KV8's Flamers
Posts: 15
and I say this as player who has almost never uses KV8 but get faced off it a lot.
Posts: 2425
Permanently Bannedwatch the video.
the entire point here is that it will kill you on retreat as well.
its like people don't even read threads anymore.
Posts: 928
Probably reduce the speed of the KV-8 so it can't keep up with retreating infantry in that case? After all it's a heavy tank anyway. And if you get caught out by the KV-8 (like the first gren squad in that video did, not the other squads) that squad should die.
Posts: 2425
Permanently BannedFlame is already super effective vs Ostheer armor reliant infantry, which it bypasses completely.
Posts: 255
I think Nullist idea of the modifiers is the best way to help
Posts: 928
yes Pgrens just get roasted by all flames which is very very bad for the ostheer, they cost tuns to reinforce.
I think Nullist idea of the modifiers is the best way to help
Sorry if I'm going to compare it to the Ostheer HT again but....
The thing about the KV8 is, compared to the Ostheer HT, which is the unquestionably the best at roasting squads
KV8 - MP 440 Fuel 100 (or something, I'm kinda certain about the MP cost, not the fuel)
German HT - MP - 120 Fuel 25 Muni - 120
Considering, given any COH2/COH1 game MP is far more significant over Muni, The KV8 is significantly more expensive than the German HT (by at least 2 times, if we say 60 muni is worth something like 50 MP. This is being really conservative towards the Ostheer btw).
So yes, the KV8 has to do some serious killing, especially considering counters to the KV8 are probably in the field by the time the tank comes out, unlike the German HT.
Although I agree that the KV-8 might need to be a tad slower so it doesn't chase squads like it currently does, I feel the damage it does vs cost is actually somewhat justified.
Posts: 2425
Permanently BannedProblem is solely its retreat dmg.
Posts: 928
The cost is justified in its armor.
Problem is solely its retreat dmg.
It has to do something. I mean a box which doesn't do any damage hypothetically shouldn't cost 200-300 MP just because it is armoured.
Although, something does have to be done about the retreat damage though, I agree.
Pretty much, what I don't want this to become is a tank which no-one builds - IE a croc. In fact, in relative terms, a Sherman croc is cheaper than the KV-8 (and it's still quite tanky too, the croc)
Posts: 604
Those units have a huge shock value, which is ok. But them killing off everything even if it retreats is stupid. Normal weapons have a high miss chance against retreating units but flamethrowers can't really miss (huge accuracy, AOE damage) and are normally designed to be used rather stationary. Vehicle flame throwers bypass this completely and infantry-held flamethrowers don't really hit retreating units anyways because they have to be stationary.
Posts: 49
I also think its damage should be lowered. Being able to rout an entire army of infantry, or risk losing them all to one unit seems over the top.
Sure, tanks can counter it, but Soviets most likely have counters to your tanks up as well, and infantry to back them up. Your infantry is either dead or running, leaving your tanks alone and vulnerable.
Posts: 2425
Permanently BannedPosts: 14
So sure it should do some damage else it'd be useless.
Next you will complain that ISU-152 can oneshot a german squad. Which it can and does often.
Posts: 2425
Permanently BannedPlease, more non sequitor.
Posts: 255
Posts: 49
Posts: 67
"you don't retreat as soon as you see one, then that's your own fault."
watch the video.
the entire point here is that it will kill you on retreat as well.
its like people don't even read threads anymore.
People generally don't read shit anymore. To go off topic for just a moment, look at any news station's website and the comments on any number of stories. Look at any randomly selected forums. Hell, even text messages. Hardly anyone acknowledges anyone else. Unless it's only super-abbreviated, one line phrases, it's apparently tl;dr for most people.
To get back on-topic: yes, the KV8's murderous capabilities on retreating squads needs to be looked at. Marcus' example makes that obvious, especially if the unit hasn't been changed or modified since then (closed beta).
Posts: 2425
Permanently BannedOntopic: Flame has an asymetrical effect in CoH2 due to the design of Sov unit size vs Ostheer infantry armor, in terms of survival and cost efficiency.
Sov infantry and Ostheer infantry has the same hp. It is their armor vs model count that balance them.
The result of this, is that when using flame vs Ost infantry, it reduces their survivability to the equivalent of the SAME number of Sov infantry.
Meaning a Gren, when hit by flame, survives as if it was 4 Cons, not the nominal 6 Con equivalency from bullets/shells.
An Ost Support team is hit as if it was 3 Cons manning it. (Though it is not manned by Cons)
Wheras a Sov Support team is, ofc, hit as if it was 6 Cons manning it (which there are)
This, to me, is a serious problem in flame balance.
Ideally, since flame has a template/aoe effect, this should be balanced by the fact that the larger Sov units will take more hits, since there are more models, meaning the same net dmg overall to the unit from a flame hit.
But since both factiins have the same infantry hp, what is axtually happenening is Ostheer units, when hit, are reduced survival wise to the equivalent model count in Cons, which is obviously problematic for survival and cost efficiency reasons, because Ostheer infantry has lower model counts who still, individually, are treated by flame as if they where the cheaper Cons, which they are not.
Livestreams
10 | |||||
5 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.655231.739+15
- 2.842223.791+5
- 3.943410.697+9
- 4.705.933+11
- 5.35459.857-1
- 6.599234.719+7
- 7.278108.720+29
- 8.307114.729+3
- 9.269143.653+2
- 10.10629.785+7
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
13 posts in the last week
32 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, king88reisen
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM