Login

russian armor

KT thread

26 May 2020, 14:05 PM
#21
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 15434 | Subs: 7



I agree, that's the biggest drawback of Super Heavy tanks, but normaly their performance should make up for that, or at least ,for the KT, turn it in a somewhat viable/situational option. And I don't feel it does the job in any situation, but that's only my POV.

Its hard to consider it good in specific situations, when everyone refuses to use it and is basing its performance exclusively off of a singular, downhill tournament game..

Try it on maps that do not involve massive open spaces for TDs to plink at it freely and you'll see its much more useful.
26 May 2020, 14:21 PM
#22
avatar of Darkpiatre

Posts: 174

jump backJump back to quoted post26 May 2020, 14:05 PMKatitof

Its hard to consider it good in specific situations, when everyone refuses to use it and is basing its performance exclusively off of a singular, downhill tournament game..

Try it on maps that do not involve massive open spaces for TDs to plink at it freely and you'll see its much more useful.


My POV is based on 3vs3/4vs4, and there, if you consider that Ally TD have roughly have 100% chance of pen (worst scenario possible), it is better to "tank" with a lot of Health Point rather than counting on RNG-Armor, therefore it is better to swarm your opponent with many tanks (Panther in most cases) rather than a Big boy KT because is it more reliable/has more survivability and 2 "medium" guns do more damages than a "big" one.

Such strange logic can be illustated with Churchill. On the first glance, it doesn't have that much armor (a Panther does pen it reliably) but with it's enormous HP pool (1280 like the KT if i am correct) it is a good "swarming" tank.

So IMO, the Heavy/Super Heavy tank role isn't properly define because the Ratio Cost/Performance isn't good/ linear with medium/premium medium tank. (in a more idiotic way, if it is slow and cost 2 P4, it should at least do as much damage and have the same HP pool as 2 P4)

26 May 2020, 14:41 PM
#23
avatar of Aerohank

Posts: 2560 | Subs: 1

It's not a no-brainer unit but it is not bad. It's a really tough cookie on maps with sight blockers, but too slow to be effective on open maps when you only have light support. On open maps it only becomes viable in the super lategame when there are also JP4s and Walking Stukas to counter the counters.
26 May 2020, 14:58 PM
#24
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 2416 | Subs: 5

if you consider that Ally TD have roughly have 100% chance of pen (worst scenario possible)


Even a vet 2 SU-85 still has a 25% chance to bounce at far range. Same for a vet 3 Jackson. The Firefly has 45% chance to bounce regardless of veterancy. Only a veteran HVAP Jackson has a higher 87% chance to penetrate the Tiger II at long range. Nothing except a point blank veteran HVAP Jackson has a (near) 100% chance to pen it. And it still has 1280 hitpoints to tank shots anyway, which can easily be enough to force off Allied TDs with the help of friendly tanks or ATGs.

I use the Tiger II to good effect in 3v3s and 4v4s all the time. When backed up properly and when used defensively it's really good at locking down 1/3-1/4 of the map, and occasionally it can be used to spearhead a push.
MMX
26 May 2020, 14:59 PM
#25
avatar of MMX

Posts: 271

kt is in a good spot performance-wise and definitely NOT lacking in either the AI or AT department. if anything, maybe combat blitz could come a bit earlier
26 May 2020, 15:12 PM
#26
avatar of SuperHansFan

Posts: 814

It's crazy good with commander, repairs and HEAT

26 May 2020, 15:22 PM
#27
avatar of Sully

Posts: 344 | Subs: 2

26 May 2020, 15:23 PM
#28
avatar of oootto92

Posts: 121

KT is such a meme. It has no use in 1v1 and in teamgames it is hard countered by the Allied TD meta. There's no way of making it useful, without making it game breaking.

The change would really have to start with introducing a better tier system to the game where you actually would have to go through every vehicle tier from light, medium, mmedium+, heavy to heavy+ in order to stay relevant. People in team games can just hop to the end game units like panther and Jackson so quickly that it renders stuff like KT useless.
26 May 2020, 15:35 PM
#29
avatar of Alphrum

Posts: 680

jump backJump back to quoted post26 May 2020, 13:13 PMKatitof

Its current armor is why allied TDs have pen where it is.


not to previous levels, which i think was 440. right now moving it from 375 to 400 would be an option which will need testing of course.

Its either that or a mobility buff which is highly unlikely.
26 May 2020, 16:18 PM
#30
avatar of EffenNewbie

Posts: 1531



Except that it does have excellent anti-infantry. It reliably hits enemy squads for ~40% health every 1-2 shots, more when they are clumped, which is significantly better than the Panzer IV because it forces off squads faster and generally has a better chance to wipe squads. Spearhead gives even better AI because the hull gun will suppress. Add to that the highest AT DPM in the game (on paper even more than a vet 3 SU-85), a huge chunk of hitpoints and good frontal armor and great synergy with the Panzer Commander and HEAT Shells abilities.

The only real downsides of the Tiger II are that it's slow and that it's expensive and that its veterancy is still a bit of a mess, which means it's only good for dominating one part of the map and that it's hard to properly support it. But it is excellent at holding one portion of the map which makes it a good unit in teamgames. Combined with an Elefant or with a Jagdpanzer IV or two in support it becomes really tough to beat.


I forgot to put in vetoes and ended up playing against a KT in the city on Vielsalm. It pretty well stalemated me in the city. Even when you can get a T34 behind it, you'll still lose the T34 without coming close to killing it. I lost about 60 infantry models and a couple of T34's to it. It seems pretty good with a lot of shot blockers. I'd take a lot of it's health and then it would just retreat. The other player was able to use it in the city just fine, but I couldn't really push in very far with my ISU and SU85.

It doesn't one shot squads, but it does enough damage that a good hit on a squad combined with Obers (or volks/isg/etc) will sometimes wipe.

I'm guessing that people want it buffed so it would be a good choice in the wide open part of the map also. That would be pretty game-breaking.
26 May 2020, 17:49 PM
#31
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2316

Increase the KT armor.

But because its kind of a no-brainer to a lot of players, an increased performance should be paired with increased APM tax, IMO.
Being said that if KT had new abilities that demand a lot of attention, like the one in CoH1 Tiger elite that could manually target the main gun, you could add some pretty much needed buffs.
Another ideas i can come up with, as suggestrions might be, reduce normal shots AI, a lot. Add a vet0 HE round with the same impact the current main gun shot has. Add a stock hull down to increase armor vs TD at the expense of losing mobility (and become very vulnerable to AT strafes and skillshots). Make blitz Vet0 but after used the tank has a engine damage or cooldown like T34s.


KT should not be a one hero army, but currently IMO its the complete opposite, its a big tank to spearhead only if you already have the correct army composition and power. Its a support unit.
26 May 2020, 17:53 PM
#32
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 3651 | Subs: 1



Except that it does have excellent anti-infantry. It reliably hits enemy squads for ~40% health every 1-2 shots, more when they are clumped, which is significantly better than the Panzer IV because it forces off squads faster and generally has a better chance to wipe squads. Spearhead gives even better AI because the hull gun will suppress. Add to that the highest AT DPM in the game (on paper even more than a vet 3 SU-85), a huge chunk of hitpoints and good frontal armor and great synergy with the Panzer Commander and HEAT Shells abilities.

The only real downsides of the Tiger II are that it's slow and that it's expensive and that its veterancy is still a bit of a mess, which means it's only good for dominating one part of the map and that it's hard to properly support it. But it is excellent at holding one portion of the map which makes it a good unit in teamgames. Combined with an Elefant or with a Jagdpanzer IV or two in support it becomes really tough to beat.


Let's be real sander. The KT has RNG based AI and great AT. The issue is it cannot use that AT unless your opponents push into the KT, which means they're bad or they're going to try and go for an all in flank/il2bomb/rocketrun etc. If it had excellent AI and as good of AT as everyone says it would be picked every match in 1v1 where TDs are significantly more rare. The AT is nothing short of best ingame when it's in range. It hardly ever misses tanks and is cappable of 3 shotting stock mediums. The issue is it's too slow to chase anything and the range is low enough that even mediocre players can kite very easily.

So with RNG based AI and low range AT and no mobility why would anyone pay 720MP 270F for this? When you can get the best TD ingame for 145F, 1400HP meat walls at 165F, and there's hilariously easy combos which can take out heavy tanks in seconds at the cost of a ram and 100 muni rocket run.

Is the KT "bad"? I don't think so, but it's on the lower end of the totem pole because of the enviorment of coh2 meta. A meta where 1 allied faction holds all the best off maps ingame, the next has the best TD in the game, and the last has the largest HP tank ingame. Why would you pick a KT into any of those things when OKWs anti infantry lategame power is in their obers and obers alone. OKW doesn't need another gimmick AT only unit. They already have 3 in the rak, JP4, and the panther.

Also 26 popcap is brutal.
26 May 2020, 18:10 PM
#33
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 2416 | Subs: 5

If it had excellent AI and as good of AT as everyone says it would be picked every match in 1v1 where TDs are significantly more rare.


It isn't picked in 1v1 because combat there is fluent and all over the map, and the Tiger II is too slow to fit that meta.
26 May 2020, 18:14 PM
#34
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 3651 | Subs: 1



It isn't picked in 1v1 because combat there is fluent and all over the map, and the Tiger II is too slow to fit that meta.


It was always used pre nerf in 1s even though it was just as slow. The difference now it has trash stats by comparison. So no, it isn't too slow to fit the new meta. It just isn't good enough when 2x p4js have both mobility AND far more total combined AI power than it.
26 May 2020, 18:15 PM
#35
avatar of Jae For Jett
Senior Strategist Badge

Posts: 997 | Subs: 2



I mean, yeah, no one is going to go for a 270 fuel unit in 1v1s unless its a guaranteed win. It still works with elite armor because of the resource boosting and the early t4 allowing you to stabilize on the map without any vehicle presence. Most people will get preemptive double AT guns, meaning mediums arent as useful and saving up makes them waste that manpower. Anyway,the point is that saving up 270 fuel in 1v1vs just isnt ever going to be a strong way to play the game no matter what you get as a pay off at the end, and thats probably fine.
26 May 2020, 18:17 PM
#36
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 2416 | Subs: 5

It was always used pre nerf in 1s even though it was just as slow. The difference now it has trash stats by comparison.


Yeah of course it was picked when it was blatantly OP. Being slow didn't really matter when it could take out entire armies. Now that it has fairly well balanced performance, it is too slow for 1v1s, and it needs too much dedicated support to work. It's good at holding one part of the map, but that isn't very useful in 1v1s.

My point is that when it only needs to hold a small portion of the map so speed isn't much of an issue, and when it can get concentrated support from ATGs or Jagdpanzer IVs etc., it's a very good unit to lock down a particular sector like a VP. It has way better staying power than a couple of Panzer IVJs in that role because of its armor and health and (unlike the P4Js) it doesn't lose its field presence when heavier vehicles show up. Which is why it is a good unit in 3v3s and 4v4s and even 2v2s when used properly.
26 May 2020, 20:08 PM
#37
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 7193 | Subs: 1


I mean, yeah, no one is going to go for a 270 fuel unit in 1v1s unless its a guaranteed win. It still works with elite armor because of the resource boosting and the early t4 allowing you to stabilize on the map without any vehicle presence. Most people will get preemptive double AT guns, meaning mediums arent as useful and saving up makes them waste that manpower. Anyway,the point is that saving up 270 fuel in 1v1vs just isnt ever going to be a strong way to play the game no matter what you get as a pay off at the end, and thats probably fine.


Basically this.

KT is fine. Wouldn't mind HEARING people ideas on buffs that doesn't relate to raw offensive or defensive performance.
26 May 2020, 20:09 PM
#38
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1092



Basically this.

KT is fine. Wouldn't mind HEARING people ideas on buffs that doesn't relate to raw offensive or defensive performance.

give it a crew in the form of pzgrens from ost in black uniforms wth crit repairs and smoke grenades :)

Edit: and the ability to push the king forwards with the effect of "step on it" and another ability to quickly push the turret so that it can spin around much faster (one crew member would be delegated to do this (hull mg wouldn't be working then).
26 May 2020, 20:58 PM
#39
avatar of Latch

Posts: 671

Facing it now I just think "Why did you even bother" so that side of me thinks it should have a buff but then the other side of me states that it is doctrinal so it shouldnt be great, just OK and that is where it seems to lie.
26 May 2020, 21:11 PM
#40
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 119

KT is a rolling fortress. Slow and steady. It can win a game if properly supported, no matter what's going on, on the map. It's fine. If you use KT on small maps with lots of corners, well, it's your problem then. It's a non doctrinal heaviest heavy tank. What more could you want?

Let's give it 999 armour so that TDs can't penetrate it and let's give it 3 top MG gunners so it can wipe infantry within seconds. That's basically some of the replies on this thread. In order to counter KT, you need tank destroyers. I've seen game winning plays with one KT and supporting infantry. The worst mode to use KT is 1v1 since it can get destroyed if it's left unsupported and it's quite slow. Anyone that thinks that KT is underperforming needs a reality check
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest
Votes for 1vs1, 2vs2 Maps
Event in Progress

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • Ostheer flag Reto.GarGamel
  • The British Forces flag °NOOBMarkov.-
uploaded by Augustine

Board Info

200 users are online: 11 members and 189 guests
Rosbone, SkysTheLimit, Baba, Brick Top, Major Shentypoo, luvnest, Sturmpanther, Stormjäger, Zyswen, PatFenis, BANAN0RAMA
191 posts in the last 24h
938 posts in the last week
4196 posts in the last month
Registered members: 24533
Welcome our newest member, Cartayaaq70a
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM