yea it has really poor lock-on range :/ most of the time you would be using it with dumbfire since the enemy knows it has a short range so they stay out there and gun you down
I know I'm late to the party, but I just want to throw in another vote for the Hawk. During beta I had the chance to try them both and the Hawk won by a mile. It shoots straight with little drop for ground targets and it makes the fighters break and run. True, you may not take too many out of the air, but that one that is zoning in on your squad's Sunderer will run like hell when they see that lock on get them. I have repelled wave after wave of incoming fighters with nothing more than locking on to them. Hey, until we have another reliable infantry AA weapon (mana turret) it's pretty much all we have
Lock on often wraps around and hits vehicles in the back when it'd normally have to be a front or side hit. You can also lock on, then fire the rocket directly up to give it altitude and it'll occasionally count as a top hit rather than front. Also I was under the impression the AA launchers did less damage to ground vehicles and the AV ones did less to air. It was definitely changed to that shortly after Amerish was released because EVERYONE used the hawk because it was only 70 or so certs and Skyguard/Bursters had just been turned into a joke.
90-100fps, 60fps in a big fight. I've seen it drop to 39 once or twice. I need a better video card soon.
AV launchers do slightly less damage to vehicles than dumbfire and AA do less than AV by a slightly larger difference AFAICT. AV launchers used to be deadly, but the lock-on range was reduced significantly. They used to have an effective range of about 350m extendable to 400m under ideal conditions with practice. They would acquire and lock on up to about 450m however. This caused consternation amongst the drivers and frustration amongst the HA. They were then reduced in range so much that you could dumbfire the missiles and hit most of the time rather than expose yourself long enough to lock on. The lockon usually did nothing more than warn your target that they were about to be fired upon. IMO, AV should be able to acquire targets beyond infantry draw range and actually lock at exactly infantry draw range, with enough flight time to hit a vehicle that simply retreats.
I went with the crow because I find myself in more situations where I have to take out a ground vehicle than I do having to take out an aircraft. Aircraft a never really bother me. I am probably missing out on a lot of kills though vs aircraft, but I get plenty of vehicle kills and assists with the crow
Thats on high? I am getting an i7 2600k, p8p67 pro, 8gb 1600mhz ram, 128gb ssd and a 6870. (Only buying the processor and mobo as an upgrade, have the rest already). Do you think Ill get similar fps? At least 40 in big fights?
Air seems to be the better choice most of the time. Ground though is murder in the right fight where tanks have to come into lock range to fire. In that case ground will just rake in the kills on damaged vehicles trying to use range are retreat out of battle. I have both I stay with Air unless I see the right fight presenting itself.
The Crow is good for some situations but I have to admit I am more and more leaning towards the Hawk. The lock-on with the Crow can actually sometimes reduce your DPS at short range if you are always waiting for the lock as well as tipping off a vehicle you're targeting it.
They are both limited to locking on to their specific vehicle type, however I'd rather be able to lock on to air than ground because: Ground Vehicles frequently stop moving aircraft don't. It gives me plenty of time to flank, aim, whatever. Unmanned vehicles with he exception of an AMS is a waste of ammo in a fight.
I got both, I prefer not to limit myself as the crow does shine in some situations. Since you are choosing between one or the other though I would roll with the Hawk. At least you will be able to keep ESF off of you and still do descent damage on armor.
I also had to choose and after trialing both, I unlocked the Crow. It wasn't an easy decision, but here's my reasoning. What's a BIGGER pain in the *** MORE OFTEN? Tanks. What's generally more popular and easier to use for most players? Tanks. What's more threatening in terms of actually killing me as opposed to just annoying me or harrying my Sunderer? Tanks. The trade-off is that I will have no defense against air (except hiding or manning an AA turret). But without the Crow I would be defenseless against good tankers at mid-long range. The VS Magrider in particular is great at just strafing out of the way of shots and continually pummeling from mid-long range, making the default Shrike useless. So basically that's what it came down to. Armor columns are more plentiful and more threatening thus far in PS2, so when deciding between a hard counter of air vs a hard counter of ground, the hard counter of ground won out for me.
As a dedicated reaver pilot with 30 beta flight hours and around 7 after launch. I have never been shot down by ground fired Anti-Air Missles. Its to simple to hide behind some terrain and shake the missle. Or I just use my flares. So, the Anti-Air launcher is pretty useless if you ask me. The Crow does significantly more damage to tanks from my experience. I could be wrong though.
