Will LO be consulting veterans in regards to their 'balance' changes?

[No 12]

I know it's easy to think that our lords and saviours Little Orbit will magically right all the wrongs of APB without input from the community, but I find this unlikely, particularly from the balancing perspective. It's probably not difficult to have more game knowledge than Reloaded Productions but I still doubt LO is aware of what constitutes good balance for this game. Imagine if they did something absurd like buffing Kevlar or Fragile. I don't really consider myself an active player of APB at the moment, my patience hovers on a tightrope but that would certainly tip me over the edge and thankfully away from this accursed game.

 

I did send a spiel of balancing suggestions/advice to our new hosts a few weeks ago but alas it has gone unanswered: perhaps it's wishful thinking to expect them to have replied but all the same the behaviour reminds me of RP. Listening to the experienced contingent of your playerbase is usually a good idea (I'm not saying you're not, rather I'm not in the loop enough to know if you are).
 

It equated to fairly simple advice/suggestions:

- Don't buff Fragile/Kevlar

- Remove/nerf heavy N-HVR damage as to be useless. The problems with this gun are inherent to its design, rather make the Scout the new meta 'sniper'. APB was never designed to have such low/instantaneous Time To Kill gameplay (which the heavy HVR allows) particularly after G1's TTK reduction post-RTW, quickswitching is still a major issue despite efforts from G1 to fix it. The Scout is an effective team gun without the issues of the heavy N-HVR. Perhaps reinstate the Scout's 'jump shooting' feature which everyone enjoyed.

- Nerf/remove Low Yields, reduce perc grenade damage radius/damage
- Nerf the Yukon secondary pistol (and its variants) - it's far too good and easy (at a 0.5 second TTK) especially when people are corner camping. I'd recommend a moderate nerf to 0.8-1 second TTK since it's a secondary.
- Do not improve any of the newer weapons (particularly not the inherently random weapons like the Norseman guns). I think that the meta exists for a reason and that buffing every money-grabbing niche-filler that G1 added is not a good idea. We didn't need new guns in the first place and more viable guns that bridge every imaginable role/playstyle doesn't equal better.

Players like consistency in their weapons. I think players (particularly the veteran demographic) in general would prefer a higher Time To Kill and greater consistency in weapon accuracy akin to RTW's vision (depending on how drastic your weapon balancing vision is), this means reducing the influence of bloom due to its RNG-factor thus sorting out the spread of weapons to be more predictable, and balancing TTK etc around this. I think finding a compromise between RTW's recoil-less combat and GamersFirst's combat would be ideal, retaining bloom and recoil but reducing them by a moderate amount.

 

 

I'm sure there are other changes which other more learned players could contribute pertaining to their broken effect on missions:

- Blowtorch?

- Ammo boxes?

- Car surfer + ALIG combinations?

 

 

 

Or whatever, maybe I'm being bigoted and not considering the silvers or something. This is just the way I see it and I suspect most of you agree on the whole. Additions and thoughts welcome.

 

 

Edited July 7, 2018 by Shrub

[CookiePuss 5356]

I hope they consider the opinions of good players, not veterans.

But in the end, I hope they do whatever it takes make APB thrive.

Keeping a small number of "vets" happy wont help anything.

Edited July 6, 2018 by CookiePuss

[kokejn 22]

1 minute ago, CookiePuss said:

I hope they consider the opinions of good players, not veterans.

What about both?

 

EDIT: I hope they consider the opinions of crazy players, not both.

 

Edited July 6, 2018 by WtfSerbianoo

[No 12]

Just now, CookiePuss said:

I hope they consider the opinions of good players, not veterans.

Though of course that's what I mean, it's not a good way to win favour with the public. But true, we can't have LilyV3 running things can we.

[SelttikS 223]

I hope LO ignores anyone who can not be bother to set a profile pic but thinks their ideas are better based on some abstract concept as "veteran".

[Yoss 31]

I agree with most of what you said. But there are guns right now in the game that are so bad; you literally cannot use them. 

 

• AR-97 'Misery'
• SBSR 'Coroner'

• SBSR 'IRS'

• Every SWARM variant

• NCR 'Anubis'

• S-247 'Oblivion'

• R-2 'Harbringer'

Note that those gun were chosen by the community as the worst of the worst. 

[ok 418]

1 minute ago, SelttikS said:

I hope LO ignores anyone who can not be bother to set a profile pic but thinks their ideas are better based on some abstract concept as "veteran".

And I hope LO takes into consideration ideas of those who would add to the balance discussion rather than of those who thing profile pictures are more important than game experience

[SelttikS 223]

Just now, -Dan- said:

And I hope LO takes into consideration ideas of those who would add to the balance discussion rather than of those who thing profile pictures are more important than game experience

Not setting a profile pic shows a lack of caring, thinking of others not just yourself. Profile pics make you a person not a Letter.

 

I honestly disagree with LO giving more than a second glance at the opinions of these forums. They have a dev team and at least one of the OG devs, correct me if wrong. So i trust they can look at the numbers better than random people on the forums, whether they be Vets or nubs, the minority or the majority, because opinions can be and usually are wrong to some degree. Go with the hard data not feelings.

[CookiePuss 5356]

Didnt Matt say they brought someone back from RTW to head up weapon balance anyways?

[ok 418]

Just now, SelttikS said:

Not setting a profile pic shows a lack of caring, thinking of others not just yourself. Profile pics make you a person not a Letter.

 

I honestly disagree with LO giving more than a second glance at the opinions of these forums. They have a dev team and at least one of the OG devs, correct me if wrong. So i trust they can look at the numbers better than random people on the forums, whether they be Vets or nubs, the minority or the majority, because opinions can be and usually are wrong to some degree. Go with the hard data not feelings.

Ok, I gotta hand you that, you are right, LO can figure this out by themselves

 

 

 

But please enlighten me how is not adding a profile picture showing a lack of caring

How does my profile pic make me any better ?

 

[SelttikS 223]

3 minutes ago, -Dan- said:

Ok, I gotta hand you that, you are right, LO can figure this out by themselves

 

 

 

But please enlighten me how is not adding a profile picture showing a lack of caring

How does my profile pic make me any better ?

 

Oh it doesn't make you better, it just makes you a person. Makes you real. It shows you care enough to do something that has no real meaning just so you have a face, something that makes you a real person.

 

 

Edit* look out Matt is making a topic!

Edited July 6, 2018 by SelttikS

[Gusvato3080 75]

Dude, G1 gave us a few districts to test a higher TTK back then and it was awful, no one liked it

[No 12]

18 minutes ago, SelttikS said:

I hope LO ignores anyone who can not be bother to set a profile pic but thinks their ideas are better based on some abstract concept as "veteran".

lol, top quality post.

15 minutes ago, Yoss said:

I agree with most of what you said. But there are guns right now in the game that are so bad; you literally cannot use them. 

 

• AR-97 'Misery'
• SBSR 'Coroner'

• SBSR 'IRS'

• Every SWARM variant

• NCR 'Anubis'

• S-247 'Oblivion'

• R-2 'Harbringer'

Note that those gun were chosen by the community as the worst of the worst. 

Ah, so it's that kind of balancing.... great. These weapons are irrelevant and should stay that way, nothing useful or positive will come of making them relevant. Or rather what I mean, is that there are bigger priorities in my opinio

 

 

 

9 minutes ago, SelttikS said:

Not setting a profile pic shows a lack of caring, thinking of others not just yourself. Profile pics make you a person not a Letter.

 

I honestly disagree with LO giving more than a second glance at the opinions of these forums. They have a dev team and at least one of the OG devs, correct me if wrong. So i trust they can look at the numbers better than random people on the forums, whether they be Vets or nubs, the minority or the majority, because opinions can be and usually are wrong to some degree. Go with the hard data not feelings.

Cool, I'll bear it in mind so that you may better associate yourself with my name.

 

You really think so? All balancing changes will be subjective and inherently a matter of opinion, there will be no one size fits all, there's no objectively superior gameplay change and hard data will not dictate anything. What hard data are you even referring to? We'll see I guess, people assume that these developers will make good decisions but I'm sceptical.

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, Pachi3080 said:

Dude, G1 gave us a few districts to test a higher TTK back then and it was awful, no one liked it

I heard that it was a complete shambles in that G1 did not replicate the RTW experience at all, they still had bloom/recoil and various other things which made it not comparable to RTW. I did not experience it myself to comment. My main point there was on making weapons more consistent, reliable and reducing the influence of bloom (see the OSCAR for a well-balanced weapon in my opinion), I'm not necessarily advocating a complete overhaul of the TTK system, it's just an afterthought and my post is not premised on that, LO will do what they will do irrespective of me.

Edited July 6, 2018 by Shrub

[SelttikS 223]

1 minute ago, Shrub said:

You really think so? All balancing changes will be subjective and inherently a matter of opinion, there will be no one size fits all, there's no objectively superior gameplay change and hard data will not dictate anything. What hard data are you even referring to?

Weapon statistics? Vehicle statistics? Those such things.

 

They need to work out a system of weapon effectiveness or some such. Break that down into ranges and score them based on the data. Have a set point range that a weapon can have and assure that they are with in that.

Basically where no weapon is super effective in all ranges nor super shitty at all ranges. Besides explosives... cause well they are stupid and funny.

Same thing with vehicles only based on say speed, acceleration, torque whatever else.

 

Just off the top of my monster fueled spaz of an idea.

[AsgerLund 1271]

42 minutes ago, Shrub said:

Perhaps reinstate the Scout's 'jump shooting' feature which everyone enjoyed.

Edited July 6, 2018 by AsgerLund

[Keshi 436]

as a vet. honestly i wouldnt care if we get something or not. What we bought or did years ago is in the past. This is a new ERA. I don't think we deserve any compensation from LO tbh

[Knight 1]

If TF2 has proven anything, it's that consulting "veterans" on weapon balance just results in nerfing anything the "veterans" dislike playing against.  Weapon balance should be dictated by the intended vs. actual kill range/time to kill and statistical data.

[CookiePuss 5356]

2 minutes ago, Knight said:

If TF2 has proven anything, it's that consulting "veterans" on weapon balance just results in nerfing anything the "veterans" dislike playing against.  Weapon balance should be dictated by the intended vs. actual kill range/time to kill and statistical data.

Id rather see a few buff than any nerfs.

[SelttikS 223]

Make LTL great again! or like for the first time!

 

Also give us all those mods that were removed and the ninja ones that never saw daylight.

[CookiePuss 5356]

~snip~

Edited July 6, 2018 by CookiePuss

[CookiePuss 5356]

 

[SelttikS 223]

There is your answer lol.