Tigers

[M_W]

On Tactic level Tiger was the king of the battlefield from summer 42 (even more with tugnsten shells) untill late 43/ mid 44.

On strategic level t-34 and shermans proved to be better.

If this game want to be reallistic as its supposed to be they should make german team half the allies team (in tanks).

Cheers

 

[ROMMEL34]

Well what'd you know. The vast majority sported the L/43 however.

From late March 1943, the 7.5cm KwK40 L/48 was installed instead of the L/43, with a total of 1,275 Ausf G receiting the L/43. (Out of 1,687 G's produced)
From: Encyclopedia of German tanks of World War Two

 

[Colt .45 killer]

ehhh romel you can take the "signee of the panzer iv h petition" thingy off your sig now...

 

[Grobut]

Blah blah blah..

Mate, we've been doing this back and forth banter for how long now? and you still fail to grasp the very simple point im trying to convey.. your last post truely demonstrates that you have not understood anything i've said, i dont think you are listening to a word im saying, let alone contemplating any of my points even the slightest..

Im not going to continue this untill your willing to have a discussion, instead of a pointless argument, it degrades the both of us.

 

[Elysium]

Hmm the Tiger 2 pention link doesn't work.

 

[Maus]

Mate, we've been doing this back and forth banter for how long now? and you still fail to grasp the very simple point im trying to convey.. your last post truely demonstrates that you have not understood anything i've said, i dont think you are listening to a word im saying, let alone contemplating any of my points even the slightest..

Im not going to continue this untill your willing to have a discussion, instead of a pointless argument, it degrades the both of us.

Frankly i doubt you are hearing me either, and you aren't very clear.


I just spent a couple hours as the russians today, taking Su-76's and T-34/76's against tigers and panzer IV's on Orel/BlackDayJuly.

I was able to kill 4 tigers (along with several other tanks) with the 76.2mm guns. The trick was seeing the tiger first, and planning your next move. I often ducked behind berms and relocated when they saw me, maenuvering through trees and coming up on their flank, and waiting for them to drive by in a concealed position. One of those times, i killed the tiger frontally... although it was from a distance of probably 30m and had a pretty good angle. I'm at odds with this kill.

The Tiger, when in the hands of someone who trusts the tiger itself will keep them safe, is a death trap. Now the main issue with the TIGER is it's more-then-acceptable vulnerability to the T-34/85.

Here are my biggest issues with armoured combat, and with the Tiger. And you will see what i am getting at.

Tiger: Far too vulnerable to the T-35/85. Either the T-34/85. Not sure exactly as to why, whether it be the tigers armour or the 85mm gun. Other minor quirks.

Game: Hitpoints, with the T-34/76 it took 1 penetration INTO the engine compartment to cause light smoke, 2 to cause what seemed like heavier smoke, and 3 to start it on fire.... This can be attributed to oversimplification of the armour combat system, and the implication of HITPOINTS, not a very smart dev idea. With the Tiger, it usually takes me 2 frontal penetrations to take out a T-34... although sometimes they do blow up in one, and as a PzIVF2 one map i survived 3 76.2mm shells at close range before blowing up.

What needs to be done, is fix ballistic/armour inaccuracies like what we are seeing in the tiger vs. 85mm scenario, and more extensively model the innards of tanks. AND DEFINATELY model crew member deaths. I don't want to have to put three large 76.2mm shells into a tigers engine before it blows up, and when a tanks on fire it's done, it roasts the crew and often detonates the fuel/ammo...

The PzIVF2 vs. T-34/76 is also a wierd, but not as talked about situation. I noticed the F2 is a bit more resiliant then it should be when dealing with 76.2mm shells.



Of course things would be much more clear if the RO staff reaveled the statistics on which the tanks work right now. Their armour protection, their angling, their speed, their turret traverse, their gun performance, etc...

 

[Afterburner]

Tiger: Far too vulnerable to the T-35/85. Either the T-34/85. Not sure exactly as to why, whether it be the tigers armour or the 85mm gun. Other minor quirks.

I have not seen this problem at all so far. When I first started playing I thought the same thing, and then I saw the tank range map and realized these are INCREDIBLY short ranges in game. What I thought was one click or so turns out to be about 500m. And at ranges like that armor is almost nullified, in many cases. At 500m anything can kill almost anything. But then on the same tank range map I moved the tanks around to get 1000m shots, and T-34 rounds were bouncing around like mad. I fired round after round at the Tiger AND the Panther and just couldn't get a round to punch through. Even the IS-2 had problems dealing with the Tiger at that range. Once I zeroed in on the T-34 with the Tiger(which took awhile, because the optics **** for some reason) it only took two hits to take it down(again, which I attribute to the armor slope system in general)

I think after the next update most people will be happy, since the armor will be fixed.

 

[Grobut]

I've been saying all along that i want the Tiger to be realistic (but thats realistic, not super

 

[Field Marshal Rommel]

This means maps have to be designed smartly, if one side has the much better equipment, the other side must be given some realistic way to fight back, or the map will be broken with one side allways winning over the other, like Arad is now, broken, lobsided and not fun to play.

I argee. Yet I think depending on who won the battle in real life should have a better chance at winning in game.

I've been saying all along that i want the Tiger to be realistic (but thats realistic, not super

 

[Rameusb5]

Well, it looks like a number of tank issues will be addressed in the next patch, so we should just wait and see how it works out.

 

[Field Marshal Rommel]

Yeah, I agree I hope it comes out soon by soon I mean today-
but I can tell you they did not change the Tiger I's mobility because it was not on the change log but I hope it will be addressed one day .

 

[Solo4114]

The Tiger itself is not the problem. The tank penetration system MAY have problems, but I haven't seen any hard data beyond anecdotal reports (my own included) to make me think this is a consistent problem. There are some clear problems, such as the SU-76's top armor being overmodeled.

There also (to me at least) seem to be problems with CLOSE range tank combat.

Long range tank combat, however, seems to be working as it should. Tanks shrug off shots at longer range when they should, and take damage when they should.

The hitpoint system is an abstraction I'm willing to accept until alternatives are coded AND maps are made/revised to take advantage of the alternative coding.


Try to imagine, for a minute, if the devs implemented a spalling model so that even a shot that doesn't penetrate could kill the crew if it hit in the right spot at the right range/angle. Try to imagine how poorly a map like Arad or Bondarevo would play under those circumstances.

People's main issues with tank combat seems to focus around official maps, all of which it has been pointed out are WELL within penetration ranges of various tanks. Thus, the T34/85 is penetrating the Tiger frontally at ranges of UNDER 500m, which, from what I understand, it should be doing.

The problem in that scenario is not "ZOMGZ!! TEH T1G3r IS WEAK!!" It's that the Tiger is being used on a map where it doesn't belong and where its main advantages can't be put to use.


Would we be making the same complaints about someone with a bolt action rifle -- even THE BEST BOLT ACTION RIFLE OF THE WAR!!! being beaten in a close combat fight by someone with pistol? I doubt it. The pistol wins because the pistol OUGHT to win there. Just because it's THE BEST BOLT ACTION RIFLE OF THE WAR!!! doesn't mean that the user can take it and be invincible in all scenarios. You have to put your equipment to the RIGHT use.

And that, to me, is the biggest glaring flaw of the Tiger. As it stands, it is NOT utilized (at least on official maps) the right way.


Much of this (as has been explained repeatedly) is due to abstractions and prior limitations on the engine. You couldn't really have long range tank combat when the viewdistance was set to an absolute maximum of 2000m, and really only functioned well at about 1500m max, and where NONE of the official maps have engagement ranges beyond about 700m.

In those situations -- the sub-700m situations on the late war maps, the Tiger is simply the wrong tool for the job. It acquires targets slowly, it reloads slowly, and its armor isn't enough to protect it from its opponents by that point. Wrong tool, wrong job, wrong time and place.

Put the Tiger out in a big open field in Orel or on Black Day in July RC33, where it has a nice long view distance and the enemy is coming generally right towards it, and you'll see the thing shine.

But until we start getting into engagements at >700m on a regular basis, the Tiger is going to suffer.

And until we start playing combined arms and tank maps with +700m engagement ranges (at least to start), you won't WANT to move away from the hitpoint system. It'd just be WAY too easy to kill tanks at the ranges at which we currently engage.

 

[Maus]

The tiger seems to have gotten better with the last patch. Actually, tank combat in general has gotten better.

I still see anomalies like a panthers 75mm shell getting brushed off by the front of a t-34/85 turret at 50 meters, when hitting it dead center directly next to the gun.

Now to take it one step further and work out basic inaccuracies in armour/weapon performance, as well as speed anomalies...

And more extensively modelling the tanks as well as modelling crew members, instead of the hitpoint system is in sight.

 

[Rameusb5]

I still see anomalies like a panthers 75mm shell getting brushed off by the front of a t-34/85 turret at 50 meters, when hitting it dead center directly next to the gun.

I'm not sure how RO handles "rounded" armor. I know WWIIOL (who's penetration system is a bit more complex) can't handle it very well, and simply gives it a generic angle for the entire face (40^ I believe). This means that even if you hit it exactly head on (which would give an actual impact angle close to 0^), the sytem still thinks it's 40^.

The reason they do this is because in order to make it more realistic, a rounded face would have to be broken up into tens, if not hundreds, of different faces, each with its own armor thickness and angle. This, for technical reasons I don't understand, would cause problems with the game engine.

It's entirely possible that RO is forced to use this same method for abstracting the rounded armor on the Panther's mantlet.

 

[Solo4114]

I'm going to reserve judgment until I see the changes in armored combat over the long haul. From the sound of the change log, several major issues have been fixed, so perhaps some of the weirdness people have seen in tank combat will start to disappear.

I still think the issues with the Tiger on certain maps is purely a matter of engagement range, though, and it sounds like the problem wasn't with the Tiger necessarily, but rather with all the tanks (and the Tiger simply is the most obvious example because of everyone's belief that it's super dooper OOPER uber and can't be killed except with a kryptonite tank shell or a lightning bolt from God).

 

[crazyivan1970]

Hey, it just occured to me... maybe it takes 2-3 shots to destroy SU-76 because AP round goes right thru? Eh? with 18mm side armor and 35mm front plates... why not?

 

[Recce]

Hey, it just occured to me... maybe it takes 2-3 shots to destroy SU-76 because AP round goes right thru? Eh? with 18mm side armor and 35mm front plates... why not?

If you want a single shot, head-on kill against a SU-76, aim level with the gun and to the right. I think the shell then passes into the ammo store.

 

[Faustnik]

Has anyone noticed changes in armor/penetration since the patch?

(I haven't had a chance to try it yet)

 

[Solo4114]

It sounds like the fix will solve the overmodelling issue.

In other words, head-on shots to a tank will no longer register as angled shots, especially weirdly angled shots. Thus, you'll be a LOT more likely to penetrate the tank if you hit it square on.

This will, however, cause Tigers to be destroyed more often at close range than they were before (as well as ALL tanks, actually). So GET USED TO THE IDEA. It's not a bug this time. If a T34/76 drives up to within 200m of you, you're gonna be in trouble.

However, this will also solve the issue of you driving up to 200m in front of an IS2 and for some weird reason getting a deflection.

 

[jedinstven-o crni Wuk]

The IS2 and panther are still somewhat overmodeled right now ... at least on maps wehre you have close combat, like arad and ogledow.

it is still a very hard to penetrate a IS2 with a Tiger or panther, it seems like there canons are just to weak and it bounce all off, while the IS2 now seems to have way better chances to penetrate both Tiger and panther. On the other way, the T34/85 still cant penetrate the Panther frontal (all richochets) when it should, like a hit between turret and hull or when you just get close enough, even the panther fiebel tells, that you should not let the T34/85 get closer to your panther then 150m.

This makes some fights by times, very unfair and ridiculus. When i see one IS2 dealing with 2 panthers and 1 Tiger and he even wins the battle without a scratch i start to wonder.