...............

[Zoehh 33]

27 minutes ago, mynd said:

... I just hope these people use their second chance and don't ruin the game ...

ha

[vsb 6171]

57 minutes ago, Zoehh said:

 

A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, APB Used to have districts that were not sorted and restricted by threat levels.
You could join any district you wanted to and play whomever matchmaking decided was fair opposition for you.

Prior to that threat was divided into Bronze 1-10, Silver 1-10, and Gold 1-10 (And sometimes Blank/No threat, which happened if you passed Gold 10 because bugs.). Once you hit (for example) Silver 10, and then gained enough threat you were promoted to Gold 1, then 2, then 3, etc.
Along with that you still kept your rating level, as now. But back then it only went up to 195, of course. (Even though up to 300 is planned and implemented in the files already, but that's a different discussion)

I think this is a better system than the current system, but the best system moving forward IMO is a removal of visible threat and threat segregation.
Let people see what threat they are themselves. Preferably in the old 1-10 style to give a more granular representation of how good you are in your bracket.
No one else should be able to see what threat you are, and you should be able to join any district you want.

This should let people play the game more in-the-moment and have less preconceived notions of how well or poorly they're going to do in the match.

It would also mitigate dethreating. Both as a way of "Escaping the gold cheaters who only play in silvers and pick on the poor silvers. They have their own gold districts why don't they use those :^("   -and- "lol lets go stomp on some scrubs eksdee xd".

Gone off topic a bit but it ties in some and expands upon it.

this is the same system we still have, its just been hidden behind rank based icons instead

 

also im pretty sure g1 apb has always had districts with threat levels, for a time they were dynamically based on the threat distribution of the players in the district

[Zoehh 33]

Just now, BXNNXD said:

this is the same system we still have, its just been hidden behind rank based icons instead

 

also im pretty sure g1 apb has always had districts with threat levels, for a time they were dynamically based on the threat distribution of the players in the district

The underlying system is the same (except how it changes is different now. it used to be based purely on win/loss ratio.), how it's displayed is different.

G1 APB, quite a long time ago, had no threat segregation in it's districts. You could join anything you wanted, though usually you joined based on population.

[Dean Hall 1]

On 5/28/2018 at 10:31 AM, HandThatFeeds said:

you can change IP.

 

You cannot change your HWID.

HWID is incredibly easy to change (was very easy back in the day of PB bans) and had done this in the past but accomplished nothing sadly. 

[Rebelliousness 85]

4 hours ago, Ken2 said:

Thanks for the colouring text, it really helped me reading.

 

I am not sure about that claim of false cheating. I saw a name today that totally deserved it (i really hope that guy was just trolling and used a nick alike).

 

And about threat i am not old enough in the game to experience that, but i am allways in favour of keeping the game as original as possible. If you say that not seeing threats was so good, then it should stay that way.

 

Any older player can confirm this?

Q: The anti-cheat system. Will you be making any changes? 
A: This was the number one question. I think the community is super divided, especially the second part of the question. Will we be changing cheat detection? Absolutely. We’ve been working with Battleye, and we think that they are the market leader in client-side anti-cheat. We’re already three quarters of the way into the integration. The reason why we set this date was that we could get something concrete in place before announcing it, and also to allow the new support system to gain traction. But we think that this is the most important thing that we could implement to immensely help the game. We also mentioned that we’re keeping FairFight, but without doing auto-bans. The system has not been tuned for a year, and wasn’t being updated while the company was struggling. In my opinion with FairFight and Battleye, which will come in the next patch we put out, will be the ideal solution....
Q: Will there be unbans? Will it be a full reversal or partial reversal?
A: This is such a divisive issue. These last two weeks have been extremely busy for Little Orbit, especially with GDPR. What I did was sit on the customer support calls and worked through issues. We had FairFight auto-bans and I sat on the line with customers and logs, and we can clearly determine that there were improper bans. Those bans shouldn’t have been in place. It’s really hard for me to leave those bans in place. But I do want to say that this could raise issues of “oh these cheaters are bad” but specifically the bulk of the cheating bans are going to be reversed; the community is going to get a second chance....
Q: Will bans be broadcasted?
A: No. It’s a super toxic practice. I view banning as a failure; it’s not something to be proud of or to enjoy. We lost a player and it’s our fault when it happens. We have done something in the meantime; even if you’re banned in game, we’re not going to ban you on the forums. We’re going to be doing some tweaks and utilize temporary bans. My commitment to the community is that we are going to clean up the cheating problem in a fair and good manner.
https://forums.gamersfirst.com/topic/208-transcript-for-the-apb-qa-session-one/
 

Quote

Today, I logged onto APB to find a new update that affects rewards and threat. this update, in my oppinion anyway, is absoultely terrible because now I get 98$ per game for 10 kills because I like to play in fight club (and at this point i find normal action districts REALLY boring) any my threatwas reverted to T because of a glitch. even when my Threat comes back to bronze where it was,(aperently should take about 10 games or so) because all the fight club districts are full of higher level players (which i like because i like a challenge) I get less money because i like a challenge. i find that rather idiotic..

Now to the actual sugestion, i think that it would be more effective if a person plays a game against higher threat players, that player who had a lower threat should INCREASE in rewards rather than DECREASE, causeing people to be more ambitious, and lower threat players, who are actualy as good if not better than the people they're matched up against can get better faster to match their skill level rather then slower to make playing this game unbearable... Or, as an alternative, make fight club districts not affected by threat... thank you for reading, I hope my idea is taken into consideration.
As ANOTHER alternative, why not just completely get rid of the update because it has not done anything that was actualy helping... 
https://forums-old.gamersfirst.com/topic/249733-new-threat-update-fix-it/?hl=threat+segregation+patch#entry2381014

Note the date:  July 19, 2013

So Far

Back in March we listed our major goals for 2013. So far this year, we've brought in:
 

• The updated score system
• The new front end
• Elective spawning system
• Another test of Asylum
• Threat segregation
• The smart district spin-up 

 

• Threat segregation will be changed; players will no longer be able to go down into districts below their current threat level. We found that too many people were going into districts below their recommended threat level and making life miserable for those players. Design on this is subject to change, but it's something we're looking into and intend to move forward.

https://apbreloaded.gamersfirst.com/2013/07/

And here's the goals for 2013:
- Threat segregation (Was initially only applied to golds, and what caused the massive amount of dethreaters)
http://apbdb.com/track/384494/
_____________________________________________________
So, they introduced threat Segregation in 2012 which in their own words a year later: "We found that too many people were going into districts below their recommended threat level and making life miserable for those players."  And for whatever reason were never able to reroll that destructive patch which caused so much forum complaining, so many unhappy players, the literal death of the new player community, horrific bad press... but instead were forced to make change after change breaking the cohesion of the game and community further and further, year after year. CLEARLY they destroyed the original code and could not fix how they wrecked the game.

 

APB Reloaded hits 3 million users
By Tom Goulter December 16, 2011News 
https://www.gamesradar.com/apb-reloaded-hits-3-million-users/

 

[Excalibur! 207]

18 minutes ago, Rebelliousness said:

Q: The anti-cheat system. Will you be making any changes? 
A: This was the number one question. I think the community is super divided, especially the second part of the question. Will we be changing cheat detection? Absolutely. We’ve been working with Battleye, and we think that they are the market leader in client-side anti-cheat. We’re already three quarters of the way into the integration. The reason why we set this date was that we could get something concrete in place before announcing it, and also to allow the new support system to gain traction. But we think that this is the most important thing that we could implement to immensely help the game. We also mentioned that we’re keeping FairFight, but without doing auto-bans. The system has not been tuned for a year, and wasn’t being updated while the company was struggling. In my opinion with FairFight and Battleye, which will come in the next patch we put out, will be the ideal solution....
Q: Will there be unbans? Will it be a full reversal or partial reversal?
A: This is such a divisive issue. These last two weeks have been extremely busy for Little Orbit, especially with GDPR. What I did was sit on the customer support calls and worked through issues. We had FairFight auto-bans and I sat on the line with customers and logs, and we can clearly determine that there were improper bans. Those bans shouldn’t have been in place. It’s really hard for me to leave those bans in place. But I do want to say that this could raise issues of “oh these cheaters are bad” but specifically the bulk of the cheating bans are going to be reversed; the community is going to get a second chance....
Q: Will bans be broadcasted?
A: No. It’s a super toxic practice. I view banning as a failure; it’s not something to be proud of or to enjoy. We lost a player and it’s our fault when it happens. We have done something in the meantime; even if you’re banned in game, we’re not going to ban you on the forums. We’re going to be doing some tweaks and utilize temporary bans. My commitment to the community is that we are going to clean up the cheating problem in a fair and good manner.
https://forums.gamersfirst.com/topic/208-transcript-for-the-apb-qa-session-one/
 

Note the date:  July 19, 2013

So Far

Back in March we listed our major goals for 2013. So far this year, we've brought in:
 

• The updated score system
• The new front end
• Elective spawning system
• Another test of Asylum
• Threat segregation
• The smart district spin-up 

 

• Threat segregation will be changed; players will no longer be able to go down into districts below their current threat level. We found that too many people were going into districts below their recommended threat level and making life miserable for those players. Design on this is subject to change, but it's something we're looking into and intend to move forward.

https://apbreloaded.gamersfirst.com/2013/07/

And here's the goals for 2013:
- Threat segregation (Was initially only applied to golds, and what caused the massive amount of dethreaters)
http://apbdb.com/track/384494/
_____________________________________________________
So, they introduced threat Segregation in 2012 which in their own words a year later: "We found that too many people were going into districts below their recommended threat level and making life miserable for those players."  And for whatever reason were never able to reroll that destructive patch which caused so much forum complaining, so many unhappy players, the literal death of the new player community, horrific bad press... but instead were forced to make change after change breaking the cohesion of the game and community further and further, year after year. CLEARLY they destroyed the original code and could not fix how they wrecked the game.

 

APB Reloaded hits 3 million users
By Tom Goulter December 16, 2011News 
https://www.gamesradar.com/apb-reloaded-hits-3-million-users/

 

Still doubtful about cheaters... would like to know why they were "improper" and if they will unban players over that year (which some could be genuinely cheating).

 

Oh yes i remember about that threat segregation patch, where everyone cried that they couldnt play with their friends or something like it. Deathreaters would also ruin missions for not playing...

Wasnt there a pop drop too?

 

3million users when apb was fresh... ive been really impacted by this game when i discovered it for the first time.

 

ps: ill land you a thanks when i can.

 

 

[PrincessTwilight 3]

So. why did Alonzo delete all of his posts?

[vsb 6171]

3 minutes ago, PrincessTwilight said:

So. why did Alonzo delete all of his posts?

maybe he finally found some self-awareness somewhere

[Dean Hall 1]

2 hours ago, BXNNXD said:

maybe he finally found some self-awareness somewhere

Considering he's been shit posting since pretty much apb's launch I doubt that. I'm just amazed he's not ban on sight considering all his lies about being tight with the devs allowing him to " ban cheaters" then becoming one himself in the end

 

[Puffdragon 131]

This thread is a trash can of vomit on fire. Thought you guys should know.

[MattScott 15242]

Hi everyone,

 

I think this thread has had enough discussion about the OPs concept of turning video into Little Orbit to help ban cheaters. We are happy to look at video, and it some ways if we see enough of the same name, then we know to pay more attention, but video alone is difficult to use as evidence to ban. Viewing a player and seeing a "snap" is not necessarily an indication of cheating due to the way our camera works.

 

Seeing as players have already deleted some of the content, I'm going to lock this thread.

 

Thanks,
Matt