Jump to content
Dabba

So why is IS3 still better than KT for tourny play?

Recommended Posts

I know the IS3 has a reputation. It's a very popular tank in game, and back in the day, the thing was a very strong tank. 

 

However, the armor on the is3 has been nerfed such that the hull armor isnt what it used to be, and by it's nature you can't angle it. With the upcoming accuracy nerf, the gun may suffer more.

 

The king tiger has less alpha, but slightly better DPM, better aimtime and better accuracy and seems to be the better tank to use to snapshot and aim for weakpoints while minimizing RNG. It's only slightly slower. The tank has a better ability to sidescrape (not having to turn backwards) and has a stronger upper plate that you can angle. Frontally it seems to be less weak. Also it's viewrange is much higher.

 

Im asking because to me, the KT seems to be the better "Jack of all trades" heavy than the is3. The only advantages the IS3 seems to have is slightly better speed (Though more noticeable going up hill) and higher alpha. To me, that alpha doesnt seem to be worth the lack of armor and derpyness of the gun.

 

I never liked playing the is3 in pubs, being not fast enough to warrant the paper armor. I either like my tanks fat and slow with good armor ala Maus or E100, or fast like the IS8. The IS3 just seems to be meh.

 

 

 

Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alpha and speed is pretty damn important in competitive play. Armour isn't really that important for the most part in terms of competitive play, most people are shooting gold and know where to aim. When armour actually matters it comes down to either using a T32 for that hulldown "fuck you" mode or the 110 because hey, that frontal hull is fucking amazing for leading pushes.

 

For the most part though, the IS3 has that combination of decent enough armour, mobility and alpha.
 

 

Of late, the heavies are being used less and less, replaced by RU251 and bulldog spam instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why take a tiger 2 when you can have a 110?

^^^

KT is trash for competitive play. Lower plate made of butter, upper plate negated by gold spam, turret that more often than not gets 2 crew members knocked out in 1 shot.

Also slooooooowww when taking its sheer mass into account.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gun:

The IS3 got more alpha, similar DPM and less bloom. The aimtime isnt rly needed due to snapshots with 132% gunner, vertstab etc.

Higher calibre (against lights).

Depression or evasion is irrelevant because we are talking about city tanks.

 

Mobility:

Less weight means it accelerates faster in all things (forward, back, turning etc.), also the hp/ton ratio is way better. Terrain resistence is the same due to city maps.

Back speed is better, no pivot though.

 

Vision:

Better camo, worse view range... isnt needed anyway, city maps.

 

Armor:

Angles are better than thickness, especially against premium (turrets). Spaced armor is better, also perfect vs HEAT. Way lower profile. Turret mounted on the front is still best, reverse sidescrape is nothing bad due to less exposure than with a middle mounted turret.

 

Did i forget sth?

 

 

IMO the IS3 is way better in any type of battle than the KT (maybe besides a "Only Ram"-battle). Mobility + Alpha just rule most engagements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the perspectives. I've been seeing lighter play as well. The reason I wanted to ask is because lately I've seen a lot of battles come down to a brawl, so I was considering the KT just because of the armor and less rng prone gun.

110s are great, but show as well.

Thanks for the advice guys. I'll stop bugging our caller to let me use my KT haha. I'm perfectly comfortable in the is3, I just LOVE that gun on the KT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tiger II is actually pretty terrible in a brawl. Front armor is just as trash, if not worse (no troll bits), not as good of a sidescraper, can't facehug, and doesn't have the alpha to trade effectively. Realistically, all that it has on the IS-3 is the HP advantage of a puny 100. The bloom is actually really good on the IS-3, and it snapshots just fine at close ranges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why take a tiger 2 when you can have a 110?

If you don't like the IS3, try the 110 as indicated above. I don't think the roof can get overmatched, although everyone tries. The gun has less alpha but handles better, and since most drive IS3 and your reload is comfortably faster you can 2-1 them and have time to pull back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as the armor goes on the two

-the KT is penned EVERYWHERE with gold, especially heat rounds. The whole thing is butter

-though the actual frontal plate of the IS3 is unreliable, it will yeild more lucky bounces at odd angles than you get with the tiger 2 (when prem spam is involved)

-Is3 has Magik Russian spaced side armour capable of eating 183 AP rounds and it has a far stronger turret than the tiger 2 even with the autopen roof

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the roof can get overmatched, although everyone tries. 

It can but it isn't stupidly big as on IS-3.

 

IU40z89.jpg

 

If it had 122mm gun as IS-3, nobody would drive IS-3, honestly now IS-3 has only alpha and spaced armor over it. Maybe a bit speed also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<snip>

51mm is enough to prevent overmatch from everything except 155s(If I'm remembering overmatch mechanics correctly.) . There is no gun big enough to overmatch the roof in T8 tourney/competetive play, which seems to be what is being discussed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the perspectives. I've been seeing lighter play as well. The reason I wanted to ask is because lately I've seen a lot of battles come down to a brawl, so I was considering the KT just because of the armor and less rng prone gun.

 

there is no way I would take a KT over an IS-3 in a brawl fight...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

51mm is enough to prevent overmatch from everything except 155s(If I'm remembering overmatch mechanics correctly.) . There is no gun big enough to overmatch the roof in T8 tourney/competetive play, which seems to be what is being discussed.

No, no. Look at the side, it's 40 mm = 51 effective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KT is easy to pen with sprem, while at least IS3 turret can sometimes be trollish. Also bigger alpha with better mobility, so it can pull back for the next guy in the line to fire faster as well as having more boom per length of firing line.

 

110 roflpwns KT any day. Here is a diagram of how IS3, KT and 110 compare in terms of combat power (look at appearances, not the stats that would be there in-game): http://danbooru.donmai.us/posts/1712711?pool_id=8573

The Shimakaze depicted at Level 3 is roughly how useful the KT is in competitive play ("Sho Srow" baby talk for "So Slow")

The bottom panel Shimakaze is the IS-3's usefulness (mobility emphasis much? Read the notes text box by mousing over it--it disappears if you click on the image but reappears once you click again)

The center panel is roughly how strong the 110 works out to be in competitive play (please ignore the box that says "this is me when I was level 1 after first arriving")

 

 :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For most combat situations in WoT, IS-3 is just better suited for than Tiger 2.

 

Sure, the gun mght seem inaccurate and has that 3.4 aiming time, but if you have a good crew with snap shot and smooth ride + bia and vents etc... it's actually pretty good since the aiming circle doesn't bloom so much.

 

TBh, I found Tiger 2 is as good as IS-3, but it does require a bit more effort to pull it off. In contrast, IS-3 games are more stress free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

51mm is enough to prevent overmatch from everything except 155s(If I'm remembering overmatch mechanics correctly.) . There is no gun big enough to overmatch the roof in T8 tourney/competetive play, which seems to be what is being discussed.

In case you weren't sure why, the inspector takes the angle that the camera is at and applies that to the calculation.

So the armor is 40mm but with the angle of the camera (if you were shooing from above), it's 51.

The camera angle is just easier to show the actual armor and give the normal/actual thickness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, no. Look at the side, it's 40 mm = 51 effective.

 

Doesn't matter, if caliber = 3x nominal armor thickness then no ricochet will happen even if the impact angle is more than 70° from normal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The discussion about alpha and overmatch makes me wonder about the viability of using 110's D-25T with full or large amount of HEAT. Anyone has ever tried it? (For both pub or competitive play)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...