Nullist, please correct me if I'm wrong. But (sic)wherent you one of the people constantly replying to EVERYTHING with the response "whiners?"
To be frank, the SU-85 is flankable, and has been for a while, and now it's even more flankable. It is literally the tank that's the most easily flanked.
As for the Elephant, it is not so easily flanked unless the player pushes it too far forward, and the map has enough sight and shot blockers. And even then, anything capable of hurting it has to brave all the support units, and German tanks that can take it out. A basic T-34 isn't going to be enough to take it out no matter how much it flanks.
I saw disallow spotting scopes on elephants and instead give it a
I just came from a 3v3 where the enemy team got 3 elephants with spotting scopes and we could move up anything to deal with them, no infantry, no vehicles of any kind. Even throwing everything we had at them with Mark Target wasn't enough. And they were doing this with little in the way of support units up front to spot for them.
The game devolved into a tower defense game for them, and that requires no skill.
i like how in balance discussions the su85 is always so easy to flank and never has support, but the elefant is unflankable and has unlimited support. stop "throwing everything you had at them", expecting to kill an elefant. use some tactics. weaken them up with indirect fire and call ins. dont charge head on just because you have a blob of su85s or t34s.
you can also abuse the fact that elefants like to target infantry. get your tanks out of sight, move up 1 con. elefants will all turn to fire at him. move in behind. watch as the elefants slowly turn around and pathing screws them over. |
I don't need to pay 240 fuel for something that can one shot infantry but gets killed by most tanks. I have infantry for killing infantry.
Some people make arguments that the Panther has no AI, but what soviet infantry unit can actually do more than damage the engine?
So, the IS-2 costs 240 fuel, and for that 240 fuel I can lose to one of the most common types of tanks in the lategame, BUT I can destroy a couple squads of infantry and not get my engine damaged as a trade-off..
Seems fair. Yep.
Yeah i'll just get a KV-8 for more than half the price..
They are even in the same doctrine!
Yeah, but really, I would always much rather get a Panther. They can scare infantry away well, and their MG turret does decent AI.
But with the Panther, I can also 1v1 any soviet tank and win. ISU-152, IS-2, SU-85..
I can 1v1 all that shit and win, and in the case that there are support and massed AT weapons waiting for my Panther? Well I'll just use my amazing mobility to get out. I can even use rocket blitzkrieg mode with a damaged engine! So balanced!
well feel free to get kv8s. not sure how that will help your AT situation, but go right ahead. if you lose your is2 after killing a couple squads of infantry youre being too aggresive. let the germans come to you or use it when you push your whole army forward. the is2 will soak up a lot of hits while your zis/su85 get to take free shots at the enemy armor.
honestly, its amazing soviets can ever win a game. all they want to do is 1v1 with panthers. who cares that guards can stop a panther from moving and shooting? they just want pgrens. and who cares that is2 and isu152 are pretty much a brummbar on steroids? they just want tigers.
why are you guys playing soviets if you want them to function just like germans? |
It's a heavy tank. You can deal with it with a Panther and some support but hard counter for it are Tiger and Elephant and Pak43 (?).
IS-2 were design to hunt Tigers and I think Relic is trying to mimic this in the game. This could be the reason for recent Tiger nerf.
Because of the cost and capability of IS-2 you should always compere it to a Tiger (I'm repeating myself here, sorry)
Complaining that you can't deal with them with Panthers is like complaining that you can't deal with a PzV (Panther) using T-34/76 (without ramming the Panther, to be accurate)
To cut the long story short:
IS-2 = Panther - wrong.
IS-2 = PzVI Tiger - correct
its role in real life is irrelavent. look at ostwinds being an anti infantry tank. the is2 is not meant to fight tigers currently. this is obvious if you look at its stats. the tank thats most similar to it is the brummbar, not the tiger. if relic changes them to be AT, maybe it should be able to kill a tiger. currently its a very powerful AI tank with decent AT capabilities.
ugbear is just obsessed with the 40 mp and 40 fuel difference in cost. hes still never answered my question though. if an is2 should beat a tiger just because its a heavy tank that costs more, why does a brummbar lose to an su85? i think hes avoiding answering this question because he knows his argument is flawed. different tanks have different roles. price doesnt determine what tank wins in a fight. |
Build a Tiger is you wang to kill JS-2, build a Tiger if you want to deal with SU-85, build a Tiger is't not bad for AI, build a Tiger, it's Cheaper.
Your logic: Stop complaining about tank which is 40MP/40FU more expensive than a Tiger, and stands no chance fight a Tiger, and can barely handle a Panther which is half of the price of it.
Just because this end game unit and the most expensive heavy tank has more AI? Reminds me the old German fanboi story of "T-34/76 is fine for it can kill infantry......."
is2 has 5 aoe and 2.86 distance scatter. brummbar has 5 aoe and 1 distance scatter. notice anything similar? want to know why theyre similar? its because the is2 is for killing infantry. now lets look at tank destroyers. su85 has 1 aoe and 7.5 distance scatter. elefant has .5 aoe and 10 distance scatter. notice the much smaller aoe and much bigger scatter. thats because tank destroyers have very different roles. stop using an is2 to kill tanks.
using your flawed argument, brummbar is a heavy tank thats more expensive than the su85. why does it lose to the su85? if you want to argue that the is2 needs a new role, thats a whole different story. arguing it should beat a tiger based on cost is pointless. |
And JS-2 is not the only one overpriced, both for T-34/85 and BrownBAR, Panther may need change to 520MP/140FU, but in terms of cost-effectiveness, Panther surpass any soviet tank
what the hell is a brownbar? brumm =/= brown. i dont know why you keep insisting on saying the is2 should be equal with the tiger. they have different roles. tiger is better vs armor. is2 is better vs inf. build su85s if you want to kill armor. |
The only problem with molotovs is that the conscripts usually have to step out of cover to throw it. You'll lose half the squad almost immediately. If you happen to be fighting at a distance that's within the throw range, it's a pretty effective deterrent.
no need to exaggerate. we all know the lmg is good, but it doesnt do 240 damage "almost immediately". even within 10m it only does 17 dps. ill let you do the math.
It is disturbing how biased you r post is, you obviously don't play Soviets. Molotov are useless against lmg Grens only a fool would do that, you'll lose half of the squad charging them, and then retreat wasting manpower and munitions.lmg German come early enough to delay the Russian early game and can delay when armor comes out, have tried you the Soviet mortar? It is useless, but you wouldn't know that since you always use the German Turbo mortars or mortar Halftrack.
youve got plenty of bias in this post as well. i dont think anyone suggested charging an lmg from long range with a single conscript. he made the point that throwing a molotov stops the lmg from firing, which is true. if you see that as foolish, what is your solution? let it keep shooting you? the turbo mortar argument is also getting really old. the soviet mortar is more accurate. that means it takes less shots for it to hit its target. thats why the german mortar fires faster, it misses more. then at vet 1 just use precision strike and kill any weapon team you want in 1 shot. |
I too think grenadiers feel slightly weaker against conscripts after the damage change. I'd assume it mostly has to do with close range engagements where a lot of bullets that "miss" will still hit due to (lack of) scatter so the higher accuracy and firing rate do not fully compensate requiring one more bullet to kill a conscript.
as far as i know, small arms shots that miss cant hit due to scatter. the scatter is just for show. only tanks have collision detection on missed shots. infantry can only be hit by scatter by weapons with AOE.
The molotov also does not offer an audio warning until it is too late. DPS may calculate to be the same on paper but considering the many other factors in an engagement and the RND factor DPS is not a hard and fast rule. The way these units now operate has been changed and they are noticeably worse in games, as others in this thread are finding. WHY that is cannot exactly be explained but it has definitely occurred.
It is definitely easier for cons to dodge riflenades than it is for gren to dodge molotovs. Especially considering the retarded AI - where grens jump into the fire even when telling them to move away. More importantly a molotov forces the units to move and stay out of cover whereas the riflenade can be dodged with units moving safely back to cover.
i agree with you that the molotov gives cons an advantage over the rifle nade. however, i disagree that there is some mysterious unexplainable change in gren performance. this whole game is nothing but numbers. everything can be explained through stats. claiming there was some change no one can explain is a cop out people use. unless someone can come up with a valid argument as to why grens are now weaker, im skeptical to believe it.
all of the changes that were made to the gren are incorporated into our dps calculation. as everyone has said, dps hasnt changed significantly. what people may notice is the grenadiers damage is now less spiky. if the grens got lucky, 20 damage per shot meant the first volley could kill a conscript entity. now grens shoot faster and more accurately. this makes their dps more consistent and actually closer to the dps number. before, if grens got enough lucky hits, their actual dps would be much higher than their dps on paper. the flip side of that is, if they were unlucky, they could also do much lower than their paper dps. grens are simply more consistent now. |
It was the "Small arms dps" thread. Maybe make another thread asking him to clarify how they're being changed?
i think everyones just going to have to wait and see how theyre changing them  its the same reason they dont tell people specific changes before they release the patch. people misinterpret the changes and freak out. just look what happened with the small arms changes this patch. some people would start announcing which bulletins are op and broken before they try them. |
I believe as someone else mentioned that a reworking of Bulletins is being considered.
if im not mistaken, pqumsieh already posted somewhere that its not just being considered, its coming next patch. i cant remember what thread i saw this in though. it was somewhere in these forums. |
No I did not notice "wrong", because I called the IS2 in about 10-15 games since the last patch and it always got engine damage from panzerfaust even when shot from the front. I think your comment shows you have little experience with the unit.
you must have horrible luck then because the chances of that happening 10 times is .02%. 15 times in a row has a .0003% chance. there is obviously a much greater chance that you just arent noticing the failed fausts. |
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
