Not really.
I don't even like ISU, so the only time I see it is if its being built against me.
I don't like basing my whole strat around a single unit that comes extremely late.
What I can't stand however is complete and utter hypocrisy of german only players and their approach of "asymmetric balance is good as long as its german unit that is stronger" bullshit.
Everyone complains about ele being too strong ever since it was a stock T4 none doctrinal unit.
Same complaints are about ISU.
The only difference is, ele was used pretty much always while ISU was used only in "lol I've beat you so hard that I can field ISU" games and now that it fights armor better(not even 50% better, because armor and/or mobility of vehicles went up as well) its suddenly op.
Neither of 100 range units should be in game, but at the time relic didn't give two shits about balance, only what was "fun" to them completely and utterly ignoring negative feedback about these two units.
At least I'm not mad enough to defend "LOL you can't build any armor now and if you have T4 you can quit game" unit. Infantry weakness would be an excuse if soviets had effective AT inf. They don't and you need to be a fucking retard to ever loose ele, meanwhile grens with MG42 and likely an ostwind support will push everything off the map effortlessly, because soviet player can't use half of his arsenal only because of one indestructible unit.
So stop being a double standard hypocrites.
As I've said numerous times now, either both are OP or none of them is.
You're calling it hypocricy but it's not. They are not the same unit. An elephant does not negate all armor instantly despite your penchant for exaggeration. An elephant is not counterless and is not invincible. It is very useful, too useful to not get one in a team game, but this is predominantly because of the rest of the game's balance. The Elephant needs to be made less necessary, but that is a product of other units not performing as well as the Elephant. If you actually just nerfed the Ele and ISU right now I think the balance might actually get worse than it currently is.
We have made the point numerous times already in various threads, but the ISU's ability to destroy infantry and weapon teams is more powerful and useful than the Elefant's ability to destory tanks. The ISU's cost increaes over the elephant would be justified even if it was a horrible AT vehicle barely capable of destroying a scout car. Infantry and weapons teams are extremely important parts of any combined arms strategy. The soviets certainly don't have high powered AT infantry beyond the early game, but this is missing the forest for the trees. Soviet infantry which can laugh in the face of an elephant IS capable of destroying German infantry and German weapons teams. They are capable of capping points and winning games. It's capable of destroying the support that keeps the Elefant safe. And Soviet weapons teams, which the Elephant is also hopeless at damaging, can do real damage to the Elefant. Germany armor that is not backed up by infantry will be destroyed easily by a competent player. This is why the ISU's ability to one-shot infantry and weapons teams is more game-brekaing than what the Elefant can do. It is NOT hypocricy to point this out.
As a matter of principle I WOULD like to see both units not only nerfed but utterly abolished.
0
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
