Your opinion on the state of the 222
Posts: 133
Posts: 4928
Posts: 1124
Posts: 476
Posts: 128
Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2
Posts: 444
It's simple, make it more resistant to small arms fire, even if a price increase calls for it.
For 60 muni or is m20 side skirt 70 muni?
Posts: 515
wtf nosli, everyone knows that you dont like coh2. Comparing PE 222and Wehr 222 is like comparing apples and oranges. 222 is absolutely fine in terms of performance. Could maybe cost still 20 fuel.
That must be why I have over 600 hours of Coh2 and am top 100 with two factions in 1v1 and top 50 with several partners in 2v2? Kappa
I was simply pondering why in Coh 2 where most units lethality compared to Coh1 seems high, why the 222 got significanrly worse against infantry. Ruh dich aus alter
Posts: 1225
With that being said, I am not keen on the PE 222 either....
Posts: 476
Posts: 179
Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7
Same gun as the Luchs, and nearly (just a different mount and barrel length) the same as the Sd Kfz 251/17 and base defense FlaK38. And all of them function a bit differently, some better than others.
By this definition then t 34 /85 shoud have the same range as su 85 - use same gun.
Then corcodile shoud do the same main gun damage as normal curchill - same gun.
Etc etc
Posts: 1384
It still has the little machine gun thingy it used to have by default, in addition to the upgun.
Posts: 170
Posts: 707
Completely counters: m3, m20, universal carrier. Can damage m5, m15, AEC. Its coaxial mg has the dps of an M3. Its autocannon is a threat to clumped infantry. What else could you ask for?
Maybe you have no idea about this game.
NOT Completely counters: M3, M20 (Put a guards in M3, noobs can do that; Jump out of the M20 and shoot it)
Can damage m5, m15, AEC Suicidally.
Its coaxial mg does not have the dps of an M3.
Its autocannon is NOT a threat to clumped infantry, I can just blob right to it and heavily damage it just by blobbing and focusing fire.
Posts: 473
Permanently BannedStill I like the 222. It needs to be scaled down model wise and perhaps could do with a little increase in damage to infantry. Double 222 can rip apart infantry however.
Posts: 271
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
People comparing the m20 to a 222 seem to forget that the m20 comes with a vehicle crew that can instantly repair crits, has its own bazooka and can lay mines and has non doctrinal smoke
They also forget that it costs 50% more menpower and more fuel and is completely ineffective vs vehicles unless you expose that vehicle crew, completely stopping vehicle in place and exiting it.
Still I like the 222. It needs to be scaled down model wise and perhaps could do with a little increase in damage to infantry. Double 222 can rip apart infantry however.
Any improvement to its AI would have to be at the cost of its AT dps.
Posts: 473
Permanently Banned
They also forget that it costs 50% more menpower and more fuel and is completely ineffective vs vehicles unless you expose that vehicle crew, completely stopping vehicle in place and exiting it.
Any improvement to its AI would have to be at the cost of its AT dps.
It has almost no AT dps, what do you want to decrease? Lol
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
It has almost no AT dps, what do you want to decrease? Lol
It have enough AT dps to reliably penetrate vehicles that costs 4-5 times as much fuel.
It hardcounters effortlessly every single light that costs less then 50 fuel(short of upgraded M5).
Livestreams
210 | |||||
44 | |||||
13 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.611220.735+5
- 3.35057.860+15
- 4.1110614.644+11
- 5.276108.719+27
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.918405.694+2
- 8.262137.657+3
- 9.722440.621+4
- 10.1041674.607-2
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
7 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Harda621
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM