Login

russian armor

Should KV1 get 'Inspire' ability?

Should KV1 get 'Inspire' ability instead of capture point?
Option Distribution Votes
63%
37%
Total votes: 38
Vote VOTE! Vote ABSTAIN
16 Apr 2019, 04:18 AM
#1
avatar of Stahpdis

Posts: 1


I came to the conclusion it could be a fun idea because of a few things,

1) I don't think there is much of a reason to go for it with its cost of 145 fuel and being nothing but a t34 pretending its a heavy tank ( more armor and health, same gun). Don't get me wrong its a not under-powered in any way but maybe a bit overpriced for what it brings to the table, considering the other options available.( Would rather go for a t34 or su85 considering how if you went for a t70 you might get overrun by a P4 if you waited for a KV1)

2) No one ever picks a doctrine for KV1 but I suppose that's not a strong enough argument.

3) Recently the poll for new commander selection poll had a commander for deep battle tactics.I think the Guards combined arms doctrine could become something similar to it if KV1 had 'inspire'.

4) People recently were asking for a command KV1 or Sherman and this seems to be a good enough compromise.

5) this way all the KV series tanks will have inspire

So this is why I personally think it would make KV1 really viable and fun. What about you guys?

P.S- This is what the ability does:
Infantry will move faster and have their weapon cooldowns reduced by 20%. (credits to the ability guide)

16 Apr 2019, 06:18 AM
#2
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

Suits better on this than the KV-2 but might be problematic with ppsh cons
16 Apr 2019, 06:26 AM
#3
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

I'd rather have something else, like HE or HEAT shot. Something to address its lackluster firepower.
Also, second look at overall veterancy of KV series would be nice, they vet relatively fast, but they have same vet as T34.
16 Apr 2019, 06:44 AM
#4
avatar of miragefla
Developer Relic Badge

Posts: 1304 | Subs: 13

I remember awhile back before it got cut was giving the KV-1 the ability to hulldown itself.

It suits the unit that is meant to be a damage sponge. Inspire is nice and does suit tanks meant to lead the charge, but so would a defensive ability allowing it to sit in a defensive line and be un-movable brick.
16 Apr 2019, 09:29 AM
#5
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



KV-1 can beat an OKW PzIV 1vs1 and is cost efficient.

It needs a veterancy overhaul giving bonuses that would make it better in role as heavy tank.

Other than that its rear armor (165) should be lowered and become inline with other units and damage reduction should become the vet 1 ability and turned into a timed one.
16 Apr 2019, 10:14 AM
#6
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1

KV1 needs something to make it viable that's for sure. Right now it's just garbage compared to T34 85 and KV8. I don't even get KV1 over simple T34/76s either. It's just not worth 145 fuel.
16 Apr 2019, 10:15 AM
#7
avatar of Grim

Posts: 1096

Yeah its just a really lacklustre unit. Although it needs more than the inspire ability.

16 Apr 2019, 10:48 AM
#8
avatar of WAAAGH2000

Posts: 731

I think KV1 limit 1 and change to command tank will be better
16 Apr 2019, 10:50 AM
#9
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

I think KV1 limit 1 and change to command tank will be better

And how would that help anything?
What would it to do justify that?
16 Apr 2019, 11:00 AM
#10
avatar of Bananenheld

Posts: 1593 | Subs: 1

Kv1 has a unique damage reduction, resulting in good ehp and repair speed for the damage it can take.
Make its hull mg better could be a good way.
16 Apr 2019, 12:08 PM
#11
avatar of WAAAGH2000

Posts: 731

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Apr 2019, 10:50 AMKatitof

And how would that help anything?
What would it to do justify that?

I think KV1 just meat shield for friendly unit,most time training one is enough,make KV1 got buff aura like OST Command P.IV will better,at least better than capture point
16 Apr 2019, 12:10 PM
#12
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

KV1 needs something to make it viable that's for sure. Right now it's just garbage compared to T34 85 and KV8. I don't even get KV1 over simple T34/76s either. It's just not worth 145 fuel.

Comparing the KV-1 with other doctrinal units for balance reason is simply flawed. The unit can be compared to new PzIV H and it is cost efficient compared to it.

One should probably nerf both T-34/85 that got a HMG buff by accident and lower the power level of KV-8 than buff the KV-1 from balance point of view. That could actually help with diversity also, but when it comes to commanders one should probably balance the commander better and not a single unit.
16 Apr 2019, 13:09 PM
#13
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Apr 2019, 12:10 PMVipper

Comparing the KV-1 with other doctrinal units for balance reason is simply flawed. The unit can be compared to new PzIV H and it is cost efficient compared to it.

One should probably nerf both T-34/85 that got a HMG buff by accident and lower the power level of KV-8 than buff the KV-1 from balance point of view.


Completly disagree with everything written here. T34/85 and KV8 are balanced units. OKW P4 is miles ahead of KV1 in firepower and usefullness. It´s a bit weird to even discuss about this considering no one builds KV1s at the moment. Just as a hint: It´s not because KV1 is a good tank.
16 Apr 2019, 13:27 PM
#14
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


Completly disagree with everything written here. T34/85 and KV8 are balanced units. OKW P4 is miles ahead of KV1 in firepower and usefullness. It´s a bit weird to even discuss about this considering no one builds KV1s at the moment. Just as a hint: It´s not because KV1 is a good tank.

You are entitled to your opinion.

The PzIV H might have more firepower (more line better penetration) but its not miles away and KV-1 will probably bit it 1vs1. The Kv-1 is also "miles ahead" in durability.

Do you actually have stat that you can provide about how many KV-1 are being built or are you just guessing?

The fact that doctrinal unit is not being built does not really mean much about how cost effective it is, especially if there are +15 commanders to choose from. That was proven from Dshk which was broken for a couple of year before people started to abuse it.
16 Apr 2019, 13:29 PM
#15
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Apr 2019, 13:27 PMVipper

The fact that doctrinal unit is not being built does really mean much about how cost effective it is especially if there are +15 commanders to choose from. That was proven from Dshk which was broken for a couple of year before people started to abuse it.

And what fact was proven by shocks?
Rangers?
Ass grens?
M-42?
Calliope?

Somehow wide choice of alternatives didn't prevented these units from being labeled as "fine but too many commanders" and they got much needed love.

I guess no one but you can just use them correctly.
That, or you're completely wrong about generalizing your "fact"ual opinion.

KV-1 is more fine then not, it is cost efficient to a point, but its a heavy tank with a gun balanced for flanking and flanking it can't do. Again, giving it some role supporting vet instead of generic soviet tank one would go a long way.
16 Apr 2019, 14:16 PM
#16
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Apr 2019, 13:29 PMKatitof

And what fact was proven by shocks?
Rangers?
Ass grens?
M-42?
Calliope?

Somehow wide choice of alternatives didn't prevented these units from being labeled as "fine but too many commanders" and they got much needed love.

I guess no one but you can just use them correctly.
That, or you're completely wrong about generalizing your "fact"ual opinion.

KV-1 is more fine then not, it is cost efficient to a point, but its a heavy tank with a gun balanced for flanking and flanking it can't do. Again, giving it some role supporting vet instead of generic soviet tank one would go a long way.

Can you please stop the personal comments?

Now I am not sure what you are questioning.

That the Dshk used to be OP? or that is was not used?

The case of DShk is clear proof that a unit not be used does not automatically mean it not cost efficient. I might be or it not might be.

And since according to your opinion "KV-1 is more fine then not," you agree with me so I am not even sure what this attack is about. I am simply responding to an argument that the KV-1 "garbage compared to T34 85 and KV8" and thus KV1 is a not good tank.
16 Apr 2019, 14:19 PM
#17
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

I'm questioning your logic about unit not being used isn't up, considering the fact that you have used a single example, while we had pretty much every single doctrinal unit not being used due to it being up, the only possible exception being current partisan doctrine.

There are crushingly more examples that units aren't used because they are weak or inefficient then there are examples that they are overshadowed by stock unit and emerge only after that stock unit is nerfed.
16 Apr 2019, 14:39 PM
#18
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Apr 2019, 14:19 PMKatitof
I'm questioning your logic about unit not being used isn't up, considering the fact that you have used a single example, while we had pretty much every single doctrinal unit not being used due to it being up, the only possible exception being current partisan doctrine.

There are crushingly more examples that units aren't used because they are weak or inefficient then there are examples that they are overshadowed by stock unit and emerge only after that stock unit is nerfed.

I have never claimed that doctrinal unit not being used means that is not up. I have clearly and repeatedly post that if doctrinal unit is not being used that does not automatically make it UP. There are factors that might lead a doctrinal unit not being used, other than its cost efficiency (the existence of similar but superior Commander, equally good or better stock options ans so on...)

I will have to ask the same questions again:
Was the Dhsk OP?
Was the Dhsk used?
16 Apr 2019, 15:17 PM
#19
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
KV1 is borderline OP. It's literally a Churchill with damage reduction and faster repairs.
16 Apr 2019, 16:08 PM
#20
avatar of jagd wölfe

Posts: 1660

KV-1 is fine, beats Panzer 4 H for the same fuel cost. Most of the issue comes from the fa t that T-34-85 is just much better as option. The ability to capture point doesn't make sense tho, i'll rather give it some new ability not some aura thing. Faster reload but is stationary mode ?
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

799 users are online: 799 guests
2 posts in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
40 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49077
Welcome our newest member, juliavargascom
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM