Removal of Striker

[yellowghetto 3,206]

In my opinion, Striker serves no purpose in the game but to waste game space, other's players time, and kill stealing. It has 0 potential in the line up of turrets and it literally a trash version of Gauss. If we are all to just accept Gauss in the game. Striker has to go? Here are some reasons. I will only take stock Striker as an example. After a year and a half with no serious Striker changes, this turret honestly has no hope.

Cons:

• The Developers hate this turret. Besides its Augments, which are all pretty bad, they will never buff or nerf this turret.
• It has a laser, why on earth would we use a turret with a less damage potential then Gauss
• Aiming Recovery is slim to none 
• Missiles are insanely easy to dodge
• A full lock on almost never has a chance of even destroying a medium hull
• A Missile Launcher does less damage than Thunder
• It is weaker than Thunder, Magnum, and Gauss
• It is awkwardly built. Missiles autoaiming like to fly randomly sometimes on HTML5
• It has great self damage potential
• Hull specific (In a "dynamic" game we have to think which hull fits best on Striker?)
• Map specific (In a "dynamic" game, we have to worry which map we play on, in an RNG MMS?)
• Slim to none impact force to flip over hulls.
• Missiles are tiny, less splash than Thunder 
• Wiki lies about player opinions. Correction: Worst Option for a Defensive and Offensive weapon. Ability to inflict splash damage to multiple enemies or an enemy while always being in sight.
• No skill based. Just drive shoot in one space, pray it hits or even kills someone.
• Augments do not do much but in certain game modes. You could argue, "Well Striker can do well there!" No, there are always better options. Just use Hornet Magnum. Easily replaces this trash.
• Waste of game space.
• Useless when ODs are taking place.
• Useless when Drones are taking place. You can argue, that Drones can be nerfed. This is Alternativa, do you think they are smart enough to nerf Drones that actually impact the game?
• Modules give Striker nearly a 0% chance of destroying anybody.
• Maxing it out has almost no noticeable differences.

Pros:

• This turret is only useful in parkour. Like, wtf.

Here is the description for Striker. 

Since the dawn of warfare, the biggest threat to a tank was an anti-tank missile. That beastie could carefully deliver an explosive package to its target from a very long distance. Anti-tank complex “Striker” continues a century old tradition of express explosion delivery to the tank and its armor. Target capturing system with a pre-installed AI will use spectral analysis to allow maximum precision when firing the missiles. For dynamic battles an option to directly shoot the rockets is also included. Tankers don’t show much affection for this armored box of microchips, suspecting it’s actually a severed head of a cleaning robot, which can short out at any minute and decide to “clean” all of the tankers from the battle.

Now, here is the corrected version of it.

Since the dawn of warfare, the biggest threat to a tank was Gauss' accelerated caliber or a Submachine Gun that can destroy faster than Striker's laser lock on. That mentioned "Striker" of a turret could carefully deliver an explosive package to its target from a very long distance, of course, if they don't move. An attempt for an Anti-tank complex “Striker” continues a century old tradition of express explosion delivery to the tank and its armor. Target capturing system with a pre-installed AI will use spectral analysis to allow minimum precision when firing the missiles as they usually even miss. For dynamic battles an option to directly shoot the rockets is also included. Tankers don’t show much affection for this armored box of microchips, suspecting it’s actually a crap version of Gauss, which can short out at any minute and decide to “clean” destroy your own tank from the battle.
 

I'm serious about this topic and I think Striker should just be removed from the game. If it does, I hope we get some sort of compensation for it.

It's a mess, I'm offended that this still exists, I can't really say much cons about other turrets compared to this junk.

 

Edit: Year(s) later.

POV: Really yellow?

Edited July 10, 2021 by yellowghetto

[TheCongoSpider 8,952]

You really are critical about Striker. 

[sensei_tanker 3,098]

I actually perform very well using Striker. But that said, if you remove any turret, remove Vulcan. It is indeed the lag gun.

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

It was actually on its way to become a decent turret. And then Gauss was born and killed any hope that striker was gaining.

[yellowghetto 3,206]

36 minutes ago, sensei_tanker said:

I actually perform very well using Striker. But that said, if you remove any turret, remove Vulcan. It is indeed the lag gun.

preforming well with striker? yeah maybe a battle or two after like 10 other battles, that is whack.

[alkyng 3,080]

you've forget the left-right shots makes you insanely 

[Azonyx 124]

6 hours ago, yellowghetto said:

In my opinion, Striker Vulcan serves no purpose in the game but to waste game space, other's players time, and kill stealing. It has 0 potential in the line up of turrets and it literally a trash version of Gauss.  [...] After a year and a half with no serious Striker Vulcan changes, this turret honestly has no hope.

Careful what you say there, devs might next give Striker the same treatment as Vulcan based on their "unpopular turrets" statistics.

Ares and new turret are coming soon which may / may not delay a BaLaNcE uPdAtE, but rest assured, TO is always looking for ways to monetize recycled stuff.

[Viking4s 10,791]

Is that another "joke topic"? If there is one equipment to remove that is Hunter! It destroy the game, ruine capping, steal supplies and such.

"In my opinion, Striker serves no purpose in the game but to waste game space, other's players time, and kill stealing" lol, remove railgun too then, kills stealing is what we live for.

Edited June 15, 2020 by Viking4s

[SporkZilla 1,775]

Oi, leave Hunter alone

I think the only problem with Striker is people using it when they don't have the skill. For people who have the skill, it's deadly (and they don't rely on the lock on)

If I had to remove a turret, it would be Gauss, but Shaft is really annoying me at moment because of stupid teammates using it with Mammoth and camping in the same spot for entire battles and achieving nothing for the team

Edited June 15, 2020 by SporkZilla

[JESUSaves2 98]

3 hours ago, SporkZilla said:

Oi, leave Hunter alone

I think the only problem with Striker is people using it when they don't have the skill. For people who have the skill, it's deadly (and they don't rely on the lock on)

If I had to remove a turret, it would be Gauss, but Shaft is really annoying me at moment because of stupid teammates using it with Mammoth and camping in the same spot for entire battles and achieving nothing for the team

You have a point. If a player is skilled with a weapon then they are deadly. I've seen it with every hull and turret. Unfortunately most players aren't very skilled so therefore topics like this show up.

[Harry321 67]

I've used this turret many times but could not get used to it, i mean with getting kills,left right combination, self destruction. So now i've stopped using this turret and regret buying, also i think hunter's overdrive should also be changed.

[wolverine848 13,097]

6 hours ago, Harry321 said:

also i think hunter's overdrive should also be changed.

To what?

[Blutaar 1,904]

What is it with people disliking turrets and suggesting removals from the game? We have had these similar topics and dsicussions about Gauss, Vulcan, Railgun, Freeze and now all of a sudden apparently Striker? Do not take this personally, but for the love of god! Can we please stop overexaggerating about turrets being too OP/UP that must be deleted from the game permanently?! I can agree to an extent to Gauss being overpowered, but I find this ridiculous. Please, rather give some useful changes or suggestions instead. 

There are people who play with Striker now and then or use it as their main weapon. Let them enjoy their gameplay with that turret because I don't think that could possibly annoy you in a way. I myself used to play with Striker sometimes and I am planning to buy it Mk8 as soon as I have the crystals for it. 

I have read your comment and reacted on your points. If you mind, you can read it:

Spoiler

 

• The Developers hate this turret. Besides its Augments, which are all pretty bad, they will never buff or nerf this turret.

How do you know developers hate this turret, something they single-handedly made? Besides, as a matter of fact, Striker has the largest damage-output compared to its fellow medium-turrets. I have not experienced a Striker performing/being underwhelming in gameplay, so I would not say this turret needs a large buff.
I prefer using Striker with M.L: Hunter or M.L: Uranium augments. I have had some really good plays with it and interesting situations.

• It has a laser, why on earth would we use a turret with a less damage potential then Gauss

Without a laser, Striker missiles will come unexpected and hard to foresee making this weapon straight overpowered, a similar situation of why Shaft has received a laser-aiming system. Whether Gauss should (not) have a laser can be argued among players, but this has nothing to do with Striker itself.

• Aiming Recovery is slim to none 

Here, I agree on lengthening the aiming recovery time to make targeting an enemy easier.

• Missiles are insanely easy to dodge

That is not necessarily true. Missiles can be dodged but can also hit a target for the same. It really depends on the place/situation, hitting a target with a full salvo is far from impossible. I think the main limiting factor is the aiming recovery time that decreases the changes of success.

• A full lock on almost never has a chance of even destroying a medium hull

Taking a look at minimum and maximum damage of Striker, in this case Mk8, damage-output varies between 3160 and 3880, which is enough to kill a medium hull. This goes for previous modifications as well. Killing a heavy hull is not possible, I find that strange as well since it indicates the ability to destroy heavy hulls, but that’s not the point here.

• A Missile Launcher does less damage than Thunder.

A single missile does indeed, but Striker has the ability to fire a salvo that carries a total damage larger than Thunders, something the latter turret lacks. If one wants to fire stronger missiles, they should consider buying Uranium or a different weapon.

• It is weaker than Thunder, Magnum, and Gauss

Thunder, Magnum and Striker are three different weapons. I have already discussed Thunder – Magnum is a lot harder to use than Striker, the high difficulty-level is greatly compensated with the large (splash) damage and splash radius. Magnum can do things that Striker can do not and vice versa. We are not talking about augments here, that’s a different topic on its own. Gauss is in a whole different league on its own, but again I won’t be judging Gauss here since that turret can be considered overpowered.

• It is awkwardly built. Missiles auto-aiming like to fly randomly sometimes on HTML5

What exactly do you mean? I am playing on HTML and so far I have not had any issues concerning auto-aiming.

• It has great self-damage potential

So do Thunder, Magnum and Gauss. That’s the risk of using a splash-damage turret, how is this turret any different?

• Hull specific (In a "dynamic" game we have to think which hull fits best on Striker?)

This applies to other turrets as well. Striker can fit on both medium and heavy hulls to perform well. Light hulls are questionable, but Hornet can work as well.

• Map specific (In a "dynamic" game, we have to worry which map we play on, in an RNG MMS?)

This applies to other turrets as well. To add, Striker can perform on several maps, small and medium and large: it just requires a different playing style, and perhaps alteration. But not all weapons are useful on all maps.

• Slim to none impact force to flip over hulls.

Striker’s impact force from a single is slightly lower than Smoky’s, but from a salvo it can practically flip over a light hull nonetheless. Striker remains damage, splash damage and impact force over distance, in contrary to other medium-turrets. To add, explosion impact is heavily increased to 300, somewhat lower than Thunders impact force.

• Missiles are tiny, less splash than Thunder.

Maximum and average splash is the same as Thunder, minimum is 4 meters smaller. But how is this a downgrade since striker can pull out four projectiles instead of 1?

• Wiki lies about player opinions. Correction: Worst Option for a Defensive and Offensive weapon. Ability to inflict splash damage to multiple enemies or an enemy while always being in sight.

This is solely based on your opinion.

• No skill based. Just drive shoot in one space, pray it hits or even kills someone.

This doesn’t make any sense, tracking an opponent and shooting rockets requires good timing and position. This is one of the harder turrets to use in-game, next to Shaft and Magnum. So it does require a decent amount of skills. Turrets that are easier, and thus “no skill based”, to use are Smoky and Thunder.

• Augments do not do much but in certain game modes. You could argue, "Well Striker can do well there!" No, there are always better options. Just use Hornet Magnum. Easily replaces this trash.

There are almost always more solutions and options to choose and use, that does not mean the other option should be completely neglected just because another equipment-piece is more superior. If someone feels more comfortable with Striker instead of e.g. Smoky, let that person use Striker instead.
Also, saying that Hornet+Magnum is more useful gives away your train of thought. I assume you are referring to Magnums augment RFG; if so, you are talking about a generic piece of equipment that excels in gameplay compared to all other combinations. The fact that this tank-combination outclasses other tanks is an issue on its own, many people consider this combination broken so comparing it to other turrets and hulls is crooked. Besides, you stated that “augments do not do much (…)”, so your argument can be neglected straight away.
But, if you meant Magnum without augments, Magnum is not any better than Striker at all.

• Waste of game space.

How does this have impact in gameplay? It is that Striker is at a somewhat lower Mark compared to other turrets of mine, but I still plan to upgrade it nonetheless.

• Useless when ODs are taking place.

I do not completely understand this one. If you mean ODs are countering Striker; yes they can, but so do they counter other turrets, mind to explain how Striker is any different?
If you are referring to offence, I disagree. Striker equipped with Viking can cause quite the havoc once Berserk Reactor is activated, Hornet allows to ignore any protections and Titan can allow to protect Striker for a period. And let’s not even begin with Striker+Hunter in Juggernaut mode.

• Useless when Drones are taking place. You can argue, that Drones can be nerfed. This is Alternativa, do you think they are smart enough to nerf Drones that actually impact the game?

As I have said previously, this does count with all turrets. A Railgun can do as little to a defender-user as Striker.

• Modules give Striker nearly a 0% chance of destroying anybody.

And again, that’s also the case for other weapons.

• Maxing it out has almost no noticeable differences.

I have no maxed Striker, so I cannot tell about my experiences with it. However, Wiki states that there is a large difference in stats between an Mk7 and Mk8 and I do believe the garage shows this statistics as well.  

 

 

Also, whats the main reason that encouraged you to write about this topic? You have used Striker for a very long time, so why is it that you suddenly dislike the turret?

My suggestion to make Striker somewhat more useful is by making the aiming-recovery time longer so that it will be more comfortable to lock on targets. 

Edited June 15, 2020 by BloodPressure
Typos

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

1 hour ago, BloodPressure said:

What is it with people disliking turrets and suggesting removals from the game? We have had these similar topics and dsicussions about Gauss, Vulcan, Railgun, Freeze and now all of a sudden apparently Striker? Do not take this personally, but for the love of god! Can we please stop overexaggerating about turrets being too OP/UP that must be deleted from the game permanently?! I can agree to an extent to Gauss being overpowered, but I find this ridiculous. Please, rather give some useful changes or suggestions instead. 

There are people who play with Striker now and then or use it as their main weapon. Let them enjoy their gameplay with that turret because I don't think that could possibly annoy you in a way. I myself used to play with Striker sometimes and I am planning to buy it Mk8 as soon as I have the crystals for it. 

I have read your comment and reacted on your points. If you mind, you can read it:

  Hide contents

 

• The Developers hate this turret. Besides its Augments, which are all pretty bad, they will never buff or nerf this turret.

How do you know developers hate this turret, something they single-handedly made? Besides, as a matter of fact, Striker has the largest damage-output compared to its fellow medium-turrets. I have not experienced a Striker performing/being underwhelming in gameplay, so I would not say this turret needs a large buff.
I prefer using Striker with M.L: Hunter or M.L: Uranium augments. I have had some really good plays with it and interesting situations.

• It has a laser, why on earth would we use a turret with a less damage potential then Gauss

Without a laser, Striker missiles will come unexpected and hard to foresee making this weapon straight overpowered, a similar situation of why Shaft has received a laser-aiming system. Whether Gauss should (not) have a laser can be argued among players, but this has nothing to do with Striker itself.

• Aiming Recovery is slim to none 

Here, I agree on lengthening the aiming recovery time to make targeting an enemy easier.

• Missiles are insanely easy to dodge

That is not necessarily true. Missiles can be dodged but can also hit a target for the same. It really depends on the place/situation, hitting a target with a full salvo is far from impossible. I think the main limiting factor is the aiming recovery time that decreases the changes of success.

• A full lock on almost never has a chance of even destroying a medium hull

Taking a look at minimum and maximum damage of Striker, in this case Mk8, damage-output varies between 3160 and 3880, which is enough to kill a medium hull. This goes for previous modifications as well. Killing a heavy hull is not possible, I find that strange as well since it indicates the ability to destroy heavy hulls, but that’s not the point here.

• A Missile Launcher does less damage than Thunder.

A single missile does indeed, but Striker has the ability to fire a salvo that carries a total damage larger than Thunders, something the latter turret lacks. If one wants to fire stronger missiles, they should consider buying Uranium or a different weapon.

• It is weaker than Thunder, Magnum, and Gauss

Thunder, Magnum and Striker are three different weapons. I have already discussed Thunder – Magnum is a lot harder to use than Striker, the high difficulty-level is greatly compensated with the large (splash) damage and splash radius. Magnum can do things that Striker can do not and vice versa. We are not talking about augments here, that’s a different topic on its own. Gauss is in a whole different league on its own, but again I won’t be judging Gauss here since that turret can be considered overpowered.

• It is awkwardly built. Missiles auto-aiming like to fly randomly sometimes on HTML5

What exactly do you mean? I am playing on HTML and so far I have not had any issues concerning auto-aiming.

• It has great self-damage potential

So do Thunder, Magnum and Gauss. That’s the risk of using a splash-damage turret, how is this turret any different?

• Hull specific (In a "dynamic" game we have to think which hull fits best on Striker?)

This applies to other turrets as well. Striker can fit on both medium and heavy hulls to perform well. Light hulls are questionable, but Hornet can work as well.

• Map specific (In a "dynamic" game, we have to worry which map we play on, in an RNG MMS?)

This applies to other turrets as well. To add, Striker can perform on several maps, small and medium and large: it just requires a different playing style, and perhaps alteration. But not all weapons are useful on all maps.

• Slim to none impact force to flip over hulls.

Striker’s impact force from a single is slightly lower than Smoky’s, but from a salvo it can practically flip over a light hull nonetheless. Striker remains damage, splash damage and impact force over distance, in contrary to other medium-turrets. To add, explosion impact is heavily increased to 300, somewhat lower than Thunders impact force.

• Missiles are tiny, less splash than Thunder.

Maximum and average splash is the same as Thunder, minimum is 4 meters smaller. But how is this a downgrade since striker can pull out four projectiles instead of 1?

• Wiki lies about player opinions. Correction: Worst Option for a Defensive and Offensive weapon. Ability to inflict splash damage to multiple enemies or an enemy while always being in sight.

This is solely based on your opinion.

• No skill based. Just drive shoot in one space, pray it hits or even kills someone.

This doesn’t make any sense, tracking an opponent and shooting rockets requires good timing and position. This is one of the harder turrets to use in-game, next to Shaft and Magnum. So it does require a decent amount of skills. Turrets that are easier, and thus “no skill based”, to use are Smoky and Thunder.

• Augments do not do much but in certain game modes. You could argue, "Well Striker can do well there!" No, there are always better options. Just use Hornet Magnum. Easily replaces this trash.

There are almost always more solutions and options to choose and use, that does not mean the other option should be completely neglected just because another equipment-piece is more superior. If someone feels more comfortable with Striker instead of e.g. Smoky, let that person use Striker instead.
Also, saying that Hornet+Magnum is more useful gives away your train of thought. I assume you are referring to Magnums augment RFG; if so, you are talking about a generic piece of equipment that excels in gameplay compared to all other combinations. The fact that this tank-combination outclasses other tanks is an issue on its own, many people consider this combination broken so comparing it to other turrets and hulls is crooked. Besides, you stated that “augments do not do much (…)”, so your argument can be neglected straight away.
But, if you meant Magnum without augments, Magnum is not any better than Striker at all.

• Waste of game space.

How does this have impact in gameplay? It is that Striker is at a somewhat lower Mark compared to other turrets of mine, but I still plan to upgrade it nonetheless.

• Useless when ODs are taking place.

I do not completely understand this one. If you mean ODs are countering Striker; yes they can, but so do they counter other turrets, mind to explain how Striker is any different?
If you are referring to offence, I disagree. Striker equipped with Viking can cause quite the havoc once Berserk Reactor is activated, Hornet allows to ignore any protections and Titan can allow to protect Striker for a period. And let’s not even begin with Striker+Hunter in Juggernaut mode.

• Useless when Drones are taking place. You can argue, that Drones can be nerfed. This is Alternativa, do you think they are smart enough to nerf Drones that actually impact the game?

As I have said previously, this does count with all turrets. A Railgun can do as little to a defender-user as Striker.

• Modules give Striker nearly a 0% chance of destroying anybody.

And again, that’s also the case for other weapons.

• Maxing it out has almost no noticeable differences.

I have no maxed Striker, so I cannot tell about my experiences with it. However, Wiki states that there is a large difference in stats between an Mk7 and Mk8 and I do believe the garage shows this statistics as well.  

 

 

Also, whats the main reason that encouraged you to write about this topic? You have used Striker for a very long time, so why is it that you suddenly dislike the turret?

My suggestion to make Striker somewhat more useful is by making the aiming-recovery time longer so that it will be more comfortable to lock on targets. 

I think striker just needs the following changes:

· Faster projectile speed for salvo mode.

· Longer aiming recovery time.

· Laser being replaced by just brackets for an indicator.

· An indicator of which side will fire next for the user.

· Increase in vertical auto aim.

· Smaller lock on time.

[MissaoGeneralissimo4 23]

7 hours ago, JESUSaves2 said:

You have a point. If a player is skilled with a weapon then they are deadly. I've seen it with every hull and turret. Unfortunately most players aren't very skilled so therefore topics like this show up.

This is the point. Every turret or hull is good if you have the skill to use it. Just because you don't like it and don't know how to use it is not a reason to remove it from the game. If you don't know how to play, JUST PRATICE! I always try different combinations to test my skills in the battlefield. In my example: I don't like too much the Shaft turret, because it's the favorite type for the players that don't have good skills. But I don't go to the FORUM to just start with mimimimi about the turret. And I have Shaft too, and sometimes I play with it too, and I don't like it too much. Just this.

[enri_chill 135]

11 hours ago, SporkZilla said:

If I had to remove a turret, it would be Gauss, but Shaft is really annoying me at moment because of stupid teammates using it with Mammoth and camping in the same spot for entire battles and achieving nothing for the team

While I am not a camper...in my experience (and I play primarily CTF) a strong shaft player paves the way for me to capture a flag by killing the pursuing tanks without me being aware of it. They also often kill the other team's flag carrier before it is capped saving a score. That might not be how your teammates are playing, but in general every team needs a strong shaft (on medium and large maps) to open the board.

[Russty 368]

Thunder used to be my main turret but then Striker took that place. I'm happy with Striker and I think it's quite good! I have the skills since I've used it a lot so that helps. I'm almost always in first place when I use this turret. We all have opinions and I do understand where you're coming from.

[JESUSaves2 98]

16 minutes ago, Russty said:

Thunder used to be my main turret but then Striker took that place. I'm happy with Striker and I think it's quite good! I have the skills since I've used it a lot so that helps. I'm almost always in first place when I use this turret. We all have opinions and I do understand where you're coming from.

See, their are skilled Striker players. Just like i was saying.

[yellowghetto 3,206]

15 hours ago, Viking4s said:

Is that another "joke topic"? If there is one equipment to remove that is Hunter! It destroy the game, ruine capping, steal supplies and such.

"In my opinion, Striker serves no purpose in the game but to waste game space, other's players time, and kill stealing" lol, remove railgun too then, kills stealing is what we live for.

this is not a joke topic. Striker is seriously useless. Despite Vulcan being unpopular before, it still had decent uses. Striker on the other hand just can't do anything by itself. With the release of Gauss, and everyone's denial in saying this turret is balanced, I have given up about Gauss, and we might as well delete Striker. It could open room for the new turret we saw in the most recent V-LOG.

[yellowghetto 3,206]

2 hours ago, Russty said:

Thunder used to be my main turret but then Striker took that place. I'm happy with Striker and I think it's quite good! I have the skills since I've used it a lot so that helps. I'm almost always in first place when I use this turret. We all have opinions and I do understand where you're coming from.

With not much experience earned these past weeks, and a higher play time with Thunder than Striker, I find your statement hard to believe.

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

1 hour ago, yellowghetto said:

this is not a joke topic. Striker is seriously useless. Despite Vulcan being unpopular before, it still had decent uses. Striker on the other hand just can't do anything by itself. With the release of Gauss, and everyone's denial in saying this turret is balanced, I have given up about Gauss, and we might as well delete Striker. It could open room for the new turret we saw in the most recent V-LOG.

Gauss is ponytail boy's baby. So he released it and only slightly nerfed it. The devs were on the right track to making striker a decent turret. And then plans to keep going stalled because ponytail boy wanted his baby to be in the game.

 

But honestly I like striker as a turret, I do agree though that it's quite weak and needs some nice buffs.

[yellowghetto 3,206]

52 minutes ago, DieselPlatinum said:

Gauss is ponytail boy's baby. So he released it and only slightly nerfed it. The devs were on the right track to making striker a decent turret. And then plans to keep going stalled because ponytail boy wanted his baby to be in the game.

 

But honestly I like striker as a turret, I do agree though that it's quite weak and needs some nice buffs.

Devs hate Striker, it is obvious, they never show gameplay (themselves using it) of it on their V-LOGs, its always Gauss, Vulcan, Railgun, Smoky, Firebird, or Thunder. 

One important buff it would need is infinite recovery time. I know it doesn't really make sense, but it would make Striker more viable in many maps and hull choice. Remember when the XC format existed. Wait, what was that again?

[yellowghetto 3,206]

I'm almost 100% sure the people who voted no are just players who don't want their $ or crystals wasted. 

[cosmic666 1,055]

On 6/15/2020 at 2:45 AM, yellowghetto said:

In my opinion, Striker serves no purpose in the game but to waste game space, other's players time, and kill stealing. It has 0 potential in the line up of turrets and it literally a trash version of Gauss. If we are all to just accept Gauss in the game. Striker has to go? Here are some reasons. I will only take stock Striker as an example. After a year and a half with no serious Striker changes, this turret honestly has no hope.

Cons:

• The Developers hate this turret. Besides its Augments, which are all pretty bad, they will never buff or nerf this turret.
• It has a laser, why on earth would we use a turret with a less damage potential then Gauss
• Aiming Recovery is slim to none 
• Missiles are insanely easy to dodge
• A full lock on almost never has a chance of even destroying a medium hull
• A Missile Launcher does less damage than Thunder
• It is weaker than Thunder, Magnum, and Gauss
• It is awkwardly built. Missiles autoaiming like to fly randomly sometimes on HTML5
• It has great self damage potential
• Hull specific (In a "dynamic" game we have to think which hull fits best on Striker?)
• Map specific (In a "dynamic" game, we have to worry which map we play on, in an RNG MMS?)
• Slim to none impact force to flip over hulls.
• Missiles are tiny, less splash than Thunder 
• Wiki lies about player opinions. Correction: Worst Option for a Defensive and Offensive weapon. Ability to inflict splash damage to multiple enemies or an enemy while always being in sight.
• No skill based. Just drive shoot in one space, pray it hits or even kills someone.
• Augments do not do much but in certain game modes. You could argue, "Well Striker can do well there!" No, there are always better options. Just use Hornet Magnum. Easily replaces this trash.
• Waste of game space.
• Useless when ODs are taking place.
• Useless when Drones are taking place. You can argue, that Drones can be nerfed. This is Alternativa, do you think they are smart enough to nerf Drones that actually impact the game?
• Modules give Striker nearly a 0% chance of destroying anybody.
• Maxing it out has almost no noticeable differences.

Pros:

• This turret is only useful in parkour. Like, wtf.

Here is the description for Striker. 

Since the dawn of warfare, the biggest threat to a tank was an anti-tank missile. That beastie could carefully deliver an explosive package to its target from a very long distance. Anti-tank complex “Striker” continues a century old tradition of express explosion delivery to the tank and its armor. Target capturing system with a pre-installed AI will use spectral analysis to allow maximum precision when firing the missiles. For dynamic battles an option to directly shoot the rockets is also included. Tankers don’t show much affection for this armored box of microchips, suspecting it’s actually a severed head of a cleaning robot, which can short out at any minute and decide to “clean” all of the tankers from the battle.

Now, here is the corrected version of it.

Since the dawn of warfare, the biggest threat to a tank was Gauss' accelerated caliber or a Submachine Gun that can destroy faster than Striker's laser lock on. That mentioned "Striker" of a turret could carefully deliver an explosive package to its target from a very long distance, of course, if they don't move. An attempt for an Anti-tank complex “Striker” continues a century old tradition of express explosion delivery to the tank and its armor. Target capturing system with a pre-installed AI will use spectral analysis to allow minimum precision when firing the missiles as they usually even miss. For dynamic battles an option to directly shoot the rockets is also included. Tankers don’t show much affection for this armored box of microchips, suspecting it’s actually a crap version of Gauss, which can short out at any minute and decide to “clean” destroy your own tank from the battle.
 

I'm serious about this topic and I think Striker should just be removed from the game. If it does, I hope we get some sort of compensation for it.

It's a mess, I'm offended that this still exists, I can't really say much cons about other turrets compared to this junk.

Leave poor striker alone it gives us all an easy kill.

[cosmic666 1,055]

8 hours ago, wolverine848 said:

To what?

Yeah to what? Remove overdrives and leave good ol striker just the way it is lol.