How to fix ISU-152 and JagdTiger

easy, 2 words.

remove them.

swap them for is2/tiger.

If we look at the large scale, throughout the war Soviet armor performed poorly. For whatever reason that is (crews, handheld AT and AT guns, tactics, doctrine, the tank design, radios etc.). Soviet super tanks - like you want them - are out of place.

i dont undestand what u talking about?!
what period of war/ whats tanks ?! if u so incompetent there's no difference at all about armor/

(1941) pz-3 destroy t-26/t-28 and another
(1941-1943) t-34-76/KV-1 destroy pz-3/early pz-4/stug the germans upgades guns to 76 mm (pz-4 have about 10 modifications) for successful fight with t34-76.
(1943) germans made NEW panters / tigers / elefants destroy t-34 main tanks for superiority in the battlefield (the panther is created on the basis of technology of inclined armor soviet t34)
(1943)soviet upgades tanks to t34-85 / su - 85 just as Germans earlier replase pz-4 but it isn't enough. Mades new Kv-85 (Kv-1s technology) - small period than Is-1. upgrade su-85 to su-100. Mades new isu-122/isu-152/Is-2 for offensive operations.
(1945)And new is-3 on military parade in Berlin in 1945 but this tanks didn't participate in fights, but were already made.

large calibers ignore armor, the distance, tactics, experience and other reasons is important

Funny how the Russian guy wants realism...

So... ISU-152, IS-2 etc. had HORRIBLE reload times. Their optics weren´t on par with German optics. Their ergonomics were poor. The rounds carried were half as much as those of regular tanks. IS-2 had to set the gun to standard position after every shot in order to reload, having to readjust on target after every shot, leading to poor target tracking.

Panthers and Tigers were much better than the IS-1 and KV-85. The IS-1 flopped and barely saw any action. Hell, the KV-85 has the 85mm of the T-34/85 which was insufficient to penetrate the Panther frontally.

The IS-2 is hardly comparable to the KT as you claim. KT is a different league, in the same weight category the Panther is more comparable. And the Panther was the better performing machine, having the flatter trajectory, reload time (3x as fast), optics, crew comfort etc.

In general Soviet tanks were CLUMSY machines. Looking good on paper because of a big gun but lacking in everything else.

If you wanted realism, your Soviet tanks would be pretty much weaker than now. There would be more, but complaining that they are too weak on a 1v1 basis is wrong.

On topic: That being said, the ISU-152 and JT should rather get a reload time increase and a minimum range of 10m. I think that will be sufficient.

Hmm, horrible reload times, IS-2 rate of fire is 2-3 rounds per minute.You are severely overstating the effect of slow reload times. Yes a panther or a king tiger could theoretically shoot alot faster, but in a battlefield, nobody is going to be shooting like that since it is just wasting ammo.

Even modern tanks only have a fire rate of on average 6 rounds. For example the Abrams has a firerate of 6 rounds per minute, not to bad for the a tank that is 70 years old to only fire twice as slow as a modern tank, eh?

Ergonomics were poor... Just pure nonsense, the IS-2 and later t-34 models had no issues with ergonomics and their crew compartment spaces were generally no less than other tanks.

Accuracy is also a myth, the IS-2s gun was just as accurate , if not slightly more accurate than the tigers gun.

And soviet tanks didin't perform poorly, they performed a very well in their defined roles. (Hint, t-34/85s or IS-2s were not meant to fight tanks, even tho they could do that fairly well)

Tank losses hardly matter because unlike manpower, steel is pretty much an inexhaustable resource for a nation as big as the soviet union, and if you lose a few tanks while decimating the entire german front that's very worth it.

Even tho the german soviet loss ratio is highly inflated due to the way soviets and germans accounted for their losses.

1 t-34 can be lost multiple times and also it can be built multiple times. A tank stuck in the mud even for a short period of time was already considered a loss for the soviets.

Meanwhile the germans only accounted a loss only and only if the tank was completely beyond repair and is lost hopelessly.

A tiger could be heavily damaged 5 times and still be repaired and the germans would account for 0 losses.



Less than 20000 85mm guns were built in the entire war. Yet somehow the soviets made 22000 t-34/85s not to mention su-85s, kv-85s and what not.

Question how is it that they did this? Black magic?

Funny how the Russian guy wants realism...

So... ISU-152, IS-2 etc. had HORRIBLE reload times. Their optics weren´t on par with German optics. Their ergonomics were poor. The rounds carried were half as much as those of regular tanks. IS-2 had to set the gun to standard position after every shot in order to reload, having to readjust on target after every shot, leading to poor target tracking.

Panthers and Tigers were much better than the IS-1 and KV-85. The IS-1 flopped and barely saw any action. Hell, the KV-85 has the 85mm of the T-34/85 which was insufficient to penetrate the Panther frontally.

The IS-2 is hardly comparable to the KT as you claim. KT is a different league, in the same weight category the Panther is more comparable. And the Panther was the better performing machine, having the flatter trajectory, reload time (3x as fast), optics, crew comfort etc.

In general Soviet tanks were CLUMSY machines. Looking good on paper because of a big gun but lacking in everything else.

If you wanted realism, your Soviet tanks would be pretty much weaker than now. There would be more, but complaining that they are too weak on a 1v1 basis is wrong.

On topic: That being said, the ISU-152 and JT should rather get a reload time increase and a minimum range of 10m. I think that will be sufficient.

yeah and if you want realism the ISU152 would also rip a hole in the side of pretty much every tank, there are even records of the turret of a tiger being ripped off from the ISU152 shells.

so you either need to stop comparing historic records with balance because as it has been said multiple time balance>accuracy because if you want historic accuracy you should play men of war since it has not only side armour but turret armour on tanks and tanks don't have health bars. there are too many units that stray from the historical accuracy that you can just throw it out at this point.

Ok you are right

ISU122
Armor front: 90mm
Weight: 45.5 tonnes
Armor Pen. @ 1km: 120mm

Jagdtiger
Armor front: 150mm
Weight: 71.7 tonnes
Armor Pen. @1km: 200mm

Yes, they are equal.

i was said about game class balance. isu-152 its another class machine. so ok if u want. isu good for ALL UNITS/ look pen about 152mm gun and about ammo.

Historically a SturmTiger could fire through the whole map and destroy enemy buildings with a single shot. So lets just stick with the fact, this is a game and not a simulator. Balance should come before realism.

Historically a SturmTiger could fire through the whole map and destroy enemy buildings with a single shot. So lets just stick with the fact, this is a game and not a simulator. Balance should come before realism.

maybe u write about mause. and how about ostwind? this unit never be in east front and only 44 units was made. SturmTiger - its fine game relise.

Derailed thread. :/

Regardless of tank performance, the Axis factions would be overwhelmed by numbers, and in such a game as CoH2, it would be too difficult for players to handle.

Hmm, horrible reload times, IS-2 rate of fire is 2-3 rounds per minute.You are severely overstating the effect of slow reload times. Yes a panther or a king tiger could theoretically shoot alot faster, but in a battlefield, nobody is going to be shooting like that since it is just wasting ammo.

Even modern tanks only have a fire rate of on average 6 rounds. For example the Abrams has a firerate of 6 rounds per minute, not to bad for the a tank that is 70 years old to only fire twice as slow as a modern tank, eh?

I´ll just ignore all the other bullshit and just focus on this one:

What does the 70 year difference have to do with all of this? Even 70 years ago Panthers etc. could fire 6 rounds a minute. That makes the IS-2 rate of fire shit.

And in WW2 on range a lot of shots missed. You would overshoot the target or hit the ground in front of it, adjust and fire again. The second/third shot would hit. A Panther etc. can do this way faster than an IS-2. And this is a huge advantage if every shot can make the difference between life and death.

Here you can see the Tiger-Fibel tutorial on how to hit on range ... first shot, second shot. Third one will hit. It´s obvious that a faster rate of fire is one of the most significant advantages in this.

Oh and that IS-2 has to level the gun back to normal and then aim again... good luck trying to hit shit with that.

There are plenty ways to deal with JT and ISU. The problem is to decide which one is the best one.

Jadgtiger:
First of all, unquestioned and necessary, Relic has to remove ability to shoot through obstacles.
Secondly, Jadgtiger could shoot through eveything but as ability like ISUs one. The question is does this ability should cost munition or should be free but with cooldown?
Thirdly, like Katitof said, minimum range.
Fourth, 40 range, when set up, 85.

ISU:
Firstly lower AoE. Make it more like Brummbar. Still chance to wipe squad but not with every 3 shots.
Secondly, make it only AI unit - but this change would force to change somehting with stock units and their AT power.
Thirdly, make it only AT unit but since it was designed as an assault gun it would be stupid.
Fourth, 40 range, when set up 70.
Fifthly, 40 range, when set up, 150 but it would shoot like artillery. Something similar to KV-2

First changes are must-be. The rest you can mix like you want. There are many others but I thnik everyone can figure out few more ways to deal with them.

ok this guy think if tank made "tratatata shots" that it`s be better and is-2/isu-152 "1 boom" not enought

I´ll just ignore all the other bullshit and just focus on this one:

What does the 70 year difference have to do with all of this? Even 70 years ago Panthers etc. could fire 6 rounds a minute. That makes the IS-2 rate of fire shit.

And in WW2 on range a lot of shots missed. You would overshoot the target or hit the ground in front of it, adjust and fire again. The second/third shot would hit. A Panther etc. can do this way faster than an IS-2. And this is a huge advantage if every shot can make the difference between life and death.

Here you can see the Tiger-Fibel tutorial on how to hit on range ... first shot, second shot. Third one will hit. It´s obvious that a faster rate of fire is one of the most significant advantages in this.

Oh and that IS-2 has to level the gun back to normal and then aim again... good luck trying to hit shit with that.

And in order to hit the target you need to aim, not just reload. Aiming takes time , which is why there is a difference in theoretical rate of fire and actual rate of fire.

There are plenty ways to deal with JT and ISU. The problem is to decide which one is the best one.

Jadgtiger:
First of all, unquestioned and necessary, Relic has to remove ability to shoot through obstacles.
Secondly, Jadgtiger could shoot through eveything but as ability like ISUs one. The question is does this ability should cost munition or should be free but with cooldown?
Thirdly, like Katitof said, minimum range.
Fourth, 40 range, when set up, 85.

ISU:
Firstly lower AoE. Make it more like Brummbar. Still chance to wipe squad but not with every 3 shots.
Secondly, make it only AI unit - but this change would force to change somehting with stock units and their AT power.
Thirdly, make it only AT unit but since it was designed as an assault gun it would be stupid.
Fourth, 40 range, when set up 70.
Fifthly, 40 range, when set up, 150 but it would shoot like artillery. Something similar to KV-2

First changes are must-be. The rest you can mix like you want. There are many others but I thnik everyone can figure out few more ways to deal with them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/152_mm_howitzer-gun_M1937_(ML-20)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brummbär

ok this guy think if tank made "tratatata shots" that it`s be better and is-2/isu-152 "1 boom" not enought

Panthers could also "1 boom" their targets. But sure, firing your shots at a way slower rate is an advantage now. If IS-2 and ISU-152 didn´t hit with the first shot, they were in trouble. That´s why you needed 4 ISU-152s to keep up a normal rate of fire.

And in order to hit the target you need to aim, not just reload. Aiming takes time , which is why there is a difference in theoretical rate of fire and actual rate of fire.

Well that applies to both tanks. IS-2 and ISU-152 have to aim and reload also. Still the Panther has the better reload time. Relatively speaking there is no change.

Just don't touch them, those units don't really matter on the balance.

Those beasts bring terror on the battle field and any tone down will remove that feeling.

In 4vs4 or 3vs3, they can be killed in many ways, including team work.
Hint: First, try to blind them.

The tiger Ace is also very powerful : My 3 x IS2 (not vet) weren't able to kill one from the front and they had to retreat or be destroyed... and were too slow to flank it. It one shotted all my engineers....

The balance problem is rather that allies required more team work to succeed. Axis overall are easier to play. But the allies in the hands of a good team are powerful and can win a lot...

So time to stop crying for nerfs and start to practice !

I suggest that you don't picked Allies in automatch til you played at least 20-30 matches with the Axis side. After that you will know what do do vs the Axis.

Watching high ranking 4vs4 matches is also great to quickly learn the maps and the killer moves.


See you on the battlefield !!!!

Just don't touch them, those units don't really matter on the balance.

Those beasts bring terror on the battle field and any tone down will remove that feeling.

In 4vs4 or 3vs3, they can be killed in many ways, including team work.
Hint: First, try to blind them....

Okey, yesterday I had to face Jadgtiger. No chance to flank so I used button, mark target, FAB-50 bombing and 2 ISUs were shooting from a distance. You know what? It still was able to reverse because of bouncing shells from ISU. Such combination of abilitis, units and still not enough.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/152_mm_howitzer-gun_M1937_(ML-20)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brummbär

I have no idea what's on your mind.

to all realism players on the thread:

http://store.steampowered.com/app/244450/


GO GO GO

Okey, yesterday I had to face Jadgtiger. No chance to flank so I used button, mark target, FAB-50 bombing and 2 ISUs were shooting from a distance. You know what? It still was able to reverse because of bouncing shells from ISU. Such combination of abilitis, units and still not enough.



I have no idea what's on your mind.

about guns at isu and brumbar/ isu have ml-20 gun. whats it mean. in game its mean that soviet ml-20 mortar in isu and isu can fire over open sights. brumbar cant do this

about guns at isu and brumbar/ isu have ml-20 gun. whats it mean. in game its mean that soviet ml-20 mortar in isu and isu can fire over open sights. brumbar cant do this

I know excatly that ML-20 has the same gun like ISU. I still have problems to understand what You wrote, sorry.

Okey, yesterday I had to face Jadgtiger. No chance to flank so I used button, mark target, FAB-50 bombing and 2 ISUs were shooting from a distance. You know what? It still was able to reverse because of bouncing shells from ISU. Such combination of abilitis, units and still not enough.



I have no idea what's on your mind.

Ok you did'not destroyed it, but you effectively counter it. You did a good job.