Posts: 1702
You know, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that you never played land lease commander.
You just like trolling without even a single valid point.
Posts: 307
Posts: 862
1.why is cost irrelevant ?
2.I don't care if it's an AC in real life (i don't find killing machines aka weapons as fascinating as most people in this forum so i don't know anything detailed about this unit). INGAME it costs more than a t70 and as you said the t70 is a light tank so the puma should also be classified as a tank and not an armored car.
Posts: 807
Yeah, I remember this guy. I swore to myself not to pay attention to posts of this nazi fanboy, I don't understand why I waste my time reading them.
Posts: 807
Posts: 1042
(Only 40 Ostwinds were ever made, 60 Elephants, 100 Pumas with the 50mm and 200 with the 20mm. As opposed to allied units you never see which were produced in the thousands, like the m10 Achilles, m36 Jacksons, and artillery out the wazoo. "Out the wazoo I tell you!")
Posts: 344
Pocketsize: "I can't wait till they add british to CoH: O; the extreme forces leveled by the new imbalances will create a black hole around the servers that destroys half of Canada."
Posts: 1637
When speaking about shermans, I hate it and love it in the same time. Hate it while playing germans, love it when playing soviets.
The PTRS's are fine as they are. Whenever i'm up against Guard Infantry, I always have to be careful with my vehicles or the Guards will completely destroy them. Good range, good damage and fairly cheap; if anything, the PTRS should nerfed since it's ridiculously good for the price. Even in the hands of Conscripts, the PTRS's are extremely potent.
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
1.why is cost irrelevant ?
2.I don't care if it's an AC in real life (i don't find killing machines aka weapons as fascinating as most people in this forum so i don't know anything detailed about this unit). INGAME it costs more than a t70 and as you said the t70 is a light tank so the puma should also be classified as a tank and not an armored car.
Posts: 42
Use AT guns against the Puma, vehicles are not hard counters. AT guns are. Let us know how this works out.
Posts: 141
Posts: 1163
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
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.
Posts: 2819
Something tells me this will be exactly how american TDs will work.
Posts: 807
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
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.
4 
Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2
This is fking retarded. Puma is not right at all.
It just dances around far too easy with a pak stuck to the top of it and any time you outmanouver them, bam target weak point and they swarm your one tank them disappear into the map just as quickly.
There is no tank the soviets have that can face them in equal numbers and having ZiS back up does not help that much. They are just too manouverable. It makes things far too easy.
Either they NEED target weak point removing, or their penetration lowering a bit so that heavy tanks are actually useful frontally vs them.
Dont forget soviets have weak infantry AT, make a unit which dances in circles around any soviet armour is not good.
 | Playercard of Bo-Bobby Lion | |||||||||||||||
|
Posts: 1163
Posts: 807
^You never rolled tripple vet LMG osttruppen, am I right?
I have uploaded a rep with that recently
Posts: 1063
 |
|
|
9 | ||
 |
|
|
8 | ||
 |
|
|
62 | ||
 |
|
|
23 | ||
|
|
|
|
13 | ||
|
|
|
|
7 | ||
|
|
|
|
7 | ||
|
|
|
|
6 | ||
|
|
|
|
5 | ||
 |
|
|
2 |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
