Login

russian armor

The new patch

4 Jan 2018, 13:29 PM
#61
avatar of Alphrum

Posts: 808

why do people keep comparing the Kt and the IS2, they are completely different in terms of teching cost and doctrinal. Your suppose to compare the is2 to the tiger
4 Jan 2018, 13:35 PM
#62
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

Waiting for all these "IS-2 is fine" players to post a video/replay of them using the IS-2 to the "Its as good as the King" and it not getting dunked on/missing all the time/Being a waste of time.

Until then the unit is way too trash with its high scatter, super insane low ROF, Pen and damage.


Show me otherwise.
why tiger 2 and not tiger 1 ?
4 Jan 2018, 13:59 PM
#63
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2

why tiger 2 and not tiger 1 ?


Even if we compare the IS-2 with the Tiger, the comparison is not in favor of the IS-2:
- The Tiger has six commanders
- After the recent patch the Tiger is really good: it kills the infantry perfectly, it is accurate when it shoots at the tanks, and now it has quite good mobility
- a useful first veterancy ability (unlike the IS-2)
4 Jan 2018, 14:08 PM
#64
avatar of Kharn

Posts: 264

The IS-2 might have good pen, and decent armor. But if it constantly misses I can hardly see how this matters. I see Tigers and KT's connect their shots all the time. The IS-2 always had a blind gunner.
4 Jan 2018, 14:44 PM
#65
avatar of FelixTHM

Posts: 503 | Subs: 1



This armor does not help, because almost all hits on the IS-2 are penetration. But at the same time he has a disgusting gun. That's why he has disgusting performance. Because this "armor" IS-2 does not buffed. Reduce the armor (it's almost always penetrated) and improve the performance of the gun. That's why I think Pershing is a very good tank: I don't expect armor protection, but great mobility and gun. IS-2: armor almost penetrated (it is rather a miracle that the armor is not penetrated), main gun is terrible, low mobility.


I call BS on this. IS2 has superb armour. I tried to counter an IS2 with double raketen because I went p4 instead of Panther. Raketens have 40% chance to pen and P4 like 30%. It did not end well. I couldn't faust him to stop him diving for my p4 because the first 6 shots bounced.

I had a moment of bad luck - but you don't see me claiming the IS2 is invulnerable?

In any case, IS2 has much higher armour than Tiger, and I personally like the IS2 far more than the Tiger.

But I think the reason why people always hate on the IS2 is that the Tiger actually comes together with useful Commanders, while most of the good Soviet commanders don't have IS2.

The other reason is that they only play one side and need to find an explanation for why they keep getting beaten. People who keep claiming a faction is OP should try actually playing it - then we could have a more rational discussion.
4 Jan 2018, 14:54 PM
#66
avatar of Kharn

Posts: 264



I call BS on this. IS2 has superb armour. I tried to counter an IS2 with double raketen because I went p4 instead of Panther. Raketens have 40% chance to pen and P4 like 30%. It did not end well. I couldn't faust him to stop him diving for my p4 because the first 6 shots bounced.

I had a moment of bad luck - but you don't see me claiming the IS2 is invulnerable?

In any case, IS2 has much higher armour than Tiger, and I personally like the IS2 far more than the Tiger.

But I think the reason why people always hate on the IS2 is that the Tiger actually comes together with useful Commanders, while most of the good Soviet commanders don't have IS2.

The other reason is that they only play one side and need to find an explanation for why they keep getting beaten. People who keep claiming a faction is OP should try actually playing it - then we could have a more rational discussion.


Wait wait wait, you mean people should this rationally? People should.. put on the other shoe?

This is asking far too much, haven't you see any political debate? I'm always right, and my side needs it!



+1 I play ALL factions. I overwhelmingly play allies lately because I'd rather get a game fast than wait.. and I really enjoyed the "flank shit " to win feeling that the allies had. Anytime I swapped to germans I got a bit bored...

Not saying allies are better or germans are boring. But in my opinion, I enjoy feeling like an underdog and pulling that win out! ... I also find the myth of how amazing german units and armor to be so overdone in video games that I'd rather see how other factions managed to defeat this titanic war machine. After all, that's why we're all still here :P
4 Jan 2018, 17:31 PM
#67
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

This is probably not one of the most populair ideas, but i think the mortar pit needs to be changed back to their previous form, and okw need to get their early retreat point back. Think this would increase the balance in large teamgames (3v3/4v4) a lot.


I can understamd the rationale behind early frp. However, why in god's name would you want old mortar pits back?
5 Jan 2018, 15:04 PM
#68
avatar of Chocoboknight88

Posts: 393

Originally, I was against the range nerfs the Mortar Pit, due to it's immobile nature, but once I got to use the Smoke Rounds with their vastly improved range, I no longer cared. It helps the British mount counter-offensives a lot better than before. Or at least, made them more interesting. Still... I wish Relic agreed to scuttling emplacements...
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

680 users are online: 680 guests
3 posts in the last 24h
4 posts in the last week
23 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48722
Welcome our newest member, asherllc
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM