Jump to content


110 VS IS-3

110 IS-3

  • Please log in to reply
55 replies to this topic

Poll: 110 VS IS-3 (49 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 250 battle in order to participate this poll.

Is the 110 comparable in competitive formats to the IS-3?

  1. Yes! (10 votes [20.41%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 20.41%

  2. No! (33 votes [67.35%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 67.35%

  3. I have no idea. (6 votes [12.24%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 12.24%

Vote Hide poll

XxKuzkina_MatxX #21 Posted 29 August 2019 - 05:48 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 53231 battles
  • 5,616
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016

View PostCmdRatScabies, on 29 August 2019 - 08:38 PM, said:

I had unremittingly bad games in the 110.  Scarred me for life.  

 

It's possible and personally i don't like the tank very much either BUT not because it's an extremely bad tank but because i love the IS-3 too much. I also want to point out something, the performance of the old tier 8 heavies, let's say for the past 4 months, is very close. You can't find huge performance gaps between them. Of course things like the VK 100 and the defender will stand out.



CmdRatScabies #22 Posted 29 August 2019 - 05:52 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 38551 battles
  • 5,215
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015

View PostXxKuzkina_MatxX, on 29 August 2019 - 05:48 PM, said:

 

It's possible and personally i don't like the tank very much either BUT not because it's an extremely bad tank but because i love the IS-3 too much. I also want to point out something, the performance of the old tier 8 heavies, let's say for the past 4 months, is very close. You can't find huge performance gaps between them. Of course things like the VK 100 and the defender will stand out.

I haven't played either for ages.  Can't say I really enjoy playing heavy tanks and choose something else wherever possible.



XxKuzkina_MatxX #23 Posted 29 August 2019 - 05:57 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 53231 battles
  • 5,616
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016

View PostCmdRatScabies, on 29 August 2019 - 08:52 PM, said:

I haven't played either for ages.  Can't say I really enjoy playing heavy tanks and choose something else wherever possible.

 

Platoon and have some fun with the guys in this new mode. You can make the tank you want in battle. :)


Edited by XxKuzkina_MatxX, 29 August 2019 - 09:30 PM.


SuperOlsson #24 Posted 29 August 2019 - 06:00 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 23931 battles
  • 1,210
  • [E-5OM] E-5OM
  • Member since:
    08-07-2012
About 6 years ago yes, now? Not so much, IS-3 has received a couple of minor buffs (frontal armor upgrade, better angles, track links now counts as armor, autopen plate on turret roof made harder to hit by getting a more steep angle) while 110 has remained untouched, and since it doesn't have the stalinium side armor, track links as armor and has cupolas that are a viable target 110 gets a lot less "funny" (as an old fc of mine called it) bounces. While the 110 may have more armor on paper, it is less relaible, it can't bait shots into its sidearmor as good, not to mention the bigger lfp.

MeNoobTank #25 Posted 29 August 2019 - 08:42 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 16864 battles
  • 958
  • [GT_WC] GT_WC
  • Member since:
    02-16-2017

IS-3 is miles better.

-It has a better gun with better alpha, better penetration, better handling (soft stats are better coz russian) 110 has only better aim time

-mobility is also better on IS-3 with a more powerful engine and better terrain resistance 110 has only slighly better top speed that takes ages to reach

-armor is better turret on IS-3 not sure why you say is the other way around. 110 has the stock T-10 turret which sucks hard with that 2 big and weak cupolas.

 

110 has just better DPM, that is all about it, but it has a bad gun overall, I never liked it. Fully aimed the shells goes always sideways or in the ground. AP shells also suck with penetration of medium tank level and arty velocity,

 

 



SuNo_TeSLa #26 Posted 29 August 2019 - 09:23 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 50156 battles
  • 496
  • [SWEPH] SWEPH
  • Member since:
    07-07-2013
Not even close, 110 is decent on paper, but in actual gameplay it suffers alot :(

ValkyrionX #27 Posted 29 August 2019 - 09:24 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 53546 battles
  • 2,607
  • [RDDT] RDDT
  • Member since:
    02-07-2015
is3 ofc is better 

LordMuffin #28 Posted 30 August 2019 - 07:24 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 53495 battles
  • 13,409
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    06-21-2011
While you can compare them for competetive modes, neither are good in competetive modes and should be disregarded for any competetive play if you want to try-hard or have optimal line up.

Both are the 'poor man's choice' in competetive modes.

Inappropriate_noob #29 Posted 30 August 2019 - 07:33 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 17374 battles
  • 5,246
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    09-23-2011
What about the 112 premium Chinese heavy, how does that compare to both of them?

The_Naa #30 Posted 30 August 2019 - 08:08 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 8973 battles
  • 1,556
  • [QSF-C] QSF-C
  • Member since:
    11-10-2017

View PostLordMuffin, on 30 August 2019 - 07:24 AM, said:

While you can compare them for competetive modes, neither are good in competetive modes and should be disregarded for any competetive play if you want to try-hard or have optimal line up.

Both are the 'poor man's choice' in competetive modes.

 

And thats idea behind this, a non premium tank for those that do not have the pocket book for 252U or similar.

IS-3 is good granted but 110 is still on the debate.

Not everyone has an IS-3 on hand (me included)



SuNo_TeSLa #31 Posted 30 August 2019 - 08:19 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 50156 battles
  • 496
  • [SWEPH] SWEPH
  • Member since:
    07-07-2013

View PostThe_Naa, on 30 August 2019 - 08:08 AM, said:

 

And thats idea behind this, a non premium tank for those that do not have the pocket book for 252U or similar.

IS-3 is good granted but 110 is still on the debate.

Not everyone has an IS-3 on hand (me included)

 

Caernarvon is your friend :P



Laatikkomafia #32 Posted 30 August 2019 - 08:34 AM

    Major General

  • Beta Tester
  • 23265 battles
  • 5,095
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    12-27-2010

With full APCR loadout, I think even the T32 is better than the 110.

 

And we all know the T32 isn't that great atm..



BlackBloodBandit #33 Posted 30 August 2019 - 08:42 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 6892 battles
  • 782
  • Member since:
    12-23-2018

View PostThe_Naa, on 29 August 2019 - 04:18 PM, said:

Hello :)

 

Is the 110 (Chinese Tier 8 tech tree heavy) comparable in competitive formats (Strongholds, Clan Wars, Global map) to the IS-3 (Soviet Tier 8 tech tree heavy)?

 

 

so here are some Pro's of the vehicles when compared to each other.

 

Both have the same APCR penetration.

 

110:

-Better hull armour,

-Better turret armour, (as it does not have the roof weakspot)

-More DPM,

-Accuracy and Aim time are better,

-More Hit Points,

-Faster when going forward,

-View range is better.

 

IS-3:

-Better Alpha damage,

...

-thats about it :unsure:

110 is just laughable. On paper the armor works. I remember a video from QB years ago where he bounced an AP shell on the front from an IS-7 :trollface: but in reality, you won't bounce much. IS-3 has tracks mounted on the front, which also add armor. Aim-time on 110 is terrible for a 100mm gun, while being better then IS-3, but IS-3 has a 122mm gun and the alpha that matters. Accuracy is basically the same and I missed tons of shots fully aimed with 110, while IS-3 would simply hit them. The only advantages that 110 has in my opinion are the view range (though mounting coated optics is a no-go because of the bad gun handling) and the turret armor. The pen value is just garbage for a tank that has even less mobility then an IS-3.



Hamsterkicker #34 Posted 30 August 2019 - 09:10 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 38297 battles
  • 741
  • [KWAAK] KWAAK
  • Member since:
    08-08-2011

The 110 was my go to tank in tier 8 SH battles for quite some time, but in the end I ditched it mainly because of the unreliability of the gun.. The amount of shots that went of to the moon or straight into the ground just became unbearable..

 

IS3 is just way better and lets not start talking about the defender and such..

 

Then again, just slugging it out is not my preferred playstyle, so if the commander allows I still highly enjoy to bring out my Alpine Tiger or T-32 or a good med. To at least get some variety.



The_Naa #35 Posted 30 August 2019 - 11:37 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 8973 battles
  • 1,556
  • [QSF-C] QSF-C
  • Member since:
    11-10-2017

View PostMeNoobTank, on 29 August 2019 - 08:42 PM, said:

IS-3 is miles better.

-It has a better gun with better alpha, better penetration, better handling (soft stats are better coz russian) 110 has only better aim time  

110 has same penetration on its APCR, (same is true for the 252U) and the accuracy is little bit better

-mobility is also better on IS-3 with a more powerful engine and better terrain resistance 110 has only slighly better top speed that takes ages to reach 

i need to do a race, 110 against the IS-3 on different terrains.

-armor is better turret on IS-3 not sure why you say is the other way around. 110 has the stock T-10 turret which sucks hard with that 2 big and weak cupolas.

looking at the armour models again on the turret its 50/50 IMO, IS-3 has that roof plate that can be overmatched by 90mm guns the against the 110 it has to be a bigger gun.

110 has just better DPM, that is all about it, but it has a bad gun overall, I never liked it. Fully aimed the shells goes always sideways or in the ground. AP shells also suck with penetration of medium tank level and arty velocity,

i prefer the 110 gun handling even over the ''mighty'' OBJ.252U. i like to hit stuff that i aim at.

 

 

here are some links for Tanks.gg

compared:

https://tanks.gg/compare/110?t=is-3

 

Armour models against 252U spamming gold (what is to be expected in competitive modes, nobody wants to lose because they did not dare to spend few more credits) 

 

110:

https://tanks.gg/tan...=000001&vm=live

 

IS-3:

https://tanks.gg/tan...=000001&vm=live

 

Yes, the lover plate on the 110 is slightly bigger, but compared to entire front of the IS-3 its not entirely made out of paper.

 



XxKuzkina_MatxX #36 Posted 30 August 2019 - 11:54 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 53231 battles
  • 5,616
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016

@ The_Naa

 

Guess the tank in the image below? :)

 



LordMuffin #37 Posted 30 August 2019 - 12:07 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 53495 battles
  • 13,409
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    06-21-2011

View PostThe_Naa, on 30 August 2019 - 08:08 AM, said:

 

And thats idea behind this, a non premium tank for those that do not have the pocket book for 252U or similar.

IS-3 is good granted but 110 is still on the debate.

Not everyone has an IS-3 on hand (me included)

 

In that case I say IS-3:is better.

As long as your clan is fine with having a sub-par lineup.

 

 

But it depends on map aswell, if you can pick the Map, Caernarvon makes a case for being an eligible pick. Panthera can also be used on certain maps. 

 

Main reason for IS-3 over 110 is alpha damage and gun handling imo.

 

390 × 4 = 1560 which is a T8 heavy dead, most of the times.

320 × 5 = 1600, or a T8 heavy.

 

So you need 1 whole shell less from an IS-3 compared to 110 for a T8 heavy being killed, most of the times. Which is a significant different in fights.



The_Naa #38 Posted 30 August 2019 - 12:16 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 8973 battles
  • 1,556
  • [QSF-C] QSF-C
  • Member since:
    11-10-2017

View PostXxKuzkina_MatxX, on 30 August 2019 - 11:54 AM, said:

@ The_Naa

 

Guess the tank in the image below? :)

 

Picture*

 

110

with that cool turret! :)

 

Spoiler

 

do i win anything if im right? :rolleyes:



The_Naa #39 Posted 30 August 2019 - 12:28 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 8973 battles
  • 1,556
  • [QSF-C] QSF-C
  • Member since:
    11-10-2017

View PostLordMuffin, on 30 August 2019 - 12:07 PM, said:

 

In that case I say IS-3:is better.

As long as your clan is fine with having a sub-par lineup.

 

 

But it depends on map aswell, if you can pick the Map, Caernarvon makes a case for being an eligible pick. Panthera can also be used on certain maps. 

 

Main reason for IS-3 over 110 is alpha damage and gun handling imo.

 

390 × 4 = 1560 which is a T8 heavy dead, most of the times.

320 × 5 = 1600, or a T8 heavy.

 

So you need 1 whole shell less from an IS-3 compared to 110 for a T8 heavy being killed, most of the times. Which is a significant different in fights.

Spoiler

 

9.59 x 5 = 47.95 seconds.

 

12.75 x 4 = 51 seconds.

 

so the IS-3 will be dead before it has reloaded it last shell it needs to kill that 110.

 

252U needs 4 shots as well with 14.38 second base reload so it takes it 57.52 seconds.

and it takes 57.54 seconds for the 110 to reload its 6th shell.

 

Edit* you can perma track any tank with the 110 if they did not invest in repair time.


Edited by The_Naa, 30 August 2019 - 12:30 PM.


XxKuzkina_MatxX #40 Posted 30 August 2019 - 12:31 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 53231 battles
  • 5,616
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016

View PostThe_Naa, on 30 August 2019 - 03:16 PM, said:

110

with that cool turret! :)

 

do i win anything if im right? :rolleyes:

 

Maybe some peace of mind when you know that both are soviet. :)

 

That blueprint is of the IS-2U, a transitional design between the IS-2 and the IS-3/IS-4. Pavel Isakov, the same guy who came up with Object 257, Object 770 (more or less a 277) and the weird looking Object 757.







Also tagged with 110, IS-3

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users