The people's tank

  • Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

The people's tank


  • Total voters
    244
Status
Not open for further replies.

Zhukov

FNG / Fresh Meat
Dec 5, 2006
62
0
0
Cleveland
Colt .45 killer said:
those things could punch through any russian tank with 1 hit .. angeled or not any t34 would be 1 hit and dead .. an is2 .. ehh .. probably 1 hit..

A Tiger I's 88mm KwK36 L/56 could kill an angled (or unangled) T-34 at ranges over 3000m (the round would even penetrate through the tank completely causing a catastrophic engine explosion or as witnessed through tests and combat accounts) in one shot in real life. If we are going for realisim the Tiger II and Jadtiger should have no problem killing T-34's or any other tank in 1 shot. The Tiger I can kill an IS-2 in 1 shot if the IS-2 is within range (about 500+ at 90 degrees) or farther when using tungsten core rounds. I am not saying the IS-2 is a weak tank infact it was one of the best tanks of the war (equal terms with the Tiger I depending on crew) just trying to show you that the 88mm L56 is grossly underrated and underpowered in game and if the L56 is capable then the second Tiger's 88mm KwK 43 L/71 and the Jadtiger's 128mm Pak 44 L/55 would most certainly produce even greater and more impressive results.

jedinstven-o crni Wuk said:
and the next map they run out of fuile or have to be abadoned cause of a brakedown ... and the crew gets rolled over by a lot crapload soviet T34 and IS2 ... hirr hirr hirr hirr

Breakdowns are not modeled on any tank so they should not happen exculsively on the "King Tiger" not only that breakdowns happened because of long range driving I dont think driving around on a tank map would cause a breakdown. As for fuel shortage no tank in game has a fuel gage or anything like that so modeling a fuel shortage on the Tiger II does not apply just like it does not to every other tank also please name a map which is 170 km long, this was the Tiger II's range (about 105.6 miles) or even 1/4th this distance accounting for Germany's fuel shortage at the end of the war.
 
Last edited:

dogbadger

FNG / Fresh Meat
Aug 19, 2006
3,230
553
0
here to kill your monster
But is Tripwire still developing for RO?
Remember, the above are not for us - we've already bought RO. It would be to get new players.
I agree but Tripwire owes me nothing. They have already thrown in a load of requested new vehicles to their game for free. Recon COD2 players are gonna get that? Stroll on. If they are kind enough to repeat this in the future I naturally wont complain, but all I expect to see is tweaks/patches/minor features now and then delivered though steam.

When i saw this thread and thought of new tanks TW didn't come into my mind, just talented enthusiasts that want to show their stuff. The tools are available and it's a familiar engine so i dont see why over time everything in this poll can't be added if people want it.
 

HansGering

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 7, 2006
113
0
0
Twas just playing FH for bf42, on kharkov winter. Its filled with early war tanks and was super mega fun.
Adding light tanks would be the bestest.

I just love those early war maps :D
Blasting my way with a panzer III =P
And even those really old ones on the 39-40 maps =)

but that ardennes map (cant remember mapname) with that one king tiger.. ooooooohmama... just sweeeeeth! nearly indestructable! (with 1x engineer and 2x support tanks that is) but still just the feeling back then.
 

Kaputt PzKpfw V

FNG / Fresh Meat
Dec 23, 2006
9
0
0
I don't believe the King Tiger should be included because they were too powerful and rare to be included, even though I voted for it.;) The thing I'd like to see are Jagdpanzers, the Hetzer, Marder and Nashorn along with the regular Jagdpanzers IV and V. Their Russian equivalents should make an appearance too, to balance it out. As for early tanks, the 38(t) should be added, along with an early Russian tank even though I can't think of one right now. It would be nice as an update but, if Tripwire wants to include these in an expansion along with more CA maps and soldier classes, they already have my money. :D
 

HansGering

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 7, 2006
113
0
0
You all speak of the King tiger as "too rare" Ok i know there where build about 500 of them..

But, lets do a little expreniment...
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

each O = 1 king tiger.. imo.. thats a quite a few king tigers...

And you speak about the Nashorn. its just as rare as the King tiger. only 494 of them where bouild.

still, theres one solution to the Tiger being overpowerd, just a enemy commander with some brains = an artillery strike and the Tiger II is gone. So i really dont see the problem
 

A-tree

FNG / Fresh Meat
Oct 3, 2006
370
11
0
UK
Commnading a king tiger doesnt seem fun to me. Nothing can take you out, and you can one shot evey thank you see. I think scooting around in Pz38(t) dodging kvs and popping shots off at BT7s would be a lot more exciting.
 

Zhukov

FNG / Fresh Meat
Dec 5, 2006
62
0
0
Cleveland
80mm sides and rear !

Im pretty sure most Russian tanks should have no problem with this.

Its pretty much like the IS-2 since no German tank in game could kill it except at close range from the front (Tiger I Panther G) but its flanks and rear were vulnerable (90mm). Use the speed of your T-34's to flank and kill the Tiger II.

Adding early tanks at this point is not a good move since there are no early war tank maps save 1, the one with the windmills but we do however have many 1944-1945 maps that could use the Tiger II or other late war designs. The most obvious map that requires a Tiger II at the moment is RO-Konigsplatz.
 
Last edited:

A-tree

FNG / Fresh Meat
Oct 3, 2006
370
11
0
UK
Adding early tanks at this point is not a good move since there are no early war tank maps save 1, the one with the windmills but we do however have many 1944-1945 maps that could use the Tiger II or other late war designs. The most obvious map that requires a Tiger II at the moment is RO-Konigsplatz.
I thought the last tiger to be used in combat was the one that tried to brake out over that bridge [carnt remember the name now] in berlin, and i think is was a mk1.
 

dogbadger

FNG / Fresh Meat
Aug 19, 2006
3,230
553
0
here to kill your monster
Commnading a king tiger doesnt seem fun to me. Nothing can take you out, and you can one shot evey thank you see. I think scooting around in Pz38(t) dodging kvs and popping shots off at BT7s would be a lot more exciting.
Agreed from a gameplay standpoint absolutely, i've voted early tanks and said my bit on them already.

Regards the Royal Tiger-
For me its a cool looking beast of a tank. Realising a Panther has spotted me gets my adrenaline rushing and this would be a level up again- the behemoth of the battlefield.
It was by all accounts a near unstoppable killing machine, when it wasn't a broken down immobile wreck. Many Ppl will naturally want it included because they see it as the WW2 pinacle of gun and armour.
My opinion is there's no point adding them if prone to breaking down or otherwise handicapped, but at full spec they will cause balance issues.

So it might work to see it introduced in some maps as an objective to be destroyed like static ones. Say Russ are attacking certain objectives, but there are also say KingTiger 1, 2 and 3, ( or whatever number is appropriate) - none of which will be replaced when knocked out. They may or may not necessarily be required objectives to win the map.

Having limited numbers of the type means-
- Fans of the Kingtiger are see that it's acknowledged as a precious ubertank.
- It's Distractors see that it's acknowledged that they were rare in combat cos they were always breaking down/getting stuck etc.
- From balance point of view when you finally stop one you haven't got the demoralising sight of it's replacment arriving a min later.
So hopefully this would keep everyone happy.

I would be fun to be forced to use good communication and work hard to eliminate a Tig2 as an objective.
 

jedinstven-o crni Wuk

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 3, 2006
937
0
0
germany
before we get the Tigers II we need some more realistic maps then Orel and Arad. Just to give a example. Its no problem to take your tank on Orel (Is2 or panther) set it on a hill, angle it and pick up a tank after another. With the IS2 even better as this tank is really not possible to penetrate as long he is angled (which is on ogledow as well totally unrealistic, if you take in consideration that the distance is ... somewhat about 100m ...). On maps like arad an ogledow where you have a very very bad chance to flank the enemy you would just dominate with the Tiger II the battlefield in a very unrealistic way.

It takes so far more skill to use the T34/85 then the IS2, the IS2 needs his time for reload, but near any shoot again a panzer IV is a "one hit kill" and you dont have to worry that much about angled Panthers and tigers as you can penetrate them, but they can not penetrate you, if you are angled. Even the IS2 is not realy "fixed" ... and some demand the Tiger II, where no soviet tank we have in game could do harm on his front armor ... i think the same, some more early war tanks please, but with corect armor calculation. It would be more fun and effort skill then to just add a heavy tank that can kill anything on the battlefield.
 

Reddog

FNG / Fresh Meat
Dec 7, 2005
2,572
476
0
Australia
We really, REALLY, damn well need a proper version of the KV1, not this under-armoured piece of **** KV1S version we were given with the game.

It was a very prominent early war tank and it's interesting as it fills a sort of Tiger tank role for the Russians in the early war with the Germans having nothing that can penetrate it. Though the difference is I believe PIII's couldn't even penetrate it's rear armour lol!

It'd be fun to have to knock the tracks off or something to stop one of these monsters.
 

SheepDip

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 21, 2005
3,626
495
0
38
The Elitist Prick Club
As far as I'm aware the KV-1 had some awful problems with it's engine & transmission, and the majority of them were never destroyed but abandoned by their crews because they couldn't repair them, or didn't have the time.
After looking into it a little bit, adding the original KV seems as pointless as adding the King Tiger due to the amount of other things that need to be considered for its correct implementation.


The KV-1s was MUCH more common, which is why I assume it was added instead.
 

Solo4114

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 12, 2006
1,608
38
0
Adding early tanks at this point is not a good move since there are no early war tank maps save 1, the one with the windmills but we do however have many 1944-1945 maps that could use the Tiger II or other late war designs. The most obvious map that requires a Tiger II at the moment is RO-Konigsplatz.

By the same token, adding the Tiger II offers no real improvement to gameplay. It simply throws in a more powerful version of the exact same kind of gameplay we already have. Wow! A bigger, tougher gun!! Woah!! Better armor!!

So what? Gameplay hasn't changed. Especially given that we really lack any true tank maps with good visibility ranges that show of the TRUE advantages and disadvantages of the various tanks, adding a King Tiger is a waste of time. We've already got the Tiger, the Panther, and the IS-2 in-game as far as "Big powerful tanks with tons of armor" goes.


By contrast, early-war tank maps are basically non-existent. The closest you get as an official map is Bondarevo, and even that's fairly close-combat. The best non-official map is Berezina for early war tank fighting, and it's a combined arms map, not a tank map.


I think early-war tank combat is at BEST underrepresented, and at worst, not represented at all (at least in any realistic fashion). Bondarevo is played largely the same way as Arad -- drive your tank out, park it, and just keep shooting at the other side.

The tanks all operate the same way and you use the exact same strategy with all of them, with the possible exception of the T-60 (which people rarely use anyway).

If we had some early war maps and early war tanks, the game would become not simply more of the same, but something new and different.


Trust me, the shine of that Tiger II is gonna wear off VERY quickly. I mean, ask yourself this. Did adding the Pz IV H do ANYTHING to change how tank combat plays out in RO? It's a little more durable, and I suppose on Barashka it's less prone to PTRD fire. That's it. No other changes, no new strategies required, no innovation of tactics. Just the same ol', same ol'. And while I'm glad that the German gearheads were appeased and am myself pleased to see the addition of more vehicles, honestly, it didn't do a ton to change gameplay.

Adding the practically non-existent early war tanks and quality maps that highlight the difference in tanking doctrines at the early part of the war would add a LOT to this game.
 

HansGering

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 7, 2006
113
0
0
As far as I'm aware the KV-1 had some awful problems with it's engine & transmission, and the majority of them were never destroyed but abandoned by their crews because they couldn't repair them, or didn't have the time.

Read the books about the russian - finnish war and atleast there is seems like they didnt have much of a problem destroying them.
Easy to take em out due to its design (and perhaps the drivers) as in Molotows, At-guns and even Smgs.
 

dogbadger

FNG / Fresh Meat
Aug 19, 2006
3,230
553
0
here to kill your monster
It was a very prominent early war tank and it's interesting as it fills a sort of Tiger tank role for the Russians in the early war with the Germans having nothing that can penetrate it. Though the difference is I believe PIII's couldn't even penetrate it's rear armour lol!
But in RO the PIII batters the crap out of the KV-1s in my experience. Frontal 1 shot kills are no prob for that little grey nutter and its' APCR. In fact a PIII crew needn't get too upset about meeting a 34-76 either.
However this seems contary to accounts from the eastern front. I'm not saying nerf the 3 (its my fav tank) but we surely need something like the KV-1e to represent the trouble the Germans had with the Russian armour.
I should not feel so confident going off to face these Russ tanks and would rather be forced to use a little ingenuity in the face of adversity. In the eastern front the Germans were famous for it.

If the early war tanks are more evenly matched than i would have expected, then I feel like an underdog if i choose Russ in later war tank maps.
IMO, the T34-85 + IS2 vs. P4-h + Tiger is a decent match up , but throw in the panther (as you should- they were plentiful) and Russ are up against it. The addition of the tiger2 will compound this.

I wonder do people want the Kingtiger added because-
a - It was there, and it's cool so it should be added
b - It is desparately needed to help balance the game
c - It's just not right or fair that the russians have the tougest, hardest hitting tank - vorsprung durch technik.

I would agree with a, but I would say right now the Russian's need is greater. If for no other reason then for the sake of variety.
 

SheepDip

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 21, 2005
3,626
495
0
38
The Elitist Prick Club
The problem is, if you're going to implement the KV to highlight the problems the Germans had, you need to consider the fact that the majority of the time they were either killed by air support or an 88 that was rolled in to deal with it.
 

jedinstven-o crni Wuk

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 3, 2006
937
0
0
germany
By the same token, adding the Tiger II offers no real improvement to gameplay. It simply throws in a more powerful version of the exact same kind of gameplay we already have. Wow! A bigger, tougher gun!! Woah!! Better armor!!

So what? Gameplay hasn't changed. Especially given that we really lack any true tank maps with good visibility ranges that show of the TRUE advantages and disadvantages of the various tanks, adding a King Tiger is a waste of time. We've already got the Tiger, the Panther, and the IS-2 in-game as far as "Big powerful tanks with tons of armor" goes.


By contrast, early-war tank maps are basically non-existent. The closest you get as an official map is Bondarevo, and even that's fairly close-combat. The best non-official map is Berezina for early war tank fighting, and it's a combined arms map, not a tank map.


I think early-war tank combat is at BEST underrepresented, and at worst, not represented at all (at least in any realistic fashion). Bondarevo is played largely the same way as Arad -- drive your tank out, park it, and just keep shooting at the other side.

The tanks all operate the same way and you use the exact same strategy with all of them, with the possible exception of the T-60 (which people rarely use anyway).

If we had some early war maps and early war tanks, the game would become not simply more of the same, but something new and different.


Trust me, the shine of that Tiger II is gonna wear off VERY quickly. I mean, ask yourself this. Did adding the Pz IV H do ANYTHING to change how tank combat plays out in RO? It's a little more durable, and I suppose on Barashka it's less prone to PTRD fire. That's it. No other changes, no new strategies required, no innovation of tactics. Just the same ol', same ol'. And while I'm glad that the German gearheads were appeased and am myself pleased to see the addition of more vehicles, honestly, it didn't do a ton to change gameplay.

Adding the practically non-existent early war tanks and quality maps that highlight the difference in tanking doctrines at the early part of the war would add a LOT to this game.

Good point! But i would not compare the Tiger and Tiger II with Panzer IV F2/G and Panzer IV H, theres huge differences. The Tiger II is near in evry way superior to the Tiger, except that he was even more underpowered and had problems with his running gear.

But in RO the PIII batters the crap out of the KV-1s in my experience. Frontal 1 shot kills are no prob for that little grey nutter and its' APCR. In fact a PIII crew needn't get too upset about meeting a 34-76 either.
However this seems contary to accounts from the eastern front. I'm not saying nerf the 3 (its my fav tank) but we surely need something like the KV-1e to represent the trouble the Germans had with the Russian armour.
I should not feel so confident going off to face these Russ tanks and would rather be forced to use a little ingenuity in the face of adversity. In the eastern front the Germans were famous for it.

If the early war tanks are more evenly matched than i would have expected, then I feel like an underdog if i choose Russ in later war tank maps.
IMO, the T34-85 + IS2 vs. P4-h + Tiger is a decent match up , but throw in the panther (as you should- they were plentiful) and Russ are up against it. The addition of the tiger2 will compound this.

I wonder do people want the Kingtiger added because-
a - It was there, and it's cool so it should be added
b - It is desparately needed to help balance the game
c - It's just not right or fair that the russians have the tougest, hardest hitting tank - vorsprung durch technik.

I would agree with a, but I would say right now the Russian's need is greater. If for no other reason then for the sake of variety.

panzer III and KV1s are pretty "fair" at the moment, even when i really can not say how many Panzer III have been issued with the APCR ammounition. Non the less many times the Panzer III meets the KV in game, are "point blank" ranges anyway. From a realistc point of view, the KVe version was for german light tanks, a heavy problem. What saved germans have been there good training and tactics.

And panthers/Tigers are in NO WAY equal to IS2. The IS2 is to panthers and tigers somwhat like the panther to the T34/85. It mean how "effective" the tanks have been raelly against each other, is a very discussible point. But one fact cant be changed, that the tanks work often not even close to how they should. Angling for the IS2 is something that should not save him to be penetratred by panthers and tigers on close distance and the panthers front armor would not save him from charging T34/85 under 100m. I like to play with tanks ... but its serisouly just boring to face a IS on arad on 30m and see evry of you shots just ... richochet from it ...


thats why i think, before adding in the King tiger, the developers should overwork the tanks we have already in game. Tanks should be in there use, much more tactical and richochets be really primary a problem on maps like Orel or Black Day July where you have distances from 700 or 1000m (the distance where the panther REALY had trouble penetrating the IS2, not 50m)
 

R1G4M0RT1Z

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jul 24, 2006
188
0
0
31
England
I think the Russians need a new SPG, such as the ISU122 or 152. German's don't really need a King Tiger, cos it came in so late, and in such little numbers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.