now that the anti terrans are gone

You damn hippocrite:

All in one post! You really are reaching now aren't you?

Why don't you read some other threads? The one below has some comments by Movoza, but I've repeated the same elsewhere a dozen times, and I can't be bothered to repeat them over and over again every time:
https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/now-that-higbys-gone.214882/#post-3108612

Ofcourse the "score per hour" stats are pointless! But in combination with KPH, KPU, V KPU, V KPH, A KPU, A KPH, amount of players who used it etc over a month, it becomes valid to use. Otherwise we would be down to arguing with "a Sniper is the best, as a headshot is a OHK, therefore skillful people will be best with it, therefore it's OP". That's basically the line of "proof" that you've been on so far.

No, the Vanguard doesn't beat the Prowler in most scenario's at most ranges. Can you prove it? I have a month's worth of data, collected from all servers from all players to back my claim up, what do you got? Oh yeah... you got the "I think it's like this, thus anyone who is against me is dumb, stupid and should simply learn from me".

oh no, that wasn't your point, just re-read your posts so far, from beginning to end.

You don't get away that easily, you basically just ignored every point I made and then diverted everyone by trying to throw dirt at me ("see this quote of yours") and then when I don't try to deny it and actually use it you suddenly never have been in a discussion with me about all the points you and I brought up? Convenient.

You are out of ammo, you haven't provided a single shred of evidence, all I did thus far with the exception of this post was point you in the direction where you can find my proof, not the best track record but much better than what you've been doing. You also have done nothing more than try to get people off your back rather than show us why you are supposedly right.

Yep tr got punished for running striker squads. And everyone whined. What did you expect when 10 guys would sit there with strikers to lock Dow. The sky? so punish me for team works....yay.

No way. The NC has a clone of every factions guns. And the best cqc max. Why give them another leg up on the other factions.

If you want to talk about other factions , how about giving the tr a sniper rifle like the vs and NC.

Phase rifle and railjack, tr got. Nothing.
Phase sniper and rail jack, what did the tr grt

As a side note, the Banshee can kill so fast that by the time the first bullet registers on your screen, you are already dead.
It also works for longer ranges for the Banshee
The Airhammer also has a large portion of luck thrown in the mix, with bad luck even at close ranges of 50+m you can have most of your pellets miss and not get the kill
And despite the "incredible" power of the OHK mechanic (which is also available on the Banshee as said), the Air Hammer was always the lowest of the bunch until the Banshee got a tad overnerfed.

Oh, and infantry can OHK with a shotgun as well
Snipers can OHK without time to retaliate or find cover...

OHK has been overused, it's a bad argument and while it does help in a weapon, it's far, faaaaaaaar from being an ultra-trait that immediately makes it OP or something. There's carbines that can OHK when you open fire on someone's head, by the time their screen tells them they are hit the server already counts them as dead.

Actually no, there is no NC equivalent to the CARV nor the Orion, those bullethoses being referenced. If you need it spelled out to you, no, I'm not saying the NC LMG's aren't good and well rounded, just that the NC lacks that particular type of LMG. One could argue that there is no Gauss Saw equivalent, but the niche the SAW fills is inarguably less critical than that of the other two. In a general sense, basically all of the weapons across all factions are moderately tweaked clones of each other. This isn't strictly an NC thing. As to the NC MAX, it also has the worst sustained fire, and typically must choose either CQC or short/mid range. TTK in CQC is pretty low, so the margin of difference between the factions is not incredibly significant, given its drawbacks.

Neither the phaseshift nor the railjack are any better than the other sniper rifles already available to their own faction, let alone the other factions. The railjack is okay, but is outclassed arguably entirely by the longshot. The phaseshift is versatile, I suppose, but that gain in versatility means using an inferior weapon comparative to either class. The TRAP is more or less a standard burst rifle; the burst mechanic is still not where it ought to be, but at least it is entirely different in function from the other weapons.

Decent arguments can be made for balance between factions. These are some odd choices.

There was no such thing as a "striker squad"
there were 2 Strikers in a base and every ESF got gibbed without a chance of survival thanks to the flares also being bugged back then.

the Striker did 1/3 the damage of an Annhi with a single rocket, so a full mag did 5/3=> ~165%

Fact is NC has the most options and don't need anymore.

I could agree with you but then we would both be wrong.

You have no idea what your talking about.

When I played with it wore Nerf it was 5 guys to take down an esf. Not all missiles would hit and lockons were iffy. I call shenanigans on this post. Just lies really.

lol, you can have teamwork with anything, a team of lancers is extremely effective but we don't want lancer nerfs,
in Striker's case though all it took was 2 people with a Striker (not even knowingly working as a team) and ESFs couldn't enter TR occupied airspace.
it was far worse than the Vulcan-H situation.

Fact is that, numerically speaking, each faction has the exact same amount of options. Maybe you should clarify,

Say what? Don't lie man! The whole point of that period was that lock ons couldn't miss. The missiles would fly through terrain and hit! Flares sometimes didn't work and the missile would hit you anyway etc.
2 Heavies with a Striker could gib an ESF, period. Don't go calling shenanigans on something if you are the one with the shenanigans.

Right now lock-ons have the problem of not hitting because the missile decides to ram the tree or go through the ground while trying to intercept an ESF. But it wasn't back than (not to mention it wouldn't have mattered with missiles going through the terrain).

Im going to go with 'NOPE' on OP.

I... have no idea where you get those numbers. Every lockon deals exactly 1000 damage, although the G2G one has a different damage type than the G2A and the Annihilator.
I don't actually recall the strikers exact damage numbers, and it had its own damage type anyway... I think it was something between 250 minimum and 350 at most. Either way its damage was enough to kill ESFs with two salvos, while other launchers only set them on fire. So, yes it did deal more damage. But not that freaking much.
Going on to the second point... that is NOT an advantage. No pilot will wait to get hit before diving for cover, and if they do they will die to almost anything. They dive as soon as they get locked on, which means that it is better to deliver all damage in one punch that hits as soon as possible, than to deliver 25% more damage in 5 hits and givint the pilot more time to lead them into something solid and evade the damage.

For reference why the Striker was so OP see here as an example (hope the stuff works, if not follow the links):


http://gfycat.com/WateryRashBlacklab

Or this:



Here's the link: www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQryDsaSO7k
Read the comments too if you want.

Almost every TR got it, they loved it, loved how it looked and felt to fill the sky with dozens of faction colored rockets at once.
Observation: 6-8 guys shoot everything that flies and is painted the wrong colour and take it down almost instantly.
Conclusion: It must be OP.
It does not help the cause that Liberators were actually both a lot more powerful and more fragile back then.
Also any missile had about a 50/50 chance to ignore obstacles and phaseshift through it to get to its target (which, seeing as the striker fires 5 rockets, means that there is a good chance that at least two hit you)
AND, for the final touch, decoy flares were pretty wonky. They also worked only half of the time... if you were lucky.

So, to cut a long story short:
The Striker was popular, which means a lot of people had it.
There were two bugs that the strikers unique modus operandi could greatly capitalize on, but which any other launcher had also, although it was less noticeable.
Instead of fixing the bugs and dealing with the fact that people used it in numbers it was made useless, except if you need fireworks.

If I recall correctly, the striker did more damage than the rest of the lock ons and could lock all vehicle types. It was better than the dedicated AA rocket at AA, as well as the AV rocket at AV, and the annihilator at both. It couldn't dumb fire, but unless you were expecting MAX's, it really didn't need it. The striker made it basically impossible for air to operate at all, and this likely would not be different even if the bugs got fixed and the mechanics changed. Any relatively open field fight that needed vehicles was an easy TR victory, provided the pop was anywhere near even. When it got changed, the TR didn't seem to be interested in switching to annihilators, which they seem to think is just as good.

No, the striker was OP as ****. That's all.

The gun that really need some loving in the tr is the trap it lives up to its name ITS A TRAP XD

Go away.

No one on this planet would be daft enough to do that, it was ridculously overpowered.

Again no one on this planet would be daft enough to revert it as it was insanely overpowered vs infantry and MAXs, it might need a little rebuff though, or the AH and LPPA nerfed down a bit.

The Lynx isn't nerfed, it is a great weapon and arguably the best performing of its competitors.

Sigh...

Ignore a ****ton of facts, post counterwise statement without facts, claim your opinion is the one and only.

Im done arguing, your kind will only drag me down on your level and beat me with experience.

Which ****ton of facts did he ignore? From where I'm standing he was spot-on. Instead of being scathing and insulting, could you please enlighten us to what we are missing?