Jump to content


IS-M is slightly op (and about mm)?


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

Squirting_Elephant #1 Posted 22 February 2018 - 10:31 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9773 battles
  • 219
  • [VIVU5] VIVU5
  • Member since:
    06-10-2011

Sorry, semi-rant-post.

 

I can't pen that thing in a tier 6-7 tank and my jgdpz8.8 also cries when shooting at it (rng will occasionally cause tons of bounces when aiming on lower plate from a distance w/o resorting to gold ammo). Sure the Crysler K still has more armor, mobility and pen (that thing is even more seriously op) but the IS-M is still very op for it's tier or am I missing something? Every time in Paris when 1 or 2 enemy IS-M's are toptier, can only pray for the mediums to rush the north side really fast before we are all dead or for having some skilled Jap heavies in our team or them being bots. I don't even go south-side if I drive a bot-tier heavy-tank when I see those tanks in the match-up because I know how it will play out. They will side-scrape our top-tiers to death and then bumrush the low-tiers.

 

Even the VK 100.01P (which is imo also slightly op) is easier to pen (bigger frontal lower plate + it is really big and slow and easier to shoot at it's side). Or is it just me being unskilled playing those tier 6-7 tanks or that terrible jgdpzr88 (not unlikely)? Also shouldn't the jgdpz88 not have more pen and remove the pref mm? I just cannot possibly drive this jgdpz88 well. Just too many bounces vs tier 9's and quite some tier 8's. And vs tier 6-7 I get gold-spammed. I hate this premium tank so much. I just cannot play it properly without camping my behind off.

 

Especially in patch 9.22 I'm having problems in my bot tier tanks vs armored tanks. Yesterday we got these enemies: 268V4, Type4's, Emile2, 430U, IS-M, T28prot, etc (I made a screenshot in case someone thinks I exaggerate) while our toptier tanks didn't have lots of armor. The result? They steamrolled from base A --> Base B literally without stopping and firing on the move. I was running to the other side hoping to shoot some lower tier tanks there before the facestomp would reach me. How is this balanced? Same with one team having almost only tomatoes and the other team many greens and some purples. Match is decided from start. They won with 14-0 (I shot that one tank before I died horribly from all sides). Why can't there be more balance... Having 2 Grille15's in my team Himmelsdorf is not the same as having 2 268V4's man.. Come on mm... You can do better than this... Take skill, toptier-armor, map and etc into account please...

 

Also a bit off-topic, but what the hell is this: https://i.imgur.com/8vki3Ro.jpg Even if I were to drown my tank every match, I would probably have more WN8 than that from accidental spotting damage or something. Just how... It gets even better when I get flamed by those same players like "Squirt, sell your lorraine40 you noob" and we end match with me being top xp from both teams... Are they trolls? Bots? 6 year olds? Or just terrible people? When I don't mute chat I get that several times a day. Hardly have enough reports for it (10/day). If I drive my tank straight into the enemy team at start, not fire a single shot, and do this every time, I will get more WN8 than that. Also I almost exclusively get flamed when I actually do well that match. When I die with 0 damage done, not a single flame.


Edited by Squirting_Elephant, 22 February 2018 - 10:38 AM.


Search_Warrant #2 Posted 22 February 2018 - 10:42 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 27182 battles
  • 6,136
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011
I do think the IS-M could do with a cupola or something, that thing sidescraping is almost impossible to pen without 250+ pen to go threw the mantle. he has to be stupid and overangle or show the curved front of the upper hull at a perfect angle to pen it at all.

Squirting_Elephant #3 Posted 22 February 2018 - 10:47 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9773 battles
  • 219
  • [VIVU5] VIVU5
  • Member since:
    06-10-2011
T-150 for example with 167 pen (219 with gold ammo) has like no chance vs an IS-M. 15-20% chance on lower plate (straight on) and 0.3% (yes 0.3%) if the IS-M angles his tank. Best weakspot you got... And the problem is that most teammates don't know this so they will fight that IS-M head-on (instead of luring it out, circling it, waiting for arty, anything) until they all die and then they start the bum-rush. A cupola or something would be nice. But also because hull-down it is a serious beast even for a JagdTiger. This is (yet another Russian) tank that can hulldown-facetank a JagdTiger and likely walk away with full hp. It's current cupola is soooo small.

Edited by Squirting_Elephant, 22 February 2018 - 10:49 AM.


Igor_BL #4 Posted 22 February 2018 - 11:02 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 39513 battles
  • 1,330
  • [GX] GX
  • Member since:
    06-10-2015
and how much tier8 heavies have against maus or type5?

Squirting_Elephant #5 Posted 22 February 2018 - 11:17 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9773 battles
  • 219
  • [VIVU5] VIVU5
  • Member since:
    06-10-2011

Versus Maus if you spam gold, Lowe for example has a 62% pen on turret. IS-3 about 50%. It's not THAT bad since it is REALLY easy to hit it in the huge turret + the Maus is a big and slow tank with lots of other issues. https://tanks.gg/tan...=lowe&cl=000001 The Type5 also has flat armor and has problems with gold spam from tier8 (but not all tier 8 okay, but most).

 

However, if we were not to use gold ammo, then yes it would be a problem. But overall everything tier8 can pen the Maus by pressing 2 and the Maus cannot really hide it's turret while the IS-M can hide it's lower plate rather easily (just side-scrape or find some rubble). Most tier 6 cannot pen the IS-M when it hides the lower plate regardless of gold spam. When hulldown, it can even reliably facetank a JagdTiger that spams gold at it. So that to me is quite a larger difference than a tier8 vs a Maus. But I do agree that there are more tiers and tanks that have minor to serious balance problems.


Edited by Squirting_Elephant, 22 February 2018 - 11:18 AM.


Igor_BL #6 Posted 22 February 2018 - 11:20 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 39513 battles
  • 1,330
  • [GX] GX
  • Member since:
    06-10-2015

why wouldnt maus angle?

 



Aikl #7 Posted 22 February 2018 - 11:26 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25536 battles
  • 4,349
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostSquirting_Elephant, on 22 February 2018 - 09:31 AM, said:

Sorry, semi-rant-post.

 

I can't pen that thing in a tier 6-7 tank and my jgdpz8.8 also cries when shooting at it (rng will occasionally cause tons of bounces when aiming on lower plate from a distance w/o resorting to gold ammo). Sure the Crysler K still has more armor, mobility and pen (that thing is even more seriously op) but the IS-M is still very op for it's tier or am I missing something?(...)
Why can't there be more balance... Having 2 Grille15's in my team Himmelsdorf is not the same as having 2 268V4's man.. Come on mm... You can do better than this... Take skill, toptier-armor, map and etc into account please...(...)

 

Overpowered or not aside, I-SM is a very 'typical' armoured tank in that it's very good against T6-8 tanks, but less so against T9-10 - where armor effiency goes out the window. Add some sidecrape capability in case you don't fancy using the 'W' key too much. Fun stuff, isn't it? Technically I guess the IS-M isn't that bad against T9/10s, but I'd be inclined to think an IS-3 would do better - despite struggling against a well-managed IS-M.

 

 

I guess we all wish for more balance, but the question is how extensive it can be implemented. T8-10 tanks are actually 'grouped'. The idea is indeed to prevent a team from getting a too mismatched setup - though Wargaming has sort of borked that to bits when they put KV-5 in the same group as VK100.01P and Defender (or even FCM into the same group as IS-3). Not that this is very prioritized anyway; it hints towards the matchmaking already "struggling" to keep up distributing tank classes, platoons and making sure everyone is top-tier once in a while.

 

Even a more 'even' matchup, if it even is possible, would be problematic. Some players have padded their stats. Some are better in mediums than heavies. They might have the majority of their battles at T5 - but be totally inexperienced at playing T10. Some tanks would be stock. Some would have bad crews. Some use a lot of premium ammo, others use mainly HE.

Heck, even in an entirely symmetrical match (map, classes, loadouts, player skill), there'd still be two things remaining: RNG and the 'human factor'. RNG is obvious. The 'human factor' is a combination of multiple elements, that ultimately means that a human can't play consistently good/average/bad.

 

The struggle towards equality is more or less pointless, even moreso if you consider that everything done in this regard has been implemented after 3-5-7 matchmaking became the primary pattern. The amount of, and therefore variability, of top-tier tanks is what the problem is. Most things done in terms of "balancing teams" is simply adressing the effect of 3-5-7 matchmaking (and not the cause).



Geno1isme #8 Posted 22 February 2018 - 11:54 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 42587 battles
  • 7,804
  • [TRYIT] TRYIT
  • Member since:
    09-03-2013

The armor isn't all that great actually. At ground level the L71 (the gun of the Tiger and JT88) has about 40% chance to pen the upper plate with AP when he's not angling, and if he angles the shoulder plates become even weaker. Lower plate is over 50% chance. Plus there's always the cupola (admittedly a rather small target). T-150 with APCR has about the same chances.

 

It's important to realize if you're above or below it. If you're even slightly above it the LFP becomes actually stronger thant the UFP.

 

The VK-100 on the other hand can only be penned in the lower plate at all, which is also smaller. Side armor is pretty similar. Yeah, the VK is bigger and less mobile, but also comes with a better gun and more HP.

 

For visual comparison of comparable worst-case scenarios:

IS-M vs. Cromwell APCR: https://tanks.gg/tan...=live&cl=71212k

Vk-100 vs. Cromwell APCR: https://tanks.gg/tan...mwell&cl=71212k

Maus vs. T-44 APCR: https://tanks.gg/tan...=live&cl=51211g

 

Chances are equally bad in all those situations, however only the IS-M provides at least a minimal weakspot that can be penned by almost every gun it meets at any angle.


Edited by Geno1isme, 22 February 2018 - 12:02 PM.


Squirting_Elephant #9 Posted 22 February 2018 - 01:07 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9773 battles
  • 219
  • [VIVU5] VIVU5
  • Member since:
    06-10-2011

View PostIgor_BL, on 22 February 2018 - 10:20 AM, said:

why wouldnt maus angle?

Because if he angles its turret, it cannot shoot you back. It should angle while reloading but it cannot angle when it is about to shoot anyone near you (or you), Giving you a good chance to pen it with gold spam. That somewhat balances the Maus as a toptier imo. IS-M does not have that balance as a toptier.

 

Good points and good post Aikl. I agree that it is not a great tank against tier 10 enemies (except against TD's due to it's amazing turret armor, but TD's are in a general bad spot anyway). This goes for many tanks including the Crysler K though (gets penned by all high tier gold spam flat out in the turret even).

 

So if I understand correctly, the mm is already pushing its limits? Why not just decrease the tier spread down to 1 and only increase it back to 2 if queue times are long for certain tanks? And why not mix tanks? Why put 2 Grilles in one team and 2 268V4 in the other? Why not one of both in both teams? Wouldn't that be more fair? What about not giving mediums more pen than TD's, Why don't they at least balance every tank for it's own tier? Currently some tanks are just weaker than others at the same tier for the same role. Etc. I mean, these questions have probably been asked a zillion times but I still do not get it. Sure it's good for marketing (encourages players to use gold ammo and whatnot) but for gameplay... I don't see it.

 

Another problem with this tier-spread imo is that if your toptier tanks are complete garbage (WN8 of < 100) or get wiped out for just about any reason on a closed map with near-full-hp-highly-armored-toptier-enemies, it's game over. The MM decides too many outcomes imo. On top of the MM that there is RNG. Bounce a lorraine40t twice on 50m with 300-400pen and then it kills you, maybe a free flame from a teammate... Or when you are sniping/camping and a scout shoots you and then retreats again before it becomes visible because of 'rng-server-vision-delay'. It's all so annoying because I can't do anything about it.

 

@Geno1isme Ah nice. Also things are probably more complicated than I imagine them to be. There are probably good reasons, I just don't see them. And I forgot about those shoulder plates, thanks!


Edited by Squirting_Elephant, 22 February 2018 - 01:27 PM.


Geno1isme #10 Posted 22 February 2018 - 01:48 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 42587 battles
  • 7,804
  • [TRYIT] TRYIT
  • Member since:
    09-03-2013

View PostSquirting_Elephant, on 22 February 2018 - 02:07 PM, said:

So if I understand correctly, the mm is already pushing its limits? Why not just decrease the tier spread down to 1 and only increase it back to 2 if queue times are long for certain tanks? And why not mix tanks? Why put 2 Grilles in one team and 2 268V4 in the other? Why not one of both in both teams? Wouldn't that be more fair? What about not giving mediums more pen than TD's, Why don't they at least balance every tank for it's own tier? Currently some tanks are just weaker than others at the same tier for the same role. Etc. I mean, these questions have probably been asked a zillion times but I still do not get it. Sure it's good for marketing (encourages players to use gold ammo and whatnot) but for gameplay... I don't see it.

 

Another problem with this tier-spread imo is that if your toptier tanks are complete garbage (WN8 of < 100) or get wiped out for just about any reason on a closed map with near-full-hp-highly-armored-toptier-enemies, it's game over. The MM decides too many outcomes imo. On top of the MM that there is RNG. Bounce a lorraine40t twice on 50m with 300-400pen and then it kills you, maybe a free flame from a teammate... It's all so annoying because I can't do anything about it.

Look at the patches since 9.18, there are two clear patterns emerging. Of course WG will never admit it openly, but it's become so obvious that it hurts:

a) WG only cares about T10 anymore, T8 and T9 only receive changes as they can meet T10. Anything below T8 is more or less ignored and no longer exists in WGs mind, short of a few minor balance tweaks. The whole point of the new template MM is to push people toward T10 so they can be top-tier all the time.

b) WG wants to increase the usage of premium ammunition. Chrysler K being the most obvious example, but we've seen massively increased armor levels across the board, e.g. many T10 meds got significant better turret armor last year. And the new T10 tanks introduced pretty much all have armor models ranging from very good (Super-Conqueror) to insane (268-4), while the guns only get average or even substandard penetration on their AP rounds.

 

Limiting tierspread is often requested but IMO the wrong answer as it causes other issues. First it devalues tanks with special MM even more, so that problem needs to be solved first. Second it reduces diversity, so matches become even more predictable. Same goes for making teams even more mirrored than they are atm. You and others often say that it would be more "fair", to me it's more "boring" (mind that both are very subjective terms). After all a completely "fair" matchup would be if everyone would be driving the same tank, but I hope nobody is really asking for that. Third it just turns the whole balancing mess upside down rather than really solving it: Tanks with high penetration get devalued, Tanks with good armor (against same-tier guns) become even more powerful. And last but not least the "unfairness" of +-2 also creates more "hero" results which (unconciously) are a significant motivation factor. In a +-1 MM there will be less Top-Guns, Radley-Walters, Pools or Kolobanov medals, and those games are often what brings people back to WoT.



Rati_Festa #11 Posted 22 February 2018 - 02:27 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 42756 battles
  • 1,372
  • Member since:
    02-10-2012

View PostAikl, on 22 February 2018 - 11:26 AM, said:

 

I guess we all wish for more balance, but the question is how extensive it can be implemented. T8-10 tanks are actually 'grouped'. 

 

 

That for me as been an utter failure of the new MM changes. Considering the amount of fanfare they put behind it and the amount/perception of steam rolls have increased, it didn't, won't and can't resolve anything as it's far more dependent on the players use of the tank than the actual tank in most instances. It was a smoke screen to try and persuade us all the changes were positive but in reality no in game affect at all.

 

A better weighting option would be to make sure each side has the same number of RU tanks/tier in the current game development direction.



Dava_117 #12 Posted 22 February 2018 - 02:44 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 19424 battles
  • 3,276
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

We could have a better idea on IS-M with the WR cuves, but from my personal experience, IS-M is pretty avarage HT. Bad gun depression, really hard turret and hull front that works only on lower tier (something like IS-3). VK-100 and KV-4 can sidescrape better, have gun advantage (mainly alpha for VK and pen for KV) and better overall armour layout.

If I have to think something to make IS-M less immune to lower tier, I would just ad a 20-30mm plate on turret (there is already a riveted plate on the model) or reduce engine deck armour to, again, 20-30mm (as it is now on IS-3).



Squirting_Elephant #13 Posted 22 February 2018 - 07:22 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9773 battles
  • 219
  • [VIVU5] VIVU5
  • Member since:
    06-10-2011

View PostGeno1isme, on 22 February 2018 - 12:48 PM, said:

the new template MM is to push people toward T10 so they can be top-tier all the time.

That failed to me personally. I personally prefer tier 9. Tier 9 is less expensive and is most of the time in an 8-9-10 match (is unique for tier9). This to me is better than being in a tier-10-only-match. Especially because some people are still grinding and thus don't have op crews and don't spam as much gold as in T10 matches and some people are yoloing credits in premiums and etc. It's easier to farm those players compared to the try-hards-T10-cola-and-gold. And some other reasons. And for some tank lines (Emile 2) I see no reason to upgrade to tier10 anyway.


Edited by Squirting_Elephant, 22 February 2018 - 07:22 PM.


Spurtung #14 Posted 22 February 2018 - 07:23 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 63590 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013
IS-M is OP alright...then you play with it and stfu.

Cmdr_Psycho #15 Posted 23 February 2018 - 06:27 AM

    Corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 18527 battles
  • 112
  • [ACTS] ACTS
  • Member since:
    07-22-2010

I think the frontal and side armor is a bit over the top (compare ISM armor layout to VK-B at tier 9 for instance) but not the main problem. The main problem is the combination of armor, gun AND mobility.

Normally a tank is balanced by one of the aspects. But IS-M has great armor (compare to all other tier 8s except the vk-100.01 which gets close), good gun (good pen, decent dpm - similar to Tiger2 & is3) but
also mobility. This thing is faster than a vk-b or a tiger 2 (even though it has nearly double the effective armor or the tiger 2 --- but I guess side and turret armor don't weight anything ^^ else the total weight compared
to tiger 2 would be WAY higher and the HP/T would be worse than the tiger 2 and more in the line of the vk-100.01).

 

 

 

I don't care if they want very good back-turreted heavies already at tier 8 but then balance it around one of the other main characteristics. Similar gun to the WZ-111 or 112 for instance (below 190 pen, long aim-time) or

drastic nerf in regards of mobility (HP/T as well as the ridiculous ground resistances compared to tiger 2, vk100-01p, etc. ) to bring it in line with all other "super heavy" tanks (which it should be looking at the armor thickness).
 



Geno1isme #16 Posted 23 February 2018 - 08:29 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 42587 battles
  • 7,804
  • [TRYIT] TRYIT
  • Member since:
    09-03-2013

View PostCmdr_Psycho, on 23 February 2018 - 07:27 AM, said:

Normally a tank is balanced by one of the aspects. But IS-M has great armor (compare to all other tier 8s except the vk-100.01 which gets close), good gun (good pen, decent dpm - similar to Tiger2 & is3) but
also mobility. This thing is faster than a vk-b or a tiger 2 (even though it has nearly double the effective armor or the tiger 2 --- but I guess side and turret armor don't weight anything ^^ else the total weight compared
to tiger 2 would be WAY higher and the HP/T would be worse than the tiger 2 and more in the line of the vk-100.01).

How about you drive that thing before judging it ... because it doesn't have any mobility. Top-Speed is actually worse than the Tiger II, and it turns like a boat. HP/t is a bit better, but that's mostly compensated by worse ground-resistances. DPM is slightly better than the Tiger II, but you pay for that with worse penetration, aimtime, accuracy and gun-depression. Only when turning the turret it has a clear advantage (faster+less dispersion). Armor is arguably better esp. on the turret, but as noted above overall worse than the Vk-100, plus it gets only 1500 HP.

 

As for being lighter than the Tiger II, well, just look at the size of both tanks, the Tiger is just way bigger, and the VK-100 has like twice the volume.


Edited by Geno1isme, 23 February 2018 - 08:31 AM.


Search_Warrant #17 Posted 23 February 2018 - 08:35 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 27182 battles
  • 6,136
  • [LEWD] LEWD
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011

View PostGeno1isme, on 23 February 2018 - 07:29 AM, said:

How about you drive that thing before judging it ... because it doesn't have any mobility. Top-Speed is actually worse than the Tiger II, and it turns like a boat. HP/t is a bit better, but that's mostly compensated by worse ground-resistances. DPM is slightly better than the Tiger II, but you pay for that with worse penetration, aimtime, accuracy and gun-depression. Only when turning the turret it has a clear advantage (faster+less dispersion). Armor is arguably better esp. on the turret, but as noted above overall worse than the Vk-100, plus it gets only 1500 HP.

 

As for being lighter than the Tiger II, well, just look at the size of both tanks, the Tiger is just way bigger, and the VK-100 has like twice the volume.

 

No point pointing out VK-100 and its stupid armor. it needs a nerf and shouldent have been released as it is.  705 turns like a boat and same for 705A. they are actually really bad tanks but amazing at the same time. they are solid when sidescraping and worthless when pushing. 705 taught me this harsh lesson (i own it). and i feel like a poor mans backward turreted IS-3 at teir 9 with 257 gun (top gun really..really sucks).

Igor_BL #18 Posted 23 February 2018 - 09:23 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 39513 battles
  • 1,330
  • [GX] GX
  • Member since:
    06-10-2015

Hull armor on IS M is lot worse then VK B, tier for tier.

I would say turret is better. While, VK B's turret is really strong against regular rounds (265-270), it really strugles against premium shells. Mostly, like all german high tier tanks, because of flat front design. While IS M has around 250 eff with smaller cupola then VK B. With premium round you have realistic chance around the mantlet and that is about it. Sides are still really strong. Even against 330 HEAT, same story.

 

But, VK B has a lot better frontall hull.
1) it has no shoulder weakspots.
2) UFP and LFP are a lot stronger, tier for tier. Best penetration-wise tier8 guns have 70-80% to pen LFPm and 60ish% for UFP, straight on. (talking about 220-230 guns, not TD guns, ofc)
while, 250 pen guns have around 50% on VK's LFP and almost 0% on UFP.

3) side armor is similar, so that goes to ISM tier for tier.

 


in majority of real game situations, ISM UFP is weaker then LFP, and easier to pen when tank is angling. Not to mention shoulders.

 

ISM is strong tank. meaby best in that new mini-line. But it is not that mobile people think looking at stats. As 705 is not that strong tank armorwise, looking at best possible angles on tanks.gg (you can make it imune to regular rounds when sidescraping perfectly, but in real combat it sucks). When you miss perfect angle, or turn your turret 10% left or right, they pen your sides or side turret.
705 has nowhere near good turret as is7, which people might think.



TAXOPAREI1 #19 Posted 24 February 2018 - 12:31 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 57539 battles
  • 8
  • [CAMON] CAMON
  • Member since:
    12-27-2013
50 games with is-m i havent see tier 6s , 8/10 its in tier 10 mm and 211 its a joke vs type , e100 , ans eny russian med 

Snake_Keeper #20 Posted 24 February 2018 - 07:27 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 8938 battles
  • 712
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

Mostly a problematic opponent in ranged engagements due to most tier 8 guns not having enough pen to pen this thing anywhere but the cupola weakspot if this thing is staring at you with the whole tank angled your way. Also...some people get fooled by that can on top of the turret that houses a fan, it has no armor rating at all. Rounds just go through it. 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users