Login

russian armor

KV8's Flamers

16 Jun 2013, 21:34 PM
#21
avatar of Downtown1

Posts: 15

What's wrong with the KV8? If you don't have a panzerfaust or any other AT nearby and you don't retreat as soon as you see one, then that's your own fault.

and I say this as player who has almost never uses KV8 but get faced off it a lot.
17 Jun 2013, 03:13 AM
#22
avatar of Nullist

Posts: 2425

Permanently Banned
"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.
17 Jun 2013, 03:18 AM
#23
avatar of hubewa

Posts: 928

After watching that video, I think the KV8 moves just too fast. But I reckon decreasing the damage is not a good idea - it just makes an investment not so worth it.

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.

17 Jun 2013, 03:24 AM
#24
avatar of Nullist

Posts: 2425

Permanently Banned
Reduce retreat dmg modifiers on all flame.

Flame is already super effective vs Ostheer armor reliant infantry, which it bypasses completely.
17 Jun 2013, 03:28 AM
#25
avatar of Crells

Posts: 255

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
17 Jun 2013, 10:00 AM
#26
avatar of hubewa

Posts: 928

jump backJump back to quoted post17 Jun 2013, 03:28 AMCrells
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.
17 Jun 2013, 10:01 AM
#27
avatar of Nullist

Posts: 2425

Permanently Banned
The cost is justified in its armor.

Problem is solely its retreat dmg.
17 Jun 2013, 11:17 AM
#28
avatar of hubewa

Posts: 928

jump backJump back to quoted post17 Jun 2013, 10:01 AMNullist
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)
17 Jun 2013, 11:29 AM
#29
avatar of rofltehcat

Posts: 604

I think the proposed damage reduction of flamethrowers on retreating units would be the best thing to do. It would fix the KV8, M3+flamers and the flamer HT.
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.
17 Jun 2013, 12:11 PM
#30
avatar of Alties

Posts: 49

On another note, the KV8's range seems fairly big too. Coupled with its damage, squads that retreat after the first burst have barely a chance of survival.

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.
17 Jun 2013, 13:17 PM
#31
avatar of Nullist

Posts: 2425

Permanently Banned
Making all flame effects fireable only when stationary is also an alternative solution.
17 Jun 2013, 13:49 PM
#32
avatar of shifty

Posts: 14

It opens on command level 4, costs a fortune and competes with IS2 for fuel and MP.
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.
17 Jun 2013, 13:56 PM
#33
avatar of Nullist

Posts: 2425

Permanently Banned
Implying any of that relates to its retreat dmg.

Please, more non sequitor.
17 Jun 2013, 19:17 PM
#34
avatar of Crells

Posts: 255

Calm down people, we dont want the KV-8 to become useless just to change its damage vs retreating units, with every flamer. Surely it cant be that hard to understand.

17 Jun 2013, 20:58 PM
#35
avatar of Alties

Posts: 49

I'd be perfectly happy if they changed flame damage vs retreating units alone. It's a good start, and it might be enough.
18 Jun 2013, 02:16 AM
#36
avatar of Pounder

Posts: 67

jump backJump back to quoted post17 Jun 2013, 03:13 AMNullist
"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).
18 Jun 2013, 08:19 AM
#37
avatar of Nullist

Posts: 2425

Permanently Banned
Offtopic: Yes, I miss the days when you where required by the community on forums to read the goddam thread before jumping in, especially looking through sources/videos etc if someone actually took the time to provide them (which was applauded dor the effort)

Ontopic: 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.
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

480 users are online: 480 guests
9 posts in the last 24h
39 posts in the last week
151 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45060
Welcome our newest member, Lcfvfeeaka
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM