IS 2 problem

The is2 was made to counter tigers, panthers and king tigers. for example it could pierce the front armor of a king tiger at 800 m and the king was able to pierce the front armor of a is2 at just 500m

the is2 had a high piercing main gun so idk why in the game its a good ai and soso at it should be good at and ok ai like it historicaly was and the nickname of the is2 was the animal hunter(german tigers and panthers) some months after the deployment of the is2 on the battlefield hitler gave the direct order to all his tanks to no engage the is2 because it was 1 shoting every tank that it was facing and btw idk why it is the isu 152 that is the tank destroyer like heavy for the soviet it was made to explode position not to destroy tanks.

And a lone is2 faced 3 king tiger in southern finland and it got them all plus the king tiger had a pooor mobility so it made it a easy target. so in action eve if the king tiger have better stats like armor in action the is2 was beating all these tanks. The problem is that it have a poor at for it history and btw 3842 is2 were made and just 1300 tigers and around 462 king tiger so it should be cheaper than the tiger.

That were just real facts about the is2 and i would like to know your proposition of thing that could be adjust.

The IS-2 is a superior at AT compared to AI, actually.

Also, you got a fun fact mixed up - it was the ISU-152, and its predecessor the SU-152 that had the nickname "beast/animal/whatever killer/slayer" Zveroboy.

Let me answer you in some points.
1. You made two identical threads.
2. It was the su-152 to be called animal hunter, not IS-2
3. Is-2 is 3rd best tanks in the game after KT and JT that cost considerably more. It also has great AI and impenetrable armour.
4. Ballance is more important that history. In history the tank was also very inaccurate and due to 2 part ammo it took long to reload and best known types of ammunition couldnt be used limiting possible penetration. We had IS-2 as historical as it gets designed with those features in mind but it was so much rng everybody decided it wasnt good. So now it has limited damage but it got better acc and reload while keeping it superior armour, both front and rear.

The IS-2 is a superior at AT compared to AI, actually.

Also, you got a fun fact mixed up - it was the ISU-152, and its predecessor the SU-152 that had the nickname "beast/animal/whatever killer/slayer" Zveroboy.

"whatever killer" is more like "Pizdets vsemu" so rather su-100, but yeah, animal killer "zveroboy" was su-152.

4. Ballance is more important that history. In history the tank was also very inaccurate and due to 2 part ammo it took long to reload and best known types of ammunition couldnt be used limiting possible penetration. We had IS-2 as historical as it gets designed with those features in mind but it was so much rng everybody decided it wasnt good. So now it has limited damage but it got better acc and reload while keeping it superior armour, both front and rear.

Well, at that point its pen was awful, so it was still like half and half in historical-ness.

IS-2 was shitty, poor AT capabilities ( compared to german counterparts )...

"whatever killer" is more like "Pizdets vsemu" so rather su-100, but yeah, animal killer "zveroboy" was su-152.

The "whatever" portion was really just me being silly about how I've seen it translated as both animal and beast. Naturally, it doesn't really matter which of the two one chooses to use.

IS-2 was designed as a breakthrough tank to clear fortifications not to hunt tanks and counter Tigers.

It could destroy a Tiger I with no problems but this was not his main role, because of 2 part ammo it had slover reload then Tiger and could not shot for a prelonged time because of bad ventilation and propellant gases inside the tank after several shots.

Is2 needs a buff somewhere I think, but I think in doing so it will become OP in 1v1.

IS2 was fine up to the point where the tiger and king tiger got a massive buff.

right now the tiger have superior range and penetration.

The is2 could use a buff to keep up with the king tiger and tiger, but this is how power creep happen.

IS2 was fine up to the point where the tiger and king tiger got a massive buff.

right now the tiger have superior range and penetration.

The is2 could use a buff to keep up with the king tiger and tiger, but this is how power creep happen.

They really shouldn't have touched the range of them. They can't give the IS-2 the same range back, since that would massively mess up its use against 50 range units, which Axis has got a fair amount of.

In history the tank was also very inaccurate and due to 2 part ammo it took long to reload and best known types of ammunition couldnt be used limiting possible penetration.

It was inaccurate not because of the ammunition, but because the main gun had to be reset to default elevation to be reloaded, which meant it needed to be re-aimed for every shot. Compare to most tank guns, which could zero in with subsequent shots.

IS-2 was shitty, poor AT capabilities ( compared to german counterparts )...

The IS-2 has about the penetration of a Panther, but a much longer reload and had to re-aim every shot like I said above.

The IS-2 has about the penetration of a Panther

no, the penetration on the panther is quite a bit higher than the is2. I think it's about 20% higher.

That's not even considering the panther have longer range.

The is2 was made to counter tigers, panthers and king tigers. for example it could pierce the front armor of a king tiger at 800 m and the king was able to pierce the front armor of a is2 at just 500m

the is2 had a high piercing main gun so idk why in the game its a good ai and soso at it should be good at and ok ai like it historicaly was and the nickname of the is2 was the animal hunter(german tigers and panthers) some months after the deployment of the is2 on the battlefield hitler gave the direct order to all his tanks to no engage the is2 because it was 1 shoting every tank that it was facing and btw idk why it is the isu 152 that is the tank destroyer like heavy for the soviet it was made to explode position not to destroy tanks.

And a lone is2 faced 3 king tiger in southern finland and it got them all plus the king tiger had a pooor mobility so it made it a easy target. so in action eve if the king tiger have better stats like armor in action the is2 was beating all these tanks. The problem is that it have a poor at for it history and btw 3842 is2 were made and just 1300 tigers and around 462 king tiger so it should be cheaper than the tiger.

That were just real facts about the is2 and i would like to know your proposition of thing that could be adjust.

I'm a little puzzeled. So you didn't hear about that happening in Poland in '44 with 3 Tigers destroying around 20 IS2s.....okay....
Is2 had many problems and the most important were aiming and reloading. In order to reload, the crew should abbandon the sight, level the gun to be parallel with the soil, reload, then aim again! That was an important drawback and in a direct confrontation decreased its chances drastically. Also, the way that soviet projectiles "penetrate" the target.... it's not actualy penetration. The amount and quality of explosive material used for these gun projectiles tore apart the armor. It was another way to destroy it. That is why the destroyed german tanks pictures from WW2 look like big chunks of their armor are missing. At the opposite end, the german projectiles were indeed penetrating the armor and kinda explode inside. But if you say so....

Anyway, from the game point of view it appears that IS2 indeed misses to much actualy. This is the problem I see.

IS2 was fine up to the point where the tiger and king tiger got a massive buff.

right now the tiger have superior range and penetration.

The is2 could use a buff to keep up with the king tiger and tiger, but this is how power creep happen.

They both have similar pen.

IS-2 250/220/190
Tiger 240/220/200

So, is-2 has more speed and armor while tiger has a bit better weapon. Both are fine.

OP, don't bring the historical things in balance. What you brought was not even test results, and even test result is not a good material to discuss in balance section.(unless it is significantly away from concept)
It is general concept of a weapon Relic use to make certain unit, not the all the accuracy that weapon had.

Let me answer you in some points.
In history the tank was also very inaccurate...

It is a myth. At the testing range, the IS-2 hit the a captured German tank three times out of four, with 700 meters.

They both have similar pen.

IS-2 250/220/190
Tiger 240/220/200

So, is-2 has more speed and armor while tiger has a bit better weapon. Both are fine.

OP, don't bring the historical things in balance. What you brought was not even test results, and even test result is not a good material to discuss in balance section.(unless it is significantly away from concept)
It is general concept of a weapon Relic use to make certain unit, not the all the accuracy that weapon had.

the tiger gun reload significantly faster. ~ 5 seconds compared to ~6.4 seconds on the IS2.

infact the tiger gun is one of the fastest firing tank gun in the game.

there's also the issue of extra range on the tiger.

the tiger gun reload significantly faster. ~ 5 seconds compared to ~6.4 seconds on the IS2.

infact the tiger gun is one of the fastest firing tank gun in the game.

there's also the issue of extra range on the tiger.

Range become same at vet 2.
And it has better pintle mg for making up slower main gun.

And you don't expect better fire power for the tank which got better survivability.

Thread on RTS game where your ideas are backuped by history is not a good think.

Maybe if you specify it from game , eg. what you want to buff on is2 and why

And a lone is2 faced 3 king tiger in southern finland...

Not a single King tiger were shipped to Finland, and even IS-2 was rarity there, JSU-152 was there and was one of those tanks in 1944 retreat that finnish salvage groups tried to capture for valuations and to use against soviets. They even managed to capture one

IS-2 had the same problems as T-34 had before it got bigger turret, 4 man crew. In battle conditions tank commander was taxed with multiple tasks as in their German counter parts tank commander could just command his crew and scout surrounding area.

Range become same at vet 2.
And it has better pintle mg for making up slower main gun.

And you don't expect better fire power for the tank which got better survivability.

even if their ranges are the same at vet, it still mean the is2 have to pay catch up.

the is2 have better pintle mg, but it lacks a hull mounted mg.

I don't think the is2's better armor and speed quite make up for the difference in rate of fire, penetration, and range.