Profile of Gbpirate

I'm gonna drop this copy-pasted from the general balance feedback thread. Lots of quoted posts there so I apologize for the confusion.

To me, the ISU is a crutch in Soviet late game. If things are even, I am often relying on that thing to wipe squads. In much the same way it is or was a tactic to use Sturmtigers for the same role. Having to go forwards into battle, take a shot or two from a Jagd or Elefant, then having to retreat and repair, will make it more vulnerable to pushes more of the time, make it do less damage over time as it's forced to withdraw, and these two aspects combined will make it less useful when it is sorely needed.

Still, with this nerf to ISU152, one no longer needs to change rear armour because the main use of ISU152, which is to snipe units is in range of JP4 and heavy tank destroyers. Even a panther can take it on with a bit of closing in (50 range vs 60 HE mode).

Elefant and Jagdtiger are the best anti tank units in the team games, 2v2+ they completely shut down any sort of tank play, especially if supported well, but they are not OP. With the exception of the nuke ability on Jagd, elefant is weak to infantry and can be flanked if out of position.

When you're saying things like this, I agree, but I wonder why you think it's fine that ISU has lower range. Ele and Jagd can already shoot at it from the front and, I'm sure, reliably penetrate it at maximum range, let alone fifty range.

Not really. The 60 range nerf is not as bad as it seems.

it is bad because ISU is going to have to repair or be more vulnerable to pushes as it takes damage from its now shortened maximum range.

ISU-152's ability to snipe infantry from behind a wall of AT I would say is more impactful as you stop all ability to capture territory and also can deny VPs for infantry daring to step on that. The JT and Elefant are more devastating to vehicles, but they can't lock out a VP or territory from infantry on their own and bleed the opponent of infantry.

I raise you Jagdtiger's barrage ability, and, secondly, the Brummbär's (although less extreme but still with considerable range).

If anything, I'd like to keep the range as is but, to counter this, maybe increase scatter when attacking ground to make smoke more feasible?

I appreciate the response. Some additional thoughts for you and the team:

• Soviets rely on armor late game to counter vetted axis infantry. Having an Elephant or JT on the field sitting behind a defense shield negates their ability to operate, especially the ones that are good at AI, such as the T70 or T34. As such, I'd say that the Axis player could equally lockout territory by sitting and sniping with the Elephant or JT and using other armor or vetted infantry to hold points. Please consider applying a similar treatment to the Elephant or JT.
  
• What role, if any, does the KV2 have in the game?
  
  

Here's Napalm saying the same thing I said above, where Soviet vehicles are the wiping tools of the Soviets, not elite infantry squads with LMGs. When you have Ele and Jagd shutting down a sector of the map it's difficult or impossible to wipe axis squads with the anti-infantry oriented tanks that are so necessary. Same for USF, too, with the standard Sherman and 105mm howitzer Sherman.


I'm including this from Mr. Someguy because he has done the hard work for me already. I think the points he makes here and the numbers he provides illustrate just how difficult it can be in an evenly matched late game.

What I said in the Soviet thread fits here as well, since we are now talking about the Elefant and the ISU-152 and their respective positions in each Army.

Jump back to quoted post29 Nov 2020, 10:28 AMMr. Someguy

The Elefant and Jagdtiger are heavy casemate tank destroyers with 110 Rear Armor and 1040HP, the SU-85 cannot challenge them because it is woefully outranged and outgunned, so they must flank it with T-34-76 but this is not successful either because the immense HP and occasional bouncing mean that you could leave it idle and alone and it'll take a pair of T-34-76's twenty seconds to kill it.

Unlike facing the ISU-152, the Soviets don't have a Panther they can send forth to poke holes in the front or front sides without risking swift annihilation. An Elefant does 300 damage, so a shot to an SU-85 that dare challenge it will put it down to 340HP in a single counter-hit. An ISU does 240 damage, so if a Panther steps up to challenge it, a successful counter-hit will only put it down to 720.

It is very difficult for stock Soviet to deal with an Elefant that is completely unsupported, add in the fact that it absolutely will be supported and you've got something that is incredibly difficult or even outright impossible to remove. On the other hand, Ostheer and OKW both have a tank that can not only take a few hits to the face, but dish some out.

Let's pretend Axis can only field Panzer IV's and have to deal with an ISU-152. You still have a much easier time than the T-34-76 v Elefant: Panzer IV's higher penetration allows them to punch through the ISU's weaker rear armor 100% of the time from max range, while a T-34-76 is required to close in to medium-close range for a 100% chance to penetrate an Elefant from the back. Now factor in that the Panzer IV has blitz, and it is extremely easy to rush around the side of an ISU even if it starts reversing. But Ostheer/OKW doesn't even have to do this, because they have the Panther.

Soviets do not get that choice, and they still have it considerable harder. Had the Soviet's medium tank been the T-34-85 I would understand, but it's not. Lowering the ISU-152's rear armor to Elefant's does not level the playing field, it unbalances it. Here is statistical proof:

Panzer IV vs ISU-152 (Live)
125/115/110 Pen vs 155 Armor = 80%/74%/70% chance to penetrate.

T-34-76 vs Elefant/Jagdtiger
120/100/80 Pen vs 110 Armor = 109%/90%/72% chance to penetrate.

Panzer IV vs ISU-152 (Preview)
125/115/110 Pen vs 110 Armor = 113%/104%/100% chance to penetrate.

Now consider Axis also have access to Panzerschrecks which they could support their Panther or Panzer IV rush with, and you're dealing damage to the ISU at a rate far exceeding what a T-34-76 rush could do to an Elefant or Jagdtiger.

Overall, I think if only the ISU is going to be changed and it's going to receive both a rear armour nerf and a range nerf with it's HE ammunition, then it should also receive mobility/speed buffs, significant reduction to switch shell types, and/or a reload increase to AP rounds. This is all to counter the vulnerabilities that are being introduced to it.

To me, the ISU is a crutch in Soviet late game. If things are even, I am often relying on that thing to wipe squads. In much the same way it is or was a tactic to use Sturmtigers for the same role. Having to go forwards into battle, take a shot or two from a Jagd or Elefant, then having to retreat and repair, will make it more vulnerable to pushes more of the time, make it do less damage over time as it's forced to withdraw, and these two aspects combined will make it less useful when it is sorely needed.

Still, with this nerf to ISU152, one no longer needs to change rear armour because the main use of ISU152, which is to snipe units is in range of JP4 and heavy tank destroyers. Even a panther can take it on with a bit of closing in (50 range vs 60 HE mode).

Elefant and Jagdtiger are the best anti tank units in the team games, 2v2+ they completely shut down any sort of tank play, especially if supported well, but they are not OP. With the exception of the nuke ability on Jagd, elefant is weak to infantry and can be flanked if out of position.

When you're saying things like this, I agree, but I wonder why you think it's fine that ISU has lower range. Ele and Jagd can already shoot at it from the front and, I'm sure, reliably penetrate it at maximum range, let alone fifty range.

Not really. The 60 range nerf is not as bad as it seems.

it is bad because ISU is going to have to repair or be more vulnerable to pushes as it takes damage from its now shortened maximum range.

ISU-152's ability to snipe infantry from behind a wall of AT I would say is more impactful as you stop all ability to capture territory and also can deny VPs for infantry daring to step on that. The JT and Elefant are more devastating to vehicles, but they can't lock out a VP or territory from infantry on their own and bleed the opponent of infantry.

I raise you Jagdtiger's barrage ability, and, secondly, the Brummbär's (although less extreme but still with considerable range).

If anything, I'd like to keep the range as is but, to counter this, maybe increase scatter when attacking ground to make smoke more feasible?

I appreciate the response. Some additional thoughts for you and the team:

• Soviets rely on armor late game to counter vetted axis infantry. Having an Elephant or JT on the field sitting behind a defense shield negates their ability to operate, especially the ones that are good at AI, such as the T70 or T34. As such, I'd say that the Axis player could equally lockout territory by sitting and sniping with the Elephant or JT and using other armor or vetted infantry to hold points. Please consider applying a similar treatment to the Elephant or JT.
  
• What role, if any, does the KV2 have in the game?
  
  

Here's Napalm saying the same thing I said above, where Soviet vehicles are the wiping tools of the Soviets, not elite infantry squads with LMGs. When you have Ele and Jagd shutting down a sector of the map it's difficult or impossible to wipe axis squads with the anti-infantry oriented tanks that are so necessary. Same for USF, too, with the standard Sherman and 105mm howitzer Sherman.


I'm including this from Mr. Someguy because he has done the hard work for me already. I think the points he makes here and the numbers he provides illustrate just how difficult it can be in an evenly matched late game.

What I said in the Soviet thread fits here as well, since we are now talking about the Elefant and the ISU-152 and their respective positions in each Army.

Jump back to quoted post29 Nov 2020, 10:28 AMMr. Someguy

The Elefant and Jagdtiger are heavy casemate tank destroyers with 110 Rear Armor and 1040HP, the SU-85 cannot challenge them because it is woefully outranged and outgunned, so they must flank it with T-34-76 but this is not successful either because the immense HP and occasional bouncing mean that you could leave it idle and alone and it'll take a pair of T-34-76's twenty seconds to kill it.

Unlike facing the ISU-152, the Soviets don't have a Panther they can send forth to poke holes in the front or front sides without risking swift annihilation. An Elefant does 300 damage, so a shot to an SU-85 that dare challenge it will put it down to 340HP in a single counter-hit. An ISU does 240 damage, so if a Panther steps up to challenge it, a successful counter-hit will only put it down to 720.

It is very difficult for stock Soviet to deal with an Elefant that is completely unsupported, add in the fact that it absolutely will be supported and you've got something that is incredibly difficult or even outright impossible to remove. On the other hand, Ostheer and OKW both have a tank that can not only take a few hits to the face, but dish some out.

Let's pretend Axis can only field Panzer IV's and have to deal with an ISU-152. You still have a much easier time than the T-34-76 v Elefant: Panzer IV's higher penetration allows them to punch through the ISU's weaker rear armor 100% of the time from max range, while a T-34-76 is required to close in to medium-close range for a 100% chance to penetrate an Elefant from the back. Now factor in that the Panzer IV has blitz, and it is extremely easy to rush around the side of an ISU even if it starts reversing. But Ostheer/OKW doesn't even have to do this, because they have the Panther.

Soviets do not get that choice, and they still have it considerable harder. Had the Soviet's medium tank been the T-34-85 I would understand, but it's not. Lowering the ISU-152's rear armor to Elefant's does not level the playing field, it unbalances it. Here is statistical proof:

Panzer IV vs ISU-152 (Live)
125/115/110 Pen vs 155 Armor = 80%/74%/70% chance to penetrate.

T-34-76 vs Elefant/Jagdtiger
120/100/80 Pen vs 110 Armor = 109%/90%/72% chance to penetrate.

Panzer IV vs ISU-152 (Preview)
125/115/110 Pen vs 110 Armor = 113%/104%/100% chance to penetrate.

Now consider Axis also have access to Panzerschrecks which they could support their Panther or Panzer IV rush with, and you're dealing damage to the ISU at a rate far exceeding what a T-34-76 rush could do to an Elefant or Jagdtiger.

Overall, I think if only the ISU is going to be changed and it's going to receive both a rear armour nerf and a range nerf with it's HE ammunition, then it should also receive mobility/speed buffs, significant reduction to switch shell types, and/or a reload increase to AP rounds. This is all to counter the vulnerabilities that are being introduced to it.

Is there any discussion about Panzerfusiliers & their early panzerfaust? If I recall, changes to Volksgrenadier faust timing was to allow more openers for t1 soviets. Regardless, I always felt frustrated that panzerfusiliers come at 0 CPs and have that faust whereas volksgrenadiers do not.

I'd love for volks and panzerfusilier faust timing to be the same.

Is it possible to also have the faction that where in each game?

Do you mean statistics for matches as Ost vs UKF USF Sov and OKW va UKF USF Sov?

If so, this was one thing I considered but as I noticed how skewed the faction selection was I decided it wasn’t exactly worth it because the statistical significance of it would be slim-to-none. I wouldn’t be able to compare it to previous tournaments easily as I had not collected or looked at that data. Looking at seed upsets and ace games was easier to compare across all three tournaments and more meaningful because because of that reason.

I can't speak directly to this, but if you are interested in running a tournament, that's something that can be done! You could talk to still active organizers of previous 2v2s for support, advice, or perhaps even a partnership.

It's also much more difficult for casters to catch the action of four players rather than just two. And there might be another issue re: funds, where having a prizepool may attract more players, but rewards would be cut in half for each individual in a 2v2 format.