Drop Primary Weapon On Death

[ElectroStingz 52]

To provide a solution to those that do not wish to share their weapons, make it an option.

• Before the missions starts you have it either 1) share with all, 2) share will team, 3) disabled
• Once a mission starts it becomes locked to your choice.
• So weapons will only drop from the players that have it enabled / team or all.
• Weapons can only be picked up by those that have it enabled / team or all
• If you choose to disable the feature, you miss out.

So as a tactical advantage, it would be great to share with your team.

Why would you share it with the opposition, without any incentive it may be a useless feature.

Disabled, don't help your team, don't let anyone touch your weapons.

Edited June 18, 2018 by ElectroStingz

[Darth_Whatever 4]

It is really impressive how one greedy kid is making speeches against it only because he is selfish and can not sleep knowing that other people are having fun. And yet while he has no actual arguments against this idea, all those who are really thinking about it and trying to offer something to make this game better, changing now their ideas in order to satisfy him.

For the record, I am also against situations when other people can use my stuff (cars especially). But if weapon will be dropped without mods, skins and all possible customization, would not even consider it to be "my weapon" and will not think that other "unworthy ones" are touching my precious toys. So still consider this idea to be a great way of making APB more realistic and fun.

Short timer for picking was also a great addition. But maybe rank restriction could be added too? For rocket launchers for example and such stuff. Simply out of realistic ways. People are learning first how to use stuff, right? So why not to keep rank system. Or maybe add some skill lvl for using weapons.

[Dopefish 245]

11 hours ago, Kewlin said:

How about we don't cheapen the tactics of the game by allowing you to easily almost always have an optimal weapon for every stage without thinking about it, while simultaneously destroying the skill of being aware of your enemy's loadout and thus try to out-smart him and predict what he's doing.

I'm glad you took the time to reply with your concerns to the topic Kewlin 

 

Though I'm not sure how this would allow someone to have the optimal weapon at all times, other than being able to carry two primaries, which is just ridiculous and a reason why the feature got bad reputation the first time around.

 

People seem to put too much weight into being able to open the scoreboard and seeing the enemies loadout to be able to equip a good counter for their setup. It would become harder to know what their current weapon would be, even if it would be displayed on the scoreboard after being picked up, but it would add another skill to be able to correctly read what they might've picked up. This could be based on seeing them killing your teammate, knowing what he was carrying and if the situation would promote the enemy to switch to that weapon, or if they'd be next to another enemy you just killed.

Also, your teammates could give call outs based on the deathcam if they think they'll pick up their weapon after their death. It would take more effort and time to get used to, but I strongly believe the feature would add more depth to the game and new strategies. Remember to look from the other perspective aswell, like what the potential would be for yourself, not what it would mean for your enemies.

 

11 hours ago, ExoticZ said:

I would not mind testing this mechanic before we would have it in the actual game.

I think any feature should be tested thoroughly before being a permanent addition to the game, or permanently removed. Let it be active for two weeks, and see how the feedback would be for it, and either update it based on the suggestions for another trial run, or scrap the idea after that.

[Kewlin 692]

1 hour ago, Dopefish said:

Though I'm not sure how this would allow someone to have the optimal weapon at all times, other than being able to carry two primaries, which is just ridiculous and a reason why the feature got bad reputation the first time around.

I'm speaking from experience from the last time this was tested. It doesn't have to do with carrying multiple primaries at once, it has to do with the fact that virtually all the time someone in the mission will have a gun optimal for the range of the current objective that you can take instead of swapping weapons, which in my opinion cheapens the tactical decisions around making and using your loadout and team composition. I believe this is especially advantageous to defense, which is an issue in of itself because defense is already better than offense.

 

Say, for example, you're guarding a dropoff point in the Yoido Complex (Just South of Gaijin) and you've got a ALIG out 'cause the last stage involved cars, but your teammate's got an OCA and he kills some enemy that's got an ATAC. Bam, now you've got a close-quarters weapon with zero effort or tactical decisions: no risk of being hit while resupplying or need to communicate with your teammate to cover you, no repercussions for equipping an AV weapon, and let's face it, most of the time you succeed on a defense stage you live through almost the whole stage, so the fact that you lose the gun when you die isn't an issue.

 

How does this make the game more skilled? It doesn't, it just makes it so you need to think less about your loadout, and less about managing ammo, and it's already an issue that managing ammo is so easy now.

 

 

1 hour ago, Dopefish said:

People seem to put too much weight into being able to open the scoreboard and seeing the enemies loadout to be able to equip a good counter for their setup. It would become harder to know what their current weapon would be, even if it would be displayed on the scoreboard after being picked up, but it would add another skill to be able to correctly read what they might've picked up. This could be based on seeing them killing your teammate, knowing what he was carrying and if the situation would promote the enemy to switch to that weapon, or if they'd be next to another enemy you just killed.

Also, your teammates could give call outs based on the deathcam if they think they'll pick up their weapon after their death. It would take more effort and time to get used to, but I strongly believe the feature would add more depth to the game and new strategies. Remember to look from the other perspective aswell, like what the potential would be for yourself, not what it would mean for your enemies.

 

In my opinion this goes far too far into the world of things you simply cannot know, especially in PUGs, which is the percentage of all missions, and turning complex aspects of a game into aspects that are out of your control removes huge amounts of skill.

[Dopefish 245]

32 minutes ago, Kewlin said:

It doesn't have to do with carrying multiple primaries at once, it has to do with the fact that virtually all the time someone in the mission will have a gun optimal for the range of the current objective that you can take instead of swapping weapons, which in my opinion cheapens the tactical decisions around making and using your loadout and team composition. I believe this is especially advantageous to defense, which is an issue in of itself because defense is already better than offense.

This is a valid point, and the enemy is probably positioning himself where the gun is most optimal for their use. Though this does require someone to be adapt with several weapons instead of only a select few, to be able to benefit from this. I also feel like this would benefit attackers more than defenders, like being able to kill a sniper on an overpass with your close-quarter weapon, and then switch to his sniper to take over his position.

 

In other scenarios it would be plausible that you have similar weapons to begin with, or maybe you're the one with the more optimal choice for that scenario?

 

42 minutes ago, Kewlin said:

How does this make the game more skilled? It doesn't, it just makes it so you need to think less about your loadout, and less about managing ammo, and it's already an issue that managing ammo is so easy now.

I don't think this system would make the game less skilled, but rather require another type of skillset more focused on situational decisions instead of checking the scoreboard for what to switch to. 

 

Managing ammo might need to be balanced a bit if a system like this would be introduced, as you could most often pick up weapons with more ammo in them than yourself. The enemy might have wasted their ammo so you pick up an almost empty gun, but it's more likely the longer you survive, that you'll be the one benefiting from the exchange. But like you said, ammo management isn't much of an issue in the current state of the game either.

 

50 minutes ago, Kewlin said:

In my opinion this goes far too far into the world of things you simply cannot know, especially in PUGs, which is the percentage of all missions, and turning complex aspects of a game into aspects that are out of your control removes huge amounts of skill.

It would benefit organized teams much more than PUGs for sure, and yes, randomness or variables out of your control would be detrimental to skill-based gameplay. I'm not convinced this is such a case though, and that when you get used to the system you'll be more easily able to predict it. If not being able to tell the current loadout of an enemy is truly the deal breaker, maybe weapon changes could be broadcasted through the kill feed?

 

Also consider this system from a new player, low-skilled player, or a free-to-play players perspective, who doesn't have access or experience with all these weapon varieties. It would give them a chance to experience weapons they otherwise wouldn't have, help negate people's belief about P2W once they get a chance to try the weapons for themselves, or be incentive for them to purchase a weapon they like through Armas.

 

I do believe a proper implementation would have alot merits and be beneficial to the game, so it wouldn't hurt to try it out for two weeks and see how things play out?

[Kewlin 692]

5 hours ago, Dopefish said:

Also consider this system from a new player, low-skilled player, or a free-to-play players perspective, who doesn't have access or experience with all these weapon varieties. It would give them a chance to experience weapons they otherwise wouldn't have, help negate people's belief about P2W once they get a chance to try the weapons for themselves, or be incentive for them to purchase a weapon they like through Armas.

 

Every non-legendary already has a trial option though, and most can be bought on the Joker store, and legendaries are mostly slightly modified normal guns anyhoo.

[Dopefish 245]

On 6/19/2018 at 4:16 AM, Kewlin said:

 

Every non-legendary already has a trial option though, and most can be bought on the Joker store, and legendaries are mostly slightly modified normal guns anyhoo.

Armas weapon trials are quite a hassle though, and requires going through several menus, your mail box and then finally weapon locker for a short one time test. That's if you even know about the weapon to test it, and you're unlikely to try weapons that seemingly doesn't interest you.

 

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but joker weapons are only leashed as well, right? Besides how long does it take to earn the required amount of tickets for one weapon, without doing fight club?

[Kewlin 692]

9 minutes ago, Dopefish said:

. . . without doing fight club?

Well that's kinda' a harsh restriction. . .

[Dopefish 245]

8 hours ago, Kewlin said:

Well that's kinda' a harsh restriction. . .

The reason for that is that you shouldn't have to grind a game mode that alot of people don't enjoy, and that aren't part of the main game, just to be able to try out a weapon. But if we ignore that and include Fight Club, how long would it take to farm enough tickets to try out one weapon? (I'm asking since I honestly don't know)

[Zolerox 564]

Short story.

 

It was nice for an event (crims raging when i kill them with their own atac ahh good times)

Players didn't want it in actual missions (wouldn't work and it was impossible to balance around)

We won't accept it into the actual game unless it get's balanced immensely (but then it will take more work then your suggested "the feature would be ready in no time") I'll leave you with this. [no content till new engine here's why]