Who else loves the ISU these days? :D

Post invised for flaming.

Please do not put words into the mouths of other posters that they never wrote. Consequences may ensue....

Seriously people is complaining about ISU-152 armour? I thought it was its only feeble point.

ISU's armour is a joke compared with the IS2's one.

Seriously people is complaining about ISU-152 armour? I thought it was its only feeble point.

ISU's armour is a joke compared with the IS2's one.

Do you consider the armor of a Tiger a weak point? Because it has slightly less armor than an ISU-152.

Only tanks that have more armor than ISU-152 are IS-2, King Tiger, Jagdtiger and Elefant.

Do you consider the armor of a Tiger a weak point? Because it has slightly less armor than an ISU-152.

Only tanks that have more armor than ISU-152 are IS-2, King Tiger, Jagdtiger and Elefant.

Want to compare penetrations of weapons its up against?

300 allied armor =! 300 axis armor

Want to compare penetrations of weapons its up against?

300 allied armor =! 300 axis armor

Why did I know you would appear again to say something like this?

Armor is armor. Anti tank guns are nearly the same, IS-2 has slightly better penetration than Tiger, T34/85 has slightly better penetration than P4 etc., you cannot just say that allied armor is worth less than axis armor overall, not everything is a Panther.

And even if there is a slight difference, it hardly disqualifies my statement that the ISU-152s armor is not really a weak point, unless you think Tiger armor is weak.

Why did I know you would appear again to say something like this?

Armor is armor. Anti tank guns are nearly the same, IS-2 has slightly better penetration than Tiger, T34/85 has slightly better penetration than P4 etc., you cannot just say that allied armor is worth less than axis armor overall, not everything is a Panther.

And even if there is a slight difference, it hardly disqualifies my statement that the ISU-152s armor is not really a weak point, unless you think Tiger armor is weak.

Yes, armor is armor, but effectiveness of this armor is dependent purely on the penetration of AT it faces.

Unless you want to argue that 300 armor against 200 penetration is the same as 300 armor against 140 penetration or (PaK40 vs USF AT gun).

And anti tank guns are not even close to being the same. Penetrations are different, rates of fire are different(both in favor of axis).

Sure, not everything is a Panther, but the most common AT, AT guns and zookas/shrecks have wide enough gap in performance to say 300 allied armor is nowhere near being equal 300 axis armor.

Its not theorycrafting, its not myths or fairy tales, its hard facts based on in game stats of units in question, you can't really argue that, unless you want to argue stats.

Oh, and I'm not saying ISU armor is weak, its fine.
I'm saying its not equal to Tigers in effectiveness due to meaningful and noticeable AT difference.

im surprised you didnt compare the pak43 to the 45mm AT gun. then you couldve made your point look so much stronger.

but seriously, the pak has 10 more penetration than a zis. i dont need to explain the you that the zis excels in other areas.

as for the american AT gun, it has the best range and is able to spot for itself by using "take aim" after vet 1, it also get +50% penetration by using AP rounds. 210 pen with 70 range and extra sight.

those are facts.

claiming the most common AT are bazookas/schrecks therefore axis armor is worth more is not fact

Armour protection of the ISU of all units against the PAK is virtually irrelevant. More often than not, the ISU will oneshot the PAK. And it will do so outside the range of the latter. That is the "reality" of the game.

Axis tanks doesn't have to deal against blobs with schrecks. That is a point that some people tend to forget.

Armour protection of the ISU of all units against the PAK is virtually irrelevant. More often than not, the ISU will oneshot the PAK. And it will do so outside the range of the latter. That is the "reality" of the game.

Can ISU outrange a Pak without activating the Focus Sight ability? Because with that ability ISU is slow as a snail and is easy to flank.
Even deactivating the ability, it takes a long time to recover its normal movement speed.

ISU should be attacked at first by tanks, and once in the engagement then approach infantry and paks. It's hard and requires a lot of unit position and somekind of arty to kill supporting units, but it is also hard for allies to deal with King Tigers, Tiger Aces, Jadgtigers and Elefants.

im surprised you didnt compare the pak43 to the 45mm AT gun. then you couldve made your point look so much stronger.

Do they have similar cost or arrive at similar time?
See, I like to compare units of similar tier/cost/performance, if you feel like reading hyperbole, please search for nearest Frikadelle or Vetlolcake.

but seriously, the pak has 10 more penetration than a zis. i dont need to explain the you that the zis excels in other areas.

And 50% better ROF. Sure, ZiS can barrage, but no one is going to barrage tanks, this is why its no competition in AT dps versus PaK.

as for the american AT gun, it has the best range and is able to spot for itself by using "take aim" after vet 1, it also get +50% penetration by using AP rounds. 210 pen with 70 range and extra sight.

I think you need to play americans a bit more if you think their AT gun can spot for itself, the ability increases range and nothing else, and again, you need to spend munis to get what other AT guns have by default in terms of penetration(why have the ability in the first place if the gun is completely ineffective without it?).

claiming the most common AT are bazookas/schrecks therefore axis armor is worth more is not fact

I've said AT guns in the first place, zookas/shrecks 2nd. Don't know how it is in your games, but I have yet to see a game without pshreck volks and captain/bazooka RETs aren't uncommon either.
And this goes for pretty much all AT, not just these two, tank guns, TDs are no exception.
But you know stats, I don't need to tell that you that axis in general got more penetration then allies counterparts(not everything got a counterpart thou, StuG III I'm looking at you).

Personally I think the ISU-152 is UP. It should be 3-5CP and cost around 100FU.

I really hate the design of the ISU. I think it should cycle AP rounds or HE rounds, like the M4A3 Shermans.

I think it should be reworked to a primarily heavy AT vehicle. Decrease it's AoE by a significant margin, increase its penetration somewhat. I'd also remove the Crew Shock chance from normal shots and hand it over to the bunker buster ability. Allow that ability to be used on a unit to compensate. It should be decent against infantry, but mostly useful against tanks.

Because honestly, there is no reason for a 70 range unit to do so much damage to infantry without barrage abilities.

Mind you, I think pretty much all late game call-ins save maybe the Tiger and IS-2 overperform. But the ISU, while in my experience it doesn't wipe squads that much, can be a very heavy blow to your opponent's map control in the long run.

I belive you all know the ISU is 12 CP, 720 MP and 260 Fuel. That is the reason of all the comebacks, people are eighter waiting for the ISU or even planning taking that unit from first second of the battle - that has to cost them mid game but it is part of the strategy, it's not a magic comeback unit that builds itself for free. Also if you go t3 (and you know t4 is a bad idea) the ISU is the only good unit you can use against heavy tanks, couse rushing 85's is too risky.

Axis tanks doesn't have to deal against blobs with schrecks. That is a point that some people tend to forget.



Can ISU outrange a Pak without activating the Focus Sight ability? Because with that ability ISU is slow as a snail and is easy to flank.
Even deactivating the ability, it takes a long time to recover its normal movement speed.

ISU should be attacked at first by tanks, and once in the engagement then approach infantry and paks. It's hard and requires a lot of unit position and somekind of arty to kill supporting units, but it is also hard for allies to deal with King Tigers, Tiger Aces, Jadgtigers and Elefants.

You won't see further than the PAK without focused sight, but of course ideally you are gonna have a spotter. Even if you dont have one, you can and should use attack ground gratuitously to probe for any possible positions - also clears potential mines etc. Same with houses if you face OKW, you don't want Fallis to spawn behind you at the most inopportune moments. Downsides is of course that you will give your position away. In COH1 you could check for locations of Paks (which were cloaked back then) by moving the cursour over terrain where there should be yellow cover. If it indicated green - the Paks gunshield- voila. Dunno if that still works though.

I belive you all know the ISU is 12 CP, 720 MP and 260 Fuel. That is the reason of all the comebacks, people are eighter waiting for the ISU or even planning taking that unit from first second of the battle - that has to cost them mid game but it is part of the strategy, it's not a magic comeback unit that builds itself for free. Also if you go t3 (and you know t4 is a bad idea) the ISU is the only good unit you can use against heavy tanks, couse rushing 85's is too risky.

The same nominally applies ie. to Tigers, IS-2s, etc. who are not significantly cheaper. And they can indeed enable a comeback, but in terms of impact I don't think they are anywhere near an ISU.

So maybe lets just make it 280 or 290 fuel and let it live? when you lost mid game you cannot raise such a sum, and if you can with no vehicles you deserve a win.

The same nominally applies ie. to Tigers, IS-2s, etc. who are not significantly cheaper. And they can indeed enable a comeback, but in terms of impact I don't think they are anywhere near an ISU.

I would agree to an extent.

Relic has said that the way they balance is asymmetrical. ISU is one unit with no turret in one faction restricted to doctrine. USF has no super heavy or even a heavy at all. It is pretty much fact that allies have to deal with super heavies much more frequently while lacking the infantry AT that the axis has. Not every side has equal this or equal that, you know?