Greyhound could use some more AT DPS

I think balance is a pretty good reason...

Not really.

Centaur, Luch, 222, Ostwind,...use different mechanism the that make them behave completely differently. The could all use a single mechanism and have DPS adjusted accordingly the same way the DPS of the HMG-34 crew was moved to gun from the crew.

But there is, since the 222 is an AT vehicle with decent AI power while the Luchs is an AI vehicle with decent AT power. The vehicles serve different roles (gameplay) in different factions (variety). The fact that they happen to share a similar (not the same) gun IRL doesn't matter for the game. It's exactly the same for the HMG 42 dealing suppression while the LMG 42 only does damage despite being the exact same weapon IRL. But whatever.

Can you tell me which of the following guns use accuracy, which uses AOE, which has modifier vs vehicles and which uses the point blank mechanism? Can also tell me who long it took to find that that info?
Centaur
222
Luch
Ostwind

Point here is that one can achieve the different roles for these units with a single approach/solution which will greatly increase how user friendly the game is.

For instance if Luch and 222 need to have different performance vs vehicles they can simply have different penetration values...

Can you tell me which of the following guns use accuracy, which uses AOE, which has modifier vs vehicles and which uses the point blank mechanism?
Centaur
222
Luch
Ostwind

The centaur uses accuracy, but gets a lot of scatter hits (less so with its relatively recent scatter nerfs) and has pretty low but not insignificant aoe.
The 222 is almost purely scatter based and has a fairly low aoe, hence why it usually has a low damage against infantry (except when the squad is on the wrong side of cover).
The luchs uses accuracy, but occasionally gets some scatter hits. It's aoe used to be surprisingly large, but it was reduced over a year ago such that the aoe is a small bonus. Edit: looked at the question again to make sure I answered everything, and the luchs uses a modifier against vehicles because it would hit vehicles 100% of the time (after all, the main cannon was accuracy based). I also believe the luchs uses point blank...the centaur might too, but im very uncertain on that.
The ostwind uses scatter, like most tank main cannons.

This is all off of the top of my head, so I'd like to know how I did.

Other edit to avoid double posting: Now that I understand what you meant when you said they use different mechanics, I agree almost entirely. The 222 needs to be scatter based though, or else its performance against infantry would be too high, and the luchs needs to be accuracy based, because if it instead had a super low scatter, that would have weird implications. But yeah, the 2cm cannons have so many unnecessary qualities that should probably be removed.

Also, the ostwind doesn't use a 2cm cannon - that would be the whirbelwind.

the 222 AI power is low but stronger than puma for a single reason, it has paper armor, so at least when unit with smg gets close it can do something

No.... its half the cost and earlier arrival.

Its AI is stronger then puma, because its not dedicated AT, its generalist one with AT focus, 5 minute version of Stuart.

...

Actually it is so complicated that I have to look it up and the answer is not that simple because the weapon are different in so many ways. But you are pretty close.

As far as I know only Luch uses the point blank mechanism but Centaur is using better modifier vs cover.

Lets check modifier first using 222 as base line:
222
Light cover accuracy 0.5, Light cover damage 1
Heavy cover accuracy 0.5, Heavy cover damage 0.5
Garrison accuracy 0.4, Garrison damage 0.25

Ostwind
Light cover accuracy 0.5, Light cover damage 1
Heavy cover accuracy 0.5, Heavy cover damage 0.5
Garrison accuracy 0.4, Garrison damage 0.25

Luch
Light cover accuracy 0.5, Light cover damage 1
Heavy cover accuracy 0.5, Heavy cover damage 0.25 (x50%)
Garrison accuracy 0.5 (x125%), Garrison damage 0.3 (x120%)

Centaur
Light cover accuracy 1 (x200%), Light cover damage 1
Heavy cover accuracy 0.5, Heavy cover damage 1 (x200%)
Garrison accuracy 0.5 (x125%), Garrison damage 0.35 (x140%)

Just BUMPing to make sure you see the edit in my post.

I'm gonna disagree with y'all; I don't think it is worth the effort 5 years into the game to try and readjust all these units when they mostly work fine. Consistency is good but they really work good enough already. There are bigger fish to fry.

I'm gonna disagree with y'all; I don't think it is worth the effort 5 years into the game to try and readjust all these units when they mostly work fine. Consistency is good but they really work good enough already. There are bigger fish to fry.

Yeah if it ain't broken don't fix it. Even if almost no one understands how or why they work.

I'm gonna disagree with y'all; I don't think it is worth the effort 5 years into the game to try and readjust all these units when they mostly work fine. Consistency is good but they really work good enough already. There are bigger fish to fry.

No they do not work fine imo.

Luch can decimate units in cover in range 9 while it useless at range 10, Centaur on the other hand completely ignores yellow cover while at vet 1 it has the option to use no scatter/no accuracy fire.

222 can decimate armored cars, luch can be hunted down by even m3 with AT infantry inside due to modifier vs vehicles.

AEC decimates Ostwind that has a hard time even vs T70 due to low accuracy and low scatter that does not allow the unit to get collision hits, while Centaur can deal with a Puma.

222 most AI capability comes from coaxial (unless the main guns shot hit world object next to target) which does around double the damage than luch's coaxial.

222 uses mostly AOE on its main gun yet it gain accuracy as vet bonus (which mostly benefits it's coaxial)

And the list can go on...

All this add complexity for particular reason. There are far simpler solution for fixing the performance of this weapons while keeping the behavior similar.

We don't want Valentine spam 2.0
Show Spoiler

Actually it is so complicated that I have to look it up and the answer is not that simple because the weapon are different in so many ways. But you are pretty close.

As far as I know only Luch uses the point blank mechanism but Centaur is using better modifier vs cover.

Lets check modifier first using 222 as base line:
222
Light cover accuracy 0.5, Light cover damage 1
Heavy cover accuracy 0.5, Heavy cover damage 0.5
Garrison accuracy 0.4, Garrison damage 0.25

Ostwind
Light cover accuracy 0.5, Light cover damage 1
Heavy cover accuracy 0.5, Heavy cover damage 0.5
Garrison accuracy 0.4, Garrison damage 0.25

Luch
Light cover accuracy 0.5, Light cover damage 1
Heavy cover accuracy 0.5, Heavy cover damage 0.25 (x50%)
Garrison accuracy 0.5 (x125%), Garrison damage 0.3 (x120%)

Centaur
Light cover accuracy 1 (x200%), Light cover damage 1
Heavy cover accuracy 0.5, Heavy cover damage 1 (x200%)
Garrison accuracy 0.5 (x125%), Garrison damage 0.35 (x140%)

Why does the Centaur get all those OP modifiers vs green and yellow cover while the Ostwind doesn't. In addition, it has better on the move dps, armor that doesn't get regularly penned by T70 and blatantly OP AA capabilities that the Ostwind doesn't even get after vet 2 bonus all for just 10 extra fuel?!

We don't want Valentine spam 2.0
Show Spoiler

We have greyhound spam .
I feelz bad for you.

After the KOTH Event from yesterday i think we can agree that M8 doesnt need a buff...