King Tiger/Ferdinand/Elefants/Panthers (Merged)

[Russkie11]

I searched the forums and found no mention on the topic. Will there be a drivable Tiger 2? Of course very limited as it was right?

 

[malice]

only a tiger 1 i believe

 

[Felix Ostheim]

It has not been announced afaik and it would have to be on 44/45 maps and would be very rare--maybe it would fit to have one available with slow respawn on Koenigsplatz. I have heard however the Tiger I will be there.

 

[FYROM]

In the past the devs have tried to model vehicle and weapon types that would have seen the widest service on the front. Because of that, they'll probably only model the Tiger I (1942-1945) instead of the Tiger II (1944-1945), so that it will be available on more maps. However, they've said they want to add more content later, so keep your fingers crossed

 

[Sichartshofen]

Another problem is some whiners will scream it's not balanced. Because there is no Soviet tank armed with a gun capable of penetrating the Tiger II's front armour at any range.

 

[Pycckuu]

[quote=Kr

 

[Nyu]

Isu-152

 

[WickedPenguin]

While not necesserily penetrating, a hit from an 85mm gun could cause shattering of the armor, which resulted in the tiger crew getting showered in shrapnel. A hit from 122mm round caused even the frontal armor to crack, and sometimes the armor plates detached completely.

LOL - I read that and just pictured Ramm saying to himself "You want me to code what?"

I can see it now...

You're looking through the viewfinder, when suddenly...
*!!!BOOM!!!*
Half your screen goes dark and a big message pops up. "YOU HAVE JUST BEEN BLINDED BY SHRAPNEL. PRESS CTRL-P TO SCREAM IN PAIN".

 

[Death_Eagle_571]

LOL, I also was reading abut IS-2s Vs Tiger IIs, and aside from the long reload time of the IS-2, they were both very well matched, although the SU-122 and SU-152 could easily destroy a King Tiger...

 

[Helmut_AUT]

Such tanks could/should be an objective, not a simple player vehicle.

A King Tiger on a hill in a decent fire position would stop an entire platoon of russian armor. Same for early-war german encounters with KV-1 and KV-2.

Sometimes these tanks could block a position for up to a few days, until the airforce or combat engineers managed to sink a few kilograms of high explosive into them.

Could be an interesting map.

 

[Richard_B.]

I heard that there is no proof that the frontal armor of the King Tiger was ever penetrated...

But personnaly, I would prefer lighter tanks like PzKpfw II Auf. F vs. Ba-10 Amored Vehicle. Those vehicels you could also use in city fights, rhey should have the ability to drive with the same speed a crouching soldier have, and can destroy the other Light vehicle/tank with one shot from rear/sides, two shots frontal.
Could be nice: Pz2 guards 2 Sto

 

[HSCN-II-gd1944]

What I want to see most is this:

A SU-100 will be able to balance the Tiger II.

 

[Az*]

In FH the KingTiger is an absolute monster and real fun to use, however imo it kinda messes the game up as everyone wishes to use it so you end up with half your team waiting at the spawn for the KT leaving a few of you in P4's/panthers to fight off a whole tank armie...

I myself if i have a choice prefer to use the Panther series of tanks wich imo are the best all rounder of ww2 and is formidable in the right hands, After that then ofcourse i will use the Tiger 1 wich is the best looking tank by far imo

Also like peeps have mentioned they were not as common as Tiger 1's,Panthers etc so i aint so sure it would be a good idea to add them, well not untill more common tanks are added..

Az

PS. I would rather see things like the JagD series and Hetzers before the KT's or the more obscure SU guns, Thats just me though

 

[Richard_B.]

As I said, I would prefer light tnaks for close sombat in towns, so I made a little .pdf-File which shows a bit more clearly what I meant in my first post in this thread.
DL:http://www.4shared.com/file/676799/bf4cb015/PzKfpw2F_vs_BA-10.html

 

[FYROM]

As I said, I would prefer light tnaks for close sombat in towns, so I made a little .pdf-File which shows a bit more clearly what I meant in my first post in this thread.
DL:http://www.4shared.com/file/676799/bf4cb015/PzKfpw2F_vs_BA-10.html

Very nice little pdf there

I would think a better foil to the Pz-II would be the T-60, though, since it has the same crew size (two each), and was equipped with a 20mm automatic cannon like the Pz-II. They also both saw roughly the same service period (1941-late 1942).

http://www.battlefield.ru/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=97&Itemid=50&lang=en

http://www.battlefield.ru/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=99&Itemid=50&lang=en

 

[Sichartshofen]

What I want to see most is this:
A SU-100 will be able to balance the Tiger II.

Not at all. The SU-100 is more of a tank destroyer/hunter. It had a maximum of 75mm of armour and 110 on the mantlet, not even close to the Tiger II. The 100mm D-10 cannon can only penetrate 130mm of armour out to 500 meters at 30 degrees. At 50 degrees that drops to nearly half of that.

I heard that there is no proof that the frontal armor of the King Tiger was ever penetrated...

Correct, there are no records or photographs to prove that the Tiger II's frontal armor was ever penetrated in combat.

Fortunately for us, you are not entirely correct. Because of the lack of materials, the late war production German tanks were noted to have fragile armor. While not necesserily penetrating, a hit from an 85mm gun could cause shattering of the armor, which resulted in the tiger crew getting showered in shrapnel. A hit from 122mm round caused even the frontal armor to crack, and sometimes the armor plates detached completely.

Source?

I seriously doubt the interlocking armour plates would detach from a hit with a 122mm shell.

 

[[TW]schneidzekk]

There are several images of tests on the Tiger II armor on the web and alot of rounds penetrated it. On the other hand you are right, i have never found a unbiased proof that it happened in combat situations.

A decent link or a reference would be really appreciated.

 

[Richard_B.]

@FYROM: U think you're right, the T-60 would be better.
I'm wondering that I didn't forund him, I alsways only found the T-70, which would may be too strong against PzKpfw II.

 

[RedStorm]

I don't see what started the myth of later-war German armour being "crap". It was still highly superior to most armour Russian or western allied tanks used. The myth that the armour all of a sudden became crap was just a propaganda feat started by the allies and continued after the war. No, a Tiger II didn't desintegrate the second you shot your Garand at it. It was still a beast and on a one-on-one engagement you wouldn't want to be on the receiving end. Logistics made it impossible for this thirsty beast to keep up with other, more "down-to-earth" tanks, and that was ultimately its achilles heel. It was too far ahead of its time.

 

[Pycckuu]

I did not say that the armor on the King Tiger was crap. I did, however, say, that the armor was noted to be more brittle, and therefore of lesser quality than that of a Panther, Tiger, or the Ferdinand SPG (thats from the testing that was done on a captured KT). It was explained by the replacement of Molibdenum(Mo) with Vanadium(V), which was done either because of the shortage of material, or in an attempt to bring down the already monstrous construction cost. Also, an 85mm shell can hardly be compared with a Garand. In any case, I've just rechecked my sources. I was wrong, an 85mm would not penetrate the frontal armor of the King Tiger at 300meters, and during the testing it was concluded that it did not cause any significant damage either.

Here are a couple of quotes from the testing of the King Tiger on the fireing range, conducted by the Russian experts in 1944.

1. Качество брони танка "Тигр-Б" по сравнению с качеством брони танков: "Тигр-Н", "Пантера" и СУ "Фердинант" первых выпусков, резко ухудшилось. В броне танка "Тигр-Б" от первых одиночных попаданий образуются трещины и отколы. От группы снарядных попаданий (3-4 снарядов) в броне образуются отколы и проломы большой величины.

"The armor quality of the Tiger-B in comparison to "Tiger-N", "Panther", and SPG "Ferdinand" of the early production, has significantly decreased. Single hits cause the armor to crack slightly, and result in scabbing. A group of hits(3-4) cause significant scabbing, and create large cracks in the armor."

3. В броне лобовых листов танка толщиной от 100 до 190 мм, при попадании в них 3-4 бронебойных или осколочно-фугасных снарядов артсистем калибра 152, 122 и 100 мм, с дистанции 500-1000 м, образуются трещины, отколы и разрушения сварных швов, влекущие за собой нарушение работы трансмиссии и выход танка из строя как безвозвратные потери.

"The frontal armor of the tank has plates ranging from 100mm to 190mm in thickness. After 3-4 hits with armor piercing or high explosive rounds of caliber 152mm, 122mm, and 100mm, from the distance of 500-1000m, the armor cracks and the welding is disconnected, shrapnell breaks off, leading to the damage of the gearbox, resulting in the tank becoming unrecoverable."
(Sorry for putting you through my terrible attempts at translation twice, maybe there is a Russian around here who can do a better job than me )

Also, I do find the lack of information about the actual penetration of the frontal armor in combat interesting. Most of the photographs I seem to find either have the KT sunk in the mud, or shot through the side, or are taken during the testing by the Soviet engineers. The only battle involving King Tigers described indepth that I have found so far was the first encounter near Sandomir(an ambush by the Soviet medium and heavy tanks), which did not end well for the tigers.


But, my point still stands. Since both the IS-2 and the Tiger-B had about an equal chance against one another, I think there would be no problem at all in including it into RO sometime in the future.