Leaderboard

Voe and I were talking about trying to organize an APB clan war type of thing with anyone interested. Some high level play with teamspeak and everything.The problem is that we don't have the playerbase to support two high-end clans facing it off properly without one overpowering the other by sheer pro-player-snatch-up. To counter that we're going to try and make a community-wide roster and put everyone in teams prior to a match depending on game experience so the team skillsets are somewhat evened out. Anyone who applies to participate cannot expect for their entire clan to be placed on one side, it all depends on how many skilled players we have to put in game. We'll need somewhat evened out teams. We can handle this by having two very experienced W3D Hub staff members picking team members prior to the begining of a PUG (Pick-Up-Game) match on teamspeak. You don't have to have a microphone to participate (but it would greatly boost the quality of the game if you did!), but you do need to be able to listen in and follow directions if a strategy is being put in motion in game. Anyone who wants to join up and apply to play in PUG matches can just leave a reply here. We're trying to see how many people we can scrape up to play in organized matches. Ideally on a weekend for this first test. Anyone can play as long as you cooperate, don't go against a chosen team leader's game tactic and don't team hamper or break any server rules. We also need people interested in moderating and helping organize the thing, just keeping track of people and helping set up teams prior to a match on teamspeak. (moderators feel free to edit and add or remove people from the roster) POSSIBLE PLAYER ROSTER:

Sign me up. I want to relive 2008 all over again. Also guys, if you want to have some of the best games of APB possible; sign up for this. It's gonna be special.

Me too. Kinda need to get another mic before this though.

I'm in

Hey guys! If anyone wants to take a look at these old maps being discussed, I have an archive here that you can get most of these maps from, as well as many others from the past. Have a look! https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Bzcnim4baG7fU2VnOVc2RV9IWTg The maps are stored separate from the game installers, so you'll need to download the version(s) of the game you want, and then manually place the map files into the data folder of the appropriate installation (for maps that are not packaged with the game). Pay attention to the install location during setup so you'll know where to go!

Hey guys. The origin of this idea comes from a couple of games AZ-Stalker, Zee and I have played tonight on the main server. Having a small team of closely cooperating teammates, on teamspeak and with a decent leadership reminded us of the good old APB clan wars. As our player base is limited, with some of us coming and going, the currently existing "clans" don't really work out. We want more of these teamwork oriented games, but it's hard to pull off if we have uneven, predetermined teams which can't even mobilize forces for a single match within 2(?) years of Delta's existence. Besides, what about those players who don't belong to a clan? We're sure they'd like to participate, too. We want to start a new initiative where those willing to do some real tournament game play can sign up quickly before an event, assign themselves into teams and go out and fight. No clans. Just us, the APB players. Our thought is to organize these events on Weekends, perhaps even as a form of replacement for one the the "Gaming Nights". Your answers to questions in the poll should give us a better idea of how to make it happen. Do we want to set-up a team a week before the event? That gives time to prepare for the maps and work out some form of coordination between players who most likely never played with one another. On the other hand, if the turn-out a week later is low, we might not be able to start. On the other hand, having teams picked ad-hoc can ensure the teams are even and everyone is there, but at the cost of actual training and practice. What do you think? How would you like to see it happen? Discussion is now open

[blurb]We need your input on several APB features and fixtures! Come and let us know your opinion![/blurb] [thumb]thumb_apb.5.png[/thumb]Several threads have started recently, asking for your feedback! ChopBam asks, "Which APB maps should we bring back?" Raap asks what improvements can be made to his map, Hostile Waters. Pushwall asks how everyone would feel about implementing an anti-stalemate feature. Visit these threads and others in the W3D Hub Discussion forums and express your thoughts!

I'd like to be able to add bots to more maps so people could mess with bots while idling on the empty server waiting for players, but they are in a very experimental stage right now. In particular their biggest problems are overzealousness when it comes to buying vehicles, kills against them counting on stats (meaning easy KD), and their turret rotations being completely bugged out when online. They're still fun though and I applaud @moonsense715 for his work on the new AI.

This is awesome. More so with the new TSR coming out soon

I am in

It can indeed be fun

Idk what the clans are up to these days, my own included. Count me in for this.

I'd be up for it!

I've been meaning to upload them to the forum's downloads section, but I haven't taken the time to do it yet. They would definitely be easier to find there. I'll get around to it eventually

I've been wanting to take a nostalgia trip for a few weeks now. Thank you Einstein-sama

My choices from highest to lowest priority: A Path Beyond - The game's namesake map. I remember being able to get under the map and kill almost everything that can get into the MCT room of the conyard, and then some (and got kicked for it, ofc ) Alpine Lake - There's something about me and large "scenic" maps. Alpine Lake was one of them. Condensing the bases a bit could be a little helpful especially when you've got nukes dropping at the other side of where you spawned. Partium - This one is tied for Alpine Lake in terms of scenery. Plus, IIRC it's a symmetrical map. Partium was also that sort of meatgrinder map that I particularly enjoyed especially at high-playercount games. Basically whoever had the more powerful organized rush won the game. Allied Assault - I remembered this as a 9935 tweekbee(?) map, a good complement to Seamist. The Woods Today - The very first map I played in when I first started playing APB. Lagsniping from the allied hill was fun

I'm sure we can manage with some people just listening in, albeit that's the less than ideal version. We have quick commands in game too so should be fine. The important thing is we actually get it going and organize. Hence why, really, anyone who can listen to people on teamspeak is free to join. I'm not for cutting people out if it's just a mic issue.

I'm down for this.

Let's slap the lolmap's music on LunarParadox and call it even

Eggman's lolmap. Nothing beats tin can Yaks and googly eyed LTs.

I think naval vs. aerial is the main problem for this map. To put it bluntly naval units are far too slow. Especially when cover is available in the form of the icebergs, it allows the helicopters to run circles around the ships. Add in the helipad and service depot smack in the middle of the map for easy refills/repairs and it really doesn't make any sense to buy a ship if your team has control of the middle. How would I fix this? Make destroyers and missile subs very, very effective against aircraft. Helicopters already have such great mobility over ships that they should still be able to avoid them relatively easily and strike land-based targets. Increasing the durability of naval vessels against air pushes more people to get naval units, which to me (Raap can disagree) was always the intention of this map. I realize this may affect the balance of other maps as well, so if there is concern this will make Destroyers and Missile Subs too powerful I would say nerf them against land targets. And just one final thought, I'd also get rid of the turrets and flame towers guarding the naval yard/subpen. Again, I don't think you need more reasons to discourage the use of naval units

What about moving the barracks locations to an underground room connected to the surface of a base via tunnel? Granted that wouldn't make sense map-wise, since who builds a barracks underground on an island, but it would make the most vital structure harder to get to.

Problem there is scaling health. Objects' health maximums are set in stone, so reducing health would be pointless as people could repair it anyway, and would be detrimental to an attack team if the player count changed during their attack anyway. Oh, you got that NY down to 100/750 health? Too bad, someone left in anger and now the playercount says it should be 650 health, so it's back up to 650/750 health now. Who needs golden wrenches when you can just ragequit? And I get the feeling swapping out the entire building controller for a new one will not fly (last time I remember spawning a building controller midgame it led to a crash), and even if it did, it would fully heal it every time the player count changed anyway. There's a reason the defense logic is handled by replacing the armour class with a different one. Which you can't do with actual buildings because buildings have two armour types: one for the exterior and one for the MCT. I haven't tried using the armour replace script on it but there are clearly 4 things that could happen, ranging from undesirable to nothing: it replaces the exterior armour and not the MCT (meaning repairs and infantry assaults are equally effective at all player counts) it replaces the MCT armour but not the exterior (so it only affects repairs and infantry assaults, and not naval/air rushes) it replaces both armour types with the same new armour type (so the MCT and walls behave identically, either making repairs/infantry assaults completely ineffectual if we choose the exterior armour, or making repairs too easy because a golden wrench works from anywhere if we choose the MCT armour) it doesn't replace any armour (so it just doesn't work) Also, Allies already win too easily by Longbow rushing the sub pen. Scaling its health down as it becomes easier to amass the 5 longbows required for a kill sounds... counterintuitive? Same goes for armour, though to a lesser extent if it follows the same "don't affect limited-ammo units" rule as defenses - but if the LBs fail, the rocket soldier pilots will just have an even easier time finishing the job. Maybe the "rushes too easy to spot" issue can be fixed by fog being even thicker than it already is - but then Longbows become even more overpowered at base destruction - something that is, again, normally not an huge issue (but still something I'll be nerfing with slightly lower building damage) as on other maps it's not too hard to spot an LB rush before it happens and then either intercept with rockets/TTs or just engy-camp the expected building - the latter being the only option here. Maybe the sub pen needs a set of battlements made out of indestructible SAM sites, devised by the Soviets after seeing how incredibly effective the castle is on Siege?

A few notes before I got to go; The lack of the feeling of "pulling vehicles" doesn't appear to be the problem since other non-ground vehicle maps operate fine. Barracks destruction gimping a team is a problem, removing it might help, but making Engineers baseline might be easier - Although I'm not sure if that also goes for preset management (too many small differences in individual maps might cause development visibility issues down the line). If a land route lacking is indeed the problem; fair warning, this would be the most time intensive problem to take on, since it requires a major redesign, and won't look logical, while not being a guarantee to make the map more enjoyable. Air versus naval may need some tweaks in where naval units do more damage to them, or air units deal less damage to naval units. I don't think having your Gunboat blown up by a Hind which your weapon cannot reach is a fun experience. At least Submarines can hide from Longbows, but that also can be seen as non-engaging gameplay. Concepts currently on my personal drawing board for a potential Hostile Waters "Redux", please do not take these as promises, the actual changes remain dependent on the poll results; Improved aesthetics for ice appearance, iceberg infantry play space, and base islands. It goes without saying that developing Siege showed me there is room for improvement (and room to murder your frame rate). Include a few geometry optimization techniques I picked up after HW was released, this will counterbalance any visual improvements in terms of performance cost. CONCEPT STAGE: Capturable "Naval Repair Yard (working title)" - This might potentially replace the SD and Refill Pad in the event that the removal of air units is the change the map requires to have. CONCEPT STAGE: Capturable "Coastal Defense Missile Launcher (working title)" - If infantry-to-naval capacity is diminished and capturing made easier, a new capturable defense building may be added, likely non-AI controlled and incapable of aiming high upwards. The purpose of this would be to retain the value of holding the icebergs for defense, but in a more controllable fashion. CONCEPT STAGE: Additional bonus objective revolving around NPC teamed cargo ships randomly appearing on one side of the map and slowly sailing in a straight line to the opposite side. If the cargo ship makes it to the other side intact, the team that specific cargo ship belongs to receives a credit bonus. Destroying an enemy team cargo ship prevents that team from gaining credits from that ship. Cargo ships would respawn at specific intervals but at semi-random locations. The purpose here would be to divert naval unit attention to more open waters, away from bases and icebergs, as well as provide a second source of income besides the capturable silos. Disclaimer: Code feasibility undetermined.

Cool kids go through the Renegade campaign pistol-only.