Striker has been fixed.

Because they are looking at sales they know the TR apes will gobble up the Striker while it exists in its current state.

The Phoenix was nerfed within a week when it was one shotting infantry. The Striker has taken months to fix and the Zealot Overdrive took a while as well not sure how long exactly. Take what you will from this but it's obvious they want the NC to be hard mode and constantly screw us but they occasionally toss us a bone and give us something over powered just to shut us up.

Pretty sure most MMOs are handling more than 2000 players.

What I said is still correct, I have never seen it in game, although I corrected myself once I read the idea that render distance may be a factor in this issue. Please read through the entire thread before commenting.

With my PPA you never will.

No... I am sure you will be able to do that... Just now, you can't do that without them finally knowing WHERE you are instead of a simple 'Damage from that direction' and not knowing where exactly.

At the same time in the same place? Haha good luck with that.


"Right now no matter how good SOE is, no matter who they bring to program Planetside 2. If the CPU of 90% of the world can't handle a 2 kilometers warfare is just waste of money and effort trying to make your game have a 2 kilometers warfare."

That's why you shouldn't put a MMO where you only affect 100 players around you, with a fps where 1000 players need to affect 1000 players. That's why PS2 didn't take the world record. While it's true it can handle more them 1000 players it doesn't make everyone affect everyone, so even being in the same "world"/server still play like indivual matchs.

I can't be sure about the fact of what paul mentioned, what i know is: in games where you have a HUGE number of players in the same place affecting everyone around them, there's a HUGE lag and Instability. Just go and see Eve Online, they indeed had a battle with 2,900 ships, but eve online has a system that slow down the world when such a huge encounters happens. And ppl said that in this battle actions that would normaly take 5secs, took 5 minutes of so much the system needed to slow down to handle such a encounter.

Most of the games are build in a way where players far away don't affect you, so it relieve the usage of your own cpu and in the server handling the place in question. To make a game where you shoot at the horizon and can hit someone in the other edge of the map means you will need to make the server calculate everything to everyone everytime. Unless i'm losing something here it makes the server/yourpc work WAY more then just having it calculate 50 players to 50 players.

If you think things are as simple as "but alot of MMOs have more then 2000 players", you need to remember: they normaly don't affect each other and when they do That's what happen

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=guild wars 2 karka lion's arch

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=orgrimmar invasion

Pick one video. you will see extreme lag and ppl appearing from nowhere.

You never see 2000 people in the same area on PS2 either. What is your point? In the huge fights you may get 200-300 people in a base.

"To make a game where you shoot at the horizon and can hit someone in the other edge of the map means you will need to make the server calculate everything to everyone everytime. Unless i'm losing something here it makes the server/yourpc work WAY more then just having it calculate 50 players to 50 players."

The extreme lag occurs because the server/yourpc need to calculate everything to everyone in the area, to make a game where you shoot and hit ppl edge to edge of the map means you will need to make everyone calculate everyone. Putting the whole map in this "high density" problem.

PS: That's not a problem in a map with 64 players, begin to get silly at 256. With 2000 players.... good luck.

You cant hit something on the other side of the map. Once a projectile reaches a certain distance it disappears. Your PC is not tracking anyone outside of what is in your immediate area. I have no idea what you are even talking about now.

yes, you don't. read the last 2 pages before posting.

You repeatedly switched between client performance and server performance. How about sticking with one subject. I can only come to the conclusion you have no idea what you are talking about.

I was refering to both.

Client because right now the game is "limited" and runs mostly in your side. But since i know a huge improvement in this client sided was done in others games, GW2 with culling, i hold my opinion here.

Server sided: Because as i've said ALOT of games have mechanics to deal with the "high density" problem, you think time in EVE online slow down to make things look cool?

And as i've showed, even in a simple game MADE to run alot of ppl, man vs machine, the server still having problems to handle it. I don't think it's as "simple" as you guys believe to make a game work as "one", read shoot at ppl you don't see and still hit because the server know it would hit, so easy.

About what Paul said about arma, i don't know about that but i'm already searching, if it is true that's interesting indeed. And something that i want to know about.

Well currently the Striker needs to maintain lock through flight or it flys straight up in the air. so FIXED
not sure if this is intentional as nothing about that in patch notes.

Now when you get locked with the frigging thing, the lock sound plays until you get locked by some other G2G lock on.

Also still not rendering.

2500 Damage for a striker clip...Dalton only does 1750....direct hit non lock on...yea I would say it should be toned down.

Really? interesting....

Last i checked, a Dalton can OHK a ESF, one Striker clip can not. Your argument is flawed. (Gotta remember damage resistances).

the Game had enough lock-on launchers before the striker was introduced, and the annihilator had been balanced around the other two lock on launchers before the introduction of the striker

i don't understand who thought that introducing a new and better lock-on launcher to the annihilator to only one faction was a good idea after the annihilator had already been nerfed

SOE's policy on weapons in similar categories stated that weapons would be "different" from each other not better... the striker is obviously better than the annihilator and this is totally messed up. I really don't understand why this has been left like this for as long as it has.

The striker should have been introduced as a type of skillshot weapon and not another lock-on. SOE for the sake of balance, should go back to the drawing board and rework the striker instead of "fixing" the bugs and continuing the pursuit of "trying to balance the striker". This weapon should have in the first place been made to be something fun that takes skill to use, not a better copy and paste of the Annihilator and they should take the time to rework it now instead of gimmicky "fixes".

It's not. It's supposed to have a six second window with the lock-on changes (12 without) where it pursues with a lost lock.

Just another broken item in a broken patch.

i was merely commenting on his flawed comparison of the strikers damage vs the dalton's damage. The numbers suggest that the striker is more powerful when in game, in terms of damage, the dalton is better due to damage resistances. That comment was not meant to be interpreted in any other way. I agree that the striker is an upgrade the the annihilator but its doubtful that its core mechanic will be changed

I have never ever outflown Strikers in the past; did so tonight for the first time.