Tigers
- Thread starter RoclorD
- Start date
- Status
1941, 1942, 1943, 1944, 1945.. nope, war in russia lasted labout 4 years in total, 3 solid years, and then you have some months of 41 and 45 ontop of that.
The whole global deal is about 6 years, but the east front is 4 or so.
Upvote
0
I'm actually getting tired of people using the "Red vs Blue" argument. There's nothing about RO that's "Red vs Blue"
Red vs Blue insinuates that both teams have identical equipment and are just skinned a different color.
Most people who are arguing against Red vs Blue are actually arguing against "Balance" which is something else entirely. You are oversimplifying the argument in order to push your point, which is that you want realism.
What I actually hear a lot of people saying here is that they want the Tiger to be some kind of unstoppable killing machine all the while none of the disadvantages (such as numbers of equipment or late war Russian air dominance) are modelled.
Guess what? No game designer EVER is going to give you what you're asking for, so you might as well get used to it. ANY multiplayer game is going to need balance. Balance is good. By trying to insinuate that balance is the same thing as "Red vs Blue," you are making clear that your agenda is just to make your own gaming experience better at the expense of the "other" guy. Sorry, but that's not going to happen.
Personally, I'm sick of the "realism" argument. Yes, we all want realistic vehicles. But you cannot throw out "balance" for the sake of realism. And you also cannot pick and choose which factors you want to make "realistic" while ignoring the rest.
As I see it, smart Tiger drivers can still dominate with this vehicle even considering the vast flaws in the armor game at the moment. If you use it like it was intended, it should be quite powerful. NOT INVINCIBLE LIKE YOU WANT, but still quite a force to contend with.
As soon as they do away with the Hull Hitpoint system, the Tiger will become quite a force to be reckoned with. That, IMHO, is more why the Tiger "underperforms" than any other reason in the game.
Upvote
0
Well you were refering to the "war" and for me the war is the 2nd World War.
Operation Barbarossa is for me only a part of this war but not another one.
And now it depends on what you call eastern front.
Poland is in the East of Germany, so again 6 years.
Operation Barbarossa is for me only a part of this war but not another one.
And now it depends on what you call eastern front.
Poland is in the East of Germany, so again 6 years.
Upvote
0
I understand your point of view. I don't need or want perfect realism, I'm tired of the uber-realism-club aswell.
But we need at least simplified realism. Roughly speaking that means a Tiger > T34 on most occasions and in the bigger picture. I don't want it to take out 5 T34s before dieing but in most occasions a Tiger should have the upper hand (given the crews are of identical skill). Currently that doesn't seem to be the case.
When you have your shells bounce off at point blank range or have it penetrate but not kill, while the enemy kills you with one shot through the front although having a much weaker gun, it's not about realism anymore... it's about credibility.
Upvote
0
It seems we are in agreement then. And for what it's worth, the Tiger IS > the T34 in game at the moment. The problem is, people want it to be super DOOPER better than the T34.
I think the real issue here is that the tank combat in this game is oversimplified in terms of penetration calculations and damage results (well, and in every other aspect for that matter). The Tiger gets a lot of attention in the forums becuase a lot of people have a boner for it, but the truth of the matter is that ALL tank combat is fubar in some way or another. What we have now is an abstraction of reality, with glitches. These glitches are what have people's panties in a bunch.
For what it's worth, I think OVERALL the Tiger is much better than the T34's in the game. There are incidents where the Tiger is underperforming, but on the whole, it is fine.
Upvote
0
After playing solely the Tiger the entire day on mostly BlackDay and Arad i have to agree. The Tiger is still somewhat underpowered against the T34/85 which seems to dominate it in most cases, but it's way better than the T34/76, just as it should be.
I'm beginning to agree that most of the blame has to go to the penetration / defelction system: It's way to random/bugged, sometimes they just don't penetrate as they should... for every tank. You simply notice it more when it happens to a Tiger or an IS2. Given you were in a situation where any tank's gun should penetrate the other: If the Pz4 fails to do so you think "oh well" but if the Tiger fails you think "WTF?!?!"... whereas really the problem is the same-
I'm beginning to agree that most of the blame has to go to the penetration / defelction system: It's way to random/bugged, sometimes they just don't penetrate as they should... for every tank. You simply notice it more when it happens to a Tiger or an IS2. Given you were in a situation where any tank's gun should penetrate the other: If the Pz4 fails to do so you think "oh well" but if the Tiger fails you think "WTF?!?!"... whereas really the problem is the same-
Upvote
0
To be honest, I've read "only" up to page 12.
Just a comment on optics and range finding: It is quite easy to find ranges with the german optics if you practice a little bit AND know the aprox. size of the enemy you're aiming at. BUT it seems (I cannot say if it is still this way or it has been solved in a patch) the measures of the sights are wrong, so if you use them correctly (i.e. as intended by Zeiss), you still have to take HALF the range. Also, the 2nd magnification (means zoom) to 5.0 or also 6.0 (not sure now) of the Tiger and Panther optics (TFZ-9c and TFZ 12a, iirc) are not implemented. At long ranges, the combination of this two items made the german tanks surely superior, not only the gunnery and the armor.
This has been already discussed somewhere here (not in this thread), but I'm short on time now to look for it or for accurate sources. I may edit it later if I find the time.
If someone noticed this too or -much better- noticed this has been corrected, advice would be appreciated.
EDIT: Typo
Just a comment on optics and range finding: It is quite easy to find ranges with the german optics if you practice a little bit AND know the aprox. size of the enemy you're aiming at. BUT it seems (I cannot say if it is still this way or it has been solved in a patch) the measures of the sights are wrong, so if you use them correctly (i.e. as intended by Zeiss
), you still have to take HALF the range. Also, the 2nd magnification (means zoom) to 5.0 or also 6.0 (not sure now) of the Tiger and Panther optics (TFZ-9c and TFZ 12a, iirc) are not implemented. At long ranges, the combination of this two items made the german tanks surely superior, not only the gunnery and the armor.This has been already discussed somewhere here (not in this thread), but I'm short on time now to look for it or for accurate sources. I may edit it later if I find the time.
If someone noticed this too or -much better- noticed this has been corrected, advice would be appreciated.
EDIT: Typo
Last edited:
Upvote
0
good post you are right, my shells from my tiger bounce off at point blank range the front of a t34/76 and its not even at an angle. then the t34 hits me in the front and kills me with one shot
this last patch
Upvote
0
Point blank penetration does seem wonky at times. I get the "Ghost" shell issue a lot too (where the gun fires, but no round leaves the barrel).
As for the T34/85, I think the reason why it is so effective against the Tiger is that the Dev's have used penetration data that says that the 85mm gun can penetrate the Tiger's frontal armor out beyond 700 meters. Since we tend to play inside that range, the 85 is easily penetrating the Tiger. People have posted a lot of arguments why they think that the 85 shouldn't be penetrating the tiger even at 100 meters, but the penetration tables found everywhere else seem to dispute that.
Upvote
0
yes but i am talking about the T34/76 killing me from the front with one shot
I would like to see this reproduced. I have performed testing on the SU76 vs the Tiger frontally and even at nearly point blank ranges it took multiple shots to damage frontally, even at weak points like the driver's view slit and hull MG.
If you can provide me with a location on the Tiger where the 76mm gun "instakills" it reliably, I will agree with you.
The fact that sometimes the game burps and allows these results is acceptable, IMHO. If it's a reproducable problem, then it definately needs looking into.
Upvote
0
To me now laziness to dig on battlefield.ru . To search for the exact text. But if I am not mistaken, in the document discussed the situation with shells.
Further...
" Whether American tanks M3 General Lee having a gun with similar ballistics, successfully penetrate the Tiger with the same of distances "
To whom not laziness go battlefield.ru .
Soviet Union lagged behind the USA and Germany with development of new types of shells for 2-3 years. The fact. There were also greater problems with their mass production.
During same time works above Hi-Speed guns similar to a gun of the Tiger have begun. It is a gun it has been created and has was tested.
But it demanded a new shells with longer sleeve (?) . It could not be started in manufacture not on one of available lines. It was necessary to order the equipment in the USA. The same problem was with a barrel of a gun. For mass production big purchases of the equipment were necessary.
It had the big weight to put on Т-34 it it was impossible. The complete shells for KV has been limited because size of shell is big . When it became clear on how many expensively , idea have silently buried.
SU-85 Has appeared as the temporary decision. Till the moment of delivery ordered in the USA and England the industrial equipment. This equipment allowed to increase diameter of the basis of turret Т-34, for installation 85мм guns .
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I have never seen a Tiger get killed in a single hit from the front by a T34/76.
I've seen a kill happen from a T34/85 from the "front" but that simply was front FACING, rather than the front ARMOR. The Tigers in these cases were actually going downhill or had the tops of their hulls exposed which, assuming Tripwire modeled top armor as independent of other armor plates, would make sense as a penetration and potential instakill.
The ONLY situation where I could see a T34/76 doing this is if it's actually hitting the top armor.
Now, given that some people DON'T use the range adjusters and instead lob their shells at the enemy, I suppose it IS possible that Tigers are getting penetrated when facing towards the enemy BUT hit from the top and the angle of attack lines up with the ammo store.
But a true head-on shot will, at most ranges, deflect. I've tested at short ranges (<200m) and a T34/76 CAN penetrate the Tiger's frontal armor enough to make it "go yellow", which presumably means it can penetrate enough to score an instant kill if you aim right. But the stories about "I was instakilled in my tiger by a Mosin Nagant 91/30 at 20000m" are, I think, slight exagerrations.
Like I've said, people tend to overestimate range in the game while in tanks. Go and practice on Mormegil's tank range map (do a search for posts by him or for "tank range") and you'll start to see that your "OMG!! IT WAS A 1500m AND I GOT KILLED IN ONE SHOT" stories are probably closer to 700m, if that.
Overall, I think we've covered what the issue is -- short range penetration is slightly overmodeled, as is the effect of angling. Some vehicles are indeed buggy (SU-76's upper frontal armor, for example). But long range penetration is GENERALLY accurate, if you play on long range maps. Arad is NOT a long range map, by the way. It's a mid-range map. Even the later versions of Black Day in July are mid-to-long but not extreme long range.
Seriously, as slow and boring as it may be, your best test of penetration power is Orel76v88. If you REALLY want to match up Tigers and T34/76s and see who comes out on top, play that map. One on one head-on engagements are almost guaranteed to go to the Tiger.
I've seen a kill happen from a T34/85 from the "front" but that simply was front FACING, rather than the front ARMOR. The Tigers in these cases were actually going downhill or had the tops of their hulls exposed which, assuming Tripwire modeled top armor as independent of other armor plates, would make sense as a penetration and potential instakill.
The ONLY situation where I could see a T34/76 doing this is if it's actually hitting the top armor.
Now, given that some people DON'T use the range adjusters and instead lob their shells at the enemy, I suppose it IS possible that Tigers are getting penetrated when facing towards the enemy BUT hit from the top and the angle of attack lines up with the ammo store.
But a true head-on shot will, at most ranges, deflect. I've tested at short ranges (<200m) and a T34/76 CAN penetrate the Tiger's frontal armor enough to make it "go yellow", which presumably means it can penetrate enough to score an instant kill if you aim right. But the stories about "I was instakilled in my tiger by a Mosin Nagant 91/30 at 20000m" are, I think, slight exagerrations.
Like I've said, people tend to overestimate range in the game while in tanks. Go and practice on Mormegil's tank range map (do a search for posts by him or for "tank range") and you'll start to see that your "OMG!! IT WAS A 1500m AND I GOT KILLED IN ONE SHOT" stories are probably closer to 700m, if that.
Overall, I think we've covered what the issue is -- short range penetration is slightly overmodeled, as is the effect of angling. Some vehicles are indeed buggy (SU-76's upper frontal armor, for example). But long range penetration is GENERALLY accurate, if you play on long range maps. Arad is NOT a long range map, by the way. It's a mid-range map. Even the later versions of Black Day in July are mid-to-long but not extreme long range.
Seriously, as slow and boring as it may be, your best test of penetration power is Orel76v88. If you REALLY want to match up Tigers and T34/76s and see who comes out on top, play that map. One on one head-on engagements are almost guaranteed to go to the Tiger.
Upvote
0
At Solo- I downloaded this tank range map and did some testing. I hopped into a T-34/76 and fired at the Tiger at 750m. Ricochet, ricochet, ricochet, ricochet. It was Ricochet after ricochet. So I fired at the side of the Tiger. I ended up with 7 or 8 ricochets before I finally got one to connect, and even then it was just light smoke. So I hopped into the SU-76. Same thing happened to the front. I absolutely COULD NOT penetrate it. So I fired at the side. This time it took about 4 rounds before I got one to connect and deal some damage. Finally I hopped into the T-34/85 and hit the front of the Tiger. It took two shots to kill it, but I MAY have been able to do it in one shot if I aimed better. A tiny bit overpowered. The T-34 could defiantly penetrate at 700m, but it wouldn't be entirely reliable. From the side it took two shots again, which is entirely realistic as a good T-34 gunner would realistically have been able to slag a Tiger from the side in one shot.
Now that I had thusly proven that the Tiger's armor was nowhere near as crappy as people make it out to be I decided to test its gun. I took aim at my first target, the front of an IS-2. One shot, one kill. I moved onto the next target, the T-34/85. First shot bounces, second shot hulls it. So I took aim at the SU-76, first shot bounces, second shot hulls it. From this second test I concluded two things. The first is that it is not the individual gun or armor of any tank that is messed up, but rather the deflection system in general. The whole deflection system doesn't seem to take in the size of the round, so even the high powered rounds bounce when they shouldn't. Again, not a problem with the T-34, SU-76, or Tiger, but the system in general.
The second thing I conclude from the test is that the German tank optics are HORRIBLE.At 700m I absolutely could not tell the difference between ANY of the Russian tanks, they were all just green blobs. The reason I could tell the difference is simply because I remembered where in the line the various tanks were. So I would like to see better tank optics. If I'm not mistaken the Germans had extremely good optics, yet the Russians seem to have better ones in game, in terms of magnification or clarity.
Now that I had thusly proven that the Tiger's armor was nowhere near as crappy as people make it out to be I decided to test its gun. I took aim at my first target, the front of an IS-2. One shot, one kill. I moved onto the next target, the T-34/85. First shot bounces, second shot hulls it. So I took aim at the SU-76, first shot bounces, second shot hulls it. From this second test I concluded two things. The first is that it is not the individual gun or armor of any tank that is messed up, but rather the deflection system in general. The whole deflection system doesn't seem to take in the size of the round, so even the high powered rounds bounce when they shouldn't. Again, not a problem with the T-34, SU-76, or Tiger, but the system in general.
The second thing I conclude from the test is that the German tank optics are HORRIBLE.At 700m I absolutely could not tell the difference between ANY of the Russian tanks, they were all just green blobs. The reason I could tell the difference is simply because I remembered where in the line the various tanks were. So I would like to see better tank optics. If I'm not mistaken the Germans had extremely good optics, yet the Russians seem to have better ones in game, in terms of magnification or clarity.
Upvote
0
Finally
Finally
And finally the proof that the tiger turret is slower in RO than in real.
http://video.google.it/videoplay?docid=-8227409640018821523&q=tiger+tank
In RO Tiger Turret takes 14 sec. to turn 90
Finally
And finally the proof that the tiger turret is slower in RO than in real.
http://video.google.it/videoplay?docid=-8227409640018821523&q=tiger+tank
In RO Tiger Turret takes 14 sec. to turn 90
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Yep...Im sorry but I just wanted to post my oppinion.
Sorry again. But anyway....there are quite a lot of pissing on Tiger....maybe the better solution is removing it from the game because its too powerfull and nobody would like to play the game if they were reallistic...
Sorry again. But anyway....there are quite a lot of pissing on Tiger....maybe the better solution is removing it from the game because its too powerfull and nobody would like to play the game if they were reallistic...
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
- Status