[GAME] Threat Rating Suggestion / Possible Leagues System / Rewards for Ranking Up

[Salvick 248]

2 minutes ago, Ken2 said:

Why do you care about elitism?

 

What examples can you give me about changes made by elitist golds? If every change that been added was for the benefit of low skill players and thats what killed the game.

Well, I think the contrary, while there have been a bunch of actions taken in the direction of "protecting" newbies, most of the stuff that have been done since ever was based on feedback provided by hardcore players since those are the ones who were part of the test servers, not trying to go against any of them, but just saying that the outcome of such decisions based on feedback from "only the best players" just exaggerated the already in place elitism the game itself has.

 

I'm not talking about a conspiracy kind of elitism where a sect of players took control of the game management, I'm talking about that thin boundary between competitiveness and elitism that any game could have and, as you've said when you pointed out that you weren't used to the forums, the fact that a small group of players involved with the game can mislead the perception of the majority of people some times.

[VickyFox 352]

2 hours ago, Ken2 said:

Bringing the word toxicity in a thread were there are constructive critics is being toxic. Stop using that word it doesnt benefit anyone and is practically an insult that should be censored.

Safe places can be invaded by bad intentioned players, like dethreaters. And it will.

Prematch games can be abused too... to farm rewards and stuff.

 

Maybe it was because i just played the game and didnt visit the forums, but before i never seen someone complaining about elitism and the poor victimis that cant play the game and everyone was actually playing the game. And it was filled with people enjoying and focused on it.

Caring so much about people that can't or dont want to play the game if you dont modify it to their personal comfort is what i think its harming APB.

 

27 minutes ago, Ken2 said:

Why do you care about elitism?

 

What examples can you give me about changes made by elitist golds? If every change that been added was for the benefit of low skill players and thats what killed the game.

APB doesn't revolve around you.

Well the someone other than myself expressing there feelings of elitism may be an issue then clearly there are people out there that do care about the game but have concerned.

 

I'm not going to sugar coat what the community like at times, It can be toxic and yes I am a blunt person that calls things are she see it.

I've told you before that I get both sides of the argument and I don't like it, but just because a player is bad at APB doesn't mean they don't want to get better or that they don't like/want to like APB.

If someone is less skilled at something, it doesn't mean they have any less of a say than anyone else.

 

Not sure if you're just a pain naturally but if not, good troll dude. I won't lie and say well done! 

 

52 minutes ago, Salvick said:

However, regarding the idea of some sort of "low tier" JMBs, aka look boxes, I think there woudln't be any harm done if we get something such like that and the concept is to let everyone who gets involved with the game have a taste of what the ARMAS items are and what a JMB feels like when you open it.

I'm bringing what I think is a *win win* solution for both, the players willing to have more fair and competitive game and the company looking for new ways to attract free players to invest some money in the products the company sell. Its from a business perspective that I focus this proposition of adding prizes and rewards just for playing, and this also helps a lot to mitigate the "P2W" perception that a F2P game always gives.

After some thinking maybe I was hasty in my response to saying no more lootboxes without hearing out potential context, content and implementation.

 

If it was was something that could ONLY be gotten by playing in game then I can support it this far depending on it's content.

I suppose some higher tier gun and vehicle mods can be given as a lease as well as Joker Tickets, also shot term leases for some of the more exclusive weapons can be gotten including JMB legendary weapons on rare occations. On more common occasions I could see guns from Armas Gear pack's guns could be gotten as  leases.

 

Now I say guns from gear packs because JMBs alraedy give out leases for weapons not included in packs and I think these more newer and unique guns would help get experience for newer players and dispel the feeling of pay to win as you say.

 

New armas content tends to actually be worse in aspects to stock in game content to deliberately not be pay to win but there are some guns that are the exceptions.

 

-edit-

 

Yeah I would say that actually most of the new content added to APB just adds more complexities. New gun mechanics and re-balancing isn't really for anyone's specific benefit over anyone else.

 

The only additions to the game which is there to benefit new players are a improved UI and tutorial system... and I think that's probably it. The Refer a Friend system could be argues to encourage existing users to invite friends and to play/mentor them but there was no reward for the new player so the system was more abused than dethreating!

 

 

Edited May 28, 2018 by VickyFox

[Excalibur! 207]

18 minutes ago, Salvick said:

Well, I think the contrary, while there have been a bunch of actions taken in the direction of "protecting" newbies, most of the stuff that have been done since ever was based on feedback provided by hardcore players since those are the ones who were part of the test servers, not trying to go against any of them, but just saying that the outcome of such decisions based on feedback from "only the best players" just exaggerated the already in place elitism the game itself has.

 

I'm not talking about a conspiracy kind of elitism where a sect of players took control of the game management, I'm talking about that thin boundary between competitiveness and elitism that any game could have and, as you've said when you pointed out that you weren't used to the forums, the fact that a small group of players involved with the game can mislead the perception of the majority of people some times.

I am still not sure about what you are talking about.

Its been really long time since i joined apb, and started as a bronze, get gold and never felt such thing as elitism or toxicity or any of that stuff. I was focused in the game and to get gold status.

I am completly honest here.

[Excalibur! 207]

21 minutes ago, VickyFox said:

 

APB doesn't revolve around you.

Well the someone other than myself expressing there feelings of elitism may be an issue then clearly there are people out there that do care about the game but have concerned.

 

I'm not going to sugar coat what the community like at times, It can be toxic and yes I am a blunt person that calls things are she see it.

I've told you before that I get both sides of the argument and I don't like it, but just because a player is bad at APB doesn't mean they don't want to get better or that they don't like/want to like APB.

If someone is less skilled at something, it doesn't mean they have any less of a say than anyone else.

 

Not sure if you're just a pain naturally but if not, good troll dude. I won't lie and say well done! 

 

And it doesnt revolve around you and your low/starters victimization either. See how many damage over the time apb took because people would complain about everything, they listened and tried to please them... how did it end? http://steamcharts.com/app/113400

 

Yes, because those people get stagnant, they get better items that other starters and will abuse it, like max silvers in bronze playing against other silvers and bronzies. How a player that thinks ntec is op talk about balance? Or if it gets constantly killed with 17fps say that golds should leave any district  when he would get problems even with his counterparts... i honestly dont understand your reasoning.

 

I am not trolling and i have no idea what is pain naturally. Take your offenses and acusations somewhereelse.

And i honestly want this game floating once again to have fun, and listening to players that constantly find excuses to pinch the boat like it is: "p2w, omg he is so skilled get him in another district, i cant have max rank mods pls do something, free items bls xD, my pc cant run apb please lower the graphics so it looks awful, omg feminine features im so offended (meanwhile we by default have erotic lingerie everywhere), oh no he said gg i feel bad pls ban him, i got killed by ntec pls nerf" etcs.

 

Edited May 28, 2018 by Ken2

[Salvick 248]

Both of you @Ken2 and @VickyFox are right with your statements, this is a subjective thing that relies in our individual perception, and the diversity of opinions is what makes this forum a great place to share and exchange our thoughts.

 

Regarding looting JMB by playing the game Vicky, and trying to put it from a business perspective, giving for free something you sell is a big "no no", so these "looting JMB" should be strictly limited, that's why I even think if it aims to provide freebies with a taste of what the premium ARMAS guns and Legendary guns are, those must be for a very short term lease. Check this reply I've posted earlier to have a clearer idea of my concept:

 

 

 

14 hours ago, Salvick said:

Regarding this, I forgot to clarify in the OP that also I think threat/rating should not be visible at all, or taking the example of CS:GO competitive match-making, you only get to see your opp's rank after the match has ended.

 

About exclusive content for top players, I think I didn't expressed it clearly, but my idea is to provide rewards for everybody as an incentive for lower threat players to climb up in look for better rewards.

 

Then you could simply put some sort of limit in the amount of rewards you get every day while also I think this would happen naturally once you are maxing out your character's progression because the items you could get as "mission reward" or "league progression prizes" etc. shouldn't be much better than what you finally get once you are involved with the game, unlocked basically everything from NPCs and bought ARMAS items, I think being on top, regarding character progression, along with a consistent high threat rating, would be an inherent regulation of this system since these rewards would turn redundant.

 

In that regard, maybe special multipliers in the APB$ cash rewards or some extra Joker Tickets would be something worthy to keep grinding for.

 

Also, my suggestion lacks of some details such as the scale of the rewards because I don't think I would be aware of what the business model of the company is in order to create a proper scale, but based in other games, there isn't such a huge difference within the rewards you get in the different stages of a league, depending if it is a currency or items, usually they set the biggest price as something that represents like ~20% or 25% of a decent paid item you could get and then from bottom to top you get the smallest rewards as private/bronze/rookie which then increases by a small factor of 5% or 10% till it hits the max reward.

 

A rough example I could think of to graphic what I'm saying:

 

 

Threat&Tier	Multiplier	JTickets	JMB Chances Rate	JMB possible items	JMB Leased Legendary Weapon
Green I	1	0 to 5	0%		No
Green II	1	5 to 10	0.5%	3 days stock weapons / 500 to 1000 APB$ / 10 to 50 JTickets	No
Green III	1	10 to 15	1%	3 days stock weapons / 500 to 1000 APB$ / 10 to 50 JTickets	No
Bronze I	1.05	10 to 15	2%	5 days stock weapons / 1000 to 2500 APB$ / 30 to 70 JTickets	5 days low tier secondary
Bronze II	1.10	15 to 20	3%	5 days stock weapons / 1000 to 2500 APB$ / 30 to 70 JTickets	5 days low tier secondary
Bronze III	1.15	20 to 25	4%	7 days stock weapons / 15000 to 3000 APB$ / 40 to 80 JTickets	5 days low tier secondary
Silver I	1.20	20 to 25	5%	7 days stock or low tier armas weapons / 1500 to 3000 APB$ / 40 to 80 JTickets	10 days low tier primary
Silver II	1.25	25 to 30	6.5%	7 days stock or low tier armas weapons / 1500 to 3000 APB$ / 40 to 80 JTickets	10 days low tier primary
Silver III	1.30	30 to 40	7%	10 days stock or low tier armas weapons / 3000 to 5000 APB$ / 50 to 90 JTickets	10 days low tier primary
Gold I	1.40	35 to 45	7.5%	10 days stock or med tier armas weapons / 3000 to 5000 APB$ / 60 to 100 JTickets	10 days med tier primary
Gold II	1.50	45 to 50	8.5%	10 days stock or med tier armas weapons / 3000 to 5000 APB$ / 60 to 100 JTickets	10 days med tier primary
Gold III	1.60	50 to 60	9%	15 days stock or med tier armas weapons / 4000 to 6000 APB$ / 70 to 100 JTickets	10 days med tier primary

 

This shouldn't be considered as part of the suggestion but is just a sketch of what I think would be a system of scales to set the prizes the players can access on each league/threat rank.

 

 

 

Also there should be a one time only reward for hitting a higher threat level, such as a fixed amount of APB$ cash but unable to get the same reward again if you go back to a lower threat level and then rank up again.

 

Of course looking at the example I'm giving this kind of stuff implies a whole adjust in the overall economy and specially in the Joker Tickets items pricing, but despite that I think this serves its purpose of just provide an example.

 

 

By the other hand, Ken, I wasn't trying to bring the "elitism" thingy as the core of the discussion, I think is something else to add to the conversation but the meaning of elitism in APB is kinda divided between those who think is just a feature of the game as same as in any other game might be and the ones who think it is a major issue within the community and the staff too.

 

I'm kind in the middle, I like some sort of elitism in the meaning of something that doesn't harm the social factors of the game nor discourages newcomers from getting involved but I don't like the company taking actions and making decisions biased for what "the best players" or "the core veteran player base" says every time.

 

If anyone wants to do quick analysis in the old forums, you'll find that there have been plenty of times where new players brought their concerns to the forums and a handful of veteran players were there like "don't listen to this newbie", "...he is a silver" and such, along with other points I could bring if I search a bit further.

 

 

Ken, there's a reply for you inside the spoiler at the bottom too, I still mess up the spoilers in the new forums.  :S

Edited May 28, 2018 by Salvick
I can't handle spoilers well with this forums. A comment that was meant to be out of the spoiler ended up stuck in there and I can't edit it. :/

[magik 184]

19 hours ago, Salvick said:

Let's bring some concepts I want to share since I've been thinking of this ideas for a while already.

 

The threat system as it is already have huge flaws that let the portion of the players in both ends of the rating spectrum out of having chances of decent match-making while also enabling every single player out there abuse this system in search of more advantageous matches in detriment of the overall gaming experience for everyone else, aka: dethreat.

Ok, established the problem, and specified why it's a problem.

The Threat System has huge flaws, hurting people on the two ends of line, (I'm going to assume you're talking about Green / Gold) and it's ability to enable the dethreating community to foster.

 

Here are some reads about what has been done in the past in APB so we can base our discussion with acknowledgment of these previous updates to the rating (threat) system:

 

March 2011:  https://apbreloaded.gamersfirst.com/2011/03/missing-skill-ratings-and-thanks-to.html

April 2014:     https://apbreloaded.gamersfirst.com/2013/04/settling-score-version-11.html

 

 

 I think of a few options that might work to improve matchmaking and ensure encouragement of players to play fair, be more competitive and get rewards accordingly to their effort and skills.

 

Let's get into it:

 

 

1. Frequency-Playing-Based Rating.

 

• ~snip~
• While the threat system does allow for a quick change of threat, it shouldn't need to be reset monthly, while it might be nice, the threat of players should be adjustable, fine tuned, and allow for some leniency. Threat was intended as a measure of a player's skill level. (The system itself is flawed, and poor at that actually measuring it)

 

Potential solution:

• Look above

 

       _____________________

 

2. Weapon-Role-Based Match Making:

 

• What happens when a group of experienced snipers who maxed out that role are teamed up against a group of CQC expert players? We are assuming here they are all on the same level regarding the overall performance of each one for any given scenario, but for some specific situations, having no snipers in your side when the other team is holding positions in high spots surrounding an objective with <4mins to finish it makes for a CQC team fall in the need of a very tactical and well coordinated moving to clear the area and reach the target before the time runs out, otherwise, we get very short missions as a result disregarding if you are in the winning or the losing team.
• Ok, skill is a measure here, which is what threat should be. Weapon roles should not be used to measure a player's skill level, they're just a number of kills with a particular type of weapon...

 

Potential solution:
 

• The problem with trying to fix this, is that the environment of the game changes, your objectives move. You don't repeat the same locations every stage, every mission, with the same people (although grouped with people you might)
• In addition, your weapons can change throughout a mission, when a particular moment might call for you to use a sniper, and other for you to use a shotgun. While having a team evenly balanced is good, it can't, and won't stay like that.

       _____________________

 

3. Rewards for going up on a League System instead of only four threat tiers:

 

• When it comes to a wide player base the spectrum of skill ratings is way too big to actually have an accurate method to pair every player in a balanced match without risking to have an amount of them in the same pool with players way above or way below their level when there are so few tiers to frame them. Also in this particular situations there's the point where players looking for more rewards will try to game the system (I don't quite understand what you're trying to say here) or would end up not getting proper rewards accordingly to their effort or skills put on the game leading to discouraging the new players or casual ones since they'll be struggling to get cash and xp or either making the more skilled ones get very few motivation to put an effort on improve and rank up if they could be getting same or better earnings and easier wins by just getting matched with less experienced players.

1. If there is a wide player base, I'm sure that there would be a rather balanced set of high/skilled/casual/new/whatever players.
2. This is a problem with matchmaking, having few tiers as well. In the old days, your exact threat was public. You were divided up as a color, and then a rank. (not your R value) I.e. Gold 1, Gold 6, Silver 5, Bronze 10... This still exists, but the numbers are hidden from players. As I have said in previous posts in other threads, the color as well should be hidden from ALL players. Still display your character's R value (R135, R255, etc.)
3. What do you define a proper rewards? For completing missions you receive:

• Money
• Standing (Points that rank you up with whichever contact gave you the mission)
• Symbol, and Symbol sheets for use in customization

Through contacts, by gaining standing you get:

• Clothes, Cars, Unlocking weapons, etc.

Everyone gets access to the same things through missions... Once you achieve max rank, you stop unlocking things, but you still gain Money. Money that can be used for purchasing X item.

19 hours ago, Salvick said:

 

Potential solution:

 

• Monthly League Rankings and Rewards Accordingly: If we could have sub-tiers within the current threat levels we could have some sort of a league system where every player gets matched within other players of his same league/threat but subdividing the spectrum into maybe 3 or more tiers within each threat rank. I think there already is something like 10 invisible ranks on each threat? Let's say the weekly rating session starts and past week you ended up as Silver II, then you have to play 5 matches to settle it down and define if you'll stay as Silver II or maybe Silver I or III or even jump to Gold or Bronze depending if you are performing better or worst this time. Then there's a multiplier in your rewards based on the tier you are which means that if you put an effort to go up to higher tiers your rewards will be bigger and also maybe in addition to this you get the chance of having some other rewards such as a set of League JMB  with a small factor for bigger rewards and less relevant prizes when you are in a lower threat/league and a higher factor for important rewards and more relevant prizes once you go up through treat levels. This is also a way to discourage dethreating and add more interest for the players who will fight the best they can to get such mentioned rewards.

 

          To clarify this, let's say Bronze, Silver, Gold threats grants you better prizes (aka: JMB or JTickets) while the internal tiers (ie. Silver I, II, II, and so on) increases the multiplier for your cash and XP rewards

          and a chance of getting also a few JTickets if you earn MVP or something like that.

       _____________________

 

Now, what I think many of us will agree is that showing up that threat badge above our name tags only thing it did was not only segregate the community, particularly by separating servers, but also increased the amount of toxicity between players and discouraged a lot of newcomers of keep playing because they usually got bullied by other players who just reached a higher tier than them but were facing very stressful matches against higher threat players before so they learned it the wrong way, that's why I think threat badges should've never been there in the first place.

I agree with you here, displaying your threat should have been removed, and they did, in the Open Conflict districts... which are ghost towns.

If you want to see your ratings, you should be able to check your stats privately and then if decide you want to share them or not is up to you. 

I would personally want to share my rating, should anyone in game ask me for help, I would like to brag with my experience, but still help them. I'd share it, but it is a choice, I'll abstain on the vote for this item being implemented.

We could have some sort of ladders or weekly/monthly rankings for these who wants to take part in a separated competitive instance districts ruleset for that too where also prizes might be more interesting.

I think that's what Fight Club should've been, and seems to halfway incorporated it. Press f6 when playing, you'll see the fight club leaderboard for the week. I don't want to see this with mission districts, but fight club would see this as a healthier addition... considering that it's already in the game. (sorta)

I'm not sure if I'm being accurate with my proposition in regards of what might be actually possible to do and what might be already in the board for future plans but by bringing this suggestion here, although it is a bit sketchy, I just want to contribute with some ideas I had based as well in what I saw around some other games where prizes for reaching higher leagues are a motivation that worked to stop tankers from dethreating and ruining the game.

I disagree with some of the ideas that you have brought forth being implemented, but I don't want to deter you from arguing your point, or making more ideas. You have a good thought out methodological reasoning.

 

In addition, I'm setting a poll to know what kind of rewards you'd like to have if  we could get a Leagues System with prizes for going up the ladder.

As long as they only pertain to Fight Club.

 

Waiting for your feedback guys, hope we have a good discussion about this.

 

 

Regards,

Sal.

 

 

17 hours ago, Salvick said:

 

I do agree with some of what you say, but I think that's on a different topic regarding cheaters and such. I'm focusing this suggestion in the idea of bringing more people to play the game and give incentives. I'm not talking about rewarding the higher rank players, indeed these prizes and rewards would not only be limited, but also would become redundant once you gather a bunch and even more redundant once you get used to buy stuff from Armas and upgrade your rig yourself by your own means.

 

In the meanwhile I think this as an effective solution to get people back on track with the competitive spirit of the game and the chance of getting rewarded above the current expectations is aimed to get lower rank players motivated to climb up the ranks ladder, and I quote you yourself too:

I think that players already have a competitive spirit by the nature of the game.

 

^This is what I aim to with this ideas I had.

 

When people have something to grind for, they put a bigger effort than just posing around with a gold badge looking to be "the best player" and also there are lot of factors that discourage lower threat players from trying to play when they get nothing more than the frustration of a bad match making and a little reward for trying while at the same time, the experienced players know they'll get the same reward for playing against easier/less skilled players than if they try hard against the top ones.

 

That's why so many people, specially average and newcomers, are skipping a mission every time they get matched against those who already stomped them earlier, but if you give everyone something worthy to fight for they stop skipping missions and ruining the game for everyone else.
 

I might don't know about a lot of games, but I can tell for a few I saw where this problem of people ranking/de-ranking to get matched against weaker/less-skilled players was a big problem, they stopped doing it when there was implemented a league system where the higher tier you play the better the chances of getting good prizes are.

If you could provide some games, and examples as to where you have seen this, that would be great.

Also the most important thing of introducing leased Armas weapons as an ingame prize along with some special JMB (with basic prizes maybe or very, very low chances of getting a relevant prize) is a good marketing strategy to introduce freebies to the market where they could eventually decide to invest some money. It is from a business perspective that I see it this way.

Introducing short leased Armas weapons isn't a bad idea, so long as they are short. like... one day, or two day max. If you make them only attainable from FC, and as rewards, it shouldn't be an issue, and won't eat into the profits of the permanent weapons, or longer lease weapons. The only problem is that this would hurt the JMBs...

I understand from a gamer perspective a bunch of players (including myself) might feel this goes against the elitism feeling this game brings when someone can buy all the stuff they want to

show-off while plebs shouldn't have access to exclusive stuff for free, but from my perspective, every improvement that can provide other players with a better experience is a chance to make the population grow bigger and make the game last longer along with the attractiveness to potential customers spending money in the things they want to have.

As a near broke college student, the free items, should help players at least experience Armas, but not have to be gouged. And I also see the need to have an income from the game for the publisher, so this is 50-50 with me.

APB is a very attractive game for a huge niche of average/casual gamers out there that have been trying to join but left because of toxic competitiveness but if the casual players and freebies get the chance to taste what they could get if they decide to buy something then the chances of having more people spending money on stuff are increased considerably at the same time the "product" (players to play with and against) refines and offers a better quality game since you ensure that the customer's investment will worth the fun they'll get if we have decent amount of players to get matched with more diversity of skills and equipment in the streets.

I would argue this to need to be further debated.

 

16 hours ago, Salvick said:

Regarding this, I forgot to clarify in the OP that also I think threat/rating should not be visible at all, or taking the example of CS:GO competitive match-making, you only get to see your opp's rank after the match has ended.

Showing it at the end is questionable... It shouldn't be shown at all imo.

About exclusive content for top players, I think I didn't expressed it clearly, but my idea is to provide rewards for everybody as an incentive for lower threat players to climb up in look for better rewards.

Threat is a measure of skill, and some people's skill plateaus. If threat is to not be visible, or shared, then there is no way to know if you have advanced for higher incentives... I don't think to throw out the idea all together, but to remedy it. Threat should not be desired, but measured. Players should play to get better, and have fun, competitive, or not.

Then you could simply put some sort of limit in the amount of rewards you get every day while also I think this would happen naturally once you are maxing out your character's progression because the items you could get as "mission reward" or "league progression prizes" etc. shouldn't be much better than what you finally get once you are involved with the game, unlocked basically everything from NPCs and bought ARMAS items, I think being on top, regarding character progression, along with a consistent high threat rating, would be an inherent regulation of this system since these rewards would turn redundant.

 

In that regard, maybe special multipliers in the APB$ cash rewards or some extra Joker Tickets would be something worthy to keep grinding for.

I have to say, with premium, earning APB$ is most certainly easy, not to mention if you have a good skill customizing anything you can sell it.

Also, my suggestion lacks of some details such as the scale of the rewards because I don't think I would be aware of what the business model of the company is in order to create a proper scale, but based in other games, there isn't such a huge difference within the rewards you get in the different stages of a league, depending if it is a currency or items, usually they set the biggest price as something that represents like ~20% or 25% of a decent paid item you could get and then from bottom to top you get the smallest rewards as private/bronze/rookie which then increases by a small factor of 5% or 10% till it hits the max reward.

 

A rough example I could think of to graphic what I'm saying:

 

 

Threat&Tier	Multiplier	JTickets	JMB Chances Rate	JMB possible items	JMB Leased Legendary Weapon
Green I	1	0 to 5	0%		No
Green II	1	5 to 10	0.5%	3 days stock weapons / 500 to 1000 APB$ / 10 to 50 JTickets	No
Green III	1	10 to 15	1%	3 days stock weapons / 500 to 1000 APB$ / 10 to 50 JTickets	No
Bronze I	1.05	10 to 15	2%	5 days stock weapons / 1000 to 2500 APB$ / 30 to 70 JTickets	5 days low tier secondary
Bronze II	1.10	15 to 20	3%	5 days stock weapons / 1000 to 2500 APB$ / 30 to 70 JTickets	5 days low tier secondary
Bronze III	1.15	20 to 25	4%	7 days stock weapons / 15000 to 3000 APB$ / 40 to 80 JTickets	5 days low tier secondary
Silver I	1.20	20 to 25	5%	7 days stock or low tier armas weapons / 1500 to 3000 APB$ / 40 to 80 JTickets	10 days low tier primary
Silver II	1.25	25 to 30	6.5%	7 days stock or low tier armas weapons / 1500 to 3000 APB$ / 40 to 80 JTickets	10 days low tier primary
Silver III	1.30	30 to 40	7%	10 days stock or low tier armas weapons / 3000 to 5000 APB$ / 50 to 90 JTickets	10 days low tier primary
Gold I	1.40	35 to 45	7.5%	10 days stock or med tier armas weapons / 3000 to 5000 APB$ / 60 to 100 JTickets	10 days med tier primary
Gold II	1.50	45 to 50	8.5%	10 days stock or med tier armas weapons / 3000 to 5000 APB$ / 60 to 100 JTickets	10 days med tier primary
Gold III	1.60	50 to 60	9%	15 days stock or med tier armas weapons / 4000 to 6000 APB$ / 70 to 100 JTickets	10 days med tier primary

 

This shouldn't be considered as part of the suggestion but is just a sketch of what I think would be a system of scales to set the prizes the players can access on each league/threat rank.

I understand what you were saying, and I'm not going to critique the example, but please reread what I said above about making threat invisible, and it applies to this as well.

 

 

Also there should be a one time only reward for hitting a higher threat level, such as a fixed amount of APB$ cash but unable to get the same reward again if you go back to a lower threat level and then rank up again.

once again, same thing... threat should be invisible. Threat should not be desired, you should not be able to change it, by seemingly knowing what is. But it should be measured, and compared in the system to give appropriate matches for players.

Of course looking at the example I'm giving this kind of stuff implies a whole adjust in the overall economy and specially in the Joker Tickets items pricing, but despite that I think this serves its purpose of just provide an example.

 

[Jeffrey_Epstein 17]

-

Edited October 30, 2018 by xRyona

[VickyFox 352]

I do have to agree with @Sergsininia, The ability to make content like symbols and music and selling it on the market place is something which is really quite ridiculous in how profitable it can be.

 

@SalvickI did say that the leases should be short, although i could of emphasised on it a bit more. probably a day lease at most for Armas content but while boosters are nice for contact standing and money, It's not going to help much with improving the new player's skills despite feeling more rewarding.

 

I do realise that there is a potential financial business loss for Armas Content being leases, but at a couple hours which could later lead to a sale for that leased item, I think it would be justifiable from a business aspect.

[TzickyT 210]

i am answering on the title and the question asked ( i didn't had any time to read the text or what has been said until now.) as for what i read on short period of time and look into the mind of what can happen whit it

 

first of all if we get ladder matches we are going to see competitive play. whit this we gone need a better system in the first place.

if everything would be fixed and we look from Little Orbits perspective i don't think that they wil give u multipliers in Cash and XP most people will be already Maxed Level in the game and the cash they wil have basicly everything ingame that they need to play whit in the competitive scene.

 

Joker tickets ... thats cool having a crown...

 

Random leased legendary' or armas weapons.... same point a max level will not need any

 

And league joker mystery boxes... guess another gun to play around whit or change the meta whit.

 

in my opinion i like the idea of joker tickets that can be exchanged for JMBoxes where u can get a 10-30 day lease on 1 untradable Legendary wapon at random. these could get intresting for those people who farm joker tickets all day and they can get some things out of it. but stil i don't think that this is ladder material.

 

in APB the Ladder means fame. but i don't think any of the above will deliver a hype for people to come to the competitive ladder scene ...

[VickyFox 352]

25 minutes ago, 313Felicia said:

In short, I would prefer a K/D Ratio system. (E.G 2.00 K/D tells you are skilled)

Simple and to the point imo. All that extra stuff, up to y'all, each to their own.

Sorry to say this but that's a rather system which isn't reflective in skill, This isn't Call of Duty.

In APB tactics and strategy can and do factor into some missions and locations. The player that gets no kills and does all the targets can still be MVP, also there is Less than Lethal Arrests.

Besides anyone could get a OCA, or Joker Carbine and you don't need skills to just run and gun.

 

What is needed is really a new algorithm formula which factors in overall game play experience, something with end game points (excluding premium bonus), character rank and total hours played (except when in social).

Bare in mind that current threat system does not factor in experience of gameplay in fightclub and Open Conflict, While these districts shouldn't impact the player's threat normally the player can improve their skills and become better in these districts still. Because of that, hours should be considered.

[Excalibur! 207]

1 hour ago, Salvick said:

Both of you @Ken2 and @VickyFox are right with your statements, this is a subjective thing that relies in our individual perception, and the diversity of opinions is what makes this forum a great place to share and exchange our thoughts.

 

Regarding looting JMB by playing the game Vicky, and trying to put it from a business perspective, giving for free something you sell is a big "no no", so these "looting JMB" should be strictly limited, that's why I even think if it aims to provide freebies with a taste of what the premium ARMAS guns and Legendary guns are, those must be for a very short term lease. Check this reply I've posted earlier to have a clearer idea of my concept:

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

By the other hand, Ken, I wasn't trying to bring the "elitism" thingy as the core of the discussion, I think is something else to add to the conversation but the meaning of elitism in APB is kinda divided between those who think is just a feature of the game as same as in any other game might be and the ones who think it is a major issue within the community and the staff too.

 

I'm kind in the middle, I like some sort of elitism in the meaning of something that doesn't harm the social factors of the game nor discourages newcomers from getting involved but I don't like the company taking actions and making decisions biased for what "the best players" or "the core veteran player base" says every time.

 

If anyone wants to do quick analysis in the old forums, you'll find that there have been plenty of times where new players brought their concerns to the forums and a handful of veteran players were there like "don't listen to this newbie", "...he is a silver" and such, along with other points I could bring if I search a bit further.

 

 

Ken, there's a reply for you inside the spoiler at the bottom too, I still mess up the spoilers in the new forums.  :S

Okay.

 

 

I think players threat should be NOT hidden. In my active times of action district, seeing players thread could alert me how hard should i play.

Recent example:

Got 2 vs 2 mission in fin, silver bud and me vs two golds (yeah, max). Can't remember well if we got defense -i think yes-, we did what we could and we reached last mission that consisted on take item to the team zone. We got that lucky strike to being able to kill both, silvy damaged one gold good enough and i could kill both. We took the item to my vegas and we started running around the map to make time until last minute.

*The tactic consist in that, if we can't deliver the item, they wont be able to deliver it because they would have a short time.*

We got another lucky strike, the one mistake i was hopping they would commit, one of them tried to chase us about when we were getting our item to destiny. As my silvy was really brave even when he was bad, i let him rush the gold guy first. He got killed and i finished the goldy. Took my vegas again, silvy spawned in my car and headed quick to destiny where the other gold was, we took him down, deliver item. GGEZ, because even if they could kill us both we would still win because my tactic (about less than 1' of holding item).

 

After telling this fantastic adventure, would you still try to hide our threats? I would think about it. Because if i couldnt see my silver bud threat, i would play like if he was skilled.

 

 

Regarding rewards, its a good table. I am not sure if you would apply it in all missions or special maps or daily missions... ive been thinking about major rewards like joker boxes (if they ever do it ofc) they would be put in maps where only max ranked (255 right? threat wont matter) players could access. The reason is what i alrady typed in my first post in this thread.

 

Edited May 28, 2018 by Ken2

[cyral 25]

for these higher threats...they(L.O.) can give a penalty for em killing and bashing in a district 2 threat levels BELOW their current 1s....based on your current skill lvl and gear levels to your opp in 1 match you can see as high as a 90% reduction in points/cash earned...and on your next battle you might be able to see a 20% reduction in points/cash earned....

for example...CHADCHASE a 255 rank CRIM w/ a MEDUSA in his 1st match is silver....no penalty needed.... in his 2nd match of the day he goes GOLD..again no penalty needed....(happens all the time)...Now hes considered a major threat to any 1 of low/now skilled players and new players in general in the BRONZE DISTRICTS...

now match 3...CHAD here is a 255 GOLD MEDUSA USING PLAYER vs. a rank 22 Bronze ENF that still uses the STARTER gun.....lets call her Maggie.... you see Maggie dies 12 times a match gets 0 objs done and might get 3 kills if lucky for the assist....match maker is unkind to Maggie...now in this match CHAD should get a 90% reduction in points earned for killin Maggie...instead of 100 he should only get 10...if CHAD is on a DEFEND mission, he should get 1 point per minute while he's sitting on the obj......

Now for Maggie those points and cash earned should be doubled for doing OBJECTIVES and KILLING CHAD...instead of the normal 150 pts for breaking a door she should get 300...and again Maggie should get 200 pts for each kill on CHAD instead of the standard 100.....

Lets increase the rewards to hunt and hurt bashers in the bronze districts while at the same time encourage the same bashers to play players of their own skill levels...not low skilled 1s..

 

and VIKI FOX, this game primarily a kill or be killed...so yes a KTD ratio DOES indicate skill level...most of the players i run across don't give 1 rats behind worth of screwballs about doing the objectives....they just want to kill you...THAT IS APB ....or like you just said, arrest you....and ARREST  does count as a KILL... it might not have been that way 100 years ago when you joined this game and community.... but it is now...

LIKE YOU KEEP TELLING ME....GET USED TO IT....ITS GONNA BE THIS WAY FOR A LONG TIME....

and to do this <<<<<<<<

Besides anyone could get a OCA, or Joker Carbine and you don't need skills to just run and gun.

you still need some skill in order to AIM your gun...these weapons don't come with built in aimbot.....or at least for me they never did....

Edited May 28, 2018 by cyral
wasn't through

[magik 184]

2 minutes ago, Ken2 said:

Okay.

 

  Hide contents

 

 

I think players threat should be NOT hidden. In my active times of action district, seeing players thread could alert me how hard should i play.

Recent example:

Got 2 vs 2 mission in fin, silver bud and me vs two golds (yeah, max). Can't remember well if we got defense -i think yes-, we did what we could and we reached last mission that consisted on take item to the team zone. We got that lucky strike to being able to kill both, silvy damaged one gold good enough and i could kill both. We took the item to my vegas and we started running around the map to make time until last minute.

*The tactic consist in that, if we can't deliver the item, they wont be able to deliver it because they would have a short time.*

We got another lucky strike, the one mistake i was hopping they would commit, one of them tried to chase us about when we were getting our item to destiny. As my silvy was really brave even when he was bad, i let him rush the gold guy first. He got killed and i finished the goldy. Took my vegas again, silvy spawned in my car and headed quick to destiny where the other gold was, we took him down, deliver item. GGEZ, because even if they could kill us both we would stin win because my tactic (about less than 1' of holding item).

 

After telling this fantastic adventure, would you still try to hide our threats? I would think about it. Because if i couldnt see my silver bud threat, i would play like if he was skilled.

 

 

Regarding rewards, its a good table. I am not sure if you would apply it in all missions or special maps or daily missions... ive been thinking about major rewards like joker boxes (if they ever do it ofc) they would be put in maps where only max ranked (255 right? threat wont matter) players could access. The reason is what i alrady typed in my first post in this thread.

 

I would still hide your threat.

[cyral 25]

39 minutes ago, VickyFox said:

Bare in mind that current threat system does not factor in experience of gameplay in fightclub and Open Conflict, While these districts shouldn't impact the player's threat normally the player can improve their skills and become better in these districts still. Because of that, hours should be considered.

i agree with you here....thats a 1t for me...

[magik 184]

42 minutes ago, VickyFox said:

Sorry to say this but that's a rather system which isn't reflective in skill, This isn't Call of Duty.

In APB tactics and strategy can and do factor into some missions and locations. The player that gets no kills and does all the targets can still be MVP, also there is Less than Lethal Arrests.

Besides anyone could get a OCA, or Joker Carbine and you don't need skills to just run and gun.

 

What is needed is really a new algorithm formula which factors in overall game play experience, something with end game points (excluding premium bonus), character rank and total hours played (except when in social).

Bare in mind that current threat system does not factor in experience of gameplay in fightclub and Open Conflict, While these districts shouldn't impact the player's threat normally the player can improve their skills and become better in these districts still. Because of that, hours should be considered.

I have to agree with you on factoring hours.

[VickyFox 352]

5 minutes ago, cyral said:

i agree with you here....thats a 1t for me...

Who are you and what did you do with Cyral? 

Edited May 28, 2018 by VickyFox

[Salvick 248]

58 minutes ago, Sergsininia said:

[...]

 

 

Excellent input, and I appreciate the effort you've put to point out each one of the items I've been bringing here.

 

I'll be a bit brief because been already replying a few posts and I don't have much time right now but I don't want to delay my answers to you.

 

Rating based on frequency playing: I see I haven't been enough with that point, my bad. What I mean is not a "threat/rating reset" but just some sort of "weekly or monthly league season"

 

Like, you carry over your rating through weeks/months but the system restarts the ratings measurements while keeping everyone's ratings each week/month to ensure players are still active and ratings are consistent through time before it keeps giving away rewards and matching players who might not have a steady consistency and also to consider the amount of active players for further seasons. Although something likely already happens with the current system, what I'm trying to say is that if you have more sub-tiers between threat levels, each "league session" it settles down again to match players regarding their consistency and regularity playing the game.

 

Let's say we have a niche of 80 players in gold, 50 silvers and 20 bronzies, which is a total of 150 players, then the next season there are only 60 goldies but 100 silvers and 80 bronzies because of new players joining which gives a total of 240 players, then there should be a factor to adjust the leagues in order to gran better quality match making, so regarding the amount of players available the next season could drop down or up a bunch of players who are in the border. I couldn't go further with this because I'm really not that much into this kind of math stuff tbh, must be more a matter of laziness I admit it, lol, but I think this serves the purpose of explaining it.

 

Weapons role based match making: You are totally right with that. I just suggested this could be considered as a very small factor put only as a last weighing, I mean, once the server gather the players it needs for a match, when there are more players available than the needed for a determined mission, then it could bring that factor to choose between those available. It could be based on equipped weapons instead, but that way you can easily game the system since you usually switch your guns when the match starts.

 

And there ^ I think I answer your question about what I mean when I say "game the system" I mean "fool the system", evade or circumvent its given mechanics.

 

 

Rewards and Prizes: I'm aware of what you pointed out regarding this, what I mean with my proposition is more aimed to provide a stimulation for ranked matches, I'm quite against rewarding top tier players from over the lower rank and newcomers, since I think these needs motivation to get involved with the game and eventually get hooked, but also it is hard to retain a player that already experimented all the features of a game and might get bored than bringing new people who can be baited to join the game and would take months of experimentation if they feel attracted to discover everything the game can offer to them.

 

Said this, and based also in your feedback along with what I'm already trying to bring with my suggestion, these rewards shouldn't be something that suffocates the already in place system and its rewards but should be some sort of accelerator that stimulates the current system. Its complicated for me to put this clear but let's do an analogy where the current rewards system you listed represents 100% of the available prizes we can get for free by just playing the game, then I think that anything we add to it by improving the match making with some sort of leagues mechanics, should boost these by a very small factor of 5% or maybe 10% in given rewards, either by boosting the time needed to unlock the stuff we have or by adding a new factor of interest as it might be the Joker Tickets, which is indeed a third kind of currency the players have to acquire items, and from a business perspective, the more options to get items you provide, the players will feel more comfortable against the stress it might cause having very limited ways to acquire valuable items, which also reinforces the perception of the game being P2W.

 

 

Examples of leagues and rewards: Honestly, I was thinking of old games that no longer exist and mainly private hosted servers, where the ladders used to grant access to exclusive stuff, either visual enhancements or special weapons or vehicles and even titles / tags to show off, etc. but what made me think of all this, and some of you here might want to kill me for this, is an Android game that have been brutally criticized for its business practices and now is climbing to number #5 in revenues, can't do deeper research right now so I'm linking just this post where they explain a leagues system and I'll let you do the research yourself if you want. Only thing I can say, I stopped playing that game a while ago because of tankers de-ranking to destroy weaker players and since they started to implement a rewards system for climbing up the leagues, the game population boosted considerably and it really seems they addressed the issue quite well, yet they apply the most hardcore gambling tactics ever seen which I'm totally against.

 

Although I have odd feelings about rewarding top tier players above the new comers and low rank because, as someone said, some people simply doesn't climb further in the ladders either by their own skill limitations or interest put on being competitive or because of other technical limitations, but I mentioned something about this already here in this reply earlier.

 

Anyways, I think that having the Joker Tickets currency already implemented, Little Orbit have a chance there of exploit that in many different ways from a marketing perspective to introduce the players to the products they sell in the ARMAS market (which is its original purpose already) at the same time they can implement it in a way that stimulates the community in a much more positive way to fix the match making issues, because beyond how perfect a match making system can be, the human factor will be always determinant and there isn't much you can do to control the player's habits besides than stimulating positive behaviors and discouraging the bad ones.

 

 

Regarding competitive gaming vs casual gaming: Should bring more information but can't recall old articles and information I've read in the past, so I'm just linking this article I found doing a extremely quick search in Google. I think it is important to note that, despite that younger players might be usually more compulsive with their purchasing habits, they also have more limitations, you called it yourself when saying "as a broke student"  which is natural since you'll be getting your own earnings once you finish your career or whatever your plans are, so, considering the niche of players for any game is supposed to have its gross mass in players above 20 years and specially around +30 and more, these players are not only the ones who might be able to invest (note I don't like to use the word "spend") money freely at any time, also are players who despite the competitive spirit we all put on a multiplayer game we are also looking for the overall experience a game provides than just bragging about skills, and from a customer perspective, I had too many disappointments (ie. Ubisoft, EA Games and even Rockstar now) when purchasing a product I was not able to try which made me refrain of trusting them again in further releases. That's why I think it might be a good tactic for the company to simply slap some products in your face to let you try it and taste what it could be to own these items as part of your gaming experience. As long as there are good quality products, then there is no risk and the odds are that a huge amount of players will eventually buy something, specially if they feel it is right there to reach it by simply investing a few bucks in exchange for a long term / permanent satisfaction granted.

 

 

About your last observations: Yes, I insist that threat shouldn't be visible because it only feeds the toxic aspects of elitism, but we must acknowledge our rating in order to know what rewards we would expect, just as you said. The sample grid I've made is also just an example and your current rating would be visible only for you but not for the outsiders unless they inspect your character stats as we actually do. The rewards such as leased ARMAS weapons or even leased Legendary guns should be as you said very, very limited, I do agree maybe 1 day, 2 or 3 as much, and also limited to a set of lower and mid tier ones, letting the top tier items be something out of discussion in this regards.

 

About the rewards and prizes, these should be meant to: A) boost interest in the game and commitment with the match making process from the players who should focus only en exclusively in playing the game. And B) Let the players test and taste what they can get from the game if they eventually decide to invest real money but should never be a replacement that allow freebies to consistently access to paid items.

 

Hope this helps to clarify and continue to develop this conversation and sorry for the wall of text but you took a big effort to address each one of the items you were concerned about so I wanted to be as much detailed as I could. Regards!

[Salvick 248]

1 hour ago, VickyFox said:

 

@SalvickI did say that the leases should be short, although i could of emphasised on it a bit more. probably a day lease at most for Armas content but while boosters are nice for contact standing and money, It's not going to help much with improving the new player's skills despite feeling more rewarding.

 

I do realise that there is a potential financial business loss for Armas Content being leases, but at a couple hours which could later lead to a sale for that leased item, I think it would be justifiable from a business aspect.

 

I was wrong when bringing the idea of multipliers affecting also the standing points (xp) my mistake, league multipliers should impact only in cash, then Premium boosts the same it always did, both money and standing points, rewarding even better when there's this multiplier thingy in effect too. (Notice the sample grid I've made there is not such thing as XP values)

 

 

1 hour ago, TzickyT said:

i am answering on the title and the question asked ( i didn't had any time to read the text or what has been said until now.) as for what i read on short period of time and look into the mind of what can happen whit it

 

first of all if we get ladder matches we are going to see competitive play. whit this we gone need a better system in the first place.

if everything would be fixed and we look from Little Orbits perspective i don't think that they wil give u multipliers in Cash and XP most people will be already Maxed Level in the game and the cash they wil have basicly everything ingame that they need to play whit in the competitive scene.

 

Joker tickets ... thats cool having a crown...

 

Random leased legendary' or armas weapons.... same point a max level will not need any

 

And league joker mystery boxes... guess another gun to play around whit or change the meta whit.

 

in my opinion i like the idea of joker tickets that can be exchanged for JMBoxes where u can get a 10-30 day lease on 1 untradable Legendary wapon at random. these could get intresting for those people who farm joker tickets all day and they can get some things out of it. but stil i don't think that this is ladder material.

 

in APB the Ladder means fame. but i don't think any of the above will deliver a hype for people to come to the competitive ladder scene ...

 

Exactly this is what I've been saying would be the natural regulator of such rewarding system, top tier / maxed out character players will be used to the game longer enough to already have their rigs set up and even owning whatever they wanted to buy, while giving them some extra APB$ cash and JTickets would motivate them to move out from Fight Club and go play missions with other buddies and specially newcomers. Also I clarified in this same reply that standing points (XP) are out of the equation because that's something you only boost with premium, I agree.

 

1 hour ago, VickyFox said:

What is needed is really a new algorithm formula which factors in overall game play experience, something with end game points (excluding premium bonus), character rank and total hours played (except when in social).

Bare in mind that current threat system does not factor in experience of gameplay in fightclub and Open Conflict, While these districts shouldn't impact the player's threat normally the player can improve their skills and become better in these districts still. Because of that, hours should be considered.

 

I never mentioned, but taking hours on record is key, I've been always wondering why when I roll a new character the game still thinks I should be paired with a totally new player.

[VickyFox 352]

36 minutes ago, Salvick said:

I never mentioned, but taking hours on record is key, I've been always wondering why when I roll a new character the game still thinks I should be paired with a totally new player.

I suspect the game may possibly factor in the contact standings total rank... but I could be wrong on that.

Again we can try to make a mathematical formula for the matchmaking and threat system to use but it should consider a lot of factors and it will never take in every possible factor into consideration sadly.

Previous experience on another account, practice and experience with other shooter games, these things can't be factored in but I suppose trying to grade something human into a number for a automated bot to quantify is something of a impossible task.

Can't help but reminded of an analogy a friend told me of "try to explain the complexities of politics to a dog!"

Edited May 28, 2018 by VickyFox

[Excalibur! 207]

1 hour ago, Salvick said:

 

I was wrong when bringing the idea of multipliers affecting also the standing points (xp) my mistake, league multipliers should impact only in cash, then Premium boosts the same it always did, both money and standing points, rewarding even better when there's this multiplier thingy in effect too. (Notice the sample grid I've made there is not such thing as XP values)

 

 

 

Exactly this is what I've been saying would be the natural regulator of such rewarding system, top tier / maxed out character players will be used to the game longer enough to already have their rigs set up and even owning whatever they wanted to buy, while giving them some extra APB$ cash and JTickets would motivate them to move out from Fight Club and go play missions with other buddies and specially newcomers. Also I clarified in this same reply that standing points (XP) are out of the equation because that's something you only boost with premium, I agree.

 

 

I never mentioned, but taking hours on record is key, I've been always wondering why when I roll a new character the game still thinks I should be paired with a totally new player.

I really enjoy fc... like i said it should be a nice place for retirement and having a little purpose on it more than jt. If you want still play with friends in action thats no problem.

 

[magik 184]

I'll respond in blue, because I like it, and you already used red ;-;

2 hours ago, Salvick said:

 

Excellent input, and I appreciate the effort you've put to point out each one of the items I've been bringing here.

 

I'll be a bit brief because been already replying a few posts and I don't have much time right now but I don't want to delay my answers to you.

 

Rating based on frequency playing: I see I haven't been enough with that point, my bad. What I mean is not a "threat/rating reset" but just some sort of "weekly or monthly league season"

 

Like, you carry over your rating through weeks/months but the system restarts the ratings measurements while keeping everyone's ratings each week/month to ensure players are still active and ratings are consistent through time before it keeps giving away rewards and matching players who might not have a steady consistency and also to consider the amount of active players for further seasons. Although something likely already happens with the current system, what I'm trying to say is that if you have more sub-tiers between threat levels, each "league session" it settles down again to match players regarding their consistency and regularity playing the game.

 

Let's say we have a niche of 80 players in gold, 50 silvers and 20 bronzies, which is a total of 150 players, then the next season there are only 60 goldies but 100 silvers and 80 bronzies because of new players joining which gives a total of 240 players, then there should be a factor to adjust the leagues in order to gran better quality match making, so regarding the amount of players available the next season could drop down or up a bunch of players who are in the border. I couldn't go further with this because I'm really not that much into this kind of math stuff tbh, must be more a matter of laziness I admit it, lol, but I think this serves the purpose of explaining it.

Okay, understandable, this goes very similar to what Clash of Clans does with their trophy system, if I'm correct?

And that's not bad, I'm simply making a comparison.

I rather like how long and difficult that game makes it to gain trophies, and I guess, in a sense, if you're trying to gain trophies, it's hard to lose them (if you built a base effectively)

APB should have threat difficult to gain, or lose. While I'm not advocating for a monthly/weekly season/league, I'm certainly not against it. If the game does get a competitive base like Matt Scott (don't know if I should @ him, but it would be nice if he reads this...) described, I'm quite sure that with Clans, and matchmaking changes, this would be an interesting/welcome change.

Weapons role based match making: You are totally right with that. I just suggested this could be considered as a very small factor put only as a last weigh in, I mean, once the server gather the players it needs for a match, when there are more players available than the needed for a determined mission, then it could bring that factor to choose between those available. It could be based on equipped weapons instead, but that way you can easily game the system since you usually switch your guns when the match starts.

 

And there ^ I think I answer your question about what I mean when I say "game the system" I mean "fool the system", evade or circumvent its given mechanics. <-- Thanks lol

I think that if there are more than enough players available for the mission the server has selected, then bring in the default 8 players, (4v4) and fine tune who's going to play, matching them with the skill level (If threat system remains, or whatever system they choose) as close as possible.

 

Rewards and Prizes: I'm aware of what you pointed out regarding this, what I mean with my proposition is more aimed to provide a stimulation for ranked matches, I'm quite against rewarding top tier players over the lower rank and newcomers, since I think these needs motivation to get involved with the game and eventually get hooked, but also it is hard to retain a player that already experimented all the features of a game and might get bored than bringing new people who can be baited to join the game and would take months of experimentation if they feel attracted to discover everything the game can offer to them.

 

Said this, and based also in your feedback along with what I'm already trying to bring with my suggestion, these rewards shouldn't be something that suffocates the already in place system and its rewards but should be some sort of accelerator that stimulates the current system. Its complicated for me to put this clear but let's do an analogy where the current rewards system you listed represents 100% of the available prizes we can get for free by just playing the game, then I think that anything we add to it by improving the match making with some sort of leagues mechanics, should boost these by a very small factor of 5% or maybe 10% in given rewards, either by boosting the time needed to unlock the stuff we have or by adding a new factor of interest as it might be the Joker Tickets, which is indeed a third kind of currency the players have to acquire items, and from a business perspective, the more options to get items you provide, the players will feel more comfortable against the stress it might cause having very limited ways to acquire valuable items, which also reinforces the perception of the game being P2W.

Since we don't have any information regarding the competitive stuff L.O. is planning, I'd wait before bringing in Ranked Matches to the table, especially since the game doesn't have anything currently as 'ranked matches' (I think CS:GO when I think of this)

 

And I can understand with what you're saying about the rewards, which aren't a bad idea, (I think you meant to say "which also won't reinforce the perception of the game being pay to win"?

 

Examples of leagues and rewards: Honestly, I was thinking of old games that no longer exist and mainly private hosted servers, where the ladders used to grant access to exclusive stuff, either visual enhancements or special weapons or vehicles and even titles / tags to show off, etc. but what made me think of all this, and some of you here might want to kill me for this, is an Android game that have been brutally criticized for its business practices and now is climbing to number #5 in revenues, can't do deeper research right now so I'm linking just this post where they explain a leagues system and I'll let you do the research yourself if you want. Only thing I can say, I stopped playing that game a while ago because of tankers de-ranking to destroy weaker players and since they started to implement a rewards system for climbing up the leagues, the game population boosted considerably and it really seems they addressed the issue quite well, yet they apply the most hardcore gambling tactics ever seen which I'm totally against.

 

Although I have odd feelings about rewarding top tier players above the new comers and low rank because, as someone said, some people simply doesn't climb further in the ladders either by their own skill limitations or interest put on being competitive or because of other technical limitations, but I mentioned something about this already here in this reply earlier.

 

Anyways, I think that having the Joker Tickets currency already implemented, Little Orbit have a chance there of exploit that in many different ways from a marketing perspective to introduce the players to the products they sell in the ARMAS market (which is its original purpose already) at the same time they can implement it in a way that stimulates the community in a much more positive way to fix the match making issues, because beyond how perfect a match making system can be, the human factor will be always determinant and there isn't much you can do to control the player's habits besides than stimulating positive behaviors and discouraging the bad ones.

I like how your ideas have been fairly thorough, and well explained. I will take a look at the article, and read some more information about it.

 

Regarding competitive gaming vs casual gaming: Should bring more information but can't recall old articles and information I've read in the past, so I'm just linking this article I found doing a extremely quick search in Google. I think it is important to note that, despite that younger players might be usually more compulsive with their purchasing habits, they also have more limitations, you called it yourself when saying "as a broke student"  which is natural since you'll be getting your own earnings once you finish your career or whatever your plans are, so, considering the niche of players for any game is supposed to have its gross mass in players above 20 years and specially around +30 and more, these players are not only the ones who might be able to invest (note I don't like to use the word "spend") money freely at any time, also are players who despite the competitive spirit we all put on a multiplayer game we are also looking for the overall experience a game provides than just bragging about skills, and from a customer perspective, I had too many disappointments (ie. Ubisoft, EA Games and even Rockstar now) when purchasing a product I was not able to try which made me refrain of trusting them again in further releases. That's why I think it might be a good tactic for the company to simply slap some products in your face to let you try it and taste what it could be to own these items as part of your gaming experience. As long as there are good quality products, then there is no risk and the odds are that a huge amount of players will eventually buy something, specially if they feel it is right there to reach it by simply investing a few bucks in exchange for a long term / permanent satisfaction granted.

Same, here, I'll read the article after posting this (currently making a song for market and need to get back to that >.>)

 

About your last observations: Yes, I insist that threat shouldn't be visible because it only feeds the toxic aspects of elitism, but we must acknowledge our rating in order to know what rewards we would expect, just as you said. The sample grid I've made is also just an example and your current rating would be visible only for you but not for the outsiders unless they inspect your character stats as we actually do. The rewards such as leased ARMAS weapons or even leased Legendary guns should be as you said very, very limited, I do agree maybe 1 day, 2 or 3 as much, and also limited to a set of lower and mid tier ones, letting the top tier items be something out of discussion in this regards.

 

About the rewards and prizes, these should be meant to: A) boost interest in the game and commitment with the match making process from the players who should focus only en exclusively in playing the game. And B) Let the players test and taste what they can get from the game if they eventually decide to invest real money but should never be a replacement that allow freebies to consistently access to paid items.

In my opinion the threat system should be completely re-hauled for it to be hidden, in the background, and just a set of values... no color, but an algorithm. So, I wouldn't want to base anything new off of this broken, and exploitable system. However, it's a good set of inputs.

 

Quote

Hope this helps to clarify and continue to develop this conversation and sorry for the wall of text but you took a big effort to address each one of the items you were concerned about so I wanted to be as much detailed as I could. Regards!

Thanks, glad to see some more clarification, and detail. Overall, I'd have to say the matchmaking, threat, and league/season ideas you've provided aren't bad. I'll look into what you were talking about with rewards. I can see how those could boost the game's popularity, as well as market it. (The Word of Mouth is very powerful) Thanks for providing a thorough reply! - I'd give you a like but I'm out of them for the day ._.

 

Edited May 29, 2018 by Sergsininia
last statement

[Salvick 248]

  Quote

Hope this helps to clarify and continue to develop this conversation and sorry for the wall of text but you took a big effort to address each one of the items you were concerned about so I wanted to be as much detailed as I could. Regards!

Thanks, glad to see some more clarification, and detail. Overall, I'd have to say the matchmaking, threat, and league/season ideas you've provided aren't bad. I'll look into what you were talking about with rewards. I can see how those could boost the game's popularity, as well as market it. (The Word of Mouth is very powerful) Thanks for providing a thorough reply! - I'd give you a like but I'm out of them for the day ._.

 

 

 

 

Thank you for the exchange indeed, yes I meant "it won't reinforce the idea of P2W" and I did give you a like, lol. Looking further to see what else you and anyone else bring here.

[Dopefish 245]

7 hours ago, Ken2 said:

What examples can you give me about changes made by elitist golds? If every change that been added was for the benefit of low skill players and thats what killed the game.

I'd normally argue that changes are made to benefit the game as a whole, like improved weapon balance would make it better for both low skilled and high skilled player, but considering Gamersfirst have been actively working on removing incentives for performing well, locking only golds into the gold district (no other threat were affected at the time), making the game less skill based by continuously lowering TTK and increasing the randomness of weapons, it's hard to argue for it. But I believe these changes eventually made it worse for low skilled players aswell, due to the playerbase dropping and promoting dethreating (the gold district lock was when everyone first started to dethreat).

 

7 hours ago, Salvick said:

Well, I think the contrary, while there have been a bunch of actions taken in the direction of "protecting" newbies, most of the stuff that have been done since ever was based on feedback provided by hardcore players since those are the ones who were part of the test servers, not trying to go against any of them, but just saying that the outcome of such decisions based on feedback from "only the best players" just exaggerated the already in place elitism the game itself has.

Other than threat elitism (I'm gold, you are not, so you must suck), I'm not entirely sure what kind of elitism there would be beyond that. If you talk about the SPCT group of testers, they had very mixed skilled levels and high skilled players did not dominate that group, not to mention that the developers at the time usually just ignored any kind of feedback they received whatsoever. Nor am I sure what changes have been made as a result from high skill players feedback.

 

Could you provide some examples of elitism you notice in the game, so I can get a better understanding?

[Excalibur! 207]

23 minutes ago, Dopefish said:

I'd normally argue that changes are made to benefit the game as a whole, like improved weapon balance would make it better for both low skilled and high skilled player, but considering Gamersfirst have been actively working on removing incentives for performing well, locking only golds into the gold district (no other threat were affected at the time), making the game less skill based by continuously lowering TTK and increasing the randomness of weapons, it's hard to argue for it. But I believe these changes eventually made it worse for low skilled players aswell, due to the playerbase dropping and promoting dethreating (the gold district lock was when everyone first started to dethreat).

 

Other than threat elitism (I'm gold, you are not, so you must suck), I'm not entirely sure what kind of elitism there would be beyond that. If you talk about the SPCT group of testers, they had very mixed skilled levels and high skilled players did not dominate that group, not to mention that the developers at the time usually just ignored any kind of feedback they received whatsoever. Nor am I sure what changes have been made as a result from high skill players feedback.

 

Could you provide some examples of elitism you notice in the game, so I can get a better understanding?

You are right.

 

Players kicking for not performing well. But then some players would start ruining missions on purpose, you couldn't kick afks etc.

[cyral 25]

Folks....alls i want is a little more fairer on the mach makin...that's all...i really don't understand about 60% of this thread....and i admit that,,but as it stands now with the current system in play....more and more people will leave cause their getting slaughtered to hard when their trying to learn the game...and as a low skilled player with handicaps,, it is frustrating as hell right now...