IS 2 problem

Be happy your IS2 reloads in 6.4 ish seconds in this game. In real life an experienced crew managed, at most, 2.5 rounds per minute.

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.

How is that comparable to a battle against a tank where it matters that you land the first shot?

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

Actually 2 ISU-152's were captured by finnish troops in 1944. One was abandoned after receiving multiple shots from T-34-85's while the other was sent for repairs, but never saw action in finnish service.

As for the actual topic, everytime I've seen a topic about IS-2 it seems to evolve into a discussion about the reloading mechanics of the actual tank and not the IS-2 that we see in the game. Remember that it is a very good damage sponge and trying to faust it is very close to suicidal. It can stay in the fight long enough to give sight to longer range AT specific units. I'd like to see people point out exactly what would need to be changed about it and why? Sure, it is not overpowered, but its not that bad either.

How is that comparable to a battle against a tank where it matters that you land the first shot?

Suddenly, guns accuracy on the battlefield and on the range is same

A gun's accuracy may be, but not the gunner's. The whole problem of the IS2 is that the gunner needed to re-aim after each shot, which is not as much reflected on test ranges (where the crew has far more time to aim because there's no fear of incoming shells).

The is2 was made to counter tigers, panthers and king tigers.

No, it was constructed mainly as a breakthrough tank. Further it was constructed from December 1943 onwards. So it wasn´t constructed at all to fight versus the King Tiger (first time fielded during 1944).

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.

Wrong again. The King Tiger could penetrate the IS-2 on all combat ranges. There are even reports of that happening 2km far away. The IS-2 could somewhat fight back, but definitely not by "penetrating" the King Tigers or often even Panthers armor with AP ammunition for that matter. The HE shells caused spalling damage.

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)

Wrong. That is the SU / ISU-152.

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.

The reality looks different. The early IS-2 version wasn´t without flaws. It looks good on paper but there are accounts of 7,5cm Paks etc. taking out the early version through the drivers hatch. The ammunition of the IS-2 was seperated and it could only fire in a low succession.

And a lone is2 faced 3 king tiger in southern finland and it got them all

That´s an anecdote. You will find some stories of Tigers/ King Tigers etc. beating IS-2s. That does not mean the whole vehicle (of either side) is superior.

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´s the only point I can agree on in your topic. I would like to see more IS-2s in the game.

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.

The biggest flaw of the IS-2 actually was poor accuracy resulting from a gun that was too large for the turret. That means to load the gun you have to level it down to its initial stance to then lift it up again. This means time is lost and you have to readjust on the target. While any other tank just aims, over-/ undershoots and can simply level the gun a bit up or down, the IS-2 has to totally adjust itself onto the target again. Totally impracticable to fight.

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.

Like it lacking hull mg does mean something? And IS-2 has turret rear mg instead of hull. They are different.

And I did show you pen was at the same level. Is-2 is better at near distance and tiger is better far distance.
Now what's better on tiger? Range of 5 more and rate of fire. That's asymmetrically equal.
I can agree rof can be shortened by 0.4, but other than that, it's fine.

Id like to see its VET-1 tactical point cap ability reworked.

About topik. IS-2 was OK then you can use 2 of them. Now they only 1 left and his...well, no OK.

Wrong again. The King Tiger could penetrate the IS-2 on all combat ranges. There are even reports of that happening 2km far away. The IS-2 could somewhat fight back, but definitely not by "penetrating" the King Tigers or often even Panthers armor with AP ammunition for that matter. The HE shells caused spalling damage.

Wow. Krup steel soooo strong Learn the history of computer games is a bad idea, I tell you.

The biggest flaw of the IS-2 actually was poor accuracy resulting from a gun that was too large for the turret. That means to load the gun you have to level it down to its initial stance to then lift it up again. This means time is lost and you have to readjust on the target. While any other tank just aims, over-/ undershoots and can simply level the gun a bit up or down, the IS-2 has to totally adjust itself onto the target again. Totally impracticable to fight.

Cool story, bro. You found it in the secret Nazi archives? Because it seems to be only mention to this problem that I have seen in all the internet ever.

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....

Did that germans panzer drivers gone crazy after such MASSACRE?

I'd choose Tiger I over IS2 in game and in reality without any hesitation.

after Tiger penetration and range got buffed, IS2 needs some sort of buff too, like adding some 160-200 extra hp.
Also both Tiger and IS2 could use a price increase to 260 fuel

Ohh again the IS-2 vs Tigers... alright here we go...

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 two main projectile of the IS-2 (BR-471; BR-471B) could penetrate a 90° 158-164 mm steel plate at 1000m.
At 500m it could penetrate 179-183 mm. The Tiger 1 had a 120mm frontal armor, so yes, it could pen it, if the hull wasn't angled. However the projectile's penetration rate dropped to 142-146mm at 1000m if it hit a 60° angled armor. The Tiger 2's frontal armor is a 50° angled 150mm armor, and the effective thickness of it is around 215mm. But the turret's armor is only 185mm, so at close combat the IS-2 may had a chance to penetrate there, but we know how accurate the gun of the IS-2 was (hint, not that accurate).
However, the Tiger 2's two main projectile (the PzGr. 39/43 and the PzGr.40/43) could penetrate a 90° 204-228mm armor at 1000m. The IS-2's frontal armor's thickest point was 140mm... sooo yeah.

the king tiger had a pooor mobility so it made it a easy target.

The Tiger 2 was 68 ton, equipped with a 700 HP engine. Making the power/weight ratio 10,2.
The IS-2 was 46 ton, equipped with a 600 HP engine. Making the power/weight ratio 13,04, making it slightly more manouverable, than the Tiger 2. However, actual heavy tank combat didn't really needed manouverability, because who would like to engage in close combat if you can penetrate them from far away? Maybe the IS-2 needed the manouverability to close the distance between it and the Tiger 2. Let the medium tanks have the mobility, and do the flanking. But even the Panther had great penetration values at great distances.

3842 is2 were made and just 1300 tigers and around 462 king tiger so it should be cheaper than the tiger.

If I make 3842 BMW, and only 462 Dacia, does that make the Dacia more expensive?

If I make 3842 BMW, and only 462 Dacia, does that make the Dacia more expensive?

Do you believe there are so many people around here knowing what a Dacia is? . Anyway, in this comparison, IS2 smells more like a Dacia and Tiger I like an BMW....

Do you believe there are so many people around here knowing what a Dacia is? . Anyway, in this comparison, IS2 smells more like a Dacia and Tiger I like an BMW....

Haha, yeah, no, but I wanted to point out some relatively cheap car, but hey, google is anyone's friend.
Maybe I should have written Mercedes instead of BMW, because of the Maybach engine

But okhay, the IS-2 is maybe weaker than the Tiger 2, but it is cheaper than a KT, and you can bring it out sooner. And the OKW can also field only 1 KT. And the ZiS field gun is pretty good against a KT. My KT almost got wrecked by 2 ZiS. (the guy had a pen buff bulletin for the ZiS.) 1 or 2 ZiS supported with the IS-2 is a serious threat for the KT. And the ZiS also have a really nice RoF. However the raketenwerfer43 barely can pen the front of a IS-2.

IS2 would be fine if the chance to overshoot the target will be lowered from current ~70%.

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.

700m is like point blank for a tank. The fact it missed one shot rather prooves something. Standard range of fight for tanks is over 1km with maximal accurate range going from 1,5km to above 2km depending on a tank.

700m is like point blank for a tank. The fact it missed one shot rather prooves something. Standard range of fight for tanks is over 1km with maximal accurate range going from 1,5km to above 2km depending on a tank.

Source? I saw a documentary a few years ago that stated where it was stated that german tanks usually engaged in battle ranges up to 900-1000m.

Oh, and the IS2 is fine.

is 2 is the only unit that dont have much problem. KT is overbuffed but thats not is2's problem