Tiger - The Facts

[Denwad]

Sry, my fault. I've done a damn mistake. After switching the sides (as playing for Axis), I've found only Panzer IV F2s. Then its correct. But even so ... that gun wasn't that powerfull vs T34 @ frontal hits. Maybe side and behind, but NOT front. Thats why (and because a Panzer IV F2 was easily destroyed by ANY medium and heavy tank the Russians could throw in a battle) the germans invented their Panther.

the panzer IV with the 75mm L/43 or 48 is perfectly capable of destroying T-34s at range

in my many Combat Mission games, playing as the Russians, you learn that late war tanking is mostly eggshells with hammers, who ever hits first wins ( with few rare/expensive exceptions )

 

[prinz eugen]

I think the number of deflections are fine. What else do you want, if all tanks were to get destroyed in only one or two hits, tank combat would be boring.
The Tiger definately cannot match the Soviet tanks in terms of armor though. Not sure if that's historical correct or not.

no its not.... the designers should just admitt it and fix it!!!!!!! if this game was just about not being bored i would go back to playing COD, etc...... tank combat is boring when all the tanks are made artificially similar... with little regard to the simple fact of the matter that a t34/76... had almost no chance against a tiger.... and a t34/85 only if it got the first shot... conveniently, for those who want to propagate some kind of magic quality to the t34... all of the t34s in game (against tigers) are 85s.... most t34 were 76s even very late in the war..... those are the "facts"....

 

[MkH^]

I like the analogy with eggshells and hammers. There's definitely something weird going 'round with particular damage models - or damages of particular vehicles. If the game goes for full realism, it should be fully realistic and not cut corners like with Tiger, T-34 and T-60, or actually the whole concept of the current damage models. I have yet to see any tank killed by one shot, except in the IS-2 versus Panzer IV case.

The armored combat has great potential, but you can't really speak of simulation level realism.

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

no its not.... the designers should just admitt it and fix it!!!!!!! if this game was just about not being bored i would go back to playing COD, etc...... tank combat is boring when all the tanks are made artificially similar... with little regard to the simple fact of the matter that a t34/76... had almost no chance against a tiger.... and a t34/85 only if it got the first shot... conveniently, for those who want to propagate some kind of magic quality to the t34... all of the t34s in game (against tigers) are 85s.... most t34 were 76s even very late in the war..... those are the "facts"....

.....Apart from all that - yes, we will be re(rere)looking at armour penetration all the time. And, no, we won't nerf it to suit people's views - it will be based on the best fact we can find. If the rounds are genuinely skipping too often, we'll rework the maths! Patience

I don't quite agree with your assessment Prinz Eugen. I initially thought the same about the Tiger, until I played it more and tried to operate it properly. I noticed I could take out most tanks in 2 shots (if I wasn't shooting at some crazy angle) and if I kept my Tiger angled towards the enemy, it was hard for them to kill me. I still got wacked with a frontal or side shot from short range at an angle near 90 degrees, but I believe that was realistic. Also, it seems in any map, most ranges in tank vs tank occur at 500 meters or much less. That ups the penetration.....

In any case, [RO]Wilsonam did mention before your post that they will look at everything and try to base it on facts. That is good enough for me.

 

[LemoN]

well i think the damage model is fine
but the tanks in the maps are just fu**ed up
either do it Tiger and Pz4 F2 vs T34/42/43
or do it Tiger and Pz4 H or J vs T34/85 and IS2

its just unfair for the german warmachine in ROOSt to have late 1942 and mid 1943 material and face late 1944 tanks...
and i would pretty much enjoy it to have a panther instead of a tiger on k

 

[Feuerstrahl]

I was doing a lot of thinking, and maybe it's not the tanks. Maybe its us. Even the thickest armor is no guarantee of invincibility. While many of us refer to charts and battlefield accounts (which may not be accurate-try remember the details of a car accident, and then right them down a few years later; it's probably not accurate), perhaps the developers did get it right in terms of modeling them accurately. If that's true, then the only error is our lack of skill in deploying the tanks to their true potential.

Perhaps the use of the tanks on the whole is not at all what it would have been in WWII and that all the perceived short-comings are really just ours. An analogy then would be a novice violinist complaining that his expensive violin doesn't sound as good as that of an expert's.

 

[Armed_To_Teeth]

i have read books from WW2 veterans, Otto Carius that was one of the guys that made the Tiger Legendary, he had over 30-40 kills against T34 and he hit em straight on the sloped armor at ranges up to 1000m +, penetrated like i knife through butter and this is not "bad remembering", he had a combat cameraman many times in the tank to report his actions.


i recommend reading, Tigers in the Mud: The Combat Career of German Panzer Commander Otto Carius

Armed To Teeth

 

[Denwad]

watch the panther video, the panther in K

 

[Wk~]

I believe I've had ranges of at least 900+ on Arad before, and used the 1000m setting on IS2s to destroy tanks spot on sitting behind that wall near the German tank spawn.

 

[-MM!!-Lazarus]

I was doing a lot of thinking, and maybe it's not the tanks. Maybe its us. Even the thickest armor is no guarantee of invincibility. While many of us refer to charts and battlefield accounts (which may not be accurate-try remember the details of a car accident, and then right them down a few years later; it's probably not accurate), perhaps the developers did get it right in terms of modeling them accurately. If that's true, then the only error is our lack of skill in deploying the tanks to their true potential.

Perhaps the use of the tanks on the whole is not at all what it would have been in WWII and that all the perceived short-comings are really just ours. An analogy then would be a novice violinist complaining that his expensive violin doesn't sound as good as that of an expert's.

I think you are right. At least that for sure is the biggest factor here.

 

[LemoN]

well i think that the fact wich lets the tiger appear weak on most roost maps is the fact that it IS weak against the IS2 and the t3485
yes it still hab power but it just didnt have the BIG+ in 1942/43
his weapon and armour

as it stands now thje tiger sux bad and that wont change till there acutally are some 1942/43 maps
untill that it will be the only tank left @ spawn...

 

[kfnguy2]

well i think that the fact wich lets the tiger appear weak on most roost maps is the fact that it IS weak against the IS2 and the t3485
yes it still hab power but it just didnt have the BIG+ in 1942/43
his weapon and armour

as it stands now thje tiger sux bad and that wont change till there acutally are some 1942/43 maps
untill that it will be the only tank left @ spawn...

I still personally use the tiger. You just have to use it like the heavy tank it is. But yes, you are completely correct in that it doesn't appear to be godlike - as we are playing it on later war maps. It's not that it's unrealistic for them to be there... It's just that they were much better in 1943 after getting all the kinks out and no real tank could compete with them. I mean t34/76's could flank and penetrate at 500 meters from the side and the back... But that's it. The later war russian tanks could all penetrate it's frontal armor at up to 1,000 meters (the IS2 could obviously penetrate at greater range) which is exactly what is happening in the game. They just need to insert into the game some of the later german tanks... and no I don't mean the konigstiger as only about 500 were put on the battlefield and hardly any of these were on the eastern front. If they were to introduce these into the game they would have to be VERY rare. But I mean things like jagdpanther and later stugs etc.

 

[prinz eugen]

I still personally use the tiger. You just have to use it like the heavy tank it is. But yes, you are completely correct in that it doesn't appear to be godlike - as we are playing it on later war maps. It's not that it's unrealistic for them to be there... It's just that they were much better in 1943 after getting all the kinks out and no real tank could compete with them. I mean t34/76's could flank and penetrate at 500 meters from the side and the back... But that's it. The later war russian tanks could all penetrate it's frontal armor at up to 1,000 meters (the IS2 could obviously penetrate at greater range) which is exactly what is happening in the game. They just need to insert into the game some of the later german tanks... and no I don't mean the konigstiger as only about 500 were put on the battlefield and hardly any of these were on the eastern front. If they were to introduce these into the game they would have to be VERY rare. But I mean things like jagdpanther and later stugs etc.

you brought up a good point..... but for me the irony is that one of the battles in the game--Ogledow--is known for the fact that it is one of the first uses of the King Tiger.... as far as i know their were no Tigers in this battle--but their were (at least) 3 or 4 King Tigers. The 501 heavy tank batt. took part and had just recieved them.... !!!!!!!!!! for the other side, there where both t34/ 76 and t34/ 85's in the battle, but there are no t34/ 76s in the game.....
(interestingly.... it was the t34/ 85s that stopped the king tiger's advance at one point...)

 

[prinz eugen]

I was doing a lot of thinking, and maybe it's not the tanks. Maybe its us. Even the thickest armor is no guarantee of invincibility. While many of us refer to charts and battlefield accounts (which may not be accurate-try remember the details of a car accident, and then right them down a few years later; it's probably not accurate), perhaps the developers did get it right in terms of modeling them accurately. If that's true, then the only error is our lack of skill in deploying the tanks to their true potential.

Perhaps the use of the tanks on the whole is not at all what it would have been in WWII and that all the perceived short-comings are really just ours. An analogy then would be a novice violinist complaining that his expensive violin doesn't sound as good as that of an expert's.

point well taken.... and the same has occured to me--and the game has only been out in the present form for little over a week or 2.... im sure im doing almost everything wrong at this point..... but you can just as easily turn it around.... let say a t34 in 1941..... soviet tankers in the summer of 41... were no "experts" yet there are countless stories of t34s being almost completely unstopable.... i know this situation occurs in one of the new battles... i havent enought exp. with the game to play this angle ( so to speak) out yet.... its another irony--if you will..... about the russian front....
this is my favorite game and i dont mind learning something or being proven wrong.... im sure i will be on at least some points....

 

[wokelly]

watch the panther video, the panther in K

 

[Oberst Freitag]

watch the panther video, the panther in K

 

[SasQuatch]

We have tested the tiger extensively, because after initial implementation in our maps, we too thought the tiger was 'weird'.

We've taken pot shots at tigers from many distances on arad with T34/85's and vice versa. We've put our findings against the data we have, and from what i can see, it's correctly modeled as far as our current models can take it (we dont have a molecule perfect modeling of armor, but what i get from Alan, we plan on making the models even more extensive). We knew people would be screaming hell about the Tiger, but we ran with it anyway, since it is correct as far as we know.

The main disadvantage we have is mapsize/distances. I can compare it to the Mod's infantry against most Ostfront infantry battles. In the Mod distances could be so small in a lot of the MOD maps, even nades and bullet balistics seemed weird. If you compare the core gameplay on Konigsplatz for instance, you can actually see the various weapons function to their properties, so propper even, that i hear sappers scream for a rifle instead of the default loadout

It's a hard bargain: either we model the tanks unrealistically to counter the 'short range' map sizes we can make (<1000m tops at some odd spot), and up their armor specifics and downgrade their ballistic capabilities to suit the max size maps we have going, OR we make the tank maps even bigger, with larger view distances, even less detail, and having 32 players max on 3x3 km maps killing the servers and your computer and the fun; neither options are good for us.

There is 1 map where the tiger meets T34/76's. Due to the scenario's at hand, we ended up with mostly late war tank maps, the only map where there's T34/76 and 85's up against tigers is Ogledow. So please, go test with T34/76's and the tigers there. The only problem there is that the map is fairly small. I'd say test it from left to right, you should be able to fire long range shots in that direction. Make sure its the 76 though, it's got a smaller turret.

We will probably visit earlier war tank engagements in the future, where the tiger will live up to it's 'hype', meaning, it will be meeting early war russian tanks.

But still, it's not the machine that makes the killer, it's the operator. I can do pretty well on a Tiger on Arad, as long as you use it as a 'rifle' and not an 'smg' Your key asset is your driver, and that goes for almost all the tanks in Ostfront. Good driver > Good Armor.

 

[Denwad]

the round hit at almos ~60* angle...what they adise you to angle the tank at...not to mention its a 90mm round vs 40mm armor...

88mm vs 45mm in case of the Tiger vs T-34

 

[kfnguy2]

88mm vs 45mm in case of the Tiger vs T-34

45mm what?

 

[Sichartshofen]

I was doing a lot of thinking, and maybe it's not the tanks. Maybe its us. Even the thickest armor is no guarantee of invincibility. While many of us refer to charts and battlefield accounts (which may not be accurate-try remember the details of a car accident, and then right them down a few years later; it's probably not accurate), perhaps the developers did get it right in terms of modeling them accurately. If that's true, then the only error is our lack of skill in deploying the tanks to their true potential.

This would mean that every tank on the Eastern front would blow up after 2 hits, T60 was capable of punching through 50-70mm of armor and the IS2 would blow up Panzer IV tanks with 1 hit.

Now I'll say this again. The tank damage model in the beta version (not the mod!) was different. Hitting an undamaged tank in the ammo storage with any tank cannon (75mm, 88mm, 85mm, 122mm) and Panzerfaust destroyed it. Hitting a tank in the engine disabled any tank.


Now in the game 2 shots will destroy any undamaged tank no matter where you aim. You now need 2 Panzerf