Comments on the July 10 Patch Notes!

_

All of this argumentation on the two tanks is not going to lead us anywhere since the devs. aren't trying to make a historical simulation.

Both tanks either need to be buffed, or made cheaper because as it stands neither one is particularly useful.

IS-2 and tigers fought very few combats during WWII (you can check Tigers in action vol. 1 and 2 by Jentz for details on every confrontation between the two tanks), because the IS-2 is a heavy breakthrough tank. It was typically sent into battle with a 2:1 ration of HE ammunition versus AP (out of a total of 28 rounds).

Von Manstein I can't agree more. Both tanks are over-priced and underwhelming. I'd say, give the IS-2 more at, and give the tiger more damage and range. Tiger shouldnt lose to su85.

Tiger should win 1v1 vs IS-2, but IS-2 should have better AI.

That being said, the devs have to think about overall balance and not just the two tanks in isolation..

Von Manstein I can't agree more. Both tanks are over-priced and underwhelming. I'd say, give the IS-2 more at, and give the tiger more damage and range. Tiger shouldnt lose to su85.

Tiger should win 1v1 vs IS-2, but IS-2 should have better AI.

That being said, the devs have to think about overall balance and not just the two tanks in isolation..

Your logic:

1.Tiger should get MORE DAMAGE and RANGE

2.Tiger should not lose to SU-85(since when it lose to SU-85 if you support it)

3.Tiger is 20MP/50(!!!) Fuel CHEAPER than the IS-2, and comes with almost every useful commanders, and Tiger should WIN 1v1 IS-2

4. Tiger should bla bla bla

very fair and unbiased, and very cool

Your logic:

1.Tiger should get MORE DAMAGE and RANGE

2.Tiger should not lose to SU-85(since when it lose to SU-85 if you support it)

3.Tiger is 20MP/50(!!!) Fuel CHEAPER than the IS-2, and comes with almost every useful commanders, and Tiger should WIN 1v1 IS-2

4. Tiger should bla bla bla

very fair and unbiased, and very cool

Not referring to support mate, of course you have to support tanks, that goes without saying.

I'm stating that the tiger sucks and I am by no means alone on this matter, this opinion is shared by many pro players as well. Elefant is way better and comes roughly the same price as a tiger. Hell, even a panther is a better investment than a tiger at a fraction of the cost, and it actually pays for itself.

Speaking of costs, by all means make the is-2 a bit cheaper than the tiger, thats totally fine by me. Even increase it's AT a bit. Just remember the is-2 is not a "russian tiger". It has a different role and place in the game. It is currently underpowered, i fully agree. But both the tiger and IS-2 needs attention from devs.

Not referring to support mate, of course you have to support tanks, that goes without saying.

I'm stating that the tiger sucks and I am by no means alone on this matter, this opinion is shared by many pro players as well. Elefant is way better and comes roughly the same price as a tiger. Hell, even a panther is a better investment than a tiger at a fraction of the cost, and it actually pays for itself.

Speaking of costs, by all means make the is-2 a bit cheaper than the tiger, thats totally fine by me. Even increase it's AT a bit. Just remember the is-2 is not a "russian tiger". It has a different role and place in the game. It is currently underpowered, i fully agree. But both the tiger and IS-2 needs attention from devs.

Tiger is underpowered?

This:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHyhVQ6axr4

and this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERrqSooHgK0&feature=youtu.be

if you're not a hardcore reich fanboy.....you'll feel sorry for the IS-2....
please remember, IS-2 costs 20MP/50Fuel MORE than a Tiger.


Notice: There's crew shock effect in the video, that means it implies recent patch changes (June 13 the tank balance change)

Seems so yes, sadly it's almost impossible to create a fight of two top tier tanks in COH2 due to how the system currently works but I'll bring this up to Relic, the IS-2 should be looked at, not only at its accuracy but also in its penetration.

Tiger is underpowered?

This:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHyhVQ6axr4

and this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERrqSooHgK0&feature=youtu.be

if you're not a hardcore reich fanboy.....you'll feel sorry for the IS-2....
please remember, IS-2 costs 20MP/50Fuel MORE than a Tiger.


Notice: There's crew shock effect in the video, that means it implies recent patch changes (June 13 the tank balance change)

I have seen these videos before yes, and I realise the IS-2 loses badly to a tiger. Just don't forget IS-2 murders infantry. I agree its cost can be lowered and its penetration can be a bit better(especially vs rear armor of tiger), but it should not win frontal 1v1 with a tiger AND have better AI. You have to choose between the two.

Note: I am not sure about this(dev's will be able to tell you) but isn't the IS-2 damaging itself from splash damage in the one video?

Historically it was better AI and that is what relic was going for imo. But It shouldnt cost more than a tiger, to that I agree.

When I said that the tiger sucks, I was NOT implying it sucks vs an IS-2, I was implying that it sucks in general compared to other german tanks. A p4 does more dps than a tiger and is a lot better vs infantry. I would much rather have 2 or 3 p4's OR p4 + panther than a tiger. It has a lot of hp but its damage is poor and it can't kill infantry for shit.

They both suck. Everyone happy now?

They both suck. Everyone happy now?

Rofl mr cat.

Yeah they certainly both need to be looked at. Currently the Elefant/ISU-152 are far more appealing.

i like how they trashed whole soviet t2 ... guess to promote even more m3/sniper spam

do they even realize maxim have half the cone of fire? yet they nerf setup time .. its not german mg covering half of screen ...

do the test, soviet mortar vs german mortar barrage same time ... soviet will lose 9/10 times .. pure balance

but whatever, lets all play germans, and dont even look higher than 1v1 as soviet, its pure bs more than ever

ps: tiger at least got decent effective hp, is2 is just pure waste of fuel

i like how they trashed whole soviet t2 ... guess to promote even more m3/sniper spam

do they even realize maxim have half the cone of fire? yet they nerf setup time .. its not german mg covering half of screen ...

do the test, soviet mortar vs german mortar barrage same time ... soviet will lose 9/10 times .. pure balance

but whatever, lets all play germans, and dont even look higher than 1v1 as soviet, its pure bs more than ever

ps: tiger at least got decent effective hp, is2 is just pure waste of fuel

1. The ZIS is the best ATG by far. Period.
2. They nerfed it from the time 4 maxim start was certainly viable. It was simply impossible to flank a maxim at the time. You just have to place it a bit more carefully I guess.
3. There are far bigger issues that the Germans have than the T2. Most players now will still opt for a T2 start.

Useless discussion for 3 pages whether IS-2 is equal to Tiger. Its NOT.
And its anti-infantry capabilities... yeah, but tiger has one extra mg, so it doesn't lose much.

Its weird how you can compare armor of tanks, when german AT capability is so much better. Pak beats Zis, Pgrens beat everything and all german armor can make mashed potatoes of russian armor. With exception of Su85 with its sight range. Oh wait, Pz4 can just circle around and kill it no prob.

The way russians win in games is careful and planned execution with mandatory use of maxim and Su85. And even then late game is unwinnable without ISU152
Meanwhile germans can just spam any unit of their choise and ololo rush. When they get to pz4 first (which they do, since no need to spend fuel on molotov, m3, at grens) game is won.

oh and their mortar... 81mm spam everywhere.

Regardless of how much units costs, they should never be compared against each other purely on the basis of cost. Yes, how expensive they are should be a reflection of their power, but just because somethings costs more for one army than the other, doesn't mean it has to be necessarily better, every single time.

How expensive a unit is, should be a reflection of how that cost interacts with that Army's playstyle. Neglecting this very fact was what brought problems in OF, when the British Faction played a 2v2 with Amis (shared resources would stack with brit bonuses for americans).

For example: Both armies could have an ability that costs say, 50 munitions. Although the cost is objectively the same, it is far more expensive for the Germans to use a 50 munition ability in their playstyle, because their abilities as a whole tend to be expensive and necessary to counteract superior Soviet numbers.

My point being: just because the IS-2 is more expensive than the Tiger doesn't necessarily mean the tank has to be better, although in most cases it will. We need to look at how those costs synergize with the army's playstyle.

One last example: Rifles versus Volks. Volks were always more expensive than rifles to field and without a doubt much worse in the long run, as an investment. Before competitive gameplay matured in vCoH, many german players complained that volks were too expensive. However, veteran players understood that the German army had a versatile army with inexpensive MG's and Sniper support. The cost was balanced within the army, not compared to the equivalent unit in the opposing force.

TL;DR: Cost isn't necessarily based on the enemy's equivalent unit, but your own army's playstyle and resource dependence.

Combatcake said it.

There was a point when Tiger and IS2 where identical.
Obviously, this didnt work.

Goes without saying that the Tiger needs to be the pinnacle of a tank hunter.
The IS2s role is not so clear. Imo it needs to have less AT but better AI, and less speed, but better armor.

It will be pretty similar to the ISU-152 then though Nullist, albeit with far less range (unless they make the turret actually rotate, rather than essentially be an assault gun, as it is extremely slow and my major gripe with it).

IMHO, both tanks need to be the pinnacle of battlefield domination. The only tank that should surpass this in raw power against tanks is the Elephant (sacrificing mobility, of course).

I would make both tanks similar, but not identical: Same range, similar penetrations. IS-2 should do slightly more damage, while the Tiger should shoot slightly faster. Acceleration and speed should be better for the Tiger (similar to the Panther), while armor frontal armor should be better for the IS-2 (again, slightly).

Both tanks need to be the same at the core, but with slight differences to give them flavor. They still need to be expensive though (perhaps not as much as it is now). They need to be trump cards in a game, where the player has to become defensive, or risk losing a big investment.

Also, for balancing purposes: They need to be, along with the elephant and ISU-152, very expensive population costs. In this way, a person fighting against this doctrine without a super tank will have a bigger more mobile army, whereas having this tank is meant to punch a hole through the enemy, or hunker down a VP.

did you people even play the first game?

The Tiger was cool
The Pershing was cool
The tiger Ace was cool

Supertanks are supposed to be cool, a reward for gathering the necessary resources and command points.

These tanks fucking suck. It's like opening a huge present under the tree to find a dirty sock stuffed in a big box. I would rather have 1 (1!!!!) su85 than 2 Tigers which is just stupid. They are awful against infantry. They are mediocre at best against tanks. How Relic could have destroyed these endgame units is beyond me.

Hell, in the first game they devoted an entire section of the campaign to a Tiger just to show off how amazing it was.

Did those just massively start blowing hard dick when they were moved to the Eastern Front? Were those drivers just blind or what?

did you people even play the first game?
Did those just massively start blowing hard dick when they were moved to the Eastern Front? Were those drivers just blind or what?

Maybe they all blowed at the beginning of the war, and by vCoH they were all cool and experienced... since the Eastern front happened before the Americans landed in Europe.

Joking aside, this is true. The units need the cool factor back. I want my enemy to scream "TIGER!!!!!" at his monitor when I get one. I want to see my enemy mass retreat squads when they see an IS-2 coming. I want that psychological warfare feel.

Hell, I want to hear Rogers' scream during his casts when he sees an enemy Tiger destroyed.