You axis are the ones that cried all the rivers to nerf flames...well there you have it. Now you have a shitty expensive tank just like all the rest of us and our KV8's.
Referring to any faction or side as 'you' or 'them', or identifying with any makes you lose your credibility pretty fast.
As for the commander, I'm glad it's underperforming rather than overperforming. An underperforming commander is ignored pretty easily, CAS, Rifle comp or Windustry not so much.
Side armour would add nothing to the game except needlessly complicating things and nerfing tanks. Just think of the damage shitty pathfinding would do.
Teching for the demo is not going tochange the situation. It will simply delay it a bit, that's all. It will not stop it from wiping your squads.
I would be for maybe lowering the damage to non squadwipe-levels and adding surpression that automatically pins a unit so you'll have to retreat it. Change the cost accordingly.
I think the mistunderstanding here is that Squippy insists that the German counterattacks were very predictable, which they were not, according to coh2player, and I think I have to agree on this.
To be clear, are we referring to Counterattacks on the scale of Unternehmen Lüttich or smaller, tactical counterattacks, such as quickly counterattacking a hill that has been lost?
Part of the reasoning behind the soviet IS2 having so much more armor is the fact that it fights generally better AT units. Units like the pak40, Panther, JT, elephant, and the pak43 are much better options than anything that allied players have.
The JT, Elephant and Pak43 never bounce anyway.
Besides, the Pak40 is a ZiS with TWP and the Panther is an IS 2 with less AI and Blitz.
I kinda don't understand the 'better AT units' argument. IS 2 will scare off anything that isn't a 200+ fuel tank destroyer and any kind of infantry or AT gun. The ISU has excellent AT characteristics, the 85s have speed and mark target and a very high DPS, The Jacksons penetrate everything except for the Jagdtiger.