Profile of Abdul

This game shows how to own a maxim spammer in 10 minutes. I dedicate it to luvnest because it is through his reply (link below) that I became familiar with this abusive start. Funny enough, it was the same player and map as in luvnest reply.

http://www.coh2.org/replay/17385/sniper-counters-5-maximspam-on-langres-winter...-kinda/page/1#post_id155729

edit: sorry this is the wrong reply the correct one is here

http://www.coh2.org/replay/17760/how-to-own-a-mxim-spammer-correct-reply

Hey there.

Well I think that people blame balance instead of design when it comes to ISU-152 and Elefants over performing.

The way I see it it's not the range, nor the AI power of the ISU-152 nor the armour values of both units that cause issues. It's design. It's just that the maps for 1v1 and 2v2 are way too small with the exception of Rails & Metal for such beasts.

Yes coh2 has some fundamental design flaws much like opposing front had them, but the suggested solution is to reduce the problem as much as possible.

As for maps we have very few 2v2 maps available and most of them are really 1v1 maps. Sad situation.

Nerfing the range to 80, the same as a panther (I think, not sure) is a bit unfair for such slow unresponsive tank destroyers and would throw them into abandon again. What's the point in fielding them instead of panthers or SU-85s. Ele & Isu used to be a waste of fuel, now they are finally good.

Panther and SU85 have 60 range. Both ISU/ele will still be good with 80 range, its just not so many people will get them because they wont be as easy. They will be specialty units.

Moreover an ISU-152 and Elefant with 80 range would lose any advantage over other tanks in huge 3v3/4v4 maps where flanking is commonplace, and rewarding. Reducing the armour of the ISU is unfair if taking into consideration the elefant's armour, something that bugs me seeing that the ISU-152 is based on the IS-2 chassis it, should be as durable. So the front armour is fine as it stands.

Nerfing range is just band aid patching, they would become useless in 3v3 and 4v4 where the huge maps really trump the overperformance of both. Artillery must become viable to counter them, it is the logical and intuitive counter for a strong defensive position. So is reworking the commanders Mechanized Support (SU) and Jaeger Armour (OT) as both have bombing strikes and heavy tank destroyers that instagib artillery positions. But maybe that's asking too much and expecting too much from relic.

Balancing for 3v3 and 4v4 is next to impossible and yes those commanders have the ability to destory their counter howitzer/pak43 which is ridiculous.

Also, I have successfully insta killed Elefants with the IL-2 Precision bombing strike if 3 bombs connect the TD, that's a semi reliable hard counter right there.

Something I wonder is why Relic does not apply different balance values for 1v1 and 2v2, such as Ele/Isu have 80-85 (respectively) range and then appropriate ones for 3v3 and 4v4, such as Ele/Isu keeping the 100 range? That looks like a fair solution to me.

Lastly Relic won't patch this until Western fronts is out. Anyways The new factions will change the ISU/Ele meta.

Cheers.

The game would become so hard to learn and play in different tiers.

Replay or it never happened.

That applies to you not me, but I am glad you got the point. Now please stop making nonsense claims.

No.
Elephant owns ISU-152 every time. With or without Mark Target.If that's not what happening in your case then you're doing something wrong.

That's not true, I destroyed many elephants using 1 ISU152 + 1 guard squad and mark vehicle against good players.

The original ISU-152 topic got too long and turned into mostly negative stuff. After playing with or against the ISU about 50-70 games I can say the best solution is to:

-reduce range from 100 to 80 (same for elephant)
-reduce front armor from 310 to 250

The reason behind this is to first reduce the insane range this unit has and to make it more possible to attack with infantry not just tanks.

Right now if you try to attack an ISU it will most likely be covered by 2-3 AT guns. In this arrangement, the ISU counters infantry and the ATs counter tanks. Throw in few cheap mines and flanking becomes next to impossible.

If the range and front armor is reduced as suggested this will give a combined arms push a greater chance of success. For example, a player can send one tank from the side and send pg with shreks and 1 or 2 paks from the front and manage to hit it enough shots to destroy it.

Right now if a players attempts to do this, the frontal assault has little chance of reaching the ISU because of it's huge range and IF the units reach many of their shots will bounce (especially shreks) because of the ISU's high frontal armor.

The suggested solution will fix this problem and make ISU/elephent better units in the game.