Jump to content


KV-5 buff discussion

Not_Another-KV5_PMM_Thread KV-5 Armour Pen Ammotype

  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

Dava_117 #1 Posted 28 May 2018 - 10:32 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 17817 battles
  • 2,404
  • [B-BAS] B-BAS
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

So, after the announce that KV-5 will probably lose it's preferential MM and get buffed, I saw a lot of post and thread about it. But all of them are mainly focused on the PMM part than on the buff the tank will get. 

I can understand this, but because I don't have a KV-5 and honestly don't care about preferential mm, I would like to open a discussion on those buffs, to see what people think about them from the game balance point of view, which is my main concern atm...

 

Here is my opinion. The tank looks overbuffed and, at the same time, underpowered for mainly 2 reasons:

1) Armour. The armour layout is getting worst, the frontal armour buff to 220mm is just plain stupid and another step in the armour meta. Basically the tank would became immune to all the lower tier HTs and some tier 8 too while still butter for tier 9-10 HT. This wouldn't be a problem (except for lower tier of course!) because the KV line has allway been known for the amazing sidescraping capabilities, but they will nerf side armour from 150mm to 135mm. You may think it's negligible, but the old KV-4 collision model had the lower part of the hull that was 130mm instead of 150, and you could notice the difference while angling. Basically they whant to change the tank role from chockepoint keeper and MT bully to something halfway between a VK100.01P and a 268v4...

2)The gun. The gun is the same used by T-150, KV-2, A-44 and, as stock gun, by KV-3 and KV-4. So not much could be done...

Increasing alpha to 330 is just wrong. Same gun, same damage so, unless all the other tanks using it get buffed, it's a no.

On the penetration side, I expect to use APCR as standard ammo (the proposed pen is 1mm less than T-150 premium APCR) and HEAT as premium round. Mounting AP as standard would not only be unrealistic (I know WG don't care, but for some extent I care) but, as for alpha buff, it would require the same buff to all the tank using that gun with AP.

So, let's consider the APCR/HEAT setting. Both this ammo type have really bad behaviour against angled armour, isn't it? Well, the only frontal spots where the buffed KV-5 can pen itself with standard round are the 2 miniturret, and it will be quite unreliable, because those are rounded and 200mm thick! Also 218 pen APCR is quite lackluster! You can't reliably pen IS-3 UFP with it.

 

So, that's what I would do to buff KV-5: first of all exchanging the gun with KV-4 top gun. It would really help the tank to be competitive.

Then I would partially change the armour layout:

-Turret front up to 220mm (as WG suggest)

-Back plate down to 95-100mm (again as WG suggested)

-Everything else unchanged

In this way KV-5 would became similar to KV-4 but without powercreeping it. KV-4 still have better frontal hull armour and no turret weackspot, while KV-5 get a stronger turret front, while keeping a weacker hull and a cupola weackspot. Both would still be sidescrape king and KV-5 would still be the MT bully.

 

What do you think about the subject? I'm quite curious about it! :)



leggasiini #2 Posted 28 May 2018 - 10:45 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 10467 battles
  • 5,938
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

Personally I'd make the premium round standard round, and then give it like 250-260 pen APCR as premium round, and dont buff the alpha (unnecessary IMO and that also buffs the DPM, which makes the tank even more ridiculous VS tier 6s and 7s). I don't think it should get the KV-4's gun, which most likely would mean nerf to it's DPM and gun handling - some key features of the tank (perfect combination of alpha and fast enough reload to permatrack tanks with fairly bad repair crew).

 

So, my proposed changes:

 

  • make the premium round the standard round, add new APCR shell with ~260mm penetration as premium
  • turret buff WG suggested is kinda fine, however, buff the mantlet further so it's a lot harder to pen, so 220 turret and +250 mantlet
  • rear hull and rear turret armor nerfs are fine as well, I guess
  • view range buff to 370, which would kinda help the tank at tier 10 games and encourage the very unique playstyle of the tank that is basically a weird mix of a super-heavy and medium tank. Would still get outspotted by mediums and LTs, and I don't want VK 100 levels of stupid view range. 

 

I feel like that would be fine, it would keep the KV-5 pretty much as the same it is now, while having some tools for higher tier games. It's kinda hard to make the KV-5 competitive in tier 10 games while keeping it as much as KV-5 as possible AND without making it unbalanced. +/-1 MM would make fixing things easier, but whatever.


Edited by leggasiini, 28 May 2018 - 10:48 AM.


Dava_117 #3 Posted 28 May 2018 - 10:52 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 17817 battles
  • 2,404
  • [B-BAS] B-BAS
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014
Spoiler

You're indeed right about the DPM. I would just add that it's quite hard to get a 250-260 pen APCR, more likely a HEAT round, considering how silly the pen increments are when WG start to use HEAT! ;)

I like your proposal too! :)



leggasiini #4 Posted 28 May 2018 - 11:08 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 10467 battles
  • 5,938
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

View PostDava_117, on 28 May 2018 - 11:52 AM, said:

You're indeed right about the DPM. I would just add that it's quite hard to get a 250-260 pen APCR, more likely a HEAT round, considering how silly the pen increments are when WG start to use HEAT! ;)

 

Just make up one, it's not like it really matters nowadays, anyway. Penetration values are completely off - the HEAT shells on the derp of the T49 / Sheridan had like +350mm pen IRL :trollface:



Dava_117 #5 Posted 28 May 2018 - 11:12 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 17817 battles
  • 2,404
  • [B-BAS] B-BAS
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

View Postleggasiini, on 28 May 2018 - 11:08 AM, said:

Just make up one, it's not like it really matters nowadays, anyway. Penetration values are completely off - the HEAT shells on the derp of the T49 / Sheridan had like +350mm pen IRL :trollface:

 

I can see this come true before 2020 for how things are going... T49 HEAT toon driving around! :trollface:

xx984 #6 Posted 28 May 2018 - 11:17 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 51362 battles
  • 2,153
  • [GO-IN] GO-IN
  • Member since:
    08-11-2013

I've played the KV-5 a Shitload, one of my favourite tanks in the game, even in the current meta, had it since 2013 or so. I find the changes quite unneeded tbh, All it really needed was a standard pen buff up to 190-200 area, and a prem buff to 240 area, and keep the pref MM. but obviously because WG are stupid and taking away preff MM, what i would do is 

 

- Buff the frontal armour as WG suggested

-Keep the side and rear armour how it is now

-Buff standard pen to 220

-Buff gold pen to 256-260 (Similar to gold pen on a tank like the T26E5)

- Buff up terrain resistances slightly

-Buff the base dispersion at 100 meters from 0.42 to 0.40

-Buff the gun mantle armour from 180mm Spaced with no armour behind it, to 180mm Spaced with 100mm behind it.

-View range up to 360/370 Meters

-Nerf top speed down to 37-35 km/h

-Nerf Hitpoints down to 1750 or buff it to 1800 (No reason for this, but its always frustrated me being on 1780 and looks weird compared to other tanks which is always like 1500/1550 for heavies)

 

 


Edited by xx984, 28 May 2018 - 11:18 AM.


Dava_117 #7 Posted 28 May 2018 - 11:24 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 17817 battles
  • 2,404
  • [B-BAS] B-BAS
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

View Postxx984, on 28 May 2018 - 11:17 AM, said:

I've played the KV-5 a Shitload, one of my favourite tanks in the game, even in the current meta, had it since 2013 or so. I find the changes quite unneeded tbh, All it really needed was a standard pen buff up to 190-200 area, and a prem buff to 240 area, and keep the pref MM. but obviously because WG are stupid and taking away preff MM, what i would do is 

 

- Buff the frontal armour as WG suggested

-Keep the side and rear armour how it is now

-Buff standard pen to 220

-Buff gold pen to 256-260 (Similar to gold pen on a tank like the T26E5)

- Buff up terrain resistances slightly

-Buff the base dispersion at 100 meters from 0.42 to 0.40

-Buff the gun mantle armour from 180mm Spaced with no armour behind it, to 180mm Spaced with 100mm behind it.

-View range up to 360/370 Meters

-Nerf top speed down to 37-35 km/h

-Nerf Hitpoints down to 1750 or buff it to 1800 (No reason for this, but its always frustrated me being on 1780 and looks weird compared to other tanks which is always like 1500/1550 for heavies)

 

 

 

Wouldn't this be a bit overdone? Armour powercreep KV-4 compleately and 220 pen with that DPM is quite dangerous for the platform you suggest... at least IMO.

HQ65 #8 Posted 28 May 2018 - 11:49 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 27768 battles
  • 510
  • [CMERC] CMERC
  • Member since:
    01-16-2012
Sadly, I cannot take part of this discussion, out of an act of stupidity, I sold my KV5.....Maybe a couple of bad games, and a few beers too many....Oh well, I wish I had mine back....

xx984 #9 Posted 28 May 2018 - 12:01 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 51362 battles
  • 2,153
  • [GO-IN] GO-IN
  • Member since:
    08-11-2013

View PostDava_117, on 28 May 2018 - 10:24 AM, said:

 

Wouldn't this be a bit overdone? Armour powercreep KV-4 compleately and 220 pen with that DPM is quite dangerous for the platform you suggest... at least IMO.

 

KV-4 needs a buff itself even without changes to KV-5.

 

KV-5 Is a brawling superheavy with high DPM instead of high alpha, its always been that way, but if its facing tier 10, it needs armour that can bounce higher pen guns if you angle it properly, and better pen to be able to contest more armour, Higher view range is also needed for higher tier games, and the slightly better accuracy would make it feel as comfortable as most of the other tier 8 heavies, while not being super accurate either



gunslingerXXX #10 Posted 28 May 2018 - 12:01 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 10116 battles
  • 1,544
  • Member since:
    11-16-2014

Balancing armour for +/-2 MM seems quite impossible to me. How on earth can you design armour relevant for tier 9/10 tanks and for tier 6/7 at the same time?

Only way is to have tanks with weakspots that can be penned by all and armour which is unpenetrable by all. However than there is no point in having different pen-values between tanks...

or make a range of multiple weakspots with increasing armour, in such a way tier 6 has only one point to shoot the tank, tier 7 gets two, tier 8 three, tier 9 four and tier 10 five.... but this will probably make the game very arcade like.



Dava_117 #11 Posted 28 May 2018 - 12:02 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 17817 battles
  • 2,404
  • [B-BAS] B-BAS
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

View PostHQ65, on 28 May 2018 - 11:49 AM, said:

Sadly, I cannot take part of this discussion, out of an act of stupidity, I sold my KV5.....Maybe a couple of bad games, and a few beers too many....Oh well, I wish I had mine back....

 

Well, I don't have it too, as I said in the OP, so you can still contribute. It's an open discussion. :)

HQ65 #12 Posted 28 May 2018 - 12:06 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 27768 battles
  • 510
  • [CMERC] CMERC
  • Member since:
    01-16-2012

View PostDava_117, on 28 May 2018 - 12:02 PM, said:

 

Well, I don't have it too, as I said in the OP, so you can still contribute. It's an open discussion. :)

 

Although, when they do all the changes, it will probably be available to buy again

 



Aikl #13 Posted 28 May 2018 - 12:24 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25142 battles
  • 4,178
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

Bit more pen would be plenty to stay competitive in PMM. Penetration up to 220mm-ish APCR and 240-250mm AP (provides some actual point to swapping ammo, which is nice).  

 

Removing PMM would require, hm, a bit more speed and a minor armor rework. The current one is too 'stupid' for T6/7 to deal with. Keeping weakspots is a good idea, as is nerfing the rear armor. Make the rest of the armor a bit tougher. Goal would be to be require the enemy to aim/hit when shooting. Kind of like it used to be.

 

 

View PostHQ65, on 28 May 2018 - 11:06 AM, said:

 

Although, when they do all the changes, it will probably be available to buy again

 

 

That is more than likely the plan, unless they totally bork it up. They're at least smart enough to rebalance the KV-5 first - it's likely among the less common T8 PMMs. Of course, now we see why we got to swap our tanks in the past. Many probably got rid of their FCM or T-34-3 ahead of schedule. Bet we'll see another trade-in soon after they fix the KV_5.

 

Pretty obvious that Wargaming offered the trade-in program while planning to improve the very same tanks you could trade in. Not illegal, but scummy. Especially when we likely get a far better swap program now. Kind of called it back during the first trade-in event.

View PostHQ65, on 28 May 2018 - 10:49 AM, said:

Sadly, I cannot take part of this discussion, out of an act of stupidity, I sold my KV5.....Maybe a couple of bad games, and a few beers too many....Oh well, I wish I had mine back....

 

I'm not sure how the rules are at the moment, but have you used your single-use recovery yet? There was a second single-use recovery offered during the first trade-in event too. Maybe you could plead your case to customer support or a community coordinator. Doubt they have much sway, but doesn't cost anything to ask.

 

View Postleggasiini, on 28 May 2018 - 09:45 AM, said:

(...) makes the tank even more ridiculous VS tier 6s and 7s). (...)

 

That's apparently kind of the core idea of WoT nowadays, and it's kind of obvious that this is the plan. 3-5-7, you know. "Scary monsters and VERY SCARY", as the creative director of WoT likes to put it.

 

 

 

 



TankkiPoju #14 Posted 28 May 2018 - 12:29 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 19967 battles
  • 6,163
  • Member since:
    05-20-2011

I like the part where WG is planning these changes to "fix KV-5", when the game has tanks like Tiger 2. Yeah gotta have that 220mm turret face on a Russian heavy!

 



HQ65 #15 Posted 28 May 2018 - 12:30 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 27768 battles
  • 510
  • [CMERC] CMERC
  • Member since:
    01-16-2012

View PostAikl, on 28 May 2018 - 12:24 PM, said:

Bit more pen would be plenty to stay competitive in PMM. Penetration up to 220mm-ish APCR and 240-250mm AP (provides some actual point to swapping ammo, which is nice).  

 

Removing PMM would require, hm, a bit more speed and a minor armor rework. The current one is too 'stupid' for T6/7 to deal with. Keeping weakspots is a good idea, as is nerfing the rear armor. Make the rest of the armor a bit tougher. Goal would be to be require the enemy to aim/hit when shooting. Kind of like it used to be.

 

 

 

That is more than likely the plan, unless they totally bork it up. They're at least smart enough to rebalance the KV-5 first - it's likely among the less common T8 PMMs. Of course, now we see why we got to swap our tanks in the past. Many probably got rid of their FCM or T-34-3 ahead of schedule. Bet we'll see another trade-in soon after they fix the KV_5.

 

Pretty obvious that Wargaming offered the trade-in program while planning to improve the very same tanks you could trade in. Not illegal, but scummy. Especially when we likely get a far better swap program now. Kind of called it back during the first trade-in event.

 

I'm not sure how the rules are at the moment, but have you used your single-use recovery yet? There was a second single-use recovery offered during the first trade-in event too. Maybe you could plead your case to customer support or a community coordinator. Doubt they have much sway, but doesn't cost anything to ask.

 

 

That's apparently kind of the core idea of WoT nowadays, and it's kind of obvious that this is the plan. 3-5-7, you know. "Scary monsters and VERY SCARY", as the creative director of WoT likes to put it.

 

 

 

 

 

I sold my tank a long long long time ago.....

 

Sadly no, I cannot recover it....



arthurwellsley #16 Posted 28 May 2018 - 12:33 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 50794 battles
  • 2,643
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

1. Do not take away the pref MM from the KV-5.

 

Thats the bottom line non-negotiable bit done.

 

If it does need a buff then as xx984 says, the only thing that really needs changing is the penetration.

 

The present setup is 167/219/54 mm, the dpm is 2,100, and the 107 mm ZiS-6M gun does 300/300/360 damage depending on the round shot with the HE doing the most.

The KV-4 Kreslavskiy reward tank also has a 107mm gun, more alpha, slower reload and less dpm but has penetration of 227/289/62 mm.

The IS3, IS3A, IS6, IS5, and Object 252U all have 122mm guns (larger calibre so not really the same thing).

The KV-4 has two 107mm guns the bottom stock one, and the top elite one, with two 122mm guns inbetween.

The KV-4 top 107mm gun has more damage (320/320/420) but a slower reload and so a lower dpm. The stock gun which has the same penetration value as the present KV-5 has a higher dpm than the elite gun. The elite gun penetration is 227/289/62.

 

As xx984 correctly says the play style of the KV-5 is workable armour within the pref MM gameplay band, linked to high ROF and high dpm at the cost of lower penetration.

 

So to make the KV-5 useful again the penetration needs a buff above the present 167/219/54.

 

Lets look at a few recent heavy tank tier VIII premiums (all without pref MM)

T26E5 (90mm calibre, less alpha, faster ROF than KV-5) penetration = 230/259/45

Chrysler K GF (105mm calibre more aplha) penetration = 198/260/53

Somua SM (100mm calibre, auto loader) penetration = 232/263/50

 

I would therefore suggest that KV-5 keeps pref MM and the penetration is buffed to 197/258/54.

Armour and everything else remains the same.

 

EDIT

As WG are again selling in the premium shop the Mutuant aka M6A2E1, consider that it has a 105mm calibre gun with higher alpha and lower ROF with penetration values of 198/245/53. If WG are prepared to sell the Mutuant with it's pref MM NOW, then the penetration values must be acceptable for pref MM.

Based off of that my 197/258/54 suggestion for the 107mm KV-5 gun might need to change to 197/244/54 for the KV-5 which coincidentally also fall into line with xx984's suggestion of "All it really needed was a standard pen buff up to 190-200 area, and a prem buff to 240 area, and keep the pref MM. "


Edited by arthurwellsley, 28 May 2018 - 01:29 PM.


HQ65 #17 Posted 28 May 2018 - 12:47 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 27768 battles
  • 510
  • [CMERC] CMERC
  • Member since:
    01-16-2012

I think this whole discussion boils down to the Matchmaking....

 

Whether you're a fan Frontline or not, everything is Tier 8. Everything is balanced. I know that all will have Tier 8, which is what makes the game so enjoyable in my opinoin. If I am in a Tier 8 Med and face up against a Tier 8 HVY, I KNOW he will have an advantage with his armor and gun, but I know I will have an advantage with my mobility (normally). 

 

 



Dava_117 #18 Posted 28 May 2018 - 01:03 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 17817 battles
  • 2,404
  • [B-BAS] B-BAS
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

View PostHQ65, on 28 May 2018 - 12:47 PM, said:

I think this whole discussion boils down to the Matchmaking....

 

Whether you're a fan Frontline or not, everything is Tier 8. Everything is balanced. I know that all will have Tier 8, which is what makes the game so enjoyable in my opinoin. If I am in a Tier 8 Med and face up against a Tier 8 HVY, I KNOW he will have an advantage with his armor and gun, but I know I will have an advantage with my mobility (normally). 

 

 

 

Yep, single tier mm is really balanced. I enjoy those kind of battle a lot. But WG will never reduce the tier spread: some like it (I like it in some extent), but mostly it brings income due to free exp and credit spent in premium ammo.

Bulldog_Drummond #19 Posted 28 May 2018 - 01:12 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 28042 battles
  • 9,664
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    08-10-2014

View Postarthurwellsley, on 28 May 2018 - 11:33 AM, said:

1. Do not take away the pref MM from the KV-5.

 

Thats the bottom line non-negotiable bit done.

 

If it does need a buff then as xx984 says, the only thing that really needs changing is the penetration.

 

 

Having left it on the shelf for a year I played a couple of dozen games in my KV-5 a few weeks ago to see how it had kept up with power creep and the new MM.  To my surprise it stood up very well and I got about 55% win in it, which with my modest skills is as well as I can expect at tier 8.

 

Having played 1500 games in the KV-5 over the years, like driving a car or skating the handling returns instinctively.  It continues to be able without much effort to on average block about 2K of damage.  Being rare, no one these days knows where to shoot it, and angling is very effective.  Although the pen is a bit wet, it has the advantage of height, and can auto-pen the upper turret of most low-profile heavy enemies.  And the 700 damage ram capability, although rarely implemented, scares the heck out of the opposition.



AvalancheZ257 #20 Posted 28 May 2018 - 02:44 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 3309 battles
  • 222
  • [3WCST] 3WCST
  • Member since:
    05-26-2017

View PostHQ65, on 28 May 2018 - 11:49 AM, said:

Sadly, I cannot take part of this discussion, out of an act of stupidity, I sold my KV5.....Maybe a couple of bad games, and a few beers too many....Oh well, I wish I had mine back....

 

Can't you get back premium tanks you've sold by contacting support? IIRC if you have enough credits in your account (the same amount you sold the KV-5 for) then WG support would be happy to return the premium tank to your garage. 




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users