Tier List - Vehicles

[Uminee 15]

15 hours ago, TheSquigg said:

Tiers for vehicles are very tricky and this one is based on your experience and your skill in vehicles. Personally, I prefer higher turn rates on the Grown, Cisco, and Vaquero. The ability for me to dodge and weave around opposition causes them serious issues and has resulted in many wins in a vehicle to gun combat swaps. An example of this happened about two hours before my posting of this in my little packer vaquero I was 'racing' a criminal in a vegas to point they kept trying to pit maneuver me off the road and into walls but couldn't touch me because of the sharp turns and quick stopping resulting in his vehicle receiving enough damage by the time we reached the objective for me to jump out, AMG the crap out of his vehicle, kill him and move on.  In that case, the Vaquero an average tier superbly outplayed one of your top tier vehicles. As with guns, there is no 'best overall' just 'best situationally'.  Long straight paths to a point where there are no collisions the vegas would have beat my packer but cause he tried to deal damage while mobile on a faster/smaller target he messed up his chances.

 

I also read the part of this not being 'an end all' and no i get that but this list is biased for you and your opinion on vehicles which is totally fine... this is just my opinion on the matter that you CAN NOT PUT TIER ON A VEHICLE. 

 

Espacio or a Pioneer. Also the 'everyone should have' part on the vegas/pioneer/dump truck bit... that's illogical you need ALL the cars in game to have a rounded team comp just like the guns.

 

Also, one quick note certain cars that are kind of pointless and are really just there to have a rounded out pool of vehicles to pick from such as the Varzuga, Ravan, Calibra, stuff like that more for "I LOVE THAT CAR IRL I'M GONNA USE IT INGAME!" For an example, I owned a Bravada and a Blazer irl so the Charge Sentinel hits home cause I LOVED those cars and it looks like them.

 

Have a wonderful day now!

You make some good points in that vehicles, much like the variety of guns in the game, are useful situationally. Which to me seems like the way it should be, balance wise. Where I disagree is that you cannot put tier on a vehicle ... because some vehicles are useful in more types of situations than others, or are useful in a type of situation that occurs frequently.

 

That's not to say that driving skill is not a factor in determining a vehicle's usefulness, as with your vaquero vs vegas example scenario. I myself am a lot better with cars than I am with guns, often getting more vehicular kills than gunfire ones. I've had more than one gold player accuse me of 'drive botting' after a match. I can say with certainty that it's a skillset as important to winning missions as fps skills.

 

But the balance of cars abilities at the moment is such that we see very little to no variety. As much as I love how effective my 4x4 vegas is in missions, I really miss the days before they existed. The regular, rear wheel vegas had such a high risk vs reward factor, as it's very unforgiving of mistakes, but unmistakably faster than anything else. Now driving it just feels directly inferior to the 4x4, because even if it has a slightly higher top speed, the time it takes reaching that top speed would still put it behind the 4x4 on all but the longest, straightest roads.

Edited June 10, 2018 by Uminee

[IAmDisappointSon 45]

On 5/26/2018 at 10:02 AM, QtePi said:

bes car in ze gaym

I’m actually curious if they gave the calibria kits, but didnt make some upgraded calibria. Would people drive this slow patootie car with kits?

[Kewlin 692]

17 minutes ago, IAmDisappointSon said:

I’m actually curious if they gave the calibria kits, but didnt make some upgraded calibria. Would people drive this slow patootie car with kits?

 

I might occasionally for shits and giggles, but not much, no.

[TheSquigg 13]

8 hours ago, Uminee said:

You make some good points in that vehicles, much like the variety of guns in the game, are useful situationally. Which to me seems like the way it should be, balance wise. Where I disagree is that you cannot put tier on a vehicle ... because some vehicles are useful in more types of situations than others, or are useful in a type of situation that occurs frequently.

 

That's not to say that driving skill is not a factor in determining a vehicle's usefulness, as with your vaquero vs vegas example scenario. I myself am a lot better with cars than I am with guns, often getting more vehicular kills than gunfire ones. I've had more than one gold player accuse me of 'drive botting' after a match. I can say with certainty that it's a skillset as important to winning missions as fps skills.

 

But the balance of cars abilities at the moment is such that we see very little to no variety. As much as I love how effective my 4x4 vegas is in missions, I really miss the days before they existed. The regular, rear wheel vegas had such a high risk vs reward factor, as it's very unforgiving of mistakes, but unmistakably faster than anything else. Now driving it just feels directly inferior to the 4x4, because even if it has a slightly higher top speed, the time it takes reaching that top speed would still put it behind the 4x4 on all but the longest, straightest roads.

When is say you can't put tier on a vehicle, (my apologies for the vagueness of it) I meant as an ALL ENCOMPASSING tier they can very easily be ranked on strength like on a turning list cisco/packer/growl EVEN A CALIBRA would be on top and a 4x4 would be dead last. whereas on straight speed, the vegas would be top and in strength or durability, the Pioneer would be top alongside the Espacio. 

 

I am not the best with words but your points are actually a much better way of explaining what my thought process is. I certainly know where some vehicles shine over others but a single 'best to worst' tier like this is not the way to go in order to really get the raw data we'd have to find some of the best and worst cars and see WHAT makes them good or bad and then based on that we can make several tier lists. Like I said earlier a good example for tiers would be Strength, Speed, Turning, Carrying capacity?, and of course looks! That last tier is more of a joke because tastes differ from person to person I love the Cisco/Vaquero/Growl/Fresno others would prefer other vehicles. Speaking of Fresno I always found with remote detty that that card blew up in a bigger radius (perhaps cause of it's length) and when I put on EXP 3 I had a little rolling nuke on the field with me so another tier could be Explosive Radius.... these are how you class vehicles. I hope that is better at explaining what I want to get across. heh

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

6 hours ago, Kewlin said:

 

I might occasionally for shits and giggles, but not much, no.

I'd drive it for lols if the kits were cheaper than usual.

[Uminee 15]

17 minutes ago, TheSquigg said:

When is say you can't put tier on a vehicle, (my apologies for the vagueness of it) I meant as an ALL ENCOMPASSING tier they can very easily be ranked on strength like on a turning list cisco/packer/growl EVEN A CALIBRA would be on top and a 4x4 would be dead last. whereas on straight speed, the vegas would be top and in strength or durability, the Pioneer would be top alongside the Espacio. 

 

I am not the best with words but your points are actually a much better way of explaining what my thought process is. I certainly know where some vehicles shine over others but a single 'best to worst' tier like this is not the way to go in order to really get the raw data we'd have to find some of the best and worst cars and see WHAT makes them good or bad and then based on that we can make several tier lists. Like I said earlier a good example for tiers would be Strength, Speed, Turning, Carrying capacity?, and of course looks! That last tier is more of a joke because tastes differ from person to person I love the Cisco/Vaquero/Growl/Fresno others would prefer other vehicles. Speaking of Fresno I always found with remote detty that that card blew up in a bigger radius (perhaps cause of it's length) and when I put on EXP 3 I had a little rolling nuke on the field with me so another tier could be Explosive Radius.... these are how you class vehicles. I hope that is better at explaining what I want to get across. heh

Huh. I've been rolling around with a remote det/explosives 3/flak jacket loadout for years (yeah, turns out I've found many ways to be effective at this game while still being bad at aiming) and I never once considered that larger vehicles might have a larger explosive radius. Might have to experiment with that.

 

Anyway, I still think it's possible to give an overall tier for a vehicle ... because if we break down a list of all potential areas a vehicle can excel at, some vehicles will will be in the top tier of more of these areas than others. Some vehicles actually have no need for certain things. Being bad at (or practically incapable of) weaving through traffic is not going to really effect the overall performance of a dumptruck, because there's very little chance that other vehicles are going to prove an obstacle. This principle would also apply to a lesser extent to the pioneer and that crim soccer van thing I can never remember how to spell, which places them at a high tier overall because they require maneuverability less often, so their lack of it counts against them less.

 

In an ideal APB, there'd be a lot more vehicles sitting at the top tier. And indeed, someone would have to break down the existing strengths/weaknesses to figure out what to tweak to even things out. We could sit around and do that for fun if we wanted, but in the end if anyone's going to be making those changes it'll be a dev, so it'll be them making that analysis.

 

So to explain why it's important that we use these generalized tiers rather than break down the strengths/weaknesses of the vehicles: If we ever want any devs to look and notice there needs to be adjustments for balance, a nuanced list of the pros and cons of each vehicle isn't going to get that across at all. Generalized tiers indicating the vehicles that are vastly more useful overall, will. I'm getting tired of seeing the same 3 types of cars everywhere I go.

[TheSquigg 13]

2 hours ago, Uminee said:

I'm getting tired of seeing the same 3 types of cars everywhere I go.

 

This exactly, tiers and other stats out of the way in all honestly this does get boring... same with the guns we have what... 4 types of Ntec and Mikro vs Vaquero are the same things functionally Espacio is the Pioneer, there is little diversity or reason for getting anything but what is 'meta' Personally going down this route I would love to see current vehicles tweaked and say not make the Ravan and the Varzuga basically the same vehicle, also for the new cars that could be added give us different types. The 'new types' of cars would almost need its own thread for people to discuss what they should be and how to implement certain changes to current vehicles. 

 

But as for Tiers of the current vehicles, the dump truck may not need to weave traffic, same with the pioneer and Espacio. but really the dump truck isn't a 'player' car so I'm not going to spend too much time on that, it can't stop to turn or it gets super slow again dump trucks are really only good for trolls and 'ME SMASH YOU GOOD!'. You could look at the cars on a general scale for updating I'm not saying that you can't but saying that 'this vehicle' is bad because you don't like it isn't useful for that. You are actually completely right about using a general unbiased tier list to figure out which cars need to be fixed. The tricky part, especially from a player standpoint, is the unbiased part. Players can't agree what is 'best' because we all prefer different things... honestly, I hate the 4x4 I admit it is fast and good but I don't like it I crash into a wall right in front of me too often when driving them.

 

When I said you can't put them into one general list I meant to classify them on which vehicle we can use NOW or recommend them to others, not which ones need a buff or nerf in some aspects. If I made a list of cars I thought were good and someone else tried them and didn't drive the way I do my list would be wrong. That is the sense I mean that we can't tier them all together on one list. I would support a player debated threat dedicated to classifying cars on the lines of needing a buff or nerf (not that anything but hitboxes really needs a nerf atm).

 

 

P.S. Yea don't hold me to it but I do think the Fresno has a bigger radius, It may be a personal bias I have but either way, it's a great detty vehicle. Strong, good speed, easy to get in, jump out (maybe brick it) and then detonate. My favorite car for that. I've not played around with blast radius myself it's just a minor observation I have made that it MIGHT be larger due to its length.

[CookiePuss 5378]

God Tier: Pioneer

Good tier: Espacio, 4x4

Dont use tier: everything else

 

 

I dont say this to be mean. 

But rather I say this to illustrate how possibly broken vehicle balance is. 

 

[Guest]

espacio

 

more like

 

despacito

[Uminee 15]

1 hour ago, TheSquigg said:

When I said you can't put them into one general list I meant to classify them on which vehicle we can use NOW or recommend them to others, not which ones need a buff or nerf in some aspects. If I made a list of cars I thought were good and someone else tried them and didn't drive the way I do my list would be wrong. That is the sense I mean that we can't tier them all together on one list. I would support a player debated threat dedicated to classifying cars on the lines of needing a buff or nerf (not that anything but hitboxes really needs a nerf atm). 

Ah, I see.

 

Well, in my experience, no amount of explaining is able replicate just hopping in game and driving the car around for a bit and getting the feel for it. Deciding on a vehicle based on any rating system we could devise would amount to an experience like trying to choose your favorite flavor of ice-cream by someone's description of all the flavors  before trying them. There's very little utility in creating such categorizations, but some people enjoy doing it I suppose.

 

As for the figuring out what is and is not effective, we don't all have to shout and squabble to come to a consensus. The fact is, people use what is effective. Just look around at what people are using, and you'll have the consensus. As you've noted, the 4x4 does not suit you, but you've recognized it is effective. I'm fairly adept with all APB vehicles (except the crims ones I havn't tried, I assume) but I have a similar relationship to long ranged guns that you have with 4x4's. As I mentioned earlier my aim's not so good, so I only really use close quarter guns because they're what I can get good results with. I wouldn't assume that all other weapons are bad, that would be absurd. I can look around and see so many people using the guns they've found effective, which are those of varying ranges. This is true of vehicles. No one player needs to say what is 'best', but the the population will naturally gravitate towards what is most efficient, so all we really need to do is see what most people are driving.