Anyone else think that the strike scoring is either broken or badly designed?
I just played a game against a B-17. Fair enough, it's a heavy duty bomber and should do serious damage. But in a 500 ticket match, one drop from the B-17 took our tickets to 49. From 500 to 49 - in one drop. Without destroying a single target?
Err...huh? Are the tickets not the sum total of the target's health? If not, should they be?
And also while I'm posting about strike scoring, how come you only seem to get * points for actually destroying a target (kills not withstanding). What about the poor guy that spends the whole match wearing down a load of targets (and setting them on fire so they are easier to spot) but doesn't actually deliver any finishing blows, all he gets to show at the end of the match is that he was killed several times. And no doubt leaderboard positions are equally badly reflected.
IMO the * score should be kills + damage done to targets. And there should probably be a multiplier for killing enemy bombers in your half of the map so that fighters can compete.
Shame because strike is "potentially" a fantastic game mode. I say potentially because it relies on a good balance of teams and for people to read the situation and react accordingly - not just run off on their own agenda or treat it like a team deathmatch. And I'm sure we all know how good random people are at acting in a co-ordinated fashion online