112 versus IS-6: the showdown

Hello everyone,

lots of people were asking about the new upcoming tier 8 heavy tank, the “112″, especially in relationship with another tier 8 heavy, the IS-6, because both fill the same niche (relatively mobile, decently armored tank with relatively worse armor). Let’s have a look at the both of them then. Keep however in mind that the 112 data are based on 0.8.6 test server and might (and most likely will) change to some extent.


Here’s a comparative picture of both the vehicles in question (as posted by Twistoon (EU forums) here)


You can click on the picture to make it bigger of course.

Let’s start with the turret. There is no doubt about it, while both turrets are relatively well armored, when facing this vehicle up front, the 112 has a clear advantage here. The turret is well rounded and despite not being as thick on the sides on the paper, the side armor is approximately of the same thickness. Frontal turret armor however is much thicker on the 112 (compare the 240mm to IS-6′s 150mm). The mantlet of the 112 is also much thicker (240mm, compared to the 150mm one). Both have a relatively big gap behind the mantlet, but 112 has it thicker (not that it matters that much, when considering the mantlet thickness). Both vehicles have comparable weakspots (periscopes, hatches), but there is the matter of the 112′s upper turret 100mm plate. As a conclusion, 112′s turret is better, but not as much as you’d think, as the upper turret weakness can (and will) be exploited.

While the upper frontal hull armor is better on the 112 again (20-40mm thicker), lower frontal armor is 112′s weakspot. 80mm with roughly the same slope as the one of the IS-6, the protection is lower. If the lower frontal armor gets exposed, some serious angling will be required. Side hull armor is definitely thinner on the 112, which also has a bigger 30mm spaced armor strip covering a part of the tracks, improving the anti-HEAT effect, as well as acting as a second spaced armor layer. That gives the IS-6 an advantage. Generally speaking, I’d say it will be difficult to angle the hull of the 112 without creating the “IS-3″ effect (being penetrated thru the frontal part of the tracks into the hull). Here, IS-6 has a clear advantage.

Overall, despite the fact that both tanks have different armor layouts, I do believe that in head to head combat, IS-6 driver would have an advantage, as the hull armor of the 112 offers several spots to exploit. On the other hand, there is the visible IS-6 frontal weakspots.

Both vehicles have relative good armor, but the 112 is better. If played defensively and with its lower place hidden behind an obstacle, the advantage becomes even bigger.


When considering the data from gamemodels3d:

112 is equipped with the Chinese copy of the D-25, the D-25TA, while the IS-6 carries the D-30 field gun.

Accuracy – 0,46 for both (a ties) (it’s worth noting that moving accuracy dispersion is better for 112, by roughly 10 percent)
Rate of fire – 5 for 112, 5,13 for IS-6 (IS-6 wins, but slightly, the difference between reload times is 0,3s)
Damage – 390 for both
Penetration – 175 for both
Gold penetration – 217 for IS-6, 300 for 112

The 112 gold ammo is probably the best feature of the vehicle, making it instantly a better choice than the IS-6, despite the slightly lower rate of fire. 300 penetration for a limited matchmaker is brutal and there is a danger that when spamming gold shells, this vehicle will become overpowered.

Aim time – 3,4 for IS-6, 3,1 for 112 (a clear 112 advantage)
Both vehicles have the same aim circle dispersion after a shot. Gun depression is also the same (-6), while IS-6 has a slightly better elevation (20, compared to 17 of 112). One minor issue is very low gun depression of 112, when the turret is facing backward, but that can be easily avoided.

One last factor is the shell velocity. While the regular shells of the IS-6 fly slower than those of the 112 (790 vs 900), gold shells of IS-6 fly faster (988 to 720). It might not seem like it, but this is an advantage for the 112. When do you need shell velocity? When sniping. Both guns are quite inaccurate, but with current accuracy buff across the board, the distance of engagement increased in general. Thus, in mid-to-long range combat, 112 has a clear advantage, while lower velocity for the 112 gold shells doesn’t matter that much, since gold shells are not used for “lucky” shots across the map, but when you are in danger. Plus, the IS-6 gold shells are subcaliber, while the 112 gold shells are HEAT, which makes them not lose penetration with distance.

It is also worth noting that 112 turret rotates slightly faster (26 deg/s to 24 deg/s)

Clear victory for the 112. Its gun will be its trademark.


First, the obvious: Hp/ton. While both vehicles have roughly equal level of protection, the 112 is actually cca 5,5 tons lighter (48,822 compared to 43,327 tons). However, while the IS-6 has a 700hp engine (14,34 hp/t), 112 only has 580hp (13,38 hp/t). This implies that the 112 will be slightly less mobile. The 112 engine has a lower fire chance, but that’s about the only advantage it has.

However, the speed limits are something else: 112 will be able to reach 45 km/h, while the IS-6 can only reach 35 km/h. In other words, if given time to accelerate, 112 will be faster. Also, thanks to better terrain resistance (for bad and medium terrain 20 percent!), 112 will be more maneuverable in terrain. Both vehicles have the same hull traverse speed – 26 degrees per second, so if you want to know how 112 turns, you can check out the IS-6 (if you have it, that is).

One could argue yet another victory for the 112, but not a decisive one, as acceleration will most likely be worse than that of the IS-6. On the other hand, the ability to reach higher speeds will make this vehicle quite useful.

Other factors

Both vehicles have a 4 man crew with the same roles (radioman is the commander, then there’s driver, loader and gunner). 112 however can see further (380 viewrange, IS-6 has 350) and has longer radio range (600, compared to 440 of 112). Both vehicles have the same limited MM planned (eg. neither will meet tier 10′s in battle).

Complete verdict

I do believe that for an average tanker, especially for a wallet warrior, 112 will be a better vehicle. Its decisive factor are the 300 shells, which – compared with the 0.8.6 improved accuracy – are destined to HURT. While the IS-6 is mediocre in most respects (but not totally hopeless in any), 112 has some clearcut advantages over it, such as the gun and the speed.

Personally, I believe that even without the 300 pen shells, 112 would be a relatively decent vehicle, but the gold shells give it an edge even over regular vehicles. Therefore it is my believe that some factors (possibly the gold shells penetration) will be nerfed for the 0.8.7 general test. Without such nerf, there is a danger of 112 becoming another Type 59, flooding the tier 7-9 battles. I am not sure we or WG need that.

41 thoughts on “112 versus IS-6: the showdown

  1. Hi.

    1. massive use of premium ammo on a premium tank is kinda strange.
    2. any idea of the shellprice?

    • Well thats how SP works currently, which means if wont bring much money in when facing tier 8-9 heavies.

    • 112 Ammo Price: AP:1,025 HEAT:14 (5,600) HE: 608
      IS-6 Ammo Price: AP:1 025 APCR: 12 (4,800) HE: 608

  2. Well if they want to keep penetration i would give it regular tier 8 heavy MM means it will fight in tier 10 battles

    • “Besides pleasing the 2nd biggest market, WG wants to please the biggest market too.”

      Welcome to the grown up world.

    • China server – 150,000 players or more. Plus from what ive heard, the prices there are higher too.

      Lets mix the ingredients :

      - 150.000+ player base
      - a bit higher price than NA,RU,EU servers
      - OP CHINESE tank
      - a bit of communist propaganda in a few ads, about how great the tank is.

      Result : people will buy it like hot bread and this premium tank alone will provide enough money for Wargaming for another 2years.

        • So what if they make money? If the WOT will stop making money, they will close down, because the are here FOR THE MONEY, THEY ARE NOT A CHARITY.If they close down, we will lose all the time we invested in this game, grinding to our tier X tanks. I have 8 of them, some have more, some have less. So… I wish WOT prosperity, so that I can enjoy my game. And I think you should wish them that too….

  3. Now please make showdown with 112 and VK45A. Because i want know how exactly i will get pwned by this rolling nuke.

    • A quick one:

      VK 4502A is faster with better HP/T
      Has worse armor
      Better non-gold pen
      Worse Gold pen
      Better accuracy (by a long shot, 0.11 better)
      Lower alpha
      A bit better Rate of Fire but ultimately worse DPM

  4. Why would they nerf gold pen on 112? IS-2 currently has the same pen on T7 and I haven’t seen any whining about IS-2s dominating battles. HEAT shells are not so shoot-anywhere-and-do-dmg (especially with D-25 accuracy) – tracks or spaced armour eats them.

    The only problem with 112 is that all those differences from IS-6 are making it very pro-friendly – good players will be able to get much better results with it (better armour when keeping enemy in front, better gold shells, faster in rough terrain). It is not OP on T8 (IS-3 or 110 are better) but it will probably get such reputation – and unfortunately it is enough to cause type-like flood.

    • True… but IS-2 doesn’t have something what 112 will.
      It’s called high credit factor. You just can’t spam HEAT ammo with your IS-2 all the day. With 112 any half decent player can make some profit with only HEAT (without prem acc), because 300mm HEAT will pen and cause dmg! And with premium account… I would say even noobs can earn money (let alone pros, who will pwn very hard)
      It would be really nice if my IS-6 could pen E75, ST-I and other hard stuff without problem… But right now, if I face with them on the battlefield I need to retreat, load APCR and pray to hit their weakspot and maybe pen it…
      But it isn’t a problem for 112.

      The ~300mm pen alone wouldn’t be such a problem, but when you get high credit factor with your gun… you will know it.

  5. I find your article very biased. You just present every weakness of 112 as an advantage. I think that the best thing about is-6 is it extraordinary side armor. Most tanks fails to penetrate it very often.

    • Every weakness can be turned into an advantage, if used correctly. Weak 112 side armor is a serious one, but if kept at least partially hulldown, it will be negated. Meanwhile, IS-6 doesn’t benefit from any such situation.

      • IS-6 wins for me.
        RoF – both are brawlers so its very important
        Armor almost the same, 112 has better frontal /+20mm and is6 seems welrounded (side armor 100)

  6. You omitted to mention the angle of 112′s upper frontal armor. What’s its effective armor?

    • It has the same slope as 113. They are almost identical tanks. And ive just played it on test server few days ago. God it feels great to bounce E-100 HEAT shells.

  7. “I do believe that in head to head combat, IS-6 driver would have an advantage, as the hull armor of the 112 offers several spots to exploit”

    What weakspots 112 has in facehug mode? the driver port is a part of the 120mm sloped front. The turret? good luck penning 240mm. Whats left? the command hatch. They’re small, decently armored and possitioned way back.

    And what weakspots 112 has even at range, besides the lower plate?

  8. Does it have special MM?

    I have an IS-6 and I really love it but it feels as if WG are saying – screw you IS-6 drivers. Here is a better tank for you to buy.

    I understand the lower plate is weaker on the 112 but as is summed up the frontal armour has fewer weakspots.

  9. Prem pen nerf won’t happen, because it’s identical to the T7 Chinese HT cannon that also has 300 pen HEAT.

  10. I love how the Engine only having 260HP on the 112 gets completely neglected.

  11. This test is rather bad, since it’s incomplete.

    The Is-6 has 220mm armor on the frontal sideplates left and right of the front.

    The current picture, that the complete front of the is-6 is 100mm is plain wrong.

  12. Excelsior is basically a much better T14.

    I don’t here T14 players scream. Is-6 drivers get over yourselves.

  13. Power creep much? Everything the is6 can do, the 112 can do better.

    Consider this: IS6 has better side armor yes, but it also has “shoulders” to its frontal armor, which when attempting to side-scrape provide a nice flat surface to shoot at.

    The 112 has no shoulders, only one straight angled plate, which will make side-scraping just as effective.

    The 112 in its current state is basically a huge “fuck you” to the IS6 drivers.
    Thanks WG!

    • no its not. is6 has much better side armor and way less weaspots. get your facts straight. k thx

      • Way less weakspots??! What are you smoking cheech.

        The is6 has the frontal drivers hatch, the 112 has the lower glacis. The lower glacis is by far a better weakspot to have in that its harder to hit reliably, and can be hidden or even angled more effectively.

        You try hiding that square drivers hatch, good luck… Oh and angling? Now they have a nice fat shoulder to shoot at 90 degrees.

        The is6′s side armor is great but when compared to the all round better soft stats on the 112, 300 pen heat rounds, and the fact it can still sidescrape…

        Your arguement is worse than your spelling. Any decent player recognizes (so far) the 112 is a better tank, hands down.