State of the ISU-152

The 80% health damage done by ISU was a RNG stuff it does not usually happen, at long range the scatter of ISU shots come to effect and it gets fairly inaccurate at hitting both Infantry and Armor at max 70 range.

On top of that, 50% damage is more consistent, brummbar and lucky KV-2 takes squads down to 20%, not ISU.

Every thing in that post is accurate. Your response on the other hand is full of inaccuracies as other users have pointed out. Can you pls tone down the hostility in your post a bit?


Let me explain this once more, comparing ISU-152 and Brumbar is totally misleading for a number of reasons including the one I have already mentioned.

On top of that units work differently.

Brumbar needs to be aggressive to auto-fire while it is facing allied TD that can penetrate it reliably while outrangeing it by double its range.

ISU-152 can sit back and snipe units because the are few units that outrange it and even those by small margin and need spotter to do so.

Regardless if Brumabar has better AI or not ISU-152 has much better AT.

Accept it's not, actually you're wrong on the micro and range front because you forget Brum has bunker buster. ISU actually has to expose itself on the front line and can't fire behind houses or shot blockers.

43 people disagree with you and think the ISU is fine but I don't use this against you in a discussion about the unit. Actually this is pretty irrelevant so let's keep the discussion on topic.

... at long range the scatter of ISU shots come to effect and it gets fairly inaccurate at hitting both Infantry and Armor at max 70 range.

If MMX's unit stats are correct, the ISU has actually the same accuracy and a better scatter area profile than the Elefant, so it's safe to assume that the ISU will hit more often. The AP shell uses different stats than the HE shell, so while the HE shell indeed has a large scatter area, the AP shell is more "accurate".

It is not a balance problem, if you let your opponent stall for 260 fuel and have even control of the map while the Soviet guy saved up his 260 fuel, you need introspection rather than balancing of ISU.

This is a very thin argument. Following this train of thought, all heavies could also act as game enders again because you did not push enough beforehand.
In a somewhat even game, it is often viable to sacrifice some CP in order to push resources more heavily and go for a heavy tank instead. I'm not saying that it were impossible to deny heavies by constant pushing, but brushing it off by saying "push more and you won't see a heavy ever" just does not work. Especially not in team games where fuel is not as limited due to caches.

Accept it's not, actually you're wrong on the micro and range front because you forget Brum has bunker buster. ISU actually has to expose itself on the front line and can't fire behind houses or shot blockers.

43 people disagree with you and think the ISU is fine but I don't use this against you in a discussion about the unit. Actually this is pretty irrelevant so let's keep the discussion on topic.

According to your logic the ISU does not have to expose itself (at least not vs armor) because it has a piercing shot.

I'm still trying to find these replays of ISU oneshotting squads

According to your logic the ISU does not have to expose itself (at least not vs armor) because it has a piercing shot.

Which is correct, but the threads not full of people complaining about its AT apart from vipper

I'm still trying to find these replays of ISU oneshotting squads

We get it. They're about as rare as you playing Axis

Which is correct, but the threads not full of people complaining about its AT apart from vipper

No it is not.
These abilities are either costly or have some decent cooldown and are not designed to be the default usage of the unit. You cannot spam them. To get your value back, you have to use the "normal" shots as well.

The ISU can't be parked behind buildings and be effective, just like the Brummbär can't be effective with using bunker busting barrage only. And while 10 range can be bridged without large issues in moving battles, they make a big difference for harrassing.

Accept it's not, actually you're wrong on the micro and range front because you forget Brum has bunker buster. ISU actually has to expose itself on the front line and can't fire behind houses or shot blockers.

At this point you are reaching for straws compering auto-fire and a vet 1 ability barrage with long cool down. If in your opinion 70 range is "in the front line" I wonder how you describe 30 range.

43 people disagree with you and think the ISU is fine but I don't use this against you in a discussion about the unit. Actually this is pretty irrelevant so let's keep the discussion on topic.

If you have lost many ISU-152 to the static pak43 that would explain a lot.

Thank for agreeing with me that talking about brumbar in thread about ISU-152 is irrelevant. It is also misleading.

Which is correct, but the threads not full of people complaining about its AT apart from vipper

At least try to get your fact right.

I have not complain about that the AT performance of ISU-152 on the other hand completely ignoring as you do when you compare it with brumbar is simply misleading.

I disagree that talking about the Brummbär is irrelevant. They are similar enough to paint a picture, however cost is a part of that picture and maybe a bump in cost for the isu is required for the boons it has. But again, I think looking at the commanders so that the isu can't counter its counters and picking it means missing out on something else is the best start point.

I disagree that talking about the Brummbär is irrelevant.

Let me rephrase this , the claim that ISU1-152 is fine because it similar to Brumbar holds very little water.

They are similar enough to paint a picture, however cost is a part of that picture and maybe a bump in cost for the isu is required for the boons it has. But again, I think looking at the commanders so that the isu can't counter its counters and picking it means missing out on something else is the best start point.

As I have posted in this thread and years ago when the commander revamp started one should start with the commanders (and the rear armor) and see how it goes from there.

I disagree that talking about the Brummbär is irrelevant. They are similar enough to paint a picture, however cost is a part of that picture and maybe a bump in cost for the isu is required for the boons it has. But again, I think looking at the commanders so that the isu can't counter its counters and picking it means missing out on something else is the best start point.

+1

I think the doctrine being able to delete it's counters is arguably the biggest thing about the 152. Lefh can't displace the unit in its deployed area nor put pressure on its repairs because it gets deleted with a click. Not saying that an lefh is a counter but it can help with scattering a line for everything else.

Add guards, mark target, bombing run. Completely stupid not to pick it. 152 doesn't need a cost increase or really anything else on its own, but the shit around it does.

I think the best approach to balance the ISU is to remove mark target from the doctrine.
The best counter to slow moving casemates like Elefant and ISU are vehicle pushes to get shots at the rear armor. And although it is not cheap, the mark target allows you to quickly get rid of a Panther or similar.
We could toss in Conscript repairs or something that is seen rarely otherwise.

That is 100% on you then, ost has multiple methods of forward healing and reinforcement stock.

Even if you keep reinforcing, ISU will keep dealing consistent bleed form 70 range. That is the OPness.

Its the exact same case with brummbar and brummbar is much more oppressive because
-it arrives earlier
-it costs much less
-it shoots twice as fast
-it always hits, contrary to ISU which has highest scatter values in game

To use Brumbar you have to be attack ground master (just like using puma your micro has to be perfect). Byt most important point (explained by Hannibal) is that Brumbar has to be in range of all AT guns/AT tanks to even shoot. It will be almost in a snare range (hoorah cons, button guards are very likely to snare it). The risk on it is so much greater than on ISU.

We've just had a tournament where 1 of these units was used predominantly and performed above expectations consistently. That unit was not ISU. If ISU was half as potent as you try to claim it, it would be used more often.

My personal belief is that ostheer just lacks any more anty infanty units and ostheer player just use what they have.

ISU wasn't used much because such expensive heavies are rarely used in 1v1.

Flank it.
Do not go in frontally against all of the support that will stand IN FRONT of ISU and don't suicide a single panther, where is your own infantry support to clear ATGs?
If Helping Hans can deal with ISU using only Pumas, you certainly can do the same using panthers.

The problem with ZiSs is that they will clear your support units more often than be cleared by support weapons based army themselves. Additional problem is the abundance of snares on Soviet units and the best in game mines. Generally rushing ISU is very risky.

While using stuka on vehicle is indeed unlikely scenario, ele itself hardcounters ISU badly, mark target or not, Ele will destroy ISU before losing 30% of own health consistently.

And no, ISU can NOT do both jobs from 70 range, its AT, as already established yet you chosing to ignore it all the time is OK at the very best and in context of all AT units in game, its plain bad, moreover, since you already forgot it, ISU needs to switch ammo, it means it can do AI OR AT, it can NEVER do both, because it doesn't work that way.

It is You who keep ignoring any competition results, not me. You also keep ignoring certain changes that have happened to the game in recent years.

Not doing both things at the same time means very little (God forbids it could shoot at tanks and infantry simulaneously!). As an ISU owner you CAN choose what you want to fight depending on your opponent's composition and in game situation. It is a great advantage, especially with so much range.

The 80% health damage done by ISU was a RNG stuff it does not usually happen, at long range the scatter of ISU shots come to effect and it gets fairly inaccurate at hitting both Infantry and Armor at max 70 range.

It is accurate enough to bleed opponents hard.

I mentioned 1v1 of ISU and Panther, I don't know how panther will be snared in a 1v1. I also dont understand why a top 400 player will push ISU if it is supported by infantry. I dont want to get into this ISU vs Panther discussion it is idiotic.

Panther is only 75 fuel less expensive. The difference in armour, range and anty infantry potential seem to be greater than the price difference. Panther looks bleak here imo.

It is not a balance problem, if you let your opponent stall for 260 fuel and have even control of the map while the Soviet guy saved up his 260 fuel, you need introspection rather than balancing of ISU.

Generally, 70 range unit that can deal with both target types is a bit OP imo and follows the pattern of many Soviet dual purpose units.

I don't think that stalling for a heavy tank is such a bad idea, especially if you can have a mixture of t70s and ZiSs to deal with most threats anyway.

I think the best approach to balance the ISU is to remove mark target from the doctrine.
The best counter to slow moving casemates like Elefant and ISU are vehicle pushes to get shots at the rear armor. And although it is not cheap, the mark target allows you to quickly get rid of a Panther or similar.
We could toss in Conscript repairs or something that is seen rarely otherwise.

Yeah, one of the good ideas to start with.

I would still consider balancing the ISU around 50 range AT shells and 70 range HE shells.

to sum the problems with ISU up.

causes constant bleed, low effort unit, massive range, self spotting, comes in great doctrines overall, effective against infantry/armor and it counters its own counters (atgs)

if you want to counter it on an "even level" you need an JT/ele and even these are not 100% counter as they dont cause any bleed

regular tanks will not be able to counter an ISU if the sov is not brain afk or did a mistake, this is where the allied TD meta kicks in

Its performance would be fine if it wasn't so difficult to counter. Its armor is simply too high.

Axis being forced to go Ele/JT is not good game design.

imo these 70 range tanks (isu ele jt) should have their armor values reduced so that it rewards players that move up to them.

the jt and ele are easier to deal with in the sense that they have defined roles. AT exclusive. but isu can simply switch ammo and halt all tanks short of super heavies or 1 shot inf from long range.

don't think there should be any nerfs to the isu, except maybe slightly reduced mobility. as others pointed out already it's rather the whole package it comes with that is just too good to pass on, not necessarily the unit itself. replacing either the offmap or mark target with something less synergistic would already go a long way towards making it less of an obvious choice in teamgames. same goes for jäger armour doctrine