Profile of MissCommissar

KV-1 is just more armored T-34-76 with lesser speed. It's not that better, than T-34-76 itself.

For to make T4 reliable again, they just should throw out T-34-76, becuase it is too old for 1944-45 wars (just as KV-1, pretty old tank too) and put there T-34-85 for 380 MP 130 Fuel.

And instead of penals in T1 should be some AT infantry. Maybe penals with PTRS, maybe AT partisans, maybe Plaugemarines with rocket launchers... No matter how, but T1 should get AT infantry, just as entire USSR.

And of course - equilase Maxim MG to MG-42.

No, even people who disagree with you are part of a conversation. You cannot just accept the views that relate to yours without taking into consideration other people's point of view - especially in discussions forums.

You brought the idea of Soviets being a one role-faction, so yes, if you say that USSR has no patterns of play, you cannot just suddenly switch the topic again if I disagree with you.

Soviets are not defensive, I heartily agree; every faction has clear strengths, and clear disadvantages, even if the most recent 222 changes may have blurred that away slightly. Soviets have no need for defense though, it is not their design intention; The game even promotes them being aggressive over defensive.

If you want a defensive Ally faction, go play Brits.

Views of Zarok47 are more preferable to me, because he explained his position and showed, that he deserves to be part of normal discussion. I don't agree with him, but I can accept some of his arguments. Meanwhile, all others have no arguments at all, just their ponit of view, which based on unexplained something. I can't discuss with them, since I saw no arguments in their repiles.

Sovs don't have patterns of game, in your first understanding of word "patterns", like unpredictible choising of Tiers. There are only one reasonable pattern with Tiers for USSR right now: 2-3-4 without 1. Inside of that tree of tiers can be patterns, but that's not what I meant in a first place.

At least you agreed that soviet are not defensive. Maybe, you will also agree, that British, which you suggested me as defensive, are also good in ofensive playstyle? And not only British, but also all other factions. And only USSR is that "one-role faction". UK have emplacements, but also have Comets, Cromwells and Churchills. Ostheers have PaKs (43 i mean), bunkers and MG-42s, but also have Tigers, Panthers. And same for all other factions.

We can find a lot of perfect ofensive units in USSR, maybe even better than their analogs in other factions. But we won't find any good defensive unit, at least no defensive MG's. And HMGs in CoH 2 plays a major role, as holders of infantry attacks, which can be more dangerous sometime, than even tanks.

Who are all these "everyone else" that you keep referring to? Countless people in this forum disagrees with your threads and you refuse to accept ESL and high level gameplay due to people being "nerds" - there's no "everyone else" that you are able to speak of. Sovs got countless more patterns of gaming than the one you seem to strictly stick to because they do not fit your preferred type of play.

Anway, in addition, you just seem to ignore what people write and twist responses to the way that it sounds best to your ears, like you just did. Sigh.

I listened only one person here, who reasonably explained me his vision of "why Maxim is not so trashy as you think". Well, Im not agree with him and write my answers to his arguments. He wrote me back, I wrote my back... That's how normal discussion goes.

All others just write something, without even trying to discuss, explain their vision of situiatuion. Why and how should I listen to them? What should I answer to "Maxim is fine, OP is troll". Is it reasonable way of discussion?

Sovs got countless more patterns? Maybe, but problem is not about "how much patterns USSR has". Problem is - USSR can't into effective defensive playstyle, only in offense, while all other factions can combine or, at least, choose between 2 of those. Isn't that showing you weakness of USSR?

SOV has been demonstrated countless times to be the most resourceful, and the least predictable army of the game, mostly due to its open techtree, and most divers commanders. Sure, it does have a few bits that lack (T4 in general), but it is far away from being a one-role faction.

Stop throwing random keywords around. "Fair assymetrical balance"? Perhaps it does sound fancy to you, but that's it.

Hard to call USSR "most resoursfull", since everyone thinks, that it is right to play in "spam", which steals a lot of resourses from you. Spam of Maxims is not cheap actually, spam of conscripts is less cheaper, spam of T-34... of everything.

And how it suppoused to be less predicteble, when soviets right now, mostly, have only 1 pattern of gaming. T2-T3-T4. T1 is useless, since nobody cares about M3 and penals. M3 will die after first meet of panzerfaust and penals are not much better than usuall conscripts with explosives and flamers. And with T1 you will have NO AT at all, untill T3 with SU-76. So, USSR now is even more predictible, than OKW, which can decide what to build - T1 right now or w8 little and get T2 with Puma, Luchs and Stuka.

And that was not my idea of "assymetrical balance" in a first place. I have nothing against balancing by equialing. That's what I suggest for Maxims. But everyone thinks, that "assymetrical balance" is kinda Holy Grale of CoH 2. It could be, if it would be balanced. But it is not. Care more about balance, not about similarity of factions.

Ok, Maxim is not defensive MG, and I shouldn't use it in that way. More than that - entire USSR faction is not defensive, I could agree.

But, look at OKW - it's both defensive and offensive faction at once! Same for wehrmacht with bunkers, 42s and other stuff, but also with Panthers, Tigers and not last in game medium tanks. UKF is same both defensive and offensive, combine powerfull tanks like Comet with bunch of emplacements, USA is offensive mostly, but still have a lot of options to be good in defense. At least they have fireing postitions with MGs and good MGs at all.

But only USSR is very poor in defense play with not much benefits in offensive. All best offensive tanks they gave to Axis, and non-doctrinal infantry of USSR is not reliable in attack or defense.

USSR is one-role faction which is also hardly addicted to doctrines. There is not such faction, which depends so much on doctrines they choose. USSR should be fully reworked, because right now they don't have enough to be equial in powers (not straightly equial, don't mess it please) with all other factions. Make it less dependeble of doctrines with giving them more usefull non-doctrinal units and fix their lackness in defense game.

Or make Wehrmacht, OKW and UKF offensive units same bad in "offense", like they made Maxim in "defense". At least, it will be fair "assymetrical balance".