Hello,
I would like to have it put up for discussion why the ISU 152 does not get a range buff to be equal to the Ferdinand and Jagd in role. Its present role is confused, and punishing since the addition of the forced ammo switch. For a similarly turret-less unit it represents easy prey late game for tanks, rather than a deterrent as it should be. Not to mention it can be simply edged out by the range of the Jagd. At the very least, this unit need something as late game it and the IS2 are struggling to fill their purported roles for cost.
ISU 152, Jagd and Ferdinand. Why don't they share range.
8 Mar 2017, 21:24 PM
#1
3 
Posts: 545
8 Mar 2017, 21:37 PM
#2
Posts: 2066
I would like to get rit of the splitted he-ap shells on the ISU too. Switching those rounds is just annoying and takes so much time..
Kappa
8 Mar 2017, 21:37 PM
#3
Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2
Not sure if bait or serious
8 Mar 2017, 22:00 PM
#4
Posts: 851 | Subs: 1
I would like to get rit of the splitted he-ap shells on the ISU too. Switching those rounds is just annoying and takes so much time..
But one is used for busting defensive positions, the other against tanks!
Not sure if bait or serious
Why would they be baiting?
They just want an Allied long range tank destoyer is all.
8 Mar 2017, 22:04 PM
#5
Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2
Why would they be baiting?
They just want an Allied long range tank destoyer is all.
ISU, SU, FF, Jackson.
Not enough?
8 Mar 2017, 22:05 PM
#6
Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4
If the ISU-152 were to receive a range buff like the Jagd and elephant to be near or equal to them you'd have to remove the HE rounds. Essentially it would become an infantry wiping machine as well as a long range tank destroyer. It cannot be both or it would be a a no brainer in team games to combo it with mark target or other disables.
8 Mar 2017, 22:15 PM
#7
3 Posts: 545
If the ISU-152 were to receive a range buff like the Jagd and elephant to be near or equal to them you'd have to remove the HE rounds. Essentially it would become an infantry wiping machine as well as a long range tank destroyer. It cannot be both or it would be a a no brainer in team games to combo it with mark target or other disables.
The band-aid switch ammo type can go and yea give it a pure anti vehicle role
It hasn't been an infantry death machine in a long time either. to the above as well, just like how the Jagd and Ferdinand are no brainers? Strict AT capabilities and Jagd range, as the one side have two massive range massive Armour and the other having glass cannon Jacksons that bounce so reliably off of panthers and above is working great.
8 Mar 2017, 22:29 PM
#8
Posts: 2272 | Subs: 1
i suggest grabbing a time machine and going back to late 2013
8 Mar 2017, 22:52 PM
#9
Posts: 2066
But one is used for busting defensive positions, the other against tanks!
Yes but they were one before, just 'general purpose'.
Kappa
8 Mar 2017, 23:34 PM
#10
Posts: 212
just like how the Jagd and Ferdinand are no brainers? Strict AT capabilities and Jagd range, as the one side have two massive range massive Armour and the other having glass cannon Jacksons that bounce so reliably off of panthers and above is working great.
The Jagd is not a "no brainer" unit at all... There are lots of situations even in 4v4s where it should not be purchased or other doctrines would be more suitable. The Jagdtiger can't do anything with out adequate support, so you need to make good decisions regarding its usage.
As for the ISU I feel it's already a pretty powerful unit, I find it to be a huge nuisance when it's owner can micro it correctly. I don't really feel it's role needs to change; the SU-85s are already very effective, non-doctrinal tank busting units.
8 Mar 2017, 23:37 PM
#11
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
I hate to have to say this but ISU-152 and Elephant/Ferdinand have the same Range of 70, so I am not sure why a range buff is need to make them equal.
JT has a range of 85.
JT has a range of 85.
9 Mar 2017, 00:29 AM
#13
3 Posts: 545
Still don't see the logic of one faction having a range bonus, as I remember when the SU85 bulletin existed the rage was real. BTW couldn't find Ferdinand range on COH2 stat initially my msitake http://www.stat.coh2.hu/squad.php?filename=elefant_tank_destroyer_squad_mp.
Jagd still being the one range king is a silly concept. SO there's still plenty to discuss here
Can rename the thread with the help of a mod please. "SU-152 and Jagd, Why don't they share range stat"
Jagd still being the one range king is a silly concept. SO there's still plenty to discuss here
Can rename the thread with the help of a mod please. "SU-152 and Jagd, Why don't they share range stat"
9 Mar 2017, 00:42 AM
#14
Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4
The band-aid switch ammo type can go and yea give it a pure anti vehicle role
TBH I find this issue to more a map issue. The more we try and "balance" these factions the more we'll come to realize the maps are hilariously biased and and favored to one side. On certain maps, JTs and Elephants can reign uncontested when supported correctly. Such maps are port of hamburg, placing the JT or elephant into 1 of the 2 primarly lanes has an immense effect. On the other hand on certain maps the high mobility of the allies tanks and mass numbers reign supreme. Maps like Steppes and general mud where there are many pathways to flank with jacksons, fireflys, t34/85s, comets. Your point about the jackson has its values but is largely incompatible due to the fact the jackson has its own issues. Mainly the fact its health pool is smaller in exchange for mobility according to relic and asymmetric design.
9 Mar 2017, 01:50 AM
#15
3 Posts: 545
asymmetric design in regards to the range difference was unlike in the days of super range su85 with the 10% bulletin. Making them all equal would also solve the issue. On lane maps both sides would have to weigh how to push with the long range TD's instead of the slow creep of a JT/Ele that is the usual degrading. Even if it means making the ammo type of the isu-152 purely AT.
9 Mar 2017, 05:51 AM
#16
Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4
asymmetric design in regards to the range difference was unlike in the days of super range su85 with the 10% bulletin. Making them all equal would also solve the issue. On lane maps both sides would have to weigh how to push with the long range TD's instead of the slow creep of a JT/Ele that is the usual degrading. Even if it means making the ammo type of the isu-152 purely AT.
I believe the reason it cannot be equal is due to the fact mark target exists. It would simply be to easy to combo that with a teammate and out damage the JT or Elephant
9 Mar 2017, 06:06 AM
#17
Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2
Gosh...
It's simple.
JT - pure AT
ISU152 - anti-everything.
You can't have anty-everything unit with range of a JT.
What's more, you want ISU to fight agasint JT/Ele, while JT and Ele are counters excatly for ISU.
It's like saying that I want to buff/change Luchs, because SU76 hard-counters it lel.
What's more, what you want to do with ISU would be simple nerf.
You need to adapt and find other ways of countering jt/ele, instead of whining that ISU can't go toe to toe with them. They also can't go toe to toe with ISU in terms of AI.
It's simple.
JT - pure AT
ISU152 - anti-everything.
You can't have anty-everything unit with range of a JT.
What's more, you want ISU to fight agasint JT/Ele, while JT and Ele are counters excatly for ISU.
It's like saying that I want to buff/change Luchs, because SU76 hard-counters it lel.
What's more, what you want to do with ISU would be simple nerf.
You need to adapt and find other ways of countering jt/ele, instead of whining that ISU can't go toe to toe with them. They also can't go toe to toe with ISU in terms of AI.
9 Mar 2017, 06:38 AM
#18
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
One week ago comment.
Disclaimer: implement whenever we nerf party cover, crushwell and comets.
We don't need call in late game wonders which win the game by sitting "iddle" at max range nuking things.
+1
Let's not go back into making every 2v2+ game into ISU vs Elephant/JT by making them have 85 range back.
ISU role is not to be strong AT wise, but a pak/infantry unit deleter late game.
The AT shell could be made to be less SAD whenever it BOUNCES (increase deflection damage to 33%) which would make it hit like a zook (80dmg) every +10s. I don't think that would make it OP since you don't want to use the ISU as an AT platform.
Disclaimer: implement whenever we nerf party cover, crushwell and comets.
JT: one of the reasons you want Artillery cover. This kinda of age of empires wonders are mostly never field on 1v1 but are commonly seen on 2v2+, specially depending the map.
Plausible changes: not all, a combination or just a single one.
-Remove engine upgrade.
-Reduce range to 70 (same as Ele and ISU). Adjust cost. Give it a mode on which it further reduces speed/rotation to almost none but gains back 85 range.
-Target tables. Super heavies are more vulnerable to howitzer like type of ONMAP artillery. Suxton, Anvil (?), Priest, LeFH, 152.
We don't need call in late game wonders which win the game by sitting "iddle" at max range nuking things.
i suggest grabbing a time machine and going back to late 2013
+1
Let's not go back into making every 2v2+ game into ISU vs Elephant/JT by making them have 85 range back.
ISU role is not to be strong AT wise, but a pak/infantry unit deleter late game.
The AT shell could be made to be less SAD whenever it BOUNCES (increase deflection damage to 33%) which would make it hit like a zook (80dmg) every +10s. I don't think that would make it OP since you don't want to use the ISU as an AT platform.
My controls weren't working
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
9 Mar 2017, 07:14 AM
#19
Posts: 1653
i suggest grabbing a time machine and going back to late 2013
Just this, ISU 1 shotting every single thing. No leave it as it is. Or at rounds same range and infantry round current range
9 Mar 2017, 19:43 PM
#20
7 Posts: 1664
How about we remove ISU-152, Jagd Tiger, and Elefant from the game instead? They are all cancer units.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
66 | ||
|
|
|
|
8 | ||
|
|
|
|
5 | ||
 |
|
|
3 | ||
 |
|
|
98 | ||
 |
|
|
95 | ||
|
|
|
|
23 | ||
 |
|
|
20 | ||
|
|
|
|
8 | ||
|
|
|
|
6 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.600215.736+15
- 3.34957.860+14
- 4.1107614.643+8
- 5.305114.728+1
- 6.916405.693-2
- 7.273108.717+24
- 8.722440.621+4
- 9.1041674.607-2
- 10.17146.788+1
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1235
Board Info
970 users are online:
970 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
8 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49106
Welcome our newest member, nohuvin
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, nohuvin
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM