is 2 needs buff

KT

"scatter":
angle_scatter":4.8,"distance_scatter_max":3.7,"distance_scatter_offset":0.185,"distance_scatter_ratio":0.64

IS2
"scatter":
angle_scatter":7.5,"distance_scatter_max":5.7,"distance_scatter_offset":0.185,"distance_scatter_ratio":1.0

looking at this it seems that IS2 has it way worse then KT

KT
"accuracy":
near":0.072,"mid":0.054,"far":0.036}

IS2
"accuracy":
near":0.06,"mid":0.045,"far":0.03

so you can see it's worst but i gotta say that the accuracy of the is2 is the almost the same to tiger just scatter is better even tho i'm not showing this.

is-2 is in now good situtation.İts has rng cannon but it has also very good armor and health. İts also super efective aganist Okw(generaly okw players go p4) without special ops.

dude! this isn't about 4v4. i am a 1v1 player to, or atleast i was. i mean i've faced IS2 in 1v1 recently and tbh i wasn't afraid of it. the thing misses all its shots. it should be a litle more to the side of the tiger. i want it to atleast fucking hit its shots. it keeps missing and when it hits it may kill a model maybe 2 if you're lucky. i like how the tiger is right now but not how the IS2 is.



so what tank is 'weakness-free'? doesn't every tank have AT to counter it? isn't that their weakness?
LOL the last bit is just funny. so you use the IS2 defensively? so you can sit back at the points you have but you can't attack the opponent? guess i'll have to use other units than my heavy tank that's supposed to have some impact on the game. idk what you're trying to accomplish with saying that.
shit man with buffing that accuracy a litle it will probably become the centaur when brits came out.

AT isn't even a reasonable category. AT is split into handheld infantry based AT, anti-tank guns, tank destroyers, other tanks, random stuff like 17pder, Stuka CAS etc. Heavy tanks have enough armour to constantly deflect handheld AT and non-AT specialist tanks.

The Pershing is a heavy tank with only one weakness - low health and many strengths. If it had the same health as IS2 it would be really overpowered. The IS2 definitely feels inferior compared to the Pershing - but honestly, the Pershing is an outlier.

If you compare Tiger to IS2 - Tiger has a lot of non-doc counters, and has significantly worse armour, but has much better scatter (anti-infantry ability). That's the definition of fair because you're trading offense for survivability. It's already a very good unit, and the main reason IS2 isn't a dominant choice is because of its doctrines. Not having Guards and PPSH probably means you're losing the infantry advantage, which you expect the IS2 to single-handedly overcome.

I use the IS2 like a much tankier KV1 with a better gun. I don't use it to dive enemy squads for wipes - it can't. Over the course of a game the RNG cannon rolls enough times to get a good amount of damage done, and it spends a lot more time on the field because of its super high armour compared to the Tiger. It also works well as a Spearhead tank if I want to make a big push.


I don't understand why you want the IS2 to be OP. You're expecting a 375 armour, 1080hp tank to aggressively dive and push like a P4 or a T34-85? Fun fact, no such tank exists in this game. Basically you want medium tank strengths + heavy tank strengths rolled into one. Why can't you accept that tanks can't be good at every single category in the game? Basically you want a Pershing with 375 armour and 1080health....Which would then make every other medium and heavy tank horribly underpowered in comparison.

I don't understand why you want the IS2 to be OP. You're expecting a 375 armour, 1080hp tank to aggressively dive and push like a P4 or a T34-85? Fun fact, no such tank exists in this game. Basically you want medium tank strengths + heavy tank strengths rolled into one. Why can't you accept that tanks can't be good at every single category in the game? Basically you want a Pershing with 375 armour and 1080health....Which would then make every other medium and heavy tank horribly underpowered in comparison.

No one saying that IS-2 must be soviet verison of Pershing without flaws. IS-2 must be soviet KT with the same weaknesses and strong sides - slow and high cost unit, but powerfull. Now we have slightly cheaper KT with RNG cannon. You better prefer build instead of it 1-su85 and t-34 and got more advantages, than trying to hope that your IS-2 turn the game to your side. KT and Pershing in good hands could do that, but not IS-2. As said earlier, IS-2 give you only good defense state, but very unreliable in offensive.

kv1 with a better gun? it keeps missing! you could say it's just a more armoured version of the kv1. i bet you the kv1 has better accuracy then that dip shit. something like a pak43 and so on and on and on is AT. stop bs'ing. i'm not gonne be writing down all fucking sorts of AT that can pen an is2. you know every tank has it weakness. oh and cause the tiger has alot of none doc counters we don't buff the IS2 cause everybody is to stupid to use commander efficiantly. it's not only a pak43 wich can pen an IS2, i've seen a simple pak40 a stug, panther and so on penetrate. you're acting like the IS2 is a tank destroyer, but sorry to say, it's a HEAVY tank. you say you wanne use it as a unit you can push with, while you litterly said before, that if it had offensive capabilities it would be OP...
buffing accuracy and scatter just a litle wont make it OP. unless you wanne buff it to the point of a pershing wich would ofcourse be OP. every heavy tank in this game has the power to fight both tanks and infantry. this is the one i see struggling at infantry and sometimes tanks cause of its accuracy. this tank is ment to be an all around tank. a bit like crommwel and such.
btw could you write a litle less, i mean shiet. i'm trying to avoid wasting to much time on this, cause this isn't gonne make us get a new patch for IS2 anyways

No one saying that IS-2 must be soviet verison of Pershing without flaws. IS-2 must be soviet KT with the same weaknesses and strong sides - slow and high cost unit, but powerfull. Now we have slightly cheaper KT with RNG cannon. You better prefer build instead of it 1-su85 and t-34 and got more advantages, than trying to hope that your IS-2 turn the game to your side. KT and Pershing in good hands could do that, but not IS-2. As said earlier, IS-2 give you only good defense state, but very unreliable in offensive.

Have you played this game recently? KT turning the game to your side? LUL. IS2 is commonly used by top streamers and players - KT isn't used by anyone in top 300. The KT's penalties/weaknesses are many times worse than what it brings to the table, and it is truly un-useable in 1v1 - unless you're using it as a type of Victory Strike. IS2 on the other hand is actually very good at turning games around.

I use IS2 whenever I feel I don't need Guards. I use KT a total of never. KT is 720/280, 26 pop. It has 3.8 speed 1.4 accel and 12 turret traverse. To put that in perspective, its regular performance is basically moving like an engine damaged medium tank.

OKW gets a p4 out before I can get a t34-85. Instead of building t4 and a t34-85 to try and match him, I call-in an IS2 to outmuscle his solo p4. Even when he gets two p4s the IS2 can easily hold his own, so he basically has to save 225 fuel for a Command Panther. That's easily 8 to 10 mins of dominance on the field - and by the time his Command Panther is out I would have teched t4 and gotten an SU85.

kv1 with a better gun? it keeps missing! you could say it's just a more armoured version of the kv1. i bet you the kv1 has better accuracy then that dip shit. something like a pak43 and so on and on and on is AT. stop bs'ing. i'm not gonne be writing down all fucking sorts of AT that can pen an is2. you know every tank has it weakness. oh and cause the tiger has alot of none doc counters we don't buff the IS2 cause everybody is to stupid to use commander efficiantly. it's not only a pak43 wich can pen an IS2, i've seen a simple pak40 a stug, panther and so on penetrate. you're acting like the IS2 is a tank destroyer, but sorry to say, it's a HEAVY tank. you say you wanne use it as a unit you can push with, while you litterly said before, that if it had offensive capabilities it would be OP...
buffing accuracy and scatter just a litle wont make it OP. unless you wanne buff it to the point of a pershing wich would ofcourse be OP. every heavy tank in this game has the power to fight both tanks and infantry. this is the one i see struggling at infantry and sometimes tanks cause of its accuracy. this tank is ment to be an all around tank. a bit like crommwel and such.
btw could you write a litle less, i mean shiet. i'm trying to avoid wasting to much time on this, cause this isn't gonne make us get a new patch for IS2 anyways

You're the one bs-ing, dude. I've already demonstrated countless times that the IS2 has a lot of strengths. Removing its only weakness would make it overpowered, unless you nerf the strengths as well. What you're asking for is basically a 375 armour Tiger. You keep insisting on making it a perfect, no-weakness unit because you can't understand simple English.

In fact, you may be too stupid to read but I've pointed out many times that the IS2 itself is already very good. The "problem" is that it's in Commanders that are either bad or have no infantry presence, which is why it's difficult to win with an IS2 alone - again, something that you're expecting it to do.

It surely doesn't. It's already very good for its cost. I don't understand why people think that tanks should be perfect and weakness-free. If you give the IS2 good offensive ability it would be overpowered.

Pershing: Everyone knows it's amazing, but it has a downside of super small health pool for a heavy tank

Tiger: jack of all trades but not statistically impressive in any category.

IS2: slower than average, but extremely heavily armoured. It deflects Panther and PAK shots regularly with its 375 armour, basically trades offense for defense. Is good vs other tanks but RNG cannon vs infantry.

If you make it better against infantry it would basically just be a Tiger with much much more armour.

Right now it's a Churchill with more RNG. Neither is good. It can be given the Brum bar treatment easily.

I would:
Buff damage to 200/240 but reduce ROF to keep DPS the same
Adjust accuracy and profile so that it damages infantry reliably but isn't going to wipe every shot like launch.
Make the 122 unique instead of the same as every other cannon.

Why isn't this guy balance expert and responsible for the next patch?

Because we already have enough idiots on the balance team already. They for example think that not having players test their ideas is good.

If you play 3v3 and 4v4 please know that balance is centered around 1v1 and 2v2. Heavy tanks in general are more effective in smaller games as there are less dedicated AT especially less probability of things like elephant and jagdtiger which brutalize heavies.

IS2's rng cannon is quite decent as shown in this replay. Plenty of wipes and easily the MVP of the match. I know its just one example but I need to counter the exaggeration on this thread.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vc2lZA6ATko&t=87s
I would prefer a more consistant cannon with less damage and/or aoe but what the IS2 brings to the table right now is quite good too.

You're the one bs-ing, dude. I've already demonstrated countless times that the IS2 has a lot of strengths. Removing its only weakness would make it overpowered, unless you nerf the strengths as well. What you're asking for is basically a 375 armour Tiger. You keep insisting on making it a perfect, no-weakness unit because you can't understand simple English.

In fact, you may be too stupid to read but I've pointed out many times that the IS2 itself is already very good. The "problem" is that it's in Commanders that are either bad or have no infantry presence, which is why it's difficult to win with an IS2 alone - again, something that you're expecting it to do.

lol, kid.''no u''. IS2 is only effective against armor. it's USELESS agianst infantry but your blind eyes can't see that. i said it could use an approach towards the accuracy and scater damage of the tiger. NOT JUST COPY THE THING. i refer to the tiger cause i think the tiger is pretty balanced. it doesn't have that wipe ability the pershing does. this tank is a heavy tank and cost you alot. you wanne use it like a more armored su85. well that's your problem. this should be a versatile unit. maybe not as good as pershing or tiger vs inf but atleast a litle decent. pls stop with that 'no-weakness' bs. it's not like we have a 2k17 crocodile here wich just needed some AT to win the game. oh wait even that had it weakness.

No one saying that IS-2 must be soviet verison of Pershing without flaws. IS-2 must be soviet KT with the same weaknesses and strong sides - slow and high cost unit, but powerfull. Now we have slightly cheaper KT with RNG cannon. You better prefer build instead of it 1-su85 and t-34 and got more advantages, than trying to hope that your IS-2 turn the game to your side. KT and Pershing in good hands could do that, but not IS-2. As said earlier, IS-2 give you only good defense state, but very unreliable in offensive.

There is no reason why the is2 should be the "be soviet KT" unless it were to require all tech buildings, we remove SU caches, and increase its cost.

lol, kid.''no u''. IS2 is only effective against armor. it's USELESS agianst infantry but your blind eyes can't see that. i said it could use an approach towards the accuracy and scater damage of the tiger. NOT JUST COPY THE THING. i refer to the tiger cause i think the tiger is pretty balanced. it doesn't have that wipe ability the pershing does. this tank is a heavy tank and cost you alot. you wanne use it like a more armored su85. well that's your problem. this should be a versatile unit. maybe not as good as pershing or tiger vs inf but atleast a litle decent. pls stop with that 'no-weakness' bs. it's not like we have a 2k17 crocodile here wich just needed some AT to win the game. oh wait even that had it weakness.

Yeah whatever dude. Your head is so far up your own ass that even if the IS2 had the exact same stats as the Tiger you would scream "buff IS2". Nvm that until the recent patch, the Tiger was slower than the IS2. But if IS2 became similar to the Tiger you would cry about the IS2 having weaker armour (like the Tiger). The Tiger also has a significantly smaller one-hit-kill AOE radius, which is why it has much better scatter. Yeah, but logic doesn't work on you.

Basically you want an unfairly overpowered Tiger with the same cost but much better armour and a larger instant-kill aoe.



Fixes that would be reasonable: revamping the IS2 commanders to be more useable

Fixes that you want: Making the IS2 grossly overpowered and the best tank in the game by an overwhelming margin.

Yeah whatever dude. Your head is so far up your own ass that even if the IS2 had the exact same stats as the Tiger you would scream "buff IS2". Nvm that until the recent patch, the Tiger was slower than the IS2. But if IS2 became similar to the Tiger you would cry about the IS2 having weaker armour (like the Tiger). The Tiger also has a significantly smaller one-hit-kill AOE radius, which is why it has much better scatter. Yeah, but logic doesn't work on you.

Basically you want an unfairly overpowered Tiger with the same cost but much better armour and a larger instant-kill aoe.



Fixes that would be reasonable: revamping the IS2 commanders to be more useable

Fixes that you want: Making the IS2 grossly overpowered and the best tank in the game by an overwhelming margin.

dude the stats show enaugh it has double as shit of a scatter then the KT. you just don't care. you just try to get people to think or yourself idk, that i want an OP tank, but it's good to know you can't find any reasons why it shouldn't be buffed. you want me to sound like an ally fanboy. lol nice try. why in the world would i cry for more armor if the tiger and IS2 had the same stats. i'm clearly saying i like the tiger how it is.
for as far as i know the IS2 is 0.3 faster and has 75 armor more then the tiger. the tiger has everything else better that doesn't have to do with speed and armor. so with these stats i think it just needs to be used like a churchill, but then with not anti-infantry capabilties. you want a 230 and around 600mp tank only be able to fight back agianst tanks but let infantry overrun it? it doesn't have range like an elephant, you know that? i'm not asking for more armor. i'm asking for more accuracy and scatter for the IS2. but not to much so it wont be OP. but you're to biased, so i might aswel stop discussing with you. all you can see is OP and me wanting to make it a more armored tiger and all the bs that you keep repeating. look at the stats, then think agian.