Your scenarios are not relevant.
Because you say so?
The rest of your comparisons are just semantics for the sake of being contrarian and an edgelord. Completely useless post. Try harder please.
This is sadly not a real argument, but namecalling, and also you seem to be misusing the word "semantics", which appears to mean in your vocabulary "a comparison I do not agree with." If you do not want to argue counterpoints then that's fine, just admit it and I'll let it go.
But okay, I will try harder. I honestly was not being contrarian, I was honestly trying to make a point. Please understand that.
You will be surprised to learn that I am an avid opponent of snipers as they stood in coh1 and I am not happy with them in coh2. I want snipers to be less dominant in the meta, not more. But you can't see even that. I want the Brits to have a viable snare, and think it is completely unfair to use a single unit, the 222, to justify gimping an entire faction.
This game is full of counters, some are soft, some are hard. Relic clearly wanted the 222 to perform better as a sniper hunter, and the British sniper can counter the 222 with his snare ability. I am not disputing those things. However, I do not see how these two things are mutually exclusive.
Counters being countered themselves is nothing foreign to CoH2, as it usually comes down to skill, facing, positioning, numbers, and micro. This was my sole point and I gave some examples for that, like tanks being able to take on at guns, and infantry being able to flank and take out an MG, Antitank infantry being able to damage anti-infantry vehicles etc. This is what makes coh2 great in my opinion, it's not just what you have, it's how you use it that determines the outcome.
And yet people think that they can use the fact 222 is meant to hunt snipers, to justify the complete removal of the sole British snare because in their mind conceptually the 222 must unconditionally win against the sniper? Are you saying you want a 222 to always be able to win against the sniper? Keep in mind this is not the same equation as m20 vs ostheer sniper, because Ostheer has fausts. And why do we conveniently forget the British sniper is a tier 2 tech unit with worse stats than the Ostheer sniper? For what reason is that so, if you want him to unconditionally fare just as badly versus 222 as an Ostheer sniper would against the M20? Why is antitank infantry allowed to take on Ostwinds, Centaurs and the like, but a sniper with an antitank rifle is not allowed to take on a light vehicle? Why are you allowed to theorycraft more than one tank when discussing AT gun flanking, but insist 222 / sniper equation must be 1 on 1? I could just as well say, use more than one 222 to attack the sniper, they can't both be snared by one sniper, can they?
Contrary to what you may think, I know what you are saying. My examples are not comparable because the sniper is invisible, the snare comes out of the blue and leaves no room for counterplay for the 222 player. Okay, this is something we can talk about (my question now is, how is that different from, say, a couple of Raketenwerfers taking down an m20 in a single salvo?) but, you would much rather stoop to namecalling so I don't think there is material for discussion there.
If you aren't successful with Brits (which, judging by your stats, it seems you aren't) then don't be surprised that better players figured out how to use the sniper and abuse its broken counter relationship.
This is where you start outright belittling me, which I find odd, since I hover around ~150 with brits, which is enough for me to meet top of the ladder frequently and is really nothing to be ashamed of.
I am sorry if that rank is not to your satisfaction, but I am in a way really happy to see you had to resort to that instead of arguing the point.
It does give rise to an interesting question - how big of a rank does one need to have to be able to post in this section without being subject to ridicule from you? I suppose your rank of ~60 with Brits is cool while mine of ~160 whatever isn't? Where do we draw the line, exactly? Why listen to you, then? Why not top 20? Why don't we just shut down the forums and allow the 1st player on the ladder to post what he thinks about balance?
Get off your high horse. I have no idea why you think is okay to act like a dick towards other people in a balance discussion. If you disagree with me, fair enough, but there is no need to be hostile and call me names. If you are here to dismiss everything everyone else says and insult people, you will never learn anything.