fair enough and reasonable. i was, however, responding to the part that the tiger was allegedly way superior to the is-2 in terms of anti-infantry performance, not to the overall position of the is-2 in the soviet roster. there are obviously many reasons the is-2 sees little use, but i don't think a 240 dmg cannon will solve these (at least not without creating a bunch of new issues along the way).
I don't think either 240 dmg will solve the problem. Now, to me, the Tiger is superior because the game design goes in a direction that make its superior in usage, the unit is less clumsy, more reactive and at the same time enough tough to give you time to micro your army around. Then the way Commanders are designed around tiger vs IS2, what each tank is supposed to fight and then what each tank has as supportive tools around it make the Tiger a vastly superior investment.
Alright I don't mean to derail the thread here but since I already said something on topic I hope you'll oblige me.
Anyways, I know British people and others outside the US say IA instead of AI for bots (Intelligent Adversary VS. Artificial Intelligence) but what do you mean using IA instead of AI when referring to performance against infantry? Anti-Infantry versus what exactly? Infantry Attack?
My bad, its AI.