What scares me about Striker Buff

Lancer = AV good, AA poor, AI pointless. MAX V Good
Pheonix = AV Trolltastic, AA impossibru, MAX nice & obnoxious, AI pointless
Striker 2.0 = AV meh, AA Good to V Good, AI WHHHYYY???.
^FTFY^

Footnote to this I forgot to clarify: Talking about Striker 2 weeks ago when it was "remade" and pushed back out the door in a worse state than the Valkyrie was. That was afterall the focus of this discussion I thought? ...assuming the Op felt 2 weeks wasn't enough time for "data". ...basically data that would say "The sky is BLUE"

Lel, decent at most.
Lock ons are twice more effective: better range, better accuracy and better damages.

Well... Considering that's based on them both being outdoors and the Lancer user having the time to charge it before unloading itself all over the MAX... I wouldn't exactly call it very good at it.
You'll be laughed out of the base if you bring a Lancer to an indoor fight, for example.

Who brings a lancer indoor when you can switch to a decimator..? It's not supposed to be a do-it-all RL or there would be complaints everywhere, but it does come close to being one.
Unloading a full clip of lancer with a charged round onto a MAX is still more effective than even tank rounds, especially against the MAXes standing on tower pads. It can hit MAXes very hard and very fast, at medium-long range. You can't do that with any other RL or mobile infantry-equipped weapon.
Poor in close range, but excels in long-range—opposite of a decimator. It's not the best but it's the best at what it can do. It's still "pretty good."

Yes... That was the point.

Well, in theory you can snipe those obnoxious Raven MAXes with it.

Your post seemed to undervalue the lancer's ability as an anti-MAX weapon. If the "best" medium-long-range, infantry-carried anti-MAX weapon isn't "good" at medium-long-range anti-MAX, then what is?

To keep more on the thread topic, at the very least the lancer is superior to the striker and the phoenix as anti-MAX.

Statistically it did well, both in comparisson to the other two ESRL (obviously) and in general.

The Striker 2.0 was good at AA, mostly because of its high 1 mag damage/DPS I think (and perhaps because in general more damage was landed - other lock-ons are obviously very/completely hit or miss), I usually got more kills with it than with a basic AA lock-on.

It was especially good against spawn campers, comparatively (I suspect the Striker 3.0 will be as good if not better in similar circumstances).

It was more that the situations where the Lancer is good against MAXes are rare, and distinctly outside the normal MAX engagement situations.

Seems to be the policy with the Spiker

The Striker still is garbage. There is nothing good about it compared to the other launchers. To me its a waste of time to pull it out. I have a grounder and deci, the striker is not fun to use.

Problem was, that VS requested a "viable" charge up effect... Well you got one. On a nonviable weapon :/ Spiker 1.0 was such a good sidearm though :/

There's Fairy-Mode for the sardine can maze-fights. I was indeed only talking about longer ranged field utility where the MAXes are running AV/AA loadouts for obvious reasons. Hell this is true for us NC maxes at pretty much any range above 10ft. (slugs kinda suck BTW when SOE's hitreg is as bad as its been lately)

Well, isn't that narrowing it down a bit too much though?
And the hit registration problem rears it tail in everyone's face, not just the NC MAX.

I would say yes around this time last year. But lately there's almost always that awkward transition phase between pure base fights and the bigger field battle on every major lane. #1 reason is the Resource changes, but there's other factors too and it really impacts the Strikers potential too I notice.

The VS actually see that far less often b/c your commanders are always using forced organization that specifically circumvents "giving your opponents a chance to rally / push out". But between the NC and TR lately, there's a ton of it b/c the NC love their pointless bolt actions and the TR love their equally as flankable sitting duck lockdown HE/HEAT Prowlers. So instead of two cohesive groups of homogeonously competent armies, you have packs of farm-bait on both sides camping horrible positions on the nearest high ground but getting flanked by the few good players who still play for these Factions. And there's just not enough good players to affect the overall "blobiness" of these amateur-hour field battles.

If you've ever watched a 96+ allies base-defense immediately followed by DOZENS of players and MAXes all running straight out into the field like that's the most effective way to march on the next base... then you've seen what I'm talking about. It looks cool at first but quickly turns into a parody of itself

Are you talking about Emerald or Miller?
As for those 96+ defenses that lead to infantry rushes... It usually falls apart within minutes. Then it's either back to defending on vehicles enter the fray.