Login

russian armor

KV-2 needs some adjustments

18 Dec 2014, 05:24 AM
#41
avatar of gman1211

Posts: 133

7 seconds? holy mother of terrible. No wonder no one uses it.
18 Dec 2014, 07:23 AM
#42
avatar of Blackart

Posts: 344

I used them in 4v4, but they cost to much population imo. I was able only to build 3 + I had some infantry.

KV-2 use 24 population, same as IS-2 but it's a worse unit. It's also overpriced.

18 Dec 2014, 12:39 PM
#43
avatar of TensaiOni

Posts: 198



I have managed to kill the darn thing in the time it takes for it to unpack. You can simply walk/drive under its minimum range as well and not be shot by it.

But it is pretty powerful if you make use of its max range against a fortified enemy since its RoF set up is pretty fast.


If you managed to kill it in ~7 seconds, it was already dead even before you got there :P

Also, if I'm not mistaken, it's RoF doesn't change depending in what mode it shots right now, only range changes.

7 seconds? holy mother of terrible. No wonder no one uses it.


Please, because a 7 second set up time makes or breaks KV-2? Tanks that are a threat to the KV-2 won't put more than one shot during this time. Also, if you are using it properly (with spotters etc.), you'll have plenty of time to reposition if you'll see a threat approaching.

The doctrine isn't used not because KV-2 is underperforming or has a 7 second setup time, only because it's MP starved.

I used them in 4v4, but they cost to much population imo. I was able only to build 3 + I had some infantry.

KV-2 use 24 population, same as IS-2 but it's a worse unit. It's also overpriced.



It's not worse, it's different - it's not a pure heavy tank like IS-2 or Tiger. It's role is much more similar to an ISU-152 than your regular heavy tank.

When compared to an ISU-152, it has less penetration, slightly less AoE and slightly less DPS (mostly due to lower accuracy at long range), but at the same time, it has greater range, can shoot over obstacles, don't have to change shell types and in terms of "pure" cost, it's cheaper.
Again, the main problem with KV-2 is the doctrine it's in.
18 Dec 2014, 15:15 PM
#44
avatar of jackill2611

Posts: 246


it has greater range,

What range? I doubt that it have 70 like ISU152.
18 Dec 2014, 15:21 PM
#45
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053



Also, if I'm not mistaken, it's RoF doesn't change depending in what mode it shots right now, only range changes.



I think we all need to test out the KV-2 again since we are all using "iirc" for this discussion. :P

I remember very strongly the KV-2 shooting much faster set up than in normal mode. Range is just a bonus.
18 Dec 2014, 16:09 PM
#46
avatar of rafiki

Posts: 108

rate of fire is not the same in the both mode. Lot longuer if not packed (something like 5s vs 9s). 1-2 shot of panther/P4 on rear armor during these 7s. Without even talking about the bad position of your tank because during these 7s the panther/P4 will go behind the tank and the speed of rotation of the tank take ages ! Try to win a 1vs1 against panther or even a P4 with all of that....

So you need 1 or 2 ziz to def it at least. But still the same issue. You have low MP with this commander. So MP penalty + conscript + Ziz + high cost of the tank. Hard to manage all of this.

In artillery mode it is an interesting tank but you have no mobility so.... A Stuka shoot and move. You can't kill it so easily.
18 Dec 2014, 16:52 PM
#47
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

Locked down KV-2 can easily kill Panther when fighting frontaly.
18 Dec 2014, 17:04 PM
#48
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Locked down KV-2 can easily kill Panther when fighting frontaly.

Unless panther will drive up close in which case it won't loose a single hp as KV-2 simply will not shoot.

KV-2 is expensive, not really durable and simply bad and hard to use ISU.
19 Dec 2014, 12:56 PM
#49
avatar of TensaiOni

Posts: 198


What range? I doubt that it have 70 like ISU152.


It has 100 range in indirect fire mode.



I think we all need to test out the KV-2 again since we are all using "iirc" for this discussion. :P

I remember very strongly the KV-2 shooting much faster set up than in normal mode. Range is just a bonus.


I guess I should have wrote "last time I've checked game stats" instead of "iirc".

Anyway, I've checked them again, and unless I'm looking at the wrong thing, I can't find any RoF changes.

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Dec 2014, 17:04 PMKatitof

Unless panther will drive up close in which case it won't loose a single hp as KV-2 simply will not shoot.

KV-2 is expensive, not really durable and simply bad and hard to use ISU.


Nothing stops you from turning off the indirect fire mode at close range. KV-2 will still most likely lose against a Panther but it shouldn't be surprising - dedicated AT beating a more generalist tank/mobile artillery.

Also, I don't think that KV-2 in terms of overall cost is expensive for what it does - if ISU-152 is worth 260 fuel, then KV-2 is worth 230. It's worse at some things, like penetration (it's still at Jackson levels) or hp/armour (it's still at Panther levels), but it has it's advantages, like longer range or ability to shot over obstacles, that emphasise it's "mobile artillery" role. Obviously, if you'd use it as a regular tank, it's pretty expensive for what it does - but the same logic can be applied to a lot of different vehicles too.

And again, while KV-2 is fine, the doctrine it is isn't.
19 Dec 2014, 13:23 PM
#50
avatar of jackill2611

Posts: 246

No it don't have 100 range in static mode! Where did you get those numbers? It have like 70. I played last 2 games with KV-2 with spotter\attack ground. It certanly dont have 100 range.

see some stats... (select RAW data)
Maybe KV-2 had 100 range before ISU\jacdtiger\Elefant range nerf, when they had 100 range too
19 Dec 2014, 13:42 PM
#51
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Also, I don't think that KV-2 in terms of overall cost is expensive for what it does - if ISU-152 is worth 260 fuel, then KV-2 is worth 230. It's worse at some things, like penetration (it's still at Jackson levels) or hp/armour (it's still at Panther levels), but it has it's advantages, like longer range or ability to shot over obstacles, that emphasise it's "mobile artillery" role. Obviously, if you'd use it as a regular tank, it's pretty expensive for what it does - but the same logic can be applied to a lot of different vehicles too.

And again, while KV-2 is fine, the doctrine it is isn't.


Its not really the fuel cost that is a problem here.

Remember KV-2 costed 440mp before. Now it costs over 600 in a doctrine most heavily penalized on menpower.

It also have worst survivability out of all heavy armor with only 800hp, yet costs as much as IS-2/Tiger except having considerably lesser stats while not providing anything over ISU, which still survives much better and performs better in both AT and AI thanks to scatter and accuracy that actually allows it to hit anything.

You've seen the yt clip, KV-2 have hard time hitting panther sitting in front of it. This thing was battered with nerfs on the cost increase patch as well as the whole doctrine was when relic kept increasing menpower and fuel costs for everything until it became not affordable for the doctrine.
19 Dec 2014, 14:36 PM
#52
avatar of aradim

Posts: 110

KV-2 only needs 2 things:

Slightly more HP
Slightly reduced setupt/desetup time, the commander it is in was realeased at a time when there were not nearly as many tools to counter it.

If not increase the range while in locked mode.

If it being a volatile and very vulnerable tank is indeed the design then it needs a manpower cost decrease that doesn't force you to stop reinforcing for 5 minutes to get it.
19 Dec 2014, 18:44 PM
#53
avatar of TensaiOni

Posts: 198

No it don't have 100 range in static mode! Where did you get those numbers? It have like 70. I played last 2 games with KV-2 with spotter\attack ground. It certanly dont have 100 range.

see some stats... (select RAW data)
Maybe KV-2 had 100 range before ISU\jacdtiger\Elefant range nerf, when they had 100 range too


Thanks for linking my own site. You are right though, I've completely missed the half a year old changelog and that KV-2 range change.
KV-2 has 70 range in indirect fire mode, so it doesn't have a greater range than ISU-152.
jump backJump back to quoted post19 Dec 2014, 13:42 PMKatitof


Its not really the fuel cost that is a problem here.

Remember KV-2 costed 440mp before. Now it costs over 600 in a doctrine most heavily penalized on menpower.

It also have worst survivability out of all heavy armor with only 800hp, yet costs as much as IS-2/Tiger except having considerably lesser stats while not providing anything over ISU, which still survives much better and performs better in both AT and AI thanks to scatter and accuracy that actually allows it to hit anything.

You've seen the yt clip, KV-2 have hard time hitting panther sitting in front of it. This thing was battered with nerfs on the cost increase patch as well as the whole doctrine was when relic kept increasing menpower and fuel costs for everything until it became not affordable for the doctrine.


I know, if you read my other posts in this thread that's what I've been saying - the fuel cost is fine and MP would have been fine too, if KV-2 was in any other doctrine. In Soviet Industry the MP cost is not fine. But it's more of a problem with the doctrine than with KV-2 itself.

As for it's survivability - it's not as survivable as other heavy tanks, because it can shoot from behind obstacles. I'm also pretty sure it's intended role is different than other heavy tanks. So not a damage sponge that can deal some damage, but a support artillery that can take some beating. I'm also not really sold on accuracy/scatter differances - it has larger scatter angle but less scatter distance, as well as having the same base accuracy as old ISU/current HE ISU. As for penetration values - are they so bad for a long range general purpose gun?

Though, since I was wrong about the indirect fire range - which is indeed only 70 - I guess KV-2 could use a buff somwhere. Like bring it's HP back to 960 or increase it's indirect fire range.

But I still think that they should fix Soviet Industry MP income before changing KV-2.

Oh, and by the way, while KV-2 was nerfed 2-3 times (hp 960 -> 800, scatter nerf and MP/FU cost adjustments with all other heavy tanks), it's penetration was actually buffed :P
19 Dec 2014, 19:31 PM
#54
avatar of NinjaWJ

Posts: 2070

my friend said that pq stated that KV2 would be getting a buff.... but this was pre-WFA!! I guess he forgot :(
20 Dec 2014, 00:30 AM
#55
avatar of wongtp

Posts: 647

its in industry, thats why its not used. the manpower drain is too penalizing. the tank itself has issues, but its not the main reason why its so unpopular.

also soviet t3 got a massive nerf when okw came in with schreck blob. its just that much easier to chase tanks away with schrecks than having mediums totally shitting on infantry. industry relies far too heavily on having t3 as its core. so while you are gimped on mp, you are also far too hard countered. thats why industry is rarely used and in turn, kv2 isnt that popular anymore.
22 Dec 2014, 05:45 AM
#56
avatar of DakkaIsMagic

Posts: 403

KV-2 needs the Armor to bounce Panzer 4 shots, or some shots.

That or it either needs to be less expensive or on more Doctrines, just, something else. I could see it being a callin for like, I don't know another conscript-AI focused Doc.

You get the point.
22 Dec 2014, 13:41 PM
#57
avatar of somenbjorn

Posts: 923

The entire inclusion of the KV-2 to the game is weird. It should never have been put in the game. Thank you Quinn for your historical authenticity, including a vehicle withdrawn from service and converted to KV-1s already in 1942 in MP set in late 1944.
#relichistory


Just remove it and give the windustry T-34/85s or something, maybe ML-20, those two represents soviet industrial power more than a shoddy gimmick from the early days.
22 Dec 2014, 23:31 PM
#58
avatar of Kronosaur0s

Posts: 1701

KV2 Stock. lol.
22 Dec 2014, 23:35 PM
#59
avatar of NinjaWJ

Posts: 2070

KV2 Stock. lol.

hey it could be fun
23 Dec 2014, 01:00 AM
#60
avatar of Nuclear Arbitor
Patrion 28

Posts: 2470

honestly, it wouldn't be that bad. the VI B and sturmtiger already set the precedent. it would escalate the late game though, and given the issues with infantry right now i'm not sure that's a good idea.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

538 users are online: 538 guests
0 post in the last 24h
3 posts in the last week
23 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48733
Welcome our newest member, service
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM