Another Striker Thread

There has not been a lot of talk about the Striker recently, and a lot of TR don't bother using the Striker any more now days since it received the Maintain a Lock nerf. I decided to go to the VR and Test how much this nerf effected the Striker's usefulness.


As you can see, past 250 meters, the Annihilator's TTK becomes better then the Striker's. This does not take into account the fact that in a real game scenario, your target will not be sitting still, it will be moving behind cover, meaning your rockets will not all hit. With the Striker having such a limited range of usefulness, in its current state, you are better off with any of the other Lock-ons available in the game.

To make the Striker useful again, I believe that the Striker should be given a system that allows it to re-lock onto a different target mid-flight. This is what the PS1 Striker was able to do, which balanced out the Strikers need to maintain a lock. I could not find a PS1 video showing this, but I did find a Battlefeild 4 video where a rocket launcher had a similar mechanic (Skip to 4:24):


This would make the Striker much more interesting to use, and worth choosing over the other Lock-ons available.

The lock on time (to fire) for both weapons is static. The fire time for both weapons is static. The reload time for both weapons is static. The damage done to target for both weapons is static.

The only variable in your TTK demonstration is projectile travel time - which you intentionally excluded from testing for the Annihilator.

I'm sorry, but your little video is completely faulty at best, and intentionally misleading at worst.

Or scrap lock on rockets compeletly as its about the same state as cancer.

Scrap the whole ****** concept and come up with another concept.

Because contrary to the anihilator travel time is relevant because you have to maintain a lock untill all missiles hit maybe?

True, however the Annihilator does have an increasing projectile travel time as distance increases, just like the Striker. Yet, his assertion is that weapon's TTK remains the same at all distances, and it flat-out does not (unless he's willing to cut off the measured Striker's TTK at the point where the killing missile (no.3 from the second clip, IIRC) is fired.

Again, the comparison is flawed at best, and intentionally misleading at worst.

This exactly. I put this note in the video as well. The Anni's travel time means absolutely nothing when the missile will track it's target even when you are not aiming at your target.

So the Striker is superior at short ranges and the Annihilator at longer ranges? The Striker is now a sidegrade instead of being a vastly superior upgrade in all situations?

Sounds perfectly fine to me. No change needed.

The Anni is fire and forget. The missile will hit the target even if you are not aiming down sight. Meaning if you fire it, it will pretty much be guaranteed to hit it's target unless the target moves out of range. With the Striker, you further out your target it, the longer you must remain scoped, meaning the longer you have to wait to reload. With the Anni, you can begin to reload right after the missle is fired. I did record the Anni at all of the ranges, and I could post that later when I have the time, but the TTK difference was about the same as the Striker at 250 meters. Past that, the Striker's TTK was slower. I didn't bother editing in the clips of the Anni because the TTK stayed very close to the same.

Why would I use a lock on rocket launcher at close range? All I want is a mechanic change. Something to make the Striker interesting and worth using.

That is exactly the problem many terrans have with the striker.

"it is a sidegrade of an NS weapon"

The TR are the only faction whose ESRL has an NS counterpart. It has nothing unique going for it while both the NC and VS get something unique AND get to have a striker sidegrade on top if they so wish.

Again, I'm not saying your point is wrong, but your posted illustration (and the times you use for comparison) is flawed.

Honestly, what you're complaining about isn't so much time to kill, as time on target.

And frankly, when packing twice the damage-per-reload of the Annihilator, a longer time-on-target seems like a decent compromise to make.

still the best ESRL imo
phoenix cant hit anything past 300m and lancer doesnt have much chance of hitting aircraft at 250M unless it is moving in a straight line

sure compared to the anni its not as effective past 250 but its still effective - other ESRL's have their own weaknesses past 250/300m too

whats the ttk on a phoenix vs a striker at 250m?
how many moving aircraft can you hit with the lancer at 250+ meters

also am i the only one using the striker than can still keep lock (after shooting) even when the enemy goes behind trees? i do it all the time - am i bugged or is this intended?

After the no-patch-notes nerf, it looks like the Striker still makes people angry, only twice as less.

This would be true if the Striker did all of its damage in one rocket. Thing is, in a real game scenario, your target will be moving behind cover, meaning that your rockets almost never all hit the target. What I showed in the video was in a perfect world scenario where your target is dumb enough to not move. In game, all your target has to do to avoid the striker is move behind a rock.

The Striker was one of the most imbalanced and game breaking weapons to ever exist in PS2. It needs to be buried and forgotten.

So instead if making it a unique and more Intresting choice like the other two esrls, you would rather keep it as a boring side grade to the anni because it used to be OP? I sure hope the Devs don't think like you.

Already done.
TR must use Grounder or Scep launcher, or Annihilator atleast - because Striker turned in pile of crap now.
Too long lock/firing rockets/keep aim on target/reload time, too low DPS, too big chance to get sniper bullet/tank shell in the head.
Its useless like another TR empire-specific weapon, MCG. TR have way better, cheaper standard or even NS choices.
I prefer to see Striker as dumb-fire rocket launcher than that useless crap I have now.
To all TR haters: make TR alt on Miller, where playing many players with full-certed ESF and tanks, and try to kill someone with Striker in big battle at Crossroads, as example.
Interesting, will you get atleast 5-10 frags in trial time? How many times you will die, trying to lock on target/fire rockets/maintain lock under massive fire?

Pretty much what is being said here is.... Yes. That's exactly what we want.

I'd rather it be a unique weapon with an intresting new mechanic like the lancer and Phoenix. The striker is currently another boring lock on with a limited range of usfulness. The worst thing is the fact that is a boring side grade to an NS weapon.

I own all of the TR launchers...

Any NC or VS vehicle that goes down to the Striker in its current form is guilty of poor situational awareness, sitting still in one spot for too long, or has been already heavily damaged by something else. The Striker has been nerfed into uselessness, and any fear or respect it still gets from the NC and VS is based on pre-nerf effectiveness. The Striker is only a threat when used in groups, and even then the Annihilator is a better option. All three factions can perform equally with groups of Annihilators that do not require you to keep line of sight to land a hit.

The Striker was OP at launch, and remained so through the first couple of nerf-bat swings. Now it is nothing more than a waste of certs/$. Any TR still using it are doing themselves a disservice.