Login

russian armor

Is the King Tiger still worth 260 fuel?

PAGES (19)down
24 Apr 2015, 11:56 AM
#221
avatar of Butcher

Posts: 1217

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Apr 2015, 11:39 AMKatitof

If your opponent have 2 IS-2 and T34, then you had very low map control and were pushed off the map most of the game.
If your opponent has the King Tiger, what were you doing the whole game? With the tech involved and the price and the fuel income of OKW, it´s way harder. Even when denying the Soviet player the fuel point, he can afford an IS-2 thanks to only having to spend his fuel on T2. If anything else fails, get a cache - OKW can´t do that.

And for all those trouble OKW get a clumsy, slower IS-2 with a better gun.

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Apr 2015, 11:39 AMKatitof
Also, have fun doing engine damage to KT with AT nade, if you did, time to try some Lotto next.
Easier than you think with mines (ammo flow) or not throwing the at nades from the font. Even then the gamble is on the Soviet players side, because if the AT nade penetrates, the game is over. Ever seen the turret speed of the KT?
24 Apr 2015, 11:59 AM
#222
avatar of Porygon

Posts: 2779

24 Apr 2015, 12:00 PM
#223
avatar of kamk
Donator 11

Posts: 764

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Apr 2015, 11:39 AMKatitof

If your opponent have 2 IS-2 and T34, then you had very low map control and were pushed off the map most of the game...

Sadly not.

Get a FlakHT / Puma, and tech to KT, and you will have nearly spent the equivalent of 2x IS2, T34, and T3 in fuel cost.

Though i'm not a huge fan of comparing this directly, OKW gains a lot of goodies and tech as well, or could also go for doctrinal solutions like 43s.

IMO the IS2 could get a slight (!) armor nerf, and KT a slight (!) pen buff.
24 Apr 2015, 12:06 PM
#224
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

IS-2(and tiger, well, all 11+cp units) need one thing only, which is a limit of 1.

Its equally bs to fight 2 tigers as it is to fight 2 IS-2s from a single player.

Again, this is the design issue. Argument that KT is weak because it loses to 2x IS-2+more isn't really a good one.

@kamk
Got to admit, I took the assumption of going straight for the KT as still so many OKW players try to do, if they will get lights, especially puma it all changes.
24 Apr 2015, 12:37 PM
#225
avatar of JohnnyB

Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Apr 2015, 12:06 PMKatitof
IS-2(and tiger, well, all 11+cp units) need one thing only, which is a limit of 1.

Its equally bs to fight 2 tigers as it is to fight 2 IS-2s from a single player.

Again, this is the design issue. Argument that KT is weak because it loses to 2x IS-2+more isn't really a good one.

@kamk
Got to admit, I took the assumption of going straight for the KT as still so many OKW players try to do, if they will get lights, especially puma it all changes.


Surprisingly, this time you are the one who said a sensible thing related to heavies. Exactly this I was asking for and that is why COH1 was more balanced when it comes about heavies. THEY WERE LIMITED AT ONE AT A TIME on the battlefield. And this would solve a big part of the "call-in meta" problem that so many are complaining about. Fact is, I really don't know how things can be settled in dual call ins case like T34/85s. If one of them dies, then what? Generaly speaking 2 85s = 1 IS2. Or in KV1 heavy tank call in's case, which is not so strong to be limited at just one at a time.
24 Apr 2015, 12:39 PM
#226
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Which is why I've specifically stated 11+CP.
Units below that do not have firepower and durability mix to excuse any limitations other then to command units, its not hard to counter them with normal AT guns+infantry support.
24 Apr 2015, 12:43 PM
#227
avatar of JohnnyB

Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Apr 2015, 12:39 PMKatitof
Which is why I've specifically stated 11+CP.
Units below that do not have firepower and durability mix to excuse any limitations other then to command units, its not hard to counter them with normal AT guns+infantry support.


Hmmmm... this could actualy work. The only problem here is Ostheer with its expensive teching and not so good atm Tiger...
24 Apr 2015, 14:12 PM
#228
avatar of WingZero

Posts: 1484

The problem is not the KT but the player who is solely relying on this tank to win. OKW has verity of other options such as Panther and Jagdpanzer, more than enough to take care of IS2s. KT is a very late game and by that time OKW should have enough Vet infantry for a push. The armor nerf was needed and everyone knows it.
24 Apr 2015, 14:13 PM
#229
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Apr 2015, 12:06 PMKatitof
IS-2(and tiger, well, all 11+cp units) need one thing only, which is a limit of 1.

Its equally bs to fight 2 tigers as it is to fight 2 IS-2s from a single player.

Again, this is the design issue. Argument that KT is weak because it loses to 2x IS-2+more isn't really a good one.

@kamk
Got to admit, I took the assumption of going straight for the KT as still so many OKW players try to do, if they will get lights, especially puma it all changes.


The issue is that this would be an insanely massive nerf to to Soviets while not affect Axis barely at all. You almost never get more than 1 Elefant or 1 Jadgtiger or King Tiger, but you almost ALWAYS get more than 1 IS2 or ISU.

The Tiger would be seen less, but with some teching fixes Ostheer could rely on the Panther.

I will never get why Axis haters always love to suggest giant nerfs to Allies.

The problem is not the KT but the player who is solely relying on this tank to win. OKW has verity of other options such as Panther and Jagdpanzer, more than enough to take care of IS2s. KT is a very late game and by that time OKW should have enough Vet infantry for a push. The armor nerf was needed and everyone knows it.


If your trying to counter IS2's with JPIV's you going to lose.
24 Apr 2015, 14:23 PM
#230
avatar of Imagelessbean

Posts: 1585 | Subs: 1


If your trying to counter IS2's with JPIV's you going to lose.


I hesitate to even ask this but why would you even think that?

JPIV is stellar against all tanks. It gets good damage, penetration, and ROF. To top that it gets great vet bonuses that buff the tank quickly. If that is not enough it comes out ages before any serious tank hits the field.

If you are not able to use the JPIV to hold off or even destroy an IS-2 as OKW you are not playing well.
24 Apr 2015, 14:32 PM
#231
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8



The issue is that this would be an insanely massive nerf to to Soviets while not affect Axis barely at all. You almost never get more than 1 Elefant or 1 Jadgtiger or King Tiger, but you almost ALWAYS get more than 1 IS2 or ISU.

The Tiger would be seen less, but with some teching fixes Ostheer could rely on the Panther.

I will never get why Axis haters always love to suggest giant nerfs to Allies.

And you have problem with that why?
You clearly have close to zero insight on foreseeing impacts of changes and balance-I'm getting paid to do that. You don't even know what is wrong with the game and why soviets use double ISUs or IS-2s.

Let me enlighten you-to counter double Tigers. Now, how possibly could we stop that without buffing, nerfing or impacting game flow and economy while also encouraging players to actually tech instead of stall for heavy call-in spam?

OH I KNOW! BY LIMITING THEM TO ONE AT A TIME!


If your trying to counter IS2's with JPIV's you going to lose.

Lets ignore the fact that its most reliable, safe and cost effective unit to counter IS-2 unless you are fighting on really tight city map.

Lets ignore the fact that it was already done countless of times by players who actually have a clue and realize they don't need panther/KT on every map at all times.

Lets also ignore that SU-85 will deal with Tiger because of range, Jackson will do because of range and why do you think JP4 can't? Too low range?
Or you simply always assume vacuum situation with no other unit on the map? Which still gives advantage to JP4 because of its RoF, pen and self spotting as well as really good accuracy on the move.
24 Apr 2015, 15:03 PM
#232
avatar of Butcher

Posts: 1217

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Apr 2015, 14:32 PMKatitof
as well as really good accuracy on the move.
I guess that can be blamed on your lack of experience with OKW. If it fires on the move it is going to miss at all but the shortest range.
24 Apr 2015, 15:05 PM
#233
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Apr 2015, 15:03 PMButcher
I guess that can be blamed on your lack of experience with OKW. If it fires on the move it is going to miss at all but the shortest range.

Thats still much better then SU-85 on the move.
24 Apr 2015, 15:11 PM
#234
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Apr 2015, 15:03 PMButcher
I guess that can be blamed on your lack of experience with OKW. If it fires on the move it is going to miss at all but the shortest range.


On the move it has same acc like SU85. Stationary it's better than SU
24 Apr 2015, 15:34 PM
#235
avatar of Nuclear Arbitor
Patrion 28

Posts: 2470

in many respects i don't think the VI B fits very well with the game's meta; it's pretty bad for hard pushes but it's amazing for defending or making slow, short pushes. as people have mentioned, the crappy movement speed means it get's caught easily but it won't get put in a bad situation (assuming equal resources spent by players) if it isn't over extended. the speed makes it both hard and easy to over extend; it's hard to move it ahead of your units but it's easy to retreat your other units past it. on any kind of choke point map this tank is fucking amazing.

the IS-2 and VI are both better to use in fast, hard pushes because they have decent speed (quite possibly too high) and have good durability and damage and so they can make aggressive pushes to take a lot of territory and if it goes bad have an easier time retreating. the VI B can't push as far or retreat as fast but it's much harder to stop.
24 Apr 2015, 15:37 PM
#236
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1



I hesitate to even ask this but why would you even think that?

JPIV is stellar against all tanks. It gets good damage, penetration, and ROF. To top that it gets great vet bonuses that buff the tank quickly. If that is not enough it comes out ages before any serious tank hits the field.

If you are not able to use the JPIV to hold off or even destroy an IS-2 as OKW you are not playing well.


It's ROF and penetration are worse than the SU-85. Which I assume you don't rely on to counter King Tigers no?

Mostly because a single AT gun sitting beside the IS2 counters your JPIV is why you shouldn't rely on it to fight IS2's for you. Ways to fight IS2's: Jadgtiger, mines, Panthers, make capturing enemy ZiS guns a priority, C-Panther

Ways NOT to fight IS2s: Shreks, Rackten, JPIV, PIV Battle group, KT.

The JPIV is best used for countering enemy medium armor, if you do get lucky enough to vet it up then yes it will do okay versus an IS2 but the same could be said of the SU-85.

Thats still much better then SU-85 on the move.


Play more OKW please, they both have the exact same accuracy on the move.

The SU-85 has slightly better penetration and a better ROF while having nicer mobility. The JPIV's strength is it's better armor and nicer vet 1 ability.

On the move it has same acc like SU85. Stationary it's better than SU


It has to constantly rotate to fire it's gun due to the fact it can't traverse like the SU-85, so the result is about the same.

And you have problem with that why?
You clearly have close to zero insight on foreseeing impacts of changes and balance-I'm getting paid to do that. You don't even know what is wrong with the game and why soviets use double ISUs or IS-2s.

Let me enlighten you-to counter double Tigers. Now, how possibly could we stop that without buffing, nerfing or impacting game flow and economy while also encouraging players to actually tech instead of stall for heavy call-in spam?

OH I KNOW! BY LIMITING THEM TO ONE AT A TIME!


You don't need double IS2's or double ISU's to counter the Tiger. Soviets get them because both are cheap compared to teching and have excellent battlefield impact for said price.

Lets also ignore that SU-85 will deal with Tiger because of range, Jackson will do because of range and why do you think JP4 can't? Too low range?
Or you simply always assume vacuum situation with no other unit on the map? Which still gives advantage to JP4 because of its RoF, pen and self spotting as well as really good accuracy on the move.


Again, play more OKW because this isn't true.
24 Apr 2015, 16:29 PM
#237
avatar of Imagelessbean

Posts: 1585 | Subs: 1



It's ROF and penetration are worse than the SU-85. Which I assume you don't rely on to counter King Tigers no?

Mostly because a single AT gun sitting beside the IS2 counters your JPIV is why you shouldn't rely on it to fight IS2's for you. Ways to fight IS2's: Jadgtiger, mines, Panthers, make capturing enemy ZiS guns a priority, C-Panther

Ways NOT to fight IS2s: Shreks, Rackten, JPIV, PIV Battle group, KT.

The JPIV is best used for countering enemy medium armor, if you do get lucky enough to vet it up then yes it will do okay versus an IS2 but the same could be said of the SU-85.


Uhhh...seriously?

Yes I use SU85 to counter KT, if I don't as Soviet and I don't have IS-2's or T34-85's what do you recommend [hypothetical]?

So if you have an AT unit covering another unit can I also have an AT unit covering my unit? You make such weird statements I don't really even understand how I am supposed to respond.

When you say ways to not beat IS2 it appears you mean 1 on 1 with the IS2. I agree to that (ignoring JPIV and KT), but if you just simply dismiss those units then that's your problem. A couple of them together do wonders. Two Rakenten will force off an IS-2 in a hurry. And if they have vet they can do it without losing a man.

Please don't respond to this post I will not respond to anymore of yours.
25 Apr 2015, 01:16 AM
#238
avatar of acosn

Posts: 108 | Subs: 1


tl;dr - Problem: Same armor as IS-2, yet almost twice as expensive fuel-wise for the first unit.



Same armor as the IS-2 while only having to actually fear a narrow range of AT units.


Seriously, if you want to argue the OKW units are secretly more expensive because of the resource tax they have, then you need to agree that the same armor value for a German unit compared to an allied unit is actually more armor because allied tanks simply do not have the same kind of armor penetration German tanks do.


Is the Tiger 2 worth it? If you're fighting the US the only time it might not would be against E8 balls. Against the Soviets? If they picked an ISU-152 commander it might not be worth it.



25 Apr 2015, 01:42 AM
#239
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1



Uhhh...seriously?

Yes I use SU85 to counter KT, if I don't as Soviet and I don't have IS-2's or T34-85's what do you recommend [hypothetical]?

So if you have an AT unit covering another unit can I also have an AT unit covering my unit? You make such weird statements I don't really even understand how I am supposed to respond.

When you say ways to not beat IS2 it appears you mean 1 on 1 with the IS2. I agree to that (ignoring JPIV and KT), but if you just simply dismiss those units then that's your problem. A couple of them together do wonders. Two Rakenten will force off an IS-2 in a hurry. And if they have vet they can do it without losing a man.

Please don't respond to this post I will not respond to anymore of yours.


What is the point of replying to my post if you decide to throw a fit and demand I don't respond to your counterargument?

The SU-85 can work against the KT, so can the JPIV, but you can't rely on it because of the fact the JPIV is a medium TD which can be easily delt with by enemy AT weapons.

The Rackten doesn't have very good penetration, and is about as reliable for killing an IS2 as using the Soviet ZiS gun to kill a KT (not every), but suffers hugely from the fact it's squishy with short range allowing the IS2 to wipe it without much effort.

Your ignoring the fact for every KT your opponent can field 2.5 IS2's, and 2 IS2's will always kill a KT.

TLDR: Call in meta is fucked, KT nerf should have come with a fix to call in meta or not at all.
25 Apr 2015, 04:15 AM
#240
avatar of Nuclear Arbitor
Patrion 28

Posts: 2470


The SU-85 can work against the KT, so can the JPIV, but you can't rely on it because of the fact the JPIV is a medium TD which can be easily delt with by enemy AT weapons.

The Rackten doesn't have very good penetration, and is about as reliable for killing an IS2 as using the Soviet ZiS gun to kill a KT (not every), but suffers hugely from the fact it's squishy with short range allowing the IS2 to wipe it without much effort.


i don't understand your issue with the jpIV. it's good when it comes out and fucking amazing with vet. it should never die because it's tough, hard to hit, and OKW support units to protect it from other vehicles in most of their main builds.

the raketen has STANDARD penetration for an AT gun. STANDARD PENETRATION FOR AN AT GUN. it's not low, it's not high, it's standard. the zis has the same pen and the pak has an insignificant 10 more at far/medium/long. let's not talk about the 57mm. the 10 range difference on the raketen affects pen insignificantly and is a different "issue".

STANDARD PENETRATION!
PAGES (19)down
0 user is browsing this thread:

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

789 users are online: 789 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49065
Welcome our newest member, Huhmpal01
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM