Sdfksz 222 Revamp

People are making too big of a deal out of this. 222 cannot harm infantry, and is no threat and has weak armor. Fix this and there is no issue. Light armor still will counter the 222 easily, but infantry won't be able to yolo push 222 and kill it, and 222 wont have to chase a squad all the way across the map just to kill 1 model. Fuck sake. Nothing will really change except not being able to LOL rush ostheer with yolo stuarts, AECs and t70s and riflemen. 0 problem with a soft counter for light tanks and infantry.

222 is only good at 2 things. Destroying m3 scout cars and repelling m20 but never outright killing it unless american player is shit, and providing sight. Nothing else. All else is shit. Armor, firepower, accuracy, cost. All garbage. If the 222 was just a wooden podium with wheels and a 2cm gun that can't hit shit, it would look more realistic, because thats how the thing performs.

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.

If you read other posts, you will see that just because a faction doesn't have something means it should. I'm quoting someone but OKW and non doc MG, UKF and USF with non-doc artillery.

Stuart is T3 70 fuel... 222 is T2 and 15
T70 is T3 and also 70 fuel... 222 is T2 and 15
AEC is T2 I believe around 55/60 fuel? ... 222 is still 15 fuel
Luchs is T2 65 fuel? ... 222 is 15 fuel

Also the tradeoff for OKW to get a luchs is a forward heal/retreat point... which is pretty dang important to OKW. There is nothing hindering a healing bunker.

So based off of your answer, all factions should have a tank like a panther that has crazy high frontal armor, all get mortars, all get wide area suppression MGs, the best penetration AT pak40, all get non doc heavy armor with squadwiping main gun, all get crazy rocket artillery like calliope and panzwerwerfer, all get FRPs, all get crazy artillery strikes like UKF, all get panzershreks for AT handhelds, all get light tanks like sniping T70, all get snipers with high RoF like OST and can survive a mortar on the head, all get B4s... etc. Do you see where this is going? 222 currently fills a niche and it's pretty good for what it's meant to do.

If you let your su-76 wich hard counters light vehicles get destroyed by a 222 you did something horrible wrong.

First of all SU-76 is NOT a hard counter to vehicles. It's also a light artillery piece, so it has anti building/infantry capabilities (Seriously all it needs is an MG and it would bea 10/10 in versatility).

Anyways,its armor is thin, and being turretless you could flank it easily with the 222.

That would completely remove sov T1 play, force soviets into early upgrade if T2 was to have any chance and remove brits from the game.

I love it when people make suggestions wile seeing as far as teching of their fav army goes and only that army.

Firstly OKW is my favourite army, I rarely play Ost. I didn't mention OKW so you're very wrong there. In addition, you're a hypocrite because your posts are strictly allied-favoured. You use to the phrase "Axis fanboy" so much I wonder if you're getting paid to do it. You are biased, you are blind, you are widely considered unable to understand this game well. Fix your own house before criticising mine.


Secondly, present some reasons to back up your claims. How on earth would it remove soviet T1? That's a silly claim.

222 cannot harm infantry, and is no threat and has weak armor.

You're thinking of it wrong.

You're putting it in the Stuart leauge. For god's sake it's 15 fuel (same as the soviet M3A1). It's supposed to counter stuff like bren carriers and soviet scout cars.

Also about its damage. It's damage is fine, maybe you should stop when firing so the accuracy will not decrease from movement penalty.

It's a fast hunter-killer that packs a mean punch for its price but relies on speed for protection. It is NOT an anti-infantry substitute to a light tank. IT IS A SCOUT CAR.

SCOUT CAR NOT A LIGHT TANK

If this thing is buffed it would just wipe infantry, and with its speed, run away. Think about that.

Also it's AA.

Firstly OKW is my favourite army, I rarely play Ost. I didn't mention OKW so you're very wrong there. In addition, you're a hypocrite because your posts are strictly allied-favoured. You use to the phrase "Axis fanboy" so much I wonder if you're getting paid to do it. You are biased, you are blind, you are widely considered unable to understand this game well. Fix your own house before criticising mine.


Secondly, present some reasons to back up your claims. How on earth would it remove soviet T1? That's a silly claim.

My posts also do not involve buffing weaker things by 100% so they hardcounter units that are their own hardcounters by design by increasing every single possible stat for units that need minor tweaks to be fully viable(this thread is prime example), my posts also do not scream for completely and utterly patching up every single possible flaw or disadvantage the armies I play have, I have my own bias, but in comparison to people like you, aaa or mycalliope, I might just as well be called one of the most objective posters around here.

How it would remove soviet T1?

222 is a vehicle, soviet T1 is hardcountered by vehicles, old kubel utterly destroyed any T1 builds unless you pidgeonholed yourself into specific doctrine. Need any more arguments? Common sense took a week off and went to Bahamas? Do you want an argument why would it remove brits as well or will you make a call and pull your own common sense off from vacations and force it to work?

Only aaa is close to the level of insanity to some buff axis suggestions level.

Increase 222 coax accuracy at long range by 50% and cost to 20fu, there, unit fixed. You have long range early game light. In case you wondered, M20 already deals 50% of 222 dps at long range and that is excluding actual 2cm kwk. There, fixed early game, cheap jack of all trades unit without utterly breaking early game dynamics for the whole game.

Way too many people post random suggestions without even considering the effects it would have on global balance and other armies.

Some people are obsessed with it and want to make it light tank level unit.
Its NOT and will NOT be one. Lights are ost WEAKNESS not STRENGTH.

"Way too many people post random suggestions without even considering the effects it would have on global balance and other armies. "

If this comment includes "miragefla" who wrote OP, I personally feel it is rather unjust.

The fact that he has created a mod with these changes and tests regularly is proof enough that he does consider the effects on global balance...

Although I don't agree with all of the changes made in his mod, imo he deserves congratulation for the time and effort...

If this comment includes "miragefla" who wrote OP, I personally feel it is rather unjust.

The fact that he was created a mod with changes and tests regularly is proof enough that he does consider the effects on global balance...

Although I don't agree with all of the changes made in his mod, imo he deserves congratulation for the time and effort...

I know he got good intentions I certainly appreciate his effort, this is perfect example of how balance thread should look like, but he overdid by a long shot with the changes.

People often make long lists of suggestions and changes without realizing the effects and impact of small changes. If anyone have any doubts about the accuracy of my statement here, please, familiar yourself with recent AEC change and its impact.

Miragefla level of changes could be comparable to removing old AEC and putting Cromwell with increased range in its place-its really hard to agree with him on more then single change from the list. Range change alone would make it hardcounter its own hardcounters like Stuart, AEC or T70.

isnt this another homogenisation?

Range change alone would make it hardcounter its own hardcounters like Stuart, AEC or T70.

Hardly. The 2cm might need adjustments against infantry in the mod and price/hp, but the range buff you're making too big of a deal of. The majority of the lights are more than capable of closing with a 222 before they take too much damage and 2cm requires more than 20 shots to kill the 400hp light vehicles when you take misses into account from both target size. bounces on something like the Stuart and the 222 moving to continue kiting. That's more of a micro heavy soft counter than it is a hardcounter.

isnt this another homogenisation?

If you took out the autocannon buff vs inf, not really. What you have is a different unit that can skirmish against light armour, but never fight them directly with some ability to engage infantry at shorter ranges. It's closer to Puma than it is to the T-70, Stuart, or AEC.

Why does it make more sense on OKW? OKW already has a light tank.

I was referring to how only a minority of the 500 captured by the Germans during WW2 were used in the Western front,

I was referring to how only a minority of the 500 captured by the Germans during WW2 were used in the Western front,

If we want to get technical, they aren't Ostheer anymore they are Wehrmacht

+1, I'd love to see these in game.

If we want to get technical, they aren't Ostheer anymore they are Wehrmacht

They were never officially Ost

They were never officially Ost

Ostheer will always be better than canon

Is it possible to get back on the suggested changes on the 222?
Has anyone tested the 222 in this mod?

First of all SU-76 is NOT a hard counter to vehicles. It's also a light artillery piece, so it has anti building/infantry capabilities (Seriously all it needs is an MG and it would bea 10/10 in versatility).

The SU-76 was never equipped with any Machine Guns.

Back on topic about the 222.

Aside from the autocannon buff against infantry that I'd be willing to change and take away, I don't see this thing becoming a killing machine people claim it to be.

The 222 effectiveness vs infantry is akin to the AEC prepatch. Pretty worthless.

My posts also do not involve buffing weaker things by 100% so they hardcounter units that are their own hardcounters by design by increasing every single possible stat for units that need minor tweaks to be fully viable(this thread is prime example), my posts also do not scream for completely and utterly patching up every single possible flaw or disadvantage the armies I play have, I have my own bias, but in comparison to people like you, aaa or mycalliope, I might just as well be called one of the most objective posters around here.

How it would remove soviet T1?

222 is a vehicle, soviet T1 is hardcountered by vehicles, old kubel utterly destroyed any T1 builds unless you pidgeonholed yourself into specific doctrine. Need any more arguments? Common sense took a week off and went to Bahamas? Do you want an argument why would it remove brits as well or will you make a call and pull your own common sense off from vacations and force it to work?

Only aaa is close to the level of insanity to some buff axis suggestions level.

Increase 222 coax accuracy at long range by 50% and cost to 20fu, there, unit fixed. You have long range early game light. In case you wondered, M20 already deals 50% of 222 dps at long range and that is excluding actual 2cm kwk. There, fixed early game, cheap jack of all trades unit without utterly breaking early game dynamics for the whole game.

Way too many people post random suggestions without even considering the effects it would have on global balance and other armies.

Some people are obsessed with it and want to make it light tank level unit.
Its NOT and will NOT be one. Lights are ost WEAKNESS not STRENGTH.

Thanks for the reply. You made some good points about the changes I proposed.


When someone makes a suggestion, they are often likely to miscalculate or misjudge something. They can miss knock-on effects that would spoil gameplay. Your example about the effect of my suggestions on Brits is a decent example.

This is a natural part of a group dialogue. I think most people here are open to counter-suggestions. For example:

A) Let's add the Pak to Ost T1
You) That would result in negative consequences 1,2,3
A) Ah, I see. Well how about adding the pak but then adding something to the US Lt tier
You) That could work but then D, E, F
A) Oh right. It's probably not workable then.



Instead what you do is get angry that they would even make an imperfect suggestion and write:
"Another scrub suggestion from a terrible axis fanboy. L2p, idiot."

In your reply above you wrote "Common sense took a week off and went to Bahamas?" This tone is unpleasant as I'm sure you know. If you want an argument or flame war, sure, use it, be sarcastic and condescending. But why? Why do you want that? Why do you want the conflict and why do you want so much conflict?



Everyone's going to make flawed posts. You too. The question is how to respond to it. With understanding or with vitriol and hate?