is2-1944 is garbage at its br

[MurkyShallows]

205mm of pen with 27 second reload is an absolute joke a 6.3

[kamikazi21358]

It isn’t bad at 6.3, it just isn’t as good as the other 6.3s like the Tiger II. Br decompression would fix this.

[The Bone Zone]

Originally posted by kamikazi21358:

It isn’t bad at 6.3, it just isn’t as good as the other 6.3s like the Tiger II. Br decompression would fix this.

I doubt that would fix the problem, the only real advantage the IS-2 1944 has over the normal is-2 is a better UFP, but the turret armor and the LFP are still the same, you can also add the top mounted mg but that doesn't make that much of a difference.

If you start comparing it to its 6.3 counterparts its seriously lacking in.... almost all aspects, when it comes to armor the Tiger II P outclasses it in all aspects, and the Super Pershing only has a weaker UFP, but thats still really good at range, while the IS-2 44 has a huge turret thats only 100mm thick.

When it comes to the gun, in terms of flat pen both the long 88mm and long 90mm outclass it, when it comes to pen at angles than yes, the IS-2 beats both of them, but there are few things that really need that much pen to kill, both the 88 and 90 can deal with whatever the IS-2 can.

When it comes to reload time, both beat it, hell the Tiger II P which has an overall better gun pen shoot 2 rounds in the time it takes an IS-2 to shoot one.

The only thing it has better than both of these 2 tanks is a better HP/T ration, but even so it only has 11 HP/Tone while the tiger II P has 10.2 and the Super Pershing has about 10 per tonne.

Even with br decompresion this tank will still be lacking compared to its counterparts, probably the best thing to do would be to move it to 6.0 ass all tanks that can kill the IS-2 should have no problem taking care of the IS-2 44, or we could give it back the BR-471D, but if you look back at the ♥♥♥♥ show that happened when it first was added with all the wheraboos screaming and crying about how unfair it was, even tho it only gave the russians a gun on par at least in pen with the Tiger II P, even tho it was still lacking in terms of armor and reload time.

[kamikazi21358]

Originally posted by Garfield:

I doubt that would fix the problem, the only real advantage the IS-2 1944 has over the normal is-2 is a better UFP, but the turret armor and the LFP are still the same, you can also add the top mounted mg but that doesn't make that much of a difference.

The LFP is increased by 22.5mm RHAe as well, which although isn’t too much, it does make things difficult at range and for some tanks.

Originally posted by Garfield:

If you start comparing it to its 6.3 counterparts its seriously lacking in.... almost all aspects, when it comes to armor the Tiger II P outclasses it in all aspects, and the Super Pershing only has a weaker UFP, but thats still really good at range, while the IS-2 44 has a huge turret thats only 100mm thick.

It only lacks specifically for one reason, and that is BR compression. The tank is better than all 6.0s, and it is not a bad 6.3. It’s like the M26 for example, it is a fun 6.3 and worth playing, but technically speaking, like the T26E1-1 being moved to 6.3 also, or the T-44 reciving APCBC and having that APCBC buffed, the IS-2 obr. 1944 was an excellent 6.3 and now it’s just a good one because 6.7s like the Tiger II (P) were moved down.

The mentioned are specifically stronger than 6.0 tanks however, and 5.0s vs a IS-2 obr. 1944 will be absolutely brutal — moving it down will only generate more BR compression. You have this new separate class of tank at 6.3, two different strengths between weak 6.3 and strong 6.3, that effects multiple tanks. BR decompression will fix this, as will it fix many things.


Also that 100mm turret is very rounded and only is 100mm at a small area, so hitting that place can be quite trollish.

Originally posted by Garfield:

When it comes to the gun, in terms of flat pen both the long 88mm and long 90mm outclass it, when it comes to pen at angles than yes, the IS-2 beats both of them, but there are few things that really need that much pen to kill, both the 88 and 90 can deal with whatever the IS-2 can.

It isn’t a bad gun however, the gun is quite effective up to even 7.3 with APHEBC. It’s, as I mentioned, “a good gun but now no longer the best because of tanks being moved down.’

Originally posted by Garfield:

When it comes to reload time, both beat it, hell the Tiger II P which has an overall better gun pen shoot 2 rounds in the time it takes an IS-2 to shoot one.

It has to be pointed out though, although the 8.8cm is still better, the shear damage of the 122mm has to be a factor. It trades reload in for a shell that liquifies what it penetrates.

Originally posted by Garfield:

The only thing it has better than both of these 2 tanks is a better HP/T ration, but even so it only has 11 HP/Tone while the tiger II P has 10.2 and the Super Pershing has about 10 per tonne.

Also it does have a very good reverse speed if that counts.

Originally posted by Garfield:

Even with br decompresion this tank will still be lacking compared to its counterparts,

Which is precisely what BR decompression fixes. In the Br decompression scenario I suggest, the ‘elite’ 6.3, the 6.3s that have been buffed or the 6.7s that have been moved down (Tiger II(P), T26E1-1, T-44, M26A1), while most of the ‘lower 6.3’, the original 6.3s and lesser 6.3s that ‘are better than 6.0s’, will be at their own BR, tanks like the IS-2 obr. 1944, SU-100, M26, etc.
This also solves uptiering of 5.7, among other things, as this is an example of just how many benefits BR decompression does. This successfully makes all vehicles relevent again at 6.3, as well, because there is a new BR, this adds 0.3 between what is currently 5.7 and what is currently 6.7. This means 6.7 tanks like the Tiger, IS-2 (1943), T25, and more don’t get uptiered to fight Tiger II (H)s, Jagdtigers, T29s, etc. So in the new scenario, ‘a full uptier’ will be like facing 6.3s for 5.7, instead of fighting Centurion Mk.3s like they do now.

Originally posted by Garfield:

probably the best thing to do would be to move it to 6.0 ass all tanks that can kill the IS-2 should have no problem taking care of the IS-2 44,

I have to point out, it is no Tiger II (P), but you seriously underestimate the IS-2. 120mm of armour at 60° isn’t seen until 7.3/7.7, 100mm LFP + 30mm tracks do quite some trollish stuff to anything that is at range or isn’t facing it flat, and the turret is a small target. My issue is “it isn’t on par with the best 6.3s anymore.” The tank itself I have no problem with, it is a great tank — I was just playing it tonight and it reminded me that it can bounce shells just fine (basically I was fine until that P-47 with 2 1,000lb bombs, that is what the IS-2 needs sometimes), and the 122mm gun obliterates tanks. Not to mention it is not at all slow for a heavy tank, soviet tanks do a good job at retaining their mobility.

Originally posted by Garfield:

or we could give it back the BR-471D,

I am fine that they removed it from the in game IS-2s, they are after all Cold War shells. It is sometimes annoying to get events and have it possible to take Cold War ammunition into them.
It doesn’t need it, nor do I think even BR-471D would provide the difference, it still has less penetration than PzGr 39.

I rather take the BR decompression.
(Also it would be nice to have a higher BR IS-2M too in the future with BR-471D, I am surprised we don’t have M variant tanks yet.)

Originally posted by Garfield:

but if you look back at the ♥♥♥♥ show that happened when it first was added with all the wheraboos screaming and crying about how unfair it was, even tho it only gave the russians a gun on par at least in pen with the Tiger II P, even tho it was still lacking in terms of armor and reload time.

Presuming still on subject with the BR-471D, it wouldn’t change anything. It would still have less penetration than PzGr.39 currently does, and wouldn’t bring it up to par at all with the Tiger II P / T26E1-1. Nor does it solve many of the issues 6.3 tanks have with BR compression, or broadly speaking, pretty much all the Rank III-VII tanks have with BR compression. It wouldn’t even solve the problem, BR decompression would.

[kamikazi21358]

Originally posted by dresden:

Just wait until you play the stock IS-3, OP. That's a real pain.

IS-3 is fun though, even stock.

[Psycho Yuri]

IS-2 1944 is one of my greatest tanks I have. I got 102 kills and 67 deaths with it in rb right now.

But you have to get used to it. When I researched the IS-2 (not 1944) I hated it because of the slow reload. But at the time I got the IS-2 (1944) researched I started to get good with it and even enjoy it a lot.

Just make sure that you can drive into cover immediately after you shoot. And never drive solo, always keep someone around you that can reload much quicker

[Kotory]

Originally posted by Garfield:

Originally posted by kamikazi21358:

It isn’t bad at 6.3, it just isn’t as good as the other 6.3s like the Tiger II. Br decompression would fix this.

I doubt that would fix the problem, the only real advantage the IS-2 1944 has over the normal is-2 is a better UFP, but the turret armor and the LFP are still the same, you can also add the top mounted mg but that doesn't make that much of a difference.

You are wrong.
- It has different turret with a lot of overlapping parts.
- Great AA hmg.

But in general - yes. It's worse than average in direct comparison with over 6.3 tanks. 200 mm of pen might be great on 5.7 but on 6.3 a lot of tanks have much better pen with 3 times faster reload and the same "1 hit kill" capability
Tiger IIP for example is straight away better tank in every single aspect except AA

[Kotory]

Originally posted by dresden:

Just wait until you play the stock IS-3, OP. That's a real pain.

real pain will come with IS4M, which
- has the same 5.7 BR gun at 7.7
- has the worst mobility and reverse speed among all IS tanks
- every single game faces tanks with APFSDS/ HEAT which can pen his "stronk armour" from 2 km away

[Ponto]

Originally posted by MurkyShallows:

205mm of pen with 27 second reload is a ♥♥♥♥ing joke a 6.3

...guess you won't be playing it then?

[biomike]

Originally posted by Kotory:

Originally posted by dresden:

Just wait until you play the stock IS-3, OP. That's a real pain.

real pain will come with IS4M, which
- has the same 5.7 BR gun at 7.7
- has the worst mobility and reverse speed among all IS tanks
- every single game faces tanks with APFSDS/ HEAT which can pen his "stronk armour" from 2 km away

ya its sad that all heavy tanks 7.7+ just loose everything that they were made with in mind like strong armor

[kamikazi21358]

Originally posted by =WFT= Psycho Yuri:

IS-2 1944 is one of my greatest tanks I have. I got 102 kills and 67 deaths with it in rb right now.

But you have to get used to it. When I researched the IS-2 (not 1944) I hated it because of the slow reload. But at the time I got the IS-2 (1944) researched I started to get good with it and even enjoy it a lot.

Just make sure that you can drive into cover immediately after you shoot. And never drive solo, always keep someone around you that can reload much quicker

I agree, I have stated “it isn’t a Tiger II (P)” as newer 6.3s have outclassed it statistically, but it is not a bad tank at all. I actually love it specifically because of it’s long reload for shear damage — I like the idea of being able to pop out, use the armour for if they shoot before I retreat, but with the 122mm essentially get a garenteed kill if I penetrate; and then the reload doesn’t matter because I can use the best armour of all, buildings, hills, rocks, thicc trees, etc.

Originally posted by dresden:

No it's not.

“No, it isn’t fun, and that’s a fact and not an opinion”?

Originally posted by dresden:

You are slow, ~ can't traverse

Yes, that’s what a ‘heavy tank’ does...

Originally posted by dresden:

have low pen,

Still has more than tanks like the T32, 230mm penetration is completely workable. In fact, 200mm is too with the IS-6, so I don’t see the issue here.

Originally posted by dresden:

and face 7.7 minimum every game.

It does a whole lot better than 6.7/7.0 that faces 7.7, 7.3 in what is technically a 0.3 uptier is not bad at all. It is still a strong tank even against 7.7s, either they have difficulty penetrating you, or they have HEAT-FS — and 90% of the 7.7 and lower tanks that fire HEAT-FS also can be obliterated by the 122mm.

Originally posted by dresden:

Originally posted by =WFT= Psycho Yuri:

IS-2 1944 is one of my greatest tanks I have. I got 102 kills and 67 deaths with it in rb right now.

Those are horrible stats dude. The tank is garbage because nobody shoots at the UFP. They will either shoot your turret or LFP.

And how are those “garbage stats?”

[Justy]

The older IS-2 is even worse, as it can be lolpenned by just about any gun at its BR by going for the massive flat areas of the upper and lower glacis. And unlike with the 34, angling won't help here due to the shape of the upper glacis, which presents a vulnerable flat area at every possible angle. At least the 1944 will shrug off a decent portion of the shots that would kill its predecessor, at the cost of having to face slightly more tanks it will struggle to penetrate frontally itself, even with the D-25T. I used to hate them coming from a long time of playing 34s, but if you adapt, you can rack up some decent kills with the 122mm. Just forget the heavy tank label and don't rely on your armor at all, treat it as a turreted tank destroyer that can withstand SPAAG fire and nothing more.

[MurkyShallows]

nah is-2 5.7 is good

[real british joker (real)]

Originally posted by Garfield:

Originally posted by kamikazi21358:

It isn’t bad at 6.3, it just isn’t as good as the other 6.3s like the Tiger II. Br decompression would fix this.

I doubt that would fix the problem, the only real advantage the IS-2 1944 has over the normal is-2 is a better UFP, but the turret armor and the LFP are still the same, you can also add the top mounted mg but that doesn't make that much of a difference.

If you start comparing it to its 6.3 counterparts its seriously lacking in.... almost all aspects, when it comes to armor the Tiger II P outclasses it in all aspects, and the Super Pershing only has a weaker UFP, but thats still really good at range, while the IS-2 44 has a huge turret thats only 100mm thick.

When it comes to the gun, in terms of flat pen both the long 88mm and long 90mm outclass it, when it comes to pen at angles than yes, the IS-2 beats both of them, but there are few things that really need that much pen to kill, both the 88 and 90 can deal with whatever the IS-2 can.

When it comes to reload time, both beat it, hell the Tiger II P which has an overall better gun pen shoot 2 rounds in the time it takes an IS-2 to shoot one.

The only thing it has better than both of these 2 tanks is a better HP/T ration, but even so it only has 11 HP/Tone while the tiger II P has 10.2 and the Super Pershing has about 10 per tonne.

Even with br decompresion this tank will still be lacking compared to its counterparts, probably the best thing to do would be to move it to 6.0 ass all tanks that can kill the IS-2 should have no problem taking care of the IS-2 44, or we could give it back the BR-471D, but if you look back at the ♥♥♥♥ show that happened when it first was added with all the wheraboos screaming and crying about how unfair it was, even tho it only gave the russians a gun on par at least in pen with the Tiger II P, even tho it was still lacking in terms of armor and reload time.

I may be late,but the top mounted DSHK really helps againist tank destroyers like VFW or Waffentrager.

[Wiesell]

Originally posted by MurkyShallows:

205mm of pen with 27 second reload is an absolute joke a 6.3

Huh? I use it everyday with my T44-122 and it's fine. I really like the reverse speed since it's the only tank that allows hit and run tactics. 122mm is a killer one shot. You complain about the 122mm then you suck at it. The only thing to complain about the tank is that gaijin RNG is one of the worse saving grace and also killers on this game. If you know how to use the 122mm it's good.

[MurkyShallows]

Originally posted by KiSkA Dolbaeb:

Originally posted by Garfield:

I doubt that would fix the problem, the only real advantage the IS-2 1944 has over the normal is-2 is a better UFP, but the turret armor and the LFP are still the same, you can also add the top mounted mg but that doesn't make that much of a difference.

If you start comparing it to its 6.3 counterparts its seriously lacking in.... almost all aspects, when it comes to armor the Tiger II P outclasses it in all aspects, and the Super Pershing only has a weaker UFP, but thats still really good at range, while the IS-2 44 has a huge turret thats only 100mm thick.

When it comes to the gun, in terms of flat pen both the long 88mm and long 90mm outclass it, when it comes to pen at angles than yes, the IS-2 beats both of them, but there are few things that really need that much pen to kill, both the 88 and 90 can deal with whatever the IS-2 can.

When it comes to reload time, both beat it, hell the Tiger II P which has an overall better gun pen shoot 2 rounds in the time it takes an IS-2 to shoot one.

The only thing it has better than both of these 2 tanks is a better HP/T ration, but even so it only has 11 HP/Tone while the tiger II P has 10.2 and the Super Pershing has about 10 per tonne.

Even with br decompresion this tank will still be lacking compared to its counterparts, probably the best thing to do would be to move it to 6.0 ass all tanks that can kill the IS-2 should have no problem taking care of the IS-2 44, or we could give it back the BR-471D, but if you look back at the ♥♥♥♥ show that happened when it first was added with all the wheraboos screaming and crying about how unfair it was, even tho it only gave the russians a gun on par at least in pen with the Tiger II P, even tho it was still lacking in terms of armor and reload time.

I may be late,but the top mounted DSHK really helps againist tank destroyers like VFW or Waffentrager.

is-2 (1944) revenge of the hero brother at 6.3 doesnt even have a 50. cal