|
These vehicles have increased sight
M20
WC51
M8
These vehicles have increased sight once vetted
M3
m5
Stuart
Pathfinder and IR pathfinder have increased sight
ATG can get increased sight with take aim
Mark target will provide sight
Radio net will provide sight bonus
Raid tactics will provide sight bonus
Combined Arms will provide sight bonus |
|
Lets put comment Churchill here and comment of Comet in the other thread. |
|
Pre patch Tiger was OP.
Current Tiger is probably a victim of the OP allied TDs especially once vetted. |
Thread: Comet12 Jun 2020, 20:36 PM
I like it till there are craters everywhere. Then the MG DPS goes out the window and the main gun is still inconsistant. Other than that though, it's fast, gets emergency war speed, insane armor. Good for the price, just wish it didn't inevitiably fall off.
Even when there craters everywhere it has 2 great AI tools grenades and WP. |
(ISU AT capability) It's ok...
That is fine by me. As I said the original post is badly worded. |
|
Most support weapon have been nerfed to much and the contributes to blobs of infatry with brute force.
(pak howitzer is still op) |
I would not agree that the ISU152 AT performance is "great". Up to an OST P4 it pens 100%, OKW P4 and JP4 are still in the range I'd term reliable to very reliable (about 90% pen chance +5% equivalent for deflection) But for everything above that the ISU is "okay". Not bad, not great, but alright. The deflection corrected pen chances lie between 75-90% for heavies/Panther. However, there is the factor of low accuracy (combined with VERY high scatter, especially in the fog of war which makes shot against mediums and even the Panther miss often, scatter collisions less likely and ground targeting a real gamble). Plus the long reload that makes even the StuG perform better against mediums when it comes to DPS, and against heavies it is okay but far from great.
The more you need to shoot AP rounds, the less your ISU will pay off. SOV has better AT options than the ISU, and even if you compare it to Axis units that need to deal with often different unit designs the Axis tank performs better.
The more you have to use your ISU as AT, the less it will pay off.
(Talking about low ROF without taking into account damage is rather misleading a stug probably has better TTK than an Elephant vs a medium)
(accuracy is in line with Elephant and even get a vet bonus)
(ISU-152 has 120 guaranteed damage on hit vs any target regardless of armor)
If in your opinion it is not "great" I am fine with it, but saying that ISU-152 should be used Only for AI is simply BS. |
Compare to what and against what?
It takes more time for ISU to kill P4 then for SU-76.
Against late game armor above P4, its AT performance is bad, supplemental at best and incomparably lower then SU-85 which costs half.
If you say that about a unit with largest scatter and longest reload in game, I'd like to know your opinion about Brummbar. By that metric, we probably should completely redesign or remove brummbar from the game for how OP it is, wiping all squads in 1-2 shots with 100% accuracy.
Is this why despite ISU being used often in team games, literally no one uses it for AT ever regardless of opponents armor composition?
Also, no one in his right mind will use 90 muni to deal 240 dmg to a vehicle with a skill shot.
That's opinion, not a fact.
Its supplemental AT at best because of reasons above.
Ahhh the daily harassment was wondering when it was coming. Well this is a thread about the Tiger and I am not going derail it because you want to.
ISU-152 if extremely powerful unit and now matter how much spin you put on it will not change that.
If in your opinion it is UP feel free to start a thread complaining about it. I doubt you will find allot of people agreeing with you.
Play the game sometimes and use the units you try to argue, in your excel sheet every unit is OP, reality strikes a different image.
And the hilarious joke of the day we both know that I probably play more games yesterday than you did the last month.
|
It's not false, it is how the current ISU should be used(imo) to its full effect. Using it for AT doesn't nearly give you the reward as using it for AI, hence why i argue that using it for AT purposes is quite a waste of using the unit. This is especially so considering soviets have a much more powerfull AT unit nondoctrinally.
I still don't see any connection between the ISU's performance and the Tiger 1 performance considering they are massively different units in the game.
This is what you wrote and is very poorly worded:
ISU doesn't have the AT performance of a tiger, and should really only be used for AI.
It implies ISU-152 AT performance is bad which is not. On the other hand its AI performance is OP but that does not mean that it AT performance is bad.
With long range, high penetration, deflection damage and powerful AT shot ISU-152 has great AT even if its AI performance is even better.
The unit should be used for AI when there are soft targets and AT when there are hard targets. |
Well, here's a random thing on the SU-76 that might help it at least engage when its trying to run away. A bug-fix if you will.
-Firing Cone from 2 to 5
All other casemate TDs have a firing cone of 5, in addition to better horizontal traverse radius. If the firing cone gets standardized to the other vehicles, the SU-76 would be slightly better at engaging units that are slightly off center. From what I've seen, if the vehicle is not dead center with the SU-76, it won't fire- likely due to said firing cone.
This looks like a solid change one can start from here and see how it goes. |
0
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
Heartless Jäger 
