Login

russian armor

The 222's ability to counter snipers

10 Jan 2018, 09:51 AM
#21
avatar of zarok47

Posts: 587

What are your thoughts on the 222's ability to counter snipers


It doesn't exist.

Either AEC hardcounters the 222, or the sov sniper survives while you run into a mine/guards/ptrs penals.

10 Jan 2018, 13:29 PM
#22
avatar of Kharn

Posts: 264

The 222 is pretty awful, I've also chased Soviet snipers back to base and they just laugh at me.... the double sniper play is real in 2v2's right now.
10 Jan 2018, 15:45 PM
#23
avatar of YRon²y

Posts: 221

i think the 222 could use a buff against snipers but for the rest it's great
10 Jan 2018, 17:10 PM
#24
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post10 Jan 2018, 08:47 AMVipper

It should be a mp+fuel instead of ammo or it could a separate vehicle one can buy.

It could even be a T1 vehicle requiring T2 research so it can come out faster


Or you could increase the added sniper modifier on the MG. By design, both M3 and M20 have higher AI but no AT which makes the current modifier good. The 222 been a counter to light vehicles and soft deterrent to light tanks while having some AI is not good enough to counter them.
10 Jan 2018, 17:14 PM
#25
avatar of Kharn

Posts: 264

I do find the scout car sits in a weird area. I've been around to see it buffed, nerffed, munition upgrade removed on the autocannon, etc..

It sort of just gets laughed at now because Penals can equip AT rifles which really put a beating on the scout car. Mind you, it should but it also doesn't scare Penals at all, it feels like its AI is pretty god awful.

I missed the old scout car that was decent AI, autocannon made it more AT vs lights but less viable vs ai...

I mean it's fairly cheap to bring out, it shouldn't be amazing.. but I feel like it really doesn't do a whole lot anymore.
10 Jan 2018, 19:23 PM
#26
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

At 30 fuel, the 222 really can't be built in numbers.

The 222 is not sniper counter. It was changed to light AT a while ago instead, and then it's fuel cost increased because penals had no real AT at the time, and Soviets had to bring out guards to troll the 444 away as it was called.

In those days the 222s performance you're looking at in those clips was considered too strong for its cost.

It seems we're reaching full circle in can kicking balance strats.
10 Jan 2018, 22:45 PM
#27
avatar of dbmb

Posts: 122 | Subs: 2

It's stealth detection range should be increased, enabling other troops to counter snipers.
11 Jan 2018, 07:19 AM
#28
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 2243

what is the job from 222? counter jeeps and UC? wow...30 fuel..

a bofors cost the same...
11 Jan 2018, 09:43 AM
#29
avatar of Kurfürst

Posts: 144

The 222 is beautifully balanced and is in the right spot.
11 Jan 2018, 11:07 AM
#30
avatar of Array
Donator 11

Posts: 609

The 222 is beautifully balanced and is in the right spot.


Actually I think it kind of is but others things are not. Skilfully used, in combination with other units it allows you to bleed and win engagements around the map and counter lights but It is in no way a 1 car army. It is poor at countering snipers though and OST lack other tools for this job
11 Jan 2018, 12:25 PM
#31
avatar of Kurfürst

Posts: 144

Thing is, for 250 MP and especially 30 fuel, and at this ability set, it is just a waste of resources. It can't do a single job well.

As a harassment tool - to slow for that.
As a L vehicle counter to infantry - it actually melts to blobs
As an anti sniper unit - can't hit it, useless.
Utility unit - no, no useful abilities.

Specifically the sniper / lack of AI issue stems from that the Coax MG 34 is supposed to do the damage and it has really, really atrocious long range accuracy and low LR DPS, coupled with that it halves a 0.50 moving accuracy modifiers. Or its still bugged or something.

Worst part is that its a weak unit that cannot disengage very well either. Its slow and ponderous for a light vehicle, doesn't even have smoke, the armor is useless. Its neither a glass cannon, neither a hit and run vehicle that the Panzer Elite 222 was. That one actually had a pretty good cannon vs infantry and a well suited Overdrive speed boost ability to get it out of bad situations. I am not sure while ours doesn't have those traits as well. OST at least would have a hit and run/harass vehicle that would prompt some counterplay.

http://companyofheroes.wikia.com/wiki/SdKfz_222_Armored_Car

Add to that there are numerous counters against it from the get-go or very early on. Its a threat to nothing but saps OSTS fuel resources.

Plus it arrives at about the same time its hard counters do.
Its only single use to knock out well microed Clown Cars or pesky Flamer Bren UC which the Brits can spam from the start for 0 fuel and against which OST has very limited options if its reasonable well microed (stays out Faust range, shoots at an MG 42 first). But thats sets your right back in the fuel game and.

For me by far the best working strategy so far is to stay away from the current 222, and if fact any OST light vehicle and get out a StuG or Pz IV as fast as possible. They are useless, easily lost and just delay your tanks.
11 Jan 2018, 23:25 PM
#32
avatar of IJustDontCare

Posts: 62

One of the better counters to soviet snipers is the half track reinforce with g43 greb spam. The extra dps from g43s will wear the soviets down and the reinforce will keep you on the field long enough to cap viable territory.

Other advice is veto really open maps like rails and metal. Axis acutally fair pretty well on close combat styled maps since patch.

This has been working for me atleast, i will admit though majority of OKW players are really bad lol.
12 Jan 2018, 03:26 AM
#33
avatar of Mr.Flush

Posts: 450

Probably should have a bonus vs the soviet sniper since the ostheer's incendiary shot got nerfed.
12 Jan 2018, 12:32 PM
#34
avatar of Kharn

Posts: 264

One of the better counters to soviet snipers is the half track reinforce with g43 greb spam. The extra dps from g43s will wear the soviets down and the reinforce will keep you on the field long enough to cap viable territory.

Other advice is veto really open maps like rails and metal. Axis acutally fair pretty well on close combat styled maps since patch.

This has been working for me atleast, i will admit though majority of OKW players are really bad lol.


G43's is where it's at, just spam that. The sniper build often seens all of his Penals going AT or he hauls out early guards. This gives you superiority in AI with G43's (build like 3-4) also toss a Pgren in there for some lovely nades and high dps.

Though, that doesn't solve how the 222 is suppose to handle a sniper... it's sad to say but Bren carrier can do far more in this game now than a scout car usually can and.. as mentioned cost no fuel.
19 Jan 2018, 21:32 PM
#35
avatar of ZaneyZap

Posts: 264

Since the 222 is suppose to counter snipers, why would they do this kind of change back in march last year?

  • MG42 0.75 accuracy modifier versus Snipers (down from 1.5).

    Isn't this a penalty?
    I think it means it has a lower accuracy vs snipers than regular infantry.

    Please correct me if I am wrong, because I am baffled as to why the 222's anti infantry gun has a penalty vs snipers but not regular infantry. Especially when the 222 is suppose to be effective vs snipers

19 Jan 2018, 21:39 PM
#36
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

Since the 222 is suppose to counter snipers, why would they do this kind of change back in march last year?

  • MG42 0.75 accuracy modifier versus Snipers (down from 1.5).

    Isn't this a penalty?
    I think it means it has a lower accuracy vs snipers than regular infantry.

    Please correct me if I am wrong, because I am baffled as to why the 222's anti infantry gun has a penalty vs snipers but not regular infantry. Especially when the 222 is suppose to be effective vs snipers



Because sniper cloaking was completely altered to eliminate players from being able to expose their snipers and quickly recloak into cover after firing.

The 222 was changed into ostheers anti light tank/vehicle option. This was imbalanced so the fuel was increased to 30 to nerf the effects of that change.

The 222 stopped being a sniper counter to become a fill-in for anti tank because the goal was to break the panic puma meta.
19 Jan 2018, 22:50 PM
#37
avatar of AceOfTitanium

Posts: 162


The 222 stopped being a sniper counter to become a fill-in for anti tank because the goal was to break the panic puma meta.


It's a shame that the 222 only really counters the m20 and the universal carrier... Since the sniper cloaking was fixed why not revert the 222 back to 221 (anti-infantry)? No one really uses 222's to fill the lack of an AT gun because of AEC, Stuart, AA half-track, T-70 but wehr do need something to help the 4 man squads win engagements more often (without having to blob).
20 Jan 2018, 00:10 AM
#38
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742



It's a shame that the 222 only really counters the m20 and the universal carrier... Since the sniper cloaking was fixed why not revert the 222 back to 221 (anti-infantry)? No one really uses 222's to fill the lack of an AT gun because of AEC, Stuart, AA half-track, T-70 but wehr do need something to help the 4 man squads win engagements more often (without having to blob).


Well the thing was is the 222 DID counter Stuarts and t70s and the like. You just needed at least two of them and you'd likely sacrifice one in the process. Hence the "444" meta.

So that was consequently nerfed because it kind of worked. Putting the fuel to 30 made the 444 dives of light vehicles way too inefficient, nerfing it out of the role it was changed to.

I can't remember right now if penals got ptrs and at satchels at the same time or after that. But flamethrower penals not being able to beat a vehicle rush was apparently an issue that needed solving.
20 Jan 2018, 00:53 AM
#39
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


.... But flamethrower penals not being able to beat a vehicle rush was apparently an issue that needed solving.

Not really. Penals with flamer and ourah vet 2 where simply broken.

The had a questioner where people could vote either for PTRS of Flamer and people voted PTRS. There is should be an option for neither.
20 Jan 2018, 01:03 AM
#40
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2



Because sniper cloaking was completely altered to eliminate players from being able to expose their snipers and quickly recloak into cover after firing.

The 222 was changed into ostheers anti light tank/vehicle option. This was imbalanced so the fuel was increased to 30 to nerf the effects of that change.

The 222 stopped being a sniper counter to become a fill-in for anti tank because the goal was to break the panic puma meta.


It goes way back in time. The 222 had even a lower HP pool and it received several buffes while ninja bugging the cost. It was something around 20f and for some reason they lowered it to 15f.
Looking back at older posts: it was 230mp 20f 240 HP and then they buff it (officially) to 320 HP. But at the same time they moved the cost to 210mp 15f which in fact it should had been a +5f from ORIGINAL cost after they fixed the MG bug.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

unknown 17
Germany 870
unknown 52
unknown 19

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

709 users are online: 709 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
37 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49094
Welcome our newest member, Douds
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM