Nice argument that really unbenched what I said, good job.
Very epic.
And please, I'm 100% sure we both know what kind of moderator rules over steam forums..
And stop acting like GCS and 1v1 is the benchmark for all balance, acting stupid.
>Not used in gcs bad unit waaahhh
Did ISU,KV-2 or IS-2 get used a single time ? I don't think so but havent checked. Highly doubt it. Guess theyre utter garbage, buffs when?
Bet they didnt use a lot of units
IS2 did get used, lol. The Armoured Assault doctrine was chosen a good number of times. The IS2 is a very good unit that doesn't get chosen only because the doctrine doesn't have Guards. If Guards got nerfed then Armoured Assault would become much more attractive.
The KT on the other hand, is always available, but is always bad. GCS2 may not be the perfect benchmark for balance, but people who think the KT is good clearly have no business discussing balance in this game. Horrible scatter, atrocious speed, ridiculously bad acceleration, basically costs as much as 2 Panzer IVs, nonsensical exp values given, gigantic target size, and far and away the worst turret rotation in the game.
The IS2 basically only has bad scatter values on its main gun as a key weakness. The KT has almost every weakness in the game rolled into one unit. The last time I saw a KT being impactful as a unit was when I was rank 600+ and didn't know what tank destroyers were.
I mean, I can understand people complaining about Command Panther....But the KT? If you're losing, saving for the KT will get you overrun and it will have limited impact when it comes out. If you're even, saving for the KT will get you overrun and it will have limited impact when it comes out. If you're winning, getting a KT can throw away the advantage and swing the game in your enemy's favour.