State of the ISU-152

Use PMs or bans.

Last warning.

Hmmm...will be ISU friends adjusted as well? I am about Elef and JT. Because, if you make 50 range AT for ISU, it will be clear message for every player - ISU is AI unit. And no one in sane would be call-in it against Elef or JT.
Or Maybe, just maybe, make from ISU-152 copy of JT, with ability to shoot seria of HE rounds like JT do. Problem solved - pure AT unit with AI abilitiy.

I sort feel that ISU should be primarily HE tank countered by tanks, while Ele/Ferd should be pure AT tanks countered by infantry and AT guns. I understand it could be just me.

ISU should trade blows with AT tanks rather than outrange them.

Ele/Frd should imo otrange tanks - they should be counter to ISU but leaving a player vulnerable in infantry department.

I sort feel that ISU should be primarily HE tank countered by tanks, while Ele/Ferd should be pure AT tanks countered by infantry and AT guns. I understand it could be just me.

ISU should trade blows with AT tanks rather than outrange them.

Ele/Frd should imo otrange tanks - they should be counter to ISU but leaving a player vulnerable in infantry department.

It sounds nice in theory, in practice - one stun shot, and farewell ISU. How you suppose trades with tanks if you don't have turret, have very-low mobility and low rof? It's like say - M-42 could trade with infantry due canister shots. Nowadays you almost never see how someone try to use canister shots against infantry, due high risk to lost unit. This change just make ISU like M-42.

There is only one td in game that fullfil your description - Brummbar. It can trade blows with mediums, mediocre, but can. And it pure AI unit. But no one in sane don't become to use it against mediums. THe same destiny will be wait ISU, if make short AT range.

Better or don't change it at all (and change instead commander loadout) or change it completely. Change role or for pure AI unit without AT, or pure AT unit without AI.

I sort feel that ISU should be primarily HE tank countered by tanks, while Ele/Ferd should be pure AT tanks countered by infantry and AT guns. I understand it could be just me.

ISU should trade blows with AT tanks rather than outrange them.

Ele/Frd should imo otrange tanks - they should be counter to ISU but leaving a player vulnerable in infantry department.

I agree to this, depending on what you understand with "trade blows" though.
Infantry alone can hardly threaten an Elefant, PaKs are just to slow to pursue it even given the shitty speed of the Elefant. They can be supplemental but the main threat still needs to come from vehicles and thereby units that are at high risk when attacking it.

Therefore, if the ISU should become a pure HE vehicle (I know this is not what you suggested, but just as an example), it would need more reworks. Infantry can barely threaten in anyway, so the main attack will be lead by vehicles again. But contrary to the Elefant, the vehicles would not have to attack their own counter. So either the ISU would need a major rework regarding cost, performance and timing, or it needs to retain the AT to an okay level. I think we are not too far off at the moment.

Thereby I argue to change the commander first since it is a nobrainer for team games. Guards, mark vehicle, precision strike. And even the ATG camo as a minor goodie that allows you to not be targeted by rocket artillery. It's all muni heavy, but there is just too much good stuff in there that all helps your AT capabilities (camo, Guards and mark target) and forces the enemy to push because he cannot dig in (ISU and precision strike). It basically forces the big push to destroy the ISU, otherwise you just feed infantry into it.

If this is reworked, maybe like Sander suggested, then the ISU might already be more vulnerable to counter attacks.

il-2 strafe instead of bombs
maybe 120mm instead of mark target
con ppsh instead of guards?
rapid conscription?

the isu really should be the star of the commander. the other abilities, since its combined arms should be wide reaching is scope so i think indirect, infantry and airpower all good topics to be touched

I think the ISU-152 could do with a rear armor nerf from 155 to 110 (same as Elefant/Jagdtiger) so that it's more vulnerable to flanking Panzer IVs. And then remove the IL-2 bombing run from the commander together with removing the Stuka Dive Bomb from Jaeger Armor.

+1

I think the ISU-152 could do with a rear armor nerf from 155 to 110 (same as Elefant/Jagdtiger) so that it's more vulnerable to flanking Panzer IVs. And then remove the IL-2 bombing run from the commander together with removing the Stuka Dive Bomb from Jaeger Armor.

Can't say I disagree with this.

Tightrope just casted an ISU vs Ele match on 2v2 Crossing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zobVgWdbyqw&lc=z220fdhyznmnjphdvacdp430iuhqxpjpkceq5btyhy5w03c010c

As u can see, the Ele had a hard time landing shots on the ISU and the ISU bled out both axis players. Even with the supposed best counter, with just minimal support, the ISU can do it's work against infantry and not be too afraid of the Ele.

I didn't know the rear armor was so high at 155. That definitely is the culprit.

A reduction of rear armour would help open up proper countering but an ele shouldn't be missing.... Anything frankly given it's price point so maybe an accuracy improvement for the ele should be in order independently of the isu

I think the ISU-152 could do with a rear armor nerf from 155 to 110 (same as Elefant/Jagdtiger) so that it's more vulnerable to flanking Panzer IVs. And then remove the IL-2 bombing run from the commander together with removing the Stuka Dive Bomb from Jaeger Armor.

I totally agree with putting best teamgame commanders back in line with others. Is there any chance that while the 70 range TD doctrines are getting equalized Breakthrough commander ultra half map arty would also be moved to another commander and replaced with something else like mortar HT? Mortar HT would help all the Mechanized mains to bring indirect fire especially against mortar pit and wouldn't be a half map wiper like it's now. I think this is a fair move considering ISU commander losing IL2 and Elefant commander losing Stuka dive bombing. Former Breakthrough arty could be moved then to Feuersturm, or moved to Scavenge doc and Scavenge arty moved to Feuersturm or sth.

I think the ISU-152 could do with a rear armor nerf from 155 to 110 (same as Elefant/Jagdtiger) so that it's more vulnerable to flanking Panzer IVs. And then remove the IL-2 bombing run from the commander together with removing the Stuka Dive Bomb from Jaeger Armor.

+1 makes sense.

Tightrope just casted an ISU vs Ele match on 2v2 Crossing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zobVgWdbyqw&lc=z220fdhyznmnjphdvacdp430iuhqxpjpkceq5btyhy5w03c010c

As u can see, the Ele had a hard time landing shots on the ISU and the ISU bled out both axis players. Even with the supposed best counter, with just minimal support, the ISU can do it's work against infantry and not be too afraid of the Ele.

I didn't know the rear armor was so high at 155. That definitely is the culprit.

Tightrope himself said the axis ele micro was poor

Ele vs ISU play is more how you can use your supporting ATG and infantry. Allies did it better in this regard so they won. I think both units are balanced, it's a map issue when there are no flanking opportunity.

That game was pretty well balanced so just only nerfing ISU/mark target/IL2 will further entrench JT/ele meta. Unless you massively nerf those doctrines too. Those stukas were raining death all game.

Tightrope himself said the axis ele micro was poor

Ele vs ISU play is more how you can use your supporting ATG and infantry. Allies did it better in this regard so they won. I think both units are balanced, it's a map issue when there are no flanking opportunity.

That game was pretty well balanced so just only nerfing ISU/mark target/IL2 will further entrench JT/ele meta. Unless you massively nerf those doctrines too. Those stukas were raining death all game.

https://youtu.be/zobVgWdbyqw?t=2447

I linked you the time. Shows everything that is wrong with the ISU. A Cromwell would have made mincemeat of an Elefant/ Jagdtiger in the same situation. Meanwhile the Panzer IV bounces most shots on the ISU (even on the rear).

https://youtu.be/zobVgWdbyqw?t=2447

I linked you the time. Shows everything that is wrong with the ISU. A Cromwell would have made mincemeat of an Elefant/ Jagdtiger in the same situation. Meanwhile the Panzer IV bounces most shots on the ISU (even on the rear).

ye, those rear armor shots should pen

https://youtu.be/zobVgWdbyqw?t=2447

I linked you the time. Shows everything that is wrong with the ISU. A Cromwell would have made mincemeat of an Elefant/ Jagdtiger in the same situation. Meanwhile the Panzer IV bounces most shots on the ISU (even on the rear).

T-34/76 actually has less chance to pen a JT than a P4 can a ISU. So if the chance of RNG bounces is the issue then JT/KT/Ele should get rear armor reductions too.

Cromwell is an outlier because it has an extra 10pen over the Sherman in close range. I think it should be 10f higher now the MGs were buffed.