Jump to content


KV-4 Guide- The Battleship

KV-4 guide soviet tierVIII heavy tank advice

  • Please log in to reply
244 replies to this topic

Poll: Opinion poll! (679 members have cast votes)

How would you rate this tank?

  1. 11/10, whichever team has more of these tanks is likely to win (42 votes [6.19%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.19%

  2. 10/10, OP, needs nerf (7 votes [1.03%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.03%

  3. 9/10, borderline OP (19 votes [2.80%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.80%

  4. 8/10, great tank, warmly recommended (173 votes [25.48%])

    Percentage of vote: 25.48%

  5. 7/10, solid performer in its tier (231 votes [34.02%])

    Percentage of vote: 34.02%

  6. 6/10, decent (71 votes [10.46%])

    Percentage of vote: 10.46%

  7. 5/10, average (45 votes [6.63%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.63%

  8. 4/10, mediocre (43 votes [6.33%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.33%

  9. 3/10, quite bad (24 votes [3.53%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.53%

  10. 2/10, terrible (6 votes [0.88%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.88%

  11. 1/10, among the worst tanks in the game (18 votes [2.65%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.65%

Vote Guests cannot vote Hide poll

Platypusbill #1 Posted 18 March 2013 - 08:31 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 20902 battles
  • 3,701
  • [WOOF] WOOF
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011
Ding760 sponsored another guide contest, here's my entry:

Platypusbill's guide to the

KV-4
-Tier VIII Soviet Heavy Tank-

Stock KV-4:

Spoiler                     

Fully upgraded KV-4 with my configuration:

Spoiler                     

WoT Wiki page --->

Notes are marked as [#]. Scroll to the bottom of the guide to read them.

General Information:

Spoiler                     

Attributes:

Spoiler                     

Powerful if awkward gun on a slow and very unmaneuverable platform. However, the KV-4 is easily one of the most durable tanks in its tier when its armour is utilised properly.

Review:

Spoiler                     

Extremely powerful tank for breaching or holding chokepoints- provided that it isn't completely abandoned by the team- at the cost of being slow to relocate.

Set-up Tips:

Spoiler                     

General performance boosts and improvements to the tank's resilience take priority.

Modules:

Spoiler                     

Notes:

Spoiler                     

Changes I would make to improve balance:

-Buff KV-4-5 turret front armour to 200mm (keep the "tumour" 180mm thick)

-Shorten the 107mm ZiS-24 aim time when mounted in the top turret to 3 seconds

-Extend the view range of KV-4-5 turret to 360 meters.

Current poll average: 7.26

Edited by Platypusbill, 03 July 2013 - 07:41 PM.


Sabroan #2 Posted 18 March 2013 - 03:32 PM

    Junior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 3138 battles
  • 126
  • Member since:
    01-07-2013
I bought recently KV-4 And I find it as good tank, I still have stock guns because I skiped Kv-3 didnt even bother to elite it but in aproximatly 2 days I should get 122m and I hope in 1 week that 107 Zis 24. But I can still do descent amount of damage even with stock zis
Tank has great armor, movement speed is not bad, 112 tones and still goes 30kmh wich is great. But somehow it can't compare to other tier 8 tanks for example Tiger ll, Is3, T32 because even tho it has great armor they can still penetrate frontal armor and driver gets killed too fast, also hull armor is well less than other tanks for its tier.
My personal oppinon is this tank could get small buff like better gun, yes it has 107mmzis24 but it cost 44,000 Xp and can't be used on any other tank. Wich means when you unlock St-i you will have stock guns if you didn't go with IS line.
There was a topic with poll to add Derp gun on KV-4
http://forum.worldof...age__st__20#top
Hopefully WG will add Derp gun and make this tank better.

Edited by Sabroan, 18 March 2013 - 03:33 PM.


Platypusbill #3 Posted 18 March 2013 - 04:58 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 20902 battles
  • 3,701
  • [WOOF] WOOF
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011
^^If anything, they should make the ZiS flagpole available on the ST-I (would look weird as hell but at least it wouldn't be a free-XP sink).

Not sure how the 130mm would really perform, though. 196 penetration with presumably the same aim time and accuracy as the BL-9 would suck, especially on such a slow tank- even if it had awesome damage output.

Edited by Platypusbill, 20 March 2013 - 08:43 AM.


Ding760 #4 Posted 20 March 2013 - 08:27 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Community Contributor
  • 9369 battles
  • 2,984
  • Member since:
    06-18-2011
I have a KV-4 and I must say I didn't enjoy it as much as the IS-3 for example. For me...it is simply waaaay too unmanouverable. Also slow reload and relatively low damage makes it difficult for me to play.

I realize the tank has good armor but it doesn't quite suit my style as I'm more of a 'rather not get hit' kind of player.

Again Platypus....great guide! :)

_Atomsk #5 Posted 21 March 2013 - 06:59 AM

    Junior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 8330 battles
  • 170
  • [TOGII] TOGII
  • Member since:
    07-26-2012
I hated this tank first, but now that I have the modules I love it.



And for some reason people keeps ramming me, it's hilarious!

Platypusbill #6 Posted 21 March 2013 - 08:37 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 20902 battles
  • 3,701
  • [WOOF] WOOF
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

View Post_Atomsk, on 21 March 2013 - 06:59 AM, said:

And for some reason people keeps ramming me, it's hilarious!
Same here  :teethhappy: plenty of IS-3's have bumped into my side for over 400 HP.

kirstar #7 Posted 21 March 2013 - 11:03 AM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 8879 battles
  • 514
  • [316] 316
  • Member since:
    04-30-2011
On my first battle with this tank I got 2448 XP

Admitidly it was fully researched with free XP.

Its a bouncy monster and if you do not know where to shoot you die like a pig.  But if you do know what you are doing then its not as good.  Also no arty in the match is a joy.  Arty vs KV4 equals smoking wreck.

Alot of people suggest going for the smaller turret.  I much prefer the larger one.

Platypusbill #8 Posted 21 March 2013 - 12:13 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 20902 battles
  • 3,701
  • [WOOF] WOOF
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

View Postkirstar, on 21 March 2013 - 11:03 AM, said:

On my first battle with this tank I got 2448 XP

Admitidly it was fully researched with free XP.

Its a bouncy monster and if you do not know where to shoot you die like a pig.  But if you do know what you are doing then its not as good.  Also no arty in the match is a joy.  Arty vs KV4 equals smoking wreck.

Alot of people suggest going for the smaller turret.  I much prefer the larger one.
Quickybaby got something like 1 600+ base XP (non-premium, with doubles and premium bonus it was over 5 000) in his first KV-4 battle on his livestream, at full stock  :tongue:  He was basically facing off with a bunch of weaker tanks just trying to slug it out with him for whatever reason.

I agree that the top turret is really better despite adding ~10% mass to your tank. The stock one is just to easy to penetrate in the sides/ tumor.

Temptis #9 Posted 21 March 2013 - 12:25 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 30697 battles
  • 607
  • Member since:
    04-27-2012
i voted for solid, as it is a good Tier8 tank, but it starts lacking vs higher tiers as it relies to much on it's armor.
where others can still use mobility and a good gun to get into higher tiers sides, the KV-4 has to step aside when the big boys play.

Platypusbill #10 Posted 21 March 2013 - 12:40 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 20902 battles
  • 3,701
  • [WOOF] WOOF
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

View PostTemptis, on 21 March 2013 - 12:25 PM, said:

i voted for solid, as it is a good Tier8 tank, but it starts lacking vs higher tiers as it relies to much on it's armor.
where others can still use mobility and a good gun to get into higher tiers sides, the KV-4 has to step aside when the big boys play.
When you are sidescraping/ you are moving diagonally at a shallow angle and high speed ("high speed" by KV-4 standards), even tier X guns will bounce a lot, but yeah- under normal circumstances, the armour is just not enough against them. Just angling in the open does not really work against 240+ penetration, and even tier IX mediums can reliably punch through the lower plate/ turret weakspots if they get a solid hit with insufficient side angle.

Edited by Platypusbill, 21 March 2013 - 12:44 PM.


Dan_Abnormal #11 Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:29 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 29024 battles
  • 4,554
  • Member since:
    10-14-2011
I voted 3, quite bad.

I think the current state that the game is in with ever increasing penetration of AP and the availability of gold ammo make armour virtually worthless.

My problem with it is that it's not able to sway the course of a battle because once you commit to one flank it's almost impossible to either change flanks or return to defend, so your chances of winning remain solely on the rest of the team doing well on other parts of the map, and we all know how that goes in randoms!

Maybe in platoons or TC it's a good tank, but as a solo random player it isn't suited to my game play. Plus, that gun is just terrible.

Thlurp #12 Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:46 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 11042 battles
  • 613
  • Member since:
    08-15-2012
i read your post in the gameplay section and i say you're wrong Dan...

of course its your opinion that this tank is bad (at least for you)

for myself it is like OP said, a battleship, i played it completely random so far and this tank is not too much about doing damage, its about soaking up shells and this works even in t9 and some t10 games

being able to angle 35-40° in a 1 on 1 situation is insane...mainly let them shoot your tracks...

my wn7 on this tank is "only" 1444, but i have a 72% winrate in 68 games, speaks for itself

Dan_Abnormal #13 Posted 21 March 2013 - 05:00 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 29024 battles
  • 4,554
  • Member since:
    10-14-2011
Yes it speaks you don't do much but have been lucky enough to have a good team to win you the battle.

Platypusbill #14 Posted 21 March 2013 - 05:17 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 20902 battles
  • 3,701
  • [WOOF] WOOF
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011
I'm currently on ~1700 damage per battle and a high-50s winrate.

Dan_Abnormal #15 Posted 21 March 2013 - 05:54 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 29024 battles
  • 4,554
  • Member since:
    10-14-2011
I'm also on or abouts 1700dmg per battle and on 45% win rate, my worst tank by a mile. I haven't had results this bad since back when I was a noob in the T28/T95.

As a comparison, after 100 battles with the KT I had 67% win rate.

Edited by Dan_Abnormal, 21 March 2013 - 05:58 PM.


SiNiNeN #16 Posted 21 March 2013 - 06:03 PM

    Junior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9369 battles
  • 123
  • [ASEET] ASEET
  • Member since:
    02-13-2011
I was a big fan of IS-3 before,but When i bought KV-4 i was SOLD!!! Aversome tank...ewen i am playing whit stock..still make dama..and bounche a LOT!!!  :smile:  Still i havent play so mutch games yet..but KV-4 playstyle suits me better than good...i have played e-100 and is4 so i like to use sidecripe tactic..and this tank is made for it!!! and slow mobilty dont bother..only bad traverce can result bad situations..then u need u team  :blinky:

Platypusbill #17 Posted 21 March 2013 - 06:14 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 20902 battles
  • 3,701
  • [WOOF] WOOF
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

View PostDan_Abnormal, on 21 March 2013 - 05:54 PM, said:

I'm also on or abouts 1700dmg per battle and on 45% win rate, my worst tank by a mile. I haven't had results this bad since back when I was a noob in the T28/T95.

As a comparison, after 100 battles with the KT I had 67% win rate.

All tanks don't necessarily suit individual players equally well, but 45% is just a result of low sample size. Even if you camped at the back, doing 1700 damage per battle should not get you such a terrible WR.

Dan_Abnormal #18 Posted 21 March 2013 - 06:47 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 29024 battles
  • 4,554
  • Member since:
    10-14-2011
100 battles is usually enough for me to adapt and perform in any tank, even bad ones. There's something fundamentally wrong or I've just been terribly terribly unlucky with results and teams.

Platypusbill #19 Posted 21 March 2013 - 07:26 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 20902 battles
  • 3,701
  • [WOOF] WOOF
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

View PostDan_Abnormal, on 21 March 2013 - 06:47 PM, said:

100 battles is usually enough for me to adapt and perform in any tank, even bad ones. There's something fundamentally wrong or I've just been terribly terribly unlucky with results and teams.
What I'm saying is that you may not have adapted as well as you usually do, but I'm guessing it's mostly the latter (long-term 45%ers usually deal about 35% of an average same-tier enemy's HP in damage, you are doing about 120%).

Edited by Platypusbill, 21 March 2013 - 07:26 PM.


Dan_Abnormal #20 Posted 21 March 2013 - 08:53 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 29024 battles
  • 4,554
  • Member since:
    10-14-2011
One good battle amongst a sea of shit, and this was mainly down to the enemy being complete mongs, needless to say with 12.4k potential damage it was a steel wall, but this is very rare.

Posted Image

The battle previous I tried side scraping and every time I reversed to take a shot they just pen'd my turret every time, I lasted 8 shots and dealt 900dmg -.-




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users