Login

russian armor

M20 Utility Car Rework

20 Aug 2018, 17:42 PM
#1
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

Anyone feel like the USF M20 Utility Car could do with some love? It seems pretty much outclassed by the AAHT as a shock unit and costs a fortune in manpower for what's essentially USF's scout car.

M20 Utility Car Rework
  • Cost from 340 MP 20 FU to somewhere between 200 MP 15 FU and 250 MP 20 FU.
  • Crew bazooka removed
  • M20 smoke tied to the Armor Skirts upgrade.

Without the bazooka the M20 definitely doesn't need the high cost: light vehicles counter it unless they're baited over its mine.

Tying smoke to the skirts serves as a spam deterrent: it doesn't bite much if you build one but if you build two or three you won't be able to afford to upgrade them all and throw down mines/give a squad a bazooka.

Thoughts?
20 Aug 2018, 17:54 PM
#2
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

I think the skirt should be given by default. I find that between having to upgrade that and laying mines, you really have to sacrifice anti infantry firepower (BARs) in order to make good use of the m20 and it's just much more appealing to get an AAHT. I don't think they'd be all that spammable since they lose handily to axis light vehicles (assuming you don't use the bazooka, which would theoretically be removed if the m20 was changed at all) but an increase rather than decrease to fuel cost could alleviate that potential issue.

Also I think it vets too slow still.
20 Aug 2018, 18:00 PM
#3
avatar of Tobis
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4

-Skirt by default
-Reduce manpower to 250 but add 20 seconds to the build timer so it doesn't come out so soon.
-Keep the bazooka so it keeps parity with 222
20 Aug 2018, 18:32 PM
#4
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

I'll say leave it as it is but make the skirt upgrade M20 unsnarable so it becomes a real counter to infantry play.
20 Aug 2018, 20:09 PM
#5
avatar of GI John 412

Posts: 495 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Aug 2018, 18:00 PMTobis
-Skirt by default
-Reduce manpower to 250 but add 20 seconds to the build timer so it doesn't come out so soon.
-Keep the bazooka so it keeps parity with 222


+1

The best way to balance the game in its current state and to avoid unintended second and third order of effects, is to adjust cost. If the unit is over performing for cost, then make it cost more. If it is underperforming for cost, like the M20, then make it cost less. Keep it simple.
20 Aug 2018, 21:51 PM
#6
avatar of dOPEnEWhAIRCUT

Posts: 239

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Aug 2018, 18:32 PMEsxile
I'll say leave it as it is but make the skirt upgrade M20 unsnarable so it becomes a real counter to infantry play.


If you mean make the first shot (snare on full health) not damage engine I can get behind that. I think decreasing mine deploy time as well as maybe a slight mine cost reduction (5-10 muni reduction) would help tier 1 become a much more attractive tech choice, too.
20 Aug 2018, 21:53 PM
#7
avatar of Grumpy

Posts: 1954

Give it armor skirts by default, remove the bazooka, change the cost to around 240, maybe lower vet requirements, and it would be fine. I still use it occasionally. It isn't a bad unit, just overpriced and situational.

Also, it should lose to a scout car. If you don't like that, use it differently.
21 Aug 2018, 00:27 AM
#8
avatar of Gbpirate
Senior Editor Badge

Posts: 1153 | Subs: 1

I think the problem with removing the bazooka is that the USF lose a very obvious AT element in the Lieutenant tier.

The USF got real fucked when they are given the choice between an MG or an AT gun or getting both and having the late game armour delayed.

I'd like to see the M20 delayed but removing the bazooka could make Lieutenant rarely viable, especially in 1s or 2s.

Perhaps the M20 could be given an ability to drop bazookas for munitions and the first bazooka dropped would receive a noticeable discount, like 50% or more?
21 Aug 2018, 00:48 AM
#9
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1

I wish it was cheaper just so you could trade one for a Sniper in dire situations, happens too often, I'd use it as a mine-layer, scout and capping police then.
21 Aug 2018, 07:09 AM
#10
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1



If you mean make the first shot (snare on full health) not damage engine I can get behind that. I think decreasing mine deploy time as well as maybe a slight mine cost reduction (5-10 muni reduction) would help tier 1 become a much more attractive tech choice, too.



Nop, I mean not snarable. You'll never be full health on first pfaust shot since the M20 armor isn't 100% bullet proof.
OKW and Ostheer have already all the tools available to counter it even if it is not snarable.

But if the idea is too much, then yes, make it 240mp-15fu because at the moment it is just an overpriced light vehicle.
21 Aug 2018, 07:31 AM
#11
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

The best way to balance the game in its current state and to avoid unintended second and third order of effects, is to adjust cost. If the unit is over performing for cost, then make it cost more. If it is underperforming for cost, like the M20, then make it cost less. Keep it simple.


QFT. Nothing wrong with the current performance of the M20, no need to change anything drastically and risk creating imbalance. It's just too expensive. Lower the cost according to Tobis' proposal and it should be fine.
21 Aug 2018, 07:32 AM
#12
avatar of Onimusha

Posts: 149

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Aug 2018, 07:09 AMEsxile



Nop, I mean not snarable. You'll never be full health on first pfaust shot since the M20 armor isn't 100% bullet proof.
OKW and Ostheer have already all the tools available to counter it even if it is not snarable.

But if the idea is too much, then yes, make it 240mp-15fu because at the moment it is just an overpriced light vehicle.


I agree with lower mp, but probably keeping 20 fuel cost could be better. I often use it, if a see whermacht sniper normally i go for m20 rush, but with lower mp and 15 fuel, we risk an m20 spam vs ostheer like the old 222. Good thing is a lower mp cost like 250 , same fuel cost, and probably armored skirts included, that upgrade is a little bit non sense, it's not a choice, if you want an m20 alive you need it always.
21 Aug 2018, 08:03 AM
#14
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1



I agree with lower mp, but probably keeping 20 fuel cost could be better. I often use it, if a see whermacht sniper normally i go for m20 rush, but with lower mp and 15 fuel, we risk an m20 spam vs ostheer like the old 222. Good thing is a lower mp cost like 250 , same fuel cost, and probably armored skirts included, that upgrade is a little bit non sense, it's not a choice, if you want an m20 alive you need it always.



Yes, if you include the skirt, 20fu makes sense. And if I didn't say 200mp it is because I really think the 222 should be priced back to 240-250 mp otherwise the m20 should also be set a 200mp.
21 Aug 2018, 08:51 AM
#15
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

it's not a choice, if you want an m20 alive you need it always.


It's a lot like Ranger Thompsons or Obersoldaten MG34s: it's essentially a munitions cost to the unit, but not one you have to pay up front.
21 Aug 2018, 16:38 PM
#16
avatar of wandererraven

Posts: 353

8 month ago I m Talking about M20
https://www.coh2.org/topic/66964/talk-about-usf-m20-utility-car

1 Bazooka it not have Fire power to repel and cannot help form rushing Flame halftrack I try to suggest AP Round like .50cal HMG Team
21 Aug 2018, 23:42 PM
#17
avatar of Onimusha

Posts: 149

8 month ago I m Talking about M20
https://www.coh2.org/topic/66964/talk-about-usf-m20-utility-car

1 Bazooka it not have Fire power to repel and cannot help form rushing Flame halftrack I try to suggest AP Round like .50cal HMG Team
Oh no man ,too much, with ap rounds 222 and flametruck will get raped instantly, it could counter snipers and light veichles, a little bit op.
22 Aug 2018, 00:18 AM
#18
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

I think this vehicle has its strong points, but it certainly can be easy to lose. What I dislike about it is that at vet 2 is gives very crucial vision that USF tends to lack, but it almost impossible to keep alive because it only has 320 HP. That's easy to lose vs 2x cloaked raks lategame. I don't think its HP should be raised, but USF tends to really lack decent vision abilities and instead just have rifles blindlessly charging into MG42s.
22 Aug 2018, 06:15 AM
#19
avatar of wandererraven

Posts: 353

Oh no man ,too much, with ap rounds 222 and flametruck will get raped instantly, it could counter snipers and light veichles, a little bit op.


I see but problem .50Cal on M20 low value penetration (1/2/3) When encounter 222 or 251 armor 9
low chance to taking damage (11%/22%/33% ) It only choice when encounter 222 run
and Tie when fight to 251 Flame halftrack (with RNG GOD)
and when compare 222 222 can Search some mobile Indirect Fire like katyusha or Mortar halftrack
and destory that thing
when m20 search only detect and cannot harm them (dont thing bail out fire bazooka is good idea)
22 Aug 2018, 09:58 AM
#20
avatar of SupremeStefan

Posts: 1220

8 month ago I m Talking about M20
https://www.coh2.org/topic/66964/talk-about-usf-m20-utility-car

1 Bazooka it not have Fire power to repel and cannot help form rushing Flame halftrack I try to suggest AP Round like .50cal HMG Team

Sounds nice, and maybe assault enginers as crew ?
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

736 users are online: 736 guests
1 post in the last 24h
10 posts in the last week
29 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50049
Welcome our newest member, five88vicom
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM