Been playing a little bit of Ostheer lately and I'm liking the Tiger. I wanted to get some opinions on the tanks listed above because they're roughly equivalent "jack of all trades" heavy call ins.
Not going to include the Tiger Ace because that's kind of in a class of it's own.
I don't recall if the IS2 got a buff recently or not but it's been maligned for a while as being greatly inferior to the Tiger. I have the least experience with the IS2 myself. Pershing is excellent and so is the Tiger, in fact it's hard to decide which one I like better.
Pershing, Tiger, and IS2
27 Nov 2019, 20:52 PM
#1
Posts: 884
27 Nov 2019, 21:07 PM
#2
Posts: 1389 | Subs: 1
Disagree about IS-2. Currently really easy to get second veterancy on IS-2, and after that it definetly become better, than Tiger I. With third veterancy IS-2 becomes a deathmachine, which can beat almost everything, except heavy TD, if well microed.
From my game history after september match, i've got several IS-2 with more that 100 kills and third veterancy, but it is mainly in 4v4 and with Armored Assault Doctrine.
From my game history after september match, i've got several IS-2 with more that 100 kills and third veterancy, but it is mainly in 4v4 and with Armored Assault Doctrine.
27 Nov 2019, 21:12 PM
#3
Posts: 129
Been playing a little bit of Ostheer lately and I'm liking the Tiger. I wanted to get some opinions on the tanks listed above because they're roughly equivalent "jack of all trades" heavy call ins.
Not going to include the Tiger Ace because that's kind of in a class of it's own.
I don't recall if the IS2 got a buff recently or not but it's been maligned for a while has being greatly inferior to the Tiger. I have the least experience with. Pershing is excellent and so is the Tiger, in fact it's hard to decide which one I like better.
I am fairly sure the IS2 loses vs the Tiger I, but its AI is absolutely revolting. The thing erases infantry, and takes so much punishment. A Tiger will win, but only after the IS2 wiped all your screening infantry. I can't say much about the Pershing though, mostly cause I don't play with it very often.
27 Nov 2019, 21:14 PM
#4
Posts: 528 | Subs: 1
1. Tiger/IS2
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2. Pershing
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2. Pershing
27 Nov 2019, 21:14 PM
#5
Posts: 17884 | Subs: 8
I am fairly sure the IS2 loses vs the Tiger I, but its AI is absolutely revolting. The thing erases infantry, and takes so much punishment. A Tiger will win, but only after the IS2 wiped all your screening infantry. I can't say much about the Pershing though, mostly cause I don't play with it very often.
It doesn't lose to Tiger in 1v1, but it loses everywhere else, lower AI performance, lower AT DPS lower base range, but higher armor and slightly higher speed.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
27 Nov 2019, 21:15 PM
#6
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
 | Playercard of Overweight discord mod | |||||||||||||||
|
27 Nov 2019, 23:06 PM
#7
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
I don't recall if the IS2 got a buff recently or not but it's been maligned for a while as being greatly inferior to the Tiger.
According to who? IS2 has a 75 armor advantage over the Tiger...
Is2 is better than tiger and definitely better than Pershing imo
27 Nov 2019, 23:09 PM
#8
Posts: 5279
It doesn't lose to Tiger in 1v1, but it loses everywhere else, lower AI performance, lower AT DPS lower base range, but higher armor and slightly higher speed.
Higher pen though isn't it? Also that new vet shell is a nuke...
#stalinwept
27 Nov 2019, 23:34 PM
#9
Posts: 416 | Subs: 1
As a Red Orchestra player, I must post this: 
But really, the Tiger I and IS-2 are quite similar.
Tiger has a better RoF (5 second reload vs 6.4) and is faster.
IS-2 has better AI (the DShK is 3x better than most pintle MGs), and more armor.
Tiger hunts, Stalin breaks through. Other than that, they're pretty much mirrored. And they're both a little too good, IMO.
But really, the Tiger I and IS-2 are quite similar.
Tiger has a better RoF (5 second reload vs 6.4) and is faster.
IS-2 has better AI (the DShK is 3x better than most pintle MGs), and more armor.
Tiger hunts, Stalin breaks through. Other than that, they're pretty much mirrored. And they're both a little too good, IMO.
27 Nov 2019, 23:48 PM
#10
Posts: 309 | Subs: 1
Imo, Pershing has the best dmg output (meaning it is a wipe machine even more so than the others), IS2 has an insane survivability and Tiger is the middle ground.
Have you ever woken up in the middle of the night, totally shaken and lost, because in your dream you were hearing Katyushas firing?
28 Nov 2019, 05:05 AM
#11
Posts: 1794
IS2 Pershing Tiger in that order.
Pershing needs more micro but very fun to use wiping Wehr infantry
IS2 is just a tanky tank and dominate late games.
Tiger is a good fatboy P4, but needs vet3 to get its gun to turbo up. Its pretty much zone out by 60td mostly. Much needed to supplement weaker axis infantry sadly.
Pershing needs more micro but very fun to use wiping Wehr infantry
IS2 is just a tanky tank and dominate late games.
Tiger is a good fatboy P4, but needs vet3 to get its gun to turbo up. Its pretty much zone out by 60td mostly. Much needed to supplement weaker axis infantry sadly.
28 Nov 2019, 05:47 AM
#12
Posts: 255
Permanently Banned
sovietsIS2 is overpriced, survivability low.It comes late and it is slow, meaning u cant pull it out quick enough from danger.
And who repairs it? U need like 3 Engenieers to constantly repair it. Thats 15 pop wasted on units that do nothing but repair.
28 Nov 2019, 13:50 PM
#13
Posts: 5279
It comes late and it is slow, meaning u cant pull it out quick enough from danger.
And who repairs it? U need like 3 Engenieers to constantly repair it. Thats 15 pop wasted on units that do nothing but repair.
If you are going to troll, at least try and make it good for the rest of our enjoyment yea?
#stalinwept
28 Nov 2019, 14:32 PM
#14
Posts: 4474
u sure ?
It doesn't lose to Tiger in 1v1, but it loses everywhere else, lower AI performance, lower AT DPS lower base range, but higher armor and slightly higher speed.
katitof-2018
Katitof-2018
Katitof-2018
28 Nov 2019, 15:57 PM
#15
Posts: 177
I really think that the armor on IS2 should be brought down and it should receive some other buff as compensation. The p5 does not have enough pen to fulfill the TD role against IS2 unlike its "counterparts" Jackson and Su85 vs Tiger. This always forces ostheer player to go for tiger instead of teching up and getting p5 if SOV goes for IS2. This is so stupid as these two factions are forced to just go heavies in 1v1 because they know the other one is gonna go for one. Its super boring and should be fixed.
28 Nov 2019, 16:34 PM
#16
Posts: 3260
The heavy tank field is a bit warped right now.
The IS-2's position is heavily warped by being up against OKW and OST TDs, most of which are geared towards high DPS and low penetration. In the past, this was offset by the IS-2's 13 CP timing and it being total dogshit.
That's no longer the case.
If the enemy goes for the IS-2, you have two choices:
1: Go for a Panther.
» You skip the anti-infantry medium armour you rely on to keep up in the manpower battle.
» You get a vehicle that's only really any good for fighting tanks, and the only tank they have is the IS-2.
» Your Panther doesn't actually counter the IS-2.
2: Go for a Tiger.
» You skip the anti-infantry medium armour you rely on to keep up in the manpower battle.
» You get a vehicle that's can fight the IS-2 and is also a good infantry counter.
» Your Tiger doesn't actually counter the IS-2, but you can keep up in the manpower battle again.
If you take the IS-2 out of the equation, the value of these other units changes substantially. The Tiger is a better Panther, but it's not a better double StuG.
The IS-2's position is heavily warped by being up against OKW and OST TDs, most of which are geared towards high DPS and low penetration. In the past, this was offset by the IS-2's 13 CP timing and it being total dogshit.
That's no longer the case.
If the enemy goes for the IS-2, you have two choices:
1: Go for a Panther.
» You skip the anti-infantry medium armour you rely on to keep up in the manpower battle.
» You get a vehicle that's only really any good for fighting tanks, and the only tank they have is the IS-2.
» Your Panther doesn't actually counter the IS-2.
2: Go for a Tiger.
» You skip the anti-infantry medium armour you rely on to keep up in the manpower battle.
» You get a vehicle that's can fight the IS-2 and is also a good infantry counter.
» Your Tiger doesn't actually counter the IS-2, but you can keep up in the manpower battle again.
If you take the IS-2 out of the equation, the value of these other units changes substantially. The Tiger is a better Panther, but it's not a better double StuG.
28 Nov 2019, 16:48 PM
#17
Posts: 17884 | Subs: 8
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
28 Nov 2019, 17:08 PM
#18
Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6
It doesn't lose to Tiger in 1v1, but it loses everywhere else, lower AI performance, lower AT DPS lower base range, but higher armor and slightly higher speed.
The IS-2 does lose to the Tiger I actually, because the Tiger's much higher DPM makes up for the lower penetration chances. The TTK is, quite significantly, in favour of the Tiger I. AI performance is similar I'd say, the IS-2 hits harder but the Tiger I hits more often. The IS-2 has a huge armor/durability advantage though, because the Axis have trouble reliably penetrating 375 armor.
28 Nov 2019, 17:50 PM
#19
Posts: 682
Is2 loses against everything else. It needs more armor.
/s
28 Nov 2019, 18:45 PM
#20
Posts: 5279
To be honest, for the panther... Wouldn't buffing its pen be acceptable? Hear me out. It's only got 50 range but also already always pens allied stock tanks less brit end tier shit.... That would give both factions something that is reliable as hell against the few allied heavies. Adjustments would be needed to keep them from over running team games (hard cap of 2?)
Allied factions got their answer to heavily armored targets (overly so) but the axis are both geared almost entirely towards lightly armored mediums. The panthers cost and a restriction of build could really allow it to shine in the role it's supposed to. A hard limit on units that are difficult to balance has proven great for the game, I think we should build on it
Allied factions got their answer to heavily armored targets (overly so) but the axis are both geared almost entirely towards lightly armored mediums. The panthers cost and a restriction of build could really allow it to shine in the role it's supposed to. A hard limit on units that are difficult to balance has proven great for the game, I think we should build on it
#stalinwept
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
111 | ||
|
|
|
|
64 | ||
|
|
|
|
35 | ||
 |
|
|
20 | ||
 |
|
|
16 | ||
|
|
|
|
46 | ||
 |
|
|
38 | ||
|
|
|
|
3 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.968562.633+23
- 2.555227.710+11
- 3.28843.870+2
- 4.275110.714+13
- 5.249134.650+2
- 6.259143.644+3
- 7.249150.624+10
- 8.19265.747+5
- 9.14138.788+16
- 10.506.893-1
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
7
Download
735
Board Info
7 posts in the last 24h
40 posts in the last week
149 posts in the last month
40 posts in the last week
149 posts in the last month
Registered members: 44935
Welcome our newest member, Chovanec
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Chovanec
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM