don't speak for "most people".

 

10 hours ago, Solamente said:

i've posted my suggestions for the bounty system (and n5/p5 specifically) several times, imo they were far less drastic changes than straight up deleting n5/p5 from missions but i have no issue with the temporary removal little orbit decided to do

So have I and many others. The primary concern here is that LO is prioritizing less impactful changes when worse, more pressing and overall superior things exist such as your beloved and skill-dependent, perfectly balanced spotter mod.

 

10 hours ago, Solamente said:

"up to 30 minutes" doesn't mean the average mission is 30 minutes long, and there are 30 minute missions

 

frankly mission times don't even matter since you've claimed that "good enforcers" will hit p5 every mission, so this is now a failure of a mechanic affecting 100% of missions

Good Enforcers as in Enforcers who arrest. And again, Enforcers are meant to gain prestige not lose it so this mechanic is 100% successful in that regard. It only fails to satisfy your preference that doesn't belong in APB based on the vision of those who originally created it.

 

10 hours ago, Solamente said:

assuming you can kill them

 

a random player involving themselves in your mission regardless of what's happening is not a balancing mechanic, no matter how you spin it

The only person so far who has been spinning things around is you.. You speak as if p5/n5 gain health buffs such as headless horsemen or whatever... Yes, I can kill them and I can in fact arrest them. Bounties have as much health as anybody else... "assuming you can kill them" is the most weak argument to ever surface regarding this topic.

 

Take a step back and actually think before you argue in this manner. It only makes you sound like a weak newcomer. Hell, even newcomers can kill bounties.. This is getting pathetic.

 

11 hours ago, Solamente said:

yes which is exactly why i imagine most people against the old bounty system found it frustrating when they were fighting an opponent and a random bounty decides to join in against them

Gentle reminder that those people get seriously frustrated from any death they earn in this game.. I know some who say F this game and logoff after winning as MVPs... it is just in their mentality. Their frustrations and feelings are just that, feelings. They are the purely subjective which is the furthest thing possible from being objective to be considered as such.

 

Your imagination fails here as they 2 people fighting can see the bounty approaching on radar.. the bounty on the other hand can't see them on the map. They have the option to avoid engaging the bounty or skewing it in their favor.

 

12 hours ago, Solamente said:

nowhere did i state that a bounty had to hang around to cause damage, a bounty killing your vip and forcing them to respawn away from protection or a bounty taking out one player in a stalemate tdm are just the two easiest examples i can think of where one unnecessary death instantly puts your team at a disadvantage

Ohohoho, playing innocent even more, I love this.

 

When you say I ASSUME a bounty is killable, when you yourself state the opposite as well as 'infinitely impossible challenge' that is bounty "WRECK"ing missions lasting "30+" minutes, you did in fact state that they hang around enough to do this... You would have a much easier time if you refrain from using extreme claims every now and then. People said you contradict yourself quite a lot, seems like it is just a bit too much. Perhaps even more so that bounty itself, heh.

 

12 hours ago, Solamente said:

having issues handling suddenly being outnumbered , either because you're a bounty and have potentially 40 other people to deal with or because a random bounty decided to shoot at your team, is a "shortcoming" that only the very best players can coast through - and the bounty system doesn't affect only the very best player

You are somewhat special as you are not only led by frustration, but also by a super non-realistic phobia of fighting 40 players. You overused this term quite often..

 

Maps in APB were designed for 50v50 population, which is now set at 40v40.. the maps are somewhat large.. players are busy on their missions and won't risk leaving them to chase a bounty that is most certainly to engage or suppress their bounty before them getting to it... Not even if they buff rewards..

 

To help remedy your phobia, the max number of people that can chase you as a bounty in a district can be counted on your fingertips.. which will only happen in a part of an anti-bounty-parade led live on Twitch by ThePoundOfFlesh. Fighting potentially 40 players at once is pure extremism and nonsense.

 

12 hours ago, Solamente said:

players who are not performing "too good" in their current mission can go n5/p5, a system intended to punish players playing "too good" is a failure when it affects people its not intended for

You are frankly wrong again. Those who go bounty are already passively reaping the benefits from being p5, even if they aren't good at the game.. If those players fail to end their targets, their teammates can finish the job since the already damaged enemies have their positions revealed.. The only failure here is the team's confidence and coordination.

 

And quit overusing the term "intended" to drive your discussions. Nothing of what you say was intentional. All you are doing is crush your credibility in the long run. Get out of this habit please.

 

12 hours ago, Solamente said:

affecting the open world feel and the frequency of bounty occurrences are not mutually exclusive

By definition, mutually exclusive describes two events that can not occur simultaneously.

 

Previously, you have stated: "if the bounty system is intended to enhance the open world feel it fails - a negligible difference in the open world feel at the cost of a negative impact on apb’s core gameplay", meaning in your eyes that they are mutually exclusive.

 

Now you say that they are not.. Again, you are unable to stick to a stance. This is why people say you often contradict yourself, but nontheless. Thank you for agreeing without admitting that the system doesn't fail here. Try not to fall in your own vortex here and there, it might even be more frequent than you getting bounty in game at this point.

 

12 hours ago, Solamente said:

it fails entirely at high risk/high reward - competing against 1-4 enemy players that are intended to be as equal to you as possible for up to 30 minutes awards a set amount of apb$ and joker tickets/consumables but competing against potentially 40 players forever awards less apb$ and no joker tickets/consumables

 

Again, you are stating the system fails for extreme examples that will never ever happen. Reality says that even if someone was able to maintain bounty for 30 minutes hell even for an hour, the entire district won't chase that person down as they are busy playing their own missions. 1v40 "forever" is something only a fool would stand behind. You are better than this..

 

12 hours ago, Solamente said:

there is no "over time", you pop a bounty, get 10-15 kills, and then die and that 150 extra apb$ is your "high reward"

 

this is a valid point of failure because this is how the bounty system is currently implemented, how easy something could be to change has no bearing on how bad it is without being changed

This is sad, you are quoting "over time" that was not mentioned whatsoever in that quote. You also failed to understand the message.

 

"Rewards stack as players continue to play" is not time-bound by the single bounty life... bounty comes and goes throughout days, weeks, months and years.. That $150 or whatever is not a one-time deal. This or the value being easy to change is in no way a failure to the system. Just you failing to provide proper justification to sugar-coat what you want.

 

Precisely.

[TheHidden-Tember 142]

On 2/15/2020 at 4:02 AM, Solamente said:

“just don’t play enforcer if you don’t like the bounty system” is not a solution, if one faction is punished more for the exact same intended gameplay then it’s just bad game design

 

 

This is still the case btw. As a crim, killing your fellow bounty currently does nothing major.
As an enf, killing your fellow prestige 5 makes you prestige drop to 0

There are no other mechanics.

Current system is biased against enforcers.

[TheJellyGoo 343]

With that deduction I concur and say it's biased towards enforcers  

 

Not like we have discussed this on the last 12 pages.

[TzickyT 212]

4 hours ago, TheHidden-Tember said:

 

This is still the case btw. As a crim, killing your fellow bounty currently does nothing major.
As an enf, killing your fellow prestige 5 makes you prestige drop to 0

There are no other mechanics.

Current system is biased against enforcers.

didn't that change to max 1 level drop for both parties

 

[vsb 6170]

On 2/16/2020 at 9:36 AM, Lily Rain said:

You... actually did..:

 

According to you, the disadvantage is theoretically INFINITE towards 'normal mission gameplay' (whatever normal pertains to). So yes, you DID say it through extremism.

the disadvantage lasts until you die as long as you continue playing missions as you were, therefore it has a theoretically infinite duration

 

 

On 2/16/2020 at 9:36 AM, Lily Rain said:

I stated that those who dislike having high prestige shouldn't play on the Enforcer side if they wish to achieve their confinement more easily. This in no way completely phases them out of the Enforcer faction. You need to understand that "shouldn't" does NOT equal "mustn't". I in fact brought attention to a method in which they can play as Enforcers and achieve their goal of suppressing their bounty status without inevitably dying as many claim. I went out of my way to give an effective method regarding this. This was a positive effort towards a negative ideal and in no shape or form is bad to require such an empty quote.

we're just going in circles at this point, because enforcers being intended to reach bounty more often for the same mission gameplay as criminals is still poor game design

 

 

On 2/16/2020 at 9:36 AM, Lily Rain said:

Your conclusion does not consider the entire picture, not even close.

 

Your argument is false on both of its fronts. On one hand, with how plentiful the stun-timer is, there exists all the time in the world there is to take action.. There is enough time to even stun other criminals then come back to take action on the first. Whether the Stunner, a teammate or an enemy finishes off the stunned criminal (because I don't want you to get the arrest).. the fate of the stunned criminal is already decided. On the other hand, on its worst (without aid from a primary, grenade, a teammate or opposition fault), the PIG can effectively end a fight within 1.25 seconds. This is already faster than a wide variety of lethal weapons (e.g RFP, RSA, ACT44, Snipers as a whole, and more)... Refrain from false extreme claims, please.

 

Moreover, with the exception of a special case that is Strife vs Fragile (and I already implied that R195+ mods weren't well thought out), all non-projectile weapons in APB require the opponent to be "killed twice". For instance, even a seasoned-sniper must head-shot twice to kill, since head-shots aren't a thing in APB.

 

Your argument is a global variable in APB that applies to all non-projectile weapons, not just to LTL. This doesn't make the weapon "objectively worse".

there is no need to consider the entire picture - a successful ltl takeout requires a stun and an arrest vs a successful lethal takeout that only requires a kill, and players that are arrested still receive a grace period before they are completely removed from combat

 

 

 

On 2/16/2020 at 9:36 AM, Lily Rain said:

You are confused because you are either unable to read or pretending to be confused. I stated that the complete opposite is what was intended based on existing game mechanics that compliment bounty for Enforcers..

 

And no.. because Little Orbit did so and so is a false argument.. Using your own argument against you I ask: Was RIOT intended? Was LO messing with shotguns after them taking over also intended? Was LO patching in xmas contacts outside of xmas also intended? I mean they did all of these so they had to be intended, mhmm mhmm!

 

No... LO took over APB. LO is not the original creator of APB and thus, their actions do not reflect what was originally intended by the original makers of the game. Your approach is completely misguided.

the only mechanic i can think of that compliments enforcers being p5 is the ridiculously small boost to kill rewards

 

yes all of those were intended, other than the xmas contacts which was likely a bug - little orbit owns the game, whatever the original creators intended for the bounty system is irrelevant once little orbit modifies it

 

 

On 2/16/2020 at 9:36 AM, Lily Rain said:

When you say the challenge of being bounty is impossible and theoretically infinite, then in your eyes, nothing can be done about it. Your extreme statement applies to both last and mid-mission stages. As such. according your own statements the outcome of a mission is already decided upon earning bounty status and this is how you said "otherwise" through direct implication.

a bounty can have a large (negative) impact on a mission, this is not equivalent to the outcome of a mission being decided as soon as bounty is earned 

 

 

On 2/16/2020 at 9:36 AM, Lily Rain said:

You started off by arguing that "additionally spotter is a reward for successfully using basic tactics and game skills" and now you easily say it is braindead. Again, your stance is weak and shifts back and forth rapidly..

 

No.. bounty is not a wall-hack as it is not visible outside the radar. You can't see bounties THROUGH WALLS.

 

This quotation alone implies that you believe spotter is balanced compared to bounty.... Dear heavens.. what is so balanced and rewarding about earning a wallhack by simply pressing 5? How is that skillful? Come back to your senses, please.

understanding how to use modifications and aiming at an enemy are basic game skills, that doesn't mean spotter's advantage is acceptable for that level of engagement

 

2d radar is considered a wallhack even tho it doesnt show players through walls

 

yes i think the bounty system is more poorly implemented than the spotter modification, no i don't think the spotter modification is balanced - yet again these things are not mutually exclusive 

 

 

On 2/16/2020 at 9:36 AM, Lily Rain said:

The only person so far who has been spinning things around is you.. You speak as if p5/n5 gain health buffs such as headless horsemen or whatever... Yes, I can kill them and I can in fact arrest them. Bounties have as much health as anybody else... "assuming you can kill them" is the most weak argument to ever surface regarding this topic.

 

Take a step back and actually think before you argue in this manner. It only makes you sound like a weak newcomer. Hell, even newcomers can kill bounties.. This is getting pathetic.

you spoke as if bounties were automatically free kills, i guess we're both spinning things around 

 

 

On 2/16/2020 at 9:36 AM, Lily Rain said:

They are the purely subjective which is the furthest thing possible from being objective to be considered as such.

i can get more objective then - having an out of mission player being able to participate in any mission is an unfair mechanic, as it entirely disregards the game's attempt at matchmaking

 

 

On 2/16/2020 at 9:36 AM, Lily Rain said:

Your imagination fails here as they 2 people fighting can see the bounty approaching on radar.. the bounty on the other hand can't see them on the map. They have the option to avoid engaging the bounty or skewing it in their favor.

most enemies won't allow you to just walk away from combat

 

 

On 2/16/2020 at 9:36 AM, Lily Rain said:

Ohohoho, playing innocent even more, I love this.

 

When you say I ASSUME a bounty is killable, when you yourself state the opposite as well as 'infinitely impossible challenge' that is bounty "WRECK"ing missions lasting "30+" minutes, you did in fact state that they hang around enough to do this... You would have a much easier time if you refrain from using extreme claims every now and then. People said you contradict yourself quite a lot, seems like it is just a bit too much. Perhaps even more so that bounty itself, heh.

i've already addressed the "assumption"

 

there's no contradiction here tbh, bounties can hang around or they can blast through an area

 

 

On 2/16/2020 at 9:36 AM, Lily Rain said:

You are somewhat special as you are not only led by frustration, but also by a super non-realistic phobia of fighting 40 players. You overused this term quite often..

 

Maps in APB were designed for 50v50 population, which is now set at 40v40.. the maps are somewhat large.. players are busy on their missions and won't risk leaving them to chase a bounty that is most certainly to engage or suppress their bounty before them getting to it... Not even if they buff rewards..

 

To help remedy your phobia, the max number of people that can chase you as a bounty in a district can be counted on your fingertips.. which will only happen in a part of an anti-bounty-parade led live on Twitch by ThePoundOfFlesh. Fighting potentially 40 players at once is pure extremism and nonsense.

i simply chose the highest potential option which is something that needs to be taken into account for any balancing, but even one extra person fighting against you regardless of matchmaking is generally unfair

 

there's no need for anyone to specifically hunt you down for this to become a problem, the nature of almost every mission requires players to move throughout the map

 

 

On 2/16/2020 at 9:36 AM, Lily Rain said:

You are frankly wrong again. Those who go bounty are already passively reaping the benefits from being p5, even if they aren't good at the game.. If those players fail to end their targets, their teammates can finish the job since the already damaged enemies have their positions revealed.. The only failure here is the team's confidence and coordination.

 

And quit overusing the term "intended" to drive your discussions. Nothing of what you say was intentional. All you are doing is crush your credibility in the long run. Get out of this habit please.

how am i wrong? if the bounty system is intended to balance "too good" players, then allowing players that are not "too good" to receive the same balancing is a failure of the system

 

you're quoting my summarized list of different explanations in this thread about what the bounty system is "intended" for, obviously i'm going to use the word intent when discussing them

 

 

On 2/16/2020 at 9:36 AM, Lily Rain said:

By definition, mutually exclusive describes two events that can not occur simultaneously.

 

Previously, you have stated: "if the bounty system is intended to enhance the open world feel it fails - a negligible difference in the open world feel at the cost of a negative impact on apb’s core gameplay", meaning in your eyes that they are mutually exclusive.

 

Now you say that they are not.. Again, you are unable to stick to a stance. This is why people say you often contradict yourself, but nontheless. Thank you for agreeing without admitting that the system doesn't fail here. Try not to fall in your own vortex here and there, it might even be more frequent than you getting bounty in game at this point.

the quote doesn't mean they are mutually exclusive

 

 

On 2/16/2020 at 9:36 AM, Lily Rain said:

Again, you are stating the system fails for extreme examples that will never ever happen. Reality says that even if someone was able to maintain bounty for 30 minutes hell even for an hour, the entire district won't chase that person down as they are busy playing their own missions. 1v40 "forever" is something only a fool would stand behind. You are better than this..

as stated above there's no need for anyone to chase down an n5/p5 player, just being vulnerable to 40 people instead of 4 is a significant risk increase and the rewards are not proportional

 

 

On 2/16/2020 at 9:36 AM, Lily Rain said:

This is sad, you are quoting "over time" that was not mentioned whatsoever in that quote. You also failed to understand the message.

 

"Rewards stack as players continue to play" is not time-bound by the single bounty life... bounty comes and goes throughout days, weeks, months and years.. That $150 or whatever is not a one-time deal. This or the value being easy to change is in no way a failure to the system. Just you failing to provide proper justification to sugar-coat what you want.

over time is the same as "in the long run" but we can disagree if you want

 

i'd argue a slow steady increase in rewards over years is the opposite of high risk/high reward mechanic

 

values not being optimal is a system failure, to use your previous example shotgun rayscaling was a failure because damage was frontloaded - a value that was easily changed and yet it was still a failure

 

 

8 hours ago, TheHidden-Tember said:

This is still the case btw. As a crim, killing your fellow bounty currently does nothing major.
As an enf, killing your fellow prestige 5 makes you prestige drop to 0

There are no other mechanics.

Current system is biased against enforcers.

factionkilling is not intended so im not sure this example makes sense, but i'm all for fixing this uneven punishment

[军团的黑暗 2]

 yes interesting discussion but my goodness is already 12 page)

 

Edited February 17, 2020 by 军团的黑暗

[Salvick 248]

13 minutes ago, 军团的黑暗 said:

 yes interesting discussion but my goodness is already 12 page)

 

 

Well I think that's because some of these "vocal" members of the community can't live without getting all the attention to their requests and needs, which I consider it is not always representing what the vast "non-vocal" majority of the players wants or likes.

 

So when a few of us that barely join these discussions where posers and self-proclaimed elite players that besides they "mastered" the game better than anyone they will always throw the "you're silver" card or the "game is broken and poorly designed" statement to anyone who doesn't support their change/removal requests, these discussions turns infinite in an incredible attempt to keep pushing and forcing the kind of changes in the game that only benefit their game style disregarding if everyone else than that circle of players would rather have a game where we all can have some fun the way it is.

 

Sorry for putting it this way, didn't want to be that guy but had to say this. Love you guys.

[TheJellyGoo 343]

2 hours ago, Salvick said:

 

Well I think that's because some of these "vocal" members of the community can't live without getting all the attention to their requests and needs, which I consider it is not always representing what the vast "non-vocal" majority of the players wants or likes.

 

So when a few of us that barely join these discussions where posers and self-proclaimed elite players that besides they "mastered" the game better than anyone they will always throw the "you're silver" card or the "game is broken and poorly designed" statement to anyone who doesn't support their change/removal requests, these discussions turns infinite in an incredible attempt to keep pushing and forcing the kind of changes in the game that only benefit their game style disregarding if everyone else than that circle of players would rather have a game where we all can have some fun the way it is.

 

Sorry for putting it this way, didn't want to be that guy but had to say this. Love you guys.

Always takes two to tango so I would recommend coming down from that high horse you're currently trying to ride before it drops you.

[Fortune Runner 796]

37 minutes ago, TheJellyGoo said:

Always takes two to tango so I would recommend coming down from that high horse you're currently trying to ride before it drops you.

might want to take your own advice there

[LilyRain 669]

1 hour ago, Solamente said:

the disadvantage lasts until you die as long as you continue playing missions as you were, therefore it has a theoretically infinite duration

Theory and practice are two distinct approaches. While it is ideal when both match, they often do not. Practice always takes precedence over theory as not every potential based on theory can be realized.

 

It is a disadvantage in the eyes of those who can't take advantage of it and numerous ways to effectively get out of it were already mentioned for both factions. This is far from being an issue and it being a problem now of all times is unthinkable, especially to those who have been playing the game for a decade now.

 

1 hour ago, Solamente said:

we're just going in circles at this point, because enforcers being intended to reach bounty more often for the same mission gameplay as criminals is still poor game design

Again, you aren't taking into account the entire picture.

 

Enforcers exist because Criminals exist. Criminals can ram raid, mug civilians, steal cars and so forth on top of playing missions. Enforcers can do nothing but unopposed missions unless Criminal activity is established. Enforcers realizing prestige faster overall makes things more fair towards Enforcers income-wise and even then, Criminals still have the upper-hand when it comes to making income. Enforcers gaining prestige faster than Criminals is fine and in fact decent game design.

 

1 hour ago, Solamente said:

there is no need to consider the entire picture - a successful ltl takeout requires a stun and an arrest vs a successful lethal takeout that only requires a kill, and players that are arrested still receive a grace period before they are completely removed from combat

There is ALWAYS the need to consider the entire picture in order to polish/adjust things properly. Anything short of that leads to band-aid fixes that will always feel unfinished and open to criticism.

 

The grace period is part of the game. It either rewards Enforcers extra few seconds for winning an uphill confrontation or gives Criminals the chance to progress a role called "Saviour" as seen here: https://apbdb.com/roles/Role2_CrimRescue/

 

As mentioned before, APB isn't just team red vs team blue and should never be seen as such. There is more to APB than just playing with meta weapons and vehicles in a pool of pre-set, non-dynamic missions and it is LO's job to move in that direction, not the opposite.

 

5 hours ago, Solamente said:

a bounty can have a large (negative) impact on a mission, this is not equivalent to the outcome of a mission being decided as soon as bounty is earned

But some debate as if it indeed equivalent with extreme remarks..

 

2 hours ago, Solamente said:

understanding how to use modifications and aiming at an enemy are basic game skills, that doesn't mean spotter's advantage is acceptable for that level of engagement

Based on your previous statement:

 

It was clear that you were debating in favor of Spotter-mod and attempted to justify its powerful benefits through "basic skills". I am glad you are no longer supporting the existence of that mod it its current, broken form.

 

2 hours ago, Solamente said:

2d radar is considered a wallhack even tho it doesnt show players through walls

 

yes i think the bounty system is more poorly implemented than the spotter modification, no i don't think the spotter modification is balanced - yet again these things are not mutually exclusive

From that perspective that considers bounty a wallhack, it is still leagues behind spotter, fireworks, etc and its existence doesn't make life any easier/harder. This is where the concern kicks in. LO is prioritizing lesser over more pressing things and that is not a good sign nor optimal if LO genuinely wishes to bring back the player-base that is currently waiting for the game to be fixed.

 

That can be easily re-worked and I would voice to push for that if LO realizes its promise and revisits the bounty system. A super-easy fix is to make the radar-indicator chime once every 10 seconds or any other reasonable duration rather than have it work continuously in real-time. An even better fix is to simply have the block upon which the bounty exists chime on the large map only but you already know these suggestions. The concern is that on top of LO prioritizing it over more obvious things, removing it entirely was pure laziness and doesn't conceal the player from opponents because better sources of real-time position-information still exist and are still untouched.

 

Mentioning that the bounty system was more poorly implemented than spotter mod is comparing apples to oranges. One can be more poorly implemented but still be far less impactful than the other and this is the case here.

2 hours ago, Solamente said:

you spoke as if bounties were automatically free kills, i guess we're both spinning things around 

 

 

i can get more objective then - having an out of mission player being able to participate in any mission is an unfair mechanic, as it entirely disregards the game's attempt at matchmaking

APB is a casual game. Matchmaking in APB simply brings in ready-players to intercept those currently doing an unopposed mission. The closer in skill the better of course.. but it is very normal and common for matches to never be perfectly balanced team-wise. APB does not have mission-win-count leader-boards nor cares enough to record win-counts. APB is not ESL-ready, has no plans to be an E-Sport, doesn't have the population nor district-limit allowance if the population ever exists to support the best in the world matchmaking algorithms that themselves fail to find balanced matches (and no, phasing won't make matches significantly better than now due to the nature of APB). All this does is just kill what makes APB its own game and make it an even worse game to pick in a competitive market so tweaking it in that direction is a long-shot that will never see success as prime-games that actively seek it did not. I am certain a lot of players would come to this broken game every once in a while because it offers things other games don't and missions throughout the city intersecting is one of them.

 

2 hours ago, Solamente said:

most enemies won't allow you to just walk away from combat

 

i've already addressed the "assumption"

This is a PvP game, if you aren't in a mission district to fight, you can run and drive away as this is a very successful cowardice decision under the umbrella of a tactic known as car gameplay. Most enemies are in fact not in untouchable power as most believe. The tanky health-system of this game makes death hard compared to a lot of games out there.

 

2 hours ago, Solamente said:

there's no contradiction here tbh, bounties can hang around or they can blast through an area

They can indeed stay or proceed elsewhere, that is their choice as players in an open-world PvP game. The contradiction lies in you pressing back and forth on several occasions that bounties are sometimes Gods and other times ants stepped on by pedestrians and never ever on a sweet spot in between that is the most common case by light-years.

 

According to you and those who support your stance, bounties always get punished against impossible odds or wreck missions if they chose to hang around INFINITELY AS IF they magically own Devlar-mods, to wreck an entire team over and over for an entirety of a mission stage causing the team to lose. This is far from what actually happens in-game, contradicts itself over and over and changes nothing in the big picture in the crusade to reduce the 'frustration' of some players and ultimately satisfy them. If a team of players can't kill a bounty across a mission-stage then guess what, they'll get matched against the person more often than face him/her as bounty by miles. This literally changes nothing to the 'frustration'. If a player is better than you at APB, you will die more than you will prevail against the person. This is a fact and confining missions won't alleviate it. In fact, having that menace of a person be exposed in fact makes it less 'frustrating' and is in no way a 'punishment' to the bounty as the bounty will have the opportunity to progress faster (unlock mods, slotted weapons, etc). Bounty has a ton more positives than negatives and this is the bottom-line reality, regardless of whether you like it or not. If you are indeed an objective person than subjective, you'll follow this.

 

If some don't like dying in a video game, playing PvP games does not compliment their mentality. More ironically, they'll also die in PvE games so there is that. Tweaking ANY game to satisfy subjective players is a mistake as these players themselves will surely one day leave it behind to be frustrated with another game. Ultimately leaving the game unappealing as it will only be a ripoff of a dozen games that do what it was tweaked to do better, team red vs team blue with no unique twists whatsoever in a fake background and advertising, which are amnopen-world city and open-PvP, respectively.

 

3 hours ago, Solamente said:

i simply chose the highest potential option which is something that needs to be taken into account for any balancing, but even one extra person fighting against you regardless of matchmaking is generally unfair

 

there's no need for anyone to specifically hunt you down for this to become a problem, the nature of almost every mission requires players to move throughout the map

The highest potential is never the center of focus, practicality and reality always overwrites potential when it comes to decision-making. If your logic of extreme-potential is the way to go with anything, then by basic physics, buildings that have higher than 3 stories will NEVER be approved to be built as THEORETICALLY, the lethal potential energy of falling from the 4th+ floor exists INFINITELY as long as residents are at these floors... Reality says that building material won't let this happen and they aren't going to be seduced by windows to open them and jump through... In APB not even one-tenth of a district will chase an active bounty unless the person is asking to be stream-sniped by plebs on Twitch, not even close to the theoretical assumption so it is definitely not the way to balance.

 

One extra person fighting as common as the backup-call system in APB is busted. Additionally, as established before, not even the best matchmaking algorithms in confined games bring balanced and fair matches so don't seek this unattainable dream in the expense of pretty much most of everything.

 

You aren't the only player who moves around and throughout the map. Nothing is certain here.

 

4 hours ago, Solamente said:

how am i wrong? if the bounty system is intended to balance "too good" players, then allowing players that are not "too good" to receive the same balancing is a failure of the system

You are wrong because those "not too good" players will get the chance to progress roles slightly faster every now and then to unlock mods and slotted weapons to be LESS "not too good"... simply because open-slot weapons and mods in APB alter weapon accuracy, performance and more, making role-progression a major source of power as it makes them less victims or APB's stupid RNG mechanics. This is one of the many reasons why new player experience is less than optimal (and some them legally say APB is partially pay-2-win while others argue it is pay-2-skip-grind) and your stance makes those "not too good" players spend even more time at that actually REAL unfair and closer to "infinite" disadvantage ever so than dying once by bounty...

 

And they won't get this extra role-progression chances as good players so that alone is unfair in this regard. Your current stance makes this even worse. APB is a shooter and requires players to get kills in order to get stronger, BOTH by getting more opportunities to engage in live combat to train their positioning and aim as well as to progress past these RNG-reducing walls of APB.

 

I do hope LO decides to make ALL basic weapons open-slots as well as mostly hold some obvious weapon performance stats fixed regardless of mods, especially yellow mods such as hunting and reflex sights. Sights let you SEE, not make weapons more accurate beyond your control in the stupid way APB does. You will remain wrong till this becomes true like in any half-proper shooter.

 

4 hours ago, Solamente said:

you're quoting my summarized list of different explanations in this thread about what the bounty system is "intended" for, obviously i'm going to use the word intent when discussing them

Your list says it was intended because of the personal taste of some and that LO made the change to satisfy it so it had to be intended. Reality says it was not intended by the original makers based on itself and the supportive features that factually exist alongside it in game. Your use of the word "intended" doesn't make the latter false based on your poorly-guided list and that is what I brought into attention, period.

 

4 hours ago, Solamente said:

the quote doesn't mean they are mutually exclusive

Which is exactly why I quoted it as you quoted me aimlessly. I showed by your back-to-back statements and the definition of mutual exclusivity that you are circle-jerking back and forth around this in hopes for me to make a mistake. This isn't going to work.. Stick to a stance first before quoting to discuss things. In your eyes, are they ♥♣♦♠ing mutually exclusive or not, Ωδφε?!

 

4 hours ago, Solamente said:

as stated above there's no need for anyone to chase down an n5/p5 player, just being vulnerable to 40 people instead of 4 is a significant risk increase and the rewards are not proportional

Theoretical day-dreams and conclusions are meaningless when they completely miss results obtained from practice. This doesn't happen and will never does, period.

 

4 hours ago, Solamente said:

over time is the same as "in the long run" but we can disagree if you want

First of all, you don't get to quote words that don't exist simply because they are interchangeable. Re-phrasing does not legally allow the use of quotation marks.

 

In English, they can indeed be used interchangeably. The meaning however changes drastically depending on how they are used.. You used over time in a sense similar to overtime at last mission-stages, counting bounty earnings in a single life and ended it with "$150 is your high-reward". I used in the long run in the actual sense that bounties come and go, effectively stacking benefits with every occurrence which is the real deal.

 

4 hours ago, Solamente said:

i'd argue a slow steady increase in rewards over years is the opposite of high risk/high reward mechanic

It isn't just about in-game cash.

 

4 hours ago, Solamente said:

values not being optimal is a system failure, to use your previous example shotgun rayscaling was a failure because damage was frontloaded - a value that was easily changed and yet it was still a failure

Check Mate.. You have stated: "yes all of those were intended, other than the xmas contacts which was likely a bug - little orbit owns the game, whatever the original creators intended for the bounty system is irrelevant once little orbit modifies it"

 

In essence, that is true. LO can do whatever it wants with its game but.. according to you, LO is intentionally making APB fail by doing changes that some misguided people ask for.. (e.g RIOT because battle royale is the hype, shotgun changes because some people can't hit, bounty changes because people get frustrated from dying 1 additional time with disregards to all the positives, patching in bugs to live before trying the patch on a test server, ...).

 

No one in their right mind who wants to discuss things for a healthier game would just accept this poor-management silently without voicing in some concern and you shouldn't tell people to do as such based on the extreme conclusion that LO owns the game. If that is the case then simply forbid all forum discussions and let us wait to see what LO has in store next.

 

[Spillra 135]

a TL: DR of this entire thread.
players that got punished by the old system: this is a good change
people that didn't get punished: WTF why did you remove my free advantage

[TheJellyGoo 343]

1 hour ago, Fortune Runner said:

might want to take your own advice there

I'm not the one holding condescending speeches about individuals participating in a discussion while at the same time participating in said discussion acting all inculpable?

On 2/15/2020 at 4:03 PM, TheJellyGoo said:

Could you elaborate on that then? Which of my points were biased opinions? Go through them all step by step. I want you to rebut them.

Difference in what? In a stomped game? Please, show me those comments by "golds".

But you know... might look that way when you are simply incapable of actually bringing any valid argument to the table.

I asked you to elaborate and you just vanish from the discussion to randomly surface later and throw some completely unrelated accusation at me.

Maybe if people would actually incur on the points being made instead of ignoring them time and time again I wouldn't need to use such explicit speech. 

But till then you either come back with something tangible or fuck off right again to where you came from because I'm done with this idiocy.

 

[Fortune Runner 796]

1 hour ago, TheJellyGoo said:

I'm not the one holding condescending speeches about individuals participating in a discussion while at the same time participating in said discussion acting all inculpable?

But you know... might look that way when you are simply incapable of actually bringing any valid argument to the table.

I asked you to elaborate and you just vanish from the discussion to randomly surface later and throw some completely unrelated accusation at me.

Maybe if people would actually incur on the points being made instead of ignoring them time and time again I wouldn't need to use such explicit speech. 

But till then you either come back with something tangible or fuck off right again to where you came from because I'm done with this idiocy.

 

oh you mean when you had a bias opinion against those in bronze district and basically told them they are wrong and you are right on what they go through with bounty's  even though its them and not you?

oh and sorry unlike you i was busy getting work done because i have a life lol

smh cant even go 24 hours without posting just for you huh? lol whatever

and yes you really should take your own advice  so go re read the thread.

On 2/13/2020 at 3:53 PM, Fortune Runner said:

Bounty's exist on other games , however those other games do not let bounty's interfere with missions , but instead activate them out of missions.

As for some golds saying bounty's not fun .... a bounty is the best way apb currently has for a survival mission.

 

certain golds on this thread saying its too hard when they  slaughter everyone else makes it seem like they just want it easier for them. ( especially golds in bronze )

but like I have been saying , it would be nice if bounty's were able to be caught after missions , and that they do not interfere with missions

it would also be nice if there was more things to do out of missions , though i am unsure what exactly

guess i never posted that on this thread...

[TheJellyGoo 343]

53 minutes ago, Fortune Runner said:

oh you mean when you had a bias opinion against those in bronze district and basically told them they are wrong and you are right on what they go through with bounty's  even though its them and not you?

oh and sorry unlike you i was busy getting work done because i have a life lol

smh cant even go 24 hours without posting just for you huh? lol whatever

and yes you really should take your own advice  so go re read the thread.

guess i never posted that on this thread...

You sure you're not confusing me with someone else? Haven't said bronze district or anything implying that I mean bronze district players in any of my comments.

Or is that just one of the usual exaggerations to try and undermine my points since you're not capable of actually using anything of worth to counter it?

 

Also thanks for that sad attempt to insult my personal life. 24 hours? Since my post and yours 56 hours have gone past (guess the usual inaccuracy about facts applies here too).

And in case you missed it the underlying problem wasn't that it took you so long to answer but with what you decided to continue after that time - huge difference.

 

Not sure what your quote was supposed to say in relation to mine? Have nothing against the majority said in it and am not interested in the potential changes of the bounty system.

My point of discussion was always about those having a problem with the "temporary" disable of the feature and prefer to keep the broken old system.

Those are two different topics to discuss. One: Keeping old system or disable/change later. Two: What the actual rework could be. Never argued about Two.

 

After going through my posts trying to figure out what your opening sentence was targeted at I have to agree in you sayinng that I should take my own advice.

With that I will take it and follow it:

 

On 2/13/2020 at 12:23 PM, TheJellyGoo said:

[...]

Your words will be twisted no matter how reasonable. Just don't bother.

[...]

 

Edited February 18, 2020 by TheJellyGoo

[Fortune Runner 796]

1 hour ago, TheJellyGoo said:

 

by any chance you wouldn't be on medicine for Narcissism would you? either way its a rhetorical question. i dont want to know.

try to chill you've been riding people a bit strong on this thread.

4 hours ago, Boxo said:

a TL: DR of this entire thread.
players that got punished by the old system: this is a good change
people that didn't get punished: WTF why did you remove my free advantage

in bronze district it has always been used to counter against the golds. they have a right to play and level contacts.

they have every right to be upset over todays golds stopping them from having a chance themselves to play.

as for the change  it would only interfere in matches once phasing , threat , and matchmaking are finally done.

i just hope it happens soon somehow.