VI B and Teching

I'm not sure what the problem would be with having it be a unit produced by the Schwer HQ. 4 units from the last tier isn't a problem. It would make it more dangerous to aggressively place the HQ if your long term plan was a KT.

As a random aside I feel like the T4 building should be less effective at penetrating mediums, too. And I'm not sure how I feel a out its AA potential. It feels so dumb having the building they gt every damn game just neutralise air recon >50% of the time. And also fend off all light vehicles, infantry and do non-trivial damage to all USF tanks except like, dozer sherms. If you accidentally put a Jackson in range it takes so much damage, lol.

Lots of people are saying how it would be unfair to not be able to build the KT if you lost a building or just the flak HQ, but that's how it is for all their units. That's the disadvantage of being able to put those buildings up in the field in the first place.

The king Tiger is the only unit except the base ones that is excluded from this type of risk. The result is that players fast teching to the KT put their buildings in ridiculously forward locations that they could never really defend, knowing that the buildings hold pretty much no value to them other then delaying the allied players who has to invest a lot of time and resources to taking them out. Making it way too easy to delay for a KT, especially in team games.

i have mixed feelings about t3 but they're not particularly important to the specifics of this thread.

The king Tiger is the only unit except the base ones that is excluded from this type of risk. The result is that players fast teching to the KT put their buildings in ridiculously forward locations that they could never really defend, knowing that the buildings hold pretty much no value to them other then delaying the allied players who has to invest a lot of time and resources to taking them out. Making it way too easy to delay for a KT, especially in team games.

yeah. it's different if they keep them alive until the VI B comes out, any issues there are not the same, but when they get the advantage of the forward positions and then the benefit of the VI B i think it's too much, it gives them too much momentum for too little risk.

Maybe... Just maybe the the answer is just nerf KT, or buff jackson and SU-85. KT is not invincible I know that but you need a lot more effort to take it out than your enemy needs to hold position.

Lots of people are saying how it would be unfair to not be able to build the KT if you lost a building or just the flak HQ, but that's how it is for all their units. That's the disadvantage of being able to put those buildings up in the field in the first place.

The king Tiger is the only unit except the base ones that is excluded from this type of risk. The result is that players fast teching to the KT put their buildings in ridiculously forward locations that they could never really defend, knowing that the buildings hold pretty much no value to them other then delaying the allied players who has to invest a lot of time and resources to taking them out. Making it way too easy to delay for a KT, especially in team games.

Once you lose your Forward truck, its pretty much GG. Except in team games (4v4) where other players can carry you to victory even tho you don't deserve to win on your own merit.
Because you lost your Truck and pulling KT isn't 'I win' moment.

IS2 or few Zis can take on KT just fine.........

KT isn't really the issue with OKW balance

Once you lose your Forward truck, its pretty much GG. Except in team games (4v4) where other players can carry you to victory even tho you don't deserve to win on your own merit.
Because you lost your Truck and pulling KT isn't 'I win' moment.

IS2 or few Zis can take on KT just fine.........

KT isn't really the issue with OKW balance

Nothing you just wrote is true.

Nothing you just wrote is true.

Then please discuss this in a discursive fashion and set out your reasons? If you have an argument, this is not a big ask

Waiting for the reasoned response....

Losing a forward truck is hardly GG in a 2v2 or higher. Maybe it is in 1v1, but even then it depends on how well you're doing otherwise. You lose a couple of minutes of time and a fair chunk of fuel if you want to rebuild that tier.

Putting the KT in the the Panzer HQ would not impact 1v1 balance in a major capacity because fast teching to KT is not a viable strategy in 1v1. As far as I can see, most people are beelining to panthers with heavy manpower investments in volks and obers prior to that. I may be wrong here since I'm not a huge 1v1 player, but if it was viable to stall for KT, that will change when we get balance tweaks to the volks blobs that are most likely going to come at some stage.

Then please discuss this in a discursive fashion and set out your reasons? If you have an argument, this is not a big ask

Waiting for the reasoned response....

Ok, then.

"Once you lose your Forward truck, its pretty much GG."
Not true at all. If you have even one building each one has a strong AT unit in it to keep you in the game. Schreked volks blobs themselves are enough to hold off most armor, especially with a little bit of puppchen support.

"Because you lost your Truck and pulling KT isn't 'I win' moment."
King Tiger is very easily a I win moment. If the allied player doesn't have at least 3-4 sources of AT it's over. Or atleast the decline will begin.


"IS2 or few Zis can take on KT just fine........."
An IS-2 will always lose in a straight up battle a KT easily. And I see KT literal stroll right up in front of two AT guns destroy them and then just fall back for repairs easily. AT guns alone are never enough to stop a KT.


"KT isn't really the issue with OKW balance"
It's why we are having this thread. There is a reason OKW is so strong late game and it's not because of pumas.


So yeah, everything he wrote. Just reverse it and you will be closer to the truth.

Ok, then.

"Once you lose your Forward truck, its pretty much GG."
Not true at all. If you have even one building each one has a strong AT unit in it to keep you in the game. Schreked volks blobs themselves are enough to hold off most armor, especially with a little bit of puppchen support.

Shreck blobs are quite easy to defeat at that stage in the game. Katy, Zis barages, mines, most allied medium/heavies have pretty good AI capabilities. Even Vet 5 volks get sqad wipes from Katy, IS2 etc.... They also lost retreat point and take long time to reappear leaving OKW with no presence on the field at all. Replacing truck is also a huge sink of much needed fuel and MP and in fact leaves OKW player in quite a bit of a trouble KT or not.
(it's difficult to support slow, heavy KT if you have to retreat your inf all the way to the base)

King Tiger is very easily a I win moment. If the allied player doesn't have at least 3-4 sources of AT it's over. Or atleast the decline will begin.

Why do you think you deserve to win if you don't have plenty of AT at that stage of the game?

An IS-2 will always lose in a straight up battle a KT easily. And I see KT literal stroll right up in front of two AT guns destroy them and then just fall back for repairs easily. AT guns alone are never enough to stop a KT.

IS2 is almost as good as KT, it will lose to KT if you stand at max range and have slagging match, its different story however if you support your IS2 with Zis and get IS2 to medium range.
Noob having 2 unsupported Zis guns taken out by KT is your evidence? lol

It's why we are having this thread. There is a reason OKW is so strong late game and it's not because of pumas.

Nope, however anyone can make a thread and doing so doesn't make it a fact or evidence.

So yeah, everything he wrote. Just reverse it and you will be closer to the truth

I play mostly Soviet and I like 4v4 the most. I played OKW less then 20 times since I only got WFA few weeks ago.

Playing as Soviet vs OKW I don't find 'death blobs' undefeatable. Also I don't find KT 'I win" unit.

What I do find is that most players in 4v4 who yell 'OP this' 'OP that' are really just incompetent.

Why:
Well, They make 3 IS2 and take on Axis Heavies head on at max range or charge 1 retreating tank losing 3 in process because they get flanked by other players. Having 1 or 2 IS2's and bunch of 'fall back position' ZIS guns is much better.
Don't use mines and complain about flanking, etc. FFS mines, mines, mines
Expect to win with arty/spamming Katy's
Charge deep into unsupported territory, get flanked by shrecks and cry 'death blob'
Don't cooperate with their teamates, don't anticipate when heavy armor is hitting the field after 500 games, take advice as criticizm and keep doing same fail thing over and over crying OP, etc etc.

Most 4v4 games are decided by matchmaker, since they are almost never even.

Good 4v4 allied teams can deal with KT and volk spams (not saying that Axis late game isn't a bit more powerful)

So no, KT in itself isn't the problem and solution offered would not fix anything.

There are plenty of threads that do touch on the real issues but this thread and this issue isn't one of them.

Merry Christmas and Happy new year

Last thing I want is for OKW to be encouraged to turtle more. Losing T4 is already very punishing for OKW as they lose access to Panther and Obers, which some would argue are required units to compete late game against allied elite infantry/ heavy tanks.

Plus they already tried having KT in T4 in Alpha. Obviously they didn't like it because they changed it to how it is now. Probably thought it was too punishing for a OKW player to lose a T4 building and thus made OKW play even more turtly than they do, which is not fun gameplay.

Babaroga, it takes a ton more units resource-wise ot kill somehting like a KT. It is unreasonable to say "oh you should have that mean so and so AT sources. OKW can have cheap AT infantry in Volks and still have OBERS and Tanks for AI duty. For the Allies to even have a chance to stop KT, a lot of AI power has to be sacrificed, unless you go LMG Paras.

An excellent way to get OKW to spend more fuel rather than stalling for a KT would be to make more tanks worth building that aren't so close in cost to a KT.

Sturmtiger is good, but costs a bit to much fuel and MP despite being great for blob/medium killing. Panther is just to close in cost to a command panther or even a KT, and lacks good Anti infantry capabilities which you NEED against the USF blob. Jadgpanzer is great for anti armor, and honestly in my opinion is better to get than a panther if you need to take down enemy armor.

Giving OKW the Ausf J at 100 or 115 fuel cost from the mechanized HQ would go a long way to getting players to spend fuel. As medium tank would help OKW immensely when the first shermans and t34's roll out.

Apparently, mediums are "against the design of OKW" so no dice there Alex. Just like how heavies are against the design of USF. Guess who got the better deal out of those design decisions, lol.

I love choosing my heavy USF skins knowing that there will never ever be a unit that takes advantage of it.

"No mediums" for OKW makes no sense since the Panther isn't a heavy tank, and nor is the Jadgpanzer. A single medium tank (and one that is worse than the Ostheer version until it acquires vet and upgrades).

Babaroga, it takes a ton more units resource-wise ot kill somehting like a KT. It is unreasonable to say "oh you should have that mean so and so AT sources. OKW can have cheap AT infantry in Volks and still have OBERS and Tanks for AI duty. For the Allies to even have a chance to stop KT, a lot of AI power has to be sacrificed, unless you go LMG Paras.

That is absolutely true, the best you can do is fend off and keep KT at bay, with bunch of Zis guns, until much latter in the game where Soviet Heavies hit the field. What good players/teams do. However that is unreasonable to expect in 4v4, for one side to be so heavily dependent on skill and micro, to fend off faction that requires little effort (talking about semi-skilled players that are part of most 4v4 games)

Which brings us to real issue here.
KT is supposed to be late late unit due to OKW fuel starvation and risk involved in going for fast KT, which is true in 1v1.

However, Relic in all their wisdom, haven't learned anything with Opel trucks and so on. And we have KT hitting the field in 4v4 way before anything that can deal with it effectively.

The real issue is that KT really needs CP timer in team games so it can only hit the field about the same time as IS2 as Relic intended for it to do. Not after 10 min or so. Limiting if player can pull one after having a truck destroyed or not, that wont fix anything.

It's just retarded that you have to face KT so early in the game and having to resort to playing entirely to survive, I understand that.

For me, KT should be reward for building all 3 tiers and keeping them alive.
This is stock unit so if it need all 3 trucks but I destory one you can'y build it.
If someone destroys my Soviets T4 I can't get Katy, right?

Comparasions with IS2 are pointless. IS2 is doctrinal, it's not tied to tiers so I can call it as soon as I get CPs and resources.

What's more.
I wonder why no one is asaying about KT wiping power.
ISU, ISU, ISU all day long... ISU has 4,5 AoE, no turret, decet armor, has to switch shells, easy to flank.
King Tiger has 4 AoE, turret, amazing armor, no need to switch shells, hard to flank and lowe scatter.
And now, the icing on the cake. Reload duration for ISU: 10s, for King Tiger: 6s.
So question, which unit wipes squad better?
Put King Tiger next to VP and it's almost impossible to take.

I just don't get why the hell Relic made KT non-doc unit... It's so broken...
You can get King Tiger and Pak43! THIS IS BROKEN!

It should be call in with Elite Armor doctrine and Pazner IV should non doc in one of tiers somehow.

The KT is not as much of a game closer as you think it is, if you make good use of B4 and rocket strikes you can kill it. It's not invincible.

The KT is not as much of a game closer as you think it is, if you make good use of B4 and rocket strikes you can kill it. It's not invincible.

So I should use only 1 doctrine as USF and only 1 as Soviets to counter non-doc unit?

Yes? It's not exactly unknown that there are extremely few viable allied doctrines, USF has exactly 1 good team game commander (Airborne).