If you can't answer my honest question, maybe you should edit your response so it is more factual and less insinuative. Or just delete it - like many of the other posts around here have been deleted.

So... you still can't answer my question... :rolleyes:

Bought mine as well on the 30% :mellow: sale. slowly upgrading it - currently 4/20. Might start using at 10/20...

Don't forget drones. hard to compete in DM if you don't have a drone equipped.

i agree - very poor implementation of MM. Just not enough players to make it work - and they keep adding modes that dilute the pool of players. Juggernaut, Assault and RGBY should all be relegated to Pro-battles. Want to play these offshoot modes? Buy a pro-pass. For whatever reason they are catering to the short-attention-span mobile users. At the expense of computer-users. Turning this game into Super-Mario-Kart will be its downfall in the end.

Couldn't have said it better myself! B)

Well this whole discussion was about how unrealistic it is for Striker to have recoil - since - missile launchers don't have recoil. Maybe somewhere out there exists a crappy-designed launcher that imparts some sort of recoil. But not on a vehicle-launcher. The sheer tonnage of vehicle completely negates any insignificant recoil. Worrying about smoke and back-blast on a weapon in a game without infantry, and that involves wildly-coloured animated paints and pretty much no friendly fire, is a waste of time. Striker has recoil not because launchers do - but because game designers either - did not do their homework or... - just don't care, or... - did it on purpose for some sort of balancing, or... all three of the above.

Slower rotation does not matter so much at medium to long range. At short range sure - but most 'sniper" type turrets are at disadvantage there. Rail has large impact as well. If you are each in a light hull both are going to be batted around. heck rail can turn my stinking Viking half-way around with one shot. Smoky Incendiary. Funny you should mention that. It's an OP Alteration that improves the turret. Alterations are not supposed to improve turrets.

LOL - I didn't waste any crystals on a paint. And don't plan on doing so. You accused the poster of wanting a prize for doing nothing - when there was absolutely nothing in the post to suggest the case. Getting below average stars IS doing something. Stop dodging my question - highlight the words from that post which suggest the player wanted rewards for "doing nothing".

Roughly half the winning team, even when "doing something" will still get nothing. Try again. And... it's not surprising that you never answered my question.

We need rivers added to the game. Oh... and hot geysers...

You lost me right here :D But as others have said - shaft does not need any extra perks and... it's more like an OD or Alteration thing. Hornet OD appears so weak - this should actually be added to that OD.

Based on posters questions, how do you come to this conclusion?

How is Hornet's "the best"? IMO it is the weakest of all the ODs.

Yup. Just like players on the winning team who worked really hard may get nothing as well. Roughly 25% of the participants in the game will get a prize. ~ 75% will not.

Victory condition were lowered when battles reduced from 8 min to 7 min. Those victory conditions are now easier to meet - So many battles are ending in 5 min or less.

Agree on Esplanade and Deathtrack. Skylark would be nice too. Big fat NO on Noise. Too unbalanced. Would quit every time MM gives me Blue on that map.

:o Um... NO. What disadvantages? It fires rather quickly for a "sniper". And no warning unless you are staring directly at it as it fires - not many hulls move fast enough to get out of the way. So no - not a good idea to have tanks one-shotted left and right all battle long.

You're welcome. You noticed the Bradley had no recoil at all when launching missiles, correct? Take away the 25mm chain gun and a Bradley CFV is pretty much a Striker - even going so far as to having two launch tubes. Here's a different vehicle with anti-tank missiles... same result... no recoil. and another...

Usually posted by the losers that... 1) are on the team that finishes battle on good side of 8 vs 5. 2) are in bottom half of their team = being carried by their team 3) outscored by many players on the losing team = right place, right time

Yeah - OD like that on Hornet seem pretty weak. You can already see where flags are in battle = no extra benefit. And the module by-pass ... only benefit IF an enemy is wearing that module. Plus lower ranks... benefit << 50%.

How many tanks do you think Steven Zaloga has actually driven? You don't see the point in doing research because you... already know ... it all? <_<

When you have a module vs Thunder, smoky, etc... it affects even splash or critical - which affect your tank. Why then would a freeze module not do the same versus freezing effect - which affects your tank? Modules do not make the effects useless - it just reduces them. You are still slowed down a lot.

Open up the spoiler. Your sentences in same order you presented. FYI - this entire string was started because a tanker felt that Striker having recoil made no sense. Nothing you've posted counters that thought. Read post #2. Do a bit of research on IFVs that use anti-tank missile launchers. FV102 Striker. M3 Bradley. Raketenjagdpanzer. Even the M72 LAW (light anti-tank weapon) which is shoulder-mounted by infantry can disable a tank. If there was any significant recoil it would never be a feasible infantry weapon.

1) They don't exist on any IFV invented in the last 40 years. Should we maybe start using M3 Grants in this game? 2) This makes no sense at all. 3) See 2 above 4) Since this game DOES NOT have infantry there is absolutely no reason to design a turret that takes that into account 5) see 2 above 6) No - again - because THERE ARE NO INFANTRY. Holy smokes you are dense. 7) Wow. Way to deflect 8) Wow. Changing the subject. It figures. 9) I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. But ok - I guess it's the "you don't know squat" option...