The ATAC. Yay or nay?

[Kevkof 806]

2 minutes ago, Abduct / Devote said:

So its safe for you guys to assume they have done this but it isn't for us to assume they haven't? Nice double standards. 

Very big doubts here

At least I'm saying probably and not just stating it. 

But that's probably  just semantics to you.

 

The fact that Matt knows how bad the tutorial is should already show that he went through it and ...  now I'll shut up before I get hit with an NDA ...

[Abduct / Devote 69]

9 minutes ago, Kevkof said:

At least I'm saying probably and not just stating it. 

But that's probably  just semantics to you.

 

The fact that Matt knows how bad the tutorial is should already show that he went through it and ...  now I'll shut up before I get hit with an NDA ...

I mean I get where you're coming from, I was making an assumption myself, and I think what Flaws said is the same, but there's a reason we have people test stuff, and why SPCT exists. So I'm just throwing that out there... unless you guys are considered part of this, I don't see this being a bad assumption by us. The true vets that played the game, a lot of us have quit already, or barely come back because nostalgia. There are some that still stick around. However, as you can see by some of the people here fighting me tooth and nail to "prove" they were right that the Ntec was broken, a lot of remaining people are just "out-of-context" quoters that just want to be "right." So I think the wrong crowd has been listened too, just my 2 cents  

 

You are a vet Kev, you should know what I mean. The reason I loathe the Ntec nerf is because i f***ing loved this game, and I don't like the direction it has been going, or where it's gone. I even think the HVR change was a lil over the top. 

 

Edited May 24, 2020 by Abduct / Devote

[Fortune Runner 796]

23 hours ago, Abduct / Devote said:

No, they don't struggle

Ive talked about the nerf (the past) and how the data said they should change it so they did. you posted this about today instead of the past. *facepalm*

 

5 hours ago, Abduct / Devote said:

Are you that incompetent to understand past/present yourself?

sure must be me even though you mixed it up.

 

2 hours ago, Flaws said:

No offense, mate. But its exactly thanks to people like you on the forums that weapon balancing has taken such an insane downfall

I  referenced how they used the data. I never said anything else did I ? a bit judgemental there on your part.

by all means blame me for what Little Orbit did with the data the received.

Edited May 24, 2020 by Fortune Runner

[Abduct / Devote 69]

5 minutes ago, Fortune Runner said:

Ive talked about the nerf (the past) and how the data said they should change it so they did. you posted this about today instead of the past. *facepalm*

 

sure must be me even though you mixed it up.

 

I  referenced how they used the data. I never said anything else did I ? a bit judgemental there on your part.

by all means blame me for what Little Orbit did with the data the received.

Yeah, you really do lack understanding, because you're swapping the topic to past or present now since you lost the argument. Typical  

[RespectThis 121]

29 minutes ago, Fortune Runner said:

I  referenced how they used the data. I never said anything else did I ? a bit judgemental there on your part.

by all means blame me for what Little Orbit did with the data the received.

He isn't just talking about you. He talking about players like yourself. Your argument points have been very over exaggerated. Such as 70m dominating Ntec or that the ntec dominates in cqc no matter what which was NEVER the case. You're making very extreme and illogical arguments is what i believe is the point flaws is trying to get across. He, abduct, and I have put alot of time in the game to perform things like killing poeple in cqc efficiently with the ntec. You just sound upset that you lost to in in cqc because its an assault rifle and someone who put time into the ntec outplayed you. 

Edited May 24, 2020 by RespectThis

[Flaws 1033]

20 minutes ago, RespectThis said:

He isn't just talking about you. He talking about players like yourself. Your argument points have been very over exaggerated. Such as 70m dominating Ntec or that the ntec dominates in cqc no matter what which was NEVER the case. As i mentioned in another post thats not something you can just do by picking up an ntec. Which is what i believe is the point flaws is trying to get across. He, abduct, and I have put alot of time in the game to perform things like that. You just sound upset that you lost to in in cqc because its an assault rifle and someone who put time into the ntec outplayed you. 

Basically, the whole reason the N-TEC was so complained about was the skill gap and players who are better playing it good enough to outskill silvers who can't hit the broad side of a barn with an OCA in CQC. In that situation, of course you'll get destroyed in CQC by a high tier player.

 

Also, let's not forget that there are still people in the game and on the forums who claim that the N-TEC wasn't nerfed enough which is absolutely bizarre. The gun is in ruins and people still complain because they keep getting outplayed by it by better players. It's hilarious just as much as it is tragic (for the game mainly). More and more people will eventually leave (myself included at some point) if the weapon balance retains this trajectory and the game simply won't gain that many long-term players because there are games with much more fun gunplay than current APB has to offer.

[Deadliest 385]

my ntec is gone m8

Edited May 24, 2020 by Deadliest

[RespectThis 121]

22 minutes ago, Flaws said:

Basically, the whole reason the N-TEC was so complained about was the skill gap and players who are better playing it good enough to outskill silvers who can't hit the broad side of a barn with an OCA in CQC. In that situation, of course you'll get destroyed in CQC by a high tier player.

 

Also, let's not forget that there are still people in the game and on the forums who claim that the N-TEC wasn't nerfed enough which is absolutely bizarre. The gun is in ruins and people still complain because they keep getting outplayed by it by better players. It's hilarious just as much as it is tragic (for the game mainly). More and more people will eventually leave (myself included at some point) if the weapon balance retains this trajectory and the game simply won't gain that many long-term players because there are games with much more fun gunplay than current APB has to offer.

I agree with there definitely being a huge difference between a skilled ntec player and a average one. Strange people think that anyone wielding an ntec all preform the same.

 

Not only is the current weapon trajectory extremely poor but the "holy trinity" isn't much of a thing anymore (Pmg/Oca, Hvr, and Ntec). Which in my opinion really disrupts the balance of things. Its really more of a Jenga tower. The ntec was in the middle and kept getting pulled on and pulled on until it was pull out and everything collapsed on each other leaving weapons in disarray. The AR class is almost non-existent. Shotguns are being buffed and nerfed. Now we're at pmg and percs (woo hoo). Also can't say im surprised people still complain about it since as you said there are "those people" who will always witch hunt it until its presence is as known as the oden.

Edited May 24, 2020 by RespectThis

[Noob_Guardian 417]

1 hour ago, RespectThis said:

I agree with there definitely being a huge difference between a skilled ntec player and a average one. Strange people think that anyone wielding an ntec all preform the same.

 

Not only is the current weapon trajectory extremely poor but the "holy trinity" isn't much of a thing anymore (Pmg/Oca, Hvr, and Ntec). Which in my opinion really disrupts the balance of things. Its really more of a Jenga tower. The ntec was in the middle and kept getting pulled on and pulled on until it was pull out and everything collapsed on each other leaving weapons in disarray. The AR class is almost non-existent. Shotguns are being buffed and nerfed. Now we're at pmg and percs (woo hoo). Also can't say im surprised people still complain about it since as you said there are "those people" who will always witch hunt it until its presence is as known as the oden.

You do realize they were called the "Holy Trinity" because they were considered completely broke and the most necessary weapons to win right? I don't think anyone who called it the holy trinity meant it as a good thing.

[RespectThis 121]

Just now, Noob_Guardian said:

You do realize they were called the "Holy Trinity" because they were considered completely broke and the most necessary weapons to win right? I don't think anyone who called it the holy trinity meant it as a good thing.

They were the Holy Trinity because they were the strongest of their class not because they were broken....

[Noob_Guardian 417]

9 minutes ago, RespectThis said:

They were the Holy Trinity because they were the strongest of their class not because they were broken....

PMG was (and still is) considered as slightly too powerful and needing a nerf. HVR was considered (and still is considered) too powerful and needing a nerf. NTEC was considered too versatile and was considered as needing a nerf (though this had the biggest split in the community as whether it needed any changes or not).

 

They were 3 weapons that the general consensus was, that if you wanted to win, you HAD to run, because they were considered that much better than other weapons. (that's not considered balanced and almost every other gun in game has been buffed as well by now)

 

That can certainly have been said for the HVR and the NTEC of the time. PMG had "some" competition with shotguns (least before the csg nerf), and the OCA was still/is decent against it.

 

That is why 2 of those 3 weapons have recieved reworks, with the PMG really not being touched aside to have CJ effect it (but OCA got the same change as well so it was more or less to balance out CJ on all SMGS as equal)

Edited May 24, 2020 by Noob_Guardian

[RespectThis 121]

5 minutes ago, Noob_Guardian said:

They were 3 weapons that the general consensus was, that if you wanted to win, you HAD to run, because they were  considered that much better than other weapons.

So like i said in another post. There is a huge difference between a high skill ntec users, a good ntec user, and a bad ntec user.

The general consensus is a vast pool. Between high skill, average, and low skill players. A large majority being mid to low range players. You were NEVER required to run any of these weapons to win. Just because they're considered much better doesn't mean they are the be all end all. Don't say just because they're strong means they're broken.

Edited May 24, 2020 by RespectThis

[Abduct / Devote 69]

3 minutes ago, Noob_Guardian said:

PMG was (and still is) considered as slightly too powerful and needing a nerf. HVR was considered (and still is considered) too powerful and needing a nerf. NTEC was considered too versatile and was considered as needing a nerf (though this had the biggest split in the community as whether it needed any changes or not).

 

They were 3 weapons that the general consensus was, that if you wanted to win, you HAD to run, because they were considered that much better than other weapons. (that's not considered balanced and almost every other gun in game has been buffed as well by now)

 

That can certainly have been said for the HVR and the NTEC of the time. PMG had "some" competition with shotguns (least before the csg nerf), and the OCA was still/is decent against it.

 

That is why 2 of those 3 weapons have recieved reworks, with the PMG really not being touched aside to have CJ effect it (but OCA got the same change as well so it was more or less to balance out CJ on all SMGS as equal)

Look, as much as I hate the PMG, it doesn't need a nerf. HVR just needed dmg nerf if anything, Scout jump shotting was fun for most and should still be around (OPINIONATED) while Ntec is very versatile but balanced. We didn't need those weapons to win most of the time, I did just fine without. I preferred OCA over PMG, and I prefered marksman weapons to the Ntec, while the HVR was stupid strong yeah and I did use it enough. I never once considered the Ntec as OP when vsing it with anything, lol. The fact that you immediately blame the gun as too strong, shows how weak of a player you are. 

[Noob_Guardian 417]

Just now, RespectThis said:

So like i said in another post. There is a huge difference between a good ntec user and a bad one.

The general consensus is a vast pool. Between high skill, average, and low skill players. You were NEVER required to run any of these weapons to win. Just because they're considered much better doesn't mean they are the be all end all. Don't say just because they're strong means they're broken.

If something is "too strong" it's considered broken.

 

Was the C-9 broken? Or was it just strong, was the RFP with like 60m range broken or just strong? Was the pre-nerf 80m nano broken? Or just strong, was qsing broken or strong? They were considered broken for being too strong. Sure we can argue "semantics" of broken vs strong if you like, however that doesn't change the fact that people equate "(too) strong" to being "broken".

 

You were never required to you're right. But let's be honest, it most certainly helped your game play in most situations if you did so to level the playing field.

[RespectThis 121]

21 minutes ago, Noob_Guardian said:

If something is "too strong" it's considered broken.

 

Was the C-9 broken? Or was it just strong, was the RFP with like 60m range broken or just strong? Was the pre-nerf 80m nano broken? Or just strong, was qsing broken or strong? They were considered broken for being too strong. Sure we can argue "semantics" of broken vs strong if you like, however that doesn't change the fact that people equate "(too) strong" to being "broken".

 

You were never required to you're right. But let's be honest, it most certainly helped your game play in most situations if you did so to level the playing field.

Borus please don't be that guy who's going to bring up "was the 80m nano broken". You're smart enough to distinguish the difference between strong and flat out broken.

 

I am being honest when i say it didn't give any sort of advantage in most situations. The ntec was a strong weapon for sure but not broken or op.

 

Also my point is proven just by looking at the front page of social district forums. "Nerf frag nade radius" or "When is the pmg getting a nerf". The majority of the people yelling "nerf" are typically average to low skill level players. They think they know what is "broken" when i reality they don't. They just get beaten by good players and just start crying nerf. Thats what happened with the ntec. Good players would beat people in cqc because they would do things to give them the advantage.

 

 

Edited May 24, 2020 by RespectThis

[Noob_Guardian 417]

3 minutes ago, Abduct / Devote said:

Look, as much as I hate the PMG, it doesn't need a nerf. HVR just needed dmg nerf if anything, Scout jump shotting was fun for most and should still be around (OPINIONATED) while Ntec is very versatile but balanced. We didn't need those weapons to win most of the time, I did just fine without. I preferred OCA over PMG, and I prefered marksman weapons to the Ntec, while the HVR was stupid strong yeah and I did use it enough. I never once considered the Ntec as OP when vsing it with anything, lol. The fact that you immediately blame the gun as too strong, shows how weak of a player you are. 

I mean jump shooting over pixel cover isn't "fun" to just die because someone decided to "jump" at 80m with a sniper. It was  the player using it, it certainly was not fun for the other side dying to that nonsense which only existed because a glitch in the games coding that the game maker decided not to fix for years. (player enjoy ability tends to be a factor for weapon balance in games believe it or not)

 

Oooh name calling again, cool, lets clear this up shall we?

 

For me to want to "nerf" the ntec in some way. (my prefered methods would have been ttk to .75 or bloom recovery time to 4.0 from 5.0) wasn't because I simply died to it. Though you and those who never wanted it nerfed like to argue that.

 

I originally thought the weapon was fine, it took a lot of time and looking at its stats and stats and comparison in performance of other weapons in the same category for me to believe that it was too versatile. That it was too strong "somehow" too flexible, and we all have admitted that the weapon was the most versatile in the game. I initially felt the problem was indeed heavy barrel, so I did initially call for that to be reduced in effectiveness. Which is something you yourself said I believe you were fine with. But I still came under fire from others for even holding that opinion, with the same argument you just said. "It's balanced, you're just a weak player"

 

I had done an analysis of the ntec, it had accuracy over the other ARs, ttk (aside from ATAC which came later), ranged ttk, and better bloom recovery. Everything about it aside from a handful of very small situations vs the star in cqc accuracy wise (like litterally sub 5m with both out of mm) indicated that it consistently performed better. That is why I decided to start calling for a minor nerf to it. It wasn't "oh he died to it" it was because I looked at the stats, the handling, the usage, the range, situations where it consistently came on top, and decided, yeah, something "should" be done about it. It's also why I started calling for a minor buff to the star at about the same time as well.

 

I initially did say hey NTEC is fine now that HB was nerfed, and I held that opinion for a time, but something still felt... "off" to me. Sure it couldn't just "full auto spray" anymore so much, and it wasn't as "great" at tap firing quickly for perfect accuracy, but I felt it still felt "off". That is when I started suggesting .40 bloom recovery or .75 ttk.

 

Those were the only "nerfs" i ever suggested for it, and even as I suggested nerfing it, I never once said I wanted it nerfed to the ground. I said it was only "a little" too powerful/versatile. Hence only "minor" nerfs being suggested for it.

 

 

[Abduct / Devote 69]

1 minute ago, Noob_Guardian said:

I mean jump shooting over pixel cover isn't "fun" to just die because someone decided to "jump" at 80m with a sniper. It was  the player using it, it certainly was not fun for the other side dying to that nonsense which only existed because a glitch in the games coding that the game maker decided not to fix for years. (player enjoy ability tends to be a factor for weapon balance in games believe it or not)

 

Oooh name calling again, cool, lets clear this up shall we?

 

For me to want to "nerf" the ntec in some way. (my prefered methods would have been ttk to .75 or bloom recovery time to 4.0 from 5.0) wasn't because I simply died to it. Though you and those who never wanted it nerfed like to argue that.

 

I originally thought the weapon was fine, it took a lot of time and looking at its stats and stats and comparison in performance of other weapons in the same category for me to believe that it was too versatile. That it was too strong "somehow" too flexible, and we all have admitted that the weapon was the most versatile in the game. I initially felt the problem was indeed heavy barrel, so I did initially call for that to be reduced in effectiveness. Which is something you yourself said I believe you were fine with. But I still came under fire from others for even holding that opinion, with the same argument you just said. "It's balanced, you're just a weak player"

 

I had done an analysis of the ntec, it had accuracy over the other ARs, ttk (aside from ATAC which came later), ranged ttk, and better bloom recovery. Everything about it aside from a handful of very small situations vs the star in cqc accuracy wise (like litterally sub 5m with both out of mm) indicated that it consistently performed better. That is why I decided to start calling for a minor nerf to it. It wasn't "oh he died to it" it was because I looked at the stats, the handling, the usage, the range, situations where it consistently came on top, and decided, yeah, something "should" be done about it. It's also why I started calling for a minor buff to the star at about the same time as well.

 

I initially did say hey NTEC is fine now that HB was nerfed, and I held that opinion for a time, but something still felt... "off" to me. Sure it couldn't just "full auto spray" anymore so much, and it wasn't as "great" at tap firing quickly for perfect accuracy, but I felt it still felt "off". That is when I started suggesting .40 bloom recovery or .75 ttk.

 

Those were the only "nerfs" i ever suggested for it, and even as I suggested nerfing it, I never once said I wanted it nerfed to the ground. I said it was only "a little" too powerful/versatile. Hence only "minor" nerfs being suggested for it.

 

 

You lost the argument by swapping to the subject of "name calling" when I called you a weak player. Goodbye, rest in peace! Borus you legitimately ignore all logic and just hate the Ntec, that's the honest truth. You need to relax lol. You crutch all the stuff you complain about here, you're so hilarious. You abused Hb2, you abused HVR. Get outa here.

Edited May 24, 2020 by Abduct / Devote

[Noob_Guardian 417]

29 minutes ago, RespectThis said:

Borus please don't be that guy who's going to bring up "was the 80m nano broken". You're smart enough to distinguish the difference between strong and flat out broken.

 

I am being honest when i say it didn't give any sort of advantage in most situations. The ntec was a strong weapon for sure but not broken or op.

 

Also my point is proven just by looking at the front page of social district forums. "Nerf frag nade radius" or "When is the pmg getting a nerf". The majority of the people yelling "nerf" are typically average to low skill level players. They think they know what is "broken" when i reality they don't. They just get beaten by good players and just start crying nerf. Thats what happened with the ntec. Good players would beat people in cqc because they would do things to give them the advantage.

 

 

I use broken as = to too powerful/strong. If something is a little broken, its just a "little too powerful". It's just how my language mannerisms are. Strong to me = strong, not broken but broken is "too strong".

 

I will agree to disagree with that second point because I have noticed things differently while playing with the different ARs and NTEC, and have noticed that I simply did a lot of things that I could not do and would not have been able to do without using the ntec.

 

I don't agree with every change suggested, like nerf frag radius (lol that's a new one... wait nvm I think that popped up a few years ago too) and PMG? Well that one has been around forever, well not forever, for only as long as the PMG got its initial buff. (Which I agree "something minor" should happen to it, some have suggested reducing it's crouch modifier, which i don't think is too bad of one).

I can agree that in some cases nerfing does come from average or lower skill players, but not always, and even veteran players have had decent nerf suggestions for imbalances in the game. I think new players tend to suggest nerf suggestions because they tend to be more vocal about things that make gameplay experience unfun. This isn't necessarily always a bad thing. What is "normal" for veterans to play and think and deal with, is often entirely different from new players or the average player. From an intial gameplay perspective we can all almost agree that APB is a clusterfuck. Yet when any suggestions tend to be made about making said clusterfuck be more organized and better, or even more sportsmanlike, and less reliant on abusing exploits said "features", Vets tend to get very upset.

 

[Abduct / Devote 69]

3 minutes ago, Noob_Guardian said:

I use broken as = to too powerful/strong. If something is a little broken, its just a "little too powerful". It's just how my language mannerisms are. Strong to me = strong, not broken but broken is "too strong".

 

I will agree to disagree with that second point because I have noticed things differently while playing with the different ARs and NTEC, and have noticed that I simply did a lot of things that I could not do and would not have been able to do without using the ntec.

 

I don't agree with every change suggested, like nerf frag radius (lol that's a new one... wait nvm I think that popped up a few years ago too) and PMG? Well that one has been around forever, well not forever, for only as long as the PMG got its initial buff. (Which I agree "something minor" should happen to it, some have suggested reducing it's crouch modifier, which i don't think is too bad of one).

I can agree that in some cases nerfing does come from average or lower skill players, but not always, and even veteran players have had decent nerf suggestions for imbalances in the game. I think new players tend to suggest nerf suggestions because they tend to be more vocal about things that make gameplay experience unfun. This isn't necessarily always a bad thing. What is "normal" for veterans to play and think and deal with, is often entirely different from new players or the average player. From an intial gameplay perspective we can all almost agree that APB is a clusterfuck. Yet when any suggestions tend to be made about making said clusterfuck be more organized and better, or even more sportsmanlike, and less reliant on abusing exploits said "features", Vets tend to get very upset.

 

... This is the logic the balance team listened to... I just had an aneurysm reading this. Holy pp poo poo. What the actual fk dude?

 

Edited May 24, 2020 by Abduct / Devote

[Noob_Guardian 417]

25 minutes ago, Abduct / Devote said:

You lost the argument by swapping to the subject of "name calling" when I called you a weak player. Goodbye, rest in peace! Borus you legitimately ignore all logic and just hate the Ntec, that's the honest truth. You need to relax lol. You crutch all the stuff you complain about here, you're so hilarious. You abused Hb2, you abused HVR. Get outa here.

You've been name calling pretty much all thread, and any thread that comes up about "ntec rework".

 

You really can't piece it together can you. You can't imagine that someone would want anything that they "Abuse" or "use" fixed or removed. You actually think I enjoyed it abusing qsing and hb? You're right. I enjoyed it. I enjoyed the free kills they got me. I enjoyed knowing that using them made me win in situations where I otherwise shouldn't.  I enjoyed that "abusing them" put me at a higher skill level that allowed me to compete with players "supposedly" better than me, If they were truly better, they could have handled me using them. I enjoy getting those ez kills from cheap means.

 

I called for their removal because I knew such things were truly unfair for the general playerbase and the games balance. But I abused them knowing that if I didn't i'd end up suffering worse against players who abused them against me.

 

Don't expect a boo hoo from me for abusing things that practically EVERYONE ELSE did. Don't expect any remorse from me for calling things that were legitimately imbalanced as needing fixed while still using them. I did what I had to, while advocating their removal.

8 minutes ago, Abduct / Devote said:

... This is the logic the balance team listened to... I just had an aneurysm reading this. Holy pp poo poo. What the actual fk dude?

 

 

What, you didn't know that game balances in various games occur because of player enjoyment? Or the fact that critical thinking is hard for you.

[Abduct / Devote 69]

5 minutes ago, Noob_Guardian said:

You've been name calling pretty much all thread, and any thread that comes up about "ntec rework".

 

You really can't piece it together can you. You can't imagine that someone would want anything that they "Abuse" or "use" fixed or removed. You actually think I enjoyed it abusing qsing and hb? You're right. I enjoyed it. I enjoyed the free kills they got me. I enjoyed knowing that using them made me win in situations where I otherwise shouldn't.  I enjoyed that "abusing them" put me at a higher skill level that allowed me to compete with players "supposedly" better than me, If they were truly better, they could have handled me using them. I enjoy getting those ez kills from cheap means.

 

I called for their removal because I knew such things were truly unfair for the general playerbase and the games balance. But I abused them knowing that if I didn't i'd end up suffering worse against players who abused them against me.

 

Don't expect a boo hoo from me for abusing things that practically EVERYONE ELSE did. Don't expect any remorse from me for calling things that were legitimately imbalanced as needing fixed while still using them. I did what I had to, while advocating their removal.

All thread? I used logic on you over half of my posts, you're attempting to come up with your own delusions and with your latest post, proving what's wrong with your idea of balance. New players should not dictate how a game works lol. Why is a new player getting to have a say in nerfing something instead of learning the game properly like any normal human being? You're like the SJW of the APB balance team lol. I also didn't call you a name by calling you a weak player, I just called out your skill level and hypocrisy. You're just mad I exposed it. 

 

Don't expect a boo hoo from me ever, because I'm quite fed up with you ruining this game with your terrible logic and hypocrisy. You always love trying to pretend you're intelligent with how you speak too, honestly it's so pathetic lol. Then you hit me with a sentence that made 0 sense.

 

I just read your last comment. Where does OP fall between? Broken is too strong, right? I'm trying to understand the logic pattern here of a guy who doesn't think logically. You quite literally admit to using that logic to determine things for YOU specifically, because YOU can't think critically enough to put them in the CORRECT place. Mr. "critical thinking." You wouldn't know what that was if it bit you on the patootie. 

Edited May 24, 2020 by Abduct / Devote

[RespectThis 121]

8 minutes ago, Noob_Guardian said:

I use broken as = to too powerful/strong. If something is a little broken, its just a "little too powerful". It's just how my language mannerisms are. Strong to me = strong, not broken but broken is "too strong".

 

I will agree to disagree with that second point because I have noticed things differently while playing with the different ARs and NTEC, and have noticed that I simply did a lot of things that I could not do and would not have been able to do without using the ntec.

 

I think new players tend to suggest nerf suggestions because they tend to be more vocal about things that make gameplay experience unfun. This isn't necessarily always a bad thing. What is "normal" for veterans to play and think and deal with, is often entirely different from new players or the average player. From an intial gameplay perspective we can all almost agree that APB is a clusterfuck. Yet when any suggestions tend to be made about making said clusterfuck be more organized and better, or even more sportsmanlike, and less reliant on abusing exploits said "features", Vets tend to get very upset.

 

You first sentence could have been stated much better.

 

You think new players suggesting nerfs isn't always a bad thing? Thats a terrible approach. New players shouldn't be coming into the game, crying nerf, and the company following. Why would i want little timmy who got beaten to be dictating the direction of the game. Yes i understand that the game wants new players but nerfing things because new players want it that way while the vets have to suffer? Thats just silly. And your "cluster fk" just sounds like you're saying ntec with another word. Vets get upset about useless and unnecessary changes. Why do you think I bring this up or Abduct or Flaws. You think we're doing it for kicks? I enjoy apb alot but these changes due to these average and new players ONLY hurts the game.

 

You want the game to be sportsman like yet you abused quickswitching and heavy barrel on the ntec the two things you were against? Funny and hypocritical. 

[Noob_Guardian 417]

10 hours ago, Abduct / Devote said:

All thread? I used logic on you over half of my posts, you're attempting to come up with your own delusions and with your latest post, proving what's wrong with your idea of balance. New players should not dictate how a game works lol. Why is a new player getting to have a say in nerfing something instead of learning the game properly like any normal human being? You're like the SJW of the APB balance team lol. I also didn't call you a name by calling you a weak player, I just called out your skill level and hypocrisy. You're just mad I exposed it. 

What logic? NTEC is fine didn't need touched, didn't include any logic, only opinion, and one that even G1 and LO disagreed with, which ended up with its nerf twice. Did I say that new players "should"? No I only said that new players often identify what they consider gameplay problems and call for there removal more than veterans do. This isn't wrong, you see far more average players bring up suggestions for balance, whether it be locational, mission stage/location, weapon, or gameplay. You rarely see vets do any of that. This is regardless of whether or not they "should" have a say in the matter. Many have made suggestions for legitimate changes, such as buffing the star, odin series, fixing broken locations by adding more entry into them. I'm not going to be ignorant and ignore "every" suggestion from a new player or even "average" player without seeing if it first has "any" merit. I'm not ignorant.

 

You think that weapon balance isn't thought out to some degree before implemented? Every weapon change has been thought out, tested,  and pushed out. That is regardless of whether it worked or not, or whether anyone "believes" it should have been done or not.

 

Merged.

 

10 hours ago, RespectThis said:

You first sentence could have been stated much better.

 

You think new players suggesting nerfs isn't always a bad thing? Thats a terrible approach. New players shouldn't be coming into the game, crying nerf, and the company following. Why would i want little timmy who got beaten to be dictating the direction of the game. Yes i understand that the game wants new players but nerfing things because new players want it that way while the vets have to suffer? Thats just silly. And your "cluster fk" just sounds like you're saying ntec with another word. Vets get upset about useless and unnecessary changes. Why do you think I bring this up or Abduct or Flaws. You think we're doing it for kicks? I enjoy apb alot but these changes due to these average and new players ONLY hurts the game.

 

You want the game to be sportsman like yet you abused quickswitching and heavy barrel on the ntec the two things you were against? Funny and hypocritical. 

I agree, i do tend to be bad at conveying things at times.

 

The game company doesn't make changes simply because a new player asked for it. It generally has to have some form of backing. Most (not all) changes have had some mixture of average and veteran support and some form of suggestion for it to be done (LO and G1 do read forums and said that if they were "looking at something" already they said they may take it into consideration). The difference is also that just because the company decided to nerf something doesn't mean they are going to go about the same way as suggested. There have been multiple reworks that weren't suggested by at least any players that I know of or seen on forums, while still having that weapon or feature changed.

 

Clusterfuck means clusterfuck from mission balance, spawning, the glitch/exploit abuse, to weapons ranging from pretty good to extremely underwhelming. It's not directed at the NTEC, it's directed at what the gamestate is generally called "overall". It's really chaotic.

 

So the "Average players" are ruining the game by trying to make the game more enjoyable, rather than enjoyable for a select few veteran players? Game companies have to weigh changes they make and how it will affect the game overall. Any change, weapon, vehicle they add, is always weighed for both groups of players as well as for whatever goal they intend to meet. They also admit they cannot make everyone on both sides happy. They do try to balance things out, but will always end up upsetting someone if any changes are made and have consistently said this. Vets like to argue that a lot of changes are unnecessary, yet at the same time, doing so ends up increasing "player enjoyability" (of other players) to some degree. Maybe not "every vet" is happy about it but it may make a large number of other players happy. Let's not forget that vets range in skill level, play style, and  drastically as well.

 

I don't think you're doing it for kicks at all, don't get me wrong, I can understand where you're coming from to some degree. I used to play OW heavily and everything in it has been rebalanced a billion fricken times because of powercreep and new heroes and "unfun" abilities just legit destroying gameplay enjoyability. (And a number of unnecessary changes to boot)

 

Even if you, or I may not like something happening, there does tend to be a reason, even if we don't like the answer. OW leads for example tends to do very well at conveying their "idea" for what they want and lay out exactly why the character or weapon or ability is being reworked/nerfed/buffed/changed whether for balance, enjoyability to go against, or ease of use. However, here in APB you get a little bit of text that says "we felt it was too effective". Ironically on both games you still end up having the same response, "your statistics are wrong it didn't need changed, you gave in to the casual noobs".

 

I saw HB and QS as gameplay things that were too powerful, however well within the bounds of what the game permitted. HB and Qsing weren't glitches, they weren't exploits (though qsing essentially bypassed the hvrs 2 hit ttk via 3ps3 to make it easier for a kill), they didn't  necessarily "bypass" preset intended features (like the slowdown on a vehicle from carrying a vip/item hold obj). Half the players did them, yet hated their existence. Most people do things regardless of if they like it or not, and whether its sportsmanship to do or not, because everyone else does it, or because they know they won't be banned for it.

 

You don't have to like the fact that I did them while calling for their removal, as I said, I did what I felt I had to.

Edited May 24, 2020 by Noob_Guardian

[Fortune Runner 796]

4 hours ago, Abduct / Devote said:

Yeah, you really do lack understanding, because you're swapping the topic to past or present now since you lost the argument. Typical  

no that is what you did to me and i mentioned you did that lol * pats on head *

 like i said again and again , the data Little Orbit went by said the ntec needed a change from cqc being dominated so they changed it.  the past already happened.

how is that losing an argument by me only mentioning that data and what they changed? you said it didn't dominate cqc but the data they used said otherwise so they changed it.

its a rhetorical question. no need to answer since it already happened.

4 hours ago, RespectThis said:

He isn't just talking about you. He talking about players like yourself.

talking about me is talking about me yet i never said anything  about opinions on what i thought about it , but that they changed it from the data saying they needed to.

ntec is supposed to kill up to 70 away that's fine but cqc it was never meant to dominate so they changed it from the data so that it didn't do that in cqc.

i suppose I have to word things exactly since you couldn't understand that the first time that i was referring to cqc and why they changed it and how the wording could be mistaken even though i was talking about the cqc data over and over.

clearly how i worded it can be mistaken.

4 hours ago, Flaws said:

Basically, the whole reason the N-TEC was so complained about was the skill gap and players who are better playing it good enough to outskill silvers who can't hit the broad side of a barn with an OCA in CQC

ntec was not meant for cqc. of course people complained. and since the data said it needed a change then Little Orbit did so.

 

 

you three can complain but in the end the ntec needed to be rebalanced because of the data , how it dominated cqc , cqc and how it wasn't supposed to do that role like that.

thats what made it a crutch gun.

since when is it fun to use any unfair way to win unless the person is involved doesn't like fair play for the community's enjoyment to begin with? ( some of which flat out use a cheat to win )

 

as for the atac ( the topic of this thread )  I said I do not believe it needs a nerf because it seems fine ( its been used a lot against me lately ) and that the pmg I am not sure about because of the high lag on the servers from more people playing.

Little Orbit has made it clear they need data on gun balancing changes 

so of course I expect  the community to help with gathering data and if someone  didn't , then you who did not should look to yourselves for being unhappy.

[Abduct / Devote 69]

1 minute ago, Fortune Runner said:

no that is what you did to me and i mentioned you did that lol * pats on head *

 like i said again and again , the data Little Orbit went by said the ntec needed a change from cqc being dominated so they changed it.  the past already happened.

how is that losing an argument by me only mentioning that data and what they changed? you said it didn't dominate cqc but the data they used said otherwise so they changed it.

its a rhetorical question. no need to answer since it already happened.

talking about me is talking about me yet i never said anything  about opinions on what i thought about it , but that they changed it from the data saying they needed to.

ntec is supposed to kill up to 70 away that's fine but cqc it was never meant to dominate so they changed it from the data so that it didn't do that in cqc.

i suppose I have to word things exactly since you couldn't understand that the first time that i was referring to cqc and why they changed it and how the wording could be mistaken even though i was talking about the cqc data over and over.

clearly how i worded it can be mistaken.

ntec was not meant for cqc. of course people complained. and since the data said it needed a change then Little Orbit did so.

 

 

you three can complain but in the end the ntec needed to be rebalanced because of the data , how it dominated cqc , cqc and how it wasn't supposed to do that role like that.

thats what made it a crutch gun.

since when is it fun to use any unfair way to win unless the person is involved doesn't like fair play for the community's enjoyment to begin with? ( some of which flat out use a cheat to win )

 

as for the atac ( the topic of this thread )  I said I do not believe it needs a nerf because it seems fine ( its been used a lot against me lately ) and that the pmg I am not sure about because of the high lag on the servers from more people playing.

Little Orbit has made it clear they need data on gun balancing changes 

so of course I expect  the community to help with gathering data and if someone  didn't , then you who did not should look to yourselves for being unhappy.

You're really set on this "data" so much that you have such blind faith in it. Amazing. So tell me how the Ntec "dominated" CQC? You sure you don't mean "was able to have a fighting chance if the enemy misplayed?" Because that was the reality. In CQC, the Ntec did not "dominate" anything (nor does it now). I am talking past tense because we're talking prior to nerf no? That's the whole reason I had past tense, which you wanted to call me out for. The Ntec required you to play perfectly in CQC to have a fighting chance on a CQC weapon like the OCA. OCA would win 8/10 fights if I had to estimate based on personal experience, among 2 similar skill leveled players. The Ntec required a lot more skill than the OCA too.