Opinion on new IS-2?

Jump back to quoted post15 Sep 2013, 17:41 PMUGBEAR

In the game, the JS-2 still lose to a inevitable Tiger tank which is much cheaper, that is the problem

Jump back to quoted post15 Sep 2013, 17:41 PMUGBEAR

There's only criticism of rate of fire of JS-2, it's 120mm slope armor is not something to be underestimated, The JS-2 accuracy were never to be criticized as well perhaps you have source?

BTW, JS-2 is not overrated at all, it is the only few allied tank could withstand a direct shoot from tiger or panther tank and capable to fight back at that time.

Jump back to quoted post15 Sep 2013, 17:33 PMCardboard Tank

- And could fire 2-3 shots a minute. Had horrible accuracy as the gun was to big for the turret. After each shot the gun had to be moved into the standard position to reload it. After that it had to be aimed AGAIN at the target.

- In fact the IS-2 was as "fast" as the Tiger (37 km/h for IS-2, 38 km/h for Tiger. Both on roads).

- The IS-2 didn´t even have the best gun and best armor at the time. As for armor protection: The Tiger II had better frontal protection. As for the gun: If we want to look at the anti armor role this title goes to the long 88mm. Even 17 pounder, German 75mm L70 had better armor penetration than the gun on the IS-2.

- And last but not least: The IS-2 is overrated as is the Tiger II. Big gun and big armor alone don´t make a good tank.


Also as you are bringing up realism: Germans weren´t running away from SU-85s.

Jump back to quoted post15 Sep 2013, 18:12 PMCardboard Tank

Actually it could somewhat fight Tigers and Panthers on almost even terms. The accuracy of the German Zeiss optics is unmatched at the time though. Also I advice you to read a bit about the gun of the IS-2. It had to be aimed again for every shot. The rate of fire was 3x higher in Panther and Tiger. All tanks could defeat each other frontally at about 1000m - with the difference that Panther and Tiger were much more flexible, accurate and could fire faster.


As you are so horny on sources, here´s something to Google translate:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/IS-2_%28Panzer%29
"Der Panther wies durch seine höhere Motorleistung jedoch eine bessere Beweglichkeit auf dem Schlachtfeld auf. Die Kanone des Panthers war der 122-mm-Kanone des IS-2 geringfügig überlegen, sodass sich die beiden Panzer gegenseitig auf etwa 1000 Meter ausschalten konnten."

Translation: The Panther had a better motorization and thus a higher agility. The cannon of the Panther was slightly superior to the IS-2´s 122mm, so that both tanks could take each other out at distances of about 1000m.


Conclusion: Congratulation, the IS-2 could go head on with the Germans standard medium tank of the time.

Jump back to quoted post15 Sep 2013, 17:55 PMwooof

this is obviously a more extreme example, but thats like saying its a problem that an ostwind loses to an su85 because theyre the same price. not quite the same but you get my point.

the soviet heavy tanks are far better than the german heavies against infantry. thats why they arent as good at AT. youll have to get a dev to answer why they chose to make it like that, but as it is now, you cant buff their AT ability unless you take away some AI in the process.

IS2: 2.86 distance scatter, 7.5 angle scatter and 5 AOE
ISU152: 13.2 distance scatter, 5 angle scatter and 6 AOE
Tiger: 4.3 distance scatter, 7.5 angle scatter and 2.5 AOE
Elefant: 10 distance scatter, 7.5 angle scatter and .5 AOE

the tiger is pretty much a slightly improved p4 against infantry (about half the distance scatter and .75 faster shooting speed). the elefant is obviously worthless against inf. the soviet heavies just put them to shame at AI.

Jump back to quoted post15 Sep 2013, 19:25 PMwooof

the is2 is pretty much a brummbar with 50% more damage, over 50% more armor, 95 more penetration, slightly more distance scatter, and a turret. brummbars dominate infantry. so does the is2. the is2 is much better at AT than a brummbar as well thanks to the damage, penetration and turret.

you want the is2 to be able to kill panthers and tigers as well? what exactly do germans counter an is2 with then? your realism argument has no place here. this is a game. it really doesnt matter who had the better gun or armor.

Jump back to quoted post15 Sep 2013, 19:26 PMUGBEAR

40MP/40FU means something to you?

Jump back to quoted post15 Sep 2013, 19:02 PMUGBEAR

L70 75mm capable of penetrating 120mm 60 degree sloped armor at 1000m? AKA 240mm armor penetration at distance of 1000m, even a Pak43/KwK43 won't be that confident

congrats,political propaganda

http://www.battlefield.ru/js1-js2.html

Jump back to quoted post15 Sep 2013, 19:39 PMCardboard Tank

I know "western propaganda". Have fun denying it. The IS-2 could fight back Tigers and Panthers, yes. Nobody is denying it. But claiming it was a super tank impervious to Panthers and King Tigers is ridiculous. Also German infantry was well equipped to knock them out in form of Panzerfaust and Panzerschreck. In fact Russians couldn´t get their tanks anywhere into cities without heavy infantry support.

Jump back to quoted post15 Sep 2013, 19:47 PMc r u C e

Well for it's price it should be on par at least with the Panther...
@Cardboard Fausts and Schreks were useless if shot in the front

Jump back to quoted post15 Sep 2013, 19:58 PMwooof

how does that make sense? then i want the elefant to be on par with a kv8 in terms of AI since its so much more expensive. youre comparing vehicles with such different roles. you cant have everything in one tank. the panther is worthless at AI and specializes in AT. the is2 is great AI and decent AT. you cant improve its AT more without taking something away.


besides, 1v1, the is2 usually will beat a panther already. its increased damage compensates for the slower firing speed, but the is2 has a higher chance of penetration.

Jump back to quoted post15 Sep 2013, 19:47 PMc r u C e

Well for it's price it should be on par at least with the Panther...
@Cardboard Fausts and Schreks were useless if shot in the front

Jump back to quoted post16 Sep 2013, 05:20 AMAbdul

Speaking of panzerfaust, I noticed it always causes engine damage to the IS2, even when fired at the front armor. Panzerfaust has 140 penetration and the IS2 has 325 front armor, therefore shouldn't the panzerfaust fail to penetrate at least half the time if not more?

Jump back to quoted post16 Sep 2013, 05:37 AMAppleseed

on the other hand Russian's AT nade can fly though anything so it never got blocked and 100% damage to engine from my experience(no matter where it hits, my elefant got engine damage from AT nade that hits front armor 2 time out of 2 nades yesterday and elefant have 400 front armor ) so i think you have nothing to complain about it

Jump back to quoted post16 Sep 2013, 05:37 AMAppleseed

that is not true i experience that faust does no damage or no engine damage to IS-2 (1 time), KV8（2-3 times), SU85(3-4 times) and T34(1 time not sure about this one was blocked by a tree or it hit but no damage was looking at other part of map when it fired but T34 was running fine when i look back and didn't bother check the replay) (pretty much all front armor though seems hitting back armor always engine damage). and i see faust got block by tree and building couple times.

Jump back to quoted post16 Sep 2013, 05:20 AMAbdul

Speaking of panzerfaust, I noticed it always causes engine damage to the IS2, even when fired at the front armor.

Jump back to quoted post16 Sep 2013, 05:45 AMAbdul

you say you had 1 panzerfaust deflect on IS2, how many times did u fire panzerfaust in total, 1 deflect versus how many penetrations?

Jump back to quoted post16 Sep 2013, 09:08 AMNullist

Does not always cause engine damage to IS2, even when fired at front armor.
You have "noticed", wrong.