KV-8; The Thread
Posts: 747
I would like to discuss the KV-8 in this thread.
In my opinion the KV-8 is just an absolute beast.
It shreds through Infantry like a hot knife through butter and it is soo fast and well armoured that it can't be stopped by armor if only half decently microed.
At the time it appears it's pretty much always backed up by T-34s or Su-85s.
So how would you counter that thing? Everything that is Infantry gets completly raped within seconds by the insane flame damage it does even on retreat, countering it with tanks (2-3 P4s or maybe even 1-2 Panthers depending on the game mode; 2v2 or 1v1) is extremely micro intensive because you have to avoid eirther ram or SU-85s or guards or Zis-3.
Your best bet would be that it hits a mine... or you bust it with an Elephant... or a meteorite hits it...
I find it too be too good for its price, i would like too see the flame damage reworked to the level of the FHT.
what is your opinion on that matter?
Posts: 64
Posts: 44
Much like trying ZiS's anti-tank guns vs flame Halftracks, Paks will also likely be circle strafed and fried unless their initial placing happened to be ideal.
That leaves tanks. The KV-8 has a peashooter for a main cannon (equivalent to a T-70). So a Panzer IV would have no trouble taking one out.
However, nothing is in a vacuum. If they have an SU-85, then you will need to get creative. You should at least have 2 or more Panzer IVs in this case. Ignore the KV-8 and go for the SU-85. Use smoke, flanking, blitzkrieg, etc. Really, it is a crapshoot that depends entirely on the situation.
Just keep your infantry away until the threat is dealt with.
And you won't be fighting Guards if they went for KV-8, by the way.
And it's damage should be considerably better than a FHT. It comes much later, cost much more, and is doctrine specific (basically the only point of choosing the two respective doctrines).
Posts: 2425
Permanently BannedPosts: 53
On topic: If I see one player has Shocks, I make Ostwind (no P4) and after that Stugs cuz they work better against KV8 and also against T34s. If there is an SU85 (= every game) on the field, then the only way I know is to build Pak43 and wait till my buddy has Elephant. Otherwise its "GG".
Posts: 747
Well, first obviously run your infantry away as soon as you catch sight of one. If you stick your panzershrek-equipped Panzergrendiers around to try and fire a volley off, then you were asking for it when they get fried. The key is to run WELL BEFORE it gets close enough to burn you. Otherwise it will chase you down and kill you on a retreat.
Much like trying ZiS's anti-tank guns vs flame Halftracks, Paks will also likely be circle strafed and fried unless their initial placing happened to be ideal.
That leaves tanks. The KV-8 has a peashooter for a main cannon (equivalent to a T-70). So a Panzer IV would have no trouble taking one out.
However, nothing is in a vacuum. If they have an SU-85, then you will need to get creative. You should at least have 2 or more Panzer IVs in this case. Ignore the KV-8 and go for the SU-85. Use smoke, flanking, blitzkrieg, etc. Really, it is a crapshoot that depends entirely on the situation.
Just keep your infantry away until the threat is dealt with.
And you won't be fighting Guards if they went for KV-8, by the way.
And it's damage should be considerably better than a FHT. It comes much later, cost much more, and is doctrine specific (basically the only point of choosing the two respective doctrines).
The problem is, thtat you have to keep your tanks along with your infantry when they retreat, because otherwise the KV-8 just toasts them in your base...
As for the guards, they are only a problem in 2v2 and upwards.
Btw I did't see that there already is a KV-8 thread so this one may be closed or merged.
Posts: 480
I've been using them quite a lot in a T2-T3 build (i.e. with no SU-85s) and they're pretty solid within that. I'd like the AI to stay the same, since it needs to be a step above Soviet tier 3 (especially given it's almost always hovering in faust range) but I think a cost increase is in order.
Posts: 168
I'm OK with the KV-8's damage, given it's a late-game doctrinal, largely anti-infantry tank. The cost is probably too low for the effectiveness, given that trading one for a P-IV or Ostwind or even a StuG isn't a terrible deal.
I've been using them quite a lot in a T2-T3 build (i.e. with no SU-85s) and they're pretty solid within that. I'd like the AI to stay the same, since it needs to be a step above Soviet tier 3 (especially given it's almost always hovering in faust range) but I think a cost increase is in order.
Lets have a small comparison .... the ostheer's rival to the KV8 is the brummbar which costs 180 fuel and a load of manpower more. It also has less armor and has far less killing capacity against inf than the kv8.
KV8 needs a definite fuel increase so it cant be spammed.
Posts: 2181
But I agree in general, a higher fuel price should be fine
Posts: 480
But the Brummbar does actually decent damage against vehicles with the chance of even stunning them which is really useful. So not the best comparison
But I agree in general, a higher fuel price should be fine
The Brummbar is the assault gun of disappointment. I mean, it's fun but not even close to making up the cost in 1v1. The KV-8's gun doesn't seem that much worse against /vehicles than the Brummbar to me.
Posts: 2425
Permanently Banned-FHT style nerf t rate of fire
+
-Increased fuel cost. At 4CP this unit is too effective at cost/timing at forcing a categoric infantry retreat with armor forced to do so to to stop infantry grilling at base. Needs fuel cost to disengage use with SU85s too early.
Posts: 64
Lets have a small comparison .... the ostheer's rival to the KV8 is the brummbar which costs 180 fuel and a load of manpower more. It also has less armor and has far less killing capacity against inf than the kv8.
KV8 needs a definite fuel increase so it cant be spammed.
How is a doctrine unit the rival to a Ostheer's T4 vehicle? It's an assault gun that more closely rivals that of the SU76, and if you really want to compare it to a doctrine unit I'd say it's closer to the ISU-152. The KV-8's role is solely that of killing infantry, just like shock troops, and the 45mm gun does absolutely nothing to most tanks.
I wouldn't be against a cost increase as well as a retreat defense bonus to flames. I dont have any problems with the KV-8 in its current state because to call that in means, no guards, maybe 1 SU85 or a couple T34's. If you keep your tank near your troops it dosnt cause that many problems. Try the Teller mine behind the pak gun for when it trys to flank that, thats been my most successful tactic.
Posts: 2425
Permanently BannedNerf it.
Posts: 1108
Posts: 2425
Permanently Bannedtry to build some land/teller mines on intersections
"land"?
Are you under the impression that Teller one-shots a KV-8 or something?
Posts: 1108
Posts: 44
"land"?
Are you under the impression that Teller one-shots a KV-8 or something?
It doesn't need to one shot it, it will still stop the KV-8 flat, and make it manageable to kill.
I would say all the KV-8 needs is a speed reduction so it can't chase retreating infantry back to their base so easily.
But if the KV-8 can reach your base, your dudes deserve to be fried. It's no less ridiculous than a 2 second frag bombing run or stuka precision bomb obliterating infantry at a soviet HQ.
Posts: 747
I recommend:
-FHT style nerf t rate of fire
+
-Increased fuel cost. At 4CP this unit is too effective at cost/timing at forcing a categoric infantry retreat with armor forced to do so to to stop infantry grilling at base. Needs fuel cost to disengage use with SU85s too early.
I completley agree.
Livestreams
81 | |||||
13 | |||||
2 | |||||
128 | |||||
105 | |||||
22 | |||||
15 | |||||
12 | |||||
6 | |||||
2 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.653231.739+13
- 2.840223.790+3
- 3.35057.860+15
- 4.599234.719+7
- 5.278108.720+29
- 6.927408.694+1
- 7.645.928+5
- 8.306114.729+2
- 9.1123623.643+4
- 10.266140.655+1
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger