now that the anti terrans are gone

Moving past the stats that suggest otherwise, having used both, and understanding their values...The Prowler has a lot of Edge on the Vanguard at any range. Assuming similar loadouts, 2/2 or 1/2 crew, the Prowler has the advantage. Why? Lockdown. If you're far enough away that you don't have to worry about getting rushed, use it. If you're so close and have a Vulcan Gunner, use it. The Shield is cool, but you'll chew through that thing.

Yes, straw man. I never said it's a "beast" and I never said that this game is "all about MBT vs MBT", so dont try to claim that you're making some sort of honest argument here because you're just building straw men.

As for your "sience" I'm still to see you present any of this proof and numbers that you're "enlightening" us with, all I see is you claiming to be providing proof when infact none as been presented by you. (And no I am not pretending like I'm giving hard facts and numbers here... neither of us have done that but I'm the only one willing to admit it I guess, you'll just keep claiming to be showing us proof when you're not providing any).

And I'll say again, I dont care about these "score per hour" stats and so on, they're pointless. I'm just referring to them because you seem so fond of them. The vanguard with its shield beats a prowler in most scenarios and at most ranges which makes it the better MBT vs MBT tank, that's all I'm saying. I'm not disagreeing about it having a lower "score per hour" and so on as I've said before, I just dont agree that it's an important stat to look at.

And as for the point I was trying to make from the start: You can not use the Vanguard as an example of a BAD / AVERAGE weapon on NC because it's a good tank.

Ok so if you're far away enough to not get rushed and you lock down then how effective is the Vulcan at that range? And if you're that far away the enemy has all the time in the world to back away, unless they're bads that go right out into the open with no plan for how to escape if things go bad for them.

The only real advantage the prowler has is in very close range but most fights between tanks tend to take place at medium to long ranges where the lack of synergy between lock-down and Vulcan really shows.

This was never meant to be a discussion about MBT's in general though, my point was just that I dont think you can use the Vanguard as an example of something the NC has that is bad / below average / average.

Something I failed to mention before because I didnt think this would turn into such a debate is that I when I say Prowler I mean a 2/2 AP / Halberd prowler because the Vulcan + Anchored Mode lacks any kind of synergy and shouldnt be used imo, sure it's got alot of DPS on paper but in most situations that you'll find yourself in you will either be unable to anchor or unable to use the Vulcan effectively.

Anyway this is not what this thread is about so I'll shut up about tank balance now so this thead doesnt get more off topic than it already is.

The numbers are actually widely available. Prowler is in the lead for KPH and VKPH. And KPU and VKPU... Statistically speaking, the prowler is the best tank in the game. That's what he's saying.

He's also not saying it's a bad tank, he's just saying that it is the statistically worst performing tank. He's also saying that even if a shielded vanguard has an edge in 1v1 combat, it doesn't compensate for it's otherwise low performance. Sooooo, what exactly are you arguing?


EDIT: OH! And SPH, good point.

I'd just like a little clarification, why does the Air Hammer need more nerfs, in your view?

Anyone who wants the old Striker back really doesn't give a **** about balance. It hit twice as hard as the Annihilator. If you think that's fine, then please make the Jackhammer do twice the damage of the other shotguns, thanks.

i don't even....


the old striker locked down airplay for VS and NC, TR ruled the sky because it was impossible for VS and NC to get any where near a base owned by TR or a base TR are attacking.

TR will never not be the wrong faction.

The game already has too much pro-NC/VS inertia to change course now after years.
The player base is so used to the bias that ANY effort to make things genuinely fair would cause NC and VS to flip out and rage. They are so used to fighting with the advantage, they are simply unable to recognize they've been in easy mode.

This game RUNS on TR gear being inferior and high TR turnover to keep fresh fodder for the real two fictions to farm. TR is the sacrificial lamb that keeps VS and NC players coming back because it strokes their ego to win. Even though the game is rigged in their favor, as long as they can pretend otherwise, they'll show up to roll TR every time. Self delusion is one hell of a drug, and you have to be pretty self deluded to convince yourself that Lockdown/Anchor mode is an asset. Only an idiot thinks "the enemy standing still so I can hit them easier and put c4 on them is something I gotta beware of".

All people like to win, but some only want the illusion of fair competition, and those people are who now make up the lion's share of NC/VS.

Because it represents an instant kill weapon against infantry, with no time to retaliate or attempt to find cover and because it has more versaility as an A2A weapon. It much like the PPA needs a similar nerf to splash damage.

I should note that the AirHammer needs the least adjustment out of the LPPA and Pre-nerf Banshee.

THAT would set an ESF on fire in one salvo, and I can't remember it doing that - ever.
The old T1 had slightly higher damage - two salvos would KILL an ESF instead of setting it on fire. Thanks to firing 5 rockets instead of 1 its DPS were pretty much the same as the standard G2A launcher.
Velocity and lock-on time might have been different, but thats a long time to remember that - if I would ever have noticed.

Also please remember that this was the time when rockets ******* phaseshifted through mointains to hit you. The striker was not the only one with that "advantage", but thanks to being used a lot it was also more noticeable. It was the only RL that actually felt different - Lancer was being ignored mostly and NC were busy farming infantery from the spawnroom with the Phoenix - even if that got fixed pretty soon.

Somewhere on the forums there is a "PS2 Myths" thread, carry the "Old striker OP" one right over there.
The Striker never did anything the annihilator couldn't do.
"Oh but they locked the air totally down, it was OP as hell" Yes OF COURSE they did! There were TWENTY guys with lock-ons, sometimes even more!! What in the flying **** is supposed to survive that?
I dare you to attack a mountain equipped with similar numbers of annihilators because it won't be ANY different.


That being said - I don't want the old striker back. It is not particularly useful, but it is different. It could use a proximity lock-on to ground vehicles imo, but I don't want the old one back. I have the annihilator for that, and its actually better at it since I dont have to stick my head out for 1.5 seconds just for shooting.

Also trying to knife people 20 m away from you have a higher chance of killing someone than killing people with the CAS

The dramatism from some of these TR players is truly adorable.

Make the striker better. I played PS2 a long time back. Now I choose to get the ground lock on only because the striker is so bad now. I don't need the pre nerf one, I just need a better one. Game developers have been nerfing TR for a while. Time to get stuff back on track.

If you read the forums you can see all the drama coming from NC and vs lots more than tr.

Wasn't there a little adorable thread about NC needing a cqc lmg.
..

Un nerf my Dual Mercies ..and let the slaughter begin....

Have you used the Air Hammer recently? it's not feasible in an anti air, or anti vehicle role at all any more.

While it can be an instant kill weapon against infantry, you have to get Far closer than any other AI weapon for an air vehicle to accomplish this, close enough you cannot react to a missile shot, even if you saw the Heavy preparing their launcher, and using it from further out is just wasting ammunition.

You cannot nerf this weapon more without the equivalent of deleting it entirely, in my opinion. May as well actually, I don't know too many people who have flown for any length of time that will currently chose it over any of the other nose cannons, even for AI work.

It's not an entirely unfair point to make. It's not that the NC doesn't have good CQC LMG options, it's that the NC doesn't really have the same kind of bullet hoses the other factions do, at least in the LMG category. And I suppose I didn't read the thread extensively, but I don't think anyone was trying to make the claim that there is some kind of conspiracy against the players.

ground lock-on is a reasonable choice for ranged AV honestly...

that's not the strikers niche, though it is able to engage ground targets reasonably, it's not it's strong point.

Countering A2G's without dropping resources is it's point.

I hate grabbing my dual burster MAX now. Why? Cause 450 resource hurts when I like to use vehicles. Striker is the best no-resource AA in the game.

As a pilot, G2A lock-ons always make me laugh.

3 strikers would start swatting ESF's without much of a counter other than to see what happened to others and stay the EFF away from that spot.

Unfortunately I'm usually the only Striker, but I get some solid damage in to pair with bursters and skyguards and help get (and sometimes take myself) enemy ESF kills using it a lot.

I get a LOT more Air Deterrence ticks with my Striker than when I use a grounder.

If I recall correctly (and I don't play Terran, so...) the Striker did around 700 damage a missile, and shot 5 missiles for a total of 3500. Other lock on launchers do 1750. I have no idea what the damage resist modifiers are, but I guarantee you it did more than slightly higher damage.

DPS might be similar, but front loading your damage has a significant advantage when your target typically disappears behind cover as soon as it gets hit.

This is interesting....and thank you.