Sdfksz 222 Revamp

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)

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

We can't compare the 222 in a vacuum but we also can't assume everything would be completely static.

If X needs helps against X due to X then that should be looked at and adjusted accordingly. People assume that if X unit is changed X will never get changed and that's honestly bad for balancing and so many factors enter which no one even accounts for.

It's like how everyone conveniently forgets the 222 would be more expensive giving lighter vehicles like the M20 and M3 time to roam around

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?

They're seen because Sov and USF need them to stay on the match, not because its cool to have them. Ostheer doesn't need a better 222, they already have powerful tools to manage different aspect of the gameplay. 222 is one of those tool, unfortunately 222 counters stuff that are not meta today and guess what it is also because 222 has been over-buffed couple of months ago already. The unit is too good for what it cost and this lead players to not use scout cars anymore vs Ostheer.
What you achieve with your changes is leading players to definitively leave scout car play and adding in the list light armor play. But no worries because you decided to included a increase dps vs infantry as well to be sure whatever Sov/USF/UKF player decides to do, you just need to field a 222 and here we go, countered!!!

You just lost the notion of unit usage and dedication balance and weakness and the point that increasing the cost of a unit to compensate its potential OPness doesn't work at all.

I'd make it about the equivalent to the M20, competent against infantry and light vehicles.

As such, in exchange for a higher price (say, 260/25); make its MG useful against infantry, make it immune to small arms, and increase turret accuracy against vehicles.

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.

The MG is the main source of AI right now, but I don't think it will be after this buff. I know the 2cm is quite shit against infantry at the moment, but increasing its accuracy against infantry by 900% means a straight up 2cm DPS increase of 900%. So it'll have that damage along with the MG that I believe you're also buffing a little.

I'm not against the 222 getting buffed, but all of this for 35 fuel is ridiculous. It's too low. You're creating a lighter armored, but faster Luchs for half its fuel cost. And even though its armor is going to be lighter, it's still going to require dedicated AT to handle it because you're buffing its armor as well to the point where small arms will barely do anything.

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

Funny how those are only allied units, and ostheer has the worst win rate of any faction.

I like the changes. Gives the 222 a mid to late game role outside of broken spotting scopes.

a small buff is very welcome

I'd make it about the equivalent to the M20, competent against infantry and light vehicles.

As such, in exchange for a higher price (say, 260/25); make its MG useful against infantry, make it immune to small arms, and increase turret accuracy against vehicles.

Uhh... M20 costs 340/20.. and you want at 260/25 to do the job of an M20 AND COUNTER it. lol, greedy much? If it can do all that, it should cost as much as a luch

I think an increase in health to 250-300 or so and decrease the build time would be an appropriate buff. That would make it still die to two AT gun shots, but an AEC would need three hits to kill. Cost wise you could have two 222s for one AEC and they would arrive at similar times.

IMO it would really be down to who had the better micro and supporting infantry.

Uhh... M20 costs 340/20.. and you want at 260/25 to do the job of an M20 AND COUNTER it. lol, greedy much? If it can do all that, it should cost as much as a luch

Who said anything about counter? It should be competent in a roughly similar way. Adjust the price to 290/25 if you wish, the 5 points of extra fuel makes its cost very similar, without the M20's ridiculously powerful mines or the free bazooka you get from the crew. The new 222 would of course still lose to light tanks like the AEC and Stuart 1v1, but would be able to inflict some damage to them as a micro-heavy deterrent.

Who said anything about counter? It should be competent in a roughly similar way. Adjust the price to 290/25 if you wish, the 5 points of extra fuel makes its cost very similar, without the M20's ridiculously powerful mines or the free bazooka you get from the crew. The new 222 would of course still lose to light tanks like the AEC and Stuart 1v1, but would be able to inflict some damage to them as a micro-heavy deterrent.

I'd rather have my M20 shoot antivehicle rounds than have to wait 3 seconds to unmount, shoot a rocket, and then get sniped to death by your new 222 AI gun at range.
BTW, i think other posts were mentioning at least 35 fuel for all these crazy upgrades. there will be no fruition here.

anyways, i think lelic will disagree with you guys here. there will be no change to the 222 in terms of fighting power/damage/attack rate.

I'd rather have my M20 shoot antivehicle rounds than have to wait 3 seconds to unmount, shoot a rocket, and then get sniped to death by your new 222 AI gun at range.
BTW, i think other posts were mentioning at least 35 fuel for all these crazy upgrades. there will be no fruition here.

anyways, i think lelic will disagree with you guys here. there will be no change to the 222 in terms of fighting power/damage/attack rate.

It's more that you can have the RE squad mount in the M20 while the crew can repair and use their bazooka. Zookas are a 50 ammo value, and you get one for free, and cripes those mines are so powerful they are easily worth some more MP cost. They can one-shot a Stug.

Relic will do as Relic does. But Ostheer has a bit of a hole in their midgame where they have no viable vehicles until T3 is built. The 222 could fix that.

Or USF back-techs into bazookas forcing the 222 to stay at autocannon range which isn't particularly effective, just more so than it is now( also it already spots for itself (50 sight). M20 superior mobility, smoke and small-target to escape and still harass flanks or M20 mines as possible bait. Furthermore, there's the crew for a soft counter if it wants to dive-in vs infantry as its MG is still set to range 35.

AA HT can still do a number and would be a defensive unit given the 37mm has enough ammo to one clip the 222 still.

Bazooka has 35 range, while your 222 after ridiculous change, get 45 range and 9x acc. Telling 35 range bazooka (cost 25 fuel + 50 ammo) to chase 222 to feed mp to enemy?

Mine only work when enemy is a newbie who rush his vehicle without mine sweeper. Smarter people will get their minesweeper on the front to disable mine before 222 can get in range.

I have already explained again and again why AAHT cannot work against your 222. If you still insist on your idea, so be it. "Relic balance" works on counter, and just as I point out zero weakness on your 222, it won't be in the game.

They're seen because Sov and USF need them to stay on the match, not because its cool to have them. Ostheer doesn't need a better 222, they already have powerful tools to manage different aspect of the gameplay. 222 is one of those tool, unfortunately 222 counters stuff that are not meta today and guess what it is also because 222 has been over-buffed couple of months ago already. The unit is too good for what it cost and this lead players to not use scout cars anymore vs Ostheer.
What you achieve with your changes is leading players to definitively leave scout car play and adding in the list light armor play. But no worries because you decided to included a increase dps vs infantry as well to be sure whatever Sov/USF/UKF player decides to do, you just need to field a 222 and here we go, countered!!!

You just lost the notion of unit usage and dedication balance and weakness and the point that increasing the cost of a unit to compensate its potential OPness doesn't work at all.

The main issue here isn't how good or bad the 222 is necessarily. Its the fact that UNLIKE EVERY OTHER FACTION, ost has no light tanks at all. T70, Stuart, AEC, Luchs, ost has none of these. Miragefla is proposing we give ostheer that in the form of abuffed changed (due to cost adjustment don't forget) 222.

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.

I beat vonivan in game 2 of our round in esl last weekend, I was Brits, he was Ost.

Victim complex denied.

I beat vonivan in game 2 of our round in esl last weekend, I was Brits, he was Ost.

Victim complex denied.

Okay a grand total of 1 competitive game as brits was played at top level

Good thing you were here to fight Ostheer's corner

Someone should have made a handy graph displaying the faction selections

Okay a grand total of 1 competitive game as brits was played at top level

Good thing you were here to fight Ostheer's corner

Someone should have made a handy graph displaying the faction selections

Not faction selections, but something even better.

http://coh2chart.com/

axis OP amr?

The only solution is to add the Hotchkiss to Ostheer.

The perfect solution.

If Ostheer was in fact OKW then that would be a great idea.

But not, so not.

But I get your point: a unit like the Hotchkiss seems to be the sort of unit Ostheer needs in place of the 222. IMO, 222 is at times lethal, but not durable, I believe that is the biggest issue. I for one never bother using 222 simply because baseline infantry can quickly pick away at its health and severely crippled when any AT comes around.
If however you get a unit like a 234/1 (Puma with 20mm gun, for those that don't know), you get a unit that is more durable...but no difference in firepower. Seeing as the 234s were recon vehicles, the roles is perfect. Heck, the closest variant, the Puma, is only a call-in vehicle.

So I guess to say, 222 should just become 234/1.

The only solution is to add the Hotchkiss to Ostheer.

The perfect solution.

A Panzer III would be more thematically appropriate. Either an M or an N, depending if you want the 50mm long gun or the 75mm short gun. Could be buildable from T2 after teching T3 (building not required, since it's in T2). T2 would be too early, and T3 would be too late, so I think that's an okay medium.

The 222 needs a buff. the 221 to 222 upgrade would be fine if the 221 was cost effective (it really wasn't after the vet nerfs 2 years ago) and if the 222 was also effective against infantry. it can be a weak vehicle that doesn't see a whole lot of front line use once med tanks hit (it's far from ideal but with the way light vehicles are currently implemented i don't see an easy alternative) but it should be an effective unit with an appropriate cost. just because OKH doesn't need a functional 222 to be effective doesn't mean it should be removed from the game. the more effective units there are the more build orders and player flexibility there is and the better the game is. for the reason i have no issues with units filling the same roles as long as there is a reason for each to exist (example: a cheap, light AT gun in one tier and an expensive, heavy AT gun in another tier) because it gives the player flexibility. just because a faction already has a unit in a role doesn't mean they can't have another unit in that role that fills it slightly differently. it does lead to redundancy, which from a developer cost/benefit point of view is less than ideal, but it's not an inherently bad idea.