Couple of things here. IS-2 shoots at higher armored targets, so its higher penetration values only allow it to get a chance to penetrate the harder target. They are also shooting at tanks with high speed frequently (blitz), and often tanks that have excellent cover in the form of smoke. All these things make the time required for an average kill go up.
If you think the IS2 with its slower reload and less accuracy is better at gibbing inf, then you don't play enough. IS2 can only hit infantry if they stand near cover and the IS2 gets lucky. Infantry always provide a reliable threat to IS2 since it is unlikely to wipe in one shot even when it does hit, and the long reload basically guarantees the squad can retreat to safety. The Tiger is far more lethal to inf, especially our new smaller Allied squad sizes. For instance, use attack ground with a tiger to always get the shell to land in the middle of a squad to ensure maximum damage.
Course they will both have the same range at vet 2, but you did not notice I said that in my comment. Only they Tiger will have 5 more range until vet 2. Which is kind of a big deal since that means it will always get the first shot.
The Tiger II is a fortress around which your attack hinges. It is the most skilless version of a tank in the game, and this only stresses that point. Since it cannot chase and it has insanely high damage it just sits still and destroys all within its range. When it takes damage it falls back gets repaired and moves back to the line. Its blitz is too slow to help it chase down tanks so it just uses it to try to escape. Nothing redeeming in this tank, and now it will always get the first shot on attacking tanks. Upping the micro requirement for allied players and lowering it for the German player. It should have been made cheaper and faster.
Indeed the Zis has good penetration which is compensated for by its terrible, absolutely basement, fire rate. So your basic argument is that if the 6-pounder can reliably penetrate Tiger from the front the tank deserves a buff? I assume all Allied tanks are well overdue for a buff then since the pak is like a knife through butter and almost all Axis AT always penetrates Allied tanks, besides Axis having the best snares, the best vet levels, the best abilities for AT, the most AT, and the best command structure allowing them to access it whenever they need.
If the plan is to buff the Tiger, what is the purpose of that? Is it to encourage Axis tanks to be more suitable to engage on their own? Is it to make the Axis more flexible? I don't want to see more Tigers and Tiger II's. I want to see more players digging into their tier structure and picking the right tool for the job.
This kinda falls apart when A. If you have a Tiger II you will mostly likely have no other vehicles or maybe 1 other to support it and B. The Tiger II's vet doesn't increase the range on it (well in general the Tiger II's vet is a dumb but w/e).
On the subject of AT, Soviets and Brits have no lacking in AT that can pen Axis tanks, and visa versa. The "myth" of superior armor on the Axis side is just that, a myth. Axis tanks preform for how the cost, if you are upset that lower cost tanks have lower stats well then I don't think you understand how cost performance ratio works.
The reason for the Tiger I buffs was that the IS2 completely clowned it out, and the scatter on the AoE on the IS2 really shouldn't be overlooked since it's devastating to units in cover and helps against more spread out units (lower AoE of course being worse against less clumped units) which is now how most infantry operate out of cover.
Really the Tiger I and IS2 being equals is fine, the other way of fixing it would have been to reduce the Tiger I's cost but that would have made it to good versus USF (although almost all of USF problems are being fixed).
Personally I like that Heavy tanks will now be viable, and mediums will ALSO be viable.
![[NS] Alexander flag](/images/replay/okw_flag.jpg)
Relic Entertainment
