Login

russian armor

OKW 221

15 Dec 2018, 15:11 PM
#1
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

Hi all, just wondering: do you think the 221 might come a bit late? At 20 fuel and its low armour I think having to place a truck makes it too expensive. I could see locking the upgrade behind a truck so the fighting cache doesn't come quite so soon but I think the standard 221 isn't really impactful enough as a unit to be delayed as much as it is with such a fuel cost. Thoughts?
15 Dec 2018, 15:18 PM
#2
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17875 | Subs: 8

T0 0CP vehicles need to be in check somehow as due to lack of any AT/AT nade options on allied side within first minutes would lead to potent vehicle roflstomping them.

Its not bad, but its not going to be much more useful(well, durable, useful it is) then Kubel.

If it was stronger(aka more durable) out of the gate, there simply wouldn't be a counter to it at that time as USF is vet locked from AT nades, UKF is tech locked and soviets would have to commit to upgrade that shouldn't be needed at that time, weakening their already poor vs OKW early game.
15 Dec 2018, 15:21 PM
#3
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

It can already be built after having an SWS on the field.

At that point it's good enough to hunt down a sniper or to push off lone squads, HMGs or light vehicles. At the time AT rifles, snares and other heavier stuff comes you can upgrade it to 223 for the extra durability.
15 Dec 2018, 15:39 PM
#4
avatar of Smartie

Posts: 856 | Subs: 2


All in all i agree with Sander and Katitof but its a little bit odd to see a soviet scout car destroy a unit that cost more fuel (happened to me yesterday). I think the 221 should do more damage for the cost.
15 Dec 2018, 15:50 PM
#5
avatar of Serrith

Posts: 783

Its actual damage output against infantry seems adequate but it has very poor durability for its cost and its gun has no penetrative capability which gets it wrecked by pretty much any other light vehicle. Give it a slight armor increase and bump its pen to like 1.2/1.5/1.8 so hnn it can at least defend itself against m3s.
15 Dec 2018, 16:01 PM
#6
avatar of Ther200

Posts: 13

In my findings i think the 221 is pretty usefull. Just inflict a good amount of MP bleed, pick off a squad which has gone to deep in your territory and have an option on the field to savely flank MG's.

Especially againt USF, since they rely on infantry very hard. They might have 1 squad gotten the vet for a rifle nade but still it is pretty okay.

UKF same als good. As their snare come only with their sappers. UK rifles and vickeres do decent damage so you need to be somewhat carefull.

USSR IMO not to great. Because of their cheap and healthy squads. And by that time they have multiple options to get out PTRS out quickly which renders the vehicle useless.


I upgrade the vehicle to the 223. And let it fight a while longer on the field. When i see it gets countered to much a retreat, repair it and use it in the hull down mode at a flank/fuel point or so. By that time it should have done its job.

Further notes: The first 3 vets give extra combat effectiveness, capatalizing on it early on can really give you an advantage. Vet 4 is more HP in the hulldown mode (pretty lackluster IMO) and vet 5 is riegel placement (very nice but respect for the man who get the vet and not get killed laying the mine, still nice addition i want more riegels :D)

Beside the PTRS the most notable counters your enemy can bring are IMO:

M3A1 can be even earlier on the field and the 50cal has easier time dealing damage as vice versa.

Im not sure with the new tech structure on the timings but:
M20/AAHT, by this time you might have gotten a luchs/puma.

AEC, maybe at that time you can defend it and get a puma?

UC with Vickers seems also a decent counter but is somewhat late, and can be at the same time 223 has been teched. Beside this the 221/223 can outflank the UC.

Just my thought i really enjoy it. I mostly combine it with mechanized as my first tech. As luchs and puma are good follow ups for the natural counters for the 221/223. Also the HEAT rounds make Puma a great option.


15 Dec 2018, 16:04 PM
#7
avatar of Ther200

Posts: 13

It can already be built after having an SWS on the field.

At that point it's good enough to hunt down a sniper or to push off lone squads, HMGs or light vehicles. At the time AT rifles, snares and other heavier stuff comes you can upgrade it to 223 for the extra durability.


Totally agreed!
15 Dec 2018, 16:30 PM
#8
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

At its timing window it's adequate: its armour is made of paper and wishes, but it's fighting small arms.

To survive beyond that window though, it's got to get its 223 upgrade.
15 Dec 2018, 16:49 PM
#9
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

I'm usually getting a pair of them as sort of a very early Luchs, if you upgrade to 223 they have about the same firepower and survivability if you keep them together. Then straight into Puma. As soon as it becomes too dangerous I move them back and set them up as caches for the rest of the game. Seems to work really well, especially if you have a munitions point to farm. Gives a nice stockpile of muni for all the tank abilities in late game.
15 Dec 2018, 18:48 PM
#10
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

It's firepower is very good, I don't disagree with that at all, I just feel like for its timing it's a bit squishy FOR COST. it doesn't necessarily need to be made more durable, but maybe cheaper (you can add the reduced cost to the upgrade to not bust the balance of the cache) I expect more for 20 fuel with no transport ability.
15 Dec 2018, 19:20 PM
#11
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17875 | Subs: 8

It's firepower is very good, I don't disagree with that at all, I just feel like for its timing it's a bit squishy FOR COST. it doesn't necessarily need to be made more durable, but maybe cheaper (you can add the reduced cost to the upgrade to not bust the balance of the cache) I expect more for 20 fuel with no transport ability.
Anything less and we would see it being spammed to completely overwhelm USF for example, who have no answer to lights at all from get go, UKF at least can put up a fight with UC and soviets with M3, but 2 of these things against USF in 2nd/3rd minute would royally fuck them up.
15 Dec 2018, 19:24 PM
#12
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

jump backJump back to quoted post15 Dec 2018, 19:20 PMKatitof
Anything less and we would see it being spammed to completely overwhelm USF for example, who have no answer to lights at all from get go, UKF at least can put up a fight with UC and soviets with M3, but 2 of these things against USF in 2nd/3rd minute would royally fuck them up.

I don't think 15 fuel would make hell of a large difference when it comes to spam. Knock off 5 fuel and add a point of armour and see how that feels?
15 Dec 2018, 23:06 PM
#13
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3596 | Subs: 1


I don't think 15 fuel would make hell of a large difference when it comes to spam. Knock off 5 fuel and add a point of armour and see how that feels?


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.
15 Dec 2018, 23:52 PM
#14
avatar of Kill3rCat

Posts: 33

Haven't tested it but the SdKfz 221 feels very comparable to USF WC51 Jeep, though I think it does have (slightly) more armour. I think the tech requirements for the 221 should be identical to the WC51, especially considering that the main attraction of Elite Armour has been nerfed beyond uselessness (Sturmtiger).
15 Dec 2018, 23:55 PM
#15
avatar of NaOCl

Posts: 369

jump backJump back to quoted post15 Dec 2018, 15:18 PMKatitof
T0 0CP vehicles need to be in check somehow as due to lack of any AT/AT nade options on allied side within first minutes would lead to potent vehicle roflstomping them.

Its not bad, but its not going to be much more useful(well, durable, useful it is) then Kubel.

If it was stronger(aka more durable) out of the gate, there simply wouldn't be a counter to it at that time as USF is vet locked from AT nades, UKF is tech locked and soviets would have to commit to upgrade that shouldn't be needed at that time, weakening their already poor vs OKW early game.


OKW also has this problem, bren carrier can be problematic.

I think your allied bias is showing.
16 Dec 2018, 00:57 AM
#16
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17875 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post15 Dec 2018, 23:55 PMNaOCl


OKW also has this problem, bren carrier can be problematic.

I think your allied bias is showing.

OKW has invisible AT GUN at T0.

If you have this problem as OKW, its specifically because you have chosen to have it by not building rak.
That's how you counter this thing.

Its not my bias that is showing, its your denial and refusal to use existing hardcounters for specific units that's showing here, nothing else.

I am very sorry to disappoint you here, but relic can't patch a noob out of anyone, you need to do it yourself.
16 Dec 2018, 01:03 AM
#17
avatar of Kasarov
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 422 | Subs: 2

Haven't tested it but the SdKfz 221 feels very comparable to USF WC51 Jeep, though I think it does have (slightly) more armour. I think the tech requirements for the 221 should be identical to the WC51, especially considering that the main attraction of Elite Armour has been nerfed beyond uselessness (Sturmtiger).


Sturmtiger "nerfed beyond uselessness" just shows that you're using it wrong.

I had a 5* Sturmtiger yesterday with 57 kills in automatch the other day. It can reload on the move and self-repair with the additional bonus of just being a deterrent for blobs even without firing. The rocket doesn't have nearly as many issues with object collision like everyone says it does.

On topic: 223 feels fine for cost. If the total cost was lowered any more, it would be too cheap for a combat-capable cache with FoW sight. At most, I'd probably just give it an additional point of armor. I agree 221 is fairly weak durability-wise, but it's not supposed to be a shock unit. It's a support unit that's more forgiving than the kubelwagen, pretty good for double sturms opening in 2v2's and up.
16 Dec 2018, 04:05 AM
#18
avatar of NaOCl

Posts: 369

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Dec 2018, 00:57 AMKatitof

OKW has invisible AT GUN at T0.

If you have this problem as OKW, its specifically because you have chosen to have it by not building rak.
That's how you counter this thing.

Its not my bias that is showing, its your denial and refusal to use existing hardcounters for specific units that's showing here, nothing else.

I am very sorry to disappoint you here, but relic can't patch a noob out of anyone, you need to do it yourself.


At least you didn't deny your blatant bias ;)
16 Dec 2018, 05:25 AM
#19
avatar of blancat

Posts: 810

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Dec 2018, 04:05 AMNaOCl


At least you didn't deny your blatant bias ;)



just build RAKETEN
16 Dec 2018, 09:46 AM
#20
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17875 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Dec 2018, 04:05 AMNaOCl


At least you didn't deny your blatant bias ;)

See, this here?
This is exactly why you have problems.
You ignore solution and pretend it doesn't exist while focusing on something you shouldn't even be focusing at.
This is why you lose game vs extremely easy to contest units.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

unknown 3

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

434 users are online: 434 guests
6 posts in the last 24h
32 posts in the last week
86 posts in the last month
Registered members: 44637
Welcome our newest member, tridevambulance
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM