Your steam ID is currently set to private. If you go to your profile select "update profile" and change "steam visibility" to "public" it should allow your playercard to display.
Oh lmao I didn't know that, done it should be visible now.
They are effective when a unit is very close to those infantry squads. They aren't effective far. That is often a snare region and again it puts the unit into a grater risk.
Yeah I mentioned flanking Team Weapons right? Never mentioned that it was supposed to mainly fight infantry.
Another wehraboo who wants Allied nerfs and Axis buffs this is surprisingly new.
Your knowledge of opposing factions seems very limited.
I don't see much sense discussing things with U before You start using, for example, panzerwerfer yourself. Your knowledge of axis factions seems very superficial. Can U show Your player card?
Your claims for balance seems more biased towards axis, looks like you are just another axis fanboy and this is merely another axis fanboy vs allied fanboy thread.
Also do humor me you believe Katyusha has better wiping capabilities than Panzerwerfer? This goes on to say your experience in the game.
As for the player card xD I wouldn't have asked for yours if mine was private lmao I can't figure out how you can't see my card since I linked it to this account from day 1.
calling a Panther mediocre AI, mediocre to what an AEC?
Panther has 2 mgs that have 0.7 near accuracy and they play a major role in killing infantry or decrewing TW.
I just don't agree. Soviets are much more versatile and their units trade much better. Watch tourneys and see for yourself. You can't just debunk every argument of a person who writes all that based on actual gameplay with all factions and watching hundreds of game replays, etc. I'm trying to pinpoint why it is easier to play with Soviets than it is to play with both Axis factions. If you believe that playing with axis is easier, we probably won't find common ground when discussing the game in its current state. Allies are easier to play with, and to me it is just a fact.
ISU is imo just an example of a very potent dual purpose unit with crazy range and armour, and not that bad mobility. It exists in doctrines with stuff like mark target, guards button and off maps. If you just don't see how powerful and imbalanced that is you are imo just almost blind. If ISU could deal with only infantry it would be an assymetrical counterpart to Elphant/Ferdinant. That would actually be ok as it wouldn't overlap with other doctrine tied abilities. In its current state it is just a bad design in relation to other units from opposing factions.
I just find it really difficult to discuss stuff which is based on advice "just rush it with panther". It is so biased and not acknowledging a simple fact how much better one should be to pull sth like that off.
How are soviets versatile? None of their units can stand up to axis units in late game; cons are just paper scripts even with 7 men and penals lack snaring since their satchel requires small distance and with ptrs they are very bad against AI. Whereas you get grens with sniping capability, rifle nade, bunker building and forward med healing. This is the backbone infantry.
SU-85 is AT only and no one in his sane mind would field T34 to counter pz4. Katyusha is ineffective in wiping infantry as compared to Pzwrfr. T70 is infantry only and SU-76 is AT only. Maxim has worse arc and suppresses slower. Yes very versatile. You cannot consider a tourney of top 20 players and generalize it for the rest of 50-60k player base and all the 4 modes.
If you think rushing with panther is idiotic how do you plan on killing an Elefant? Anything else with 70 range and enough HP to counter elefant except 17 pounder? You call this commander powerful it is an exact counter part of Elefant doctrine which provides scopes, imagine scopes on 70 range 300 dmg 400 frontal armor machine. Stuka dive bomb, stun on Elefant and recon.
You cry for asymmetricity because elefant does not have AI? That has to be one of the most stupid debate on this thread. Do you see any AI on stock SU-85 and it being a casemate? Do you see anyone crying about SU-85 that does not have AI and all the other OST tanks pz4, panther and a stock OP AI tank in brummbar has AI? good going mate! Do share your player card just so I know I am not wasting my time here.
I have no idea where you want to go with this one, especially since you continue to critique the AT capabilities. You are describing the obvious what 10+ have already iterated beforehand: You get the most value if your ISU shoots HE rounds at infantry for as long as possible.
What you are describing is the difference between a dedicated tank destroyer and a hybrid unit. With the same logic (ISU's AI is very good, the AT is allegedly bad) I could argue that the Elefant needs a big buff in the AI department, because it did not even kill a model after 10 shots. Regarding your calculation examples: A unit with 960 health would need 4 shots from both Elefant AND ISU (assuming all penetrate of course). Similarly, mediums take 3 shots to kill. The Elefant had 320 damage before and was nerfed to 300 to achieve exactly that. The main difference is in the snare potential that you need to back the units up with.
You also should know that the ISU does deflection damage which somewhat compensates the mediocre AT (or better to say penetration) of the unit.
You need to understand that just as Panther is mediocre in AI and pretty good at AT, Pz is good at AT and AI. Su-85 has non existent AI and pretty good at AT, T-34 mediocre AI and AT. Now what I want you to understand from this statement is that all the Axis tanks have both AI and AT whereas Soviet has to field SU-85 specifically which lacks AI. Elefant and ISU fits perfectly in this jigsaw where Elefant has no AI and ISU has pretty good AI and mediocre AT for 260 fuel. I don't want to simplify this anymore.
Also in regards to snare Axis have the best of snares and it is the pivot of their structure whereas Allies suffer from it and have to spend fuel to upgrade for snares.
I don't know if I understand what you want to say. Please rephrase this, because the only thing I got is that if Axis have a resource lead, they will also have more units/vehicles out, which is not surprising.
If your point is that stalling for a heavy is not worth it then don't do it? But again, maybe rephrase this because I don't know what you want to say.
I never said stalling for a heavy is not worth it xD, I am calling out players who gift territory control to soviet players who are stalling for ISU and let them accumulate 260 fuel without pushing him out of territories with pz4 and pzwfr.
If MMX's unit stats are correct, the ISU has actually the same accuracy and a better scatter area profile than the Elefant, so it's safe to assume that the ISU will hit more often. The AP shell uses different stats than the HE shell, so while the HE shell indeed has a large scatter area, the AP shell is more "accurate".
Yes ISU has the same accuracy and scatter as Elefant, but the main role of ISU is hitting infantry with TS:<1 whereas Elefant is hitting target with TS: >23. do let me know which will be more effective at max range.
As for the AT of ISU, it is a joke, my ISU once bounced on a vet 2 okw panzer frontally at max range imagine that, its penetration value is a joke most of the time it bounces off frontally on tiger 2,tiger and panthers, all of them have over 900 HP which means they will take 4 shots or more of ISU to be destroyed at the slow reload rate of itself. Elefant has 300 damage where except brits no one has tanks of over 640 HP which means 2 shots from elefant, it also has a stun feature that stuns the tank for few seconds when the victim tank is already on half of its HP by the first shot.
This is a very thin argument. Following this train of thought, all heavies could also act as game enders again because you did not push enough beforehand.
In a somewhat even game, it is often viable to sacrifice some CP in order to push resources more heavily and go for a heavy tank instead. I'm not saying that it were impossible to deny heavies by constant pushing, but brushing it off by saying "push more and you won't see a heavy ever" just does not work. Especially not in team games where fuel is not as limited due to caches.
My argument was based on the fact that if the Soviet is stalling for a heavy, the Axis can hold the resources and mostly fuel until then? because of no tanks or support so if they do have resources held for a long time they can easily make 2 panthers to rush ISU and save one of them and still have fuel reserves from the territorial occupancy.Thing is nothing in this game needs rebalancing its like introducing VAR in football which destroys half of the fun.
It is accurate enough to bleed opponents hard.
Yes a 260 fuel gun should do that, it would be sad to invest 260 into a unit and watch it kill a gren squad in 4 hits don't you think? It already bounces frontally on panthers, tigers and bounces 7/10 times on a Elefants frontal armor, so you see it is not that good in AP as it is good in HE.
Panther is only 75 fuel less expensive. The difference in armour, range and anty infantry potential seem to be greater than the price difference. Panther looks bleak here imo.
Also I cannot comprehend how you are unable to understand basic english language. 1v1 here signifies ISU-152 v panther only and no other unit on the map. Here panther beats ISU easily.
With support as in actual battlefield yes it is difficult to push but that's where your teammates should come to help since the presence of ISU, elefant affect all the players on the map and not just the opponent and the owner of these guns.
Generally, 70 range unit that can deal with both target types is a bit OP imo and follows the pattern of many Soviet dual purpose units.
I don't think that stalling for a heavy tank is such a bad idea, especially if you can have a mixture of t70s and ZiSs to deal with most threats anyway.
Soviet dual purpose units? Is there anything as such? T-70 is good against infantry and pz2/222 but comes around 3-4 minutes late as compared to them. T-34 bounces most of the time on pz4 and has inferior AI, it is ineffective against panthers. SU-85. Axis has the best multirole tanks panther can decrew an AT after flanking it, Pz4 can decrew it frontally with 1-2 good shots and they both fair great against T-34. If SU-85 gets flanked by any of these it is as good as dead.
You need to understand the point here, to counter a panther Soviet has to go SU-85 which is ineffective against infantry whereas panther and pz4 both are good in AI and AT both and brummbar god like AI which Soviet lack. Hence ISU fulfills the role here by providing both of it.
Imo the problem is different. Very often an mg, pak, mortar crews or infantry won't be full health. Your scenario is highly unrealistic. Axis units will be fighting other frontline units while ISU will be adding damage. If ISU deals 80% damage, any other frontline squad will easily finish the job ar ISU will finish off a squad that is fighting other squads.
Panther won't beat ISU unless Soviet player just lost all his support. Panther will be likely snared when diving and ISU will just shoot from afar adding additional damage, or will use mark target (imo then it deals even more damage than elephant).
Both above scenarios are very likely. The problem is that ISU will be able to do both jobs from 70 distance. It is a balance problem imo. It is too good at dealing with all threats.
The 80% health damage done by ISU was a RNG stuff it does not usually happen, at long range the scatter of ISU shots come to effect and it gets fairly inaccurate at hitting both Infantry and Armor at max 70 range.
I mentioned 1v1 of ISU and Panther, I don't know how panther will be snared in a 1v1. I also dont understand why a top 400 player will push ISU if it is supported by infantry. I dont want to get into this ISU vs Panther discussion it is idiotic.
It is not a balance problem, if you let your opponent stall for 260 fuel and have even control of the map while the Soviet guy saved up his 260 fuel, you need introspection rather than balancing of ISU.