168 réponses à ce sujet

[HolyAvenger]

I like the Saber on a lot of kits. Damn that gun sounds like sex.

[jlee375]

Feel-wise I love burst-fire AR, so if I had a Valkyrie X, I would definitely use it more often than the harrier. I only use the harrier on one or two kits anyway.

[GriM_AoD]

I prefer the Valkyrie over the Harrier.

Personal preference

[Constipator369]

I fail to find using the same gun all the time fun. Even if I had a Harrier at X and Valkyrie at I, I would use the Valkyrie pretty often. I would use the Harrier as well, but same for other guns. I find fun in variety.

[N7 Whiskey]

I personally prefer precision weapons, which is why when I do use an AR it it is typically the Saber. When I get the Valkyrie to a level that doesn't weigh so damned much, then yes I will absolutely use it over the Harrier.

[stysiaq]

Because Harrier gets old, just as every other gun.

The same argument can (and was) raised against any other gun.

"Why would you ever use Saber if you have the Harrier!?!?!"

Lets assume that BPP is introduced to the MP, and oh my, oh my, IT IS WEAKER THAN THE HARRIER.

Will Stardusk create a thread "why would you ever use BPP X over the Harrier X" ? Place your bets.

[MajorStupidity]

I would trade my harrier V for even just one upgrade for the Valkyrie. I just hate using the harrier, but it probably is more effective. Really enjoy the Valkyrie and hoping the get it to a higher level (only II right now).

[Arctican]

On Condor and if just between those two guns, Valkryie anyday. I had a UUP game on Condor with a Harrier. Probably spent more time finding ammo than killing stuff. Was so envious of my PPR-wielding buddies.

[Shrakelle]

Yeah I would use it if it were also a high level.

[Steppdaddy2]

I mean, yes the harrier can obviously dish out some great damage- but man it is a boring gun to use.

To answer your question Star, Yes I would. Although my harrier is IX and I don't have a Valk, I prefer the Typhoon, PPR, and especially the Saber (IMO best assault rifle). I think gun mechanics are what make using weapons fun.

[Jay_Hoxtatron]

stysiaq wrote...

Because Harrier gets old, just as every other gun.

The same argument can (and was) raised against any other gun.

"Why would you ever use Saber if you have the Harrier!?!?!"

Lets assume that BPP is introduced to the MP, and oh my, oh my, IT IS WEAKER THAN THE HARRIER.

Will Stardusk create a thread "why would you ever use BPP X over the Harrier X" ? Place your bets.

Because the BPP is as good as the Hurricane, I don't think Stardusk would make a thread about it.

[TommyNg]

There is too much harrier ,boring to see only harrier on gold , need to buff other AR especially typhoon

[SandeProElite]

The Valkyrie has a lot more spare ammo which comes handy in solos and Platinum.

[Tybo]

Steppdaddy2 wrote...

I mean, yes the harrier can obviously dish out some great damage- but man it is a boring gun to use.

To answer your question Star, Yes I would. Although my harrier is IX and I don't have a Valk, I prefer the Typhoon, PPR, and especially the Saber (IMO best assault rifle). I think gun mechanics are what make using weapons fun.

The difference is that the Typhoon, PPR, and Saber are all objectively excellent weapons.  The Valkyrie is not.  In addition, those guns function very differently than the Harrier.  The Valkyrie is directly comparable to the Harrier, with similar damage per shot, clip size, and accuracy.  The difference is that the Valkyrie has a much lower effective fire rate than the Harrier in exchange for spare ammo.  In addition, you need to spam the trigger (annoying to most people)

To use the Valkyrie over the Harrier is like using the Mattock over the Harrier.  You can do okay with it, but it is very clearly the inferior option.

Modifié par tyhw, 15 décembre 2012 - 06:07 .

[ImDedicatedToMyApologies]

I just unlocked my valkyrie from commendation pack this morning at 3...

[ToaOrka]

I despise the Harrier, so yeah, I would.

[Zjarcal]

mrcanada wrote...

If you have a Harrier X, there's little reason to use any other weapon. It's undoubtedly the best weapon in the game. 

I have a Harrier X and I still use the GPR.

I'm a hipster like that. 

Now my Wraith X on the other hand... there's a gun that I'm having problems not wanting to put on every character. 

[Poison_Berrie]

tyhw wrote...

To use the Valkyrie over the Harrier is like using the Mattock over the Harrier.  You can do okay with it, but it is very clearly the inferior option.

I disagree. 
If I were to take a Mattock in the game instead of a Harrier my playstyle and the way I'd use the weapon would change drastically. The same goes for the Valkyrie.
With the Mattock and especially the Valkyrie I make sure that each shot hits, I take more time and effort to keep the head in sight.
With the Harrier I press the trigger and let the bullets fly, aiming more centre mass over longer distances and closer by near the headmass, caring less if where every bullet hits as long as it hits the target.

[Maria Caliban]

Yes, I would.

[darkblade]

tyhw wrote...

Steppdaddy2 wrote...

I mean, yes the harrier can obviously dish out some great damage- but man it is a boring gun to use.

To answer your question Star, Yes I would. Although my harrier is IX and I don't have a Valk, I prefer the Typhoon, PPR, and especially the Saber (IMO best assault rifle). I think gun mechanics are what make using weapons fun.

The difference is that the Typhoon, PPR, and Saber are all objectively excellent weapons.  The Valkyrie is not.  In addition, those guns function very differently than the Harrier.  The Valkyrie is directly comparable to the Harrier, with similar damage per shot, clip size, and accuracy.  The difference is that the Valkyrie has a much lower effective fire rate than the Harrier in exchange for spare ammo.  In addition, you need to spam the trigger (annoying to most people)

To use the Valkyrie over the Harrier is like using the Mattock over the Harrier.  You can do okay with it, but it is very clearly the inferior option.

your making no sense, the valkyrie is in no way directly comparable to the harrier in any way other than weight.

That right there is why people hate the gun, their are comparing it to the harrier, when it was made for players who like weapons like the vindicator and the argus.

The only thing that keeps the valkyrie from being excellent is that many players don't like to try. The only thing wrong with the Valkyrie is that its refire time is a little slow, but its still the fastest burst fire AR.

Modifié par darkblade, 15 décembre 2012 - 07:00 .

[megabeast37215]

Only for variety. Its decent but not grea

[STRANGE10VE]

MastahDisastah wrote...

tyhw wrote...

Steppdaddy2 wrote...

I mean, yes the harrier can obviously dish out some great damage- but man it is a boring gun to use.

To answer your question Star, Yes I would. Although my harrier is IX and I don't have a Valk, I prefer the Typhoon, PPR, and especially the Saber (IMO best assault rifle). I think gun mechanics are what make using weapons fun.

The difference is that the Typhoon, PPR, and Saber are all objectively excellent weapons.  The Valkyrie is not.  In addition, those guns function very differently than the Harrier.  The Valkyrie is directly comparable to the Harrier, with similar damage per shot, clip size, and accuracy.  The difference is that the Valkyrie has a much lower effective fire rate than the Harrier in exchange for spare ammo.  In addition, you need to spam the trigger (annoying to most people)

To use the Valkyrie over the Harrier is like using the Mattock over the Harrier.  You can do okay with it, but it is very clearly the inferior option.

QFT, except the mattock weights 0.9, which can be good for someone with good fingers.
Also, valkyrie has less spare ammo than the harrier...180 => 90 shots of 2 rounds, its ammo lasts longer because of the refire time and the multiple reloads (12 clips vs harriers 6), but it's more dead time, which is bad.


Interesting fact: the valkyrie refire time is 0.25 seconds, its rof is 600, which means the actual refire time should be 0.1 to be in line with the rof; with 0.25 you waste 0.15 for each 2 shots burst, meaning 0.15*196/2 = 14.7 seconds firing all the shots.
If you fire all the shots reload cancelling every time you'll need 42,3 seconds to empty the whole gun...14,7 of which are wasted by the extra refire time. More than 1/3 of the overall firing time is dead time.

Awesome! 

EDIT
Proposal: lower the valkyrie weight from 1.75-1.25 to 1.5-1.0 or reduce the refire time from 0.25 to 0.15 seconds.

I'd like to see the refire time buff you suggested and a magazine size increase or drop the weight so it would be viable on casters.  Got a feeling it's going to take multiple buffs, like the eagle, to make this gun competitive.

[Tybo]

darkblade wrote...

tyhw wrote...

Steppdaddy2 wrote...

I mean, yes the harrier can obviously dish out some great damage- but man it is a boring gun to use.

To answer your question Star, Yes I would. Although my harrier is IX and I don't have a Valk, I prefer the Typhoon, PPR, and especially the Saber (IMO best assault rifle). I think gun mechanics are what make using weapons fun.

The difference is that the Typhoon, PPR, and Saber are all objectively excellent weapons.  The Valkyrie is not.  In addition, those guns function very differently than the Harrier.  The Valkyrie is directly comparable to the Harrier, with similar damage per shot, clip size, and accuracy.  The difference is that the Valkyrie has a much lower effective fire rate than the Harrier in exchange for spare ammo.  In addition, you need to spam the trigger (annoying to most people)

To use the Valkyrie over the Harrier is like using the Mattock over the Harrier.  You can do okay with it, but it is very clearly the inferior option.

your making no sense, the valkyrie is in no way directly comparable to the harrier in any way other than weight.

That right there is why people hate the gun, their are comparing it to the harrier, when it was made for players who like weapons like the vindicator and the argus.

The only thing that keeps the valkyrie from being excellent is that many players don't like to try. The only thing wrong with the Valkyrie is that its refire time is a little slow, but its still the fastest burst fire AR.

Like the argus?  And you say I make no sense...  The Argus has high damage bursts and a long wait in between.  If you stabilize it and shoot accurately, it is like a bad version of the saber.  The Valkyrie, with its relatively low damage bursts and short refire time, functions very similarly to a full auto weapon.  You have to sustain fire to maximize its damage, unlike the Argus and Saber which are bursty weapons.  The Valkyrie doesn't do enough damage in one burst to kill anything, so you will need to essentially rapid fire it to kill things.

[bendermac]

valkyrie hurts my fingers. so no... it's in my trashbin anyway