Login

russian armor

Complaint/rant about soviet heavy armor

2 Sep 2013, 17:24 PM
#1
avatar of bigchunk1

Posts: 135

I have been a long time relic fan but what are you guys thinking here?

An IS-2 costs 680 manpower and 300 fuel. That's almost enough for 2 panthers and more than enough for 2 panzer 4s. That would be perfectly fine if the tank didn't perform so poorly. It is slow and has a slow turning turret, understandable. Its armor feels like paper and does not penetrate all that well considering it is a heavy tank, now that I don't understand.

A tiger costs 250 fuel, 50 less fuel than an IS-2... what? Just because it's German? I'm also pretty sure than an IS-2 will lose in a straight fight with a Tiger. At LEAST put them on equal footing. The only historical disadvantages I have read about the IS-2 compared to the Tiger was that it was difficult to reload the main gun and that the tank crews weren't as well trained. It did however carry a 122mm cannon, which is more than a match for any opposing German armor even at long range.

An IS-2 can't take a panther head on either, I sort of understand that since a panther is a dedicated anti tank, but this is a 300 fuel doctrinal tank we are talking about here.

I see what you are trying to do. A tiger is better against armor but only fairly effective against infantry. As opposed to an IS-2 which is better against infantry and only moderately effective against armor. I don't think this balancing works. IS-2s only come out late game where armor superiority takes priority over infantry superiority. The issue is compounded by the fact that IS-2s are also more expensive.

It's a somewhat similar situation with ISU-152s. Why are they more expensive than elephant tanks? Why can they not stand toe to toe in 1v1s with them? ISU-152s are also more expensive. Can anyone explain to me how that is balanced?

I usually play medium tank games but I tried to switch it up and was horribly disappointed. Right now getting soviet heavy armor is more for bragging about how much further ahead you are than it is about actually trying to win.
VP_
2 Sep 2013, 17:56 PM
#2
avatar of VP_

Posts: 8

I can explain, build SU-85s it's best tank after Elephant
2 Sep 2013, 18:00 PM
#3
avatar of JohanSchwarz

Posts: 409

I agree with your sentiments, the IS-2 and ISU-152 are pretty useless for their price (the former especially).

Meanwhile, KV-8 is the most efficient vehicle for its role and less than half the price of the IS-2 and does essentially the same thing except better (heck, Shock Rifle commander even has both of them for some reason). How the hell is this justified?
2 Sep 2013, 18:25 PM
#4
avatar of Blovski

Posts: 480

The ISU-152 has the best gun. Vaporises infantry, smashes PAK 40s, smashes vehicles smaller than an Elephant.

The IS-2's AI is very good, its AT is so-so, its armour is very good. Turret speed presents it with a bit of a problem. The supertanks need to be just a bit more King Tigery right now. Currently they're both a tad unimpressive.
2 Sep 2013, 18:26 PM
#5
avatar of CptEend
Patrion 14

Posts: 369

People should have some patience. Relic already mentioned they're going to balance the heavy armor, but you can't balance late game if you're not done with mid game, which is what they're/have been working on lately.
2 Sep 2013, 18:33 PM
#6
avatar of Cruzz

Posts: 1221 | Subs: 41

The ISU-152 has the best gun. Vaporises infantry, smashes PAK 40s, smashes vehicles smaller than an Elephant.


It's outdpsed by a single SU85 against any vehicle (but especially high armor ones because it has less penetration than an SU85). An SU85 is in turn outdpsed by an elefant.

The ISU-152 is very much an anti-infantry unit, just like the IS-2 (and the KV-8). I'm pretty sure everyone playing as soviets wish it wasn't so we'd have some alternative to SU85s.
Only Relic postRelic 2 Sep 2013, 20:15 PM
#7
avatar of pqumsieh
Developer Relic Badge

Posts: 267 | Subs: 8

Thanks for the feedback bigchunk1.

We delayed on adjusting heavy tanks purposefully. They are late game units which will be impacted by early to mid game changes. So until we felt the early-mid game was in a good state, we held off on changes to the late game.

That said, we have adjustments in the pipeline which we feel pretty good about.
2 Sep 2013, 21:14 PM
#8
avatar of Blovski

Posts: 480

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Sep 2013, 18:33 PMCruzz


It's outdpsed by a single SU85 against any vehicle (but especially high armor ones because it has less penetration than an SU85). An SU85 is in turn outdpsed by an elefant.

The ISU-152 is very much an anti-infantry unit, just like the IS-2 (and the KV-8). I'm pretty sure everyone playing as soviets wish it wasn't so we'd have some alternative to SU85s.


I think the ISU's range is even better than the SU-85's, and the pen and damage to it is very effective against medium armour. Even heavier armour other than the elephant can't really compete with a supported ISU.
2 Sep 2013, 21:45 PM
#9
avatar of link0

Posts: 337

The ISU is far better than the Elephant because it's effective against all units. Other than that, your argument with the IS-2 is agreeable. Soviets do need AT more than AI in the endgame, usually.
2 Sep 2013, 23:25 PM
#10
avatar of bigchunk1

Posts: 135

Thanks for the feedback bigchunk1.

We delayed on adjusting heavy tanks purposefully. They are late game units which will be impacted by early to mid game changes. So until we felt the early-mid game was in a good state, we held off on changes to the late game.

That said, we have adjustments in the pipeline which we feel pretty good about.


It makes sense to do things that way. Thanks for the reply.
3 Sep 2013, 06:39 AM
#11
avatar of Cruzz

Posts: 1221 | Subs: 41



I think the ISU's range is even better than the SU-85's, and the pen and damage to it is very effective against medium armour. Even heavier armour other than the elephant can't really compete with a supported ISU.


It has the same range as the elephant. It has a very slow turn rate, more scatter than the su85, very slow reload and can't fire while moving, so getting hit by it more than once with vehicles is generally very much not an issue in 1vs1. Claiming that heavier armour can't compete with one is effectively saying they can compete with an su85 even less, because apart from the range the SU85 really is a much better unit in every way.

I guess it's an ok unit for large team games (3vs3 and 4vs4) and the most open 2vs2 maps where you can use the range on it to gib infantry from multiple players whenever you're not faced with an elefant (a pretty big requirement there...) but it just effectively becomes a katyusha replacement with mild AT then. In 1vs1 I'd be glad my opponent wasted resources on one no matter the situation, which puts it in the exact same bin as the IS2.
3 Sep 2013, 06:56 AM
#12
avatar of H_Stickeye

Posts: 79

I still think all armour problems for soviets would be countered by a infantry ability to disable, stop dead, a tank. This would stop the tactic of rushing at anti tank guns and ISU's and circling them until dead.
3 Sep 2013, 06:58 AM
#13
avatar of Cruzz

Posts: 1221 | Subs: 41

I still think all armour problems for soviets would be countered by a infantry ability to disable, stop dead, a tank. This would stop the tactic of rushing at anti tank guns and ISU's and circling them until dead.


Yes, especially when the axis don't have a commander ability to get out of that infantry ability immediately for a cheaper cost than the infantry ability.
3 Sep 2013, 14:42 PM
#14
avatar of Nullist

Posts: 2425

Permanently Banned
Yeah, lets make Ost tanks completely incapable of flanking or micro intensive and pathing bugged circle strafing on anything without a turret.

That would be good balance and unbiased.
3 Sep 2013, 17:50 PM
#15
avatar of UGBEAR

Posts: 954

I have been a long time relic fan but what are you guys thinking here?

An IS-2 costs 680 manpower and 300 fuel. That's almost enough for 2 panthers and more than enough for 2 panzer 4s. That would be perfectly fine if the tank didn't perform so poorly. It is slow and has a slow turning turret, understandable. Its armor feels like paper and does not penetrate all that well considering it is a heavy tank, now that I don't understand.

A tiger costs 250 fuel, 50 less fuel than an IS-2... what? Just because it's German? I'm also pretty sure than an IS-2 will lose in a straight fight with a Tiger. At LEAST put them on equal footing. The only historical disadvantages I have read about the IS-2 compared to the Tiger was that it was difficult to reload the main gun and that the tank crews weren't as well trained. It did however carry a 122mm cannon, which is more than a match for any opposing German armor even at long range.

An IS-2 can't take a panther head on either, I sort of understand that since a panther is a dedicated anti tank, but this is a 300 fuel doctrinal tank we are talking about here.

I see what you are trying to do. A tiger is better against armor but only fairly effective against infantry. As opposed to an IS-2 which is better against infantry and only moderately effective against armor. I don't think this balancing works. IS-2s only come out late game where armor superiority takes priority over infantry superiority. The issue is compounded by the fact that IS-2s are also more expensive.

It's a somewhat similar situation with ISU-152s. Why are they more expensive than elephant tanks? Why can they not stand toe to toe in 1v1s with them? ISU-152s are also more expensive. Can anyone explain to me how that is balanced?

I usually play medium tank games but I tried to switch it up and was horribly disappointed. Right now getting soviet heavy armor is more for bragging about how much further ahead you are than it is about actually trying to win.


Only Guard regiment have the privilege to field JS-2 tanks, they are battle hardened veteran, lacking of crew training issue starts from the beginning of the Barbarossa, after the great purge.
3 Sep 2013, 19:45 PM
#16
avatar of ☭NoobElite☭

Posts: 72

Thanks for the feedback bigchunk1.

We delayed on adjusting heavy tanks purposefully. They are late game units which will be impacted by early to mid game changes. So until we felt the early-mid game was in a good state, we held off on changes to the late game.

That said, we have adjustments in the pipeline which we feel pretty good about.


You must have like 1 or 2 Beta Testers, who play alot of single player.
3 Sep 2013, 19:46 PM
#17
avatar of ☭NoobElite☭

Posts: 72

oops double post...
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

1059 users are online: 1059 guests
1 post in the last 24h
9 posts in the last week
27 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50008
Welcome our newest member, Goynet40
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM