Is the King Tiger still worth 260 fuel?

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!

Why is why I compared it to the ZiS gun and pointed out you don't want to rely on ZiS guns to kill a King Tiger.

The issue with the Rackten in facing the IS2 the most however is the fact it's really easy to 1 shot due to the high AoE of the IS2 and the extremely close grouping of the crew.

The JPIV's issue is mostly just pathing and being overwhelmed, it has really, really bad turning speed meaning that you need to micro the fuck out of it to keep it in the action.

Why is why I compared it to the ZiS gun and pointed out you don't want to rely on ZiS guns to kill a King Tiger.

The issue with the Rackten in facing the IS2 the most however is the fact it's really easy to 1 shot due to the high AoE of the IS2 and the extremely close grouping of the crew.

The JPIV's issue is mostly just pathing and being overwhelmed, it has really, really bad turning speed meaning that you need to micro the fuck out of it to keep it in the action.

you said the raketen had low pen, it does not; heavy tanks have high armour. of course dealing with heavy AI/AT tanks with AT guns is tough, that was one of the problems with USF before the jackson buff. OKW has plenty of options though. they have raketens and schrecks (as mentioned, not very good against heavy tanks) for weak options and the puma, jpIV, V, and VI B for stronger, less bleeding options, with the Pak 43 as a doctrinal choice. obviously, mileage may vary with the jpIV and puma but they can still work. OKH is about the same as OKW, just with different options. all AT guns get one shot quite easily by heavy tanks and the raketen's range weakness is offset by the easy availability.

and seriously, i just used the jpIV in a game and the turning is fine. i got it to vet 2 before i got too careless and let it engage an SU-85 with AT gun support while forgetting to move my two schrecks up. i got 13k damage on just it. the mobility isn't much of an issue if you use the jpIV at its intended range. obviously, there are situations where casement TDs don't work and the puma probably won't work well in that situation either; nor will the stug or su-85.

Why is why I compared it to the ZiS gun and pointed out you don't want to rely on ZiS guns to kill a King Tiger.

The issue with the Rackten in facing the IS2 the most however is the fact it's really easy to 1 shot due to the high AoE of the IS2 and the extremely close grouping of the crew.

The JPIV's issue is mostly just pathing and being overwhelmed, it has really, really bad turning speed meaning that you need to micro the fuck out of it to keep it in the action.

Well.. It has same turning speed as SU85...

Not to mention that with vet2 it can self spot without losses for mobility.

Well.. It has same turning speed as SU85...

Not to mention that with vet2 it can self spot without losses for mobility.

It gets no turning speed from Veterancy and it has to constantly turn to fire it's main gun because it can't traverse like an SU-85's can. The acceleration on it is also flaming hot garbage.

tbh the JPIV is really good on some maps, and total garbage on others like many units in the game.

The issue with KT wasn't about the strong frontal armor, it's more about map designs and game mechanics. Maps are very restricted and maneuvering vehicles is a pain. And vehicles go backward as fast as they go forward.

It gets no turning speed from Veterancy

No, it gets rotation speed from vet 3.

Does people use cautious movement on their JIV ? That's how you get your first shot and been able to kite other TDs.

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

Regarding the KT: as long as it's alive, you are gonna cause heavy attrition on whatever you are facing. A KT won't win you the game, unless you have enough units to support it.
It's not neccesarily always the best option, but if you already can hold your opponent with what you have, it's not a bad choice at all.

No, it gets rotation speed from vet 3.

Ah, yes I forgot it doesn't get acceleration, it does get turning speed.

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 problem is not 2 is2-s the problem is economics where the soviet player can just sit on his fuel stockpile and wait for the callins.

nerfing the callin meta would fix this a lot. Also getting a luchs is mandatory if you do not use fsj or fusiliers obers are simply cost ineffective.

obers are only cost inefficient if you let models die without killing the enemies which pretty much only happens due to bad play. kill two enemy models, lose one ober model, and your obers are roughly cost efficient.

Look in this game where vehicles are required to get into much closer range to fight and require more shots to kill and also how weaker tanks can penetrate stronger ones frontally unlike in real life. I think its fair that tanks should be able to reverse as fast as moving forward. All penalizing reverse speed would do is just nerf german tanks/more expensive ones. And promote camping TD's, or other vehicles with higher than standard 40 range.

Reversing wasn't as big a deal in real life as in game because tanks usually sat in place and engaged from a distance. Optimally atleast.

All this would do is indirectly nerf Tiger, panther, king tiger, and is2. Suddenly jacksons, su85s, and multiple medium tanks get more of an upperhand because heavy tanks would not be able to escape unless they showed rear armor. Either way they are 100% fucked, especially with engine damage. So don't promote reverse speed decrease if some tanks are pigeon holed into getting up close to others, reverse speed nerf only makes sense if the standard tank range is 50 instead of 40, TD's still retain 60, this would just fuck up other things. RNG Armor has no value if they essentially can't escape properly.

All around bad realism idea to implement. Its on the level of requiring squads and tanks to have a finite amount of ammo.

Look in this game where vehicles are required to get into much closer range to fight and require more shots to kill and also how weaker tanks can penetrate stronger ones frontally unlike in real life. I think its fair that tanks should be able to reverse as fast as moving forward. All penalizing reverse speed would do is just nerf german tanks/more expensive ones. And promote camping TD's, or other vehicles with higher than standard 40 range.

Reversing wasn't as big a deal in real life as in game because tanks usually sat in place and engaged from a distance. Optimally atleast.

All this would do is indirectly nerf Tiger, panther, king tiger, and is2. Suddenly jacksons, su85s, and multiple medium tanks get more of an upperhand because heavy tanks would not be able to escape unless they showed rear armor. Either way they are 100% fucked, especially with engine damage. So don't promote reverse speed decrease if some tanks are pigeon holed into getting up close to others, reverse speed nerf only makes sense if the standard tank range is 50 instead of 40, TD's still retain 60, this would just fuck up other things. RNG Armor has no value if they essentially can't escape properly.

All around bad realism idea to implement. Its on the level of requiring squads and tanks to have a finite amount of ammo.

reverse speed is nerfed is due to SU85, SU85 use to kite Tiger tank to death. before the reverse speed nerf. one time i use 3 SU85 kiting 2 tigers in the end i lost 1 SU85(due to bad pathing that SU85 try to turn and got caught by tigers) and killed those 2 tiger tank (other two SU85 had no damage because it was outside tiger's FOV all the time and since reverseing tiger was missing the SU85 all the time in return fire). since SU85 have longer fire range and front view range than most tanks and pretty good speed and able to fire while moving as long facing right direction so it was too OP (if use right can stay outside the ost tank FOV and fire at ost tanks entirely) and very difficult for OST tanks to chase them down. so removing reverse speed penalty, we will back at SU85 kiting age again

reverse speed is nerfed is due to SU85, SU85 use to kite Tiger tank to death. before the reverse speed nerf. one time i use 3 SU85 kiting 2 tigers in the end i lost 1 SU85(due to bad pathing that SU85 try to turn and got caught by tigers) and killed those 2 tiger tank (other two SU85 had no damage because it was outside tiger's FOV all the time and since reverseing tiger was missing the SU85 all the time in return fire). since SU85 have longer fire range and front view range than most tanks and pretty good speed and able to fire while moving as long facing right direction so it was too OP (if use right can stay outside the ost tank FOV and fire at ost tanks entirely) and very difficult for OST tanks to chase them down. so removing reverse speed penalty, we will back at SU85 kiting age again

Actually alright the point I'm actually getting is reverse speed penalty would just be a death sentence to any tank trying to escape really rather than just having a disadvantage. Though more expensive tanks have much more on the line if the assault fails. Rather than just retreating they would likely just be destroyed. 60 range tds would still have advanatage but would be easier to catch. Heavy tanks would be sitting ducks and wouldnt be able to fire back which is already the case.

Final verdict: Still a pretty bad Idea adding in reverse speed penalty, Long range units would just have to much of an advantage. The mechanic IMO really is fine as is.

Don't add in reverse speed penalty unless you increase range of tanks so they can actually defend themselves and not be put in a stupid amount of risk when up against units firing at you from range. Engine damage like maneuverability on reverse would be an extremely bad idea.

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!

Trust me man, you have not used it as much as I have and I tell you it's pretty shitt . It's only good to use against lights/and some tank destroyers (SU, Jackson only to scare them off). other than that it dies to anything too quickly.

Ok let me explain you the point why. The advantage of any AT gun is in its range (beside from its pen/dmg etc). So when the medium/heavy tanks approach you you should be able to outrange and deal some serious damage to them before then can get close enough to you and KILL your AT gun (even if supported).

To clarify it more, its similar to the case of ISU and Pak40. Because of how high range ISU is, it can kill the Pak40 before the gun can deal serious damage to it which is why you can't reliably counter ISU with AT guns, and why against decent players in most maps you need to get elefant/JT as a reliable counter. Just ask yourself, would you ever pick a rocketen over a ZiS/Pak/57 mm! you only pick a rocketen to deny it to enemy or if you still don't have access to your AT guns yet.

Trust me man, you have not used it as much as I have and I tell you it's pretty shitt . It's only good to use against lights/and some tank destroyers (SU, Jackson only to scare them off). other than that it dies to anything too quickly.

Ok let me explain you the point why. The advantage of any AT gun is in its range (beside from its pen/dmg etc). So when the medium/heavy tanks approach you you should be able to outrange and deal some serious damage to them before then can get close enough to you and KILL your AT gun (even if supported).

To clarify it more, its similar to the case of ISU and Pak40. Because of how high range ISU is, it can kill the Pak40 before the gun can deal serious damage to it which is why you can't reliably counter ISU with AT guns, and why against decent players in most maps you need to get elefant/JT as a reliable counter. Just ask yourself, would you ever pick a rocketen over a ZiS/Pak/57 mm! you only pick a rocketen to deny it to enemy or if you still don't have access to your AT guns yet.

i'm not arguing that the reduced range is a weakness of the raketen, i'm stating the raketen has standard pen and that the range does not factor into that.

i haven't used the raketen enough, particularly recently, the pass judgement on how effective it is.

obers are only cost inefficient if you let models die without killing the enemies which pretty much only happens due to bad play. kill two enemy models, lose one ober model, and your obers are roughly cost efficient.

No mate they are not. if i look on the performance of 2 volks or fusiliers they outperform obers quite a bit especially fusiliers. fsj are also more efficient, your best bet as okw these days is mass VG with luchs or buy callin infantry,

@alladin

On its own the puchpen is pretty poor. but as support for the panther its brutal. combination of speed and the ability to retreat makes it a very useful AT gun in assaults. The problem with puchpen in the past is that it took ages for it actually fire when it was setup.

No mate they are not. if i look on the performance of 2 volks or fusiliers they outperform obers quite a bit especially fusiliers. fsj are also more efficient, your best bet as okw these days is mass VG with luchs or buy callin infantry

http://www.coh2-stats.com/compare?utf8=%E2%9C%93&squad1=obersoldaten_squad_mp&squad2=volksgrenadier_squad_mp&commit=Compare

The DPS of a volks squad varies between 0.6 and 0.5 of an Ober squad. Two of them are 480MP. Without any upgrades, Obers are pretty much twice as efficient as Volks for less than twice the cost.

With an LMG34 they are much more dangerous and STG44's are absurdly good at dealing damage in maps with good places to set up. Obers are also, amusingly, harder to kill than volks because of their accuracy modifiers.


Obers are not a viable force if you only use them. But they are very much cost efficient still.

(2 Fusiliers are sodding 580 MP though, what did you expect with them?)

http://www.coh2-stats.com/compare?utf8=%E2%9C%93&squad1=obersoldaten_squad_mp&squad2=volksgrenadier_squad_mp&commit=Compare

The DPS of a volks squad varies between 0.6 and 0.5 of an Ober squad. Two of them are 480MP. Without any upgrades, Obers are pretty much twice as efficient as Volks for less than twice the cost.

With an LMG34 they are much more dangerous and STG44's are absurdly good at dealing damage in maps with good places to set up. Obers are also, amusingly, harder to kill than volks because of their accuracy modifiers.


Obers are not a viable force if you only use them. But they are very much cost efficient still.

(2 Fusiliers are sodding 580 MP though, what did you expect with them?)

Have you also considered the hp between the 2? even with the 0.7 fusiliers are more durable and the multiple entities means they are significantly more resistant to aoe. the lmg is good but base obers are absolutely shit

cons

vs armoured:
honestly i never seen the king tiger as a viable unit, ever, unless however i can troll the fuck out of the other team. i believe the wrecking panther is a lot more useful then any other tank.
vs infantry:
sure the king may be good with its so called epic firepower, however its still a bit lacking, honestly i'd rather get more infantry and or a luche
maybe even a flacktrack or a walking stuke, i could go on.
vs combined:
i feel the king is a poor choice through and through with these types of set ups, extremely bad turret rotation, poor mobility, this slug turns into a liability real fast. i'd rather have a couple of panthers, or even a couple of jp4s and some good infantry micro, omg i said micro wtf is this micro shit.
vs heavy armour:
why in the balls fuck would you get a king tiger when you have other options like the jagdtiger or a pak?


pros of a king tiger. it has health and people focus that instead of what is around it. and get mad at the king for taking hits when it is the everything. sure its beasty but if you don't prepare for a heavy tank maybe you need to figure out were you are lacking. because i honestly think the kt is a peice of dried shit in the sun.

ps: an okw player who hates the king tiger for many reasons.

Honestly, I just miss the damaged and destroyed turret traverse criticals.

It didn't slow down a tank's ability to escape, it didn't completely eliminate is ability to fight back like main gun destroyed, and it gave the choice for players to turn and/or show rear armor to try and finish off an enemy vehicle.

It gave the chance for lighter vehicles to circle strafe unsupported heavies in addition, without having to tweak unit stats endlessly/ineffectually. The majority of variables in CoH2 have nothing to do with unit stats.