Jump to content


KV-2 guns are too overpowered compared to others in same tier class


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
47 replies to this topic

How_Terrible #21 Posted Jul 28 2012 - 23:43

    Major

  • Players
  • 15300 battles
  • 2,744
  • [REL_3] REL_3
  • Member since:
    09-26-2011
All of the russian tier 6 heavies have high pen high alpha guns, but that pay for with very poor RoF, and horrible aim times, and in the case of the KV-2 and the KV-1S they also have engines that are coated in thermite.

Edited by paladin5, Jul 28 2012 - 23:57.


Legiondude #22 Posted Jul 28 2012 - 23:44

    Major

  • Players
  • 13396 battles
  • 16,784
  • [ELVIS] ELVIS
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

View PostGunadie, on Jul 28 2012 - 23:27, said:

Parallel to these tests, OKB No.9 and the 520th Department of Factory No.183 received and assignment to mount a 100mm gun in the turret of a T-34. This decision was made due to the insufficient HE power of 85mm guns in battles against long-term fortifications. However, even the drafting of the project showed that the mounting and use of a 100mm gun on a T-34 would be hampered by the 1600mm diameter of the turret ring. Use of a JS turret with a turret ring diameter of 1850mm wasn't possible due to the need of manufacturing an absolutely new body, especially complicated by the T-34's "candle" suspension. Nonetheless, OKB No.9 experimented with mounting a 100mm D-10 Gun in a standard turret, but the details of this project are unknown.
this shows that the 100 mm gun was mounted on the t-34 as an experiment and if it was even on paper as an experimental stage, production or not, it was fit for use in this game!!
Sure, it happened. Okay. We move on.

The running idea is that be OP at those tiers, give it a rest and lets see how it performs in 7.5 before saying this was wholly unprecedented

stahlhelmii #23 Posted Jul 28 2012 - 23:47

    Captain

  • Players
  • 8323 battles
  • 1,723
  • Member since:
    03-21-2012
Your post, Gunadie, made my eyes bleed.  I'm glad you found that necessary.

Deadrightthere #24 Posted Jul 28 2012 - 23:51

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 14999 battles
  • 204
  • Member since:
    02-07-2012

View PostLegiondude, on Jul 28 2012 - 22:34, said:

The KV-2 has the same armor levels as the KV-1, it's 152mm reload is RIDICULOUS, it's turret turns slowly and is a BIG target.....and you're comparing a medium and TD to a heavy tank. Try comparing the other heavies to it instead, where the KV-1S if it hits the KV-2 it pwns, the T-150 has a lower profile, faster turning turret with the 107mm, the M6 with 90mm can rip it up and take the punch with it's spaced track armor, and the ARL can nail it from range with the DCA 45.

The gun is POWERFUL, but not OVERPOWERED
  

Right on!

wildkarde #25 Posted Jul 30 2012 - 23:51

    Private

  • Players
  • 9137 battles
  • 8
  • [ARS] ARS
  • Member since:
    09-23-2011
If any of the t6 heavies needs a nerf bat its the kv1s, that thing absolutely dominates the medium companies, you have a better chance of seeing 5-6 of them on a team than you have of not seeing 5-6 of them. Between the good chassis, decent speed and maneuverability, decent armor, and the absurdly powerful gun the thing just runs roughshod over all the other tanks in the tier. The only tanks in the tier that have higher pen are the french arls, and they have 150 less alpha to make up for the extra pen, and the only tank that has higher alpha is the KV2's howitzer and gun that on anything with actual armor will likely average less damage than the 122. That gun will 2 shot 80+% of the other tanks at its tier consistently the only exceptions being the other t6 heavies and the vk3601, but even those it has a decent shot to two shot. That is the equivalent of putting a 1000 alpha 270 pen gun on the is4.

Hlat #26 Posted Jul 31 2012 - 01:41

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 3602 battles
  • 95
  • [TLOP] TLOP
  • Member since:
    12-20-2011
Nah, look at the KV-2's OTHER stats and you will think much differently

Kramburglar #27 Posted Jul 31 2012 - 01:50

    Major

  • Players
  • 13489 battles
  • 3,854
  • [IOC_5] IOC_5
  • Member since:
    12-18-2011
The 152 does hit like a truck.  That however is balanced by the fact that after it hits like a truck (assuming you hit) it then gets to crawl away trying not to expose it's huge profile while it reloads for the next 24 seconds.

The KV-2 is usually only "OP" when it's ignored or facing tanks that are afraid of it, even right after it's fired, and hide from it long enough for it to reload and then smack them again.

I remember when myself in a KV-2 and another KV-2 took out a 6 tank wolfpack because none of them paid attention to when we had fired.  Had they rushed us, they would have lost at most 2 tanks and then swarmed us, but instead they all hid, trying to play peekaboo and got blown apart one at a time.

lpmaster #28 Posted Jul 31 2012 - 02:16

    Major

  • Players
  • 6111 battles
  • 13,582
  • [ANZIO] ANZIO
  • Member since:
    08-01-2011
Yes, it is so OP I KO'ed one in my panzer38nA... ITSHO OP!!1!  It also just OP enough for me to have taken another one out in my M8A1. NERF DIS NAOW

Jorn_Stones #29 Posted Jul 31 2012 - 03:19

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 9326 battles
  • 95
  • Member since:
    11-03-2011
KV-2. Ever since it became tier 6 i can happely say: "I'm not afraid anymore!" mainly because you only see them once every 10 battles now, and all they are good for is close range derping.

After a few medium tank comapny matches i figured out that it was not the T-150 that was the best heavy now, but the Kv-1S with its 122 mm 'All armor is paperz' gun. If there is one heavy tank in tier 6 OP its the KV-1s, before that there was the KV-3 that was slightly stronger then the KV-1S. and in many cases a KV-1S player would be able to beat a KV-3, as the tanks were almost the same in terms of strength. moving the KV-3 to tier 7 did not solve the KV-1S problem.

Ryuna #30 Posted Jul 31 2012 - 04:43

    Sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 7822 battles
  • 232
  • Member since:
    01-25-2011

View PostGunadie, on Jul 28 2012 - 22:48, said:

I dont see any tank with a gun that does 700 damage (tier 6). The reason I question and for the post was that the t-34-85 at 175 pen and 230 damage is being removed (as is the 105 from the su-85)
Should the gun be nerfed to bring it in line with the new match ups it will battle against is the question I put forth!
I also see no other tank clean up as much as this one, so is it op ?and by what measure is it judged?
Not sure if trolling or just stupid.
700 damg? meh, it's AP shell with poor 110 pen. It can pen low tier tank but only, I repeat ONLY IF you can at least HIT the target. The derp gun is way TOO INACCURATE with TOO LONG AIMING TIME why the low tier tank is all (most) small and fast. You cant pen high tier frontally.

Draculthemad #31 Posted Jul 31 2012 - 04:47

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 16211 battles
  • 557
  • [RELIC] RELIC
  • Member since:
    06-26-2011
I laughed myself sick here slightly.

"110 pen, 700 dmg guns"

Hes referring to people using AP with the 152mm! lol.

Spectre12078 #32 Posted Jul 31 2012 - 05:07

    Major

  • Players
  • 19978 battles
  • 2,485
  • [1ADE] 1ADE
  • Member since:
    04-12-2011

View PostGunadie, on Jul 28 2012 - 23:27, said:

Home
Tanks
Photos
Documents
  
Search  
Home  Tank Armament Russian


Memoirs
Tank Armament
Battles
Analytics
Blueprints
-------------
Administrator
IREMEMBER.RU
Infantrymen
Snipers
Tankers
Pilots
Artillerymen
Medics
Others
LOGIN
User Name
Password
Remember Me

Forgot your password?
Forgot your username?
Create an account
Website stats
Visitors 34
Articles 136
Articles View Hits 78896
100mm D-10 Tank Gun  
Author: Valeri Potapov
Created on Monday, 19 September 2011 11:49
Last Updated on Wednesday, 30 November -0001 02:30
Total hits: 1110
Usage:
Production tanks: none.
Production SP-Guns: SU-100.
Experimental tanks: T-34-100, T-44-100, KV-100, JS-4 (Object 245).
Experimental SP-Guns: SU-101
Although mounting 100mm guns on heavy tanks was very appealing, several things including lack of necessary ammunition, hampered their mass implementation. Firsts attempts to use a 100mm gun with ballistics of a Naval AA Gun B-34 for arming heavy tanks were made by TsAKB, designing two models during autumn of 1943. One of them was 107mm ZIS-6 Gun re-bored for 100mm calibre with a modified brass catcher and vertical aiming device, and the second one 100mm Tank Gun S-34. Judging by the NKV letter exchange, we can suppose that in September one of the models was field tested from the mount of a 152mm Howitzer ML-20. Results however are unknown, and so is the index of the weapon.
On December 27th, 1943 a decision came from GKO No.4851 about the conversion of the tank JS and self-propelled artillery with a 100mm gun, modified with an easier to use loading mechanism. Obeying the decision, Test Factory No.100 manufactured two JS tanks converted to a 100mm gun. Essentially, based on the GKO decision only the tank JS-100 was supposed to be armed with an S-34 Main Gun, but the mounting required modification of the internal module, which the tank factories didn't like. Because of that, in April of 1944 OKB No.9 suggested its variant of the 100mm Gun D-10, whose mounting did not require any modification to the turret of the tank.
Tank with a 100mm Gun D-10T received the designation JS-4 (Object 245). First testing of the tank was unsuccessful like the JS-5, armed with an S-34 Gun. The same defects were noted, such as a weak gun cradle, badly sealed recoil brake and some more. The gun was returned for repairing, but the field officers more liked the tank fitted with an S-34, that alleviated the task of the gunners.
From July 1st to 6th 1944, on the Gorokhovetskiy proving grounds, tandem field testing of the D-10 OKB No.9 and S-34 TsAKB guns mounted in tanks JS-4 and JS-5 continued. Now the reliability of the D-10 was noted, but the impressions were spoiled by the insufficient ammunition storage (30 shells), bad ventilation of the gunner module and strain on the loading gunner.
Parallel to these tests, OKB No.9 and the 520th Department of Factory No.183 received and assignment to mount a 100mm gun in the turret of a T-34. This decision was made due to the insufficient HE power of 85mm guns in battles against long-term fortifications. However, even the drafting of the project showed that the mounting and use of a 100mm gun on a T-34 would be hampered by the 1600mm diameter of the turret ring. Use of a JS turret with a turret ring diameter of 1850mm wasn't possible due to the need of manufacturing an absolutely new body, especially complicated by the T-34's "candle" suspension. Nonetheless, OKB No.9 experimented with mounting a 100mm D-10 Gun in a standard turret, but the details of this project are unknown.
It should be noted that an armor-piercing shell for a 100mm gun was in production only in November of 1944, when it was found out that due to the significant degradation of armor on German tanks, the effectiveness of the 122mm guns mounted on the JS tanks significantly increased. Besides that, test shelling of the German Panthers on Kubinka GABTU extreme effectiveness of 122mm shells against Panther's front armor. With the explosive shells, 122mm shell was superior to that of the 100mm, which is why GKO made a decision against the mount of D-10 in heavy tanks, which is indicated in mail about the mounting of 100mm gun on the JS tanks. proving grounds in September 1944 proved the
Another attempt at up-gunning a T-34 to a 100mm gun was tied with the design of the tank T-44V. By the initiative of A. Morozov, permitted by the Narkomtankprom (Minister of Tank Industry), for construction design of the T-44V turret, the 520th Department lead by Doroshenko designed a "mobile stand" from the body and devices of the T-34, where the new turret was mounted. This project received a factory index T-34-100. In February-March of 1945, this tank was field tested with guns ZIS-100 and D-10 on the Sverdlovsk and Gorokhovo proving grounds. The testing was generally successful, but the accuracy of the shells wasn't good, and the recoil reaction on the suspension too great. Nonetheless the military personnel liked the vehicle that demanded continuation of work on it, with a possible goal of strengthening the armament of the T-34-85. However, all attempts to increase accuracy of the D-10 and minimize the recoil reaction failed. The T-34-100 project was abandoned, especially since at that moment the T-54 tests were conducted.
During 1945-47, the D-10 was mounted in experimental tanks T-44-100, whose 85mm armament was deemed insufficient, as well as various modifications of experimental T-54. As a result, the superiority of the D-10 above others was confirmed, since the gun didn't have a muzzle brake and was more compatible than others for arming a medium tank.
During the whole war the only BR-412 APHE projectile used, in 1946-1950th some improved projectiles were developed, for example BR-412D and BR-412B.
D-10 GUN SPECIFICATION Parameter Value
Calibre, mm 100
Bore lenght, clb 53,5
Weight of pendulous elements, kg 2257
Weight of recoil elements, kg 1538
Normal recoil length, mm 550
Max recoil length, mm 650
Ammunition fixed
Ballistic 100mm naval gun
Practical ROF, shot/min 5-6
ARMOR PENETRATION TABLE* Projectile Angle Range, m
500 1,000 1,500 2,000
BR-412 60° CP=125 CP=110 CP=95 CP=87
90° CP=155 CP=135 CP=115 CP=100
*Certified Penetration (CP) means the 80% probability of armor penetration;
Muzzle velocity for the AP projectile - 880 m/s.
AMMUNITION FOR THE D-10 GUN* SHELL PROJECTILE PROPELLANT CHARGE
Index Weight, kg Index Weight, kg Length, clb Weight of a charge, gram Fuse Index Weight, kg
HIGH EXPLOSIVE, FRAGMENTATION
UOF-412 30.2 OF-412 15.6 4.29 1.46 RGM, RGM-6, V-429 ? 5.5
UOF-412U 30.2 OF-412G 15.6 4.29 1.46 RGM, RGM-6, V-429 ? 2.4
UO-412 30.2 O-412 (naval) 15.94 4.29 1.46 KTM-1 ? 2.4
ARMOR PIERCING
UBR-412 30.1 BR-412B (APBC) 15.88 3.6 0.965 MD-8, DBR-2 ? 5.5
UBR-412 30.1 BR-412 (APHE) 15.88 3.08 0.065 MD-8 ? 5.5
UBR-412D 30.4 BR-412D (APCBC) 15.88 3.9 0.061 MD-8, DBR-2 ? 5.5
ARMOR PIERCING SUB-CALIBER (HVAP)
n/a
SHAPED-CHARGE ANTI-TANK (HEAT)
n/a
CANISTER AND SHRAPNEL
n/a
INCENDIARY
n/a
SMOKE
UD-412 30.1 D-412 16.68 3.08 - RGM, RGM-6, V-429 ? 5.5
UD-412U 30.1 D-412 16.68 3.08 - V-429 ? 5.5
*Note: this table does not reflect some post-war projectiles.
Translated by: Dmitri ArtamonovThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Special thanks to: Paul LakowskiThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Sources: A.Shirokorad "Entsiklopediya Otechestvennoi Artillerii", 2000
Entsiklopedia Vooruzhenii KiM
"Artillerijskoye Vooruzhevie Sovetskikh Tankov 1940-1945" Armada-Vertical, No.4, 1999
Rate this article:
12345( 1 Vote )
Post your comments...
Name*
Email*
Website
Your comment*
this shows that the 100 mm gun was mounted on the t-34 as an experiment and if it was even on paper as an experimental stage, production or not, it was fit for use in this game!!

The T-34-85 DID have a 100mm and it WAS tested extensivly.

Sadly,it turned out that firing the 100mm 10DT would crack or warp(worst case it shattered) the turret ring. Also,the 100mm gave the T-34 something the other mediums didnt really have. Alpha. The VKs have ROF and somewhat alpha if it pens,the Americans have penetration with the French(moderatly high ROF as well) and the SOviets had pure alpha with piss poor accuracy.

And the IS had a better(but much rarer,possibly only 2 equipped with this weapon) anti tank option that was clearly superior in all aspects to the 122mm D-25 but wasnt chosen due to extensive modifications to the turret

The only one that I cant find any information about is the SU-85 mounting the 107. It DID mount the 122mm derp gun as an anti fortification weapon,similar to the StuH(the StuG mounting the 105)

Also,the 152mm that is used on the KV-2 and SU-152 is a fine weapon. A long reload offset by the huge alphas. Also,in reality,the KV-2 was a terrible tank. Heavy,slow,and often having issues with its transmission,firing it on a hillside would often topple the machine over on its occupants. And when you have a heavy shell like that 152mm it will hurt.

I would love to see that happen in game.

theantih4xor #33 Posted Jul 31 2012 - 05:43

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 4337 battles
  • 817
  • Member since:
    01-13-2012
For the love of god if you aren't smart enough to not go infront of a kv-2 derp in your small tank than your just.................wow

Legiondude #34 Posted Jul 31 2012 - 09:08

    Major

  • Players
  • 13396 battles
  • 16,784
  • [ELVIS] ELVIS
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

View PostDraculthemad, on Jul 31 2012 - 04:47, said:

I laughed myself sick here slightly.

"110 pen, 700 dmg guns"

Hes referring to people using AP with the 152mm! lol.
I actually do use AP, but only when I'm top tank(And I still keep more HE prepared)

The reason being HE sometimes lands me in situations where I nail a medium and it puts him at critical health, whereas if I penned him it would be oneshot

Plus nailing ARL's sides for 811 damage is quite nice

Edited by Legiondude, Jul 31 2012 - 09:08.


ComradeHX #35 Posted Jul 31 2012 - 09:13

    Major

  • Players
  • 12502 battles
  • 5,790
  • Member since:
    12-02-2011

View PostLegiondude, on Jul 31 2012 - 09:08, said:

The reason being HE sometimes lands me in situations where I nail a medium and it puts him at critical health, whereas if I penned him it would be oneshot

Plus nailing ARL's sides for 811 damage is quite nice
You can pen ARL 44 with HE from side, along with most of German tier VI.  For french you can do that all the way to Lorraine 40t(instant kill with 152mm HE from side).

Using AP instead of HE in this case actually makes it possible for them to survive.

Edited by ComradeHX, Jul 31 2012 - 09:13.


Legiondude #36 Posted Jul 31 2012 - 15:14

    Major

  • Players
  • 13396 battles
  • 16,784
  • [ELVIS] ELVIS
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

View PostComradeHX, on Jul 31 2012 - 09:13, said:

You can pen ARL 44 with HE from side
True, but it'd likely give me around 400 damage, nailing with AP I can hit much closer to full potential

Skpstr #37 Posted Jul 31 2012 - 15:59

    Major

  • Players
  • 12950 battles
  • 10,939
  • Member since:
    07-03-2011

Quote

I dont see any tank with a gun that does 700 damage (tier 6). The reason I question and for the post was that the t-34-85 at 175 pen and 230 damage is being removed (as is the 105 from the su-85)

You also don't see .5 accuracy and ~30 second reload on other Tier 6 tanks.

It makes sense to remove the 100mm from the T-34/85 in light of the MM change, because it already had the most pen and alpha for a Tier 6 medium, and won't need that so badly. It will still have the 2nd highest alpha of the Tier 6 mediums, and will have a ROF more suited to a medium.

As far as the SU-85, there is no way it needs 30 more pen and 165 more alpha than its next competitor (not counting the French T5 TD, which I think has ridiculous gun choices for its tier)

Boxhawk #38 Posted Jul 31 2012 - 16:09

    Major

  • Players
  • 12979 battles
  • 2,579
  • Member since:
    04-23-2012

View PostLegiondude, on Jul 28 2012 - 22:34, said:

The KV-2 has the same armor levels as the KV-1, it's 152mm reload is RIDICULOUS, it's turret turns slowly and is a BIG target.....and you're comparing a medium and TD to a heavy tank. Try comparing the other heavies to it instead, where the KV-1S if it hits the KV-2 it pwns, the T-150 has a lower profile, faster turning turret with the 107mm, the M6 with 90mm can rip it up and take the punch with it's spaced track armor, and the ARL can nail it from range with the DCA 45.

The gun is POWERFUL, but not OVERPOWERED

I had the KV2 when the KV split, sold it and bought it back recently.  My first match in it I was top tank and had the 152 on it.  I got sharpshooter, reaper, master gunner and was a huge bully.  At the end I had a bunch of lowbies stuffing my ass with shells because of the load time.  It is a novelty that doesn't do anything well.  My god, you see the derp gun fire, barrel ass at it, you have 15 free seconds.  I would much rather see a T 150 or KV1s on my team than a KV2

Hans_Geering #39 Posted Jul 31 2012 - 17:59

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 2310 battles
  • 212
  • Member since:
    11-13-2011

View PostGunadie, on Jul 28 2012 - 22:25, said:

After watching the lethal effects of the KV-2 and its 167 pen, 300 dmg & 110 pen, 700 dmg guns I am wondering why the t-34-85 and su-85 are having their
larger caliber guns removed in the 7.5 release, if the reason is that they are going to be too op for the new tier battle match ups.
At tier 6, this tank (KV-2) is doing extreme damage with 5-6 plus kills each round and many one shots
These guns are way overpowered compared to anything else in its tier class. (all nations)
Are there plans to reduce these extremely op guns to fit there tier 6 class rating ?

I remember it being worse when it was a Tier 5 tank... Anyway +1 for you

Edited by Hans_Geering, Jul 31 2012 - 18:00.


Forgotten_Hope #40 Posted Aug 15 2012 - 19:46

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 15372 battles
  • 993
  • [SSYD] SSYD
  • Member since:
    06-22-2011

View PostM18HellCat, on Jul 28 2012 - 22:33, said:

It's not overpowered. The T-150 uses the same ZiS-6 as the KV-2. So do we need to nerf that? The KV-1S uses a 122mm gun (not the derp), do we need to nerf that?
considering I was just one shot by the derp gun, for 870 health at 200 meters while he was driving, I don't care how long the reload is