Reaver - Worth it or not?

[Rightwing]

With the buffing of the AA MAXes, and the Sparrow's Fire and Forget rockets that will chase you clear across a continent, its becoming ever harder to effectively fly a Reaver in battle.

So I ask the community, is the Reaver as effective as it was in beta? Back in beta you could stash nothing but Rocket Pods and a Nano Dispensor with some nanite canisters in the trunk, and fight for hours.

Now you're lucky if you can stay in the air for more than 10 minutes, a typical run for me lasts about 8-10 minutes, killing several ground troops, and getting 10+ hate tells.

So I ask you all, is the Reaver still worth the 4 certs that it once was? Or is it a hunk of junk that should be degraded to 3 cert points? But then what purpose does the Mosquito serve? Would it be brought down to two points?

Does anyone feel the same way?

[Nimbus]

Personally, I really like the Reaver. I have to agree that the dang fire and forget rockets are a pain in the arse though. I think it's still worth 4 cert points though. They have a lot of firepower for a 1 man flying vehicle. With a trunk full of rockets you can really mess things up.

[Vis Armata]

In an air wing, the Reaver is great at air to ground actions, though not as good at air-to-air as the Mosquito (yes, I fly for a major outfit). Given that the Reaver only requires a crew of one, and can effectively attack pretty much anything (infantry, air, and vehicles), an extra cert point is well worth it. The Reaver should not be all-powerful - the MAX boosts are an important check on swarms of Reavers.

[Kornflake�]

Originally posted by TheRealPSJunkie
is the Reaver as effective as it was in beta?

The reaver is only as effective as it's pilot!

We may have a few extra things to worry about when flying now, but where's the fun without the challenge?

-Kornflake�

[nonentity]

Yes it's worth it.

Just learn to fly (what? You expect to be able to hover over a base and rain rockets down without being shot?)

Oh, and the Sparrow is easy to lose (I'm a VS player, you get used to dodging missile locks :)

[321]

I think the reaver is totally worth the 4 certs.

[Nimbus]

QUOTE]So I ask the community, is the Reaver as effective as it was in beta? Back in beta you could stash nothing but Rocket Pods and a Nano Dispensor with some nanite canisters in the trunk, and fight for hours.[/QUOTE]

It sounds like the Reaver used to be a veritable Angel of Death. Granted, a lone Reaver is a target and often doesn't last long, but squads are pretty fearsome.

Here's a tip. Think about it from somebody who's NOT in a Reaver. Moving reaver's are tough to hit and tough to take down. As soon as they feel the heat they get the hell out of the kitchen and regroup. The last thing any force wants is an enemy reaver zooming around where there is no ant-aircraft support. Reavers have more than enough fire power to tear up light vehicles and infantry and more than enough speed to get the hell out when things get rough or the ammo gets low.

If a halfway decent reaver pilot could dodge most anti-aircraft fire and get away from fire and forget rockets, then what really could you do against them? They'd be the perfect weapon. When you have weaponry that decimates them, then you have a good set of checks and balances.

The reaver is still one of the best aircraft, if not the best and it's still worth 4 points. You just have to either avoid anti-aircraft units or rely on your own heavy support team to try and take them out for you.

[SandTrout]

My opinion is that the Reaver is worth MORE than 4 cert points. It's the second fastest/most menuverable vehicle in the game, It has just about the most firepower available to any aircraft(and most ground vehicles), and more armor than a light tank.

I've flown the reaver and fought against them, and while the reavers power is limited by the pilot's intelegence/sklill, so is every other weapon in this game. It is deffinately the most powerful and useful combat vehicle in the game.
Now you're lucky if you can stay in the air for more than 10 minutes, a typical run for me lasts about 8-10 minutes, killing several ground troops, and getting 10+ hate tells. Do you know how long an infantry that has spent 8+ cert poinst to be an effective grunt lasts in a combat zone? They're lucky to last 3 minutes and can't run from the battle effectively to heal/repair.

Tired of grief, stop shooting explosives near friendlies. Try it, it helps tons.

[Incompetent]

My personal feeling is an ungodly cheap weapon platform that needs to be nerfed to hell or axed completely with the skeeter given a minor buff (2 atg bombs or something.)

It's the second fastest, second most maneuverable, most heavily armed and most heavily armored single person combat vehicle in the game, all that for a grand total of four cert points. Boo fucking hoo there's one unit on each side that can combat you effectively, spend a day in the trenches and see how long you live with the god damned angel of death over your shoulder.

[PallarAndersVis]

it just depends on how you fly the reaver. I see people all the time that just stop and hover above a base and shoot aimlessly. Sure they might get better aim, but that leaves them as an open target for ANYthing. I have killed alot of reavers by just using the rocket rifle (remember, no locks on this) The dumb reaver pilot just hovers in one spot, and i start shooting at him and boom, they are deaed.


if you are going to fly the reaver, DO NOT STOP IN MID AIR. Thats the dumbest thing you can do and just leaves you as an open target

[Hamma]

Reaver owns.

[scarpas]

quote: Do you know how long an infantry that has spent 8+ cert poinst to be an effective grunt lasts in a combat zone? They're lucky to last 3 minutes and can't run from the battle effectively to heal/repair.

definety true;) although the fact that you can ony get it at places linked too tech facils shoud bring it down to three certs
:trrocks: :ncsucks: :vssucks:

[Phaden]

i agree with pallerandvis, easy kills with the rocket rifle when they stand still. If they are moving i am lucky to hit with 2 out of 6 shots wile leading!

[Veteran]

The Mosquito owns Reaver for so many reasons:

1: No tech tree requirements
2: The true king of the skies, aka the premier dueling craft
3: Overflight Radar -- nuff said
4: Radar-invisible, no getting shot by Phalanx turrets
5: 3 certs, not 4 - can make or break a template

Buff Mosquito? No need. Nerf Reaver? Unwise. Check your vehicle kills and you'll likely find you've killed more Reavers than other vehicle types - not because they're necessarily overabundant, but because they have huge vulnerabilities to common battlefield assets.

/just my opinion

[Caspertoo]

Reaver kicks ass.....but you have to know how to use it now.

Sparrow is total BS, those fire and forget missles scream newbie each time they hit you. Sparrow was good enough before.

For me my main character is a reaver/grunt and because of the reaver I have over 850 kills and I'm only just got BR 12. Thats over 400 more than the average for my BR.

On average I usually only get one or two passes before i have to afterburn away and repair, but thats ok because I'll kill 2-3 guys each pass.

So yes I think the reaver is worth the cert points but only if you get engineer too. So really IMO the reaver costs 7 cert points not 4.

[Sputty]

Reavers are better now. Before the NC had air dominance(The Striker was pretty easy to shake and the VS AA MAX was easy too, the TR AA is only useful in stand off situations) and now the VS are much more balanced. Anyway, Reavers have and always will be the solo murdering machine.

[ghost018]

It's kinda' hard to find a good dogfight without it being interrupted by AA fire, friend or foe, but I don't think I'll ever forget the cert unless a better Fighter is released.

ghost

[AcidCat]

Reaver is the best vehicle in the game IMO, easily worth 4 certs. Excellent firepower without depending on a gunner. Speed and being airborne mean you can easily evade groundbased enemies when in trouble ... I just love this thing.

[BDMJ]

Reavers are good, but they are not quite the murder machines some make them out to be.

Because all empires now have good AA capabilities, it is nearly impossible to launch a reaver strike without infantry or tank support. Not that this is a bad thing :rolleyes:

Against a imbalanced force, with little AA equipment, reavers are deadly. Against small groups of infantry, reavers are deadly. Against other aircraft, well you get the picture.

For 4 certs you get the most complete AA/AV/AI package in the game with a great deal of mobility thrown in on the side.

[SandTrout]

The only thing I would like to see done to the reaver is a nerf to it's armor. As is, it has more armor than the lightning, the light tank of the game.

This is just retarded that an airborn vehicle about the size of a enforcer/marauder has more armor and firepower than a tank. If my logic is flawed, someone please point it out.

[slytiger]

The reaver can easily be taken down bye a aa max or even a infantry aa guy(ive only seen this going against tr and vs cause im only nc). The reaver shouldnt lose armor but the lightnin should gain some armor.

[Nimbus]

I agree with that. I've taken out Reavers with my supressor before and I was taken down by somebody with an assault rifle before too. The armor is good where it's at, the lightning just needs more.

[BDMJ]

I think the armor is fine based on cert cost and battlefield visibility. The reaver is always a target, as it cannot use forests as cover effectively, and only has direct fire weapons. The lightning has more options for cover, and has a weapon that does not need line of sight to hit.

[J3Ff]

Why the hell do people think that the sparrow's missles are fire and forget? Is it because they only test them in the vr with stationary targets? If your target is even remotely moving, you must keep your tracer on it or your missles *WILL* become dumbfire and *WILL* miss its target.

[ghost018]

Why do people think they're Fire and Forget? Spork and other Devs have described in that way. Sure, you can't fire at an Aircarft and then look at the ground....but it's lock is a lot easier to acheive than the Striker.

ghost

[Flammey]

Why do people think Reaver has too much armor? It takes 7 hits from a Lancer to kill it, compared to the Liberator, which I believe needed 15 shots to take it down. The only time I've even killed a Liberator is when it was on the ground. Those are damn near on impossible to shoot out of the air with a Lancer. You TR have it easy with your Strikers. 3 missles that can lock on target. Sure we have a bigger clip, but we have to lead the target constantly, you only need to point with your reticule. So why does the Reaver need less armor?

[J3Ff]

Originally posted by ghost018
Why do people think they're Fire and Forget? Spork and other Devs have described in that way. Sure, you can't fire at an Aircarft and then look at the ground....but it's lock is a lot easier to acheive than the Striker.

ghost Maybe I am misunderstanding your/the devs definition of "forget". By forget do you mean just following the reaver after you shoot your missles and not doing anything else?

[ChewyLSB]

It still takes five strikers to take out one reaver, and god knows how many strikers it take to take out one liberator. If it was a one on one, a guy with a striker and a guy with a reaver, the striker would STILL need to reload once, AND we would use up more ammo. (Our ammo comes in packs of three, your's are in packs of 6). We would use up one clip and two/third's of another, but you would use up one clip and one SIXTH of another.

[BDMJ]

Having enough ammo for the striker is never an issue for the TR because every one of you has one of the goddamn things!

[AcidCat]

Originally posted by BDMJ
. The reaver is always a target, as it cannot use forests as cover effectively,

Hehe, I beg to differ. I usually use my Reaver in true gunship form - hugging the terrain. Sure you'll get killed by the occasional tree, but with practice you can use the terrain as great cover. Sure you'll hit the occasional mine, but it's worth it to avoid AA - come in right above the turf and surprise the enemy, then boost back down into the jungle/canyons.

Effective and fun.:D

[BDMJ]

That statement was meant to be taken in comparison to the lightning.

[Nimbus]

Originally posted by AcidCat
Hehe, I beg to differ. I usually use my Reaver in true gunship form - hugging the terrain. Sure you'll get killed by the occasional tree, but with practice you can use the terrain as great cover. Sure you'll hit the occasional mine, but it's worth it to avoid AA - come in right above the turf and surprise the enemy, then boost back down into the jungle/canyons.

Effective and fun.:D

Hmmm... I'll have to try this. I was doing tricks last night, flying through bases and such so I guess if not travelling too fast you could hug the ground effectively. It would make it a lot easier to hit ground targets....although in pitched battles it would make you a big target....

[Rightwing]

I just picked Reaver back up, and I've noticed most of my fellow pilots use it as an aerial turret, they camp up in the air and pivot while shooting.

But I love to stay above Liberators going on bombing runs, and unloading a pod while leading them, scares the pilot, bomber, and tail gunner (if there is one).

They usually take off toward the ground and the AA MAXes take over from there, but its alot of fun being a pilot.

But I hate the ones who have their mouse sensitivity so low they have to move across their mouse pad twelve times to do a 180 degree turn.

But the Reaver is still alot of fun.

[Happy lil Elf]

It's not easier to find cover in a Lightning than a reaver. Anything a Lightning can use for cover a reaver can, but the reaver can get to that cover at a faster speed and by a shorter route in many cases. Reavers can do as much if not more damage than a Lightning, move faster and are more manuverable. The only thing that really limits them is the relatively small amount of ammo they carry in comparison.

Personally I think a Lightning should be smack dab in the middle of a Reaver and a Medium tank as far as armor goes. However I've learned to compensate for my Lightning's lack of armor so /shrug

[Madcow]

Originally posted by BDMJ
Having enough ammo for the striker is never an issue for the TR because every one of you has one of the goddamn things!

I swear, it seems like every time I play my char with the AV cert there's only a couple of others firing the Striker at any point in time (if at all). If I use my alt without the AV cert it seems like 90% of the time I'm standing in the middle of nowhere in my infil gear hoping a TR will fire a few Striker rounds at the Mossy hovering right above me keeping me from moving, with nobody ever firing a single shot.

You figure ~25% of the TR have the cert, then you have to figure that most TR have special loadouts which they don't normally use because of the massive amount of inventory room that the ammo takes. I'd guess that at most 10-15% of the TR on a battlefield have the weapon in their inventories at any point in time, although that would still be more than NC (18.8%) or VS (15.4%) have AV certs.

Then you see the massive differential in HA with NC and VS both at 32% and the TR at 21.5%. Couple that with our AA MAX which is far more situational than the other empires, and it becomes pretty obvious why our AV is necessary.

[Queensidecastle]

funny, Thottbot has TR with 51% of the players with the Striker. Thats far more than in any other empire. Fairly obvious why that is though

http://www.thottbot.com/planetside/2003-08-31/20/



http://stats.planetsidegaming.com/16/401225/stats.png
http://stats.planetsidegaming.com/15/484930/stats.png

[BDMJ]

*shrug* I always had an easier time getting my lightning under cover than my reaver. It could just be me though.


Regarding the striker: Perception in this case wins. Every time I'm in a vehicle or max, I can't find a safe spot if I'm anywhere near the TR. Of course when I'm looking to get a striker for a teammate, its next to impossible to find one.

[Vowels]

I notice most (but not all) of the pro-reaver comments are made by TR, hehe.

I've never been able to make the reaver work for me, even though I'm usually pretty good at most "strictly" flying games, but I've seen and felt it being deadly in the right hands.

Also, I've played a Sparrow in the past and its not quite as effective as everyone makes it out to be. It IS the best of the AA maxes, but I have a lot more success against air targets with the striker when I play TR.

Frankly, I think it should be worth 5 pts to a TR pilot and 4 to NC and 3 to Vanu, simply due to the balance of anti air capability.

It is a powerful weapon, but I've shot down too many stupid pilots with a tank round to believe any old newbie can fly it with skill, and I've taken way too many striker hits while flying it to believe that flying against terrans with it is profitable without great skill. Don't tell me strikers are less effective than sparrows or other AA either. I can fire 3 shots in the air and then target any vehicle or max and have it either dead or nearly, within 1 to 2 seconds after I target it. Most good TR striker-users know to do that, too.

[BlackWorm]

Originally posted by Queensidecastle
funny, Thottbot has TR with 51% of the players with the Striker. Thats far more than in any other empire. Fairly obvious why that is though


No, you're looking at stats for BR20 players. If you look at ALL players, only 25% of TR have the cert, compared to 19% and 15% of NC and VS. If you look at BR10+, which represents the majority of active players, the numbers are 35%, 25%, amd 22% for TR, NC, and VS respectively.

Now compare that to 32% of ALL VS and NC having Heavy Assault, compared to 21.5% of TR... For BR10+ it's 28% for TR and 42% for VS/NC. Most of the important combat goes on inside bases...

[MuNsTeR]

I dont think its worth 4 certs.. I'm an NC and we have the worst AV gun so in my opinion when i had it i forgot it ASAP

:ncrocks: :trsucks: :vssucks:
:hitit:

[Queensidecastle]

No, you're looking at stats for BR20 players. If you look at ALL players, only 25% of TR have the cert, compared to 19% and 15% of NC and VS. If you look at BR10+, which represents the majority of active players, the numbers are 35%, 25%, amd 22% for TR, NC, and VS respectively.

why the hell would you look at the all players stats. Anyone that knows anything about statistics can tell you that including all players up to around BR 10 isnt even a proper measure of AV since AV is about the 4th or 5th used cert across the board.

Analyzing what the BR 20s do however is much more acurate. Such a sampling from the experienced players shows you what actually works and is favored by the good players in the game. In short, it doesnt make any difference whatsoever what BR1-3s do since you can never leave the Sanctuary and gain BR3. Those figures simply pollute the stats.

Proper analysis shows that for the experienced gamers, the Striker is almost 2 to 1 favored over the others and its pretty obvious this is so w/out even looking at the numbers


http://stats.planetsidegaming.com/16/401225/stats.png
http://stats.planetsidegaming.com/15/484930/stats.png

[Aegis]

Ooh, i love hunting reaver with my sparrow, the ones that stay still as you lock onto the amuse me, or the ones that try and rocket you from range, they just dont stand a chance.

[BlackWorm]

Originally posted by Queensidecastle
why the hell would you look at the all players stats. Anyone that knows anything about statistics can tell you that including all players up to around BR 10 isnt even a proper measure of AV since AV is about the 4th or 5th used cert across the board.


Which is why I also presented statistics on BR10+ players. In your previous post you claimed 51% "of the players" used AV, you didn't specify that you were only looking at BR20. That was quite misleading, and so I was moved to correct you.


Analyzing what the BR 20s do however is much more acurate. Such a sampling from the experienced players shows you what actually works and is favored by the good players in the game. In short, it doesnt make any difference whatsoever what BR1-3s do since you can never leave the Sanctuary and gain BR3. Those figures simply pollute the stats.


Even if I agreed with you, it should be clear that BR1-3 do not "pollute" the BR10+ stats, which I also quoted for comparison.


Proper analysis shows that for the experienced gamers, the Striker is almost 2 to 1 favored over the others and its pretty obvious this is so w/out even looking at the numbers


If you consider only BR20's to be experienced gamers, then what you say is correct. But how would that is obvious without looking at the numbers? Do you actually notice in game that more TR BR20's use AV than other BR20's? That would take quite a good eye, to see that backpack behind each Striker. Even if true, is it relevant given the tiny number of BR20's compared to other ranks?

No, it's not. You are making a typical flawed argument -- using a set of data about one exclusive group of people (BR20s) to draw conclusions about another group (everyone). It's particularly disingenuous here where the data for the other group is readily available, and you choose to ignore it.

In any case, there could be many reasons why TR BR20's choose AV that don't support a conclusion that the Striker is a better weapon than the Phoenix or Lancer. Maybe the lower ranks don't choose enough of them, so the BR20's must compensate. Maybe other empires use more vehicles (especially tanks) and so there is more of a need for AV among TR players. Maybe they like to have AV because they've given up on killing infantry with heavy assault the way NC and VS do. Who knows.

[Queensidecastle]

Are you a blockhead or something? The striker is the best AV weapon, everyone knows this.

[BlackWorm]

Originally posted by Queensidecastle
Are you a blockhead or something? The striker is the best AV weapon, everyone knows this.

No, but apparently you are not up to my level of critical analysis, nor my level of debate. Once you understand basic first order logic, call me.

For now, keep thinking that since the sky is blue, then germany is in europe (and point someone to an atlas when they disagree with your "analysis").

[Queensidecastle]

oh nos, your a funny guy1!!11

Denial is fun, can I play too?

A) It is common knowledge that the striker is by far the best AV
B) There are far more striker users than any other AV
C) The Striker WILL get nerfed in some fashon when the ballance changes go in

so keep it up, it is quite amusing

[Nimbus]

Originally posted by Vowels
I notice most (but not all) of the pro-reaver comments are made by TR, hehe.

I've never been able to make the reaver work for me, even though I'm usually pretty good at most "strictly" flying games, but I've seen and felt it being deadly in the right hands.

Also, I've played a Sparrow in the past and its not quite as effective as everyone makes it out to be. It IS the best of the AA maxes, but I have a lot more success against air targets with the striker when I play TR.

Frankly, I think it should be worth 5 pts to a TR pilot and 4 to NC and 3 to Vanu, simply due to the balance of anti air capability.

It is a powerful weapon, but I've shot down too many stupid pilots with a tank round to believe any old newbie can fly it with skill, and I've taken way too many striker hits while flying it to believe that flying against terrans with it is profitable without great skill. Don't tell me strikers are less effective than sparrows or other AA either. I can fire 3 shots in the air and then target any vehicle or max and have it either dead or nearly, within 1 to 2 seconds after I target it. Most good TR striker-users know to do that, too.


Yeah, the Reaver can be hard to manage. I'm actually considering moving to land vehicles because I have such bad luck with the aerial ones. At least until I get a pc upgrade.

[BDMJ]

If you want a fun air vehicle go with the liberator. It takes a fair amount of practice and restraint to not dodge wildly and to give your tail gunner and bomber the angles they need, but it's well worth it.

[Nimbus]

Heh, yeah, I've ridden in the liberator pleanty of times. It is a really fun vehicle.

I've also noticed a lot of liberator pilots don't know how to pilot them right. The last 2 times I was in one the pilot was flying too low to bomb and we got explodimated by Reavers.

[nonentity]

Originally posted by BlackWorm
No, but apparently you are not up to my level of critical analysis, nor my level of debate. Once you understand basic first order logic, call me.

For now, keep thinking that since the sky is blue, then germany is in europe (and point someone to an atlas when they disagree with your "analysis").

Although I agree, I also think that 'everyone knows it' is a valid point (albeit not in the context uses).

Everyone 'knows' that the striker is the best weapon, so everybody has it. However, I've found (from personal experience) that different AV weapons are all equally useful, but in different situations.

The common 'knowledge' has (imo) as much effect on the number of players with a cert as the actual strength of the weapon.

[Rightwing]

If you sit up on the ceiling like a Liberator, you can face downward and unload several rockets at your targets, from way up high, due to the long range.

You can unload an entire pod of rockets onto an enemy vehicle pad from the ceiling and get away with little to no damage.

[BlackWorm]

Originally posted by nonentity
Everyone 'knows' that the striker is the best weapon, so everybody has it. However, I've found (from personal experience) that different AV weapons are all equally useful, but in different situations.


So what you're saying is, those who "know" it's the best AV weapon may be incorrect.


The common 'knowledge' has (imo) as much effect on the number of players with a cert as the actual strength of the weapon.

It's a definite factor. But we can't know precisely why more TR get the AV cert than other empires, we can only make guesses. You can go around using words like "obvious" to describe the situation, but that's not a valid, logical explanation.

For the last time, for people who are slow (not you, nonentity):

- It may well be that the Striker is the best AV weapon, but it is a matter of opinion and opinions on the subject vary

- The TR do use AV more than other Empires (though not nearly 2 to 1)

- About 25% of TR players have AV, or 35% of those BR10 or above. Of those players, not all will be carrying a Striker at all times.

And most importantly:

- The fact that more TR use AV than other empires does not imply that the Striker is the best AV weapon. It may suggest it, but it does not imply it. Learn the difference between the two words.

Again, one possible contributing factor is the use of vehicles by other empires. According to Thott, the VS use tanks twice as much as the TR -- this huge discrepancy in tank use between VS and TR (greater than the difference in AV use) could have caused a backlash in which TR are forced to get AV to counter all the Magriders.

Another possible explanation is the gap in Heavy Assault effectiveness -- the TR having the weakest HA weapon, as measured by time to kill. (The MCG weakness is also suggested by the lower numbers of TR certing HA.) The TR players may be attempting to compensate for their lack of infantry superiority by focussing on eliminating vehicles. Or, they may simply be choosing AV instead of HA because their HA weapon sucks, not because their AV weapon is particularly good.

When people like Queenie here ignore all of this, and flatly claim that Striker is the best AV, that's fine. It's an opinion. But when the same people actually claim to have a logical argument that proves that Striker is the best AV, I am the one laughing when I tear their silly "analysis" down.

[Queensidecastle]

Its so funny that while playing Professor, you didnt even think about the mean BR in which most people start to use AV. Your flawed analisys assumes that all certs are held in equal reguard and that a BR3 is as likely to spend his points getting AV as he would Medium assault for example. This just isnt the case. The stats show AV increases its popularity as a cert as the BR increases

At BR10+ AV is the 11th most popular cert which means most people that are in the BR1 to 14 catagory are giving AV low priority. The statistics show that most people are waiting till "later" to incorporate AV into thier arsenal. 31% of all the TR players in Planetside are BR15 and AV rises to 7th place for its popularity as a cert and only increases from there while it does not do this for the other houses. This illustrates a couple of things. Measuring the higher BR provides more meaningfull data on AV since it isnt considered a critical cert at lower levels, Also it shows that AV follows a curve except for TR AV which defenatly does not.

Therefore, it is not just a matter of opinion as to wheather the Striker is the best AV. It is just a fact as the numbers clearly show. Now environmental factors that may contribute to the reason a statistically significant larger ammount of TR have the AV cert than the other houses is a seperate argument, but I godamn guarantee you it isnt because they want to loot Phoenixes.

I have my own theories as to why this is the case, the greatest of which is that it is the only AA that doesnt have a 5 minute timer on it and that is available at an AMS. Usefull? I think so, and so do 51% of TR at BR 20

Checkmate

[BlackWorm]

I have to laugh. There are so many contradictions, factual errors and leaps in logic in your last post that I don't even know where to begin pulling it apart. But hey, since it's clear you won't admit to being wrong on any counts, consider yourself the "winner" if that helps you face the morning. I can't really explain things to you any slower than I have already -- maybe someone trained in Special Ed. could continue where I left off, but I just don't have the patience.

[Queensidecastle]

lolz

[Intruder]

Originally posted by Queensidecastle

I have my own theories as to why this is the case, the greatest of which is that it is the only AA that doesnt have a 5 minute timer on it and that is available at an AMS. Usefull? I think so, and so do 51% of TR at BR 20

Checkmate


Checkmate, I dont think so, you state "I have my own theorys" that is all they are, they are not indefinate proof, niether are they concreate facts, instead you are going of your gut feeling, your opinions, your beliefs. That is great to hear your ideas and opinions, but in no way can you ever claim "This is why". Maybe once you have interviewed each player, or at least a high percentage of the population.

A census would be your only redeeming facts, that would make the statement a hardcore fact, until then, make sure you label your rantings as "your opinion" and maybe add "This is what drew me to my own conclusion"


Now.... BACK TO TOPIC


Being a feavered pilot in game (my main character is Gal girl extrodinare) and my other character is part of the Phoenix Legion air force (with reaver/skeet/lib certs)

The reaver is well worth the 4 points, but I dont se it being the all round best flying vehicle. IMO it has a specific duty, as do each of the flying vehicles, our airforce commander made a mistake initially, asking everyone to grab reavers, as he did belive they are the best, only afterwards, did he realize that a complete airforce needs not one type of vehicle but all 3 air attack vehicles (or if you use the Gal like I do all 4 ;) )

In reply to the best vehicle for soloing, IMO I used to use the reaver over any other, but these days I will grab my skeet before my reaver, why? I am seeing more and more air vehicles, and more anti air, and I am able to stay alive alot longer in my skeet.

To answer the original question. IMO Yes its worth 4 points.


Have a nice day ;)