The core of the toxicity is the matchmaking.

[Noob_Guardian 418]

On 2/6/2023 at 9:55 PM, Hexerin said:

Don't remove the ability to disable alliance matching. It's so nice being able to just roll with your group, without having to worry about randos screwing the match balance.

 

Instead, add a feature where players can opt into cross faction matching. By opting in, you open yourself to be matchable into a match where both sides can have any mixture of Enforcers and Criminals. If you don't opt in, you will only experience the traditional Enforcer vs Criminal matches. This feature would not be a permanent thing, you could always opt out at any time.

 

 

 

I always roll with a open alliance if grouped, because I don't mind randos. It's fine sometimes but i agree that removing it would probably not be the best, But if in a 3-4 man, they shouldn't need to have alliance off anyways.

 

I will say though, I legit hate getting 2v2s because people want to play 2 players and "alliance off" alllllll daaaaayyyy. So annoying. 3v3s are aight but 4v4s are where it's at. If i could remove 2v2s due to alliance being on, i'd do it. Because they're so boring and imbalanced. 2v2's suck and I gladly just psuedo afk, troll around and not give a fuck in 2v2s. It's like oh a 2v2? There goes my will to care. So boring. So removing the option for 2v2s, like they did for most 1v1s, i'd take it any day.

 

I wouldn't mind a "cross faction" matchmaking, but the issue is, with that, is shooting the same symbol as your allies is going to be confusing. When i see crim symbol and red name, i think enemy. It's not going to be good if you see their name and see "enforcer is working with crims" or something. Unless they "alter w/ different color" your faction symbol. To indicate you're cross faction. Otherwise, i'd say no.

Edited February 13, 2023 by Noob_Guardian

[Hexerin 1140]

6 minutes ago, Noob_Guardian said:

I will say though, I legit hate getting 2v2s

I mean yea, the game is designed around 4v4 (it's beyond obvious by the design of both missions and the gameplay map). I've always held the position that unopposed missions should never happen, and that matchmaking should always favor setting up 4v4 missions. To resolve the whole "group of 2, thus matchmaking tends to give them 2 opp for a 2v2" issue, just make it so that if a team has less than 4 players, they can call backup even if the two teams are technically balanced.

 

6 minutes ago, Noob_Guardian said:

When i see crim symbol and red name

You pay attention to the rating symbol? What an odd way to IFF.

[CookiePuss 5379]

10 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

2v2's suck and I gladly just psuedo afk, troll around 

It’s fine if you don’t want to play (imo), but at least /exit. Don’t ruin the fun of three other people.

[R3ACT3M 489]

19 hours ago, Hexerin said:

Would be a good change, for sure.

im pretty sure that's how most games operate. Another amazing change would be to make fight club matchmaking not take factions into account so crims and enforcers can be on the same side. This would keep the fight club games pretty interesting. 

[Noob_Guardian 418]

11 hours ago, CookiePuss said:

It’s fine if you don’t want to play (imo), but at least /exit. Don’t ruin the fun of three other people.

Nah see, I still show up, i just don't bother trying and end the round sooner if it's an offense on my side. If it's defense i'll just wait til last stage to bother, or i'll go scrub and do some stupid patootie weapon for the location so the match ends sooner. 2v2s aren't fun, and most times ive been in 2v2s against the -same group- -4-8x in a row- yeah no, thats boring af, screw that.

 

Not to mention -half- the time, its me and a gold, vs a bunch of lowbie silvers or coppers. Why the living fuck would I go try or put effort into -that-?! I can go braindead against silvers and bronzes, and still go 15+kills in a game. It's not fun for them and not fun for me. Plenty of golds i face i can go 10-20 kills in a match in a 2v2 if i give a shit, also -not fun- for them. So no, 2v2s are dumb. 4v4s are better, sure, i can go 20-30 kills in them, but it's not as -boring-. nor bs as 2v2s which missions ARE NOT BALANCED FOR.

 

People can't tell when i go braindead anyways cause i still get kills and die. lol. I even get 1v2s and i stand at the end obj once the enemy got it, and just camp it killing them while letting them win, because i don't care about winning that much. "fun" maybe not" but with matchmaking and having to take it easy on newbies and 2v2s being the epitome of stupidity next to 1v1s. I think i'm doing aight in ending the round sooner.

 

21 hours ago, Hexerin said:

I mean yea, the game is designed around 4v4 (it's beyond obvious by the design of both missions and the gameplay map). I've always held the position that unopposed missions should never happen, and that matchmaking should always favor setting up 4v4 missions. To resolve the whole "group of 2, thus matchmaking tends to give them 2 opp for a 2v2" issue, just make it so that if a team has less than 4 players, they can call backup even if the two teams are technically balanced.

 

You pay attention to the rating symbol? What an odd way to IFF.

I do, if i'm taking it easy on newbies, I legit kill the higher ranked (typically gold r100+) one first, then joke off and take it easier on the lower rank silver or bronze. I've had matches where its 3 high ranked golds and a low silver, and i'll wipe the golds consistently then jump in circles around the silver while single firing a pistol for lols. I legit target higher rank/threats first in certain situations when possible. It's more fun imo. Plus, if im teamed with newbies, it gives them a chance to fight another newbie or mid rank without getting stomped by the higher rank as much,

Edited February 14, 2023 by Noob_Guardian

[PotatoeGirl 220]

On 2/11/2023 at 6:07 AM, NotZombieBiscuit said:

Is this really the best evidence you have?

Does he even need more? Every match is a 1 way stomp. 

[Decimator714 22]

lmao even Overwatch with hundreds of thousands of active players can't make matchmaking not shit.

 

Imagine trying to make it good with a whopping max total of 80 people... and its usually way less than that. 

 

The issue is the population of the game.

[AutumnSan 12]

13 hours ago, Decimator714 said:

lmao even Overwatch with hundreds of thousands of active players can't make matchmaking not shit.

 

Imagine trying to make it good with a whopping max total of 80 people... and its usually way less than that. 

 

The issue is the population of the game.

Population indeed is an issue, but so is matchmaking. Because right now during day hours you have like 4-5 50/50 districts, and even so matchmaking in a full district does bananas.

It will match someone who just started playing vs max rank golds, so you can't say pop is the issue when the district is clearly full.

It should at least try and match a player vs someone close to their rank+threat and if that's not possible only then to match them vs the next lowest rank+threat.

This will certainly not fix everything but it's a start, because right now you get 4 golds vs 4 silvers and a bronze. This is not balanced, you can add another bronze and it will change nothing because high rank gold players will simply go 20+ kills and barely break a sweat vs newbies. 

Edited February 14, 2023 by AutumnSan

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

26 minutes ago, AutumnSan said:

Population indeed is an issue, but so is matchmaking. Because right now during day hours you have like 4-5 50/50 districts, and even so matchmaking in a full district does bananas.

It will match someone who just started playing vs max rank golds, so you can't say pop is the issue when the district is clearly full.

It should at least try and match a player vs someone close to their rank+threat and if that's not possible only then to match them vs the next lowest rank+threat.

This will certainly not fix everything but it's a start, because right now you get 4 golds vs 4 silvers and a bronze. This is not balanced, you can add another bronze and it will change nothing because high rank gold players will simply go 20+ kills and barely break a sweat vs newbies. 

Because it has literally no other options but to. It is almost entirely a population issue.

 

Also rating/rank has no bearing on skill and should never be used by the matchmaker.

Edited February 15, 2023 by NotZombieBiscuit

[Hexerin 1140]

13 minutes ago, NotZombieBiscuit said:

Also rating/rank has no bearing on skill and should never be used by the matchmaker.

It has an indirect influence on skill level due to the simple accumulation of game knowledge. However, knowing something and being able to act upon such knowledge are two different things. Thus, you are correct, that rating should have little/no impact on matchmaking.

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

5 minutes ago, Hexerin said:

It has an indirect influence on skill level due to the simple accumulation of game knowledge. However, knowing something and being able to act upon such knowledge are two different things. Thus, you are correct, that rating should have little/no impact on matchmaking.

Me rating 255. Me make new account. Me rating 10. Me still same skill.

[AutumnSan 12]

27 minutes ago, NotZombieBiscuit said:

Me rating 255. Me make new account. Me rating 10. Me still same skill.

At least then you won't have a o-pgl/osmaw/remote detonator/car surfer etc etc.. So if someone actually does this they will not gain a lot and lose interest after pawning some newbs and raising to gold threat.

 

What's the point if you are so good at the game and have a variety of weapons/modifications that you get matched vs some newbs? It's not a challenge for you, and it's not fun for them. I've had several newbies who just exit the game after versing tryhard golds. 

 

If you want to raise and keep your player pop then treat them fairly, instead of making it easier for the higher rank veterans who already have everything.

Edited February 15, 2023 by AutumnSan

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

8 minutes ago, AutumnSan said:

At least then you won't have a o-pgl/osmaw/remote detonator/car surfer etc etc.. So if someone actually does this they will not gain a lot and lose interest after pawning some newbs and raising to gold threat.

 

What's the point if you are so good at the game and have a variety of weapons/modifications that you get matched vs some newbs? It's not a challenge for you, and it's not fun for them. I've had several newbies who just exit the game after versing tryhard golds. 

 

If you want to raise and keep your player pop then treat them fairly, instead of making it easier for the higher rank veterans who already have everything.

Me just play a few mission and get any weapon I want and stomp noob. Or low rating give me such good matchmaking that me just stomp noob anyway. When me rating up too high just make new character and stomp noob again.

 

Or me buy account wide 3 slot weapon and stomp noob right from start each time.

 

 

Rating is by far the lowest indicator for skill out of every metric APB has. Including it in the matchmaker brings negatives that far outweigh any positive.

[AutumnSan 12]

27 minutes ago, NotZombieBiscuit said:

Me just play a few mission and get any weapon I want and stomp noob. Or low rating give me such good matchmaking that me just stomp noob anyway. When me rating up too high just make new character and stomp noob again.

 

Or me buy account wide 3 slot weapon and stomp noob right from start each time.

 

 

Rating is by far the lowest indicator for skill out of every metric APB has. Including it in the matchmaker brings negatives that far outweigh any positive.

 

You is just a minor few actually bored enough to do this. And right now noobs get stomped anyway..

 

That being said, beside shooting down every idea and comment about this issue.. what do you propose? 

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

11 minutes ago, AutumnSan said:

 

You is just a minor few actually bored enough to do this. And right now noobs get stomped anyway..

 

That being said, beside shooting down every idea and comment about this issue.. what do you propose? 

Everyone goes on and on about dethreaters, even in this thread. Well applying rating to matchmaking allows all those people to instantly 'dethreat' with zero effort.

 

Also matchmaking is fine. It is just restricted by population options.

Edited February 15, 2023 by NotZombieBiscuit

[AutumnSan 12]

15 minutes ago, NotZombieBiscuit said:

Everyone goes on and on about dethreaters, even in this thread. Well applying rating to matchmaking allows all those people to instantly 'dethreat' with zero effort.

 

Also matchmaking is fine. It is just restricted by population options.

It is not restricted by anything, a district is entirely packed, 50/50 and matchmaking does absolutely nothing of balance. 

 

The only people who say that this matchmaking is fine are those higher rank that are pawning noobs.

 

 

Here's a match from just a minute ago:

 

Tell me exactly how this is fine for the trainee? They got owned so hard that they practically got 0$. No progress at all. 

 

Meanwhile the high rank gold players faced no challenge. 

 

Edited February 15, 2023 by AutumnSan

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

6 minutes ago, AutumnSan said:

It is not restricted by anything, a district is entirely packed, 50/50 and matchmaking does absolutely nothing of balance. 

 

The only people who who say that this matchmaking is fine are those higher rank that are pawning noobs.

 

 

Here's a match from just a minute ago:

 

Tell me exactly how this is fine for the trainee? They got owned so hard that they practically got 0$. No progress at all. 

 

Meanwhile the high rank gold players faced no challenge. 

 

A full district of 50/50. You've already cut the matchmaking candidates against you down to 50. Then the majority of those 50 are already in a mission. The pool of players that matchmaker can give you is roughly around 0-10. You will almost never find a perfectly fair matchup in that, it does the best it can with the VERY small pool it is given. I'm not saying that its a good thing, I am saying that unfortunately that is the only way that people are going to get a game. 

 

Then throw in that there is not enough population to put each threat bracket in to their own district.

 

The matchmaker itself is not the problem in this situation. It falls almost entirely on that low district population count and overall population count. You could give APB the absolute best matchmaker to have ever existed (which APB uses a very similar system to most games anyway) and it would still give the same results.

Edited February 15, 2023 by NotZombieBiscuit

[FakeBungo 248]

lmao new players get beaten by veterans what a surprise, Op is a genius

[Reprimand 98]

Maybe this takes away from the thread but the update to anticheat should fix a big part of this issue which is there are gold players running around using hacks. 

 

Getting matched with a high gold isn't fun but it's a lot more engaging than having to deal with a cheater.

[Yapopal 169]

On 2/11/2023 at 7:07 AM, NotZombieBiscuit said:

 

I have exactly the same screenshots stored in a separate folder. Over the years of the game, one wagon and two carts have accumulated. I make new ones every day. 

Should all screenshots be posted here?

Edited February 16, 2023 by Yapopal

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

4 minutes ago, Yapopal said:

I have exactly the same screenshots stored in a separate folder. Over the years of the game, one wagon and two carts have accumulated. I make new ones every day. 

Should all screenshots be posted here?

For what reason?