>>2127771
>MAAWS? They killed two BMPs and tracked the terminator
So you had one unit of MAAWS (100 points) go against two BMPs with infantry and a BMPT (let's be generous and say 400 points at the minimum), the one unit of MAAWS inflicted 130+ points worth of damage even while completely unsupported, and you complain that this exchange is in favour of the Russians??? Are you fucking retarded or something? For 400 points, you can get two RAAWS and one to two dedicated anti-infantry units to handily win that engagement, while still having invested less.
>PIVADS? Cruise missile'd, or SEADed.
If you ever get your PIVADS hit by a cruise missile, then you are a braindead idiot who does not understand the basic concept for "MOVE SOMETHING AFTER IT HAS SHOT". A group of two PIVADS is nearly immune to SEAD, and up-armored they don't die to a single SEAD hit. Nevermind, I just read the rest of your sentence and you're so fucking stupid you don't even keep a transport around to cart your pararescue about.
>Stealth bombers? With what income? If you stop buying meat, you're going to lose.
The same income the enemy spent on the artillery you're bitching about??? Taking it out and losing the plane is trading evenly, taking it out and saving the plane is winning. It's a no-brainer direct counter.
>Your stealth fighters? What? Your low-cost tank group that can one-shot IFVs? What?
Are you new at the game, or are you just too dumb to remember what units are in it?
>Cluster bombers? Doesn't trade into BMP spam
Destroying a transport has a good chance of taking out a chunk of the contained infantry's health. If the enemy hasn't concentrated enough BMPs in one place for clusterbombing to be worth it, then your tanks should be easily able to handle these isolated pockets. If the enemy doesn't have enough BMPs to make clusterbombing worth it, then they're not spamming them.

>>2127775
1950 ELO US main (85% of matches) actually.