Main page

 Channel911, on 15 May 2012 - 07:56 AM, said:

Hi i think that was me, all through that match I had some pro clan noob whining that I was an idiot and had lost us the match. He died with no kills while acomplishing nothing naturally.

Anyway I like my Is-8 but I have to say I would rather fight an is-8 than an e50 in most of my tanks.

Frontal armour is beyond epic.
http://youtu.be/WxQORn-wVAk
Edited by Edward_Teague, 15 May 2012 - 09:27 PM.

Doesnt work for me...link

 HubertGruber, on 15 May 2012 - 08:50 PM, said:

now?

Sold, T-54 bought. If Im going to play a Tier IX Medium, it may as well be an MBT.
Edited by MagicHaxTurtle, 16 May 2012 - 02:46 PM.

 Kvetoslav, on 15 May 2012 - 09:01 AM, said:

Higher matchmaking weight? Sir you need learn facts before you spout something. In tier 9 meds have the same MM weight as heavies and they have worse MM chart than tier 9 heavies. So they need to be as atleast good as heavies or even better as they are end-tier tanks unlike tier 9 heavies.

So the trade pen and alpha vs speed and some armor, not to mention that IS-8 has better camo than E-50 as a bonus. Camo seems to be something people always tend forget when thinking about tank vs tank balance.

 hopeasusi, on 15 May 2012 - 11:18 PM, said:

Comparing camo is a bit tricky, since we lack exact values and therefore are dependant either on observations during battles (unreliable) or tests in controled enviroment (and even then results are just relative and not absolute).

I agree IS-8 shouldn't really be compared to E-50, since that thing has been insanely OP from the moment it was implemented. Still, one of the rules of the game is that heavy tanks have better armour, more HP and better firepower than mediums, and I understand why players are disappointed when new heavy is inferior in these aspects to same tier mediums. Anyway, I don't think it is a bad tank. Just give it more HP, lower penetration and label it as a tier 10 medium. (not really serious)

Thing is, you move from the IS-4 which was a very good over powered tank for its tier. Its armour could bounce most shells spare for the drivers hatch which was still hard to hit, the thick side armour which could not be penetrated by most tier 6 tanks, some tier 7s and tracks that even abosorbed up to tier 10 shells, and thick rear armour. It also had decent mobilty, for a heavy.
The IS-8 has much less armour everywhere and shouldn't even be considered a heavy tank, with the E-50 heavier than it. You played the IS-4 expecting a tank just as great to take its place, but it didn't. The IS-8 is not as good as the old IS-4 was. So you really should be doing this comparision between the old IS-4 and the IS-8.
If you want to compare tier 9 meds to tier 9 heavies then look at the other nations tanks.

Try the M103 to the Patton.
The E-50 to the E-75.
The T-54 to the IS-8 and the old IS-4.

The problem is just that the IS-4 was too good back then, and the IS-8 doesn't not fill in the same role that it had. At least the ST-1 is similar, but slightly weaker.

Really now, comparing IS-8 to E-50? OP is completely bias to think the E-50 is far superior to IS-8. Let me put it this way, that penetration = a BIG deal, rear armour and 20 hitpoints = NOT.

The biggest thing is the one thing you left out while you didn't, E-50's size, it's a good bit taller as the IS-8, concidering it's turret is practically underarmored compared to the IS-8's it's profile size difference increases further. Face it, E-50 is far easier to hit as an IS-8 particularly at range.

DPM is only as useful as how it can be utilized, perfect example is E-75, think up your own conclusions about this: the 10.5 L/68 on the E-75 has a higher DPM as the 12.8 L/55 on the same vehicle, the L/55 sacrifices RoF, accuracy and aiming time to gain 21mm of penetration, would you, if you owned an E-75, take the 10.5 L/68 over the 12.8 L/55 because of it's DPM? Nope, that 21mm penetration and the alpha is a big deal, and that's why the 12.8cm is generally better. I can't believe you write off a tank which has a gun with 48mm penetration more as being crap compared to the other one...  really now....

^^^^

The stats speak for themselfs really ascender.

Maybe u should try E-50 out for urself before passing any advice.

Yes, and the penetration speaks most of all as far as i'm concerned. That on top of the housing estate E-50, perhaps you should concider talking to some E-50 drivers about their "clearly superior" vehicle before condemning the IS-8, particularly in penetration being less important as DPM and the "better" armour.
Edited by Ascender, 16 May 2012 - 02:53 PM.

Ascender, Edvard has BOTH the E-50 and the IS-8.
You, on the other hand have only IS-8 in your stats, but I don`t know did you ever drive it, or those are the stats for the IS-4.
Anyway, since Edvard has an E-50, I think he has every right to compare and make judgements about those 2 vehicles, unlike you, who have no experience with at least one of them (and prolly with both).
As for "asking the E-50 drivers", these forums are full of whiners who complain about their tanks, while making assumptions that other tanks are much better (without trying them out themselves, ofc).

 Popovic123, on 16 May 2012 - 05:19 PM, said:

Good man

Thank u popovic someone that finally understands. :-)

IS-8 isn't a heavy tank. Pls moderators move this topic to a medium section.

So, I have M103 and IS-8.

I thought M103 has a weak armor but IS-8 is a lot weaker. It can be penetrated frontally everywhere, even the turret is really weak! IS-3 has a better armor than IS-8.

 typhaon, on 14 May 2012 - 09:47 PM, said:

that made me laugh   thnx for ur comment sir

 typhaon, on 14 May 2012 - 09:47 PM, said:

You are kidding, right?

This might help: http://wotarmory.wor...tection-report/

Thanks Kettenpuma that someone finally posts this, it was really overdue. The LFP is simply butter and angling destroys UFP armour. The E-50 has better protection, especially because there is no devastating critical hitzone through the LFP, whereas the IS-8 has a part of his ammo rack hitzone down there.
To anyone who knows how to aim an IS-8 below 20-30 kph is NP.

 saml6131, on 14 May 2012 - 09:48 PM, said:

Lower glacis of E-50, which have same armor of upper glacis is paper? (E-100/75 have lower glacis weaker that upper, NOT the E-50)

IS-8 have 120mm on paper too, but its far worse than on E-50 >> try to penetrate both with 175-200mm pene gun.

 Edward_Teague, on 14 May 2012 - 09:31 PM, said:

At least couple of those penetrations were by gold ammo.

Yesterday E-100 destroyed my ammorack... Blow up...