Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Abduct / Devote said:

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. 

 

still not what i said. you are still implying that I called for the nerf even though i said the data showed it dominated cqc. did I ever say a personal opinion of nerfing the ntec?

I also never once said anything about ntec today and cqc which is what you mentioned earlier saying I did about today's cqc ,  when i did not. ( which is what i commented on in reply to you about your confusion of past vs now )

 

did you help with testing that data? did you suggest to retest the ntec data since you are implying  you want to  revert it?

11 minutes ago, Fortune Runner said:

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.

I put that for a reason. if anyone doesn't help with the data testing , then they don't really have room to complain , when Little Orbit already said in the past they need the community's help on testing.

the data is completely relevant to choices made for any changes.

instead of throwing a fit , go make a suggestion for retesting the ntec.

 

and once again the topic is about the atac not the ntec . I already repeated again I do not believe the atac needs a nerf , so do please stay on topic on if you believe the atac needs a nerf or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
42 minutes ago, Noob_Guardian said:

The game company doesn't make changes simply because a new player asked for it. It generally has to have some form of backing.

 

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? 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.

 

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.

Obviously it has to have backing. My point is that alot of these average and new players give alot of the same complaints which lead to this backing. These players are also dethreaters...

 

Do i think the average player ruins the game? No. Do I think them constantly arguing nerf this nerf that because x,y,z is ruining the game? Yes. Like the frag blast radius being to high? Why is that all of a sudden a problem? It has been the same for literally 9 years. Now more people are calling for the pmg to be nerfed because the ntec and other weapons has been slapped around so much. Why do you assume that it will increase other players enjoy-ability even if its at the cost of some vets enjoy-ability. You realize a majority of APB is holding on due to vets NOT new players. Look at Flaws. He's been around for quite sometime and he's getting fed up as well. Its not that we don't like change. Its when the changes are unreasonable because the average player dislikes it. APB isn't your normal everyday fps shooter. The playstyle is different. I don't think people really grasp that idea either. Or the fact that people are just better than they are.

 

I don't like that fact that you QS and used HB. I think it makes you an absolute hypocrite and discredits your backing of sportmanlike gameplay. The fact that you felt that you NEEDED to do it is rather smh.

Edited by RespectThis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Fortune Runner said:

still not what i said. you are still implying that I called for the nerf even though i said the data showed it dominated cqc. did I ever say a personal opinion of nerfing the ntec?

I also never once said anything about ntec today and cqc which is what you mentioned earlier saying I did about today's cqc ,  when i did not. ( which is what i commented on in reply to you about your confusion of past vs now )

 

did you help with testing that data? did you suggest to retest the ntec data since you are implying  you want to  revert it?

I put that for a reason. if anyone doesn't help with the data testing , then they don't really have room to complain , when Little Orbit already said in the past they need the community's help on testing.

the data is completely relevant to choices made for any changes.

instead of throwing a fit , go make a suggestion for retesting the ntec.

 

and once again the topic is about the atac not the ntec . I already repeated again I do not believe the atac needs a nerf , so do please stay on topic on if you believe the atac needs a nerf or not.

You have stated that the data showed it should be nerfed so therefore it should be nerfed no? Your words not mine. You said I should stop whining it's now "balanced" implies you agree. That's a fact. So yes, you DID tell us your personal opinion. Thanks gg this was a fun argument about how you finally realized how to come full circle and realize how silly your lil argument was. Maybe next time you can learn to type regular English. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Fortune Runner said:

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 )

Huh? Sorry, what data? Do you mean the endless complaining of ATAC and Remote Detonator mainers? That's not data. 

 

If you genuinely think that N-TEC dominated CQC that means that a) You've not used N-TEC much at all and b) You are a terrible CQC player.

 

If you pit two equally skilled silvers one with N-TEC and one with OCA in a CQC battle, the OCA player will win every time. This example is exactly the same for trainee vs trainee and god tier player vs god tier player. Do you understand why this is? It's because the OCA (and basically every CQC weapon) was designed to be used in CQC and it dominates the CQC category and every CQC arena compared to any weapon from any other category. In even simpler terms: it is significantly easier to get a kill in CQC with a CQC weapon than it is with any other category. However, if you are unable to use that weapon correctly due to your lower skill level, you will fail and lose in situations where you shouldn't. Which means that the only reason the N-TEC "dominated" CQC was for one sole reason, that reason being the massive difference in player skill level. So when you pit a good player (N-TEC) vs a noob (OCA) in a CQC fight, the good player will win around half the time or slightly more due to their vastly higher skill level.

 

Furthermore, if you swap them and pit good player (OCA) vs a noob (N-TEC) in a CQC fight, the good player will dominate not half the times, but 10/10 times due to not only having vastly superior skill but also having the adequate weapon CQC for the fight. Therefore the N-TEC did not need changes. This "data" is completely and utterly false. At this point I am beginning to question whether or not some of you are trolling on here because this is as simple as 2+2.

57 minutes ago, Fortune Runner said:

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.

Now let me explain why the ATAC needs a nerf because apparently that's also beyond people here.

 

ATAC is an Assault Rifle, yet it requires much much less effort to get kills with than the average Assault Rifle in APB. If a weapon requires little effort to achieve what other weapons in the same category require multiple times that effort to achieve the same result = it needs a nerf. It needs some kind of downside. And the ATAC needs some kind of downside as it can laserbeam people in full auto at 40-50m with some RNG luck (I've posted gifs as proof of this somewhere before) and if not, it can still deal significant damage at that range. As such it needs a nerf to its bloom so that it can still do these things but through tap firing/bursting depending on the range which adds significantly more effort and skill required to achieve these things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Abduct / Devote said:

You have stated that the data showed it should be nerfed so therefore it should be nerfed no? Your words not mine.

name something in life for any company that does not rely on data for important decisions. The data received is always relevant.

 

and yes with how you are dragging this on it is you throwing a fit.  not to mention you accused people of whining on page 4 long before I posted anything on that

and that was only a post ago after you kept on about the ntec on a thread about the atac.

you do realize you've been off topic for quite some time now don't you?

 

not my fault if you don't accept that the data showed Little Orbit information and that they made changes from it in the direction they did.

1 hour ago, Abduct / Devote said:

You said I should stop whining it's now "balanced" implies you agree. That's a fact. So yes, you DID tell us your personal opinion. Thanks gg this was a fun argument about how you finally realized how to come full circle and realize how silly your lil argument was. Maybe next time you can learn to type regular English. 

I said numerous times Little Orbit did the balancing on the data received.  No idea why you cant comprehend  English as you suggested.

Also said about the community doing the testing to gather data , which is where the data came from.

You never did answer if you helped on that or not

but with how I brought it up multiple times , you are making it sound like you didn't help with data gathering and are only complaining that changes were made with no effort given to contribute.

 

You still haven't made a suggestion thread on the ntec and are still here on the ATAC thread instead.

 

 

1 hour ago, Flaws said:

 

 there's been gun testing for quite a few times. do you not know anything about it at all?

your opinion is the ntec didn't break the cqc , and others said it did . both would be considered opinions by the opposite side of that discussion.

as for the data , Little Orbit is known for announcing gun testing and the data they received is what they went with.

and yet again , if anyone has  a problem with that they should make a suggestion thread , and to detail that suggestion should be to retest the ntec.

id be game for testing again to make sure the data is accurate. wouldn't bother me at all.

1 hour ago, Flaws said:

Now let me explain why the ATAC needs a nerf because apparently that's also beyond people here.

the atac doesn't feel like it to me ( what you posted  )whether being used against me or if i was using one. 

just an opinion on the atac.

a gun test will be more beneficial than opinions though wouldn't it?

 

its kinda obvious i prefer for real factual data to be used for gun balancing rather than community opinions.

otherwise it like talking about personal preferences about pineapple on pizza or not. ( you know who you are lol )

 any company in the real world rely on data gathered for proper choices to be made.

 

so once again , the community needs to be involved in the gun testing.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, Fortune Runner said:

so once again , the community needs to be involved in the gun testing.

Gun testing in a special prototype test district or in the normal live game doesn't change the feedback players would give. It all depends on who is doing the testing, what their APB skill level is, what their knowledge is about the game and how biased they might be. So "testing" and this "data" are broad terms that, if tested by the incorrect crowd would lead to incorrect "data" that is being used for rebalancing. In the case of the N-TEC, most of the people who've already made their decision that N-TEC is OP in CQC will likely not change their stance and will end up giving the same data regardless of what they tested and if they even went to do a test of any kind.

 

What we are talking about is factual experience that we have had for the years and years of the N-TEC being the way it was and being used in the live game against tons of different players with different tactics, playstyles and loadouts. We are not biased against it and if any weapon is truly in need of a nerf, we would gladly have it nerfed, even if it were the N-TEC.

 

On top of that, I don't recall the community ever being asked to test the pre-nerf N-TEC to form any opinions prior to it receiving any changes. We were given an already butchered N-TEC that no one liked in a prototype district, they put the N-TEC on hold for a few months and then gave us another test for a slightly less butchered N-TEC and within a week or two they put it in the live game.  Testing changes for a weapon does not really shed light on the current state of said weapon. But again, I don't think it would've ever made it to the drawing board if it weren't for the masses of people complaining about it. I believe in the 1st or 2nd Q&A, Matt Scott specifically mentioned that they've heard that the "N-TEC is a big one". As in, tons of complaints from people getting smacked by it. I never heard any high skill players complaining about it personally over my years and I would know about it.

 

I rest my case as this thread is derailing.

Edited by Flaws
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Runner you don't know what you're talking about clearly because you keep backtracking saying "look at the data." I've pointed that out and you're getting heated because we've finally exposed that you're not sure about anything apparently. I've exposed Noob Guardian as a hypocrite too. And you guys are reporting me because you don't like me pointing out the truth since it sometimes is harsher than you'd like. I basically got called an idiot by Noob Guardian, so again nice hypocrisy. 

 

Keep talkin data, why don't you source this? You cry "data data" but I haven't seen any to back these claims up. Leme guess you can't see because the company isn't supposed to share them? Imagine having blind faith in something you have no clue about. 

 

I have "tested" the data for them for years, why is my input not taken? Oh because that's how you all roll. 

  • Dislike 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Flaws said:

 

gun testing by players making a gun go bang and the server gathering input data is not the same as  peoples opinions.

sorry flaws you are a bit wrong on that part since its not based on what people think but performance numbers by the server itself.

 

If you don't like the ntec results make a new suggestion thread and call for retesting. I already said i would welcome it and would go do more testing.

 

11 minutes ago, Abduct / Devote said:

 

I have been saying the same thing the whole time. The data showed the ntec needed  change so Little Orbit changed it.

and no im not even upset in the slightest but you name calling people what seems like most of your posts on this thread... yeah.

 

reporting you? who needs to when Little Orbit reads the threads. reporting you didn't even cross my mind. please stop assuming things with paranoia like this.

 

not sure about anything? anyone can be sure and still be wrong. we are only human and these things happen.

once again if you dont like what the data showed and how Little Orbit made decisions on it , make a new threads in the suggestions and specifically call for retesting.

 

but me saying that companies rely on data to make decisions is pretty much common sense to do rather than a blind leap.

 decisions a person can make is based on experience data gathered and what would be preferred for an ideal solution.

 

21 minutes ago, Abduct / Devote said:

Keep talkin data, why don't you source this? You cry "data data" but I haven't seen any to back these claims up. Leme guess you can't see because the company isn't supposed to share them? Imagine having blind faith in something you have no clue about. 

 

I have "tested" the data for them for years, why is my input not taken? Oh because that's how you all roll. 

you do understand this is not  G1 who was here for years don't you?

 

Little Orbit made public calls for testing because they needed to gather data  , and you still have not answered if you went in to test or not but with how you keep dodging that i suspect no.

playing for years does not equal anything in the testing if you don't go in to help gather data.

that's only on you then if you didn't.

 

If you don't like the ntec results make a new suggestion thread and call for retesting. I already said i would welcome it and would go do more testing.

 

in the meantime THIS IS THE ATAC THREAD and i do not believe it needs to be nerfed and have not had an unfair battle killing people who use it.

the atac seems fine to me but that's just an opinion of mine.

if you would like to do some testing then say so , and if you believe the atac needs changing or not say so.

its what this thread is about.

 

as for me I wouldn't mind doing testing on the atac to gather data for Little Orbit so that they have more information to gun balance with.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Fortune Runner said:

gun testing by players making a gun go bang and the server gathering input data is not the same as  peoples opinions.

sorry flaws you are a bit wrong on that part since its not based on what people think but performance numbers by the server itself.

 

If you don't like the ntec results make a new suggestion thread and call for retesting. I already said i would welcome it and would go do more testing.

 

I have been saying the same thing the whole time. The data showed the ntec needed  change so Little Orbit changed it.

and no im not even upset in the slightest but you name calling people what seems like most of your posts on this thread... yeah.

 

reporting you? who needs to when Little Orbit reads the threads. reporting you didn't even cross my mind. please stop assuming things with paranoia like this.

 

not sure about anything? anyone can be sure and still be wrong. we are only human and these things happen.

once again if you dont like what the data showed and how Little Orbit made decisions on it , make a new threads in the suggestions and specifically call for retesting.

 

but me saying that companies rely on data to make decisions is pretty much common sense to do rather than a blind leap.

 decisions a person can make is based on experience data gathered and what would be preferred for an ideal solution.

 

you do understand this is not  G1 who was here for years don't you?

 

Little Orbit made public calls for testing because they needed to gather data  , and you still have not answered if you went in to test or not but with how you keep dodging that i suspect no.

playing for years does not equal anything in the testing if you don't go in to help gather data.

that's only on you then if you didn't.

 

If you don't like the ntec results make a new suggestion thread and call for retesting. I already said i would welcome it and would go do more testing.

 

in the meantime THIS IS THE ATAC THREAD and i do not believe it needs to be nerfed and have not had an unfair battle killing people who use it.

the atac seems fine to me but that's just an opinion of mine.

if you would like to do some testing then say so , and if you believe the atac needs changing or not say so.

its what this thread is about.

 

as for me I wouldn't mind doing testing on the atac to gather data for Little Orbit so that they have more information to gun balance with.

 

I can clearly tell you don't know what you're talking about and are seething based on this post lol.

 

Yeah you claim no one is reporting yet you downvote every post I make instantly because you're upset. Gotchaaaaaa. When did I claim it was you only? It's either you or Noob Guardian, that's why I said you guys lol. I know because it was specifically about "name calling" so nice try. And yes you're a broken record at this point about the data that you talk about so much. The problem is that it's not including the skill ceiling of said weaponry, and honestly there are a large variety of different level skill players. You have the top, you have the bottom and a huge amount in between. I'm not the Top, but I've vsed the top. They made all these guns look godly. I've seen silvers/bronzies pick up an Ntec and couldn't hit anything with it, but give them an HVR (all prenerf talk btw so you're not falling behind on the convo) and bam you're solid. Why is that? Because the Ntec requires you to hit more than 1 shot in a row to severly injure someone. Crazy concept I know!

 

I never claimed data wasn't used to make decisions, I called you out for you repeating "THATS WHAT THE DATA SAID" when you haven't calculated s**t. Didn't realize you were such an expert on these things yo! 

I objected in previous threads, I objected here to the current Ntec state. You went off topic as well, so don't try to tell me how I derailed this completely and how you're some saint here who didn't pursue. I made the point originally that this is why the Ntec got nerfed, because the mentality here is to nerf something they died to and can't figure out how to beat effectively. It's a player skill issue, not a gun issue here. 

I also think the ATAC is fine, and I made that point. But so was the Ntec, and apparently how we think doesn't matter here since it's all in this "data" that you love so much 🙂 

 

Edited by Abduct / Devote

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Fortune Runner said:

the data showed the ntec needed  change so Little Orbit changed it

Im not sure what you mean by "data".

Is there some metric that can be used to see if a mid ranged weapon is too effective inside of 10m?
 

I don't think LO employees, for the most part, play much APB.*

So all that leaves is listening to player feedback and hoping you've chosen the correct path.

 

 

 

*This is an assumption, and only that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CookiePuss said:

Im not sure what you mean by "data".

Is there some metric that can be used to see if a mid ranged weapon is too effective inside of 10m?
 

I don't think LO employees, for the most part, play much APB.*

So all that leaves is listening to player feedback and hoping you've chosen the correct path.

 

 

 

*This is an assumption, and only that

I assume he's referring to the Baylan tests (which aren't in favor of CQC as it does not do as well there) with the Ntec being pretty popular there. With gun balancing, you kind of need extensive testing of equal skill levels fighting each other in specific ranges. But I doubt that was done properly, and I doubt in this data. This is all assuming this is what he's referring to, but he hasn't stated anything other than "data data data." Kind of hard to tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Abduct / Devote said:

 you kind of need extensive testing of equal skill levels

This this a thousand time this.

 

Feedback about etting destroyed by better players should not guide weapon balance, but rather what happens when 2 players of equal skill interact in a variety of scenarios.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/20/2020 at 11:12 PM, Noob_Guardian said:

I used to call for buffing the star's TTK to .7 to match the NTEC, and even suggested increasing the accuracy and bloom recovery. The ONLY thing G1 wanted to do was buff the bloom recovery, and that was only AFTER there was enough support for the star's bloom recovery to be buffed to that of the FAR's by a number of players. I don't want the star to be "exactly" the same as the FAR, but i don't mind increasing it's accuracy and reducing ttk more at all.

Lowering the min TTK of assault rifles below 0.75s is putting the cart before the horse.

The N-Tec was so strong at close range because it competed with dedicated CQC weapons on a purely mechanical level, i.e. min TTK. The STAR did not, because it was by design slower. The same should have been applied to the N-Tec before doing the whole monkey dance with the curve mechanics and whatnot.

 

In general it was a wrong move to introduce more assault rifles with a TTK below 0.75s after they added the ATAC. This one was specifically designed to act as a close range AR with a heavy emphasis on aiming down sights at all times, while still not being a noteworthy threat beyond 40m. And it was one of the most balanced weapons at its time of introduction. I still can not comprehend why they felt like it needed changing.

 

On 5/21/2020 at 11:40 PM, CookiePuss said:

You can't... what's the opposite of power creep?
Well whatever it is, just doing that wont create balance either.

Some things need buffs others need nerfs.

APB as a whole would probably benefit from nerfs across the board. The district maps were designed with a slower TTK in mind and gameplay suffers as a result of the current state.

 

1 hour ago, CookiePuss said:

Im not sure what you mean by "data".

Is there some metric that can be used to see if a mid ranged weapon is too effective inside of 10m?

When a mid range weapon can kill at short range as fast as a dedicated short range weapon can. Which the N-Tec could, as explained above.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Revoluzzer said:

The district maps were designed with a slower TTK in mind and gameplay suffers as a result of the current state.

I cannot refute this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Abduct / Devote said:

 

if someone doesn't agree with you based off of their opinion then they down vote you

and i see you have a few posts with multiple down votes on posts now that you pointed that out. . that's not reporting either though.

 

Also if you actually thought a little about what I did say , you would know it is valid for Little Orbit to gather data from testing to make better adjustments for gun balancing , rather than trying to find ways to insult again.

Instead you tried to twist words to say its on me to provide any of that to you to dodge what i said about it so that you could argue against it , which you did repeatedly.

and how does Little Orbit gathering data  = me having to provide you with their data again? that's their data they gathered as i said numerous times.

i never claimed anything on how I used the data , which i never said i used like you suggested. i said Little Orbit gathered data with testing and used what they had for gun balancing.

I also said if you didn't like the results to go make a thread asking for retesting and that i wouldn't mind.

 

and then there's you assuming I'm upset

read into it what you will , but that's coming from you not me. I already said I'm not so assume what you want then.

for you to think you know how people feel or read minds etc. is a bit much.  i do like to clear up misunderstandings though ,  which is why I'm willing to discus this with you since you keep replying.

please just stop assuming things about me though. its kind of creepy of you.

 

if you wish to keep discussing this pm me. this thread isnt for it and id rather talk about this thread's topic instead.

2 hours ago, CookiePuss said:

Im not sure what you mean by "data".

Is there some metric that can be used to see if a mid ranged weapon is too effective inside of 10m?
 

I don't think LO employees, for the most part, play much APB.*

So all that leaves is listening to player feedback and hoping you've chosen the correct path.

 

 

 

*This is an assumption, and only that

there was multiple testing districts for gun balancing , and i believe the free for all enforcer vs crim district may of been  one as well. ( that was so much fun!!! )

I do not recall if Little Orbit also used data gathered from mission districts , but it would not be surprising if they used that as a base data standard.

 

 

54 minutes ago, CookiePuss said:

This this a thousand time this.

extensive testing is why i keep saying the community needs to be involved in testing to gather data , for Little Orbit to have  more accurate data to use.

 

if people do not vote do they have the right to complain over who won?

shouldn't they of voted?

if people do not test do they have the right to complain over the results?

shouldn't they of helped with testing?

 

i do not recall if any more gun testing is expected soonish but we do need more testing done and adjustments made.

since some believe the atac needs adjustments i want to test it too with everyone.

 

I can only hope as many as possible , if not everyone in the community , helps with the testing to gather data for gun balancing.

with phasing expected to come , the gun balancing will be needed as well for more fair game play.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Fortune Runner said:

there was multiple testing districts for gun balancing , and i believe the free for all enforcer vs crim district may of been  one as well. ( that was so much fun!!! )

I do not recall if Little Orbit also used data gathered from mission districts , but it would not be surprising if they used that as a base data standard

Honestly, I don't either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Fortune Runner said:

if someone doesn't agree with you based off of their opinion then they down vote you

and i see you have a few posts with multiple down votes on posts now that you pointed that out. . that's not reporting either though.

 

Also if you actually thought a little about what I did say , you would know it is valid for Little Orbit to gather data from testing to make better adjustments for gun balancing , rather than trying to find ways to insult again.

Instead you tried to twist words to say its on me to provide any of that to you to dodge what i said about it so that you could argue against it , which you did repeatedly.

and how does Little Orbit gathering data  = me having to provide you with their data again? that's their data they gathered as i said numerous times.

i never claimed anything on how I used the data , which i never said i used like you suggested. i said Little Orbit gathered data with testing and used what they had for gun balancing.

I also said if you didn't like the results to go make a thread asking for retesting and that i wouldn't mind.

 

and then there's you assuming I'm upset

read into it what you will , but that's coming from you not me. I already said I'm not so assume what you want then.

for you to think you know how people feel or read minds etc. is a bit much.  i do like to clear up misunderstandings though ,  which is why I'm willing to discus this with you since you keep replying.

please just stop assuming things about me though. its kind of creepy of you.

 

if you wish to keep discussing this pm me. this thread isnt for it and id rather talk about this thread's topic instead.

there was multiple testing districts for gun balancing , and i believe the free for all enforcer vs crim district may of been  one as well. ( that was so much fun!!! )

I do not recall if Little Orbit also used data gathered from mission districts , but it would not be surprising if they used that as a base data standard.

 

 

extensive testing is why i keep saying the community needs to be involved in testing to gather data , for Little Orbit to have  more accurate data to use.

 

if people do not vote do they have the right to complain over who won?

shouldn't they of voted?

if people do not test do they have the right to complain over the results?

shouldn't they of helped with testing?

 

i do not recall if any more gun testing is expected soonish but we do need more testing done and adjustments made.

since some believe the atac needs adjustments i want to test it too with everyone.

 

I can only hope as many as possible , if not everyone in the community , helps with the testing to gather data for gun balancing.

with phasing expected to come , the gun balancing will be needed as well for more fair game play.

 

 

So we're continuing this data thing yeah? Gotcha... You just claimed I tried to twist your words, which ISN'T what I was doing, but actually what YOU were doing to me lol. You took 4 words out of an entire post to try to harass me on past/present tense. Nice. I called you out about not knowing anything about this data and you still haven't given me this "data" that you hold so dearly! You abuse downvote not because you don't agree, but because you don't LIKE me. 
 

The reality is, you don't like how I have been exposing this. Gotcha! 

 

I also did talk about the ATAC and how I think it's fine currently, and doing what it was designed to do, therefore yay, it's balanced as far as I can see. Cool good talk!

 

You supposedly read what I'm saying but what it looks like is nitpicking certain things I say and not addressing everything because you can't since it exposes the fact that you have not only no clue what you're on about, but that I'm actually making talking points. 

 

P.S. You're doing a lot of what you're accusing me of, I suggest you use a mirror bud. 

Edited by Abduct / Devote

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Abduct / Devote said:

 

 

1 hour ago, Fortune Runner said:

if you wish to keep discussing this pm me. this thread isnt for it and id rather talk about this thread's topic instead.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fortune Runner said:

 

 

That's what I thought, you didn't read anything. Hey LO, if you're truly looking through, this is the problem children of APB right here. This guy is exactly why we're down this rabbit hole. This mentality is it. I even mentioned the topic at hand, and he refused to address that part and is retreating with blank quoting and quoting himself. They have some weird forum ego and you've enabled it by listening to their whining. GJ I guess. 

  • Haha 1
  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Abduct / Devote said:

 

 

12 hours ago, Flaws said:

 

 

Now, I guess to understand why @Flaws   and @Abduct / Devote are so mad about the last changes.

 

Probabily they will never admit it, but especially the change of Ntec, in particular the jump shotting, is one of the reason because they are so mad.

 

Not because it make the ntec  "a little overpowered", but the fact of some mechanic and,  in probabily prevision maybe in future for other mechanics/weapons will be remove/change, removing this mechanic make the use of the Ntec much less enjoyable than in past (sadly I am agree XD).

 

This happened a lot of times with several weapons: scout, old osnaw without delay time (yeppp, dear car's rocket jumping I miss so much you ... that was so fun ages ago XD) etc

 

if it's that reason, a part of my heart feel you guys, but my mind as yours I guess, it will think there were something not a lot logic with jumping with an assualt rifle and crouch/jumpshotting in full accuracy 😶

Edited by PingOVER9000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Abduct / Devote said:

I also did talk about the ATAC and how I think it's fine currently, and doing what it was designed to do, therefore yay, it's balanced as far as I can see. Cool good talk!

 

27 minutes ago, Abduct / Devote said:

That's what I thought, you didn't read anything

doesn't that imply you are done talking about the atac which is what this thread is about? What is there to say then?

seems like you didnt read your own post , which is what i went by on the matter of any discussing atac more , which you implied that discussion of atac is over and done.

 

and as i said , if you want to discuss the ntec discussions we had more then message me. this thread is not for it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, PingOVER9000 said:

Now, I guess to understand why @Flaws   and @Abduct / Devote are so mad about the last changes.

 

Probabily they will never admit it, but especially the change of Ntec, in particular the jump shotting, is one of the reason because they are so mad.

Thats not even close to why. You really can't read the room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, PingOVER9000 said:

 

 

Now, I guess to understand why @Flaws   and @Abduct / Devote are so mad about the last changes.

 

Probabily they will never admit it, but especially the change of Ntec, in particular the jump shotting, is one of the reason because they are so mad.

 

Not because it make the ntec  "a little overpowered", but the fact of some mechanic and,  in probabily prevision maybe in future for other mechanics/weapons will be remove/change, removing this mechanic make the use of the Ntec much less enjoyable than in past (sadly I am agree XD).

 

This happened a lot of times with several weapons: scout, old osnaw without delay time (yeppp, dear car's rocket jumping I miss so much you ... that was so fun ages ago XD) etc

 

if it's that reason, a part of my heart feel you guys, but my mind as yours I guess, it will think there were something not a lot logic with jumping with an assualt rifle and crouch/jumpshotting in full accuracy 😶

What. the JUMP SHOTTING? LOL. You guys want an assumption maker? this is it. Holy hell. 

 

I finished reading your entire post here and I have no flippin clue what you just said to be honest. You clearly don't speak English as a first language, and this has resulted in great confusion man. No, Jump shotting isn't my issue with the nerf. I don't care about that particularly. I just didn't agree it should be nerfed, at all. It already happened, what is done is done. I'm basically here to argue the case that it WASN'T ncessary but w.e. I don't like random gimmicks either like what was done to the HVR but that's over too. 

 

Man I really don't understand where you got the jump shotting part from though, my only jump shotting issue had to do with the Scout. I think it was fun and balanced but apparently many disagree. 

 

Since the people who've been "debating" me on this have finally realized their shortcomings, I can now rest this and we can resume the original topic 🙂 

Edited by Abduct / Devote
  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Revoluzzer said:

When a mid range weapon can kill at short range as fast as a dedicated short range weapon can. Which the N-Tec could, as explained above.

Just because it can doesn't mean it can do it effectively. Alot of people have tried and failed to use it in cqc on a daily basis. Either A. The player using the Ntec has learned how to use the weapon in cqc situations and how to gain an advantage over a cqc player. B. The person using cqc is poor at using the oca/pmg. If the players are on the same skill level then the Oca/pmg is going to win. The Oca and the PMG are modified to excel in these ranges where as the ntec isn't. Like i said there is as difference between the ntec can kill as fast and does kill as fast. Just because it can doesn't make it an issue.

Edited by RespectThis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Abduct / Devote said:

What. the JUMP SHOTTING? LOL. You guys want an assumption maker? this is it. Holy hell. ( why are u so passionate?... 😂)

 

I finished reading your entire post here and I have no flippin clue what you just said to be honest (are you sure? XD) . You clearly don't speak English as a first language, and this has resulted in great confusion man. No, Jump shotting isn't my issue with the nerf(ah really?). I don't care about that particularly. I just didn't agree it should be nerfed (mmm...huh seem a change of thought), at all. It already happened, what is done is done. I'm basically here to argue (interesting.. ) the case that it WASN'T ncessary ( ehm...what's happening here? :3 ) but w.e. I don't like random gimmicks  either like what was done to the HVR but that's over too (seeing what I will read later after this, it doesnt seem so XD)

 

Man I really don't understand where you got the jump shotting part from though (ehehheh ), my only jump shotting issue (mmmmh) had to do with the Scout. I think it was fun and balanced (after 1 week training using only it, calling it "balanced" it couldn't have explained all the insult I received from every matchup I joined XD )  but apparently many disagree (awww, but boy at end that wasnt the same mechanic about the ntec too? XD )

 

Since the people who've been "debating" (you have your reason, not totally/so wrong at the end in my weak opinion)  me on this have finally realized their shortcomings, I can now rest this and we can resume the original topic 🙂 (ehehhe try to fly at the end?, try to guess the reason XD)

First.. Yep, my bad.. I speak 3 languages and half and anyone of them of all 3, I can call as my first language, I have still a lot to learn, my apoligize for my level.

 

About the assumption, of course I wasnt 100% sure but  it was easy, or better, it's not difficult to guess why you, and same speech for Flaws (and a lot), why the ntec nerf is a bother and that's it because LO nerfing the accuracy while crouch-jump shotting, ntec lose one of its main point to enjoy this weapon and quite part of  his versatilty in cqc against other weapon.

 

Then you confirmed it with the several argues for then finishing, you have started to list also other weapons with fun mechanics, "casually" the last one it was the scout, which "casually" got to nerf its jump modifier such as story about Ntec now.

 

Probabily you will continue to not admit it, but it doesnt matter, it's black on white one may get his assumption, another one his ones, and also that, it doesnt matter at all, we are discussing in a game forum, and someone may tell me/you to spend better your/ my time, but there always is something to learn( also if it's unuseful meh), and although if I dont speak your first language so well, I remind you the human natura it's always the same, even if you speak english or chinese.

 

At the beginning, eveybody deny but then at the end, and a lot of time without concerning, with their action/words they betray themself.

 

And when it is in black on white, it's more difficult as you can see, and unfortunately for me, even if it was for a good cause I learnt it by experience.. v.v

 

 

So quit to behaving such as a mad fishwife in a forum and tell your thoughts from the beginning, it doesnt matter anyone at the end.

 

4 hours ago, RespectThis said:

Thats not even close to why. You really can't read the room.

 

a059783397c5ff0846739580fc30950a.gif

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...