Constructive Feed back for the Striker

eh, not that often really. The # of times I'm making strafing runs on infantry with 5-20% armor missing is probably more often than attack runs at full health.

And that's presuming I have Fire Supp too.... which I only use on a couple builds. It's not even certed on my Scythe or Mossie actually I think... My Reaver has it though for the Air Superiority builds (One of which has air hammer for farming inf, and Tomcats for pissing off pilots... lol )

ok....you're right about that









but the magrider is actually pretty decent.....

When used 2/2 by people who know what they're doing, sure.

Actually, you don't need turbo on the Harasser. As long as you know where the phoenix rounds are likely to come, moving laterally or moving to a slight jink before the last second or two, the missile can't hit as reliably. The Lancer/vortex has a slightly better chance at hitting targets moving that way, however, as the target size gets smaller (further out) it becomes less easy to hit. Especially for trackball users, like myself, where you can inadvertantly move the reticle while letting go of the fire. Those who also don't have steady hands can do that.

Here is a VR Room test of the Striker... The 'ideal' conditions in which to fire the striker. Unfortunately, even under 'ideal' conditions it is not going to cut it in live fire combat. Some of my tests were approximate live fire tests. This does not count also trying to hit a MAX at 150m with the striker, which took 13 hit or indirect hits. Hipfire wise, it isn't going to be great.

I really want the striker to just have like a lockon "area" where you aim to have the missiles fly, kinda like a laserpointer. The current dumbfire mechanic doesn't work, and the damage is super low, and the lockon for aircraft area is so tiny it feels incredibly silly to even try. You're better off either using a AV launcher, an annihilator, or a dedicated AA launcher rather than the striker.

I've never used it in the VR, I've only used it in the open world. I know that the VR has had other problems that are similar to what you are seeing there.

I know what I've experienced from both sides. I'll try to get video of it.

VR or not it only locks on to air, it even says so in the description.

Yep, I just tested it in-game and you are absolutely right. I tried "barely missing" some tanks and there was no lock-on. I guess when I tested it the first time, my aim was better than I thought it was. As for when I was getting hit by one, I don't know...maybe it was some really delayed hit detection or perhaps a pounder dropping it's shell right over the ridge.

That's too bad, really. I think it should lock-on to all vehicles. Maybe they decided it would be too mush against flashes or something.

Just refund me my 1000 certs. If you're gonna revamp **** drastically like this then that's least thing that you can do.
I unlocked it because of its lock on functions. It was a nice deterrent for air as well ground. Its original function is gone now and i have no use for it. It's a glorified potato launcher now and just adds more to the ever growing spam factor of this game.

The fact you have refunded the Vanu players after the ZOE changes just shows how biased you are against TR in general. This **** should not even be a discussion.

Praise Malorn! And even Black Vanu Jesus (Tray maybe)! higby posted that there will be a fix buff later this week to striker Rof, DMG, and a burst mode.

While these changes are good, it does not solve the main issure thats stopping the Striker to work as Intended. That being the 10m heat detection radius is too small to hit the aircraft with the strikeer missiles. That and combined with the 5x lower aim accuracy vs the other launchers make it niegh to immpossible to hit aircraft other than one comming at you or hovering. Those 2 issues need to be sold the most to make the striker actually work like it should. Doest matter how much dmg or potential dmg you could do, if your weapon cant even hit the intended target.

i have a solution, just make it how it was when it came out

i paid cash for it ! and back then i loved it.. now its garbage

If VR simulated at least some moving targets, I could get better results. Such as a flying ESF, Lib, Valk or Gal. But given they are grounded, the only thing you can simulate is how far off you might have to aim and then compensate for movement to fire a round.

ESFs move a bit more and faster, and unless you are good at judging distances based on sizes (Which I am not), it is hard to lead or guess how much you have to lead by to hit the 'sweet' spot. It is worse with ground vehicles because you need to try and hit with no lockon support to home in on the vehicle.

To be honest, the Striker right now is sub par in general. While the reduction in damage was done due to the ability to do the short range spam overwhelming, which is understandable, however, the Striker is far from what it was originally like in Planetside 1.

You mean back when it was overpowered to the point that the Scythe and Reaver performed so poorly that SOE nerfed the Mosquito?

Were talking about restoring Lock-On back to the T2 Striker.

The Striker wasn't overpowered. Of course NC and VS would complain about getting shot down instead of hovering over TR base farming us like animals. That's what anti-air weapons do buddy.

Are you honestly saying the original striker wasn't OP?
Back when it was almost impossible to break a missile lock due to the missiles ignoring terrain and them having a frighteningly good targeting AI?

You have no idea, do you...

I wonder how OP the original Striker would have been without all the bugs. What made it completely broken was the flying through terrain and ignoring flares.

I'd like to give my specific feedback on this. The striker as it is does not do enough damage to justify the drawbacks. Specifically, rocket damage per hit needs to be tuned up. I am aware others have said the same, but please see my justifications for why I believe this:

In the past, the striker had more damage per mag than other rocket launchers. This was a balancing factor because the damage was spread over 5 shots, requiring the heavy assault to be exposed more with the striker than with any other launcher, having to remain in LOS for the lock-on mechanic first to lock on and then during the shots. The trade-off is that you would deal more damage over the course of the entire magazine, so you were very good at blowing up unguarded sunderers and exposed/distracted vehicles with insufficient cover.

The default rocket launcher is significantly better than the striker at fulfilling the striker's role. Why do 750 damage over 5 shots when I can do 1100 damage in 1 shot? There's just no comparison. Even with the striker's weak hornet missile ability its easier to pop an ESF with the default rocket launcher by just catching him when he is hovering. The default launcher even has less drop and no COF (because there's only 1 rocket to be launched per magazine).

Being killed by infantry is uncool. I actually had a guy bum rush me while taking my entire of clip of striker 'missiles' to the face and he stabbed me to death. This should never happen when I've definitely out-skilled him and shot him with 5 missiles that took 4-5 seconds to unload. I'm not asking to be able to 1 or even 2 shot infantry. 3 rockets should be the maximum any rocket launcher should take to kill an infantry person. It's just not fun otherwise because you're not going to have the time to switch the rocket launcher to your primary weapon if you are under attack.

The last thing I want to touch up on is striker AV. The former striker was fine at killing tanks and other forms of vehicles. This was because the lock-on mechanic is devastating to vehicles and the striker's high damage per clip made it a good choice for this role. In its current form it's like trying to kill a tank with a can-opener. It takes most of my ammo just to take down 1 un-upgraded tank. I can understand requiring multiple clips, but when it takes 27 rockets to take down a tank and I have 30 total, this is a problem. that's almost 6 magazines worth of rockets.. Please raise this damage so that it takes maybe 15 rockets. 20 if the tank has the corresponding side/frontal armor and i'm not attacking from the rear.

Some people are arguing that it needs more rounds in the magazine, While I can understand their sentiment it's not going to change the fact that if your target isn't dying from your initial volley then they're likely going to kill you or run off. If I simply wanted to chase off my oponents, the annihilator or the grounder do a better job of this. (tanks will essentially ignore both of these options though and just kill the heavy firing the rounds).