OKW 221
Posts: 3260
If it survives.
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.
Posts: 658
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.
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.
Posts: 658
Posts: 5279
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.
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
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.
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?
Posts: 2243
- 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
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.
Posts: 783
It wont.
That long time translates to 60 seconds usually, less if said vehicle allowed you to secure more ground/2nd fuel.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Livestreams
111 | |||||
27 | |||||
13 | |||||
63 | |||||
61 | |||||
15 | |||||
9 | |||||
1 | |||||
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.829222.789+35
- 2.34857.859+13
- 3.587233.716+3
- 4.1095612.641+19
- 5.882398.689+4
- 6.280162.633+8
- 7.996646.607-1
- 8.379114.769+1
- 9.300113.726-1
- 10.717439.620+1
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger