How is ISU-152 fair tank?

#1
1 year ago

I don't want this thread to turn into some mumbo jumbo , Germany OP so we need ISU-152 or , you just hate Russians etc ( I don't , I play both Axis and Allies and I've tested this tank and i can say that its quite OP )

Main issues:

  • Strong VS tanks ( Russian equivalent of Elephant / Jagtiger)
  • Long Range ( Same thing )
  • Deals strong Infantry damage ( WAIT WHAT? )

Yes, the main thing that i want to discuss is, why does a Long Range, Anti Tank Elite unit that is expensive and quite utilized Gun platform, have ability to deal shitton of Anti-infantry damage, while same versions of other nations DO NOT have this possibility?

HOW IS THIS FAIR?

Comments

  • #3
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,824
    @C3Tooth not to be nit picky but the is-2 has the same armour as the KT. Minor detail in an otherwise great post
  • #4
    1 year ago

    Alright I can accept this, but there is an issue with Elephant always leaving enemy SU-s and other tanks with a scratch ( around 10% of health surviving) which usually means they get away

    With ISU you know you have 3 shot guarantee tank kill and safety vs infantry aswell, which elefant can't even approach

    Thanks for reply lads :)

  • #5
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,824
    > @VampirePrince said:
    > Alright I can accept this, but there is an issue with Elephant always leaving enemy SU-s and other tanks with a scratch ( around 10% of health surviving) which usually means they get away
    >
    > With ISU you know you have 3 shot guarantee tank kill and safety vs infantry aswell, which elefant can't even approach
    >
    > Thanks for reply lads :)

    Elefant and Jagdtiger both deal 300 damage per shot, most tanks have 640hp so a normal tank will be left with 40 health.
    Isu deals 240 damage iirc, so 3 shots to kill is correct. But it can't engage infantry and armour at the same time. What's more is that it's not the most reliable against armour.

    For the axis you are paying to guaranteed pen enemy tanks, the isu you are paying to kill infantry and help against tanks.
  • #6
    1 year ago
    38Lightning38Lightni… Posts: 512
    > @VampirePrince said:
    > I don't want this thread to turn into some mumbo jumbo , Germany OP so we need ISU-152 or , you just hate Russians etc ( I don't , I play both Axis and Allies and I've tested this tank and i can say that its quite OP )
    >
    > Main issues:
    >
    >
    > * Strong VS tanks ( Russian equivalent of Elephant / Jagtiger)
    > * Long Range ( Same thing )
    > * Deals strong Infantry damage ( WAIT WHAT? )
    >
    > Yes, the main thing that i want to discuss is, why does a Long Range, Anti Tank Elite unit that is expensive and quite utilized Gun platform, have ability to deal shitton of Anti-infantry damage, while same versions of other nations DO NOT have this possibility?
    >
    > HOW IS THIS FAIR?

    Kind of like axis 88mm anti tank gun.
    It permenaty shoots through objects with no cooldown and cannot be hit by anti tank guns.

    But anyway vehicles that are multi role I feel should be toggled between ammunition types or clearly better against one over the other.
    Like Sherman's being almost on par with panzer4 vs infantry only slightly better with he wider splash but still very clearly not equal vs armor despite panzer4 not needing to switch amunition type. Which I dont understand. Only to later be completely outclassed by panther which again despite "lower" infantry damage once armore has been successfully disposed of can continue to clear machine gun locations unlike a true tank destroyer which are forced to play cautiously as they will lose out in a slugfest and cannot do even minor damage to infantry for any kind of support. Dealing with the elephants and jagtiger your likely to have your vet 3 tank destroyer constantly pushed into a corner with infantry chasing you down.
    So "multi role" in my opinion needs a better look at for their own niche.
  • #7
    1 year ago
    38Lightning38Lightni… Posts: 512
    Expanding on my thought process from earlier.
    ISU-152 since it is actually a tank destroyer should be treated as one. Its main thing should be able to do damage without the need of penetrating armor due to the shear size of the HE shells which would be consider it's own niche as a unit but it would still do less damage then the true heavy tank destroyers. As far as damage vs infantry it could always be tweaked like for instance a larger radius of damage but slightly less damage overall but maintaining it as a multi role unit.

    Sherman's as a multi role unit I'm always iffy with. It's just ok. I would lower its pen but give it a slightly faster turret rotation and increase reload speed this would allow He shells to do more damage vs infantry and when using ap amunition it would be a much better unit specializing in flanking as once your behind the other tank faster reload speed you have the upper hand and solidify this as an infantry support tank.


    T34 76mm multie role is a bit more of a head on fighter compaired to Sherman with better pen but weaker vs infantry units I would think this unit could toggle to hvap rounds like sherman 76mm or get a 30 munition cost to use. easy fix as this is what I hear alot of soviets complain about it not being able to go toe to toe with a panzer and solidify it as an anti tank medium brawler much like the puma is a long range light anti tank for a niche.
  • #8
    1 year ago
    ComradComrad Posts: 128

    ISU-152 is not a tank destroyer

  • #9
    1 year ago
    38Lightning38Lightni… Posts: 512
    edited July 2019
    No it is an assault gun bunker buster that doubled as one

    Thus the multi role units

    But if you want me to I can add in it was also used as a heavy mobile artillery piece.
  • #10
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,824
    Having played the game for years, I have seen many versions of the Isu, from only good against infantry (rather God tier against infantry) with 100 range, but unable to fight off a lone p4 to omnipotent fuck up everything and if you get 2 it's GG.
    The reason it's multirole however in a balance sense is that it's too hard to get your value out of a strictly AI unit of that cost without it being broken op wipe factory. The KV-2 had a similar problem.
    Dual role means it doesn't have to be an AI obliterator to be worth it and split rounds mean there is counter play.
    It's the only way to balance such a unit.
  • #11
    1 year ago
    38Lightning38Lightni… Posts: 512
    The only other rout would be to make ability changes or upgrade options to to give them different distinctions.
  • #12
    1 year ago

    This is actually an issue that I want to pinpoint to be increasing issue, with Allies getting more and more all-rounder vehicles that at some moments prove MUCH more efficient ( not due combined arms but due simplicity in use ) making them easier to blob and generally outperform Axis counterpart with simplicity of so called, Outplay*

  • #13
    1 year ago
    C3ToothC3Tooth Posts: 914

    Can counter play at anytime because of dual role, yes. Simplicity, no.
    Dual role can take care of themselves when there are no other unit. But never effective.
    One role unit need another unit to help them from their enemy that they cant fight, but always effective.


    Ostwind & Pzgren 2schreck vs Sherman & Lieu 1Bar 1Zook.
    . (AI vehicle & AT infantry vs dual role vehicle & infantry)
    Tell me the fight between those 2 forces, which one is easier to play. While enemy will have to think either Sherman change AT round with Lieu 1 Zook take Ostwind first, or Sherman change HE round with Lieu 1 Bar take PzGren first. You know when they're in contact, Ostwind take the Lieu, PzGren take the Sherman.


    2 Fallschrim vs Sherman & Lieu 1Bar 1Zook
    . (AI infantry focus vs dual role vehicle & infantry)
    If come at the flank, you will ensure Lieu will be whipped. And 2 Fall squads can retreat perhaps lower than 40% hp. Congrats you just lose ~200manpower while enemy lose 280manpower (not counting ammo)
    Spam 1 role units is to whip certain units. Combine arms is to prevent all target. A unit is whipped hurt more than low health units. A unit is spammable when they have 1 role.


    2 SturmPz, 2 PzGren 2schrek vs SturmPz, Panther, Assgren, PzGren 2schrek
    . (AI vehicle focus & AT infantry focus vs AI vehicle, AT vehicle, AI infantry, AT infantry)
    Both sides have single role units. But one has 1 type units, one has both type units. Guess which force is easier to play? Yes the 1st force. Spam 1 type of unit (vehicle or infantry) having 1 role (AT or AI) is easier to play, which lead to spammable.


    You lose to dual role combined arm units force, means you're outplay
    You lose to a spamming of 1 single type unit that have a single roles, you're not outplayed.

  • #14
    1 year ago
    SlayerSlayer Posts: 132

    For full historical background of ISU152 (and other Soviet vehicles ingame)

Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

  • © SEGA. SEGA, the SEGA logo, Relic Entertainment, the Relic Entertainment logo, Company of Heroes and the Company of Heroes logo are either trademarks or registered trademarks of SEGA Holdings Co., Ltd. or its affiliates. All rights reserved. SEGA is registered in the US Patent and Trademark Office. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

DeutschEnglishEspañolFrançaisItalianoРусский