|
Is a UMP good for mid-long range engagements? What guns (excluding the sniper rifles) excel best at mid-long range engagements? I always end up with an insane amount of 9mm ammo that I can use in my UMP, but barely any 5.56 for the SCAR (I don't use the m16 variants, I personally find them to be quite poo poo). I have been using the AKM a lot lately, even with a 4x / 8x scope to snipe people. It works really well, better than the SCAR imo. I've never bothered trying that with the UMP cause I've always assumed it's for close quarters. oh, and how can I set up a private match for my friends and I to hop in and test out guns? We wanna get a feel for bullet drop, and to scope out zones to get a general feel for the lay of the land. I'd wanna put things like godmode on, instant respawn, teleport, item spawning. Is that possible to do in custom matches?
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 03:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 12:47 |
|
|
Bolow posted:Huh, so I just died in a solo game to an AKM nearly instantly, heard absolutely nothing besides the tink on my frying pan coupled with like 3 more hits on my body all nearly at the same time, no blood. Just full hp to dead AKM is a one hit headshot kill now.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 03:34
|
|
|
Party Plane Jones posted:See if -sm4 or -d3d10 help you. They'll disable the shadows which is probably the biggest performance hit thus far. Other than that put your draw distance down. I am going to try those out later tonight.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 04:00
|
|
|
When I tried out -sm4 it caused crazy hitching. Settings advice in this game feels like superstition sometimes.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 04:04
|
|
|
VulgarandStupid posted:
I think you mean it's even better because a squad wasted their ammo and they blew me up for nothing but gas. You might run over one or two in the process, too.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 04:34
|
|
|
sm4 is bad and is confirmed going bye bye in the next patch
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 04:48
|
|
|
I drove a buggy through a river I was able to get a UAZ through, and now I am sitting in it underwater without my lungs going out. The circle is slowly closing around me
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 04:50
|
|
|
It's nice to know that in this game it's best to watch the compilation videos from streamers like I do with Hearthstone, except the allegations and cries of 'stream sniping' seem even more desperate in the live action PUBG streams.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 04:54
|
|
|
The games actually fun
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 05:05
|
|
|
Quality car jumps and bunny-hops this evening with goons. Would squad again.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 05:28
|
|
|
They really need to do something about teamkilling in squad because as it is right now there's nothing stopping you from murdering the rest of your squad because you really want all that sweet gear they're carrying around. Or just re-enacting that scene from Always Sunny and sending you and your entire team flying off a cliff, which is funny as hell but still kind of annoying.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 05:32
|
|
|
MechanicalTomPetty posted:They really need to do something about teamkilling in squad because as it is right now there's nothing stopping you from murdering the rest of your squad because you really want all that sweet gear they're carrying around. Or just re-enacting that scene from Always Sunny and sending you and your entire team flying off a cliff, which is funny as hell but still kind of annoying. ... Don't join a squad with those people?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 05:36
|
|
|
uPen posted:... Don't join a squad with those people? I just gave the random matchmaking a try a few times to see what it was like. I know the best way to experience stuff like this is with actual friends, I just think it's nuts what the game lets you get away with. And of course, there's always going to be a bunch of people who stick to random matchmaking no matter what.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 05:47
|
|
|
So are non-KO kills in duos and squads going to stay in the game or is that a bug?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 05:50
|
|
|
Classic goon teamwork: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJxvepCkr_A
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 06:06
|
|
|
MechanicalTomPetty posted:They really need to do something about teamkilling in squad because as it is right now there's nothing stopping you from murdering the rest of your squad because you really want all that sweet gear they're carrying around. Or just re-enacting that scene from Always Sunny and sending you and your entire team flying off a cliff, which is funny as hell but still kind of annoying. What are they going to do? They are a small company, so they aren't going to have the personnel to review games to enforce rules. Turning off team damage would be bad. There isn't a good solution other than don't use random matchmaking, which you really shouldn't be anyway in this type of game.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 06:50
|
|
|
Don't trust your random squadmates, imo, be ready to shoot them the moment they act funky. Could even add a degree of fun to the game.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 06:52
|
|
|
1. Add a report system so you can report players for intentional teamkilling 2. Ban players who submit stupid/wrong reports Then once you've trained people to only submit reports for legit reasons, you can start looking through those cases and banning the worst of the griefers.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 06:54
|
|
|
Jabor posted:1. Add a report system so you can report players for intentional teamkilling This may seem logical in your head, but it doesn't work at all in practice. Games with gigantic teams and infinite money like DOTA have said it would take too much effort and too many resources to put in a system like this. How would you propose PUBG does it with their relatively small team?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 07:00
|
|
|
Megasabin posted:This may seem logical in your head, but it doesn't work at all in practice. Games with gigantic teams and infinite money like DOTA have said it would take too much effort and too many resources to put in a system like this. hell League of Legends used to let the players police it through a tribunal because the community whined about how "easy" it would be, it only took like 4 months for nobody to actually use it
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 07:21
|
|
|
Megasabin posted:This may seem logical in your head, but it doesn't work at all in practice. Games with gigantic teams and infinite money like DOTA have said it would take too much effort and too many resources to put in a system like this. If every report ends in a ban (with the reporter being banned if the person being reported didn't do anything), people end up not sending useless reports. Wading through useless reports is the biggest expense involved. If you're not willing to go that far, you could just look at reddit and ban any griefer notable enough to get on the front page, while just having a report system as a placebo to make people think that the small-time griefers will get banned eventually.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 07:26
|
|
|
No offense buddy but you have really terrible ideas on how to police a game community and I hope you're never in any sort of position to do so.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 07:35
|
|
|
ive won a squad game with random teammates, there were 3 of us total because the game didn't give us a fourth. i like the matchmaking
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 07:44
|
|
|
Jabor posted:If every report ends in a ban (with the reporter being banned if the person being reported didn't do anything), people end up not sending useless reports. Wading through useless reports is the biggest expense involved. and after they finish with they they should patch out hacking how hard can it be???
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 08:16
|
|
|
Re. manually policing reports: Let's make some assumptions and do some math. Steam's stats page reports that there are currently 125,000 people playing PUBG and today the game peaked at 180,000. For ease of math, let's assume the game averages at 150,000 players. Let's further assume that 80% of these players are in a match at any time. This gives us 120,000 people actually playing at any given time. Solo mode is probably most popular, so let's assume only 20% of players are in duo/squad mode. Of these, let's assume half are using matchmaking to find teammates (rather than bringing Steam friends). So, we're at 120,000 x .10 = 12,000 players who are vulnerable to griefing of the type you mentioned. Let's assume 5% of these players get griefed. Of these, let's assume half submit a report. So, each round of matches will produce 300 reports. Let's assume each round of matches takes an hour (a generous assumption). Then we have 24 x 300 = 7,200 reports per day. That's a lot of reports. Let's assume each report takes just 2 minutes to review. That's 240 hours of work per day, 7 days per week. 336 hours per workday. Assume the company making the game pays people minimum wage to process the reports. $7.25 per hour. That's $2,436 spent every day doing nothing but processing these reports. A work-year is about 260 days. That's $633,360 spent per year processing these reports, under generous assumptions (2 minute process time, minimum wage, low report rate, etc.) Processing reports like this is not financially responsible for a sanely run business. (Note that I wrote this on my phone while watching a DOTA match on Twitch. Sorry if there's errors.) Chimp_On_Stilts fucked around with this message at 08:24 on May 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 08:20
|
|
|
Chimp_On_Stilts posted:Re. manually policing reports: Let's make some assumptions and do some math. If every one of those reports results in someone paying $30 to play again, there's plenty of money to go around.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 08:23
|
|
|
Jabor posted:If every one of those reports results in someone paying $30 to play again, there's plenty of money to go around. Are you... buying a new copy of the game every time you play? EDIT: Oh, I see what you mean. Yeah, sure. If. Chimp_On_Stilts fucked around with this message at 08:27 on May 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 08:25
|
|
|
Chimp_On_Stilts posted:Are you... buying a new copy of the game every time you play? i don't understand the relevance. you ban someone for bad behaviour. (cheating, griefing, submitting nuisance reports). they can't play again unless they spend another $30 buying another copy. what would be the point of banning cheaters if they could just type another name in the box and carry on as they were?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 08:28
|
|
|
Um. Banning may work for clear, proven cheating via hacking, but this is team killing mate, a thing that is clearly enabled by the rules of the game. I'm pretty sure any consumer protection laws worth a drat would have a field day with that sort of company conduct, banning players from the game through either doing something that is allowed by the rules of the game, or because they made an erroneous report, encouraged by the community mechanisms around the game. Even cursory examination of the idea is flakey as all get out.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 08:29
|
|
|
we often play as 3 and kill the random pubbie for loot, it's a great feature
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 08:30
|
|
|
I think team-backstabbing should be encouraged by giving higher match rewards to the sole-survivor.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 08:32
|
|
|
the bikes without side cars are super fast and also fun
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 08:34
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:I think team-backstabbing should be encouraged by giving higher match rewards to the sole-survivor. When I first heard of the game I actually assumed that teams were forced to turn on each other if they had defeated everyone else. It fits the "murder murder murder sole survivor" theme of the game.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 08:35
|
|
|
New Lobby game: announce in local voice chat that you crashed, see if you can convince anyone to quit to lobby.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 08:35
|
|
|
Maluco Marinero posted:Um. Banning may work for clear, proven cheating via hacking, but this is team killing mate, a thing that is clearly enabled by the rules of the game. I'm pretty sure any consumer protection laws worth a drat would have a field day with that sort of company conduct, banning players from the game through either doing something that is allowed by the rules of the game, or because they made an erroneous report, encouraged by the community mechanisms around the game. do you know what an eula is? there is a very real chance that, right now, probably literally every one you've agreed to has 'grounds' to remove your access to the associated program. you're drastically overestimating your rights as it relates to these things.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 08:46
|
|
|
A 50S RAYGUN posted:do you know what an eula is? there is a very real chance that, right now, probably literally every one you've agreed to has 'grounds' to remove your access to the associated program. you're drastically overestimating your rights as it relates to these things. EULAs don't have the power to dismantle consumer protection laws, they attempt to fill in gaps and often overreach in ways that turn out to be unenforceable, maybe not in American jurisdiction, but certainly in Australian jurisdiction, and I have a feeling Europe would be similar. EULAs also don't manage community good will, which matters for a small team. At any rate, this was about a theoretical program that bans on every single report. That's a poo poo load of consumer good will decisions to make, setting aside the legality. It's a risky proposition all around.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 09:25
|
|
|
oh, i didn't think any system that bans automatically based on community-generated responses was a good idea, i was just saying that at practically any point companies can and do have at least plausible deniability when it comes to revoking your ability to use their product.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 09:36
|
|
|
A 50S RAYGUN posted:oh, i didn't think any system that bans automatically based on community-generated responses was a good idea, i was just saying that at practically any point companies can and do have at least plausible deniability when it comes to revoking your ability to use their product. Oh yeah, one person sure, but a systematic effort like this, I think even a EULA can only offset legal scrutiny for so long.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 09:38
|
|
|
i mean, 'you can be banned for deliberate griefing' is not very rare in the video game community and has thus far not really seemed to be a point of much legal contention.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 09:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 12:47 |
|
|
Jabor posted:If every one of those reports results in someone paying $30 to play again, there's plenty of money to go around. If your idea is so simple why haven't other game companies with tons more money & staff, whose playerbases have been begging for a system like you describe to be implemented for years, not been able to do it? It's just not as easy as you think. Even if you continue to insist, it's irrelevant, because it 100% isn't going to happen in this game.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 10:17
|
|