Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2013 1:41:02 GMT -5
www.codghosts.net/killstreaks-strike-packages/Some of them look really good like "air superiority" or "night owl" but I'm worried about Heli Sniper and MAAWS in the support package. Oracle seems to BE false since it was announced that there is no invisibility kill-streak in the game. Also I.M.S. is back yay!
|
|
|
Post by -3055- on Aug 28, 2013 9:02:29 GMT -5
Unlike the normal Juggernaut killstreak, this version allows the player to move extremely fast.
this version allows the player to move extremely fast.
allows the player to move extremely fast.
move extremely fast.
extremely fast.
and a combat knife
ಠ_ಠ
|
|
|
Post by -3055- on Aug 28, 2013 9:12:11 GMT -5
A 9 killstreak in black ops/black ops 2 was alright. A 9 kill streak in an IW game where the killstreak kills will count towards your next streak? All you'd need to do is set up 6/7/9 and just get a kill with each of the lowers to get to 9. A 9 killstreak in MW3 was nothing.
I just hope (and it'll probably happen) that the maniac will be always present on the minimap. My issue isn't that it's going to be OP. I'm sure it's not something to choose when you want to chain kills. But it has the factor of crazylaglungeshit and trolling involved especially if it's going to be hidden from the radar.
At least it won't be a problem in S&D. Same thing with oracle.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Aug 28, 2013 9:28:53 GMT -5
Ghosts is going to feel and play a lot differently.
MW3 was a killstreak stacker game. Putting up a 5-9-12 was ridiculously easy, especially in Dom with Hardline. Two caps and two kills, the chain was off and running with the Predator (4 kills), get a little lucky (2-kill with Pred) and show some patience, it was very easy to get 8 kills and launch a strafe or reaper. Getting two or three kills with that was almost a given, which then fed one right into 11, launching a Pavelow or AC130. When you toss in that Hardline Pro gave a kill for asssist points, a blind guy could stack a 5-8-11 multiple times in a game. But with that, it was offset with the ease of shooting that stuff down. Pavelows and AC's were ridiculously easy to knock out. It only worked on bad players (and there were plenty of them thankfully)
BO2? We all know the issues here. It was harder to get the high end stuff, but Treyarch compensated this by making these streaks more brutal in that they couldn't be defended (VSAT, Lodestar, Dogs, Swarm). This then just meant over time, opponents would use the only real means of defending themselves, ...quitting. Call in a VSAT or Swarm, 2/3rds of the opponent lobby will be gone in ten seconds. Dumb design theory by Treyarch. I haven't used these in months and won't play with friends who do use them. I don't want to sit in an empty game, while someone furiously masterbates to their swarm (that isn't even getting any kills anyways)
Ghosts? A different feel here. Not very top heavy and those high streaks, don't look very powerful. Quadrotor? Looks like a Reaper, but more easy to destroy. Helo Pilot? A pavelow type of power? Then an air vehicle that gives support. This is REALLY toned down. No AC, Reaper, Osprey from MW3. And none of that dumb sh1t from BO2. On paper, this looks good. Maybe get people to move around, play to win, rather than playing for killstreaks and KD a little less.
|
|
|
Post by bucket415 on Aug 28, 2013 9:56:38 GMT -5
You can't hide we got VSATs up. Spicy red Dorito chips, we gon' eat that up.
|
|
Usagi
True Bro
Grin and Barrett
Posts: 1,674
|
Post by Usagi on Aug 28, 2013 10:51:23 GMT -5
Since Roberta and Mark Rubin have both confirmed that this is not invisibility, this must be an outline of a player that is underground and has an MMS-style outline around him, so I think the Oracle is a wallhack streak. Or it could just not be related to the Oracle at all.
|
|
wings
True Bro
Posts: 3,776
|
Post by wings on Aug 28, 2013 11:29:34 GMT -5
oh no. a nine killstreak turns someone into a knife only class. call the fu cking mounties.
|
|
|
Post by bucket415 on Aug 28, 2013 12:34:18 GMT -5
They are saying its not "invisibility" based on the strict definition of the word. Invisible means = no one can see you. In the game you won't be invisible per-say, but more like barely visible. Picture the cloak mechanism of the Predator.
|
|
|
Post by -3055- on Aug 28, 2013 13:21:44 GMT -5
the cloaking of a predator in the movies were borderline invisible. I think the best thing to do is give them like 10% opacity but make the 10% blue. So you can see the entire (albeit faint) body walking around and whatnot.
Or go oldschool and make everything but the hat and gun invisible.
|
|
Usagi
True Bro
Grin and Barrett
Posts: 1,674
|
Post by Usagi on Aug 28, 2013 17:54:25 GMT -5
They are saying its not "invisibility" based on the strict definition of the word. Invisible means = no one can see you. In the game you won't be invisible per-say, but more like barely visible. Picture the cloak mechanism of the Predator. I think that's just semantics.
|
|
|
Post by UrbaneVirtuoso on Aug 28, 2013 23:47:41 GMT -5
(VSAT, Lodestar, Dogs, Swarm) VSAT? CUAVs and EMPs. Lodestar? Launcher. Dogs? Bullets. Swarm? Blind Eye.
:3
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Aug 29, 2013 8:10:45 GMT -5
(VSAT, Lodestar, Dogs, Swarm) VSAT? CUAVs and EMPs. Lodestar? Launcher. Dogs? Bullets. Swarm? Blind Eye.
:3Bro, come on. We are ten months into BO2, isn't it time to give stock answers like the above a rest? Everytime I hear someone throw up that silly stock reply like that, it makes me want to kick a puppy (as well make me wonder if you have even played BO2) One. A CUAV and EMP are earned based streaks. I can't call them in anytime I want. For me to call in a CUAV, I have to 1) earn it and 2) have it sitting in my pocket at the very moment an opponent calls in a VSAT. How often does that happen? Next to never. And even if I get lucky, have that streak attached, earned it, haven't used it yet, I ALSO have to hope the opponents (who is good enough to get a VSAT), is stupid enough to not shoot down my CUAV before launching his VSAT. So yeah, please don't tell me how effective CUAV's are against VSAT's. Two. Once an opponent starts dropping Swarms or even other AI streaks, how many players are actually starting out or running the Blind Eye perk during the game? None. Now you may reply you are some stud and you always have it equipped just in case. Ok? If so, then I will say you suck at this game, as their are much more useful perks to be running in the tier one category. Good players don't start out using BlindEye. So seeing that is the case, what good is a non-equipped Blindeye perk going to do when you are building a nice Score Streak chain and suddenly the opponent puts up something? Nothing. You are exposed. Three. Sure, you could die and then load up another class that has Blindeye. Now you are protected, after you just died (and lost whatever streak you are building) I have done that. But here's the reality when dealing with Swarms and Lodestars. Most of your teammates won't die and switch classes. And if you are with randoms, probably none of them will. So what happens is after you die, you start respawning near five or eight teammates who are basically magnets for crap dropping down on your head. What good is BlindEye then? Four. Your point about just going and shooting the dogs. Come on, my point isn't that hard to grasp. Yes, I could retreat to a corner if an opponent calls in dogs, and then take out. But I don't have the ability to knock out the source of the dogs. I can kill one or two, but the dogs keep coming on the map. Same deal with Swarm. I could equip Blind Eye and hide, but the swarm keeps dropping on the map. With both, people are unable to knock out the source. THAT IS THE POINT YOUR ARE MISSING. In prior games, MW3, one skilled player (who actually cared) could take out an AC130, Osprey, Reaper, Pavelow, pretty easily, and help stop it from killing teammates. In BO2, I can't knock out the high end stuff. I can only hide from it a bit better....and pray all five or eight other teammates are smart enough to do that too. Most of the time, as described above, they aren't. All it takes is 2 or 3 dumb teammates, feeding enough deaths to an opponent, and their chain grows. The game gets completely out of hand. Then you hear comments on message boards like "VSAT = WIN" and hearing that repeated over and over and over, just makes people quit asap. And that's what makes BO2 suck in that regard.
|
|
|
Post by UrbaneVirtuoso on Aug 29, 2013 8:52:33 GMT -5
10/10. Also, was referencing EMP grenades and overall coordination of said counters. Give me your worst! >:3
|
|
wings
True Bro
Posts: 3,776
|
Post by wings on Aug 29, 2013 9:16:32 GMT -5
(VSAT, Lodestar, Dogs, Swarm) VSAT? CUAVs and EMPs. Lodestar? Launcher. Dogs? Bullets. Swarm? Blind Eye.
:3Lodestar is fully automatic and the launcher may not be quick enough to fire rockets given that there is no penalty for players using the streak by holding the fire trigger down for an eternity. The smaller maps and more predictable spawns on some game modes nerf anti-air alternatives, especially as there are no safe spawning mechnaisms COD uses that I'm aware of. The video makes the Nuke look tame.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Aug 29, 2013 11:16:26 GMT -5
10/10. Also, was referencing EMP grenades and overall coordination of said counters. Give me your worst! >:3 No amount of coordination amongst teammates, tossing EMP grenades in the sky, is going to help stop an VSAT.
|
|
|
Post by bucket415 on Aug 29, 2013 12:04:18 GMT -5
They are saying its not "invisibility" based on the strict definition of the word. Invisible means = no one can see you. In the game you won't be invisible per-say, but more like barely visible. Picture the cloak mechanism of the Predator. I think that's just semantics. No doubt. Its developer double speak bullshit.
|
|
pachiderm
True Bro
Chewing some serious leaves
Posts: 647
|
Post by pachiderm on Aug 30, 2013 9:25:38 GMT -5
10/10. Also, was referencing EMP grenades and overall coordination of said counters. Give me your worst! >:3 No amount of coordination amongst teammates, tossing EMP grenades in the sky, is going to help stop an VSAT. No, but it cancels out the radar of anyone hit by one. It also randomly adds to your score via assists and equipment destroys, allowing you to put more CUAVs in the sky.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Aug 30, 2013 10:11:11 GMT -5
Ok?
You are missing the point of what I originally said and what UrbaneVirtuosos was responding back to. You two have completely sidetracked things into some obscure meaningless issue.
The original point i made? Treyarch made the high end streaks much more brutal in BO2, compared to MW3. Brutal, in a sense that one individual couldn't knock out the source of the streak, that was delivering the killing to teammates. In MW3, one determined person could shoot down a pavelow, AC130 or Osprey. Kill it, before it racks up 9 kills against your teammates and wrecks your chance of winning. In BO2, this determined person can't achieve the same results. I can't shoot down the source of the streak. I can't shoot down a VSAT, I can't shoot down 'Dogs', or a 'Swarm'. And the Lodestar shoots much faster than prior equivalent MW3 streaks. I can only mostly take measures to hide or defend MYSELF. If even one or two of my teammates are sloppy, things go badly very fast.
That's all well and good you and Urbanevirtuoso pointed out a well coordinated team can toss emps and get points via assists and equipment destroys....but it has NOTHING to do with what i said up there. A point Urbane was saying was incorrect, when he mentioned how anyone can stop the above the tougher BO2 killstreaks with things like shooting the dogs or calling a CUAV. He is wrong. Those tactics don't work very well, if at all in BO2 for the reasons I listed earlier.
Quick story.
Three of us were playing a game of Dom last night. Us three, and three randoms. We got into a lobby on Cove and some old friends showed up, a team of five guys. Good players, four of the five sporting WL's over 3, and KD's over 2. We played the first half and we were ahead surprisingly, 109-61. We pretty much handled them. Unfortunately, two of opponents hid during the latter stages of the 1st half and worked our bad teammates, getting kills off of them, to build VSAT's. Second half came up, they dropped their VSAT chains on us. VSAT's...then Warthogs...then swarms. Two of us on our team quickly switched to CB/Blindeye classes. I even threw up a CUAV (I was running UAV, CUAV, HK). They shot my CUAV down in seconds. The problem? Three of our teammates COMPLETELY meatshielded out. Two of these guys went like 3-35 in the second half and fed the opponents more kills, which they then looped to a second set of VSAT's, Warthogs, and Swarms. We had FOUR vsat'S on us in the second half, as well as three warhogs and two swarms.
We ended up losing 172-175.
I went from being 21-14 in the first half (top scorer on both teams), to ending the game like 35-42. Even with CB/BE, I died multiple times trying to recap flags, due to randoms running near me who didn't have anything equipped. Caught in the swarm flak. And trying to shoot down a warthog, while a VSAT is up? Yeah, ok. Which is my point. I had emp's equipped and was tossing. I had a CUAV used, had the right perks on. Still didn't matter because i couldn't shoot down the source of the killing (VSAT/SWarms). In a way, completely bvullshit, but that's how BO2 is. It rewards douchbaggish play of hiding/tactical loitering/working for kills. And unlike prior games, this strategy works a bit better now. Which just feeds right into the typical CoD clown mentality. Play for KD, declare you don't care if you lose, and now have the above strategy work a bit more....which makes these people play that way even more.
If we wouldn't have had two teammates end up like 10-50 and 6-49, we would have easily won that game. And if that game would have had been with MW3 rules/killstreaks, we still would have easily won. But this is BO2.
|
|
|
Post by Morshu on Aug 30, 2013 22:31:39 GMT -5
I actually agree with IW5k this time. Success in BO2 is pretty much determined by which team gets the high killstreaks first. Once somebody gets a VSAT it creates a vicious cycle and results in rage quitting in the losing team. Very flawed killstreak system. I look forward to ghosts where killstreaks are much more individualistic and player centered. All the player killstreaks worked great in mw3.
|
|
thepythnator
True Bro
I like Wii U Call of Duty. Come at me bros.
Posts: 54
|
Post by thepythnator on Aug 31, 2013 11:14:35 GMT -5
I actually agree with IW5k this time. Success in BO2 is pretty much determined by which team gets the high killstreaks first. Once somebody gets a VSAT it creates a vicious cycle and results in rage quitting in the losing team. Very flawed killstreak system. I look forward to ghosts where killstreaks are much more individualistic and player centered. All the player killstreaks worked great in mw3. That's how the system should work. It isn't Treyarch's fault that everyone is a sore loser if they get a killstreak called in on them. You want team based killstreaks, use them, if you want player based killstreaks, use them. It shouldn't matter. What they should do is put a better probation system in. Something I think would be cool is if your connection was below a certain level you could leave with no penalty except a loss. But if you just can't take losing, then too bad.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Sept 1, 2013 17:58:52 GMT -5
I actually agree with IW5k this time. Success in BO2 is pretty much determined by which team gets the high killstreaks first. Once somebody gets a VSAT it creates a vicious cycle and results in rage quitting in the losing team. Very flawed killstreak system. I look forward to ghosts where killstreaks are much more individualistic and player centered. All the player killstreaks worked great in mw3. That's how the system should work. It isn't Treyarch's fault that everyone is a sore loser if they get a killstreak called in on them. You missed the point entirely. And most people who say what you do, talk up how great the scorestreak system is in BO2, people who fuss over KD......they are usually the biggest quitters.
|
|
Dumien
True Bro
Black Market Trader
No engrams. Only disappointment.
Posts: 3,292
|
Post by Dumien on Sept 1, 2013 18:26:39 GMT -5
Just thought I would mention that pubstompers are heavily catered to in BO2. Swarms + Dogs/Lodestar is game ending, destructive, and near impossible to recover from. That alone wouldn't be enough. The two pronged attack comes up with VSAT/UAV spam. It is the snowball effect. What results is more lobbies where entire teams get cycled (through quits/whatever) and games get drawn out to the nth.
IMO MW2 handled this perfectly for both the pubstomper and the poor noobs getting pubstomped. Ima lay it out for you. The nuke. Plain and simple. If you didn't run the nuke you still had options as a pubstomper. You could still get kills, but the streaks were far easier to take out (you can't easily take out dogs...and you can only hide from swarms). You could still go for kills, but the people getting stomped felt like they had a chance.
What the nuke did was twofold.
For the pubstompers it was a cool alternate win condition. Everybody has to pay attention to you and your kills in the killfeed. You get to be the hero. You aren't going to get a ton of kills, but it was always an awesome goal to achieve. You had to contruct your streaks in such a way that you weren't going to be helpful to your team in the short term, but if you got on a roll you would provide long term benefits (Harrier/AC130/Choppergunner) and perhaps even a win.
For the pubstompee (the people getting pubstomped), the nuke was better, less aggravating, and less time consuming than continually getting pummeled by unstoppable enemy killstreaks. Enemy gets 25 kills. You are done. You lose. GG. That's it. As a game ender...that is how it was. But, there is a benefit for the pubstompee here. You also had a clear indicator of when the game would end and you could have visible opportunity to hunt down the attempted nuke-getter. "Woah that guy is close to a chopper gunner...let's get him." This not only made it seem more fair, but it gave the pubstomper an extra challenge...people were going to rush him.
The nuke is a kinder, gentler example of establishing one's dominance within CoD. The swarm/dogs/VSAT only serves one side of the pubstomper/pubstompee equation. I like to use the torture example. why? Because, fun.
I have two prisoners. One on the right. One on the left.
The left one? I brutally torture him. every time he is about to pass out...I just resuscitate him and begin the process all over again. Finally, after a long period of time...he dies.
The right one? I proceed to hit him... with a blunt object... in the face... so hard that he dies.
I'm pretty sure that if I could ask the right guy in the afterlife whether or not he preferred his punishment to the left guy's punishment, for playing poorly in the game of life, he would undoubtedly reply: "yes." Unless of course he was a masochist and was into that sort of stuff...
|
|
|
Post by jaedrik on Sept 1, 2013 19:32:54 GMT -5
the only issue with the nuke was that a lot of people tried it when they had no chance, or would boost for it. It's still pretty fucking fantastic though imo. They must learn to be humble and accept their low streaks. And I agree completely with Dummyen.
|
|
|
Post by aidsaidsaids on Sept 1, 2013 20:26:54 GMT -5
I think that's just semantics. No doubt. Its developer double speak bullshit. "Fu ck you Last Stand!"
|
|
|
Post by Morshu on Sept 2, 2013 20:34:18 GMT -5
No doubt. Its developer double speak bullshit. "Fu ck you Last Stand!" What's funnier is that last stand as it was in cod4/mw2 wasn't even a problem, it was actually pretty weak compared to the other tier 3 perks. It was the BO1 version (second chance) and final stand that were the issues.
|
|
|
Post by aidsaidsaids on Sept 2, 2013 23:04:09 GMT -5
No, all versions of Last Stand were total bullshit. Invulnerability frames have no place in a game with <.2 second ttks, especially when you have to factor ping in. That's all in addition to the variance issues I outlined in the Honey Badger thread. I just bring it up for those of our users with shorter memories. Bucket's scenario (in which the devs say something isn't in the game knowing full well something functionally identical to it is) isn't that far fetched; it has happened before, and relatively recently at that.
|
|
|
Post by Morshu on Sept 3, 2013 0:15:46 GMT -5
No, all versions of Last Stand were total bullsh it. Invulnerability frames have no place in a game with <.2 second ttks, especially when you have to factor ping in. That's all in addition to the variance issues I outlined in the Honey Badger thread. I just bring it up for those of our users with shorter memories. Bucket's scenario (in which the devs say something isn't in the game knowing full well something functionally identical to it is) isn't that far fetched; it has happened before, and relatively recently at that. In mw2 there seemed to be a longer delay getting your pistol out then in BO1's version, and therefore the invulnerability was largely irrelevant. Maybe marvel can give us the exact times if he stops by. I'm not saying I want last stand back but I didn't have a problem with it. Commando and ninja were much more useful then last stand. I guess bowling though said last stand and not second chance because second chance is 3arc's and he would be mocking them if he said that.
|
|
|
Post by jaedrik on Sept 3, 2013 0:35:41 GMT -5
In mw2 there seemed to be a longer delay getting your pistol out then in BO1's version, and therefore the invulnerability was largely irrelevant. Maybe marvel can give us the exact times if he stops by. I'm not saying I want last stand back but I didn't have a problem with it. Commando and ninja were much more useful then last stand. I guess bowling though said last stand and not second chance because second chance is 3arc's and he would be mocking them if he said that. Hmm, if all perks had great opportunity costs, people would have less of a grounds to complain about them. That being said, I was actually that guy in BO1 who used Second Chance and I wrecked with it. Sniping people across the map with my M14 grip when all of the sudden people pop out in front and I go down hard pumping M1911 rounds into them? Yes please, sometimes I even finished off the sniper like that, in fact, quite often. I almost never saw anyone else use it, ever. Oh, and I was under the impression that they reduced the invincibility time from MW2's Last Stand to BO1's Second Chance.
|
|
|
Post by aidsaidsaids on Sept 3, 2013 1:11:15 GMT -5
No, all versions of Last Stand were total bullsh it. Invulnerability frames have no place in a game with <.2 second ttks, especially when you have to factor ping in. That's all in addition to the variance issues I outlined in the Honey Badger thread. I just bring it up for those of our users with shorter memories. Bucket's scenario (in which the devs say something isn't in the game knowing full well something functionally identical to it is) isn't that far fetched; it has happened before, and relatively recently at that. In mw2 there seemed to be a longer delay getting your pistol out then in BO1's version, and therefore the invulnerability was largely irrelevant. Nope. Draw time doesn't matter. Invulnerability frames do. That extra time wastes your ammo and your time; it's not as much about him killing you (he rarely will). His teammates are another story, and you're still dumping extra ammo and not playing the objective while you wait for some autistic sperglord to finish losing the gunfight he lost ages ago (in CoD time). We're talking doubling or more the ttk in some situations. It's pants on head retarded. Not good, absolutely not even close to the same power level as Ninja, just retarded.
|
|
Usagi
True Bro
Grin and Barrett
Posts: 1,674
|
Post by Usagi on Sept 3, 2013 4:01:06 GMT -5
Last Stand was bullshit in CoD4 and MW2 but no one used it so it wasn't really a problem.
|
|