I’m proposing changing this vehicle to be the first unique rider vehicle. Why?
It doesn’t fit the tank role, since it cannot effectivly support the infantry (it has no HE shells)
It won’t be a good tank hunter, since APCR has bad post-pen damage
It would be a very entertaining revival of the rider class
As the bike squad can already equip an AT soldier, adding this vehicle wouldn’t be out of the parameters of what the rider does, nor would it be better at AT duty than what it can do currently
It’s very similar to the PTRS bike which is currently in game
Yes
No
0voters
Change it to BR 2
Change it to BR 3
Keep BR as-is
0voters
Overall it’d be a much more interesting and welcome addition for the rider class.
It is not a tank, but the slot is covers a variety of vehicles whose job is just to support infantry however they can.
For example, the Flakpanzer 1 and Marder 3 are not tanks
Well that’s why it’s low BR. It’s meant to deal with a certain degree of threats
In my opinion the only other thing Rider could get is cars like jeeps and kubelwagens since they were just standard transport vehicles.
The difference is Rider is an infantry class. The 221 may be weak but it is what it is. This is like comparing the Panzer 2 and Tiger 2. Sure the Panzer 2 is weak but it is a combat vehicle nonetheless.
Except this vehicle cannot support infantry in any way. And it’s going to get sniped by some random dude it can’t even fight, because the traverse is bad
Every threat it faces it much more competent than it is, it cannot deal with any threat in a reasonable amount of time. It’s better suited for driving and covering whoever is inside, which would be much better for the rider role/
Which can equip vehicles, this entire concept is arbitrary.
I don’t think this is true, since the panzer 2 can deal with at least some of the vehicles it faces in a reasonable amount of time, which won’t be the case for the 221, unless it reloads in like one second
I mean, it’d be a great rider vehicle in BR 3/4, I was thinking about making a suggestion in the past, tbh.
Also, it was added pre-rider, maybe that’s part of it?
Well, if you put it at an apporiate BR it can still work. The cannon isn’t all that good, since it’s an AT rifle and there’s already an ATR on a bike in the game
as far as I’m concerned, the only thing seperating this thing and the PTRS bike is that this has armor, which can be balanced by making it a higher BR
Puma is at least fully enclosed.
While its an armoured car, it is easily as strong as any light tank of the war. Its one of the vehicle that just make sense to be in the “tank” category.
However Sd.kfz 221 is just another candidate for the (meme) conceptual BR0.
And maybe that it’s not on a chassis with terrible physics making playing it on anything but flat terrain annoying… and in theory should be fast as well while not tripping on everything possible.
I also assumed it was a 37mm but it appears i’m wrong and is same as ptrs
I believe basically every vehicle from the war should be added! I don’t care how good or bad it is!
Killing vehicles is supporting infantry.
We can say the same thing about most low BR vehicles like the Panzer 2, Ha-Go, T-60, M2 Stuart, etc.
Plausibly so, but we can delve into the qualities of so many different vehicles and nitpick them, like open topped self propelled guns and reach the conclusion that any vehicle that isn’t a Tiger 2 shouldn’t be a tank slot.
My point is, it meets the basic requirements for a vehicle within its BR.
The bikes are just for memes and flavor. Their primary job is to dismount. You certainly wouldn’t use the Tiger 2 as a taxi
The Panzer 2 has the advantage of a high ROF autocannon. This thing can at least penetrate armor
I still campaign for it be moved to the vehicle slot
Even if, it cannot do it well enough to justify it as a tank destroyer. This is basically a somewhat better PTRS bike.
That’s not what I meant and you know it.
This doesn’t fulfill the role of an SPG, because SPGs can deal with tanks much more effectivly, without having to pin-point aim (tanks have to generally aim for weakspots and this has to aim for the crew, which is the only way to deal dmg, same thing pretty much),
this vehicle’s only quality is being armored, which it isn’t well enough to be in a tank role, it’s gunner is sticking out,
this means it’s much better fit for the rider role
This thing would also be used for dismount, since it’s useless in every other role aswell.
Ok let’s analyze a few vehicles. The Panzer 4, Stug A, Sd.Kfz.251/9, and Sd.Kfz.234/3. All of them are armed with the same gun, the only difference is
one is in an enclosed rotating turret
one is in a casemate
one is on a halftrack
one is on an armored car
Why should they be different classified vehicles if they all have the same main gun. Of coarse a 75mm gun is different from the Pzb 41. But my point is the 221 is just an armored car with a light AT gun. It may not be able to effectively kill infantry but it can still kill vehicles. It may be a lowly combat vehicle but it is one nonetheless, just as the Panzer 2 is a lowly tank compared to the Tiger 2
But it was not intended to. Motorcycle troops were intended to dismount because they were like dragoons. Armored cars were support vehicles.
As a tank it would never ever be used by anyone with more than two braincells - its completely worthless. That being said, its a cool iconic vehicle.
In the rider class it would actually make sense - its fast and moderately armored, so its crew can do quick flanking runs, build a rally and parking the vehicle once its “scout run” is complete. Its small gun is just a gimmick and quite weak against tanks BUT it can attack APC and probably even hunt them inside the enemy backline…
Anyways this scout car is the perfect example why the rider class would benefit greatly from a rework.
No, because Motorcycles were used differently than other combat vehicles.
Well no, but actually yes. It’s complicated. Germany and SU had dedicated Motorcycle troops who were basically mechanical dragoons. Their job was to race ahead of the other infantry and take ground as fast shock troops. They certainly did have to dismount when needed to fight on the ground.
Of coarse a soldier doesn’t want to get hit by a machine gun, but that’s an occupational hazard.
I look at it like this, Rider stands as its own class to represent these mechanical dragoons. The Rider class is incentivized to dismount so Bikes and cars are fine for them.
APC is its own class to represent motorized/mechanized infantry and vehicles whose job was to carry entire infantry squads. The vehicle slot covers more than just tanks but any vehicle that is meant to support infantry
