Does Striker make Thunder obsolete?

[5HADOW 249]

Striker has around the same damage and quicker reload after a single missile shot, and it has the option to charge and fire 4 missiles for huge damage which is something Thunder can't do, not to mention it also has splash damage, which used to be unique to Thunder. Not to mention the fact that it has 4x more range than Thunder.

 

M0 Striker reloads quicker than M3 Thunder (2.46s for Striker vs 2.56s for Thunder) which makes no sense whatsoever.

[ftp 1,696]

Striker is the ultimate anti-tank turret.
Striker is the most OP turret to have ever existed 2nd to Smoky XT, which had damage of thunder and reload of Smoky.

[r_I_already_won0 2,339]

Yes I don't understand why everyone is saying Striker is UP, it's quite balanced.

 

Now as opposed to Thunder, the alternating barrels, the lack of auto-aim, etc, are it's disadvantages. It is just harder to use in a straight fight.

[Maf 32,307]

Striker is the ultimate anti-tank turret.

Striker is the most OP turret to have ever existed 2nd to Smoky XT, which had damage of thunder and reload of Smoky.

How do you know? Have you tried it? I'm not seeing any Striker in your garage.

 

I personally played with Striker for almost 20 hours and I can tell you how terrible it is. Trying to get a lock-on to launch a full salvo is extremely hard - either you die, the enemy dies, your aim gets knocked off or they go into cover. For all of those things to not happen is nearly impossible. The individual rockets are Striker's main firing mode and they are quite slow, and way too easy to dodge. Thunder's shots land on the enemy instantly.

 

The only reason why Thunder may be bad now is because a lot of players have protection from it. Barely anyone bought Striker modules and even then it's really hard to get a good score. So no, I strongly disagree about Thunder being obsolete because of Striker.

[5HADOW 249]

 

I personally played with Striker for almost 20 hours and I can tell you how terrible it is. Trying to get a lock-on to launch a full salvo is extremely hard - either you die, the enemy dies, your aim gets knocked off or they go into cover. For all of those things to not happen is nearly impossible. The individual rockets are Striker's main firing mode and they are quite slow, and way too easy to dodge. Thunder's shots land on the enemy instantly.

 

The only reason why Thunder may be bad now is because a lot of players have protection from it. Barely anyone bought Striker modules and even then it's really hard to get a good score. So no, I strongly disagree about Thunder being obsolete because of Striker.

I just made an alt to test it and I've faced all of those problems... Main reason I thought it was OP is because of Polygon CP where it's easy to hit tanks sitting on the point.  I agree now that Thunder is better and not obsolete at all (it's my favorite turret, actually).

Edited March 7, 2017 by Maf

[Maf 32,307]

Closed by request.