Panzer IV H and STUG G variants.
- Thread starter kabex
- Start date
- Status
well yes, thats true. Bigest tiger advantage was his strong 88.
Though, the so called "Tigerphobia" was never in the east such an heavy issue as in the west. When you can read some stories up there, where 1 tiger frightened brittish and american tankers realy much. But well germans noticed in the east also, that after 2 or 3 T34 got destroyed, they started to often to withdraw.
the tiger was a feared tank, but already kursk, sneaky russians found a way with there 122mm artilery which never was intended for using against vehicles dierectly to deal with against the tiger. They just started using it with direct fire again the tiger ... if its big enough, then it can destroy it. You have to love russian attitudes.
Though, the so called "Tigerphobia" was never in the east such an heavy issue as in the west. When you can read some stories up there, where 1 tiger frightened brittish and american tankers realy much. But well germans noticed in the east also, that after 2 or 3 T34 got destroyed, they started to often to withdraw.
the tiger was a feared tank, but already kursk, sneaky russians found a way with there 122mm artilery which never was intended for using against vehicles dierectly to deal with against the tiger. They just started using it with direct fire again the tiger ... if its big enough, then it can destroy it. You have to love russian attitudes.
Upvote
0
Tigers with drew after killing a few T-34s.I think not if this were true Operation Citadel would never had happened.In Kursk the Tiger I proved very effective in crushing the Soviet defenses and it was there that the Tiger destroyed many waves of T-34s as well as other Soviet tanks.Keep in mind the Tiger I's were always vastly outnumbered in Kursk.Facing impossiable number of tanks at a time with no time for proper tank formations, rest, or time to take proper aim. Not even the luftwaffe could provide enough cover for them due to the soviet airforce's revival.
STUGIII G + PANZERIV H= REAL GERMAN TANK LOAD OUTS!
Last edited:
Upvote
0
yes Rommel you are right i have lots of clips of tigers in battle in 1944 and i am going to make one big clip of tigers so every one can see the way they fightIts not just the armor its the 88mm gun the German's "trump card" that the Soviets were scared of. Yes they feared it even their newest tanks could and were taken down by the infamous long range 88mm on the Tiger I as well as the other variants found on the Tiger II ,other German tanks, and Pak guns.The Tiger I was a forminable oppenent until the end of the war on both fronts but it wasnt until 1944 that the Tiger I 's armor started to become a bit obsolete(although it was still very useful) on the Eastern front anyway but its gun remained deadly until the war's end.
I'm not saying the Tiger I is indestructable. Just saying that its gun is sevearly weakened(most tanks shouldnt take even 1 88mm round. It should not be deflected ) and its frontal armor needs a bit more tweeking. After all it does have alot of other short commings like the slow turret speed ,slow off road speed, and reload why not make it worth all of that?
Can we stay on topic now?
STUG III G AND PANZER IV H OR HUNGER STRIKE!!!!!
Upvote
0
Tigers with drew after killing a few T-34s.I think not if this were true Operation Citadel would never had happened.In Kursk the Tiger I proved very effective in crushing the Soviet defenses and it was there that the Tiger destroyed many waves of T-34s as well as other Soviet tanks.Keep in mind the Tiger I's were always vastly outnumbered in Kursk.Facing impossiable number of tanks at a time with no time for proper tank formations, rest, or time to take proper aim. Not even the luftwaffe could provide enough cover for them due to the soviet airforce's revival.
STUGIII G + PANZERIV H= REAL GERMAN TANK LOAD OUTS!
ah my bad! Coud spank my self for the bad english skills. I mean after the first couple of T34 got destroyed it was not rarely to see the russians withdraw. But im going here more with some "smaller" skirmish if you want. Kursk is a story for it self.
If i rember corect, for 1 Tiger it coud happen that there have been 400 enemey soviet tanks (from any low to heavy vehicle of course), somewhat not possible for a tiger to deal with. Air support, was neither realy a thing for russians or germans, as no side had the whole time a totally dominace in air. And cause of the heavy smoke, it was also not easy for pilots to give correct support. Both sides had some limitations for air support, for such a huge battle, of course there have been destroyed tanks and troops by air attacks.
Upvote
0
I'd like to mention a great website (that I discovered through this forum) about Russian tanks and other Russian military matters.
http://battlefield.ru
They are looking for people to help translate articles from Russian into English.
At a risk of flaming, I'm including this quote (from http://battlefield.ru/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=80&Itemid=50&lang=en), taking about the T-34.
"However, we should mention that their main opponents were not tanks as many history buffs thought, but German anti-tank artillery. German anti-tank and tank guns caused 90% of our tank losses in 1943-1945. Unfortunately, modern tank "lovers" ignore those facts and keep comparing T-34 to Panthers and Tigers".
There is also a nice little piece / report, "General der Schnellen Truppen beim Oberkommando des Heeres distributed the following 'Instructions to units on the Eastern Front for Combating the Russian T-34 Tank with our Panzers'". It gives an account of the Panzer tactics around 1942.
http://battlefield.ru
They are looking for people to help translate articles from Russian into English.
At a risk of flaming, I'm including this quote (from http://battlefield.ru/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=80&Itemid=50&lang=en), taking about the T-34.
"However, we should mention that their main opponents were not tanks as many history buffs thought, but German anti-tank artillery. German anti-tank and tank guns caused 90% of our tank losses in 1943-1945. Unfortunately, modern tank "lovers" ignore those facts and keep comparing T-34 to Panthers and Tigers".
There is also a nice little piece / report, "General der Schnellen Truppen beim Oberkommando des Heeres distributed the following 'Instructions to units on the Eastern Front for Combating the Russian T-34 Tank with our Panzers'". It gives an account of the Panzer tactics around 1942.
Upvote
0
it woud make sense considering that many german units had not always working tanks (long supply and support) or that they have been attacked by to many russian tanks, to much to deal for one single german tank.
I have read often, that many russian tanks, have been taken out by, relatively weak german guns and infantry, cause ... just of the lack in tanks or the right guns. Specialy in very intesive battles, like in East Prussia, or after Kursk and in Berlin of course! Cant rember if its totally sure, but 70% of lost russian tanks in Berlin was cause of infantry, not armed with more then several fausts.
I have read often, that many russian tanks, have been taken out by, relatively weak german guns and infantry, cause ... just of the lack in tanks or the right guns. Specialy in very intesive battles, like in East Prussia, or after Kursk and in Berlin of course! Cant rember if its totally sure, but 70% of lost russian tanks in Berlin was cause of infantry, not armed with more then several fausts.
Upvote
0
the guys over at axis history fourms would point out that battlefield.ru is not the best site as it's inacurret (it clames that the tiger IIs armor was week and post pics of after war tests with the Tigers shot to bits.)
though the quote for the T-34 can go for any other tank durring ww2.
ROMMEL34 said:
ahh but that data is for 30
Upvote
0
Where Might I ask did you get your information? It took me a good 2 hrs to find the T-34/85s penetration data and all they had was what I listed( I think they said it was for 90 degrees ).
SERIOUSLY NOW STUGIII G AND PANZERIV H OR I"LL START SHOOTING HOSTAGES!!
SERIOUSLY NOW STUGIII G AND PANZERIV H OR I"LL START SHOOTING HOSTAGES!!
Upvote
0
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/misc/wwii_index.htmWhere Might I ask did you get your information? It took me a good 2 hrs to find the T-34/85s penetration data and all they had was what I listed( I think they said it was for 90 degrees ).
SERIOUSLY NOW STUGIII G AND PANZERIV H OR I"LL START SHOOTING HOSTAGES!!
This is the best place to find info on tanks and penetration data.
Upvote
0
I'd like to mention a great website (that I discovered through this forum) about Russian tanks and other Russian military matters.
http://battlefield.ru
Recce alot of people told me that site is not that good also
Upvote
0
The source for the that particular document is the Tankomaster magazine, issue #6 1999.
The same source is used / quoted by the Achtung Panzer website.
It also talks about the tests carried out in '44 at Kubinka and includes the picture of the destroyed TigerII #102.
The article says that the T-34/85 coundn't penetrate the front armour, down to a range of 300m.
That the American 76mm did better against the side and rear armour than the Russian 85mm. (The Russian had big problems producing barrels for high velocity rounds).
"Those who tell the stories rule society" - Plato.
"History is written by the victors" - Annon.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Just because you guys have red petitions in your signiture and type threatening messages in capslock and bold won't make the devs work any faster.
I do agree that RO needs more modern german vehicles. Hower, don't forget that this game has 2 teams you play on, and the Russian side has only one self-propelled gun at this point.
I do agree that RO needs more modern german vehicles. Hower, don't forget that this game has 2 teams you play on, and the Russian side has only one self-propelled gun at this point.
Upvote
0
![[TW]schneidzekk](/data/avatars/s/0/1.jpg?1568638684){kind=avatar}
- Status