T34-76/85 needs a fuel cost increase

Completely missing the point again. Tell me katitof do you see many jacksons or su85? no you dont because 85 and e8 have taken their jobs. which is a rather massive imbalance . generalist tanks need to be decent at their jobs not take the role of a dedicated TD or AI. if it was up to me i would jack these tanks up to 175 fuel given their worth.

Actually, I do.

I don't see a single reason NOT to go major and if I go for it, having scott and jackson have no downsides.
I strongly believe ez8 is overrated.

For SU-85, I do use that as well and I'm not the only one, but you need to use advanced warfare doctrine or counterattack doctrine to have some kind of spotter armor that will also deter flanks.

You need 2 shrecked volks or 1 shrecked pgrens and 1 pak or 2 paks to completely deter use of ez8 and you don't see sov T4 with guard motor, because the cost of call-in is completely prohibitive to make anything else, was it single call-in you'd see much more diverse army comps.

And regarding your last line, yea, thats exactly why you don't work on any games balance.

First of all getting 2 paks in a game is a basic necessity, I dont know how you play or what games you play (1v1,2v2 ect)but having less than 2 paks in 2v2 upwards is just silly and asking for trouble. Not having paks and just waiting around for your own armor = a loss against even a half decent allied player.

Secondly T85s or E8 are not Tigers or IS2s they go down easily, (again if you have paks and a single tank anything from a stug upwards), if your enemy has a horde of them, well you have already made massive mistakes in the game and deserve to lose.

As OKW a raketen will take down both tanks so easily when backed up with volks and shrecks, I dont understand how this is an issue for you?

PS Ever hear of teller mines?

What a bunch of useless nonsense. Counters x unit is newbie level of thinking, You can say use 2 paks but that has consequences as MP is diverted from AI to AT. it forces you to be much more defensive and you cannot put as many squads out on the field as your opponent.

Right now im looking at the e8 and 85 as an imbalance as they can do far more then they are worth. Its a matter of economics.

Actually, I do.

I don't see a single reason NOT to go major and if I go for it, having scott and jackson have no downsides.
I strongly believe ez8 is overrated.

For SU-85, I do use that as well and I'm not the only one, but you need to use advanced warfare doctrine or counterattack doctrine to have some kind of spotter armor that will also deter flanks.

You need 2 shrecked volks or 1 shrecked pgrens and 1 pak or 2 paks to completely deter use of ez8 and you don't see sov T4 with guard motor, because the cost of call-in is completely prohibitive to make anything else, was it single call-in you'd see much more diverse army comps.

And regarding your last line, yea, thats exactly why you don't work on any games balance.

I doubt you see the issue as you dont even play axis. and the e8 is not overrated just look at the statistics. their penetration is nearly as great as the jacksons.

What a bunch of useless nonsense. Counters x unit is newbie level of thinking, You can say use 2 paks but that has consequences as MP is diverted from AI to AT. it forces you to be much more defensive and you cannot put as many squads out on the field as your opponent.

Right now im looking at the e8 and 85 as an imbalance as they can do far more then they are worth. Its a matter of economics.

Um ya ok buddy, you make no sense and need in all honesty l2p. Take my advice and win or simply keep losing and blame those "imbalanced" and "broken" units as you do so well........

I doubt you see the issue as you dont even play axis. and the e8 is not overrated just look at the statistics. their penetration is nearly as great as the jacksons.

Then I suppose elves put all these axis games on my playercard.
Just because you can't bear the thought of playing other faction doesn't mean everyone is equally attached to a single army.

Um ya ok buddy, you make no sense and need in all honesty l2p. Take my advice and win or simply keep losing and blame those "imbalanced" and "broken" units as you do so well........

Of course you dont understand it because your not on my level.

Then I suppose elves put all these axis games on my playercard.
Just because you can't bear the thought of playing other faction doesn't mean everyone is equally attached to a single army.

I really dont care about playercards anyway as its just useless epeen. can show mine but their is an issue 2 other people play this game on my account. But your bias is annoying as is your lack of understanding. if you look on the coh 2 charts is abundantly clear that the e8 have not only excellent AI or but also enough AT to replace the TD's and its something you often see in 1vs1 games. this is in stark contrast to the p4 wo cannot scratch the paint of the is or kv1 expect when he is lucky.

and the p4 losing to the kv1 and is 2 winning easily from the p4 is good balance and spare me your tales of how you used your p4 to destroy a kv1 or is2 because its bs. its not good balance when the slighty more expensive allied medium tanks can destroy german heavies and even the panther which is a dedicated TD. spamming e8 or 85 have no drawbacks what so ever. This is in stark contrast to the okw and ost where combined arms within tanks is mandatory to win.

just uninstall game already and play tetris or solitaire.

I really dont care about playercards anyway as its just useless epeen. can show mine but their is an issue 2 other people play this game on my account.

Its not like I'm posting mine all over the place or asking everyone about theirs. But saying I don't play axis when my axis to allies ratio is almost 1:1 now? Please...

But your bias is annoying as is your lack of understanding. if you look on the coh 2 charts is abundantly clear that the e8 have not only excellent AI or but also enough AT to replace the TD's and its something you often see in 1vs1 games. this is in stark contrast to the p4 wo cannot scratch the paint of the is or kv1 expect when he is lucky.

I'm heavily biased against bullshit. I do have a preference, but I'm not blind on strengths and problems of all 4 armies and playing them all gives me a better picture then axis or allies only heroes. I've never said ez8 doesn't have that, I just said that its overrated and it makes no sense to skip US T4, which even Siberian proved couple of games ago earlier today by loosing to mechanized assault stugs supported by a pair of PaKs that obliterated his ez8s. And I don't think you can call him a noob and excuse that with bad micro.

They aren't better then TDs, not even close, as I've said the strengths lies in numbers in support.
2 tanks+AT guns>single heavy tank and there is nothing wrong with it. Era of super tigers and paper allied tanks shooting pea is over. Catch up with the balance.

and the p4 losing to the kv1 and is 2 winning easily from the p4 is good balance and spare me your tales of how you used your p4 to destroy a kv1 or is2 because its bs. its not good balance when the slighty more expensive allied medium tanks can destroy german heavies and even the panther which is a dedicated TD. spamming e8 or 85 have no drawbacks what so ever. This is in stark contrast to the okw and ost where combined arms within tanks is mandatory to win.

Now we're going to the part where you need to take your meds, because you're loosing it.
Nowhere I have said that I'm beating KV-1 or IS-2 with P4. That is your bias towards me and lack of meds, which makes you see things that do not exist.

And slightly more expensive medium armor? Do you know what a firepower and a mobility is? With 2 tanks one will always be able to get behind heavy tank while the other runs from its main gun. You have let them too close while leaving your AT support behind? You fucked up, not balance, you.

Yet again it is the issue I've said at the very beginning. Quantity>quality. Balance proves that, WW2 proved that. Every single RTS game proved that.

Why? Because multiple weaker units will have always greater firepower then a single heavy one.
The same goes for for durability of multiple medium tanks against single heavy one.

There is nothing wrong with that, if you want to use heavy armor you need to use it right, you need proper AT support, if you don't know how to pull it, try watching how soviets had to play since closed beta, well, now you have to do the same and its suddenly balance problem?

Its not. Its the adaptation problem.
The times where single Tiger could take on 4 T34 are gone, deal with it, you now need to support your tanks.

And quickly going back to your TD argument, single SU-85 or Jackson also will not be able to fend off a pair of tanks, why Panther would fend off a pair of tanks that cost only slightly less but in pair have much greater stats? Support your heavier armor and you will not loose it. No tank can operate on its own anymore, adapt already or keep loosing armor.

Of course you dont understand it because your not on my level.

Indeed i am not on your level sir! I just happen to be in the top ladder for axis and allies in 2v2, and I don't seem to see you on any leader board? But heh you are the "pro" that doesnt need advice what do I know!

And im not going to bother asking you for your player card I can imagine already what it looks like.....

They aren't better then TDs, not even close, as I've said the strengths lies in numbers in support.
2 tanks+AT guns>single heavy tank and there is nothing wrong with it. Era of super tigers and paper allied tanks shooting pea is over. Catch up with the balance.

Yes and the era of spamming one type of tank has appeared. ATG are generally only usable in a defensive sense.

Now we're going to the part where you need to take your meds, because you're loosing it.
Nowhere I have said that I'm beating KV-1 or IS-2 with P4. That is your bias towards me and lack of meds, which makes you see things that do not exist.

Yes you did . half a year ago but i remember that bs quite fondly.

And slightly more expensive medium armor? Do you know what a firepower and a mobility is? With 2 tanks one will always be able to get behind heavy tank while the other runs from its main gun. You have let them too close while leaving your AT support behind? You fucked up, not balance, you.

Yet again it is the issue I've said at the very beginning. Quantity>quality. Balance proves that, WW2 proved that. Every single RTS game proved that.

Why? Because multiple weaker units will have always greater firepower then a single heavy one.
The same goes for for durability of multiple medium tanks against single heavy one.


And yet this doesnt apply to the p4 or Sherman and regular t-34. and thats implemented to prevent spam . this game is supposed to be about combined arms .

And yet this doesnt apply to the p4 or Sherman and regular t-34. and thats implemented to prevent spam . this game is supposed to be about combined arms .

There is nothing wrong with that, if you want to use heavy armor you need to use it right, you need proper AT support, if you don't know how to pull it, try watching how soviets had to play since closed beta, well, now you have to do the same and its suddenly balance problem?

Soviets player never needed to learn combined arms. su85's where op because of their super speed and afterwards t-34's ram prevented any heavy armour from being used.

Can you take your personal vendetta elsewhere?