Login

russian armor

King Tiger - Is it worth buying?

PAGES (12)down
2 Dec 2018, 12:22 PM
#21
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1



The current traverse speed significantly hampers all of its combat capacity, even when the unit is used correctly. It takes ages for it to train the gun on target. That's why the Spearhead ability makes the tank so much better. Obviously it doesn't need Panzer IV level of turret traverse, but the current value is bonkers (and unrealistic). It definitely needs either a straight buff or Spearhead moved to vet 1.



Agree 100%
2 Dec 2018, 12:53 PM
#22
avatar of NaOCl

Posts: 378

Thanks for all the replies so far.

Its seems like the general consensus is that it needs *something* to make it worth getting. I honestly prefer the PIV for AI and the JPIV/Panther for AT. It would be nice for super-heavies to have a more impacting role.
2 Dec 2018, 14:58 PM
#23
avatar of FelixTHM

Posts: 503 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Dec 2018, 12:53 PMNaOCl
Thanks for all the replies so far.

Its seems like the general consensus is that it needs *something* to make it worth getting. I honestly prefer the PIV for AI and the JPIV/Panther for AT. It would be nice for super-heavies to have a more impacting role.



The general consensus for team games is that it's situational and for 1v1 it's not even possible to use it. If you can get the KT out in a 1v1 game, you've either already lost and will lose it further or you've already won and you're just showboating.

Turret traverse and scatter are the commonly mentioned issues, but I think KT could use a pen buff as well. Given that it's not going to fire many shots, having its shot fail to pen is usually crippling in a tank vs tank engagement.

Its monstrous exp value is also problematic (because the damned thing costs a bajillion resources). The moment it pokes out, allied TDs jump multiple levels of Vet almost instantly.
2 Dec 2018, 17:45 PM
#24
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2358

KT as many already said, is not a bad investment, but neither a good one. Expensive and very popcap demanding too and still it doesnt give any edge in a lategame situation.
I once gave the idea to buff its frontal armor, in order to stop or bounce allied TD at maximum-80% range (allied TD still outrange it,IIRC) but at 80-40% range start to get reliable pen shots. At least this way KT could serve the prupose of scare TD in front of them. The tank is still very slow to rotate and turret to traverse, so flanking it its still an option.
I must say that KT "I win button" is annoying to anyone and promotes noob plays, some discretion is needed when talking about buffing KT.
Also all others super heavy tanks should get an edge on a single role/aspect.
2 Dec 2018, 19:27 PM
#25
avatar of jagd wölfe

Posts: 1660

Came here just to enjoy the show of the same people calling IS-2 bad saying "it is sItuAtIOnaL" and "yOuWanTitOpagAiNn?!?!!!??"

I agree tho, that it actually is situational: in the very specific case you already won, you can call it and humiliate your opponent by showing you can waste resources on junk.
2 Dec 2018, 20:39 PM
#28
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

KT's bad reputation comes from the technology tree that leds to it. In order to get to KT you need build all tech structures, but you don't need to have them on the field in the moment of getting the tank. That is a perfect noobtrap and the tank is mostly build by players who lost the ability to build other tanks thanks to overly agressive T3 placement.

Now at this point, first you have no support for your KT, and as an expensive unit, the KT needs it more than anything else. You are also usually getting it when the game is already lost, and if KT would let you win that at this point, people would argue it is OP.

To conclude, you should never build KT hoping it will win you a lost match. On the other hand, if you are in good enough situation to support a heavy tank and your commander doesn't offer any late game options, it can be a solid choice. Just be careful not to overextend it. People often happen to overestimate armour and HP of their heavy tanks.
2 Dec 2018, 21:14 PM
#29
avatar of murky depths

Posts: 607

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Dec 2018, 04:55 AMNaOCl


I don't feel like a single allied tank nullifies it. That is not at all my argument, I'm just saying I don't struggle to use allied TD (of which I have more experience)


I didn't mean you when I said that, rather others have said it in the past. I should have clarified, my B on that, but others have argued "a su-85 can keep it in check" which I do not think is true at all unless you don't pay attention to the KT. I think when used appropriately, which often means defensively, it can do a great job at decimating infantry and also slowing/pushing mediums or lights.

I feel like, If I have bought 2 panzer 4, they cost almost identical to a KT, they do more damage (to both infantry and vehicles), and are more maneuverable whilst still being survivable.

Thus, for its price, shouldn't it be similar in performance to 2 panzer IV? or fill a role more effectively than mediums, so it has a distinct use?



My personal view is that there are situations where double P4 is the way to go and there are situations where they're not, I don't like making blanket statements, but I think a lot of it also comes down to play style and what kind of game you're in. I primarily play 3v3/4v4, where an ally can cover whatever weakness your army has, so factor that in as well.

2 Dec 2018, 22:16 PM
#30
avatar of Princeps

Posts: 214



Says someone who doesn´t know how to use them.


just use them cloaked and cap points in late game, because off every lategame allie tank will 2HK it.
2 Dec 2018, 22:19 PM
#31
avatar of Theodosios
Admin Red  Badge

Posts: 1554 | Subs: 7

As soon as you stop having a go at each other we will be fine. Two posts with personal references invised. Refrain from offtopic ad hominem.
2 Dec 2018, 22:48 PM
#32
avatar of aerafield

Posts: 3032 | Subs: 3

The old KT had an even more ridiculous 1-shot wipe potential than a vet 3 pershing... even at vet 0. (at vet 2 it was basically guaranteed wipe of models or whole squads with every single shot) and the armor was extremely difficult to penetrate, even with specialized tank destroyers.

Please dont buff that thing again. Maybe a small cost reduction but that's it for sure.
KT can still be very viable if you got good raketen or JP4 support. It is situational now, and no longer the auto-win button it used to be.
3 Dec 2018, 00:50 AM
#33
avatar of Alphrum

Posts: 808

375 ----> 400 armour
3 Dec 2018, 01:20 AM
#34
avatar of TheGentlemenTroll

Posts: 1044 | Subs: 1

The old KT had an even more ridiculous 1-shot wipe potential than a vet 3 pershing... even at vet 0. (at vet 2 it was basically guaranteed wipe of models or whole squads with every single shot) and the armor was extremely difficult to penetrate, even with specialized tank destroyers.

Please dont buff that thing again. Maybe a small cost reduction but that's it for sure.
KT can still be very viable if you got good raketen or JP4 support. It is situational now, and no longer the auto-win button it used to be.


Ya I dont think we want to return back to that KT. But I do agree that the KT is a little overpriced as is and could use a price reduction.
3 Dec 2018, 01:26 AM
#35
avatar of insaneHoshi

Posts: 911

The old KT had an even more ridiculous 1-shot wipe potential than a vet 3 pershing... even at vet 0. (at vet 2 it was basically guaranteed wipe of models or whole squads with every single shot) and the armor was extremely difficult to penetrate, even with specialized tank destroyers.


A vet 3 pershing doesnt add anything to its wipe potential, so why are you bringing it up.


Please dont buff that thing again. Maybe a small cost reduction but that's it for sure.
KT can still be very viable if you got good raketen or JP4 support. It is situational now, and no longer the auto-win button it used to be.


The amount of support a 280 fuel unit should require should be less rather than more.
3 Dec 2018, 01:30 AM
#36
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2358

Price reduction wont fix its current situation, KT is near useless when compared to other more flexible tank options.
KT need to get an edge in something else than being "a slow piece of junk wiht a turret on top of it"

Edit: Even in 4v4 its kind of useless, 2 TD can take it down or displace it without drawbacks
3 Dec 2018, 01:39 AM
#37
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

I think one of the crutches the KT currently resides on it sitting ontop of a VP being bait for 2x cloaked raks to attack a TD. If OKW lost their cloaked raks (which they should for a normal AT gun) there isn't anything that would be able to deal with those 60 range TDs. The gun is too inconsistant now, the turret is slow, the tank itself is slow and requires too much support if a single TD shows up. You're designating at least 1 AT gun, possible volks and the KT to a single VP point. That's at least 45 immobile popcap and a ton of resources. If the rak isn't there the KT can just get shot at with no penalty. Often refered too as "vet sponges" previously, it is now similar to what the KV-1s were pre MG buff.

My point is, if a unit can get shutdown so easily without designated support there's a problem.
3 Dec 2018, 02:14 AM
#38
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

I think one of the crutches the KT currently resides on it sitting ontop of a VP being bait for 2x cloaked raks to attack a TD. If OKW lost their cloaked raks (which they should for a normal AT gun) there isn't anything that would be able to deal with those 60 range TDs. The gun is too inconsistant now, the turret is slow, the tank itself is slow and requires too much support if a single TD shows up. You're designating at least 1 AT gun, possible volks and the KT to a single VP point. That's at least 45 immobile popcap and a ton of resources. If the rak isn't there the KT can just get shot at with no penalty. Often refered too as "vet sponges" previously, it is now similar to what the KV-1s were pre MG buff.

My point is, if a unit can get shutdown so easily without designated support there's a problem.


I don't really think that an unsupported heavy tank being countered by a tank destroyer is a problem. That is how it is supposed to be.
3 Dec 2018, 02:22 AM
#39
avatar of NaOCl

Posts: 378

KT used to be an insta win. Now you need atleast 1 JP4 additionally. Nothing wrong with this unit.


I think we should disregard those with names such as yours, your clear bias shows.

You shouldn't need 1000+mp and 330+fuel to deal with allied vehicles that have been purchased for half, not to mention that is more than 25% of your popcap
3 Dec 2018, 02:26 AM
#40
avatar of SuperHansFan

Posts: 833

People don't give KT enough credit, in teamgames it can still do a job. Backed up by double repair truck it's a pain to deal with. Especially on urban maps when you can poke it around shot blockers and drain MP or fight a pershing/IS-2/comet.

Using the current KT I would say is a fine art, but of course if you play redball express and park it in an open field against a TD wall it's going to die pretty fast.

My point is, if a unit can get shutdown so easily without designated support there's a problem.



The amount of support a 280 fuel unit should require should be less rather than more.


ISU, AVRE, elefant, croc... all these units I would say are slow and need support in varying levels, in the case of ISU even more. So why should KT be any different?

Pershing is the only heavy that can zap around and nuke everything, but most people consider it OP. IS-2 has KT armour with decent mobility but if you give it the maingun of the KT I would say it would be OP for sure.

If there's an issue with KT I would say some of vet is a bit mediocre, spearhead for instance could use a small buff.
PAGES (12)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

unknown 34
Russian Federation 139
unknown 13
Netherlands 6
Canada 2

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

191 users are online: 191 guests
0 post in the last 24h
12 posts in the last week
24 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49879
Welcome our newest member, linakill
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM