IS-7 8.0 armor update

We are dumbfounded. I admit, I was a bit worried about the IS-7 in 8.0. A nearly unstoppable sloped armor monster roamed in my vision. When we faced it on the test server, the results were shocking but in a different way. Now, either we are that dumb and  we had screwed up the previous tests that much, or Wargaming messed with the armor parameters without any transparency, again. No problem, that’s why we have tests for.

One tiny step forward, one big step back

What did we expect? An impregnable glacis armor and a tougher than ever lower front plate, wider angling options. But unlike American heavies we had tested, this tank seemed to not get the memo about the sloped armor compensation nerf, because we found the upper hull armor of the IS-7 not much different from the previous incarnations. It’s tough all right. The head-on optimised pike nose can be still penetrated casually by Tier X tank destroyer guns. Yeah, but this hasn’t got any news value. We have spotted a difference though. Russian tank hulls lose effective armor for the facing side of the pike nose when angled. This is still true.

However, this loss was reduced a bit in 8.0, sub-240 average penetration guns have very little if any chance to pierce this armor at any range and angle.

So far so good. We had expected a bit more than that, but that’s an improvement nevertheless. However, the disappointments did not end here. For the sake of order, I started to do some re-checking shots at the lower front plate of the IS-7, and this was the point where my jaws dropped. About 10 percent of the former armor was gone. One should expect somehow improved efficiency for a nicely sloped armor plate from the compensation nerf but nothing like that.

In fact, the LFP performed even poorer than in 7.2, when we had made the original IS-7 tests of ours. No improvement, not the same level, it was downgraded.

Randomgoddess is a heartless bitch or…?

The results were so bad that we repeated the LFP tests three times, then we switched back to live servers to find out if we had been mistaken that much before.  And it doesn’t seem like the case, the 7.5 version still behaved as it was supposed to be.

8.0 armor facing tactics

30 responses to “IS-7 8.0 armor update

  1. Odd – I’ve found the IS-7 to be a bit of a beast on the Test Server, and it’s felt more like the old unstoppable force that it used to be, many moons back. Also – the sides and rear do feel a lot more resilient to attack, even bouncing gold rounds from a T100E4 at about 100m on more than one occasion.

  2. Even with just tiny 1 weakness, German guns still stand no chance most of the time. Why don’t they just up gun for the German so that Russian fans won’t go crazy about this nerf. I just don’t understand WG at all.

    • You mean the maus & E-100 gun I guess, because the E-50 and E-50M guns are pro and the JT and E-100TD all have good guns.

      In fact, when driving my IS-7, god knows TX meds shred me to pieces… but then again, they shred everything else too :p
      Imo, it is time they buff the IS-7 as with all these modern guns, it’s armor is not as reliable anymore, and it hasn’t really have a big health pool compared to other TX tanks + low pen & low accuracy gun.

      Again, I say this in comparison to the IS-4 gun & armor & HP upgrade, Maus & E-100 got buffed, T110E4 has +/- same armor & mobility but a great gun… and we all know TX meds and TD’s are pew pew (aside from the E-100jagd maybe).
      So yes, whilst IS-7 is still bouncy, it’s time to buff it by a little bit.

  3. This nerf in test server is not ninja, all tanks in test server are subject to change and WG don´t have to public this until the former update.

    UFP same? WTF, i expect this to going inpenetrable.

    You have any info/impression of IS-4?

      • This is crazy, what the hell are they doing there?

        Okay it gives the IS-7 a more german tank gun friendly frontalarmor, but i think angles of the tanks should not be changed beyond the historical parameters.

        So UFH is 150@65° and @xx° sideangle?
        That means 300mm+ armor.

        The american 120mm is abled to penetrate 336mm of armor theoretically.
        That said, you say that the 155T2 is not abled to penetrate it 50% of the time.
        So either its exactly 300mm or 300+mm.

        Could you check it out with russian gun with 303mm penetration?

        Either the armor thickness is decreased or the normalisation change was
        partly a lie. Something still has to be wrong here.

      • I can,but the IS-7 was always an oddball. Probably there isn’t any side angle bonus for the pike.

        The 7.5 UFP base armor is probably like 280 mm WoT-equivalent, the 8.0 is about 300.

      • But when we consider that the game mechanics consider any kind of angle (testing acutally shows that) than the pure thickness of the UFP has to be decreased.

        But yea, it always had been an odd piece of steel, histrocally armor thickness would probably be ~ 380-400 with the side angle.

        So yea, i dont understand how the ingame model works right now.

      • This reminds me on the old armor homogenisation factor.
        For example: In the beta: the tiger had an factor of 1.1 which means it had an effictive front armor of 110mm.
        These values are still listed at for example.

        Another tank which might be influeced by such values is the E50M, seriously this thing is abeled to bounce TX guns, i really cant understand how!

        It needs some testing!

      • Nice to hear that, a comparision with the E50 would be awesome!!

        I had a closer look to the E50 and the M variant, i noticed than that the lower half of the upper front plate has a larger angle than the upper part of the UFP.
        Thats interesting, maybe the bouncyness comes from there!


  4. The armor homogenisation factor is no more active in game, all tanks have the same factor of 1, confirmed by devs in russian forum.

    In IS7 armor, guys what gun you test after the gun of 269 pen?

  5. IS-4 is kind of weird . Its upper front only 10mm more than the KT, and not as slope as IS-7 or IS-8, but bounce like the E-75, AMX FOCH upper front.

    And the E-50M is bouncy. Trust me, its upper front is a lot harder than T54.

    Btw, E-50 lower glacis is the same as it upper glacis, 120mm. While E-75 lower glacis is only 10mm more, and looks like has been nerf in 8.0 to the level of 7.5 E-50

  6. There are a handful of fascinating points over time in the following paragraphs but I don’t know if I see them all center to heart. There’s some validity but I most certainly will take hold opinion until I check into it further. Excellent article , thanks therefore we want much more! Added to FeedBurner as well

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s