Login

russian armor

USF M20 dead?

7 Jun 2020, 10:03 AM
#61
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


221 CLEARLY does not get any pen vet.

Stop laying about what I have posted I never posted that 221 get a penetration with vet.


MG34, in case you have forgotten, incendiary rounds, TRIPPLES penetration and DOUBLES damage.

A word of advice when you try to correct me I suggest you provide the right stats, incendiary round do not triple penetration its add +9 penetration.
7 Jun 2020, 10:05 AM
#62
avatar of Darkpiatre

Posts: 282

This unit has greater potential than 222 in late game. By building it, you're building a support tool which will help you later in the game, and that's what its vets are meant for: +40% stealth detection radius.
+38% planting speed of M6 mines.
Unless you're building a 222 in late game for the almighty power of the 20mm canon, they both cover the same role but the M20 can lay down powerfull mine.
Again the unit isn't meant to be an USF counterpart of the 222 and has its own playstyle: which mean its own strengh and weaknesses.
7 Jun 2020, 10:14 AM
#63
avatar of Baba

Posts: 600

This unit has greater potential than 222 in late game. By building it, you're building a support tool which will help you later in the game, and that's what its vets are meant for: +40% stealth detection radius.
+38% planting speed of M6 mines.
Unless you're building a 222 in late game for the almighty power of the 20mm canon, they both cover the same role but the M20 can lay down powerfull mine.
Again the unit isn't meant to be an USF counterpart of the 222 and has its own playstyle: which mean its own strengh and weaknesses.



Im sure its about the 20mil and not the free recon plane you get with jaeger armor
7 Jun 2020, 10:52 AM
#64
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Jun 2020, 10:03 AMVipper

Stop laying about what I have posted I never posted that 221 get a penetration with vet.

So you agree with me that pen vet is useless on m20, finally, thanks.


A word of advice when you try to correct me I suggest you provide the right stats, incendiary round do not triple penetration its add +9 penetration.

So its even better then!
Thank you once again for pointing out how pointless M20 penetration vet is.
7 Jun 2020, 10:57 AM
#65
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


So you agree with me that pen vet is useless on m20, finally, thanks.

Although I asked politely to stop laying about what I have posted you continue to do so.

M20 penetration buffs greatly increase the units DPS vs light vehicles available to axis factions.

Is it great? not really
Is it useless? no it is not either

I would claim that it is as useful as the accuracy vet bonus the 20 cm 222 gets.


So its even better then!
Thank you once again for pointing out how pointless M20 penetration vet is.

The penetration of HMG-34 is irrelevant to the M20 and penetration vet bonus it gets.
Apples and oranges.
8 Jun 2020, 00:46 AM
#66
avatar of miragefla
Developer Relic Badge

Posts: 1304 | Subs: 13



Will put these here, but this is my opinion. Mainly some timing changes and adjustment on the armored skirts.
8 Jun 2020, 04:07 AM
#67
avatar of SuperHansFan

Posts: 833

To use some of the statistical gymnastics posters here used in the Tommy thread

M20 has 150%! Extra pen at vet 3, surely this is OP? Hotfix should be needed to nerf these game breaking numbers.
8 Jun 2020, 09:00 AM
#68
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

...
Will put these here, but this is my opinion. Mainly some timing changes and adjustment on the armored skirts.

First of all congratulation for creating these videos. There are a far better way of communicating with the COH2 community.

I am glad to see that my suggestion of changing upgrade cost from munition to MP/full is considered.

The suggestions for making it available earlier are in the right direction and I would even consider making available earlier by requiring LT only and locking skirt behind tech.

But imo one should probably tone down the performance if it comes available early. For it cost and timing it has much better armor than the 221 that come about the same while its high mobility and range of 40 makes it very good at kiting. It can even attack and force retreat on unvetted HMG from max range easily. Generally it is really hard to counter without a vehicle.

Imo one should consider lowering the unvetted performance with range to 35 and lowering armor to around 5 and move smoke to veterancy. If there is a need the vetted performance could remain the same.

Imo one should also consider removing the crew from these cheap USF units like WC51 and possibly the M20 since the value of crew allow cover most of the cost of the unit.

I would also suggest to make the 221 available to Ostheer to act as a soft counter to sniper/light vehicles and the 222 come later with higher power level. This change would help allot with timing and performance of light vehicles.
8 Jun 2020, 09:17 AM
#69
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Jun 2020, 09:00 AMVipper
But imo one should probably tone down the performance if it comes available early. For it cost and timing it has much better armor than the 221 that come about the same while its high mobility and range of 40 makes it very good at kiting. It can even attack and force retreat on unvetted HMG from max range easily. Generally it is really hard to counter without a vehicle.

Imo one should consider lowering the unvetted performance with range to 35 and lowering armor to around 5 and move smoke to veterancy. If there is a need the vetted performance could remain the same.

Imo one should also consider removing the crew from these cheap USF units like WC51 and possibly the M20 since the value of crew allow cover most of the cost of the unit.

I would also suggest to make the 221 available to Ostheer to act as a soft counter to sniper/light vehicles and the 222 come later with higher power level. This change would help allot with timing and performance of light vehicles.


What a great ideas!

Then we can move on to buffing grenadiers by slightly toning down their performance by removing their LMG, breaking their legs, making faust require T4 and rifle nade be 70 muni, because it is too oppressive against vet0 maxims, we could then slightly increase cost of medkits, maybe even leave vet unchanged and we then could decrease the cost to 220 and decrease their build time by 5 seconds, now grens are buffed and balanced against everything.

8 Jun 2020, 09:21 AM
#70
avatar of JohnSmith

Posts: 1273

I profoundly doubt that the solution of fixing the M20 is by introducing further nerfs to the unit. It needs buffs, and reverts to its glorious days, things like reduce the build time, reduce the fuel cost by 5, reintroduce bazooka crews... etc. It's already dead on arrival, no need to kick it in the ribs again with further nerfs.

Don't nerf it further. :facepalm:
8 Jun 2020, 09:41 AM
#71
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



What a great ideas!
...

Thank you.

Glad that you are starting to appreciate the power of making a units available earlier.
8 Jun 2020, 09:43 AM
#72
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Jun 2020, 09:41 AMVipper

Thank you.

Glad that you are starting to appreciate the power of making a units available earlier.

You're welcome.

However I have to point out that you've spelled "removing from the game" wrong.
8 Jun 2020, 10:17 AM
#73
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


You're welcome.

However I have to point out that you've spelled "removing from the game" wrong.

And for a moment there I though you got it.

Ok you still struggle to grasp how important timing is and for some strange reason think that making a unit available earlier will removed it from the game.
8 Jun 2020, 11:00 AM
#74
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351

Mainly some timing changes and adjustment on the armored skirts.

Logical. Sensible. I'm all for it. The idea to connect skirts with manpower and fuel is very good.

I also like Vipper's idea to make it buildable before researching the upgrade on the tier but to leave the skirts upgrade until after the research is completed. Maybe then, the skirt upgrade could also add smoke and make mg range 40. Before the upgrade it could have 35 range on an mg (but only if it could be built before the tech upgrade). I also think that the built time should be shorter.

The crew with a bazooka is not a good idea as there is the possibility of one bazooka on the officer. Two bazookas without any tech were too many.
8 Jun 2020, 12:10 PM
#75
avatar of aerafield

Posts: 3031 | Subs: 3



Will put these here, but this is my opinion. Mainly some timing changes and adjustment on the armored skirts.


:thumb:

Very good, this matches my suggestions too
8 Jun 2020, 12:34 PM
#76
avatar of JohnSmith

Posts: 1273



:thumb:

Very good, this matches my suggestions too


Yeah, you had good suggestions in your opening thread!!!
10 Jun 2020, 16:37 PM
#77
avatar of OrangePest

Posts: 570 | Subs: 1

Tbh, the m20 is fine, maybe give it armored skirts straight off the bat and reduce mp cost a lil bit for better timing. but even then i find its pretty decent. Just comes down to how well you can micro it.
10 Jun 2020, 16:56 PM
#78
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

Tbh, the m20 is fine, maybe give it armored skirts straight off the bat and reduce mp cost a lil bit for better timing. but even then i find its pretty decent. Just comes down to how well you can micro it.

Although I mostly agree I have to point that:

The M20 already has more armor than vehicles of its timing even without skirt.

There is little reason to make almost immune to small arm so early. It can already stand in front of unvetted HMG and force a retreat.

11 Jun 2020, 10:08 AM
#79
avatar of Pervitin Addict

Posts: 51

I still see M20s on the reg, one of the best counters to snareless inf and lone MG's, plus it's mine being on par in performance with a teller is pretty notable. AGrens strats come to mind. But I think you have to be actively mining with it to get it's full worth. I would kill for the ability for the 223 to plant Riegels or likewise tellers at a vet lower than 5 :P. Late game they can be a nuisance for decapping on the flank
11 Jun 2020, 10:12 AM
#80
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

I still see M20s on the reg, one of the best counters to snareless inf and lone MG's

No one ever questioned that, in fact, you have it underlined multiple times by multiple people in this thread.

The thing is, that's about all it does, contrary to every other LV which got actual utility, secondary role or weapons potent at long range or against both infantry and vehicles or garrisons.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

New Zealand 61
Russian Federation 20
unknown 1
Germany 1

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

885 users are online: 885 guests
1 post in the last 24h
16 posts in the last week
37 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48909
Welcome our newest member, rudyegill
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM