3 hours ago, Samuel_Hyde said:

Does adding IS-3M worth it? Or is it better adding it as an event vehicle?

Is the tank in the game IS-3M?

To my knowledge(which might be wrong), based on the fact that the IS-3 in game has the different fenders and the roof mounted MG. It is the IS-3M

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, G3cko873 said:

To my knowledge(which might be wrong), based on the fact that the IS-3 in game has the different fenders and the roof mounted MG. It is the IS-3M

the IS-3 on berlin parade 1945 used DSHK as well

 

26 minutes ago, *sageman901 said:

why adding another useless heavy tank to ussr it will just be a xp pinata for heatfs 

its not useless if it can use the better post war 122mm shell

But then the current IS-3 already have that.

Edited by Samuel_Hyde
  • Like 1
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Samuel_Hyde said:

the IS-3 on berlin parade 1945 used DSHK as well

 

its not useless if it can use the better post war 122mm shell

But then the current IS-3 already have that.

ussr heavy tank at higher br are obsolete. just look at t10m and is4 thier armor mean nothing for heatfs and apfsds. they're just food for Leoa1a1l44 and xm1 and they also have longer reload and no mobility to speak of

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, *sageman901 said:

ussr heavy tank at higher br are obsolete. just look at t10m and is4 thier armor mean nothing for heatfs and apfsds. they're just food for Leoa1a1l44 and xm1 and they also have longer reload and no mobility to speak of

The br of the IS4 makes no sense when compared to say the m103 when it can actually handle being uptiered .

Theres better tanks the Russian players could have like the object 277 . 

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Futarrari@live said:

The br of the IS4 makes no sense when compared to say the m103 when it can actually handle being uptiered .

Theres better tanks the Russian players could have like the object 277 . 

 

If only the IS-3/4 can shoot HEAT munition, would probably help a lot justifying the 7.3/7.7 BR

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/01/2020 at 13:57, Futarrari@live said:

The br of the IS4 makes no sense when compared to say the m103 when it can actually handle being uptiered .

Theres better tanks the Russian players could have like the object 277 . 

the m103 is god like I love it i have 2700+ kill with it

Edited by *sageman901
  • Like 2
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Samuel_Hyde said:

 

If only the IS-3/4 can shoot HEAT munition, would probably help a lot justifying the 7.3/7.7 BR

 

The main problem with those tanks isn't the gun/ammo ( although it is an issue ) but the fact that their armor means nothing at their BR and therefore their poor mobility puts them at an even bigger disadvantage !  Look at the T-10M it can fire both HEAT and APDS and it's still an inferior tank because it has poor mobility that doesn't come with any protection advantage because other tanks at its BR can fire APFSDS which will lolpen it so yeah .....

Edited by Raldi92
  • Like 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Samuel_Hyde ok, I should have explained this better, thats one me. the mud gaurds or fenders, I dont actually know which one it is now that I think about it, are different on both the IS-2M and IS-3M, they share this same difference. they bend down a little bit and cover more track, versus the just straight edge of the standard variant. its hard to explain so I just grabbed and edited a couple of pictures.

 

here is the IS-3 as shown in the Berlin Victory Parade of 1945, with the change highlighted.

1339189286_IS-3changes.thumb.jpg.be572cd

 

here is the IS-3M at some museum, you can see the difference

1580729313_IS-3Mchanges.thumb.jpg.b27857

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To sum up:no, it's not worth it, it would just be yet another cannonfodder, another useless heavy tank in a tree full of obsolete vehicles.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/01/2020 at 05:54, jackTIGR said:

To sum up:no, it's not worth it, it would just be yet another cannonfodder, another useless heavy tank in a tree full of obsolete vehicles.

I think G3cko was right, we already have IS-3M

IS-3 without cold war ammo could go to 6.7/7.0

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AFAIK what we have is a tank is IS-3M performance but a IS-3 model.

However not all IS-3 went through the IS-3M upgrade, so it can just pass as a IS-3 in later service.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Loongsheep said:

AFAIK what we have is a tank is IS-3M performance but a IS-3 model.

However not all IS-3 went through the IS-3M upgrade, so it can just pass as a IS-3 in later service.

The model we have in game is the IS-3M model, in game it has those little extensions on the track guards, IIRC that is the main visual difference between the two. I actually don’t think there is any other visual difference, I think it’s all internal, IIRC the M variant had a strengthened transmission and engine so it was more reliable.

Edited by G3cko873

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, G3cko873 said:

The model we have in game is the IS-3M model, in game it has those little extensions on the track guards, IIRC that is the main visual difference between the two. I actually don’t think there is any other visual difference, I think it’s all internal, IIRC the M variant had a strengthened transmission and engine so it was more reliable.

You are right, they have already updated the model to IS-3M.:facepalm::018:

This was the old model, resembling a standard IS-3.

is3.thumb.png.a404e3655e81ce07549e3b7f65

 

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, G3cko873 said:

Now we just need the name change to the IS-3M

Ideally there should really be both IS-3 at different BR, as either model was produced in greater number than IS-4M, IS-7 and IS-6 combined.

But with already so many IS-series tanks in the tree, they should just change the name and call it done. The IS-3 with WWII ammo would be quite hard to balance.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Loongsheep said:

Ideally there should really be both IS-3 at different BR, as either model was produced in greater number than IS-4M, IS-7 and IS-6 combined.

But with already so many IS-series tanks in the tree, they should just change the name and call it done. The IS-3 with WWII ammo would be quite hard to balance.

what could work is if they give it only WW2 ammunition, take away the roof mount, then it could maybe go to something like 6.7 along side the T-34, as they would kinda be in the same boat, great armor, bad reload, the only difference being the IS-3 would have better armor, but a worse gun and reload.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 12/01/2020 at 11:57, Futarrari@live said:

The br of the IS4 makes no sense when compared to say the m103 when it can actually handle being uptiered .

 

Man, that thing is a beast, better than T-10M and 0.6 BR lower...

 

9 hours ago, GoddePro said:

IS-3 without cold war ammo could go to 6.7/7.0

 

You mean that "cold war" ammo from 1946 that was being developed during WW2? xD

 

Quote

the only difference being the IS-3 would have better armor, but a worse gun and reload.

 

AIMED firing rate of IS-3 should be 16 seconds, pure reload is 9.5 seconds. That means shooting at targets, reload process, re-aiming and shooting again.

https://www.tankarchives.ca/2014/12/is-3-reloads.html

Quote

Just dumping shells downrange and worrying about the brass later can already obtain a rate of fire of 6 RPM. However, the 9.5 second figure is the average figure, for all racks. As you can see in the photo, bending down to get a 122 mm shell from the bottom of the fighting compartment can be really inconvenient. Meanwhile, the loader doesn't have far to reach in order to get to his closest ammunition

 

 

Also, closely related, IS-2:

Quote
Mikhail Svirin himself writes: "The practical rate of fire [of the IS-2] in place was up to 5 RPM, on average 2.5 RPM, 1.5 RPM in motion."

 

 

So what we have in game are two heavily nerfed heavy tanks, deliberately made less performing, cause... you know... "balance".

 

 

I wonder if there is any point doing a bug report with Samsonov's documents, if Gaijin wouldn't simply dismiss them...

Edited by jackTIGR
  • Upvote 3
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If everything in that website is true, I think I want that faster reload for all semi-automatic sliding breach lock D-25 guns, which to my knowledge is everything except the KV-122 and ISU-122.

Edited by G3cko873

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, jackTIGR said:

Man, that thing is a beast, better than T-10M and 0.6 BR lower...

Oh yeah, armor that actually matters against tank shots. Pretty safe as long as you don't meet ATGM.

 

7 hours ago, jackTIGR said:

AIMED firing rate of IS-3 should be 16 seconds, pure reload is 9.5 seconds. That means shooting at targets, reload process, re-aiming and shooting again.

https://www.tankarchives.ca/2014/12/is-3-reloads.html

 

Also, closely related, IS-2:

 

So what we have in game are two heavily nerfed heavy tanks, deliberately made less performing, cause... you know... "balance".

 

I wonder if there is any point doing a bug report with Samsonov's documents, if Gaijin wouldn't simply dismiss them...

The Conqueror also had faster reload in real life.

Bug reports were submitted and Gaijin did give it 9s reload at a dev server once, but on live it went back to 15s. Pretty sure heavy tanks gets slow reload as balance.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Loongsheep said:

Pretty sure heavy tanks gets slow reload as balance.

then there is just the IS-1 and T-34-85(1943) reload times, the IS-1, last I checked is about 1.5 second faster base time

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

man, 

this thread is making me more and more depressed...

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.