The upgraded 223 costs 310 MP 30 FU. It'll pay its fuel cost back easily if it survives and sits on your fuel. 250 MP is how much a cache costs, so that's 60 MP for that early mobile firepower.
If it survives.
OKW 221
16 Dec 2018, 11:46 AM
#21
Posts: 3260
16 Dec 2018, 16:27 PM
#22
Posts: 5279
If it doesn't make a hell of large difference, why proposing it in the first place? For USF it does make the difference: no atnade at this moment of the game and barely one zook if you decide to go lt first.
If you read past the first 9 words with will find more! For example directly following where you stopped reading is "when it comes to spam". If you are already planning on spamming them 5 fuel isn't going to make a difference one bit because it's the MP that will drain you.
The 22q is incredibly squishy and doesn't need hard AT to push it off. Stick to hard cover and watch as it takes far more damage than it deals and has to fall back for repairs.
#stalinwept
16 Dec 2018, 19:28 PM
#23
Posts: 658
The OKW 221 could use a slight buff. For a similar cost the Whermact have access to the 250 Halftrack that is much better and far more useful/impactful.
Also for general OKW design they need to be more realistic and not require a unit to commit mass genocide in order to get to vet 5.
Also for general OKW design they need to be more realistic and not require a unit to commit mass genocide in order to get to vet 5.
16 Dec 2018, 19:30 PM
#24
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
The OKW 221 could use a slight buff. For a similar cost the Whermact have access to the 250 Halftrack that is much better and far more useful/impactful.
Also for general OKW design they need to be more realistic and not require a unit to commit mass genocide in order to get to vet 5.
See, thing is, 221 is NOT combat vehicle.
Its armed utility vehicle and nothing more.
It can heal, maphack, boost resources, no other vehicle can do it and this is where its cost is allocated, not its armor or firepower.
Also, 250 is in ost, its pointless to compare it cross faction.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
16 Dec 2018, 19:58 PM
#25
Posts: 658
Kubelwagon has maphack and Sturmpioneers can drop healing crates, utility that isn't needed as its built into the faction baseline already and I do not need to spend fuel to gain access to those two abilities. The only thing that it offers is the resource boosting mechanic which for the price and the setback in tech is not worth it.
16 Dec 2018, 20:36 PM
#26
Posts: 5279
Yea I would hardly qualify the utility of the 221 as a selling point. You want the 221 as an armored sniper/light vehicle counter and then transition to a cache when better counters hit the field. If it's not to be used as a combat unit the price should be adjusted and it should spawn as a 223 (swing as the 222 was changed to spawn as the 222 because it was an auto upgrade) or its cost effeciency should be adjusted slightly. 20 fuel is too much given the relative performance of other lights at the time.
#stalinwept
17 Dec 2018, 03:30 AM
#27
Posts: 261
Yea I would hardly qualify the utility of the 221 as a selling point. You want the 221 as an armored sniper/light vehicle counter and then transition to a cache when better counters hit the field. If it's not to be used as a combat unit the price should be adjusted and it should spawn as a 223 (swing as the 222 was changed to spawn as the 222 because it was an auto upgrade) or its cost effeciency should be adjusted slightly. 20 fuel is too much given the relative performance of other lights at the time.
I think reduce its initial fuel cost by 10 but increase its upgrade fuel cost by 10 is a reasonable buff.
开弓没有回头箭。
17 Dec 2018, 04:34 AM
#28
Posts: 5279
I think reduce its initial fuel cost by 10 but increase its upgrade fuel cost by 10 is a reasonable buff.
10 might be a bit much of a reductionas said above. That's 2 for 1 on the fuel front which puts someone like the usf at risk of being over run by them. I think it could be tested, but might be too cheap
#stalinwept
17 Dec 2018, 05:18 AM
#29
Posts: 261
10 might be a bit much of a reductionas said above. That's 2 for 1 on the fuel front which puts someone like the usf at risk of being over run by them. I think it could be tested, but might be too cheap
Yeah, spamming is a problem. But in 1V1 case, I found that 20 fuel delayed my T2 or T3 for a rather long time.
开弓没有回头箭。
17 Dec 2018, 05:37 AM
#30
Posts: 261
10 might be a bit much of a reductionas said above. That's 2 for 1 on the fuel front which puts someone like the usf at risk of being over run by them. I think it could be tested, but might be too cheap
I have made some tests in cheat mode, I found that 221 will lose to Universal Carrier and M3...
Its machine gun lacks penetration.
Maybe keep its price but increase some penetration?
开弓没有回头箭。
17 Dec 2018, 07:21 AM
#31
Posts: 2243
this unit is to expansive or to weak for:
- it needs a commander
- is really expansive for its tools
- cant deal with any unit alone, because of low armor and low firepower
- for this price a brit can bring out a bofors, which can deal with most units which u can bring into midgame
- it needs a commander
- is really expansive for its tools
- cant deal with any unit alone, because of low armor and low firepower
- for this price a brit can bring out a bofors, which can deal with most units which u can bring into midgame
17 Dec 2018, 09:12 AM
#32
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Yeah, spamming is a problem. But in 1V1 case, I found that 20 fuel delayed my T2 or T3 for a rather long time.
That long time translates to 60 seconds usually, less if said vehicle allowed you to secure more ground/2nd fuel.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
17 Dec 2018, 11:08 AM
#33
Posts: 783
It wont.
That long time translates to 60 seconds usually, less if said vehicle allowed you to secure more ground/2nd fuel.
17 Dec 2018, 13:51 PM
#34
Posts: 261
That long time translates to 60 seconds usually, less if said vehicle allowed you to secure more ground/2nd fuel.
221 can’t beat M3 and Universal Carrier even though they are much cheaper. How could it help me secure more land with its weak combat ability?
Luchs only has 2 or 3 minuets of dominance before its counter arrives (t70, AEC, Stuart). 60 seconds is a big hit.
开弓没有回头箭。
17 Dec 2018, 13:56 PM
#35
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
221 can’t beat M3 and Universal Carrier even though they are much cheaper. How could it help me secure more land with its weak combat ability?
Luchs only has 2 or 3 minuets of dominance before its counter arrives (t70, AEC, Stuart). 60 seconds is a big hit.
Because USF also exists and not everyone goes T1 with soviets.
UC can shoot only forward.
221 is an utility vehicle, not combat one.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
17 Dec 2018, 14:07 PM
#36
Posts: 261
Because USF also exists and not everyone goes T1 with soviets.
UC can shoot only forward.
221 is an utility vehicle, not combat one.
Yeah, it looks like 221 is only viable against USF.
Do you mean I should use 221 flank UC? Don’t you think it’s too risky base on 221’s armour?
221 can only dispatch medic before upgrade, and it cost munition.
I think 223 match its price but not 221. So I suggest reduce 221’s cost but increase 223 upgrade cost.
开弓没有回头箭。
17 Dec 2018, 14:12 PM
#37
Posts: 261
Because USF also exists and not everyone goes T1 with soviets.
UC can shoot only forward.
221 is an utility vehicle, not combat one.
I don’t think 221 could do anything to maxim garrison. In the other hand, M3 and UC have flame thrower as an option.
开弓没有回头箭。
17 Dec 2018, 14:14 PM
#38
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Yeah, it looks like 221 is only viable against USF.
Do you mean I should use 221 flank UC? Don’t you think it’s too risky base on 221’s armour?
221 can only dispatch medic before upgrade, and it cost munition.
I think 223 match its price but not 221. So I suggest reduce 221’s cost but increase 223 upgrade cost.
UKF will not have enough firepower that early to fend it off and at 3rd minute you can already have 223.
Moreover, one thing about 221/3 and its vet.
How is no one mentioning that at vet2 its SIGHT RANGE is EQUAL to that of vetted T70 in recon mode?
AND it has passive detection once locked as well.
Again, it is primarily utility vehicle, not combat one.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
17 Dec 2018, 14:21 PM
#39
Posts: 261
UKF will not have enough firepower that early to fend it off and at 3rd minute you can already have 223.
Moreover, one thing about 221/3 and its vet.
How is no one mentioning that at vet2 its SIGHT RANGE is EQUAL to that of vetted T70 in recon mode?
AND it has passive detection once locked as well.
Again, it is primarily utility vehicle, not combat one.
UKF just need UC to counter, I have tested in cheat mode. And UC is already a popular choice for UKF against OKW.
I am talking about 221 not 223 here, passive detection and lock down need 223 upgrade. So I think 223 match its price, but not 221.
If you count the the ability to carry troops for a vehicle who can't capture, I don't think 221 has more utility than M3 or UC.
开弓没有回头箭。
17 Dec 2018, 14:27 PM
#40
Posts: 261
UKF will not have enough firepower that early to fend it off and at 3rd minute you can already have 223.
Moreover, one thing about 221/3 and its vet.
How is no one mentioning that at vet2 its SIGHT RANGE is EQUAL to that of vetted T70 in recon mode?
AND it has passive detection once locked as well.
Again, it is primarily utility vehicle, not combat one.
It is not easy for 221 to get vet2. Here is the reference:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iet6Nk_ZFkk
The 221 survived the whole game, but it only reached vet2 around 36 minute.
开弓没有回头箭。
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
31 | ||
 |
|
|
27 | ||
 |
|
|
20 | ||
|
|
|
|
19 | ||
|
|
|
|
5 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
 |
|
|
1 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.600215.736+15
- 3.34957.860+14
- 4.1107614.643+8
- 5.305114.728+1
- 6.916405.693-2
- 7.273108.717+24
- 8.722440.621+4
- 9.1041674.607-2
- 10.17146.788+1
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1234
Board Info
986 users are online:
986 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
37 posts in the last month
8 posts in the last week
37 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49102
Welcome our newest member, Rusel334
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Rusel334
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM