Profile of AHandyDandyHotDog

They're so god damn good, I think they're pretty much the only thing worth building for both armor and infantry. Like, the T-34 is literally the worst thing ever, I'd rather have a single SU-76 than three T-34s (which is good because I can spam out SU-76s way faster than 34s). I used to think they were worthless, par of the course for soviet armor other than the SU-85. They're so damn versatile, the SU-85 actually pales in comparison. Why have one or two 85s, when you can have like 4-5 76s for far cheaper; not only that, they can actually defend themselves from any threat.

They decimate axis armor, even panthers and tigers will not stand a chance. Pshreck blobs coming? Just slow them down with the soviets incredibly maneuverable MG and then bombard them with your line of SU-76s, say goodbye to half of them. Pretty much any game I use them, they get at least 3k INF damage + however many tens of thousands of armor damage they inevitably get.

Lose one or two? Say hello to their two cousins who are now hungry for revenge and cost half a sandwich. Pak 43? Just bombard it and destroy it immediately.

They're just freaking great and every Sov player needs to use them instead of 85s.

Only reason I can stabilize in this game was because of the SU-76s. They're not even upgraded with their bulletins, they're unbelievable with those.

Also, I was a little angry this game, but who doesn't get like that every so often.

I'm aware of what you were "going for", but it's irrelevant as I'm not defending either the AVRE or the Sturmtiger being able to oneshot people from fog, and it has absolutely nothing to do with this thread. It's a non-sequitur.

1v1 and 4v4 need separate balancing, but I'm not seeing how I'm "ignoring" that. You've been specifically complaining about the "top 5%" of players, not so much 1v1 vs 4v4 games.

You've also been insisting that Axis are heavily advantaged, when that doesn't even seem to be the case at the moment. Do you even have any specific examples of imbalance?

You did, though. You say there's no reason why the game shouldn't be balanced by just what the top 5% of the player says, but they balance the game just for those top players in 1v1. They're not balancing for the good of the rest of the player base, who primarily play teams.

The Sturmtigers an example, lots of complaining had to be done to get that fixed. What about the Pak 43, the only cannon that can shoot through buildings, the insta suppressing MG42 that Ostheer gets at the start of the game, the cache spamming that is something I only ever see Ostheer do because why wouldn't they, their nondoc tanks are just on average superior.

While its true that Axis requare less micro, especially in teamgames, your opinion will always be 100% biased if you mostly play one side.

I mean, you can be openminded and not a fanboy, but you still will be biased.

On a topic:
Pak43 is no different to any unit which requre commander solution to killed, like:
1) You play against Howis without picking com with offmap+recon, you will have a bad time.
2) You are playing against Axis heavy spam, without strong AT offmaps, you will have a bad time.
3) You are playing against Allies TD spam without Pak43\Ele\JT, you will have a bad time.

PaK43 is strong, but you have to anticipate based on map and commanders enemy have that you might have to fight it in this game.

Also if you dont like facing it that much, just veto maps where its super strong in 3v3\4v4 there are few maps where PaK43 is indeed super strong, on most of them its manageable.

1) That's a different topic, this has nothing to do with the pak 43 and its no clip shells.
2) I didn't have a hard time, I killed the crew on it immediately at the end of the game, that doesn't excuse it.
3) Panther spam, what? Or just like, Pgren spam that completely nullifies the Ally TDs, you have so many options man. It should not be able to shoot through buildings and obstacles, why is this an argument. At least it should lose shit tons of dmg and pen if it does.

That's kind of a weird strawman argument. Try to think of something realistic if you're going to put words in my mouth.



That's completely illogical. If something is actually imbalanced then being better at the game doesn't suddenly make it balanced. All that would happen in reality is that better players would be able to use broken (overpowered) units even more effectively, and would simply not use broken (underpowered) units.

Imbalance is magnified at higher levels of play, not made less obvious. If the game trends to being better balanced at higher levels then that means that the game is well balanced.

If the argument is that the game is more balanced at higher levels of play then the solution really is to simply learn to play better.

Not strawman, cause it actually happened. Replace AVRE with the Sturmtiger. I thought it was obvious.

I feel like you ignored the whole, "only balancing around 1v1" part.

THank you, so OP is a Allies only player in teamgames and has 6 Wehrmacht games in total.


maybe OP should post a replay. One of which he probably left his pershing or churchill right in front of its DESIGNATED counter

I don't play Axis because I barely have to micro. It's legit boring.