IS-7 8.0 armor update

The interpretation is all yours now

  • IS-7 upper front plate,  short-range, head on. Compared to 7.5, no real change here.

  • At 15 degrees side angle, the facing side of the UFP starts to show vulnerability against Tier X guns. Aim at the searchlight if the lower hull is covered.

  • At 25 degrees, the lower side hull becomes vulnerable against angled hits. The most vulnerable part of “facing” UFP is the searchlight and the area before it. This angle offers still solid protection for the UFP against 240-ish guns, especially at range.

  • At 40 degrees, the front hull armor is still a hard target for 240+ avg guns. It’s better aim at the lower side hull unless it is covered somehow.

This is it for now, I still owe you a side turret armor scheme. The next article will be about the Su-101. The test servers are easier to access by now, and this particular TD looks more interesting than the rest. See you yet this week, hopefully.

Eagle18, Sinenfutorepatolvaj, TibiTomi

Advertisements

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 wotdb.info 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!

        Regards

  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:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s