The Propaganda Ministry Calls for Replays

[Blackbishop]

@Sir Sharks Alot
IS3 is supposed to be weaker vs KT & Tigers, not supposed to be worse than KT otherwise IS3 would be slower. If IS3 wins without problems vs these guys then we have an issue, although I'm not sure if we already tweaked IS3 for these scenarios.

[Pac-Fish]

Well I mean in a 1v1 situation I guess the KT is on top but from what I've seen (and experienced) the KT seems to die first. Maybe cause its supported by IS-2s and veteran AT guns IDK.

[Dann88]

Phew, luckily I stayed out of this thread... Oh wait, not anymore... So... nice shoutcasts... err he he

[Hendrik 'DarcReaver' S.]

I just dont get it, why does this super powerfull doctrine need heavy tank with awesome stats?
Even if schrecks and Paks would make more dmg it would be way better than the ISU152, because its a still the best heavy tank Its Speed makes it just unkillabel, in good hands.
I played on Langers vs a Highrank(Iball16++) 1o1 Player, he used it and won the battel because of it, the Is3 is way to strong vs Wehrmacht tanks. Even 2Panthers are no match for him, thats just ridiculous, think of the Us 4M10 and what happens to a King Tiger, Vet3TIger or a Jagdpanther
JUST REMOVE ALL SORT OF HEAVY TANKS NO IS3 NO IS2 ACE from this doctrine and gave it the SU-100 as a reward unit (cheaper earlier available and/or 2 callabel f.e.), a tankhunter fits well in this doctrine, but a heavy tank is just (sry for hard word) bullshit
Just look at the Pe, you dint give them a e-75 as a reward unit for the JP
The IS3 is atm the biggest balance Problem for EF

Nah, Breakthrough needs an elite tank. What you're forgetting is that soviets are supposed to have a very strong lategame, similar to Wehrmacht in terms of doctrines and tanks.

However, the thing is that we didn't tweak the soviet reward units much. It was planned to make a seperate patch after the 1.6 release since 1.5 was pretty much broken (tank hunter spam ftw) just for fixing all the reward units. We wanted to get 1.6 out asap so EF would finally be decent to play.

However after 1.6 release the Ostheer internal alpha got in the way, and also we noticed some problems in Soviet AT department, so we're internally trying to fix it, which also delays the release. Currently the KV tanks are OP against infantry AT, too.

The IS3 is definately too strong at the moment, but it's getting nerfed quite massively. On maps which are  like Rouen the IS 3 is especially OP because of it's turret compared to ISU 152. Also AT guns are useless on that map which makes the problem even worse.

[SublimeSimuz]

I have always been sceptical to the buildable IS2. I can't say for sure if I think it's balanced as it is, so I believe the amount of IS2s could be limited. But let's look at the facts: First of all you have to spend about 200 fuel without getting any tanks or upgrades on the way. Needless to say it's a very risky move against players who know what they are doing.

Also the tank is slow, which means it has trouble dealing with flankers and dodging artillery. A cluster of IS2s even have trouble dodging a v1 from my experience. Then again, this tank is the reason I play PE against soviets. Marders, jagdpanzer 4s, APCR rounds, jagdpanther, teller mines etc makes it easy for the PE to deal with the IS2, even the IS3. The big problem though is that it forces you to go tank hunter doctrine. As wehrmacht I have discovered flak 88s to be the ultimate counter to the IS2, but that again forces you into a doctrine and doesn't work well on several maps. Apparently though, the geschutswagen is also very good against soviet heavy armor, but I feel it lacks the survivality for when a skilled soviet player knows to focus fire on the geschutswagens. You need more or less fully vetted panthers otherwise to effectively counter the IS2 front to front.

On some maps however it is very easy to flank; on a map like that I would gladly choose the T34/85 over the IS2 any day. I know it's popular rushing for the IS2, but the other tanks are definately not obsolete. In a 1v1 for instance you generally need earlier tanks to win. In 2 v 2 I find it extremely effective where one player rushes light tanks, and then skips to IS2s while the other player gets shitloads of T34/85s. This strategy can be applied to bigger games as well. After much time spent owning soviets I feel that they deserve the buildable IS2 considering how weak they are early game on standard resources. I have always found it way easier to play against soviets than western allies due to their weak early game.

Basically, I believe there are three ways to deal with the IS2:
One is to always have a PE on the team, preferrably tank hunter.
Another is to buff some wehrmacht units' armor penetration against the IS2, like the panther.
The third is to set some kind of limit to how many IS2s can be built. Maybe 3, maybe 2, or perhaps make the soviet player have to get some kind of upgrade to exceed the unit limit.

[Killar]

After reading all the comments and rethinking my statments i think the IS3 removal will fix some issues.

Its correct that IS2 as the best AT/AI tank will be the most attractive one in the tank hall. As a breakthrough tank it has the best armour, one of the strongest guns and a big aoe. If there wouldn´t be a ressource limitation this is the tank to go for. It counters everything up to Panther/Tiger easily and has a big splash against infantry.
The reason why T34 are build too is that you need earlier tanks and dont have the ressources. If you have already T34 buying the 85mm upgrade is the next logical step if you have researched only 1 pool in tier2 and the heavy tankovy ressource wise.
Still the IS2 should stay because you have not always the ressources to get it and if Tiger/IS fights are very entertaining. The focus is not on the T34 anymore however which was the most produced tank in the war.
If we delete the IS2 from the tank hall it would look then like a USA clone (sherman + upgun)

The real problem is the IS3. You get for 500MP a IS2 on steroids to your already existing IS2 army. That makes RHS BT always more attractive than the LHS with IL2. Even if we would nerf the IS3, the fact that it can fight alone (battletank) makes it still more favourable.
What would be left is the ISU152. It is supposed to be a support vehicles which helps in tank battle but not leads them. Imo a much better synergy with the tanks in the tankhall and much more interesting to play than spamming IS tanks.
Also the LHS BT would be more attractive too and a solid choice to go for. (especially with the recent changes made)

What are your thoughts?

[Hendrik 'DarcReaver' S.]

Basically, I believe there are three ways to deal with the IS2:
One is to always have a PE on the team, preferrably tank hunter.
Another is to buff some wehrmacht units' armor penetration against the IS2, like the panther.
The third is to set some kind of limit to how many IS2s can be built. Maybe 3, maybe 2, or perhaps make the soviet player have to get some kind of upgrade to exceed the unit limit.

Well, I'd like to note that the IS 2 is still less cost efficient as Panthers since it's more expensive and has a lower rate of fire. I don't even think it's "efficient" against infantry. Sure, it has splash and can kill more than one soldier at a time, but since it shoots so slowly and has pretty poor accuracy in general I find using it against infantry is quite pointless.

Also you can kill an IS 2 with Panzer IVs, it's just that it's easier to do with a Panther instead.

T34 or KV tanks have much better performance against infantry and are way cheaper. Imo its not really needed to hardcap it.
I agree with Killar that the IS-3 is the main problem.

[e-gon]

After reading all the comments and rethinking my statments i think the IS3 removal will fix some issues.

Its correct that IS2 as the best AT/AI tank will be the most attractive one in the tank hall. As a breakthrough tank it has the best armour, one of the strongest guns and a big aoe. If there wouldn´t be a ressource limitation this is the tank to go for. It counters everything up to Panther/Tiger easily and has a big splash against infantry.
The reason why T34 are build too is that you need earlier tanks and dont have the ressources. If you have already T34 buying the 85mm upgrade is the next logical step if you have researched only 1 pool in tier2 and the heavy tankovy ressource wise.
Still the IS2 should stay because you have not always the ressources to get it and if Tiger/IS fights are very entertaining. The focus is not on the T34 anymore however which was the most produced tank in the war.
If we delete the IS2 from the tank hall it would look then like a USA clone (sherman + upgun)

The real problem is the IS3. You get for 500MP a IS2 on steroids to your already existing IS2 army. That makes RHS BT always more attractive than the LHS with IL2. Even if we would nerf the IS3, the fact that it can fight alone (battletank) makes it still more favourable.
What would be left is the ISU152. It is supposed to be a support vehicles which helps in tank battle but not leads them. Imo a much better synergy with the tanks in the tankhall and much more interesting to play than spamming IS tanks.
Also the LHS BT would be more attractive too and a solid choice to go for. (especially with the recent changes made)

What are your thoughts?

As I said a good reward unit for the ISU152 would be the Su100, if u want one
An Is3 or Is2Ace is/would be just OP
I think a hradcap for Is2 would be great as well

Another Point is that the building time for the Su Snipers is way to short, they are just to spamabel

[Chancellor]

IS-2 is really fine where it is.

IS-3 is the problem, but ofc its getting the nerf bat.  At the moment its totally not cost-effective to fight the IS-3 with PG shrecks.  Get a shot in with a shreck, and you may or may not penetrate the IS-3.  If the shreck does penetrate, it takes off minimal health.  Your PGs, which are 45 reenforce per man however, will probably get shredded by the IS-3 gun...  I wouldn't object either if it got removed totally; but I wouldn't have a problem with a simple nerf first either.

Soviet sniper spam in team games IS really a problem.  3 snipers so early in the game versus PGs is really a problem.  It really FORCES PE to go Scout Car spam as the only viable option.  But there's also a problem if we don't allow support weapons early on either, because both Soviet players going conscripts is too weak, and cannot compare to USA riflespam for example.  Even in 1v1 versus Wehrmacht, the Wehr sniper is at a critical disadvantage due to the sheer amount of squad members Soviets tend to have per squad.  Shoot a Strelky, and its only 19 reenforce gone max, and 1/6 guys down.  Shoot a Gren, and its 37 manpower, 1/4 guys down.  Its the same with USA, but the USA sniper has a slower reload than the Wehr sniper.  Soviet sniper currently has the same reload rate as the USA, but I think it should be tone down a bit more to compensate for their even more numerous and cheap men.

[Killar]

Another Point is that the building time for the Su Snipers is way to short, they are just to spamabel

Already changed

[Imperial Dane]

Well the reason i keep going on about the IS-2 is while all you say might be true. People still go for it right away.

perhaps the Solution might be to replace it with the KV ? Still a heavier tank, but not IS-2 class. then move the IS-2 to the IS-3 spot and give it a small buff ?

I mean the issue in general seems to be that a lot of units just end up collecting dust while the IS-2s and 3s get all the fun.

[Tankbuster]

IS-2 is really fine where it is.
  Shoot a Strelky, and its only 19 reenforce gone max, and 1/6 guys down. 

fix'd

[Imperial Dane]

Well another sunday, and another Episode

http://youtu.be/N8Pazk-5fuA

Was a bit of a tough one >.>

[Blackbishop]

"... make a decision with the capital letters..."

lol

Watching it atm.

EDIT:
Btw, your comments about the barbed wire thingy made my day .

2nd. EDIT:
I think I'll change "The Armoury" to just "Armoury" so you can at least not worry about it .

[BurroDiablo]

I remember feeling some of building names were either bad or superfluous when they were implemented... guess I just got used to them