NC win rates are dreadful

Phoenix isnt meant for killing infantry, its meant for killing stationary vehicles behind obstacle which in some situations can turn the tide of battle, in the end, its not about the weapon its self, its about having the option, just because you dont use it it doesnt mean its bad, same with Lancer.
Striker can be replaced with standard air lock on RL, these 2 cant, thats the point.

And neither of them work near a normal launcher or can be used by themselves all that well.
Lancer is fine, but usually works best in groups to make use of it.
Phoenix used to easily one-shot infantry, and can be shot out of the Sky.
In addition, the phoenix.. yeah good luck at anti-air.
The Lancer it is do-able.

For stationary targets, the phoenix might as well be any launcher.
As a stationary vehicle, is one you would be better off not launching a missile that renders you unable to act or see what is around you during the entire firing sequence.
Hell, If it's stationary, and taking the numerous Phoenix rounds, might as well get an LA lol.

The Striker is built-for-AA, without any lock-on warnings.
And is fatal in a Valk.
Replace it for quick damage sure, but you don't usually replace it to handle Air.
Nor are you exposed for the entire travel of a rocket when using it. (NC)
Nor needing longer-exposure time to land one shot. (VS)

The Striker ain't perfect, but it ain't bad.

I think his point is the striker serves to unique purpose that a regular lock on launcher doesn't. A group of people with any lock on launcher would be equally if not more effective than one with strikers. The same cannot be said for lancers or pheonixes. Both are indeed situational, but they have situations.

Last night on Emerald, NC totally dominated. I think PHX and ZER6 are finally turning the tide... I can't wait to see how each faction does if they put a hard lock on population balance in the Critical Mass update.

I was on a hive killing rampage too, it was great. (Not as Lamat)

I still can not understand why Jack Hammer was nerfed.
Is PS2's Jack Hammer too strong like PS1's JH? I don' think so.

Saw some of the bad NC last night... I killed 18 people trying to take out my TR hive last night at Ceres Farms on Indar (Emerald)... in my ANT!

Yes, one person in an ANT took on 18 NC- experienced NC (they did the gal drop through the skyshield, they dropped a bunker and had two maxes come out- all legit experienced tactics) and I mowed them down one after the other. They made 3 attempts at the hive before killing it. My 18 kill streak was on the first pass they made (Gal drop and all).

So after it was done I whispered to one of them and asked them what happened.

"Our PL kept saying he only wanted Heavies, Medics, and 2 Maxes. Your ANT took out the heavies first. We had no way to kill you." (I had roadkilled the Maxes- I love running them over).

So I asked him why didn't they change it up on the second and third runs.

"Our PL is a stubborn [Concerned Citizen]" which I think meant MFer but not sure- I love how the PS2 censor substitutes words.

There you have it- the reason that NC lose so badly imho- it isn't because they have bad guns, it's because they have a combination of new players and stubborn RIGID leaders. They can't adapt to an ANT. Forcing new players to play a class they are unfamiliar with is bad. Heck, forcing experienced players to play what they don't want to play is bad. This game is about adaptability.

VS and TR simply have infantry equipment that is better suited to winning fights. NC have great guns for mid-range engagements, but bases are mostly won and lost in CQC where fire rate is king. VS and to an extent TR are also better camouflaged than NC in most environments (and all night fights).

Thanks for the anecdotal evidence, must be the same for the other thousands of players.

Except this story is typical for defending player made bases, i have some of the biggest kill streaks defending bases because most players (all factions) have no clue how to effectively take down player bases without throwing waves of cannon fodder at it like it were WW1 tactics charging at machine guns.

But capitalism sure does, right? .. you might as well be just a modern slave ..

(Yea i know i am a bit late on that one )

Way late, but I'll bite. People seem to think communism would save them from this service, but in reality/history the state becomes your master instead, the government becomes the 1%, and on top of that you don't own any property or even your own labor. How would you like to not even choose your own job? Capitalism has flaws sure, but it's the best we have with imperfect human nature.

Capitalism is a tainted word though too, because we don't have real free-market capitalism today, we have a corrupt system of giant government and crony capitalist corporations all working together to minimize competition and hold up the house of cards.

I sense we've gone beyond the scope of the Planetside 2 video game forums though.

You two realize that this "scenario" doesn't make sense, right?

1: The "experienced coordination team".
So these guys dropped 18 NC guys with 2 Gal's (I hope, because one carries only 12 people). Then these "experienced" players realized that their method wasn't working... But their platoon leader told them "let's do it again in the exact same way", and they did. But Purp here then says "see, the leaders are ridgid". Which is completely bypassing the point that the players who realized that it wasn't working and blame their leader for being stubborn were the one's who actually followed his commands to the letter. It doesn't make sense however you look at it, especially considering one of the biggest problems in PS2 is getting people to listen to you and actually do it because the moment they disagree they'll be off doing their own thing. This has many roots and problems, and experience is not one of them. A lack of rewards for teamplay, a lack of power gain for teamplay vs simply throwing more bodies at it, a lack of ways to keep people together and teamplaying in the extremely likely event of death and respawn etc.
But back to the point of point 1: This "experience coordinated team" does things that are too unlikely. It's like a multi-millionaire living in slums by choice and buying cheap equipment that quickly breaks down all the time. Sure it's possible, but it's extremely unlikely.

2: It's the fault of the coordination.
We have 18 dudes who have prepared, who use one of the only ways to attack a PMB and who use active coordination.
On the othe end we have a single vehicle, that besides his PMB required no preparation and who required no coordination.

The single vehicle could murder the 18 dudes and despite there being only 2 MAX's, some Medics and then the lionshare being Heavies, they had "no way to kill him". (anyone notice the lack of Engineers to support the MAX's? How flimsy is this story actually?)

And naturally it was all the fault of the coordination of the infantry...
What?
Are you completely insane? It doesn't take a rocketscientist to tell you that the ANT, a construction vehicle, is OP vs the infantry if it can take on 18 prepared and coordinated infantry. Even if they are barely coordinated the 18 infantry should be well capable of taking on an ANT if the game was fair, especially with the amount of HA's that should have been within the group you mentioned.

And to add insult to injury, Purp then says that only the NC supposedly is like this. If this guy gets any denser he'll start forming a black hole.

You have misrepresented what I said.

I meant you can not generalize a faction's player organization by subjective experience. There is no organized vs unorganized factions.

And even if NC players were some how statistically worse and less organized on all servers spanning multiple countries and cultures for some magical reason, you would still need to make adjustments for game balance if the stats suggest so.

I did not misinterpret. You went along with the scenario but added the (true) fact that this happens in all factions, not just the NC. I added you to the quote because you seemed to believe the scenario/anecdote could be possible. But it's extremely unlikely.

Additionally, you also claimed like Purp that the problem is with the coordination and the players, rather than the overwhelming power that PMB's offer vs attackers. You don't even stop to think "gee, with a PMB and a single construction vehicle I can single-handedly go up against 18 guys. Maaaaaaaaaaaybe it's not the coordination and tactics (which I can't use because I'm alone so I should be losign to any coordination and tactics on their part), but the fact that what I'm doing is much more powerful than teamplay and coordination".

The subject here is not the fairness of PMBs, I'm not defending them only stating current game experience. The subject of this thread is about NC losing statistically on all servers, the explanation, and possible solutions. Where were you going with this?

I'm going in the direction of "let's just correct some dudes who make extremely wild accusations to coordinated infantry and blame them, rather than blame the incredibly OP combination of PMB+ANT. Because if I don't do it now, they not might believe it later".

Perhaps the "Continent Locking Rewards" added in the next update will completely destroy the NC.
People are leaving Empire who can not get Reward.

Double XP weekend saw a few NC wins on Emerald, but it was definitely a VANU weekend... TR was surprisingly a no show- I remember TR winning one Indar alert last night during prime time, the rest were all VS...

I love how this site has a triangle to show what factions are focused on what factions: http://ps2.fisu.pw/activity/?world=17

Thats because most of current TR players have their main chars on NC or VS, few people truly play TR (cant blame them, no one wants to play underpowered faction hated by most devs in the team).

And the VS say the same thing.
And the NC would also say the same thing.

TR says it due to, lock-down making them stationary, the "assist-gun" that is the chain-gun, the nerf on the gatekeeper.
VS says it due to, the nerf on their Max Ability, Their magrider's higher drop & fixed-point cannon followed by duration nerf of mag-burn, to the Lasher not being a 1v1 weapon.
NC says it due to, their Maxes having 1 AI weapon capable of some range (Mattlock) requiring twice the investment, the Vanguard, the Jackhammer, starter weapon Gauss Saw, Fire-delay on the Railjack, Reaver hitbox size.

They all say it.
The comic bit is however, only the NC has the track record of losing constantly across all servers.