Profile of JohnnyB

.

I'm serious but like I said it's not for everyone.

I'm not trying to play the smartass here, but, in the love relationship between stug and churchill the problem is not the penetration. Stug can penetrate it allright, but how much damage will inflict each shot that penetrated? Do you imply to build 4 stugs or what? Stug spam to defeat one churchill? Nice trade off. When I shot churchill with stug I feel like I try to empty a bucket filled with sand with a spoon. Do you understand me, bro?

Change like this would support volkspam

And your solution for current partisan/conscripts/rifle/etc... spam is....?
Don't tell me about ISG, you want that unit to be nerfed. Tell me about the Katitof sollution to this in a perfectly Katitof ballanced game

I still use them, but in a very defensive position. It's true, if you put them too agressively on a vp or enemy cut off they get destroyed asap. But protecting your own cut off or inflicting MP loss when the enemy advances to your lines is still viable with mortar pits and bofors.

Well, what did you expect? That is the true purpose of emplacements in this game, british or not british. But British faction players thought that they can just build a bofors on your cutoff and own the game easily while you as axis have no tools to deal with them in due time, not losing all map. So if they cannot do that anymore, (because it was so easy to build 2 bofors and wait for churchills)they cry over emplacements.
Meanwhile the OKW AA emplacement is crying in a corner, next to it it's a PAK 43 emplacement crying too, because it has no brace and it's so easy to kill.

A balanced environment for all 5 armies with most if not all commanders being valid, not necessarily equally strong, but valid and diminished reliance on specific doctrines or single unit to be even able to stay in game-brits are the best example here of what I don't want, there is alooong way before UKF will not be stomped either by sniper or osttruppen.

Propaganda and empty words.

Because I usually respond in threads which I don't agree with something

Aka 2 types of threads:
type one: Thread that requests changes for axis units that could make them work better or more efficiently.
type 2: Threads that state how OP are some units/features belonging to allied factons

I just don't like messing with stuff that isn't broken.

Translation: I will not support any axis unit buff, even if badly needed.

I don't want to see volks getting more AI, because that makes completely no sense , volks role is clear-AT and meatshields for other, dedicated AI squads which OKW have plenty to choose from.

Translation:
I don't want to see volks getting more AI, because I want to constantly abuse of my rifles/cons/late game tommies, it would be a disaster if OKW would have something cost effective and viable in startgame as cons are for instance, volks role is clear-AT fail unit and I don't wanna change it, shreck being nerfed to oblivion in terms of accuracy. I need them to stay in their current role, meaning useless meatshields worst than ostruppen. In terms of AI I want that OKW rely only on its super-expensive and cost ineffective elite infantry that they have plenty to choose from because it won't matter anyway, I will still be able to blob the shit out of them with my BAR rifles and ppsh cons which will brings me a quick and easy victory wich is the thing that I want.

Since you told us earlier in this topic that you only blob to punish your opponent blob, you are confirming us that Axis blob is superior to Allied whatever unit blob.

Did I say that I do that with Axis units!? Did I? Please quote me. You are saying this because you are supposing I play Axis exclusively, isn't it?