Completed Striker: 2 or 3 rocket volley with shorter lock-on time

[DieselPlatinum 5,275]

Why not just divide the loading circle into 3 parts? And/or change color of the circle to equal the amount of rockets ready to launch once the space bar is released before maximum sequence is initiated?

 

Red = 1 rocket

Blue = 2 rockets

Yellow = 3 rockets

 

You can leave the full launch as is.

 

I like that suggestion :)

[DieselPlatinum 5,275]

I've heard this suggestion ever since the turret comes out., BlackWasp did the math to show why this idea cannot fly.

 

If you want the lock-on to launch 2 or 3 missiles, then give up the launch of 4. The new smaller number become the maximum and the reload timing re-tuned to the new number.

 

The way to fight this turret is to learn to kill with single launches. One missile hits hard. The splash is a major tactical tool.The 4-shot salvo is for certain circumstances. eg a Freeze is coming your way keep the laser on him... worst-case scenario is you take him down with you. After a couple attempts watch him run for cover as soon as the laser lights him up.

What if they double the time it takes for full lock on to complete?

[r_I_already_won0 2,359]

What if they double the time it takes for full lock on to complete?

Because then nobody would ever use it. The volley is supposed to be for special situations, while the single-shot is for normal use.

[DieselPlatinum 5,275]

Hahaha! [wiping tears from eye] Good one!

 

Yeah, that's the claim.

 

But Firebird alterations made the turret strongwe. OTOH no one in their right mind buys the Isida or Vulcan alts, because those make the turret weaker.

Good point :/

[r_I_already_won0 2,359]

Hahaha! [wiping tears from eye] Good one!

 

Yeah, that's the claim.

 

But Firebird alterations made the turret strongwe. OTOH no one in their right mind buys the Isida or Vulcan alts, because those make the turret weaker.

The thing is, stock Firebird is extremely weak.

 

Idk about Isida and Vulcan alts, but the stock versions aren't that strong either.

 

But there is NO alt in the game that is worth the price. Unless, of course, you have an M4 combo and are looking for something new.

[DieselPlatinum 5,275]

Deleted :ph34r:

[BlackWasp777 4,555]

Or we can remove striker from the game altogether :/

It's a nice turret, why should it be removed?

What's the problem you see?

[DieselPlatinum 5,275]

Deleted :ph34r:

[Jwimmer 2,836]

You say that as if alterations are meant to make turrets more powerful. That's not the case.

cough cough firebird cough cough

[r_carlo1234 118]

I disagree.

 

Because it is a lock-on time, not a charging time.

 

If you want the lock-on to be shorter then each missile should cause less damage to compensate the change. Reloads will have to be faster too.

 

And that could be a good solution, because it will be harder to evade a salvo attack. But if you get hit you have more chances of surviving.

 

That will also help you when your Striker teammate is targeting a tank that is attacking you. Many times you die before friendly Strikers fire their salvo because it takes a long time.

 

It could also help in keeping OP Shafters on their toes. Because while they are targeting others or even charging to shoot you, you will be able to fire a salvo.

 

And please devs narrow the turret.

 

What do you guys think?

 

 

PS: No devs, this is not an idea for an alteration. Alterations should not make the game less predictable. Lock-on time should be the same even with the alterations.

[Maf 32,842]

cough cough firebird cough cough

They're not meant to make them more powerful. Firebird is an exception and it was kind of an accident.

[BlackWasp777 4,555]

It sucks :/

That's the problem

If they would remove a turret when it sucks, then - during the course of the last 5 years of rebanaces - no turret would be left any more :p

 

 

And it's laser gives shaft a huge advantage.

 

The laser of a shaft and a Striker is clearly distinguishable.

• The kill log in the uppper right corner gives you an idea if the enemy team has a Striker of a Shaft (does not help sp much if they have both, but you claim they are rare, so it should be no issue)
• Striker lasers are parallel to the ground and just flick up/down to autoaim a target if there is a target, while Shaft lasers can change their angle all the time. Only if a Striker sits on a ramp (which is quite uncovered..) they can point their laser downwards intentionally.
• Shaft lasers movement to left/right is slow and more steady, while striker Lasers mvoe faster and flicker around
• If you train your battle field awareness, you anyhow know where their Shafts and Strikers sit and where you can move in cover and where not.

 

I had hopes that it would be effective in battles, sadly it did not meet my expectations. It didn't even change gameplay all that much. It's even worse than railgun, and railgun sucks as well :/

If you consider it as ineffective, then do not play it by yourself. If you already purchased it (I did not check your profile now) then you might consider to not purchase new stuff that has not yet prooven itself.. neithrr in a game nor anywhere IRL.

But as I said, you will see the turret be played more effective, as soon as you rank up (about 10 more ranks, which might take you half a year).

 

Same goes for rail. Actually, especially with rail you can see, that the turret seems to work great, as so many players are using it and enjoy the gameplay. Players love rail that much, that if Tanki would remove Rail and blame it to your wish, you might have real trouble if players find out who you are and where you live ;)

[DieselPlatinum 5,275]

Deleted :ph34r:

[DieselPlatinum 5,275]

Deleted :ph34r:

[BlackWasp777 4,555]

 

 

It's a nice turret, why should it be removed?

What's the problem you see?

 

It sucks :/

That's the problem

[...]

It's even worse than railgun, and railgun sucks as well :/

 

I didn't say to remove rail. :/

 

I thought you like to have Striker removed because it sucks.. and as rail sucks too by your opinion..

it seems my logic failed me.

 

 

 

Mafioso, can you lock this topic for me? Thanx :)

I thought that section here is ment to collect players feedback on players ideas..?

[Maf 32,842]

Mafioso, can you lock this topic for me? Thanx :)

For what reason? Also, please quote my post if you want to draw my attention.

[SUP3R_ST4R 1,207]

For what reason? Also, please quote my post if you want to draw my attention.

http://prntscr.com/egnsl7 Much better

[VaudeVille 1,436]

They're not meant to make them more powerful. Firebird is an exception and it was kind of an accident.

Somehow devs happen to make quite a lot of accidents nowadays :ph34r:

[Skills.n.Girls 774]

You say that as if alterations are meant to make turrets more powerful. That's not the case.

Let pretend it as with this formula:

 

P = B/C

Power = Benefit / Cost(Price)

 

I'd often say "too powerful for so low price". Alterations aren't meant to make turrets more powerful, I agree with this, and I didn't state this statement anywhere. Alterations are meant to make gameplay with specific turret a bit more interesting and/or different. Just stated out it would be more economical to make people spend more effort (or money) for such interesting alternative to current type. ;)

[koopa-crusher 0]

Why not have an alteration or update the turret so that the scope divided into quarters. Every time you hit one of those milestones another rocket is added to your volley.

[FailArmyGT 260]

Theres no reason to change the volley.

The turret has 4 holes and it must shot 4 rocket after locking.

[r_I_already_won0 2,359]

It ruins the feel of a true "Rocket Launcher".   Like those Soviet ones in WW2.

 

I know, it's entirely opinion-based objection, but still. :P

[DieselPlatinum 5,275]

Update: I have tested it on another account. And my thoughts on it is that it's actually a really good turret on its own, and with an update that doubles the projectile speed (meters per second) a while back, I now see a potential terminator that if in the right hands, can dominate the battlefield.

 

 

Hazel said that it is OP at the moment. But I think that striker is now one of the most balanced turrets in the game. Many people have complained that the lock on takes to long to load, but in the reality of the game, striker has 2 modes; single rocket, and full salvo. The single rocket must be utilized at all times while the full salvo can only be used if it is necessary and you are given the opportunity to use it. With the reload speed being faster than thunder, you should be able to deal quite some damage using the single rockets. If you aren't able to utilize its single rockets, then you probably are a failure at everything.

 

So with this said, I hereby state that this idea (even though I posted it myself) is no longer valid.

 

Now I want a mod to decline it, immediately. :ph34r:

[LittleWillie 3,216]

^^^ I agree Striker is overpowered*. I was just hoping no one else would notice. ^^^

 

* Not the only one though

[HAPPSHOT 2,030]

^^^ I agree Striker is overpowered*. I was just hoping no one else would notice. ^^^

 

* Not the only one though

Yeah thunder is OP as well, This Idea is nice... Though striker is OP, using it in a battle in quite complicated