Strikers are OP against air.

[blashyrk]

Nerf Strikers.

[MrMak]

Such a well thought out and constructive thread. Im sure many meaningfull points will be derived from in and it will trigger amn extremaly interesting discussion..........


Now seriosuly, if this is all you got youd best just go to the official SOE forum.

[maradine]

Do I have the mental energy for another Striker thread?

<.<

>.>

[Artimus]

^ lol. Learn to use terrain and flares.

[blashyrk]

To be honest I wrote this while I was ingame and had just died to a Striker whose missiles were following me for about 7-10 seconds before hitting me (5 of 6) and about 4 hexes away from the initial lockon.
So there is your argument, at least make it so that the missiles blow up in the air after maximum of 5 seconds so you can actually run away from them. Right now if you don't have flares ready at the moment a Striker is locking onto you, you are dead or at least on fire.

[ChipMHazard]

Going to give you a chance to make something constructive out of this:/

Edit: Nwm. You should rewrite your OP.

[Galron]

I think racer 3 plus burner tanks will let you outrun them. If you want to outrun missiles without certing flares AND not any of the above, well that would make missiles pretty useless now wouldn't it?

[camycamera]

omfg, GUYZ NERF PLZ IT RUIN TEH GAEMZ DEN WE HAZ TO NERF TEH PHEONIX BECUZ I DIE FRUM IT NERF SOE NAOW

[blashyrk]

Originally Posted by Galron

I think racer 3 plus burner tanks will let you outrun them. If you want to outrun missiles without certing flares AND not any of the above, well that would make missiles pretty useless now wouldn't it?

Yes, but it's basically the same argument people use in favor of Stikers vs MBTs: "Use IR Smoke!". Well the problem is that, by design, if you want to survive a Striker barrage, you need to strip yourself of many other vital MBT/ESF upgrades which is unfair because no other weapon in the game forces you to do so if you play it smart.

I agree with ChipMHazard, I should have elaborated my reasoning in the OP, but like I said, I wrote it in affect immediately after I was raged by the Striker. But that doesn't mean that, at least IMO, I don't have a valid point here.

Having to equip Racer 3 airframe and extended fuel tanks instead of dogfighting/hover aiframe and A2A/A2G missiles just to survive a lock on from a single infantryman when flares are on cooldown is EXACTLY what makes it unfair compared to other G2A weapons in the game. Especially when most TR players know the weapon is too strong and tend to use it a lot, there's a lot of situations where there's a swarm of TR Striker everywhere.

[WSNeo]

Originally Posted by blashyrk

Yes, but it's basically the same argument people use in favor of Stikers vs MBTs: "Use IR Smoke!". Well the problem is that, by design, if you want to survive a Striker barrage, you need to strip yourself of many other vital MBT/ESF upgrades which is unfair because no other weapon in the game forces you to do so if you play it smart.

Sorry, I always run IR Smoke, and vs Strikers I never really have a problem against them. I just play smarter after I realize that there's one or more in the area, and hang near rocks. Keep in mind that my Magrider (OMGHOVERSTRAFEISOP) is certed specifically to hunt tanks (AP rounds, smoke to obscure vision and heat optics to continue barraging enemy tanks behind smoke while they guess where I am) and not a single cert is put into anything that would allow me to farm infantry. If anything I die to dumbfire, phoenix missile or tank rounds more than Strikers. So it's not "unfair", you just want the weapon that you dislike changed before you ever have to adapt to the scenario.

Having to equip Racer 3 airframe and extended fuel tanks instead of dogfighting/hover aiframe and A2A/A2G missiles just to survive a lock on from a single infantryman when flares are on cooldown is EXACTLY what makes it unfair compared to other G2A weapons in the game. Especially when most TR players know the weapon is too strong and tend to use it a lot, there's a lot of situations where there's a swarm of TR Striker everywhere.

I rock Racer 3 and only one point in to flares (I honestly don't think it's worth it to max out yet) to complement my hit-and-run playstyle in both A2A and A2G, you don't need extended fuel tanks to escape missile that are locked on to you if I can survive this this loadout as I am a medicore pilot. Whenever I get a missile lock and my flares are on CD, I simply dip to the nearest mountain/building and fly low and fast until the lock stops (or I'm hit :P). While I would agree that Strikers are very strong, they are fine as is, and you need to learn how to deal with something rather than complain about it because you want to be a jack of all trades at surviving in the air.

[ChipMHazard]

Personally I still think that Strikers should be something other than just lock-on. I've always found them to be boring and most effective against air targets since the lock is easily broken against ground targets. They are probably going to be nightmare to use against ground targets on Hossin.

[GeoGnome]

Wait until the ESF update before saying whether or not they are useless, since lockon mechanics are changing then

[phungus]

Originally Posted by GeoGnome

Wait until the ESF update before saying whether or not they are useless, since lockon mechanics are changing then

I've made my share of striker QQ threads (all justified btw), however the announced ESF update has kinda made Striker complaints pointless.

Strikers are broken balance wise; they give TR an absurd level of air dominance over that the other factions just don't have. They are getting changed, so this is a seemingly irrelevant point now.

[GeoGnome]

Originally Posted by phungus

I've made my share of striker QQ threads (all justified btw), however the announced ESF update has kinda made Striker complaints pointless.

Strikers are broken balance wise; they give TR an absurd level of air dominance over that the other factions just don't have. They are getting changed, so this is a seemingly irrelevant point now.

I use lock-ons a lot, I don't own a striker myself, because it seemed redundant, I already had an annihilator. But, about 90% of my outfit has strikers. When we use them for an AV or AA roll, the success rate is only 50-75% for the entire trap, and they have to be fired in mass, so individual success rates are much lower. I've taken part in COUNTLESS flak traps like that and the most successful weapon at shooting down Aircraft, bar none, is by and far the old bursters, which have now been changed.

I'd still rank a skyguard above a single lock on launcher.

In concept they are rather silly and overpowered as it is now, but having to continue to track your target will mean it's more difficult, and most people can't even Lead their targets with freaking skyguards, so having to get people to track aircraft will probably reduce the number of kills further. Fire and forget is the only thing that makes the striker OP as it is right this moment, because you can't take the damage of the entire clip as assured.... ever. You have to rate each projectile's damage as the only damage you'll cause because most of the time flares are popped, or someone wanders out of range before the found can hit.

[blashyrk]

Originally Posted by GeoGnome

I'd still rank a skyguard above a single lock on launcher.

Of course, but the fact that they're even comparable is pretty much proof that the Striker is very overpowered in the state which it's in right now.

I have high hopes that after GU12 they'll be brought to a state similar to how a single default dumbfire RL does against a Lightning tank.