Login

russian armor

Current state of the IS-2

PAGES (7)down
2 Mar 2021, 15:38 PM
#81
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2


I have never mentioned cost efficency. I was talking singular unit efficiency and overall strenght. I want the IS to be less powerful than a KT but more powerful than Tiger - similar to a tiger ace, but with a diffrent feel to it (more damage per shot, lower ROF).

Also konigstiger is nondoc


The problem with that is that is has already been tried and it was not good in practice.

You need to understand damage thresholds.

160dmg is the golden standard for a reason.
2 Mar 2021, 15:53 PM
#82
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2


Panther's armour with some other means of AT have very big potential to fully destroy the IS-2, that's what i meant. I understand your point of view, but the changes I suggested to the IS-2 would also increase it's cost, and by that I also mean popcap. It would still be a worthy trade to defeat the soviet superheavy.

Lower rof and higher damage for the IS-2 would also mean that it's micro potential would be higher, as you could reverse after every shot, but it would preform not so well while fighting straight face to face. I don't want the IS-2 to wreck everything, I just think that it should be an investment having impact on the game, while also feeling unique, and not falling into the category of "welp i guess my commander has it so i might just as well try to use it".

Do you mean with higher damage that it should be buffed in AT, AI or both?

I mean, I see your point as well. However I am not sure if your design idea would work. The IS2 is currently a brawler, meant to stand in the middle of the fight. You can't pop in and out with it, it is just not quick enough to do so, neither has it the range to make it viable.
Giving it it even lower ROF while retaining the generalist status would mean it must deal more AoE damage vs infantry as well. It's AoE stats are already decent, and AoE damage is tricky to get right vs Axis squads to not wipe them out too quickly. However it might probably be doable.
Then again, ROF is probably more important vs armored targets than some slightly higher damage increment. Lowering this would make the IS2 very vulnerable if it misses the first shot.

To sum it up:
Lowering the ROF even further would mean increasing the wipe potential while decreasing reliability. Players though use to prefer a reliable unit over an RNG one (hence why Panthers I are preferred by most instead of StuGs, despite those having similar to better DPS per population/cost - health etc aside). I doubt that those changes would really make the IS2 special, it would probably just push it even further into a niche corner.
2 Mar 2021, 17:54 PM
#83
avatar of bambosh1

Posts: 36

Then how about increasing it's damage only slightly, to a number that would give a little extra punch vs vehicles like puma/luchs. I say 200. Then the rof wouldn't need a change for the most part, tank would work the same against regular mediums. The price and pop could be slightly increased accordingly to make even it out.
The IS-2 would stand out from the 160 rule, but not so much that it would greatly affect the game. There would be no need to make it more RNG based.
Current IS-2 rate of fire combined with small damage per shot make the tank laughtable. That's my biggest concern
2 Mar 2021, 18:25 PM
#84
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2

Then how about increasing it's damage only slightly, to a number that would give a little extra punch vs vehicles like puma/luchs. I say 200. Then the rof wouldn't need a change for the most part, tank would work the same against regular mediums. The price and pop could be slightly increased accordingly to make even it out.
The IS-2 would stand out from the 160 rule, but not so much that it would greatly affect the game. There would be no need to make it more RNG based.
Current IS-2 rate of fire combined with small damage per shot make the tank laughtable. That's my biggest concern

I mean this needs to be tested.
I'd say though that the main benefit of this would not be vs Luchs and Puma (at the time the IS2 comes out those units are dead for the most part, and if not the IS2 needed two shots at them which might not happen due to their speed and the IS2's ROF). The biggest impact would probably be on Panthers and other heavies, plus some minor effect of killing medium tanks with a single snare (although this implies three shots on the medium + snare = 3*200 + 80 = 680 damage).
Second, depending if you want to adjust the AoE values or not, the damage increase would also improve AoE. By how much I can't say without plotting it out.

Realistically, I don't think any heavy will see further changes since the balance team will focus their efforts elsewhere (at least judging by Sander's posts, I don't have any insider knowledge).
2 Mar 2021, 18:28 PM
#85
avatar of KoRneY

Posts: 682

Then how about increasing it's damage only slightly, to a number that would give a little extra punch vs vehicles like puma/luchs. I say 200. Then the rof wouldn't need a change for the most part, tank would work the same against regular mediums. The price and pop could be slightly increased accordingly to make even it out.
The IS-2 would stand out from the 160 rule, but not so much that it would greatly affect the game. There would be no need to make it more RNG based.
Current IS-2 rate of fire combined with small damage per shot make the tank laughtable. That's my biggest concern


More damage and consequently splash vs smaller squads sounds like a disaster. Decreasing shots to kill a panther and stug would also be a nightmare.
2 Mar 2021, 18:35 PM
#86
avatar of bambosh1

Posts: 36


I mean this needs to be tested.
I'd say though that the main benefit of this would not be vs Luchs and Puma (at the time the IS2 comes out those units are dead for the most part, and if not the IS2 needed two shots at them which might not happen due to their speed and the IS2's ROF). The biggest impact would probably be on Panthers and other heavies, plus some minor effect of killing medium tanks with a single snare (although this implies three shots on the medium + snare = 3*200 + 80 = 680 damage).
Second, depending if you want to adjust the AoE values or not, the damage increase would also improve AoE. By how much I can't say without plotting it out.

Realistically, I don't think any heavy will see further changes since the balance team will focus their efforts elsewhere (at least judging by Sander's posts, I don't have any insider knowledge).


Yeah I am aware that this would require further testing. I just wanted to point out that the current IS-2 requires changes as it just feels powerless.
Also I think that the current IS-2 AI is decent, if the rof doesn't get lowered, it should be adjusted accordingly to be on par with the old one.
2 Mar 2021, 18:38 PM
#87
avatar of bambosh1

Posts: 36

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Mar 2021, 18:28 PMKoRneY


More damage and consequently splash vs smaller squads sounds like a disaster. Decreasing shots to kill a panther and stug would also be a nightmare.


I mean nowadays T-34 will on average kill a stug quicker than the IS-2. This is the issue that i'm trying to adress.
2 Mar 2021, 18:45 PM
#88
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2



I mean nowadays T-34 will on average kill a stug quicker than the IS-2. This is the issue that i'm trying to adress.


Which is a false issue.

The T34 will bounce couple of shots while the IS2 will never do so, even with skirts. The difference in RoF is not that big as well.
2 Mar 2021, 19:03 PM
#89
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

IS-2 used to have ,more damage and lower ROF.

"IS-2
....
Damage from 240 to 160
Reload from 9 to 6.2-6.6"

I guess people did not like it.
2 Mar 2021, 19:27 PM
#90
avatar of bambosh1

Posts: 36

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Mar 2021, 19:03 PMVipper
IS-2 used to have ,more damage and lower ROF.

"IS-2
....
Damage from 240 to 160
Reload from 9 to 6.2-6.6"

I guess people did not like it.


Guessing by the poll and by the current IS-2 pickrate, they don't like the current situation either. Also the game changed since then. Maybe we should give it a try
2 Mar 2021, 19:31 PM
#91
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

>poll
>any real statistical revelance for balance/like

yea no especially if it's only 50 people (of which some probably don't even play)

poll on the internet are only for memes and clout
2 Mar 2021, 19:37 PM
#92
avatar of bambosh1

Posts: 36

>poll
>any real statistical revelance for balance/like

yea no especially if it's only 50 people (of which some probably don't even play)

poll on the internet are only for memes and clout

I know, but pickrate for that tank is still very low compared to other heavies and the vehicle simply does not posses a threat.
2 Mar 2021, 20:00 PM
#93
avatar of Descolata

Posts: 486

The Pershing exists, so the IS-2 isn't alone in pick rate.
2 Mar 2021, 20:07 PM
#94
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

The problem with that is that is has already been tried and it was not good in practice.

You need to understand damage thresholds.

160dmg is the golden standard for a reason.


Well, 240 is just as good.

The problem however is that a proper 240 damage profile (high DPM) only fits a superheavy (Tiger II) and not a generalist heavy. 240 damage with current ROF or even DPM would be batshit OP for the IS-2, and 240 damage with lower ROF was already tried before and it was bad. And turning it into a superheavy isn't an option either because the Axis lack nondoc heavy AT options compared to the Allies.


IMO it just needs -1CP, as I feel the CP increase all heavies got last patch was a bit overkill.
2 Mar 2021, 20:20 PM
#95
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1515

IS-2 is not OP nor UP. The reason it's not picked is because there are better commanders to choose and it comes too late. Tiger is the best heavy tank, followed by IS-2, splitting the place with KV-2. Generalist heavy ofc. Pershing is most likely dead last with a big vacuum between it and the next best thing.

Is IS-2 a bit underwhelming? Maybe. Is it underpowered? No.
2 Mar 2021, 20:35 PM
#96
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Mar 2021, 19:03 PMVipper
IS-2 used to have ,more damage and lower ROF.

"IS-2
....
Damage from 240 to 160
Reload from 9 to 6.2-6.6"

I guess people did not like it.


it also had horrendous pen and would lose to a tiger ass armour at point blank with the tiger having to rotate its turret from front before getting a shot off (precheat mode a friend and i tested this)

the problem with the old is-2 was reliability and they tried to fix that with more dice rolls instead of more reliability. thats why the damage and rof change, not because people didnt like it.
2 Mar 2021, 20:36 PM
#97
avatar of bambosh1

Posts: 36

IS-2 is not OP nor UP. The reason it's not picked is because there are better commanders to choose and it comes too late. Tiger is the best heavy tank, followed by IS-2, splitting the place with KV-2. Generalist heavy ofc. Pershing is most likely dead last with a big vacuum between it and the next best thing.

Is IS-2 a bit underwhelming? Maybe. Is it underpowered? No.


KV-2 does way better job than the IS-2 due to it's powerful AoE and 240 damage when on penetration. Also it's ability makes it a viable support tank. KV on vet 3 can even become a very good damage sponge as it gets 1200 HP.
I simply can't think of a situation where IS-2 would be as useful as KV-2, and judging by the current KV-2s performance i thought that higher damage per shot would be a welcome change in the IS
2 Mar 2021, 21:28 PM
#98
avatar of Descolata

Posts: 486

KV-2's AT is based on its HUGE deflection damage. its like 120 or 160, not sure.

Easiest and safest change is increase RoF. More per shot damage means infantry splattering without complex AoE jiggering. We don't want that again. More armor has already been nerfed.

Or, make IS-2's frag shell ability not require a full reload and effect enemy tanks, via blind crit. More micro more value more skill more goodness.
2 Mar 2021, 22:20 PM
#99
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

KV-2's AT is based on its HUGE deflection damage. its like 120 or 160, not sure.

Easiest and safest change is increase RoF. More per shot damage means infantry splattering without complex AoE jiggering. We don't want that again. More armor has already been nerfed.

Or, make IS-2's frag shell ability not require a full reload and effect enemy tanks, via blind crit. More micro more value more skill more goodness.

more shots per minute also means more infantry splattering. id sooner, if its damage out[put is to be changes, that it be in line with the spirit of the unit its representing. AOE rework isnt that bad assuming its current profile is satisfactory. just alter the variables so that the actual damage in the radius is unchanged (if you double the damage, just half the multipliers as a simple example)

reduced ROF could be coupled with deflection damage (which imo all heavies should have regardless) to ensure consistency

frankly if feels weird that the vaunted gun (even in the unit descriptions in game) takes a longer time to kill soft targets and as many shots compared to the base line AT...
its kinda like how if you want to destroy a structure, you dont use the 120mm mortar, you use the 82mm one...
2 Mar 2021, 22:57 PM
#100
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1515



KV-2 does way better job than the IS-2 due to it's powerful AoE and 240 damage when on penetration. Also it's ability makes it a viable support tank. KV on vet 3 can even become a very good damage sponge as it gets 1200 HP.
I simply can't think of a situation where IS-2 would be as useful as KV-2, and judging by the current KV-2s performance i thought that higher damage per shot would be a welcome change in the IS


Yes. KV-2 is much much better at AI than IS-2 but is also less agile. Furthermore, it's penetration values are quite low so on the off chance it penetrates... sure. You do 240 dmg. But unless the enemy is throwing a P4 at your KV2, KV2 ain't that great at AT.
KV2 at AT is some sort of support. It won't do the job on it's own, but it will scare off if there is a zis nearby. IS-2 on the other hand is more agile and can "solo" enemies easier. Don't neglect the IS-2's [much] higher penetration values, especially in team games where Panther/Tiger/KT spam is a thing. Having SU85, KV2 and what not on the field leaves you wide open to Panther dives. That is, if the enemy is not 90% of COH2 players and actually uses the margins and flanks to flank and go behind you.
PAGES (7)down
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 guests

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

554 users are online: 554 guests
1 post in the last 24h
6 posts in the last week
36 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48939
Welcome our newest member, Ellmjnhiem
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM