Anyone else fascinated with how much attention the Striker is getting?

I get what people are complaining about. The Annihilator is a no-skill AV point-and-click noobtube and the Striker is simply a better Annihilator.

But it doesn't add capability that isn't already available.

I still run around with the decimator for anti-ground and I highly doubt the striker is higher dps than the decimator, no-skill maybe but not better.

Meanwhile our sunderers that are parked on the other side of a base are getting sniped by phoenix's from within base shields. Absolutely new capability that only one faction has. Yet not enough complaints about them really.

So what really is fascinating to me is that the Striker introduces no new capability, but the Phoenix does, but the striker is getting infinitely more attention.

What am I missing here?

SOE hates TR.

Eh I think there both nice weapons, though the striker bugs need to be addressed.

I will say this, solo wise I think the phoenix is the more effective tool, in a group however a squad or so of HA with strikers is terrifying, they will absolutely lock down all enemy armor and air.

Personally I think the Lancer is very nice as well and if I could choose between the three I would probably take the lancer over both the striker and the phoenix.

NC is most populated faction so they keep drawing attention from Super-OP phoenix to striker which is just a bit overpowered. And soe actually hates vanu, not TR. But defiently they love NC.

I think there is a game within a game in PS2, and that secondary game is those who fly.

As such anything that directly impedes, interferes, or constrains that game is going to get a fair amount of heat on the forums. The annihilator got an endless amount of forum posts demanding a nerf. Burster maxes are still a hot topic (and they have been with us since beta).

Add to that certain outfits have employed this weapon in significant numbers, essential preventing any aircraft or armor from entering the area. I am not saying this is right or wrong, however it does generate a lot of aggravation.

I dunno about that. I like the lancer, but I think I'd prefer the camera guided business. It can hit planes.

The problem is that fliers annoy the people on the ground, who then equip annihilators.

I too would like the lancer. I ******* hate lock-on weapons. Lancer rewards skill and accuracy, good weapon.

I'd actually be fine if they deleted the striker and phoenix but its too late. They add OP weapon after OP weapon with no regard to the fact that they'll never be able to remove them because people spend $10 on them.

its quite simple, the VS and NC don't spend much time fighting each other, so those two respective factions having something potent isn't really noticed by them. The reverse is true when considering TR weaponry, both the NC and VS spend a considerable amount of time fighting against them, and consequently have a much more settled opinion on what is or isn't killing them.

Pointing out that flares, IR smoke and stealth all pre-existed to combat the newly released striker whilst no countermeasure other than breaking LoS will effect the other ESRL will not somehow register with either of them. They don't complain about the Decimator or the other NS launchers (dispite the similar damage) because they have access to them, and aren't interested in reducing the damage they themselves can have access to (even if they were imballenced)

I'm afraid there is a rather vocal group of people in both VS and NC camps that aren't really interested in ballence, they are soley concerned with how it will change thier KD, the more likely it is to lower it, the louder they get. Nothing new really.

This game is getting so unbalanced,i'm starting to think it's intentional.

Honestly, the only way strikers deny air in any area are if they are used in large numbers. One Striker can do damage to air, but if the LoS is broken, bye bye air denial. The Striker needs to have two or more people actively using it to deny air, but honestly, what weapon doesn't? I mean, you could get enough small arms fire, probably around ten people firing at once, for aircraft denial, but people aren't complaining that small arms' damage should be nerfed against air.

I hit planes easier with the Lancer honestly and as someone mentioned earlier I really like that it does actually require proper aiming and has the two modes of fire, but to be fair I don't use the Phoenix that much, pull it out on occasion, but eh.

For me default I'd always have the Lancer equipped and then only switch to the others if necessary (and it's rare that I want to switch to a lock on as Vanu.)

For NC default is the dumb fire, usually the default one but sometimes the decimator but only cause I brought kind of wish I hadn't bothered, occasionally I'll pull out the hawk just to help chase off air attacks. On rare occasions I'll pull out he Phoenix.

For TR it's either the default dumbfire or the Striker, none of the others really matter.

I'm not defending the striker. At all.
I question what it brings to the table that the annihilator doesn't already.
I know the annihilator isn't as good at anti-air as the grounder, and thats what I use. Decimator and grounder.

I've used the striker and I can see its potential in large engagements when stacked. But exactly the same thing can be said about the annihilator. Everyone has access to the annihilator.

Meh. I agree with the guy about the imbalance being intentional. This game has more rocket launchers than it does assault rifles.

There are TR outfits that even require their members to have a striker. Even if that is not the case - it feels like 75% of TR has it anyways. Now imagine an outift comunication trough TS and having 15 heavies on a hill with strikers. Enemy lib shows up - only 1 guys locks on to him and fires 1 rocket. The lib pops a flair and thinks that everything is fine. 5 seconds later 60 rockets are flying against that same lib = Game over for everyone that tries to fly aginst TR.

The Pheonix scares everybody untill they realize they can just shoot the projectile with a rifle.. you don't seem to be one of those ppl.

As for the lancer - It can perform in the 1st scenario just as well, but against ground targets with no warning and no flair - just instagib from 15 charged lasers.

On the side of fun - yeah i agree that the striker is the least novelty item and the most skillless.

LOL, if 60 rockets went out against one lilb, that outfit is wasting a lot of ammo. But I see your point. The Pheonix definitely needs to take more than one shot to take it down, and I never said anything about any of the other ESRs.....why are you dissing me?

If I wanted a lock on I would choose the Grounder or the Annihilator instead of asking for another one on my ESRL slot. But lock ons are just bad.

So I bought it but after realizing that I just couldn't kill a thing I switched back at my default RL and blaming me for choosing TR, which has no unique ESRL, but an upgraded annihilator with better damage but worse tracking.

By the way carrying the default RL around has improved my skill a lot. In fact I almost never carry the striker (which get's flared, LoS, afterburned) and try a 1 shot kill that is the default one, at least is something, much better than doing 0 damage with the striker unsuccesfully trying to lock for ages and when you eventually get the lock he evades or goes to repair behind a mountain. But I wish we had an unique RL that could be dumbfired

About the "squads with the striker will dominate the sky" argument it has been demonstrated that it's a lie, and a squad with phoenixes basically can kill everything, which includes TR infantry carrying strikers, which means no more strikers. Anyways let's apply logic into it:

------------------
1 Striker wont even damage an intelligent plane. So does the rest of lock ons. (flares, terrain, afterburns)
1 Striker won't kill a unintelligent plane. So does the rest of lock ons. (get hit,afterburn behind a mountain, repair, rinse and repeat while lolpodding in between)

A squad of Strikers won't even damage an intelligent plane. So does the rest of lock ons. (flares, terrain, afterburns, if you can evade 1 lock one you can evade 9999)
A squad of Strikers WILL KILL a unintelligent plane. BUT SO DOES THE REST OF LOCK ONS
-----------------


That means a squad with ANY LOCK ON would get the same results since it's so much damage that the kind of lock on really doesn't matter. That includes the Annihilator, but since everyone can buy it they won't complain and ignore any kind of logic.

The problem isn't the striker. The problem are lock ons in general. People refuse to accept the idea that something can shoot them down while flying on their invulnerable godlike air machines. THAT'S the real problem. Thing is, all games have lock ons for aircraft, so does real life, so these bad players will have to learn to play instead of asking for nerfs.


Example: http://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/...hy-the-striker-is-over-powered-vs-air.120389/

TL;DR "Flying is hard and casual people won't fly at all when they hear a beeping lock on all the time. It is too stressful for most people and takes too much coordination to figure out how to fly."

Lol, so your problems are lock ons in general, yet you only say things about the striker as if evading 1 lock on being striker or any other was different (in fact is much easier to evade the striker).

This is the example I posted there of the game that resembles this one the best and all the "orchestra" with beeps all around at 1:05. (they removed the gunner's flare recently because it was very difficultto take a chopper down, ESF's on Planetside 2 are just impossible compared to those. You just can't kill with a lock on a pilot unless he's willing to die.



See all those sounds at 1:05? Get used to them and play accordingly. Lock ons are here to stay and they are UP. If battlefield players have gotten used to play like that you can too. Lock ons are part of the air game, period.

This sums up pretty much the kind of player that wants lock ons nerfed in battlefield:





Reality is, you can't kill an ESF with any lock on. You can't even kill an ESF with flak. The pilot just has to afterburn past the nearest building/mountain and repair. 1 lock on or 9999 lock ons doesn't matter, any good ESF pilot will evade them all. 9999 lock ons might be impossible to evade as a lib if they catch you in a bad position since you don't have such speed. But if you allow the enemy squad to lock on you while having no way to get away or flares you will die no matter what the 9999 lock ons were.

That means that the Striker can't kill a thing alone, and when on a squad it stops mattering what lock on are you carrying, Striker, Annihilator, Grounder... since the squad would do so much damage that it would be overkill anyways.

Don't let the enemy outsmart you. As a pilot you need to know how to deal with lock ons. Wanting them removed is the step previous to ask for a button to win the game and see the credits.

From everything I'm reading here I believe we've reached a consensus.

1) Delete both the Striker and the Phoenix from the game.

2) Everyone that bought those weapons gets SC credit or cert credit of their choosing.

3) Turn Lancer into an NS weapon.

.....the lancer is 10x better at swatting planes out of the sky.

Planes can be immune to the phoenix by making use of the wonderful evasive maneuver known as "anything that isn't standing still"

I see the phoenix missiles flying about 10 meters above me, then they disappear and I get hit. I've NEVER seen them hitting anything, they disappear several meters before.

Sooo, here's some proof of what i said earlier

This. I'm beyond mad that we don't get vulcan or marauder (even though marauder is crap) for harasser yet the other two factions get BOTH their special weapons. And the striker is not OP, it is just an annihilator that actually does damage. The phoenix, now that is OP. If they couldn't shoot it out of shields I'd be more ok with it, but it's still far and away the better ESRL.