Profile of AssaultPlazma

Avatar Area

Offline unknown
Posts: 300

General Information
Steam: 76561198025875429
Birthday: 1996-05-24


Thread: Patch March 31st changelog31 Mar 2015, 03:14 AM wow so much dick stroking....... Anyways guys about the KT armor nerf, I think that had more to do with KT simply just driving up and decrewing AT guns rather than so much as the jackson. Im sure by now most of you have seen THAT video..... In: Lobby
Thread: Patch March 31st changelog31 Mar 2015, 00:04 AM Seems like a decent patch although some key things were missed -OST tech pricing was not adressed so I imagine stalling into Tigers will still be prevalent -especially since the StuG-E didnt get nerfed -Jackson dmg got nerfed while pen increased doesnt change how I feel in that I personally it will hardley change the current situation while at least it will be more viable against heavies -Regular StuG is still useless -how is suppression on Pack Howitzer going to change anything? especially seeing as how it cant even hit anything? -Glad mortar halftrack got buffed -Glad sniper got buffed -Glad to see the MG42 get buffed but why didnt all MGs get buffed for that matter? -No idea why the Scott got changed -Glad too see Canister shot get nerfed while the 37mm should be useful now still doesnt change the fact the doctrine as a whole is bad, and as broken as it was now I have even less reason to use it -Soviets basically got zero changes to their stock lategame other than snipers evenything centers on their call in's -____- -Good too see the 222 being more durable -M10 wont change the fact the doc as a whole is crap In: Lobby
Thread: Should Relic apologise for dishonoring Soviets in COH2?30 Mar 2015, 23:25 PM Jump back to quoted post30 Mar 2015, 23:09 PMvan Voort My concern is not whether that Campaign "dishonours" anybody or not, or even whether it can be historically justified or not - but rather why when there are millions of stories that Relic could have told they chose to tell that one. A game that should be huge in Russia, and they chose a storyline that's going to piss that market off. If you can have a clean German campaign it shouldn't be hard to do it for the Red Army. That's like making an USMC game about the Pacific, and then having key bits of gameplay be about collecting Japanese skulls to send home to your girlfriend and carving letter openers out of their bones. Now if you do that, you don't get to act surprised if the Americans get pissed at you. It shows remarkably poor judgement rather than anything else This +1 In: Lobby
Thread: Zis Guns and Pak 40s30 Mar 2015, 14:56 PM Jump back to quoted post30 Mar 2015, 07:49 AMKatitof Actually, that is up for a debate and not really definitively settled up until this day ZiS-3 field gun was used as AT gun just as much as it was used as artillery support. And M-42. The most popular AT gun on soviet front, good, old M-42(inb4 "but it couldn't penetrate anything", go read up about gun pockets and soviet AT tactics). @AssaultPlazma Please tell me you didn't just compared IS-2 to sherman. no I wasnt I was trying to make a point and I guess I didnt explain it properly. Johnny seemed upset at the fact a Tiger I losses to an IS-2(whether or not he meant this from the standpoint of reality or purely ingame balance im not sure), my point was asking a Tiger I to beat an IS-2 is almost like asking a sherman to win against a Tiger. Still I respect the fact he doesnt want to derail so ill just leave at that In: Lobby
Thread: Zis Guns and Pak 40s30 Mar 2015, 07:36 AM Jump back to quoted post30 Mar 2015, 07:15 AMJohnnyB OP, the issues you wrote (related to these 2 AT guns comparison) exist mainly because currently Tiger's state as heavy tank is close to pudding, regardless anything soviet aplauders have to say. It's exactly the same situation as it was a while ago, when they were crying because tiger > is2 most of the times, but in mirror. The reality is that RELIC failed to balance these 2 heavy tanks. About the ZIS, it's okish and it can shoot any unit with a degree of efficiency - vehicles and infantry alike (because it has that barrage ability), but it's not as god as you described. mind elaborating on how exactly the Tiger I is pudding? and yeah A Tiger I beating an IS-2? I can see why people were upset how would you feel if a sherman beat a Tiger I head to head? In: Lobby
Thread: Zis Guns and Pak 40s30 Mar 2015, 04:21 AM Jump back to quoted post30 Mar 2015, 04:13 AMwoolypeanut finally, thankyou someone for providing the information I want via stats. I must just be incredibly unlucky, I've had disgusting luck with Pak guns vs IS-2s and also some unfortunate experiences with the tigers main gun bouncing frequently, I can upload a replay if people really want but it doesn't seem necessary. It seems like the tiger being shit is more of a problem, really though as if that thing doesn't under perform... Doesn't help that I had a game where a several Zis literally did not fail to pen my panther a single time (frontal hits mostly). I'll ask about stats next time. ummm how exactly is the Tiger I crap again? In: Lobby
Thread: Zis Guns and Pak 40s30 Mar 2015, 03:55 AM Jump back to quoted post30 Mar 2015, 03:24 AMCookiezNcreem only on mobile,MVForum im on chrome(desktop) and cant see it In: Lobby
Thread: Zis Guns and Pak 40s30 Mar 2015, 03:14 AM Jump back to quoted post30 Mar 2015, 02:43 AMCookiezNcreem pic is broken In: Lobby
Thread: Allied War Machine29 Mar 2015, 16:51 PM Jump back to quoted post29 Mar 2015, 15:36 PMQueenRatchet123 Honest Question Whyy do u persist in making these pointless threads? knowing that ur ideas will never make it in-game? Its for his mod dude, what the heck is up your butt? On Topic: cool idea but how would this work as a stock ability? Sounds a bit too easy to abuse if you already hold the advantage allowing you to YOLO tanks to their deaths and instantly replace them In: Lobby
Thread: Pershing in demand29 Mar 2015, 16:11 PM Jump back to quoted post29 Mar 2015, 15:53 PMdasheepeh stop suggesting late game commanders to compensate for their weaker lategame. It shouldnt be like that. One thing i like about USF is the fact that i find every single core unit to be effective at what it does. They arent that commander reliant as Soviets. OKW also doesnt really need a commander, and neither does Ostheer (in theory, yes i know tiger meta). First off Pack Howitzer and stuart say hi as far as core units go. Secondly I'd argue USF is commander dependant its just that their commander options arent nearly as good as Soviets so its not as obvious. Airborne is the best USF commander as air dropped AT guns means you dont have to invest in the craptain tier and the P47 is a saving grace against heavy armor, and paratroopers scale much better late game than riflemen Rifle Company for Easy Eights helps a bit vs late game armor Infantry commander M1919s help riflemen scale better into lategame but yeah I agree we need to fix core lategame instead of pushing USF into being like the soviets. In: Lobby