Posts: 896
IS-2 should have lease rear armor it is almost invincible for Ost tier 3
Posts: 2115 | Subs: 1
The numbers in red explain why IS2 isn't the best against infantry. Shots can miss by 5.7m which is beyond its far range area of effect (3.0). Also the reload is about mid to slow.
Posts: 1221 | Subs: 41
lol at is2 frontal armor
Posts: 239
lol at is2 frontal armor
Posts: 752
Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1
The numbers in red explain why IS2 isn't the best against infantry. Shots can miss by 5.7m which is beyond its far range area of effect (3.0). Also the reload is about mid to slow.
Posts: 239
they could though at least give Tiger some advantage.
Posts: 752
You mean like considerably lower reload and scatter thus meaning it does more DPS to both tanks and infantry?
Posts: 249
Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1
Its also firing at infantry units which generally have less models though.
Posts: 896
Good thing soviet T3 and T4 are already obsolete before Tigers even show up so the fact that the Tiger rear armor durability is higher compared to T34 damage output than IS2 rear armor is compared to PIV doesn't matter.
Posts: 896
With the introduction of WFA this isn't really the case anymore. It used to be easier to balance these things with Soviets 6-men squads vs Ostheer 4-men squads. But now, a Tiger vs USF will be shooting at 5-4 men squads with 4-men support weapons. Compared to IS-2 vs OKW who will also be shooting at 5-4 men squads with 4-men support weapons. The tiger comes out on top.
Posts: 467
And the other numbers show just how good is now over Tiger, for the same price. These 2 tanks were never balanced and they won't ever be. One patch, Tiger stronger. Next, IS2 stronger. And so on. For how shitty is Ostheer currently they could though at least give Tiger some advantage.
Posts: 1221 | Subs: 41
No, 2 t34 can be a threat to a tiger, but, 2 p4 hardly can threaten an is2. Both t34 and p4 have the same penetration values but the is2 has more armor values (especially front).
The key difference between the 2 armies in this comparison is the AT guns. The pak reloads so fast compared to the zis, but only has 10 more penetration at any range. That is why it struggles against the is2 high front armor.
Posts: 952 | Subs: 1
Posts: 752
Posts: 896
Time to kill:
PaK40 vs IS2: (1040/160) / (190/375) = 12.82 * 3.9625 s/r = 50.8 secs
ZiS3 vs Tiger: (1040/160) / (180/300) = 10.8 * 5.8 s/r = 62.64 secs
Posts: 752
Posts: 70
Good thing soviet T3 and T4 are already obsolete before Tigers even show up so the fact that the Tiger rear armor durability is higher compared to T34 damage output than IS2 rear armor is compared to PIV doesn't matter.
lol at superior german AT.
Give soviets and USF PaKs, Schreks and Fausts and your Tigers can have IS2 armor any day of the week, even without getting the craptastic IS2 gun in exchange.
Posts: 1221 | Subs: 41
First shot is not affected by reload.
Have you deducted that from your figures?
I am looking at the numbers and plan to do an in game test, but I think the number of shots should be rounded because no tank dies to (1040/160) = 6.5 pak or tank shots. This should be rounded to 7 and that will increase the time for all of those calculations.
 |
|
|
52 | ||
|
|
|
|
25 | ||
|
|
|
|
19 | ||
 |
|
|
15 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 | ||
 |
|
|
95 | ||
 |
|
|
30 | ||
|
|
|
|
18 | ||
|
|
|
|
6 |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
