Supertest: IS-3A

http://cdn-frm-eu.wargaming.net/wot/eu/uploads/monthly_09_2018/post-527655019-0-67605600-1536582411.jpg

We’re starting the Supertest of a Soviet heavy that hasn’t been in the spotlight for long: the IS-3A. The version tested has an interesting quirk: an autoreloader. The objective of the test is assessing how the mechanic works with a heavy tank.

Please note: we’re checking the autoreloading mechanic on a heavy tank and not changes this particular vehicle. Also, this is the first iteration: we may adjust the mechanic and/or change the stats later.

The IS-3A has been chosen as a model aggressive brawling heavy here, and we’re giving it the ability to conserve firepower. We’ll see what happens!

So what are we testing exactly?

In this Supertest, the IS-3A gets a three-round clip like the one the top-tier Italians have. But there’s a playstyle-changing difference: here it’s the first round that takes the least time to reload, not the third one. 12/15/18 seconds is the reloading time for the first, the second, and the third shells respectively (at the first stage of testing). You’re able to fire once the first round is in, but in this case the loading sequence will start anew so you may want to wait for another shell. Or probably for one more.

In brief: when you’re empty, each successive round takes more time to load.

So what do we want after all?

We want a heavy that favors a pronounced attack. A vehicle conserving firepower when the battle slows down or while changing its position, and then giving out around 1,200 damage while staying in combat (this tank should be able to wage war with one shell loaded, if needed—for the reload time for the first one is short). The gun parameters still consign it to the role of a brawler as the gun’s low accuracy precludes sniping. Still, close combat should be more comfortable because the aiming time went down to 3.0 seconds (from 3.4 seconds). All-out attacking and a series of hard-hitting punches FTW!

So what will happen to the IS-3A in the future?

It’s being discussed as we’re testing a gameplay concept of an autoreloader heavy and not an IS-3A variant. A lot will be defined by test results, like whether this concept sees release. In any case we’ll make sure to inform you on any changes to the IS-3A, if these happen.

Once again, the stats and even the gameplay concept for the tank aren’t final and are subject to change, depending on testing data and your feedback.

Source

65 thoughts on “Supertest: IS-3A

  1. Make it happen, this tank is so meh right now that I never see it anymore. I definitely use mine more often if this happens.

    1. Yeeeeah but the IS-7 doesn\’t HAVE a true autoloader. Its a load ASSIST device operated by the two loaders because yaknow 130mm round is a heavy sum bitch.

      1. IS-7 have a ready rack system, pretty much. We see it in WoT as autoreloader on italian tanks. This type of thing is being teased for IS-7 for quite some time now.

  2. I remember the time when the tech tree IS3 was considered over performing and being more of a tier 8.5 and a tier 8.0.
    Sweet memories of days gone with premium content being more balanced vs standard content.

    How much I long for a World of Tanks evolved with it looks of today, but but held true to the design philosophy that premium vehicles should be at a slight disadvantage for their increased credits/exp gain advantages.

    1. 100% agreed…
      normak reload is3 but wait…. heres 2 more shots you can dump into someone then 10 sec later dump another…..

    2. Yeah, you shoot 3 times and thenyou can shoot normally. But if you want to burst again you have to wait for 30+ seconds. And if you’ll get caught in the middle of the reload you’re kinda screwed, unlike italians.

  3. While it is certainly interesting, giving the first shell the shortest reload will not work as that would mean there is no drawback to firing 1-2 shots, they\’ll reload the fastest.

  4. I like the idea but I would guess that a 100mm would be more appropriate for T8. You know who else had an autoloader? The T-62. Might finally give that one something special to call it\’s own.

    1. buy and large the t-62 had no autoloader, especialy not our ingame version.

      there was an experiment called zhelud and that\’s it, it had the 115mm smoothbore gun not the 100mm rifled one we have in game, which is a redflag for wg.
      it had an automatic spent case extractor which threw the shell casing out of the tank through a hatch in the rear of the turret, it would be cool to animate it, but it would not make the tank better in combat.

  5. I like the idea but I would guess that a 100mm would be more appropriate for T8. You know who else had an autoloader? The T-62. Might finally give that one something special to call it\’s own.

  6. I like the idea but I would guess that a 100mm would be more appropriate for T8. You know who else had an autoloader? The T-62. Might finally give that one something special to call it\’s own.

  7. I like the idea but I would guess that a 100mm would be more appropriate for T8. You know who else had an autoloader? The T-62. Might finally give that one something special to call it\’s own.

  8. I like the idea but I would guess that a 100mm would be more appropriate for T8. You know who else had an autoloader? The T-62. Might finally give that one something special to call it\’s own.

  9. I like the idea but I would guess that a 100mm would be more appropriate for T8. You know who else had an autoloader? The T-62. Might finally give that one something special to call it\’s own.

  10. I like the idea but I would guess that a 100mm would be more appropriate for T8. You know who else had an autoloader? The T-62. Might finally give that one something special to call it\’s own.

  11. I like the idea but I would guess that a 100mm would be more appropriate for T8. You know who else had an autoloader? The T-62. Might finally give that one something special to call it\’s own.

  12. I like the idea but I would guess that a 100mm would be more appropriate for T8. You know who else had an autoloader? The T-62. Might finally give that one something special to call it\’s own.

  13. I like the idea but I would guess that a 100mm would be more appropriate for T8. You know who else had an autoloader? The T-62. Might finally give that one something special to call it\’s own.

  14. I like the idea but I would guess that a 100mm would be more appropriate for T8. You know who else had an autoloader? The T-62. Might finally give that one something special to call it\’s own.

  15. I like the idea but I would guess that a 100mm would be more appropriate for T8. You know who else had an autoloader? The T-62. Might finally give that one something special to call it\’s own.

  16. I like the idea but I would guess that a 100mm would be more appropriate for T8. You know who else had an autoloader? The T-62. Might finally give that one something special to call it\’s own.

  17. I like the idea but I would guess that a 100mm would be more appropriate for T8. You know who else had an autoloader? The T-62. Might finally give that one something special to call it\’s own.

  18. I like the idea but I would guess that a 100mm would be more appropriate for T8. You know who else had an autoloader? The T-62. Might finally give that one something special to call it\’s own.

  19. I like the idea but I would guess that a 100mm would be more appropriate for T8. You know who else had an autoloader? The T-62. Might finally give that one something special to call it\’s own.

  20. I like the idea but I would guess that a 100mm would be more appropriate for T8. You know who else had an autoloader? The T-62. Might finally give that one something special to call it\’s own.

  21. I like the idea but I would guess that a 100mm would be more appropriate for T8. You know who else had an autoloader? The T-62. Might finally give that one something special to call it\’s own.

  22. I like the idea but I would guess that a 100mm would be more appropriate for T8. You know who else had an autoloader? The T-62. Might finally give that one something special to call it\’s own.

  23. I like the idea but I would guess that a 100mm would be more appropriate for T8. You know who else had an autoloader? The T-62. Might finally give that one something special to call it\’s own.

  24. Seems ridicilously op. Expect new soviet tank lines with this kind of autoreloader with no drawback. Balancing tier 8 = buffing tier russian tanks. Can\’t wait for the T-44-100A.

  25. Hmm
    guys better hope YOUR not in front of it when fires 3 x 390 alpha at you
    that\’s going to be module wrecking alpha damage end of YOUR game mate

    of course its NOT Over Powered at all is it Wargame?

    imagine – you can 1 shot a Tier 6 in 6 seconds back to Garage ~ not Broken at all eh WG!
    imagine – you can 1 shot 2x Tier 6 in 9 seconds no problem at all, yes with bit of luck!
    imagine – you can 1 shot a Tier 7 back to the Garage in 9 seconds!!

    but that reload penalty you say ~ tell that to the \’little fellows\’ in dead Tier 6 tanks

    yeah WG another fucking NOT thought out and fuck stupid idea!

    1. Looks like you forgot about Lorraine 40t – 1200dmg in 7.50s with speed and accuracy, Emil I – 1280 in 9s with turret armor and crazy depression, AMX 50 100 with 1800 in 13.64s which can clip how many tier 6s? Next Somua SM 1500 in 9s with much better gun stats, some armor, AMX AC mle. 48 – 1200dmg in 5.41s!!! with 325 APCR pen. Should I continue? No it is not groundbreaking, I 3-marked IS-3A, its gun sucks big time, with autoloader it will be very competitive at best. Finally after like 3 years. I think in WOT Blitz it has autoloader like from beginning probably.

        1. IS-3 hull is not 252U hull, it was reliable 3 years ago. IS-3A turret is not the same or as good armored as IS-3 turret – it has much flatter cheeks.

  26. IS-3A also suffers from excessive crew death. I dont know why, but it seems every battle I have far more crew death issues than in the regular IS-3

  27. well, the basic idea of combining the IS-3 with an form of autolader sounds OP to beginn with. DPM of 1950 in \”single fire mode\” seems ok but is better than standard IS-3. the pure idea of having the first shell beeing reloaded the fastest seems kinda akward.

    an balancing idea could to make it so, that if you have the full clip and fire one shell, then you have wait those awfull 18 seconds befpre the clip is full again – just keep shooting from the magazine. intraclip reload of 3 seconds is rather high, though.

    and dont forget: the IS-3A fires APCR as standard, so those 221mm pen are more like 215mm AP-pen against anything with an armor angle (because of worse normalization).

Leave a Reply