So ESF should be able to chase something over enemy territory without having to care about enemys on the ground?
Talking from the receiving end of the Lancer, we can't even see your tracer, so if you use that as an excuse to why it's worse than the Striker, sorry, but no.
If you play tr you don't realize how much less ground locks you get then the other factions.... Mossie pilots are spoiled and don't realize how good they have it
you want to know what i love the most?! Is flying low during a battle to stay out of striker lock and staying near your zerg and then a LOLlvl20MOSSY comes by and ***** you in the *** while you try to fight and stay out of striker lock but then proceed to get ****** because no one on your side has a2a so screw all the terds that think its balanced cuz it ruins the game and how it is played for everyone else
I'd disagree "the most". ZOE is the best Anti-Anything in the game atm. Overpowered is a term reserved for the Vanu.
at least that has a cooldown and costs resources, the striker doesnt cost anything except to purchase it and then it ruins the game for all vehicles and allows the TR to have an especially severe air superiority advantage.....
So striker is more used than other g2a weapons, that isnt exactly a reason why it is op. Try some arguments instead why it is op and how you would balance it? "Hi, i´m an ESF pilot who wants to fight against other fighters on enemy ground but nobody is allowed to shoot at me because it would ruin my fun, i dont care if it is fun for others being killed by an ESF without the possiblity to do anything against it." How about we nerf A2G capabilities of ESF first so it isnt an "anti everything" anymore?
Pfff. I would rather solo a bio lab with 50 ZOE MAXs than face 1 more Striker. ZOEs are weak *** MAXs. Just shoot them and they die. The only class I have that can't successfully outplay a ZOE is a medic and that's just cause I lack C4. Even my infiltrator knows how to sucker in a ZOE and get him to walk over proxy mines. HA has so many options to kill them it's unreal and they die fast to small arms fire. If the TRs only complaint is ZOE MAXs then you got it easy. Easy.
Uhhhh, I've played VS, TR and NC maxes and I can say unequivocally that I have NEVER, EVER died to a phoenix, striker or lancer. Striker can't lock on, phoenix isn't used against maxes, and the lancer is as rare as moon monkeys. If you think that the Striker is situational, has low RPM (compared to ANY other rocket launcher?) and has less versatility than either of the other two AV then ... well, I think you should try playing the other empires for 30-40 hours to gain some perspective. I would also like to point out that I think you're wrong when you say phoenix rockets are invisible while killing tanks. What you probably meant to say was that they don't issue an audible lock on warning. This is because they don't lock on. You do get both a visible and audible warning though. Visible - the slow blue streaks. Audible, the first hit (of 3-4 required), when you realise you've just been plunked by one. At which point you simply drive away from its TINY range of fire. This contrasts with the visible striker that is unavoidable (well, post flare fix you can use flares) in any vehicle once fired. And the lancer, which is pants when you charge it, and as damaging as a burp when uncharged. But sure, keep defending this weapon as balanced.
HOW about this?! why dont we just nerf the TR and remove the ground to air striker and make them balanced like everyone else?! or ust make them choose between having a g2g or g2a striker when they spawn instead of being able to shoot both ALL the time?!
The only "cooldown" for ZOE is the MAX Pull timer, and if you're a half decent ZOE you won't die. Roll with a squad, load up in a bus, and rinse & repeat.
ZOe may be a little stronger than it should be, but its by no means OP, OP is giving a weapon to only one side in which every heavy in the field carries around and by itself can nearly kill an ESF in one volley and besides the high numbers of use, its high versatility in locking on to both ground and air vehicles, its nearly consistant non-rendering... it has an excessively strong damage output and the worst part is that it LEADS to an overpopulated TR AIRFORCE and an underpopulated VS and NC air force!!
Until ZOE is nerfed, I will preach the Striker is just bugged (which it is btw). Balance is something SOE can't seem to figure out how to do.
I'm not saying that it is balanced in its role, but I am saying that it isn't versatile. I have hundreds of hours logged as HA on all three factions and I use all three ESRLs. I have killed dozens of MAXes with both the Lancer and the Phoenix. The damage stats are misleading - the Phoenix is actually extremely effective against MAXes and it also allows you hit one 200 meters away. The Lancer can also hit MAXes at great distances, and I'd wager that no other infantry weapons are as good against MAXes at long range. The Lancer works wonders against tanks at great distances, since nothing can block your shot except full cover or a lack of skill. You can also fight air very effectively with some skill. The ability to be invisible with the Phoenix refers to the HA player himself, not the rocket. You can't kill a good Phoenix user as the tank being targeted. The Phoenix may lack the ability to fight air well, but it allows you to harass snipers, destroy turrets (killing the engineer as well) and every once in a while hit an ESF. Dealing enough damage to make it burn. The point is that Strikers can only fight tanks and air. And even against them you need to get the lock, which can be countered, and manage to fire all of your rockets. Although it is very, very powerful when you succeed, it isn't versatile as a rocket launcher.
I wouldn't equate "Can" & "May" to "Do". The Phoenix is not extremely effective against MAXes. It might be very damaging when you connect. That doesn't make it effective. We'll agree to disagree as this isn't a flame against you , and there's no measure here to say who's right. Look up my main though. Plenty of hours in a max. I've never been killed by a lancer. Ever. I've not been killed by a lancer in anything. "Might" work wonders; but if it does, why aren't every VS carrying them? Why have I never died to one. Just saying... laws of statistics and whatnot. I misunderstood what you meant here, admittedly. However striker users are a lot less stationary. Whilst you might not shoot back in your tank, it's also extremely hard to hit those TR striker users, on a rock above you, some 200m away, with a tank shell. Most of the time I get a lock on warning, I can't see the player locking on to me: so they are effectively non-visible. Plus: that stationary phoenix user is a tasty morsel for any infiltrator or light assault who happens by. The TR dancing on the rocks needs a good sniper shot, or two if over 50m away and wearing NW2. And harassers. And sunderers. So basically what you're saying is: it cannot fight maxes. That's it really. It can't hit maxes. Everything else though gets a five second grace to escape IF you've certed flares and not already fired them in the last 30 seconds. The phoenix can be countered by the way, just by driving away from it at normal speed! I don't have the facts, but I wonder what the hit ratio of a phoenix (or lancer) is versus the hit ratio of a striker. This should also hugely under-represent how good a striker is, because you guys must waste a lot of rockets against targets that have already died to a prior volley, whereas I would bet that is not the case for a lancer or phoenix... one hit wonders that they are.
How would you compare hit ratios from weapons working totally different? Example: 2 "attacks", 1 successful, the other doesnt hit. Normal weapons will have a 50% hit ratio. The striker ratio would be much higher. If you lose lock on or can only fire 1 or 2 rockets while the other attack hits with all 5 rockets due to no defense system/distance/cover, you´ll end up with 60-100% hit ratio without having more "successfull attacks". And of course there will be a lot more scenes where we cant fire our rockets because the target used defense mechanism or the lock on didnt work due to trees/antennas/buildings/any sort of cover than scenes where we fired a volley and the target died. If you nerf the dmg you are left with a simple lock on launcher which has some disadvantages (split dmg, longer exposure time, longer time to get the rockets on the way, no use against infantry or maxes) without any advantage. Increasing lock on time would mostly affect fights against ESF, a good ESF pilot which isnt too overconfident can already make lock ons close to useless.Why would you nerf striker especially against those who can already counter it pretty well if they actually want to? Having the possiblity to choose one is a nice idea. If it is either g2g or g2a it would mean it should be able to dumbfire (otherwise it would be more restrictive than any other rocket launcher ingame). I would love the g2a striker with the possibility to dumbfire 5 rockets at the back of tanks out of a building or blowing maxes away as a hobby. I guess this would make the striker way stronger than it is right now. And of course i would love to see the threads calling striker more op than ever before. Why wouldnt we be allowed to state our opinion like you state yours? Since when do we need your permission? If this weapon is so OP, why cant anyone make a clear suggestion how to balance it? It has some disadvantages (i already mentioned some of those in my postings) with the only advantage being the higher dmg and somewhat smarter rocket flight. If people just want to nerf so it doesnt have any more advantages ("nerf dmg") why would you still use it?
What should be taken into account is the major disadvantage of having to lock on. I mainly use Striker for TR and Hawk for NC when playing HA, and I tend to like the Hawk better. The ability to lock on vehicles is nice, but often this is prevented by terrain. The Hawk can be used as a dumbfire against vehicles, and while it kinda sux at longer ranges cause of drop and slower travel, that hurts me less than the fact that you ALWAYS need to aim at your target for some time before you can shoot, or not having any way to combat smoke. On top of that the striker cannot shot at MAXes or base turrets. (Infatery too, but thats fine you got a gun for that) Dont get me wrong Im not saying the striker is bad, it is a very nice weapon, but it has a big drawback. So if you really think its needed nerf it, but then I insist on beeing able to dumbfire it!
