KV-2 What is it good for?

What is the KV-2 good for? I feel like ISU-152 is better in almost every way. I don't understand how to use this tank. Please help me.

Use it like a tank. Slow projectile but kills everything. Can duel panthers with minor support.

Call me crazy but the KV-2 feels worse than Brumbar. Armour levels feels about the same but the Brumbar fires faster, moves faster and wipes more reliably because the projectile moves faster.

If you're not, use attack ground with howitzer mounted tanks. 105 sherman, KV-2, ISU-152. They're all a lot better with attack ground. KV-2 has more HP and armor than the brummbar, but its projectile is slower. It also deals decent damage vs tanks because of deflection damage.

its basically a worse brummbär. luckily the brumm got buffed beyoned the limits of heaven in the last patch!

its basically a worse brummbär. luckily the brumm got buffed beyoned the limits of heaven in the last patch!

???

That's because ISU is better

KV-2 is a meme 1vs1 unit

Personally I would like to see Siege mode moved to the SU-76, and the SU-76 barrage would get moved to the KV-2.

This would allow the KV-2 to function similarly to the Brumbar and the SU-76 wouldn't be rare to see if the Siege Mode allowed it to shoot HE only Shells.

Brumbar has got exactly what I'm looking for in regards to a howitzer on wheels.

Good mobility, decent armour, decent healthpool, decent cost, fast projectile that wipes reliably and good vet upgrades.

I think I expected too much from the KV-2. I can see how its a meme 1v1 unit with how much health it has but its too slow and the gun on the KV-2 isn't the derp gun I expected from my times playing World of Tanks.

Also to the person saying it can duel a Panther with some help. It most definitely cannot duel a panther even with ALOT of help. Its best quality is taking damage and if I'm going to get something that is gonna take damage, I'd rather get an IS-2.

I only wish it was a little faster and had faster projectile speed. Would be nice if it was as fast as ISU HE rounds.

Personally I would like to see Siege mode moved to the SU-76, and the SU-76 barrage would get moved to the KV-2.

This would allow the KV-2 to function similarly to the Brumbar and the SU-76 wouldn't be rare to see if the Siege Mode allowed it to shoot HE only Shells.

This! +1

Personally I would like to see Siege mode moved to the SU-76, and the SU-76 barrage would get moved to the KV-2.

This would allow the KV-2 to function similarly to the Brumbar and the SU-76 wouldn't be rare to see if the Siege Mode allowed it to shoot HE only Shells.

Because we really need more 1000 HP units with an HE barrage that outranges AT guns right?

Because we really need more 1000 HP units with an HE barrage that outranges AT guns right?

Siege Mode Gives +30 to Weapon Range. The KV-2 already outranges AT Guns (70 range vs at gun 60 range) so I don't see the point you are trying to make. I would rather have a KV-2 that used ammo for an HE barrage than a KV-2 that sat behind a building shooting at AT Guns with no cost attached. By removing the cheese aspect of the unit it can be fair and better for all users, those using it and those playing against it.

Worse and more expensive then Brumbar.
IS-2 work much better and have chance vs tanks

What is the KV-2 good for? I feel like ISU-152 is better in almost every way. I don't understand how to use this tank. Please help me.

Just my two cents:

Are you familiar with StarCraft? The KV-2 is basically the CoH2 version of the Siege Tank from that game (gets a big refire rate and range increase with a toggled ability that sacrifices mobility). In my experience, it actually works best as mobile heavy artillery. But to use it at its full potential, you MUST use its deployed "turret mode". It has roughly the destructive power of the B-4 (thanks to much higher fire rate) but is way more accurate and will auto-attack any targets in range like a mortar. Thanks to its impressive range when in turret mode, it is particularly effective at helping to deny capture over multiple sectors if you position it well.

Is it strictly better than the ISU-152? I will never say that, but you have to look at costs and trade offs too. For starters, the ISU-152 is more expensive in every way (MP,Fuel,pop). You also have to account for the other Commander abilities that are included with these vehicles. Ultimately, it depends on what you are looking for. If you just want a better TD, the ISU-152 is the obvious choice. But if you want some heavy indirect fire support with more consistent fire rate, the KV-2 is the better of the two for that. Either way, the weaknesses of either can be supplemented by other units in your arsenal.

Functionally, the KV-2 does exactly what it was always suppose to (it was built to be a bunker buster). If you want to talk "balance" maybe adjust unit cost as needed (I don't have any strong opinion about that), but that should be it.

Of course, some opinions here may differ, but from what I can tell, I don't think most people use it as it was intended; if you treat it like heavy artillery, it does great.

???

Late, but I believe he was being sarcastic.

remove siege mode and give it something else. the whole unit need a rework but the question is what

remove siege mode and give it something else. the whole unit need a rework but the question is what

someone didn't read my post above

someone didn't read my post above

i did you claim its fine. with most of the axis tanks having blitz by the time its deactivated its too late.

i did you claim its fine. with most of the axis tanks having blitz by the time its deactivated its too late.

A bit vague, but I'm assuming you are talking about them using it to rush in close on your K-V?

By that logic, you could say the same for ANY artillery unit. The KV is and never was good on its own; to treat it like any other frontline heavy tank is ignoring all of its advantages. It's like complaining that the 120 mortor team is weak because it can't fight off infantry that rush in on it.

Now if we really want to talk balance, maybe adjust the cost or attack damage to make it more attractive to the ongoing meta, sure, but anyone suggesting it's current abilities suck and should be changed completely is missing out on what makes it great. Sure, it might not be for everyone, but that's not the point. Variety is the spice of life, baby!

Just my two cents:

Are you familiar with StarCraft? The KV-2 is basically the CoH2 version of the Siege Tank from that game (gets a big refire rate and range increase with a toggled ability that sacrifices mobility). In my experience, it actually works best as mobile heavy artillery. But to use it at its full potential, you MUST use its deployed "turret mode". It has roughly the destructive power of the B-4 (thanks to much higher fire rate) but is way more accurate and will auto-attack any targets in range like a mortar. Thanks to its impressive range when in turret mode, it is particularly effective at helping to deny capture over multiple sectors if you position it well.

Is it strictly better than the ISU-152? I will never say that, but you have to look at costs and trade offs too. For starters, the ISU-152 is more expensive in every way (MP,Fuel,pop). You also have to account for the other Commander abilities that are included with these vehicles. Ultimately, it depends on what you are looking for. If you just want a better TD, the ISU-152 is the obvious choice. But if you want some heavy indirect fire support with more consistent fire rate, the KV-2 is the better of the two for that. Either way, the weaknesses of either can be supplemented by other units in your arsenal.

Functionally, the KV-2 does exactly what it was always suppose to (it was built to be a bunker buster). If you want to talk "balance" maybe adjust unit cost as needed (I don't have any strong opinion about that), but that should be it.

Of course, some opinions here may differ, but from what I can tell, I don't think most people use it as it was intended; if you treat it like heavy artillery, it does great.

You are right in that ISU is slightly more expensive but not by much. I feel like the KV-2 does not perform well for its cost.

I am an avid Starcraft Broodwar and Starcraft 2 player. I like how you compare the KV-2 to the Siege tank since both have the siege tank. The Starcraft 2 siege tank has instant undodgeable splash damage while in siege mode and it has a different weapon in unsieged mode. I have said this before but the KV-2's projectile is incredibly slow and can be easily dodged especially at range which makes it ineffective against anything that isn't standing still. In addition, there are no 'bounces' or scatter in Starcraft. The siege tank is reliable, accurate high burst splash damage. The KV-2 is very unreliable in penetrating armour and hitting infantry especially at range because of its slow projectile speed.

I want to bring back the cost into account. The ISU is only slightly more expensive but it has fast moving HE shells for wiping infantry that cannot be easily dodged unless by scatter. It comes with AP rounds for engaging tanks and it has the range without entering siege mode.

IMO. As a late-game doctrinal tank, the KV-2 probably ranks as one of the worse late-game doctrinal tanks. In that it must expose itself unnecessarily and it is mostly ineffective for its cost. I think the KV-2 was good when it was released by the evolving meta/changes of Coh2 has forgotten our humble KV-2.

Edit: I don't like being an armchair developer complaining about something and not proposing changes so I think the following should be put into consideration to bring it more in line with other heavies.

- Cost needs to be adjusted if no other buffs are made
- Projectile speed needs to be looked at. Either changed to a fast projectile like the ISU or increased travel time like the comparable to the Brumbar which this tank competes with.
- Siege time needs to be shortened. See below.

I think the comparison to the Starcraft siege tank is a very good one. The Starcraft siege tank has a clear and defined role. It is powerful but it has it weaknesses too. I think the KV-2 should move more into a siege tank type role in that it is less effective while unsieged but more effective while sieged.

Setup siege time should be around 3-4 seconds while unsiege should be slightly faster at 2-3s. Currently I think it is around ~10s(?) which is far too long and makes it far too vulnerable to artillery or call-ins. There is no counter play with anything more than 3s of setup/tear down time.

These are preliminary changes with future changes to adjust reload time, penetration and AoE based on performance.