current range of strikers is simply not enough

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by VeryCoolMiller, Sep 24, 2018.

  1. Campagne

    Ignorance is no excuse. Repent in your dishonesty!
  2. Luicanus

    Do you know how many of those 6 shots would actually hit a target at 800m? assuming it wasn't stationary? Not a single god damn one.

    The only reason it was nerfed was the aerial anomaly causes very high densities of aircraft to remain either stationary or at least within a very narrow target area. I appreciate that it is noticeably better than the other ES launchers at AA but the nerf seems a little severe given the sky ceiling can be 600m+ above the base. We now have an AA launcher that can't reach aircraft cheesing at altitude. Lock-ons sure can't get that high, what am I supposed to do try my hand at the Decimator?

    Not being a big VS player I don't know if theirs has been nerfed at some point too (I know he Pheonix has) but as a tanker, I have to say it's the only one of the three that would scare me if I was facing it.
    • Up x 1
  3. LordKrelas

    Well, given no one else had an AA Launcher that could touch them to begin with...
    It's kinda hilarious, to be annoyed that your launcher now isn't able to touch them, after having the only AA that could.
    • Up x 1
  4. Luicanus

    The point was, asymmetric balance, the NC is the only faction which can steer their rockets. Meanwhile, the Striker is laughably pathetic against armour, I was on my NC alt a while back and it's a breeze to fight unless you sit there and let it kill you.
    To the best of my knowledge, the VS alternative is the only one viable anymore.

    The Pheonix is situational from certain spawn rooms it can be good for clearing Sunderers, the Striker is now equivalent or worse than a lock on for forcing enemy aircraft to back off.

    It was the only feature that made it better than the NS weapons, the NC and VS still arguably have their effective uses.

    Also, I don't know the Lancer very well but if it doesn't have much bullet drop it might be just as effective or more so against stationary high altitude aircraft.
  5. LordKrelas

    Those steering rockets are also the only ones who can be shot down.
    Having to rely on spawn-rooms, to not be completely screwed while rendered static during the entire-flight..
    Vs an Anti-Air proximity-lock Launcher that could deny the enemy their airspace.

    The Striker is still functional, at its job, it just don't out-range basically every other AA gun in addition to the practicality of firing it has over traditional lock-ons.

    The Lancer, is essentially in a reduced-state.

    Neither the Lancer or Striker, are reliant on invulnerability to function in a practical sense..
    Nor are they unable to effectively kill their target.
    The Striker can engage Aircraft still, as can the Lancer; The Striker did not lose firepower, it lost the multi-hex range.

    If you can't get use out of a Striker, since it's not reaching the sky-limit..
    How exactly are the Lock-On weapons worth a ****, in comparison?
    Let alone a 270-meter rocket you can out-repair with a repair-grenade or shoot down with a pistol.

    The Striker's power wasn't invested in that sheer range;
    That was what made TR's Infantry-level AA brutally effective at gutting VS & NC air operations near their infantry, well past any range that NC or VS could ever have, against Air.
    This left the pretty-damn tiny Mossie, fighting inferior AA at 300-400 at best, while the Massive Reaver & "pancake" Scythe are fighting Proximity-Lock Strikers at the damn sky limit..

    TR Galaxy threat compared to NC or VS Galaxy... One side can shoot it down.
    TR Valkyrie: Can pack Strikers... which then start being effective against tanks.
    Use a Phoenix in a Valk; Watch your valk explode if it's not basically sitting still.

    The Striker's perks was never the extended range advantage.
    • Up x 1
  6. FateJH

    Not unless they were aimed properly. Hitting a target at 800m? Fairly easy as long as you know how to judge the shot and the target is moving consistently within range for the required amount of time (~4s). Also, projectile lifespan and rendering ranges are big deals.
  7. Villanuk

    Then by that argument, who else has unlimited ammo, or a launcher that increase its own power. Or a launcher that has visual control, isn't that the point of faction specialty?
    • Up x 1
  8. LordKrelas

    There's factional specialty, and then there's having a cake & wanting more.
    Imagine if NC was the only side with the Archer.

    The Striker still has the best effectiveness against air, for an infantry-launcher.
    It just doesn't out-range every single other AA weapon in the field.
    Which given it is an Anti-air weapon, and aircraft aren't push-overs, that's a pretty drastic effect.
    It would be akin to VS's Lancer returning to the Render-range Deletion Squads , when engaging enemy tanks.

    After all, VS & NC, stuck at >400 return-fire ranges.
    TR, any Heavy-Assault can hit it with a Striker.
    TR ESF is a small-little bastard of a Target, the Mossie is quite effective.
    NC's reaver, is a massive target from all angles, VS's Scythe has a massive underside;
    TR's Heavy is firing a proximity-lock missile.
    NC & VS, have less range, only a lock-on, when it comes to Infantry-AA, unless they pay 450 nanites for flak.
    TR's AA has more range, doesn't cost nanites, and is better at the job.

    Having the most effective AA that has the furthest reach on top, is a bit silly to complain about.
    TR still has the best Infantry-level Anti-air, They just don't also have the longest range Anti-air on top.

    If NC's Phoenix was the best AI Launcher, and had the furthest range in that class (it's far far from it), and VS's Lancer was improved in direct-firepower, given it already has some monsterous range..
    TR having the longest range, and the best Launcher in that Class, wouldn't be as bad.
    Right now, it's just the best AA Launcher, rather than Best AA Launcher, and holding the "LONGEST RANGE ANTI-AIR" award on top.
  9. Villanuk

    Striker is still the best against air, so thats a valid reason is it, whilst others are most effective against ground, OK, so nerf that **** out of those against ground shall we for parity?

    The rest of your comments is just ear piss tbh, i could go into detail, but lets just ask this,

    out of the 3 launchers, which one would you choose now, and if you sat the striker out of the 3, your talking utter BS mate
  10. LordKrelas

    Range was never the Striker's advantage.
    Range is certainly not what the Phoenix has: And it certainly isn't killing anything fast.
    As well, neither the Lancer nor Phoenix is all that grand at AA; The Striker isn't incapable of hitting ground units.
    Use a Striker Valk.

    If I'm dealing with Air: Striker. As it's the best option of any AA option, if I can't risk a Max, and can't get a Vehicle.
    No way in hell, I'm using a Phoenix when dealing with Air, and a Lancer is 50-50.
    For dealing with tanks: If I have a squad, lancer maybe, if not, Like all 3, I'm picking a dedicated AV launcher.

    Every single side, can't use their Launcher for everything.
    The Striker works against air; The ******* other two do not.
    If we nerf the Phoenix & Lancer against ground, since the Striker lost range...
    They better then work against Aircraft, as unlike the Striker, they are designed for ground targets.

    You don't grab a Striker for AV or AI work, you grab it for AA.
    You don't grab it for Range; You grab it for what it actually does.
    If the striker was AV or AI, and it designed for Range; Then sure, then it seems bad.

    Except, it's the Anti-air Launcher, which is still does beautifully; Range wasn't the strength, that was an extra bonus.
    The Phoenix certainly doesn't work against targets like the Striker does against Air, and it certainly never had range.
    The Lancer has range, but lost a long time ago, the lethality factor against vehicles.

    The Striker had the longest range in the bloody game, in anti-air, and was the best infantry launcher against air.
    All it has lost, is the Massive range advantage, which was on top of the actual effectiveness.
    I'd pick the striker over any damn launcher if my target was a damn aircraft.
    And any idiot who picks an AA launcher, and expects grand results equal to an AV launcher, is an idiot.
    Same with anyone picking an AV launcher, and expecting AA-launcher results.
    None of these, expect to have the longest bloody range in their field at that, while also having the best results.

    Do you pick a SMG to engage an Infantry target?
    Is your SMG's range, the thing it has going for it?

    The Striker did not suddenly become **** at AA, after losing the ability to strike targets hexes away, unlike every other AA which can barely target in a hex.
    The Phoenix, doesn't kill ANYTHING like the Striker affects Air. Range was certainly never part of its capability.
    The Lancer doesn't even work as well as the Striker does against Air: There is longer-ranged AV.
    The Striker is an effective AA Launcher: It did not need the highest range on top of this.
    • Up x 1
  11. Skraggz

    Striker 100% of the time, all day, everyday. Bet I can get double the kills using striker and you using lancer per day. Don't play striker is solid and didn't need 1000m+ to be effective. Also striker is the reason I flew for tr, because going against that rl sucked.
    • Up x 1
  12. CplRDaWiggy

    Striker, all day, everyday, as it is very efective at what it does when used by a single unit.

    Phoenix and Lancer require multiple users to have any real impact, not to mention requiring relative safety as the charge up/ guiding leaves the user exposed.

    Striker you just aim, fire and the lock happens for you, and air scatters. No ground vehicle craps itself because of a single Lancer or Phoenix, and tbh I doubt you have much, if any, experience with these weapons, as saying their weak damage should be nerfed because the Striker can't obliterate air from miles away strains credulity.

    Think on this, TR were able to destroy other air from outside air render range with relative impunity. NC can fire Phoenix from spawn sure, but it requires multiple users to have any degree of efficacy, and the Lancer is sure as hell accurate, but between its charge up, amount of ammo, and overall damage, like the Phoenix requires multiple users to actually take anything down.

    Out of all that, TR lost ithe ability to destroy vehicles outside render range. And you think this is somehow unfair? You think the enemy having a possibility of recourse is against the rules?

    You're frankly mad if you can't understand how well you had it, and lets try to remember here, last I checked its damage wasn't nerfed, so its still the best g2a launcher. You gonna sit there with a straight face and say that the Lancer and Phoenix are the joint best ground launchers, thus deserving a nerf like you seem to believe is warranted?
    • Up x 3
  13. Villanuk

    when you type such a long post, the value of your point get diluted.

    Range WAS its strength. When a decent pilot was making an approach to attack, you could get a least 2 hits on him ( did you notice 2 hits, because not every rocket you fire hits, its a misconception that it always did ) so you may push him back or when you reload you will get a few more hits, but its enough to move him on and stop him sitting a range off loading, its a gave some balance.

    So as you made clear its AA, but its advantage is now taken away. Close range if a ESF flys past as speed, the striker will only a got a hit or two. Only if they hover will they be vulnerable at close range, in which your better off using a launcher for a one hit kill.

    Im not saying its range ability was fine, what i am saying its gone to far now and if thats going to stop that way, then increase its velocity or damage, there has been no balance from the nerf.

    But your also comparing the striker against the Phoenix against air, so lets compare against ground? Can the striker hide behind a hill and be effective? Can it move around corners, can a whole group push back a group of tanks, no to all.. your being selective on your points, the whole point is, they all have their unqiue traits and the striker has now lost his.
  14. Villanuk

    Dounble kiils really, well one mag will not take down a ESF, so god knows what your talking about.
  15. Villanuk

    Lies mate, pure lies. Used by a single unit, well everything becomes effective, but more so the Phoenix, sitting behind a ledge with no risk at all of being shot.
    The Lancer generates a lot of power, compare that with the 150 damage from the striker against a tank and you dont just aim and fire, it dose not work that well, **** i used to use it all the time, seldom will every rocket hit its target, less so against tanks.

    Your saying the striker can take down vehicles out of render range, now your just looking stupid.
  16. Skraggz

    Yes double the kills, I'm curious how many mags you think a lancer takes to down a tank. You're quick and weak
    dismissal is rather comical.

    It's range is not what is unique about it, its ability to be a ground based coyote that counters ground pound with ease is. Its locking ability is what is unique.

    This is what I am talking about, read the dev notes. They themselves said it was hitting outside render range, meaning all you have to do is get close to an anomaly and just throw strikers rockets at it, don't even have to see air there. Stop being a clown.

    T2 Striker (TR Rocket Launcher)

    • Projectile lifespan from 5 to 2
    • Dev Note: This brings the Striker's range to roughly 445 meters. Previously, the projectile would be able to reach well beyond the range vehicles would actually render.

    • Up x 2
  17. LordKrelas

    You're firing a Proximity-Lock-On Missile.
    That is the only Proximity-Lock-On Missile in the entire game, and it's on a clip, not a single shot;
    You get that near the target, it locks on, automatically: That makes it an advantage over every Pre-lock-to-fire Launcher.
    It also removes the early warning required to fire every other AA Launcher.
    The Ability to also fire these warning-less Proximity-Lock Missiles across entire Hexes, outside of even rendering yourself to the target, was on top of being able to fire these things near a target, and then get them tracking the target, to then explode.
    The travel distance from the point of lock-on, is at the point of proximity-detection instead of the longer distance of the Launcher on the ground: Less time to react to a lock-on, is the net-result of that.
    So the Striker has:
    • Proximity-Lock
    • Magazine-Type Launcher (only other is Swarm, for this)
    What it had over Other AA Launchers previously:
    • Proximity-Lock
    • Magazine-Type Launcher (Only matched by Swarm)
    • Multi-Hex Range on an undetectable Missile.
    It previously had over All Other AA, including Vehicle AA.
    • Multiple-Hex range.
    • An undetectable Missile, that then locked-on, hexes away from the Shooter, who didn't even have to be rendered on their screen.
    • Proximity-Lock

    The Striker's strength wasn't the ability fire missiles farther than any faction can fire theirs AA at all.
    It was the Proximity-Lock system.
    Let alone when, Aircraft have a severe potency capable of nuking tanks & infantry..
    Having your basic infantry have several-hexes of firing-range over your opponents, against one of the strongest possible threats, well past the ability for even aircraft to retaliate or track down the source... Is pretty ******.
    Let alone when it also has the smallest reaction-time period when it locks onto the target... while also doing this hexes away, from the shooter.
    The Lancer gave a direct-line to their position, and had less range than this: It also did not quite literally have the ability to rapidly fire full-power shots, Nor did it surpass by itself in single-operator numbers, every other source of weapon in it's class.
    A Decimator was never out-classed by a Lancer, in single use.
    Every AA Launcher is out-classed by a Striker.
    Hell, the AA Turrets & Max units, are less effective than it in general cases, and they cost nanites.

    The Striker is the top of the AA chain, for infantry.
    The ES Launcher for NC, is at the bottom under pistols for AI.
    The ES Launcher for VS, needs a squad to became dangerous truly, and is far from the top.
    If you buff the Striker's velocity or damage, You put it ahead of every AA weapon even further...
    which are including Nanite-options.
    It already dominates Infantry-AA Options , if it gets buffed in those stats, it will start to dominate Nanite-priced options.
    It does not need Buffs, just since it no Longer outranges every possible weapon by hexes.

    The phoenix's target is infantry.
    The Striker's target is air.
    The Striker can effectively its target, and has the best capability among AA weaponry available to infantry.
    It can not be detected prior to lock-on, and will automatically lock-on in proximity to aircraft, requiring no previous lock-on period, allowing a full-auto burst without precise aiming to still lock onto & hit a flying target.
    Against Ground-targets, it lacks this Proximity-lock-on, if range was the strength, the lack of this lock-on wouldn't be the most notable difference.
    Using it in groups, it can destroy tanks from Valkyries: An entirely different target type.
    This weapon has no loss or issue, when fired from the Hip, and can still automatically onto a target, the user never even was exposed to.

    The Phoenix requires two entire shots to kill a heavy, or a head-shot on an Infiltrator, at a max of 270 meters distance, with a low velocity, poor turning capability, and be shot down by a Pistol (I do this commonly for fun.)
    This requires the missile to travel across a max of 270 meters, impact, and reload;
    During this firing process, the user is immobilized & forced to be standing upfront, for the entire flight.
    They lose all visual & sound from their position, and control only the Missile.
    Inside 270 meters, this Heavy-Assault is standing unresponsive, while controlling a missile that requires this entire sequence twice, to kill a single soilder, the only target it is designed to face.
    This weapon has no hip-fire.
    This weapon can be fired around corners.

    The Lancer, features a charge-up system, going from 1 to 3 stages of damage at long-range.
    This process requires time on target, as the weapon will automatically fire shortly after Stage 3, and is a straight beam-shot.
    Each damage stage costs additional ammo from the Magazine, Firing early can be done at the cost of damage.
    In groups, this weapon's instantaneous impact, can vaporize tanks, in the older versions.
    While still capable, it is not as dangerous as previously, and has suffered some issues with ammunition.
    This weapon has hip-fire, though it is a precise weapon.
    If you can keep the target in sight, you can hit it.

    The Striker's unique traits were:
    • Absurd Range over every single other weapon of this type, exceeding even render range. (AV Engineer turrets lost their range for this exact same reason)
    • Proximity-Lock-On Mechanic, specific to the Striker alone
    • Magazine-Type, allowing an entire barrage of rockets to be fired full-auto, before reloading.
    The Striker's cost;
    • Is lack of a lock-on system for vehicles.
    • Lack of raw damage against ground targets (Explosive is Flak based, rather than traditional rocket damage).

    The Striker, only lost, an absurd range advantage over every single AA weapon, to where it could fire before being rendered to a pilot.
    It still has the firepower it had originally.
    It still has the proximity-lock system which is why it is effective.
    If it was never reliant on firing onto targets at several hexes away.

    If you don't fire from a spawn-room, You are sitting perfectly still, to be murdered by anyone with LOS to you, with a Phoenix.
    The phoenix also can be intercepted; unlike every other weapon in this game.

    The 150 damage from a Striker, against the heaviest ground target, when it's an Anti-air Launcher.
    Is your tank target flying? If not, pull an AV Launcher like the rest of us.
    If you want to see effectiveness from your ES Launcher, fire at ******* aircraft.
    You don't see Lancer Users complaining how their damage output against infantry is laughable.

    Any aircraft hexes away could be hit & shot down by missiles fired so far away, and locking onto them, that the TR Heavy didn't even render for the pilot.
    Engineer Turrets lost their range, since they popped out of existence for the same reason:
    And Engineer turrets are static one-shots for Tanks, which they were designed to fight against.
    Your fighting Aircraft outside render-range, with a missile that locks onto a target mid-flight after you've fired it, which includes firing from the hip, granting full motion.
    • Up x 2
  18. CobaltTR

    The striker is a ****show right now. The standard TR AA launcher is arguably better, considering you don't have to stand in the open for 3 seconds while firing huge flares. Honestly most of TR seems to be based around standing still to become a target, max lockdown, prowler anchor, striker, chaingun. But back to the striker, at least when it reached the skybox it had a use, to create a no-fly zone, right now its a spray and pray with knowledge its very likely you'll miss most of your shots. Now compare this to sitting in a base with the phoenix or the lancer. People keep saying its not meant as a babysit weapon but that's exactly what the other 2 launchers are. Seems typical in this game that TR always gets the short stick, most of what we have involves prediction which is hard as hell to do. Then again what else is there to expect when nearly all devs play NC or VS. And don't even bring up muh firerate as that only counts when the accuracy of your weapons isn't **** and the rest of the mechanics aren't a direct counter to it.
  19. LordKrelas

    You do realize that the lock-on Launchers require you to stand with LOS to air target, keeping a bead on them, which gives a lock-on warning long before firing, while the Striker has multiple shots, none of trigger this until it's already half-way there or less.
    As well, the Striker doesn't require you to ADS or be still: It can be fired while moving.

    Prowler Anchoring, takes the Tank's considerable direct firepower & amplified it hard.
    The Max Anchor, is the flawed one, given it didn't provide such a notable boost, while locking it into a firing Arc (unlike the tank)
    The Striker has no requirement to stand still, it has the most mobility of all 3 ES Launchers, and of the AA Launchers.
    The Chaingun as well, has identical COF in motion as in standing-still, meaning you have no reason to stand still.

    One side could create a no-fly-zone for hexes.. While their Opposing AA could barely function.
    Add in what the Mossie can do to opponents... and it's a bit comic.

    Sititng in a base with a Phoenix: Something that has trouble with infantry.
    Lancers needed an entire squad to be dangerous.
    A Striker alone is dangerous, a valk striker, could melt tanks, the entirely opposite intended target.
    And unlike the Phoenix, has no way to be shot down, nor makes you static.
    The Striker also has no need to delay firing as well, which the Lancer does.

    You're taking the best AA Launcher, and complaining that it can't function across hexes, and saying you need to stand still.
    Why are you standing still? You have no Lock-on Period, nor a forced-position... You have no requirement to stand still.
    Then there's the chaingun: You have no motive to stand still with it, it functions identical while on the move.

    Short stick: One side can barely use their Launcher, one side needs a Squad, and TR outmatches all AA with basic infantry.
    Next, it's going to be how an Flamethrower is worse than a mortar that has an arming distance..
  20. Pacster3

    Did you just ask to get the Striker nerfed? Cause if you want the Lancer treatment then that means that you will have to wait 2 seconds before it even reaches the lockon range of other launchers. That's what the Lancer does(and why it, unlike the Striker, doesn't get used at all) NEED to wait before its power gets close to that of other launchers.