Login

russian armor

KT, Why?

6 Jul 2016, 12:55 PM
#81
avatar of Mirdarion

Posts: 283



Does it really cost more if we take into account all upgrades and tech? At the end of the day each faction functions differently, has it own strengths and weakness and have to be balance accordingly. I think we are going too far away of the point. To make it clear:

OP premise: should KT require all tech buildings up?
1-It could BUT other adjustments to teching should be done. (free medics, payed Flaked, some tech elements been more accessible, replacing trucks not as hard*)
*This is roughly what Smith says on other post that you might miss as thinking just "nerf OKW"

You: "USF should pay as well" and you mention some OH points.
2- As i said, i don't think that the "free" squad is as breaking as such. In regards to OH, i don't think that there's an issue on the EARLY to mid game, but i'm on favor of some kind of late upgrade for both eastern front armies (T4) to compensate for the powercreep since WFA + UKF. In case of OH, a 5th man upgrade for Gren/Pio locked down behind BP3 (simil cost to UKF).


The point I replied to was not on topic in the first place, using it now to arbitrarily shut down my argument is pretty disingenuous at best. I never accused you of demanding nothing but OKW-nerfs, so there's no need to claim that either.

Regarding your second point, I have to heavily disagree. Especially Ostheer can easily hold its own and in he hands of a good player take the initiative, if your infantry game is beyond perfect. The struggles don't come from a bad lategame (although the teching requirements are quite ridiculous compared to what you get out of it), but from the fact that the combination of weak infantry, low field presence, and higher manpower upkeep doesn't allow you to keep up with the enemy.
Riflemen easily dictate the flow of the game in any situation in a 1v1, if you don't make many mistakes with them. Meanwhile, especially Grens (although other Ostheer infantry suffers from this to a lesser extent as well) are entirely reactive. They don't allow you to actually attack, unstead of just filling out the places where your enemy isn't showing up in force. And that gets only worse later on, once BARs are hitting the field. Your enemies have better survivability, higher field presence, higher damage outputs (except for Conscripts and some builder units like Combat Engineers), and also better mobility.

These problems are of course not a part of the topic at hand, but the entire point we were discussing weren't part of that in the first place...
6 Jul 2016, 19:46 PM
#82
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2



The point I replied to was not on topic in the first place, using it now to arbitrarily shut down my argument is pretty disingenuous at best. I never accused you of demanding nothing but OKW-nerfs, so there's no need to claim that either.

Regarding your second point, I have to heavily disagree. Especially Ostheer can easily hold its own and in he hands of a good player take the initiative, if your infantry game is beyond perfect. The struggles don't come from a bad lategame (although the teching requirements are quite ridiculous compared to what you get out of it), but from the fact that the combination of weak infantry, low field presence, and higher manpower upkeep doesn't allow you to keep up with the enemy.
Riflemen easily dictate the flow of the game in any situation in a 1v1, if you don't make many mistakes with them. Meanwhile, especially Grens (although other Ostheer infantry suffers from this to a lesser extent as well) are entirely reactive. They don't allow you to actually attack, unstead of just filling out the places where your enemy isn't showing up in force. And that gets only worse later on, once BARs are hitting the field. Your enemies have better survivability, higher field presence, higher damage outputs (except for Conscripts and some builder units like Combat Engineers), and also better mobility.

These problems are of course not a part of the topic at hand, but the entire point we were discussing weren't part of that in the first place...


That part about OKW was pointing out your reaction towards Smith comment which you might lack the context behind that thought ("By that logic, the free squads USF gets when teching up should be placed behind a side-tech wall as well.")

The whole point is that you get access to early good support weapons, sniper and 222 combo of units to complement your grenadiers. You don't gren spam as 2014/2015 meta. OH not "attacking" has been it's playstyle since it's release bar gren spam patches (against SU). You know what other factions performs equally? UKF with tommies.

This is why i don't consider the early game an issue. What i do see as a problem is fragility during the late game and when trying to fight vet3 double bar/1919 while relying mostly on sniper play. This is why i don't think a 5th man upgrade after BP3 is not out of mind. Another "issue" is the whole vet 1 system for EFA (OH+SU) and i've been in favor of improving/tweaking PG veterancy performance (by the time they arrived they are mostly fighting vet0/1 against vet2 with possible weapons). IF the gap in performance between vet1 and vet2 is closed, then it might make them a little more easier to fill the gap of your army composition.
7 Jul 2016, 00:40 AM
#83
avatar of sinthe

Posts: 414



That part about OKW was pointing out your reaction towards Smith comment which you might lack the context behind that thought ("By that logic, the free squads USF gets when teching up should be placed behind a side-tech wall as well.")

The whole point is that you get access to early good support weapons, sniper and 222 combo of units to complement your grenadiers. You don't gren spam as 2014/2015 meta. OH not "attacking" has been it's playstyle since it's release bar gren spam patches (against SU). You know what other factions performs equally? UKF with tommies.

This is why i don't consider the early game an issue. What i do see as a problem is fragility during the late game and when trying to fight vet3 double bar/1919 while relying mostly on sniper play. This is why i don't think a 5th man upgrade after BP3 is not out of mind. Another "issue" is the whole vet 1 system for EFA (OH+SU) and i've been in favor of improving/tweaking PG veterancy performance (by the time they arrived they are mostly fighting vet0/1 against vet2 with possible weapons). IF the gap in performance between vet1 and vet2 is closed, then it might make them a little more easier to fill the gap of your army composition.


I don't think the 5th man coming from the battle phase 3 upgrade is unreasonable.
aaa
30 Jul 2016, 19:33 PM
#84
avatar of aaa

Posts: 1486

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Jul 2016, 00:40 AMsinthe


I don't think the 5th man coming from the battle phase 3 upgrade is unreasonable.


It would be game breaking if lmg stays obviously.
you have rank n1500. I supposse rank like that can show that player might have serious problems understanding basics. So what your opinion worth then?
30 Jul 2016, 21:45 PM
#85
30 Jul 2016, 21:52 PM
#86
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jul 2016, 19:33 PMaaa


It would be game breaking if lmg stays obviously.
you have rank n1500. I supposse rank like that can show that player might have serious problems understanding basics. So what your opinion worth then?


Like double been tommiesand double bar riflemen?

Get out of here, you're delusional:snfCHVGame:
30 Jul 2016, 22:09 PM
#87
avatar of zerocoh

Posts: 930

People will complain about anything these days. KT is fine.


KT is quite underwhelming right now to be honest. As someone who play most allies I get happy when an OKW player go straight to KT since all I need to counter it is a single TD.
30 Jul 2016, 22:21 PM
#88
avatar of RedT3rror

Posts: 747 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jul 2016, 22:09 PMzerocoh


KT is quite underwhelming right now to be honest. As someone who play most allies I get happy when an OKW player go straight to KT since all I need to counter it is a single TD.


IT'S A NON-DOC HEAVY TANK WITH 240 DMG!

Golden rule of balance: if it feels bad, but you use it despite alternatives - it's balanced.
30 Jul 2016, 22:25 PM
#89
avatar of zerocoh

Posts: 930



IT'S A NON-DOC HEAVY TANK WITH 240 DMG!

Golden rule of balance: if it feels bad, but you use it despite alternatives - it's balanced.


It's also a gigantic target that move very slow, and after it take the first shot It need to get out for repairs or risk getting snared.

It's a huge gamble, if you get a KT and don't put pressure, your enemy will have full counters and you will have wasted a ton of resources on something that is not that useful
30 Jul 2016, 22:26 PM
#90
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17891 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jul 2016, 22:25 PMzerocoh


It's also a gigantic target that move very slow, and after it take the first shot It need to get out for repairs or risk getting snared.

It's a huge gamble, if you get a KT and don't put pressure, your enemy will have full counters and you will have wasted a ton of resources on something that is not that useful

And yet, despite that, its a frequent sight across all modes.
30 Jul 2016, 22:27 PM
#91
avatar of zerocoh

Posts: 930

Don't get me wrong, KT is good, just not a "let's forget everything and rush like a retard" tank like the old days anymore.
30 Jul 2016, 22:32 PM
#92
avatar of RedT3rror

Posts: 747 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jul 2016, 22:27 PMzerocoh
Don't get me wrong, KT is good, just not a "let's forget everything and rush like a retard" tank like the old days anymore.


Let me quote you:
jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jul 2016, 22:27 PMzerocoh
KT is quite underwhelming right now to be honest.


To me, saying it's underwhelming, but just minutes later, saying it's good, is quite the contradiction.
31 Jul 2016, 12:22 PM
#93
avatar of Zyllen

Posts: 770



IT'S A NON-DOC HEAVY TANK WITH 240 DMG!

Golden rule of balance: if it feels bad, but you use it despite alternatives - it's balanced.


Well people that gamble everything on it generally lose the match . sure the KT still has it uses but the current meta makes the medium tank hunters much better. a KT not supported by the stuka's or jp4's is death.
31 Jul 2016, 12:36 PM
#94
avatar of RealName

Posts: 276

People always tend to go for KT because, well, it's just there. A stock god-tank always available in the end game. A generalist heavy tank that's good in almost every situation. Not OP to the point where it's a one tank army, but still good enough to be worth it's expensive cost.
31 Jul 2016, 17:12 PM
#95
avatar of Domine

Posts: 500



Golden rule of balance: if it feels bad, but you use it despite alternatives - it's balanced.


Which other non-doc(or doctrinal, for that matter) heavy tanks do you know about that OKW gets?
31 Jul 2016, 17:36 PM
#96
avatar of RedT3rror

Posts: 747 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jul 2016, 17:12 PMDomine


Which other non-doc(or doctrinal, for that matter) heavy tanks do you know about that OKW gets?


The KT is primarily an Anti-Infantry unit. OKW has a bunch of other units such as the P4 or Obersoldaten which are also anti-infantry.
31 Jul 2016, 17:55 PM
#97
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17891 | Subs: 8



The KT is primarily an Anti-Infantry unit. OKW has a bunch of other units such as the P4 or Obersoldaten which are also anti-infantry.


220 average penetration, 240 damage and ~6sec reload are definitely NOT stats of primarily AI vehicle.

KT is anti all unit, no matter how you want to look at it.
31 Jul 2016, 18:29 PM
#99
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

You know I think the OP-'s point had to do with the KT being prominent because unlike othe units, it's call in can't be denied by destroying a tier building. When looking at the Schwerer it is worth noting that rebuilding it is less valuable when there's 's KT call in option.

Not to mention a KT locks down a vp point better than the schwerer.
31 Jul 2016, 19:56 PM
#100
avatar of Smiling Tiger

Posts: 207

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jul 2016, 17:55 PMKatitof


220 average penetration, 240 damage and ~6sec reload are definitely NOT stats of primarily AI vehicle.

KT is anti all unit, no matter how you want to look at it.


Its definitely an anti all vehicle but the reason its not the best AT vehicle is because it has crappy sight range and slow max speed and slow turret rotation so it can oftentimes be hard to finish off tanks.
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

621 users are online: 1 member and 620 guests
NigelBallsworth
9 posts in the last 24h
38 posts in the last week
153 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45059
Welcome our newest member, mickreyt42
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM