Tigers
- Thread starter RoclorD
- Start date
- Status
ARE YOU KIDDING! They are WAY too easy to destroy. A t34/85 can take one out in one shot to the front from across the map in RO. That would have never happened in real life.
Upvote
0
No, do you not realize how good of a gun the 85 is? The tiger is rolling coffin against the 85
Upvote
0
Maybe on a flank shot. I went out of line saying that it wouldn't get destroyed in real life. But the 85 was similar to the german 75mm L/48 on the Panzer IV H/J, and correct me if i'm wrong, but i don't believe it could penetrate 200mm of armor from a long distance like it can in game.
The 85mm was impressive, but i wouldn't go around saying that it could make scrap metal out of any tiger. You can't even deny that the tiger's armor in RO isn't realistic, I killed one the other day from the front with a t34/76. Granted I aimed at the ammo storage, but it still had to penetrate 200mm of high quality German armor to get there.
Upvote
0
The Tiger really wasn't THAT good of a tank on the Eastern front atleast. Against Shermans it sweeped the floor with their burning hulks, but against a T-34/85 it wasn't nearly as good. The 88 should, however, be able to rape pretty much all the tanks in the game. But the armor wasn't as invincible as most think. Especially when you factor in the lesser quality of steel used as compared to the Panther.
Edit:
Edit:
Not quite. The Tiger used a lesser quality of steel as compared to the Panther because it was a later war vehicle. Yeah the 76 shouldn't be able to do anything against it's front from anything but insanely close range, but the 85 wouldn't have done too bad against it. In reality the Panther should be the German "tank to beat", atleast until and unless a Jagdpanther or King Tiger is added.
Upvote
0
It was still higher quality steel than the Russians, at least untill late 1944 it was. I do agree that the 88 should cut through everything besides the IS2 like butter though.
Upvote
0
You've got that backwards my friend. The Tiger used the very best steel the germans had to offer. "The rolled ****geneous nickel-steel plate, electro-welded interlocking-plate construction armor had a Brinell hardness index of 255-260 (the best ****geneous armor hardness level for WW II standards). The Tiger I's armor was much superior to that of, for example the Panther, which armor had a much higher Brinell index, and consequently, was very brittle." http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/tiger1.htm
Upvote
0
Even at these ranges it should pretty much rape an IS-2 shouldn't it? Besides a few custom maps the ranges really arn't all that far for the most part. Arad has the longest range of the stock maps and even then I usually end up in engagments where I can just drop the crosshairs right on the target without aiming above it or altering the range settings(I still am terrible at estimating ranges in this game)
Edit: I'll get back to you on the armor. It ws in one of my books that is stated this(which I would trust more then any website).
Edit2: Also, I might be thinking of the King Tiger acually. Which is more likely since it was an even later production tank. I know one of the Tiger's had crappier armor, relatively speaking, to the earlier German tanks. The armor thickness pretty much made up for it, making sure it's armor was still better then other tanks, but it wasn't AS good as you might believe. Not to mention the Tiger had a crap load of other flaws that the game doesn't represent. The wheels would often clog with mud, the immense weight would crush many bridges and it was generally an unwieldy tank. At long ranges it was king(besides the King Tiger ans IS-2) but at closer ranges it was really incredibly vulnerable, at most ranges in this game are pretty close.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Afterburner, the reason the tiger 1's armor was so good was because it was an ealier war tank, when Germany still have good materials available. As the war raged on Germany had to "make due", if you will, when building their newer tanks.
Upvote
0
Then lets say it'll cut through everything like butter, except for the IS2 it'll cut through like cheese? Maybe? I don't know where i'm going with that.
I've read several books on tigers and panthers on the eastern front. My favorite being Otto Carius's, "Tigers In The Mud," I remember him saying that everytime they would show up you would hear on the russian freqencies "Tiiiigriiiii, Tiiiigriiii!" and then you could expect artillery fire shortly.
Upvote
0
d'[RWTD said:
Maybe it was just late production Tigers I am thinking of then. They were produced on into 1944.
Upvote
0
You know what wasn't hard to knock out but is in RO? T34's!
You don't know what the hell you're talking about.
Upvote
0
Just for the record, the Panther actually is the German tank to beat. With anything other than the IS2's 122mm gun you're lucky to harm it frontally at most any range.
You know what tank is a rolling coffin though? The KV1s. It's sad too because I love using it.
You know what tank is a rolling coffin though? The KV1s. It's sad too because I love using it.
Upvote
0
A t34/85 will penitrate the frontal armor on a tiger sub 800 meters (T34/76 on the other hand has to be sub 100 meters in the front to have a chance of penitration and still then it is only a chance). Most ranges on official RO tank maps are 900 to 1.1k meters.
One of the main factor to german tank "superiority" was they had better range on their guns and could engage from a further distance where most of the enemy rounds would not penitrate. You might want to check out the custom map Orel to see this in action. It has larger view distances then we use in our official maps.
One of the main factor to german tank "superiority" was they had better range on their guns and could engage from a further distance where most of the enemy rounds would not penitrate. You might want to check out the custom map Orel to see this in action. It has larger view distances then we use in our official maps.
Upvote
0
Well they were extremely difficult when they first came out. But most tank maps seem to be later on in the war. I always find it difficult to believe that i'm playing a game based on realism when my 88 bounces off a t34's armor from 200 meters.
Edit: Thanks for the info Yoshi, I always have a hard time judging distances in a video game.
Upvote
0
Why do people think the IS-2 was some amazing long-range super tank?
That wasn't what it was used for at all.
By the way, the ZiS S-53 85mm was essentially on par with the 75mm KwK 40.
There's a reason why many armored companies got kill ratios of over 10:1 on the Eastern front.
Against any later-war German tank, the T-34 was a 'rolling coffin'.
The Sherman and the T-34 are quite comparable on paper.
The only difference is the Sherman has a terrible reputation while the T-34 has a glorious one.
Also, please don't confuse the Tiger I and Tiger II.
Fake edit: A post comprised soley of single line statements is a bad idea. Oh well.
That wasn't what it was used for at all.
By the way, the ZiS S-53 85mm was essentially on par with the 75mm KwK 40.
There's a reason why many armored companies got kill ratios of over 10:1 on the Eastern front.
Against any later-war German tank, the T-34 was a 'rolling coffin'.
The Sherman and the T-34 are quite comparable on paper.
The only difference is the Sherman has a terrible reputation while the T-34 has a glorious one.
Also, please don't confuse the Tiger I and Tiger II.
Fake edit: A post comprised soley of single line statements is a bad idea. Oh well.
Upvote
0
- Status