no surrenders?

[_chain 176]

IF this is ever considered, rewards should still be given out to the winning side, and if good players not getting matched up is an actual concern, make it so rewards are not given to the losing team (no cash, no exp) so surrendering would be kind of discouraged anyways. It should also be only allowed after the 5 minute mark in a mission, or once 1/3 (or whatever percentage) of total stages are complete. maybe even half of the mission.

Edited April 27, 2020 by _chain

[jimmyneutral 3]

2 minutes ago, arkup said:

nope .

when the game was first released it would tell you who you were going up against

and give you the option to take the fight or not with a yes / no option pre-match

guess ,what it didn't work for obvious reasons , some players rarely got a match because of it 

and again, when these defeatists are left without an option to forfeit their match, what do they do? they AFK the entirety of it. its in all ways worse.

[VanilleKeks 746]

3 minutes ago, jimmyneutral said:

placing a forfeit option behind a time restriction ultimately results with a quitter afk'ing for that time restriction, then proceeding to forfeit. no difference is made, this is obvious to you based on what youve said at the end of your reply. of course not regarding all games or communities, but specifically for APB, it could range from something as simple as recognizing an enemy player's name, indicating that the mission is infact an 'unwinnable match', which is ground for 'taking the easy way out'. obviously this issue is behavioral, meaning that you cant treat it with the assumption that people are behaving according to the structure.

 

your previous post, you mentioned that, 'if you really want to, you can spam out of district or close your game'. thats what we already are doing when our opposition determines that theyd rather afk. streamlining this as a proper option funnels you against players actually willing to play you more quickly.

 

the main point here is that im not advocating quitting, im pointing out that a notable amount of players do quit for their own valid/invalid reasons, and theres no mechanic that can with certainty make them play, so there needs to be a mechanic that lets willing players conveniently get themselves out of a would-be abandoned mission.

Both sides of the coin here have pros & concs and I am well aware of them. In my opinion, the proper solution would be to develop a matchmaking system that minimizes the amount of times a surrender would even be justified. Either way, implementing a surrender function into the current game is really about picking the lesser evil, which is simply a bandaid that I don't think is good for the game.

[jimmyneutral 3]

2 minutes ago, VanilleKeks said:

Both sides of the coin here have pros & concs and I am well aware of them. In my opinion, the proper solution would be to develop a matchmaking system that minimizes the amount of times a surrender would even be justified. Either way, implementing a surrender function into the current game is really about picking the lesser evil, which is simply a bandaid that I don't think is good for the game.

i still understand where youre coming from, its obvious to me that forfeiting doesnt exist in a perfect environment. but the undeniable fact is that aslong as there is belief of your opposition cheating, its a rare feat to find where people will still accept the match and play anyway. needless to say, id play anyway, the potential cheater is a challenge like any other player.

Edited April 27, 2020 by jimmyneutral

[ExoticZ 131]

9 minutes ago, jimmyneutral said:

realize that Frosi omits or is somehow completely unaware of the fact that players who 'hackusate everyone better than them' AFK against said players, forcing you to either wait the 5-10 minutes depending on whether youre attacking or defending or restart your game, because they arent.

 

why the fuck would you want to sit in an abandoned mission any longer than you have to? so long as there are enough players with the notion of cheater pollution in mind, this is going to happen.

I'm fairly sure me and Frosi are aware of these issues. 

I do not like to play against unexperienced silver/bronze players either. We dont need a surrender option to work around this.

 

The issue lays in the matchmaking and threat segregation system. This is what needs a rework.

As of right now the engine upgrade is number one priority though. LO have to take step by step, cant take everything at once.

[jimmyneutral 3]

13 minutes ago, ExoticZ said:

I'm fairly sure me and Frosi are aware of these issues. 

I do not like to play against unexperienced silver/bronze players either. We dont need a surrender option to work around this.

 

The issue lays in the matchmaking and threat segregation system. This is what needs a rework.

As of right now the engine upgrade is number one priority though. LO have to take step by step, cant take everything at once.

reworking matchmaking properly would better route high skill players and low skill players to their own brackets, alleviating this issue to some extent, no denying that.

 

but remember that were only addressing players who hackusate alone, not even accounting for the various players that have their own minds made up on what is valid play regarding strategy, playstyle, weapon selection etc. you can rework the game to perfection and yet you'll still have that noticeable lump of wrongfully entitled players who muddy the system up. the stubbornness that leads to sandbagging a mission stems from fucked human behavior, it will keep happening to a noticeable degree.

Edited April 27, 2020 by jimmyneutral

[vsb 6174]

2 hours ago, jimmyneutral said:

and the more it happens, the more quickly you'll reach players who want to play against you as much as you want to play against them.

what happens to players that no one wants to play against?

 

legitimizing afk behavior with a mechanic that essentially rewards the people who would afk is not the answer imo

[jimmyneutral 3]

10 minutes ago, 404 said:

what happens to players that no one wants to play against?

 

legitimizing afk behavior with a mechanic that essentially rewards the people who would afk is not the answer imo

the outlier 'everybody refuses to oppose me' players versus the numerous 'a good amount of players refuse to oppose me' players.

 

i wish i had a solution for players like the one youve described, atleast theyre fruitless missions would end instantly via the defeatist team forfeiting.

 

youre not rewarding the forfeiter, theyre doing that regardless. youre alleviating the time waste of the players who actually want to play.

Edited April 27, 2020 by jimmyneutral

[arkup 13]

4 hours ago, jimmyneutral said:

and again, when these defeatists are left without an option to forfeit their match, what do they do? they AFK the entirety of it. its in all ways worse.

let me clarify my statement ,

when the feature was in the game I used it quite a bit with any player I thought I would lose against or couldn't be bothered playing 

for whatever reason depending on my mood at the time and when it was removed I wasn't exactly happy about it ,but in all seriousness 

the only real way to make things better is to fix the match making ,not real sure what to do about dethreaters or AFK 'ers

but I don't think it's a huge problem as anoiying as it is ,as there only seems to be a small amount of people who do it from what i've seen

 

 

[Zolerox 564]

I'd like to point out "it was discussed before" means The Current CEO of APB Reloaded said he wants to add it to into apb's gameplay dynamic.

 

Wasn't just a random forume user asking about it, It's part of the plan.

[Y2Venom 221]

On 4/26/2020 at 10:52 AM, Frosi said:

Absolutely not, good players already have a hard enough time getting opposition, giving the people that hackusate everyone better than them a surrender option is just going to ruin more and more missions and make the game even less playable for 4 player groups.

 

Maybe if the good players teamed with new players, you wont have this problem ?

[Queen of Love 453]

Yes is if available after 2/3 stages.
Not if is available from begin.

[Guest]

On 4/26/2020 at 4:52 AM, Frosi said:

Absolutely not, good players already have a hard enough time getting opposition, giving the people that hackusate everyone better than them a surrender option is just going to ruin more and more missions and make the game even less playable for 4 player groups. 

 

In an ideal world there wouldn't be a need for a surrender option because the matchmaking (post 2.1) is good enough to match players of equal skill. A surrender option would be a "bandaid" until District Phasing / Matchmaking improvements that could be exploited and make the game even less enjoyable.

Ah yes, because I enjoy playing against sweaty patootie people only using PMG or Nfas and jumping out of their 4x4 Vegas / Pioneer with Car Det to have the advantage in every confrontation, its really enjoyable honestly. Like, I love queing up for a round in my favorite game just go get matched against people trying their fucking asses off while executing every little fuzzy bunny tactic there is in the game to win. :^)

Like holy shitballs man, if I just want to casually play the game and not lean over my fucking keyboard and pour sweat on it calculating where to pre nade my three lowyields and where to park my vegas to make sure I can run with the OBJ or place it on some high patootie area that you have to intricately jump to using fragile to hide the OBJ and just sit at a distance with HVR, that Im STILL quickswitching with because nothings been done to combat it lmao, just to insure that I can get a gold star and a pat on the back by my Tumblr where I post all of my winning screenshots.


I can't wait for the new threat system so I can stop playing against these toxic idiots man, let em fly up the leaderboard and play against themselves and let the rest of the community that just wants to have some fucking fun playing APB.

Edited May 1, 2020 by Guest
There's a difference between losing to someone who is genuinely skilled at the game because theyve just been playing for a long time and know how the games mechanics and mission structures versus someone who is just some tryhard asshat abusing mechanics.

[ninjarrrr 261]

no surrender!