Login

russian armor

Sdfksz 222 Revamp

PAGES (7)down
19 Jan 2016, 16:28 PM
#41
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

Swipe the thread. Try to remain on topic.
19 Jan 2016, 16:35 PM
#42
avatar of Tobis
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4

The only solution is to add the Hotchkiss to Ostheer.

The perfect solution.
19 Jan 2016, 16:45 PM
#43
avatar of Rollo

Posts: 738

You already have the flame HT in tier 2 that deals double the damage as a single wasp Bren for 30 more muni

a 222 buff would break balance vs brits and force you into the overpriced 440mp AEC every game. 222 already hard counters PIAT tommies/Vickers/Bren carrier and the sniper, not sure it needs a buff.

It's also funny people mention the 222 being outgunned by the stuart or T-70 that arrive a minute later when the WASP bren upgrades at the same time a 222 can be built (the former being utterly helpless against it because zero IS snare unlike faust).

222 is a unit with its own niche, it can rush a sniper/m20/Bren WASP and pay for itself even if you trade. It's not underpowered in any way, I come up against my fair share of top players that rush a 222 and even into the lategame it has it's use for chasing off shocks/tommies (not to mention doctrinal spotting scopes and smoke).
19 Jan 2016, 16:56 PM
#44
avatar of Imagelessbean

Posts: 1585 | Subs: 1

The 222 used to arrive early to account for the Clown car flame rush. This strategy is more limited now, and has larger trade offs than before. The timing was also meant to give Osteer time to pick off unsupported snipers (before of just as guards arrived) but the 222 seems of little use in this regard because it ends up having to dive every time to kill the snipers and in so doing trades, probably for slightly better than spent, but can be for nothing.

I would like to see the 222 gain some potency, its size decrease (it's huge for no reason), its cost increase, and its role broadened. Making the 2cm on top actually hit infantry would be nice.

Moving to T1 and then unlocking upgrade to autocannon at T2 is interesting. This would give obvious counterplay to T1 play, with fair back and forth (scout car, bren vs. unupgraded 222), but I am concerned both of these vehicles would immediately be destroyed as soon as the upgrade could be bought, with little input from the other player. May be some way to better balance that issue.
19 Jan 2016, 17:15 PM
#45
avatar of Napalm

Posts: 1595 | Subs: 2

Why not lower the price of the Ostwind? Seems to me like at its current performance level that it would be a good fit. 70 fuel/300ish MP. Done and done.
19 Jan 2016, 17:16 PM
#46
avatar of miragefla
Developer Relic Badge

Posts: 1304 | Subs: 13

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Jan 2016, 16:45 PMRollo
You already have the flame HT in tier 2 that deals double the damage as a single wasp Bren for 30 more muni

a 222 buff would break balance vs brits and force you into the overpriced 440mp AEC every game. 222 already hard counters PIAT tommies/Vickers/Bren carrier and the sniper, not sure it needs a buff.

It's also funny people mention the 222 being outgunned by the stuart or T-70 that arrive a minute later when the WASP bren upgrades at the same time a 222 can be built (the former being utterly helpless against it because zero IS snare unlike faust).

222 is a unit with its own niche, it can rush a sniper/m20/Bren WASP and pay for itself even if you trade. It's not underpowered in any way, I come up against my fair share of top players that rush a 222 and even into the lategame it has it's use for chasing off shocks/tommies (not to mention doctrinal spotting scopes and smoke).


How many flame half-tracks do you see nowadays along with 222s even in the tourney games? Because from NA ESL, unless it was from me, the number of 251/222 units ranged from 0-1. That should be telling how useful/less Ostheer light armour is.

Also I'm sorry, but just because the Brit's anti-light vehicle option suck outside of ATGs and AEC doesn't mean the 222 should remain as it is. Pretty sure if the 222 gets changed, other stuff would need to be change in response, but this is about 222 not Brit anti-light armour. Furthermore you ignore the cost increase of the 222, delaying its timing giving units like the Bren, M20, and M3 more time to work.

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Jan 2016, 17:15 PMNapalm
Why not lower the price of the Ostwind? Seems to me like at its current performance level that it would be a good fit. 70 fuel/300ish MP. Done and done.


Why not buff the 222 which is in more need of help than the Ostwind which is also locked behind BP 2 and T3? This would help expand Ostheer's lack of light vehicle play outside of call-ins in the current meta of Allied light armour rushes.
19 Jan 2016, 17:43 PM
#47
avatar of PanzerGeneralForever

Posts: 1072

I agree that ost needs a proper light vehicle. Even if it was put into the role of the armored car for panzer elite in Vcoh I would be happy. Right now all it does is spot and chase snipers.
19 Jan 2016, 18:23 PM
#48
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

222 is a scout car and actually the best scout car in-game since its counter any other ones. What do you need more?
You do not use it a lot because what it's suppose to counter isn't meta actually.

To counter light armor you have faust + pack + 2xshreck squads + 222, isn't it enough?
19 Jan 2016, 18:33 PM
#49
avatar of ThePhalanx
Donator 33

Posts: 33

The 222 could probably use a slight buff, but that accuracy against Infantry is extreme. I'm pretty sure you'd be making it a more effective AI vehicle than the Luchs for a fraction of the fuel cost. The 45 range would also cause problems as it would invalidate LT tier. Furthermore, if it got a buff, it would need to be more like 40 or 45 fuel as I find that 15 fuel for the 222 is too little for what it already does.
19 Jan 2016, 18:34 PM
#50
avatar of sorryWTFisthis

Posts: 322

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Jan 2016, 17:15 PMNapalm
Why not lower the price of the Ostwind? Seems to me like at its current performance level that it would be a good fit. 70 fuel/300ish MP. Done and done.



Best idea ever. I wholeheartedly agree with this.
19 Jan 2016, 18:45 PM
#51
avatar of Durkalina

Posts: 21

Just because a unit wasn't used much in the ESL does not always reflect its performance.
It does reflect a player preference.

In an a-symmetrical game play not every unit should be as viable as other.

The 222 defined role is to spot snipers.
It's additional role is to harass weapon teams and infantry whom are without AT. These roles it performs very well thanks to it's low cost, turret and also the fact it is tier 1.

Writing the 222 in comparison with:
1)AEC - Role to counter light vehicle, slightly harass infantry (even after the buff it is the worst for the role), scouting.
2)UC - Tier 0, cannot harass well, slow, low armor, low damage (Even with the WASP.)
3)T70 - Is tier 3, and thus on a different level.
4)M20 - Infantry harassment and mine laying.

The 222 is fine.
Stop asking for buffs for factions which clearly still lead the boards.
Reference - Relic's graphs.
http://www.companyofheroes.com/blog/2015/12/23/game-balance-the-state-of-1v1-for-esl

If you will check the graph, than you shall see that the Axis factions still win more than the allies.
(With brits falling WAY behind.)

Thus you should ask not "Why is my unit unlike X or Y"
But instead thy shall ask "Why is the ally faction not like mine ?"




19 Jan 2016, 18:52 PM
#52
avatar of miragefla
Developer Relic Badge

Posts: 1304 | Subs: 13

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Jan 2016, 18:23 PMEsxile
222 is a scout car and actually the best scout car in-game since its counter any other ones. What do you need more?
You do not use it a lot because what it's suppose to counter isn't meta actually.

To counter light armor you have faust + pack + 2xshreck squads + 222, isn't it enough?


And you think Ostheer can easily get all that? Paks cost 320mp and lower your infantry presence and is slow to maneuver and can be flanked. PGs requires 340 manpower and then an additional 120 munitions which means no Tellers, medical bunkers. 222s are not a real counter to light armour outside of scout cars and I don't think Ostheer needs a cheap disposable scout whose viability is incredibly limited.

The 222 should be a viable unit even when the heavier light vehicles appear rather than providing sight and minor harrassment. 45 range would allow it to chip armour without being in danger, but it's damage output is not high enough to rip light vehicles a new one and it doesn't have perfect accuracy, still liable to missing small vehicles like the M20 with its 16 target size.

Making it more expensive also opens up the time M20s and M3s have.

The 222 could probably use a slight buff, but that accuracy against Infantry is extreme. I'm pretty sure you'd be making it a more effective AI vehicle than the Luchs for a fraction of the fuel cost. The 45 range would also cause problems as it would invalidate LT tier. Furthermore, if it got a buff, it would need to be more like 40 or 45 fuel as I find that 15 fuel for the 222 is too little for what it already does.


Luchs 2cm accuracy: 0.775/0.65/0.56
222 2cm accuracy vs inf: 0.56/0.36/0.27
222 2cm vs vehicles: 0.06/0.04/0.03

Of course, 222 2cm has better moving accuracy and has accuracy bouses at vet but the MG is still the main source of damage for the 222 against infantry. Also It is more costly at 260manpower/35 fuel.


19 Jan 2016, 19:24 PM
#53
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1



And you think Ostheer can easily get all that? Paks cost 320mp and lower your infantry presence and is slow to maneuver and can be flanked. PGs requires 340 manpower and then an additional 120 munitions which means no Tellers, medical bunkers. 222s are not a real counter to light armour outside of scout cars and I don't think Ostheer needs a cheap disposable scout whose viability is incredibly limited.

The 222 should be a viable unit even when the heavier light vehicles appear rather than providing sight and minor harrassment. 45 range would allow it to chip armour without being in danger, but it's damage output is not high enough to rip light vehicles a new one and it doesn't have perfect accuracy, still liable to missing small vehicles like the M20 with its 16 target size.

Making it more expensive also opens up the time M20s and M3s have.





1- You don't need 222 if there is no scout car on the field.
Or
2- You build it to harrass flanks and then your opponent need to build AT or t70/Stuart/AEC to counter it.

Your proposal makes it reliable to be build every match so scout car meta is definitively over and light armor are in trouble vs it. don't you see the balance gap it generates?


19 Jan 2016, 19:25 PM
#54
avatar of Pancake Areolas

Posts: 230

Permanently Banned
Im in favor of making 222 a viable light vehicle. Being made of paper and being unable to harm infantry is not good.
19 Jan 2016, 19:35 PM
#55
avatar of miragefla
Developer Relic Badge

Posts: 1304 | Subs: 13

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Jan 2016, 19:24 PMEsxile


1- You don't need 222 if there is no scout car on the field.
Or
2- You build it to harrass flanks and then your opponent need to build AT or t70/Stuart/AEC to counter it.

Your proposal makes it reliable to be build every match so scout car meta is definitively over and light armor are in trouble vs it. don't you see the balance gap it generates?




Cost could use adjustments if it's too good, but I don't think light armour would be in that much trouble outside of the scout cars and AA HTs which are other issues pertaining to the design of those tiers and not the 222. I will say it again. We can't compare the 222 in a vacuum but we also can't assume everything would be completely static.

And what's wrong with it being reliable in all match-ups? Are T-70s and Stuarts not seen in both match-ups along with the AEC against Ostheer and OKW?
19 Jan 2016, 20:02 PM
#56
avatar of Waegukin

Posts: 609

I'm in for a better Scout-car, Ostheer could really use a decent early-mid AI vehicle.
19 Jan 2016, 20:16 PM
#57
avatar of ZeaviS

Posts: 160

I'm in for a better Scout-car, Ostheer could really use a decent early-mid AI vehicle.


What if they let the scout car cap territory like the kubel?
19 Jan 2016, 20:30 PM
#58
avatar of l4hti

Posts: 476

Its dirt cheap and so on absolutely fine. It kills M20s, M3s.
19 Jan 2016, 20:32 PM
#59
avatar of Rollo

Posts: 738



How many flame half-tracks do you see nowadays along with 222s even in the tourney games? Because from NA ESL, unless it was from me, the number of 251/222 units ranged from 0-1. That should be telling how useful/less Ostheer light armour is.

Also I'm sorry, but just because the Brit's anti-light vehicle option suck outside of ATGs and AEC doesn't mean the 222 should remain as it is. Pretty sure if the 222 gets changed, other stuff would need to be change in response, but this is about 222 not Brit anti-light armour. Furthermore you ignore the cost increase of the 222, delaying its timing giving units like the Bren, M20, and M3 more time to work.



Why not buff the 222 which is in more need of help than the Ostwind which is also locked behind BP 2 and T3? This would help expand Ostheer's lack of light vehicle play outside of call-ins in the current meta of Allied light armour rushes.


You know why you don't see flame HT's built against UKF in tournies? Because noone plays UKF in tournies. The matchup is already pretty in favour of Ost which roll UKF early game without the need for more Ost buffs.

If you had played more than three UKF games in matchmaking you would know this, 222 gets built against you in pretty much every single game as it's a delete button for your bren WASP.

Speaking of tournaments I saw pretty great use of the 222 against USF in ESL, guess how much use of UKF we saw (oh wait I just mentioned that didn't I) :blush:

If it was in need of a revamp it would never be touched (just like the sexton or *cough* Greyhound *Cough*)

19 Jan 2016, 20:57 PM
#60
avatar of CookiezNcreem
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 3052 | Subs: 15

#JustGiveOstheerPanzer3
PAGES (7)down
0 user is browsing this thread:

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

882 users are online: 882 guests
1 post in the last 24h
10 posts in the last week
27 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50004
Welcome our newest member, Abtik Services
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM