The Striker - Page 2

HawkEye · 2003-06-23, 01:31 AM

Deadlock · 2003-06-23, 01:40 AM

i too am pissed off about the jackhammer whining. my rifle sucks, my bazooka punches limp wristed, dont take my shotty away from me!!! its all i have left

Kaikou · 2003-06-23, 01:48 AM

Originally posted by Warborn
Well, the Striker is ass against anything but vehicles/MAXs, which the Lancer and Phoenix are not, so hey, it all evens out. You don't like getting perma-missile lock, we don't like getting sniped by missiles fired by someone we can't even see (or perforated by a laser cannon by a guy we can barely see).

All the weapons have a benefit. They're all decent, and you don't want to start needlessly nerfing them, because the nerf bat swings both ways.

^^^^^AMEN^^^^^

Honestly, people whine about anything. You people cry nerf just because something can kill you. Before you cry nerf, try using it. Certify and use the weapon for awhile. Before I tried heavy assault and tried the jackhammer, I was dead set on that thing being nerfed hard. But now that I use it, I don't see a need for it to be nerfed, but rather or the other 2 HA weapons to be beefed up a bit.

The striker has it's own unique properties, as do the other 2 AV weapons. The lancer mows down infantry from sniper distance, the phoenix can be fire from somewhere completely safe and guided to a target. The striker can lock onto vehicles (by the way, the striker will LOSE it's lock if the user takes the reticle off their target. The grass is always greener on the other side, you'll all find that to be true. Just because the other empire has a powerful weapon you want it nerfed so that empire is easier to kill.

Leave the striker alone, leave the game alone, play it for what it is and let the devs fix what they don't like about it.

Arakiel · 2003-06-23, 02:08 AM

Originally posted by HawkEye
i see the lancer being used against infantry and MAX. isnt the lancer anti-vehicle? i know it is suppoed to inflict a lot of damage against MAXes but it also does pretty good damage against infantry.

I know. Almost how the jackhammer eats up MAXes as well as infantry, no?

Originally posted by MilitantB0B

VS- Long distance, instintaneous travel time, and good against infantry.

It's not instantaneous at all. Have you ever used a lancer? There's a delay between when you push fire and when the weapon actually fires and another delay between when the projectile is fired and when it actually hits the target. There are no hitscan weapons in PS, and the lancer isn't an exception.

Originally posted by ReaperofDeath27
oh yeah and like i said before
ITS A FRIGGIN TRI BARRELED SHOTGUN ITS SUPPOSED TO KICK ASS! sorry guys u were makin me mad once again

That is, quite honestly, the most profoundly retarded pro-JH argument I've ever heard.

Anyway, what was this thread about? Oh yeah - the striker. Right.

My problem with the striker is that its lock radius is too large and the lock is too strong. A striker trooper can very, very easily down an enemy MAX without even aiming particularly well.

Here's a newsflash for you: the lancer has a pretty large CoF at a distance, and it actually requires that you aim at the target. What a concept that is. Conversely, the striker pretty much just kills MAXes for you. In a VS MAX, I can jumpjet behind a hill, I can run through trees, I can do whatever the hell I want and that striker lock isn't going to go away.

Earlier today a striker trooper sent me a tell saying "lol I wasn't even aiming at you" when he killed me. That pretty much summed up my one problem with the weapon: absolutely no skill is required to be ridiculously effective with it.

HawkEye · 2003-06-23, 02:23 AM

dude stfu what reaperofdeath said is true. a tri-barreled auto shotty is gonna kicks ass for the second time. it is supposed to do alot of damage cuz it is an AUTO SHOTGUN.

Intruder · 2003-06-23, 02:27 AM

Originally posted by HawkEye
dude stfu what reaperofdeath said is true. a tri-barreled auto shotty is gonna kicks ass for the second time. it is supposed to do alot of damage cuz it is an AUTO SHOTGUN.

*wonders if he knows who he just said STFU to.....

Smaug · 2003-06-23, 02:50 AM

I agree with TR, and the smart other-empire people here. Leave it be. Sure it doesn't fit the 'theme' of the empire. Does the phoenix fit the theme!? No I don't think so. Nowhere does it say that NC has remotely guided weapons.... But all you TR out there, don't fret if you can't destroy a max in one clip, all you have to do is just aim the thing at people :P. Whenever I see "MISSLE LOCK" on my screen, I run like hell when I'm in vech.

Arakiel · 2003-06-23, 02:50 AM

Originally posted by HawkEye
dude stfu what reaperofdeath said is true. a tri-barreled auto shotty is gonna kicks ass for the second time. it is supposed to do alot of damage cuz it is an AUTO SHOTGUN.

Well, then let's extrapolate this.

The Comet MAX fires hot balls of plasma at a high rate of fire. I don't know about you, but when I think of something that fires plasma at me, I would assume that this weapon would be, indeed, "kick-ass." Instead, the Comet MAX sucks. Please explain.

While we're at it, aren't grenades "supposed to do a lot of damage?" Aren't they supposed to "kick ass?" I mean, again, maybe it's just me, but since my introduction at an early age to the concept of a handgrenade, I usually regarded them as a rather potent weapon. Yet, most people in PS don't carry frag grenades.

I dunno, maybe your logic is simply too complex for me, or maybe you're a complete idiot with no real argument. Are you going to contribute to the thread or are you going to pat yourself on the back a few more times first?

Originally posted by Intruder
*wonders if he knows who he just said STFU to.....

I'm not sure what this implies but, er, thanks?

Incompetent · 2003-06-23, 03:51 AM

I can jumpjet

This three letter quote, imho, invalidates your entire arguement, anyone who jumpjets to avoid a striker, outside of extremely specific circumstances, doesn't know enough about it to comment.

Arakiel · 2003-06-23, 04:02 AM

Originally posted by Incompetent
This three letter quote, imho, invalidates your entire arguement, anyone who jumpjets to avoid a striker, outside of extremely specific circumstances, doesn't know enough about it to comment.

Hey, I have a fun game we can play. It's called "Keep Quotes in Context." Do you want to play? Cool, me too!

Okay, let me go first!

"I can jumpjet behind a hill" implies a lot more than "I can jumpjet." The striker's supposed to require the soldier to aim the entire way to the target, no? Due to the game's very crappy clipping for objects and lock-on, you can stand behind a building, a hill, or whatever you want and they'll still hit you.

Wasn't that a fun game?

By the way, I find it obvious that I am, in fact, a complete newb. I've been playing VS MAX since exclusive beta (where I obviously newbed it up) and throughout retail (where I am known by my nickname, "total newb omg lol") where I retain a spot on the leaderboard (that was acquired by me getting very lucky because I am a total newb.) Obviously, I know nothing about the game. Thanks for your enlightening commentary that pretty much just reinforced that I am obviously clueless.

Incompetent · 2003-06-23, 04:15 AM

Good, you've play a VS MAX the entire time, now, lets go fire a striker under combat conditions, the thing has the absolute bitchiest lock on any weapon that ever existed, it a leaf floats in front of you (speaking figuratively) it will break the lock.

"I can jumpjet behind a hill" implies a lot more than "I can jumpjet."

No, it really doesn't, anyone who touches the spacebar with a VS MAX when fighting a striker is fighting wrong, the weapon requires you to keep LOS on your enemy, and it moves very quickly, but it looses its lock very easily, so giving the enemy a better shot for even a fraction of a second, even if you're moving for cover, is absolutely retarded

Due to the game's very crappy clipping for objects and lock-on, you can stand behind a building, a hill, or whatever you want and they'll still hit you.

Total lie, if it hits you and your behind cover, its because you didn't move once you broke the lock, or you took cover from the wrong direction.

Arakiel · 2003-06-23, 04:21 AM

Much credit, Incompetent, you actually have an argument this time other than calling me a newb. Well done.

Originally posted by Incompetent
Good, you've play a VS MAX the entire time, now, lets go fire a striker under combat conditions, the thing has the absolute bitchiest lock on any weapon that ever existed, it a leaf floats in front of you (speaking figuratively) it will break the lock.

Er, no. Sorry. The lock issues have since been fixedfor the most part. It's not even remotely difficult to get a striker lock.

Originally posted by Incompetent

No, it really doesn't, anyone who touches the spacebar with a VS MAX when fighting a striker is fighting wrong, the weapon requires you to keep LOS on your enemy, and it moves very quickly, but it looses its lock very easily, so giving the enemy a better shot for even a fraction of a second, even if you're moving for cover, is absolutely retarded

I'm sure this never occured to you, but in many situations using jumpjets is the only way to find cover.

Originally posted by Incompetent

Total lie, if it hits you and your behind cover, its because you didn't move once you broke the lock, or you took cover from the wrong direction.

In a game with client-side hit detection, it's not that easy to call. Missiles regularly fly through objects and hit people around corners.

Warborn · 2003-06-23, 04:23 AM

My problem with the striker is that its lock radius is too large and the lock is too strong. A striker trooper can very, very easily down an enemy MAX without even aiming particularly well.

That depends. The lock requires you to keep your crosshairs trained on the target for the missiles to impact. You obviously don't need to compensate for recoil or any such thing, but you're mistaken if you believe you can simply use the weapon anywhere and no shot will ever miss. MAXs are a bit stuck unless they can find some terrain feature to move behind, but Reavers and other air targets can outrun Striker rounds with their afterburner, and can also move behind hills or trees or anything else to lose the lock. Trust me, you won't get that many kills if you automatically whip out your Striker and hold down the fire button everytime you see enemy vehicles or MAXs.

Here's a newsflash for you: the lancer has a pretty large CoF at a distance, and it actually requires that you aim at the target. What a concept that is. Conversely, the striker pretty much just kills MAXes for you. In a VS MAX, I can jumpjet behind a hill, I can run through trees, I can do whatever the hell I want and that striker lock isn't going to go away.

I really can't fathom the logic behind attempting to instruct people on the mechanics of the Lancer in an attempt to defame the Striker, when you apparently do not have much -- if any -- real Striker experience yourself.

And no, picking the weapon up and firing it a few times and then assuming you're fluent in Striker use does not count.

Earlier today a striker trooper sent me a tell saying "lol I wasn't even aiming at you" when he killed me. That pretty much summed up my one problem with the weapon: absolutely no skill is required to be ridiculously effective with it.

And of course you asked him what he meant rather than assuming the missile somehow decides its own targets, right?

Thought so.

If that quote is indeed true, then the Striker user was likely shooting his rounds at something which you happened to get in front of. So instead of him having a lock on some other enemy which was behind you, his crosshairs were over you, and therefore the Striker rounds homed in on you.

"I can jumpjet behind a hill" implies a lot more than "I can jumpjet." The striker's supposed to require the soldier to aim the entire way to the target, no? Due to the game's very crappy clipping for objects and lock-on, you can stand behind a building, a hill, or whatever you want and they'll still hit you.

It would be a funny kill if they did. Once the lock is broken, the missile continues on its same trajectory as before. So if it was going straight at you and you didn't move, even if the lock is broken, the missile will still be going straight at you. So if you were behind a building and a Striker round hit you, it's probably because the missile was going straight down at you, and once the lock was broken when you went out of sight, the missile ended up hitting you anyway.

But, I do agree with the game having crappy clipping. Some of the most minor objects can break the Striker's lock. It can be annoying.

Arakiel · 2003-06-23, 04:34 AM

Originally posted by Warborn
Trust me, you won't get that many kills if you automatically whip out your Striker and hold down the fire button everytime you see enemy vehicles or MAXs.

Air vehicles, no. MAXes, yes. Ground vehicles, for the most part.

Originally posted by Warborn

I really can't fathom the logic behind attempting to instruct people on the mechanics of the Lancer in an attempt to defame the Striker, when you apparently do not have much -- if any -- real Striker experience yourself.

Instructing someone in lancer usage was a reply to someone claiming that the lancer was instantaneous shot.

I've dealt with a striker on both ends (admittedly, I play TR far less than VS, but I've played around with the striker enough to develop a valid opinion.)

Originally posted by Warborn

And of course you asked him what he meant rather than assuming the missile somehow decides its own targets, right?

Thought so.

You're right, I didn't. Sorry, in the future I'll exhaustively reply to tells in the most dumbfounded manner possible in order to satisfy your craving for pointing out inane details.

Originally posted by Warborn

If that quote is indeed true, then the Striker user was likely shooting his rounds at something which you happened to get in front of. So instead of him having a lock on some other enemy which was behind you, his crosshairs were over you, and therefore the Striker rounds homed in on you.

It is, indeed, true. I used that quote as a touch of "hey, this situation was amusing" and I'm quite sure I never claimed that he was or was not firing at something that could or could not have been behind me. It was, however, illustrative of my point that using the striker doesn't exactly make you the lauded champion of FPS skill.

If you're under the impression that the striker is a weapon that requires lots of skill, you can go ahead and stop talking now. For the record, I'm quite aware that the same applies to VS AI MAX, but that's not the focus of the thread.

Originally posted by Warborn

It would be a funny kill if they did. Once the lock is broken, the missile continues on its same trajectory as before. So if it was going straight at you and you didn't move, even if the lock is broken, the missile will still be going straight at you. So if you were behind a building and a Striker round hit you, it's probably because the missile was going straight down at you, and once the lock was broken when you went out of sight, the missile ended up hitting you anyway.

I'm aware that the lock functions like that, but the lock radius on the crosshair is large enough that retaining a lock in the first place is far too easy, which has been my point from the beginning. As far as getting a dumbfire kill around the corner, I'm sure it happens (it's a fairly fast missile, after all) but I know from experience that the missile doesn't instantaneously go dumbfire and stays dumbfire the second the target moves. If that was the case, then we'd be back to the beta striker, which was quite terrible. There was a bit too much overcompensation when they "fixed" the weapon's lock, though.

Incompetent · 2003-06-23, 05:02 AM

first off, i would like to say thank you to I.E. for giving me the chance to type all this out twice, but since warborn basically said what i was going to say, im just gonna type random shit about the stiker most people don't know, sooo....

Er, no. Sorry. The lock issues have since been fixedfor the most part. It's not even remotely difficult to get a striker lock.

All they did in beta was change one of the many factors that made the striker a bitch and half to lock with, which was the drawing LOS from your knees, it is still extremely easy to break lock on this by moving behind even the most minor objects.
Enemy Tactic, try and position yourself so you can quickly move your feet, lower legs out of LOS, and keep something behind you for the missiles to slam into when they miss. and always, ALWAYS hold the high ground.
User tactic, get as high as you can, its as simple as it is hard/dangerous.

On the topic of jumpjets, hitting the jets is an extremely bad idea except in situations to specifif to mention. Now, it seems like it might be a very good idea, after all, you move faster, and your not vulnerable to splash, but the problem is that you make your movement extremly predictable, once your in the air, an experienced striker user knows almost exactly where your gonna go, maybe even better then most inexperienced MAXes. Seems kind of stupid, since it locks on he can just recorrect and follow you no matter what you do, but this is where the bane of the strikers existence comes in, reloading. If you want to kill almost anything with a Stiker, you must reload, but the problem is, when you reload, you can't see anything in the middle portion of your screen, so an evasive MAX on the ground could break the lock and trick the missiles into hitting random terrain objects, but if you jump, you run into two problems, the missiles start moving upwards, which means they will stick around a lot longer if the lock is lost, and it is extremely easy to follow your flight path and keep the weapon locked on when you can't see your target.

Another thing many maxes do that is extremely stupid, they assume they can operate without infantry support, true, its very easy to sit up on top of a tower and maintain LOS on a MAX when he is alone, but trying doing that with snipers bolts flying around you and while getting sprayed with AR fire, also, suprisingly enough, infantry are very good for absorbing the rockets for you, since they take only minor damage from them, a quick medkit will have an infantryman in fighting order relatively quickly, so step behind the infantryman, break the lock, and let the missile slam into that poor guy or into some random terrain.

Edit: and as far as requiring massive amount of skill, no it doesn't, but it requires common sense (something most emerald TR lack to the extreme), and that you be willing to get shot to hell on a regular basis, because snipers just love shooting people that are unable to take cover, and a striker user qualifies.