Author Topic: The mighty TIGER, or not so much?  (Read 8988 times)

Offline Anaxogoras

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7072
Re: The mighty TIGER, or not so much?
« Reply #105 on: January 24, 2009, 10:59:43 AM »
I think the chart shows that the Firefly is too cheap.  It should cost more perks/kill with a firefly than with the the T-34/85.
gavagai
334th FS


RPS for Aces High!

Offline CAV

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 713
Re: The mighty TIGER, or not so much?
« Reply #106 on: January 24, 2009, 11:20:36 AM »
Hi..

One of the things that has always needing fixing on the the GV's is the "zoom in" on the gun sights. We can zoom in a target 3000+ yds and get hits at that range. WW2 tanks crews would never take shots like that.... they can't see that far. 800 yds was a long shot in WW2. 88 AT guns was feared becaused they would take long range shots...(800 to 1500 yds) but they had large crews, good sights and range finders! The Tiger had the same gun, but a 1000+ yds was still a very long shot for them and any other tank during the war.

Cavalry
"THE BATTLE Of BRITIAN" Scenario - RAF 41 Squadron

Offline ScatterFire

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 97
Re: The mighty TIGER, or not so much?
« Reply #107 on: January 24, 2009, 11:56:02 AM »
I think the chart shows that the Firefly is too cheap.  It should cost more perks/kill with a firefly than with the the T-34/85.
Yep.

Compared to other the GVs the Tiger is about the right cost.  The Firefly should be around 15-20 and the T-34/85 around 5.

The next question is in the overall scheme is the sliding scale too high?  Something is wrong when you see more (%-wise) 262s that Tigers eventhough they cost 7x as much
Scatter1:
With bullets of rubber and armor of tissue I throw myself at my enemy.

Law of Devine Intervention:
All skill is in vain when an Angel pees in the touchhole of your musket.

Offline Rich46yo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7358
Re: The mighty TIGER, or not so much?
« Reply #108 on: January 24, 2009, 03:18:17 PM »
Sorry but I dont think much of the AH Tiger. It is maybe useful upping in defense out of hangars when you have air superiority but as far as offensive operations? With the heavy IL-2 now? Its slow, not maneuverable, loud, and has a big target painted on it. I bet with the 37mms in the game now that Tiger sorties are way down. Its not a particularly tough tank to kill it seems to me. Not when dropping down in vertical with the big cannon. The T-34 or even Firefly seem harder to kill then the Tiger.

I think the Tiger is over-perked myself. Yes its big cannon is "effective" but I wouldn't call it "dominant" and it pays a price for its size and speed.

I'm seeing them less and less in my IL-2s.
"flying the aircraft of the Red Star"

Offline Becinhu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2633
Re: The mighty TIGER, or not so much?
« Reply #109 on: January 24, 2009, 04:12:11 PM »
The only time I up a Tiger any more is port defense.  I defend an island port last month with a Tiger and the LVTs had a feet dry spawn. I ended up with 37 kills and probably killed 300 troops with the Mgs before the CV despawned. Of course this was only possible because the planes off the CV couldn't drop a bomb in the ocean and hit. The LVT4s were no threat to the Tiger at all.  But in general terms the Tiger is nearing hanger queen status due to being able to get the same effectiveness with the low priced M4.  The only real chance a Tiger has in a standard GV battle is from concealment or if the only opposition is panzers and t34/76s.  There are exceptions to the rule but M4s are the most common "heavy" now for sure.
412th Braunco Mustangs OG
412th FNVG FSO
80th FS "Headhunters" MA

Offline skullman

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 432
Re: The mighty TIGER, or not so much?
« Reply #110 on: January 24, 2009, 05:09:27 PM »
the tiger does seem pretty lame now-take an m4 for a whole lot less.The IL makes life really difficult.I realize they are not accuritely modeled but sometimes it is totally unreal.seems only way to buld perks is to take a panzer an they seem pretty inefective these days but I dont wanna burn a bunch of points in a spawn war.
been there destroyed that

Offline stephen

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 744
Re: The mighty TIGER, or not so much?
« Reply #111 on: January 25, 2009, 10:14:21 AM »
problem with the sherman is that we didnt get the rather dumpy 75mm short barrel version....we got the Firefly with all the bells and whistles....and its a cheap tank, everyone knows it, and no one that banks on alot of nme tanks being around takes tigers anymore.
Personaly ive bounced my last 88mm off of the M4's frontal armor/turret.

That curved rear and side turret on the Tiger is a one piece face hardend chunk of steal  80mm's thick around the rear and sides, and the 17pounder cuts through it like butter....The M4's turret was made in a mold by a guy that probably made hubcaps in 1938, and 88's bounce off that sukker like its the bismark, and the MAXIMUM thicknes I believe was 76mm's anywhere on that tank.{straining to find accurate tables online} accept the mantlet which was 91mm's. Thickness of the M4's turret armor varies around its circumfrence due to the shape, and the process in which its made.....this isnt modled I believe.

Having been in ordnance in the Army im more familier with bullets and bb's, but just browzing around the internet trying to find proof of either tanks survivability, its obviouse on the whole which tank was superior. The M4 has it a little to far its own way here, and the perk price should be adjusted.....
Spell checker is for Morrons

Offline Bronk

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9044
Re: The mighty TIGER, or not so much?
« Reply #112 on: January 25, 2009, 10:23:39 AM »
Yea sloped/curved vs flat means nothing.  :rofl :rofl

I now return you to your regularly scheduled german 1337 whine.
See Rule #4

Offline stephen

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 744
Re: The mighty TIGER, or not so much?
« Reply #113 on: January 25, 2009, 11:01:47 AM »
A round turret {if hit at its center} will allways present a flat surface.
We now return to our regularly scheduel.....geeez the attitude on here.
Spell checker is for Morrons

Offline Bronk

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9044
Re: The mighty TIGER, or not so much?
« Reply #114 on: January 25, 2009, 11:10:29 AM »
A round turret {if hit at its center} will allways present a flat surface.
We now return to our regularly scheduel.....geeez the attitude on here.
:rofl
Think you need a dictionary.. look up round and flat.
See Rule #4

Offline 715

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1835
Re: The mighty TIGER, or not so much?
« Reply #115 on: January 25, 2009, 04:01:37 PM »
Sheesh.  The important factor is not round or flat, it's penetration angle, as stephen implies.  A rounded turret, if hit at the point where the circumference is perpendicular is 90 degree penetration, i.e. same as if it were flat, vertical, and perpendicular to the incoming round.  Thus, when aiming at the side of the rounded turret, make sure to hit the center, both left right and up down, i.e. where the metal is 90 deg/ 90 deg (both axes) to your incoming round.  Or, forget the turret and hit the vertical side of the hull (not the tracks).

The M4 mantlet is very thick- never hit the turret if the mantlet is pointed at you.  Also, the glacis is sloped so don't hit that either.  Hit the vertical center of the rounded armor below the glacis.*  You can take out an M4 in one shot from a T34/76 if you hit there at ranges under 1K.

Penetration angle is what is important.  Although penetration is much more complex than this, just think of the thickness of the armor along the path of the incoming round.  If the armor is 75 mm thick and at 90/90 degrees to the incoming round, it has to go through 75 mm.  If the same armor is at 45 degrees then it has to go through square root of 2 = 1.41 times as much or 1.41*75 = 106 mm.

*this may actually be a bug.  I don't know about this armor in an M4.  However, this technique also works with the T34 because, I guess, the armor is modeled there as the same thickness as the glacis but at a 90 degree angle (ie vertical).  The actual T34 had an enormously thick casting at that point, so penetrating there is not quite 100% realistic.

Offline Belial

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1589
Re: The mighty TIGER, or not so much?
« Reply #116 on: February 03, 2009, 04:25:27 AM »
I am a sherman drivin loser in most of your opinions lol, but I agree i wish they would give mea reason to spend my moldy perks on something worthwhile.  Ive killed many a tiger giggling when they pop first shot.

Offline RipChord929

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1022
Re: The mighty TIGER, or not so much?
« Reply #117 on: February 03, 2009, 08:40:01 AM »
Wow, this is an old thread..
I've seen a big improvement since the last update..
Far less of the "indestructable glitch" than last summer..
Tigers actually die when you hit'em with a pair of 500lb'ers

In fairness, I don't really know if it was a game adjustment
by HTC, or the new SLI comp that I bought for the game..

My framerates have gone from 65 up to 180+.. And I have
noticed that my gunfire is FAR more effective in a dogfight..
Planes now explode with just a little squirt on target..
I'M LIKIN THAT, LOL!!!

So I'm thinking, that I may have been suffering from the
"rubber bombs/bullets syndrome" at least partially...

RC
« Last Edit: February 03, 2009, 08:43:08 AM by RipChord929 »
"Well Cmdr Eddington, looks like we have ourselves a war..."
"Yeah, a gut bustin, mother lovin, NAVY war!!!"

Offline SmokinLoon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6168
Re: The mighty TIGER, or not so much?
« Reply #118 on: February 03, 2009, 11:07:24 AM »
hehe... the old "flat vs round" arguement.

Thing is... just how often does impact from an incoming AP round it at 90 dgrees to the armor (which would be ideal for the AP round)?  Sloped or no sloped armor, rounded or not.  Flat?  Doesnt matter, really.  There is a higher probability of deflection the smaller of an angle the AP round impacts.   

I believe I read somewhere that there was once a theory in WWII about not putting the front of the tank directly towards a known enemy tank or AT position, but rather at a 15-20 degree to either side.  The thought was that an incoming round had a higher chance of being deflected.  I dont remember who, what, or when this came about during the war and Im not even sure where I read it.  Seems to me that it was either the Sherman or maybe even the later Matilda tanks that had the rounded turrets that provided this theory (or was the result), above and beyond the theory of the slopwed T34 armor.  I cant remember, but anyways.... makes sense to a certain degree.
Proud grandson of the late Lt. Col. Darrell M. "Bud" Gray, USAF (ret.), B24D pilot, 5th BG/72nd BS. 28 combat missions within the "slot", PTO.

Offline Cthulhu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2463
Re: The mighty TIGER, or not so much?
« Reply #119 on: February 03, 2009, 11:22:13 AM »
Sorry to post so late on a thread that's getting a bit dusty, but if I'm reading some of your comments correctly, you guys are saying that 88mm rds are failing to penetrate the M4's front plate. That doesn't sound right at all. The Sherman's glacis is 2 1/2 inches thick at an angle of 45 degrees (turret is 3-4 inches in the front w/ a 5" mantlet).

Penetration data for the the 8.8 cm KwK 36 L/56 is shown below:

Pzgr. 39 (APCBC)
 Pzgr. Patr. 39 Kw.K. 36 APCBC Armor Piercing Capped Ballistic Capped with explosive filler and tracer.

Weight of projectile: 10.2 kg (22.48 lbs)
Muzzle velocity: 773 m/s (2,536 ft/s)
Explosive filler 0.059 kg
Penetration figures given for an armoured plate 30 degrees from the horizontal

 Hit probability versus 2.5 x 2 m target [1]
Range Penetration in training in combat
100 m 120 mm 100 % 100 %
500 m 110 mm 100 % 100 %
1000 m 99 mm 100 % 93 %
1500 m 91 mm 98 % 74 %
2000 m 83 mm 87 % 50 %
2500 m n/a 71 % 31 %
3000 m n/a 53 % 19 %


Pzgr. 40 (APCR)
Armor Piercing Composite Rigid round with a sub-calibre tungsten core.

Weight of projectile: 7.3 kg (16 lbs)
Muzzle velocity: 930 m/s (3,051 ft/s)  < IMPRESSIVE
Penetration figures given for an armoured plate 30 degrees from the horizontal

 Hit probability versus 2.5 x 2 m target [1]
Range Penetration in training in combat
100 m 171 mm 100 % 100 %
500 m 156 mm 100 % 100 %
1000 m 138 mm 100 % 93 %
1500 m 123 mm 97 % 74 %
2000 m 110 mm 89 % 47 %
2500 m n/a 78 % 34 %
3000 m n/a 66 % 25 %

Note that the ballistic path @ range makes the actual impact angle (for a head-on shot) less than the 45 degree slope angle of the Sherman's glacis armor (probably close to or even less than the 30 degree measured data). From the looks of the data, the Tiger could kill the Sherman with relative ease from any range. Historical accounts agree with this. Firefly's may have been able to kill Tigers, but the Tiger's fire was almost always 100% lethal to Shermans, and the Allied crews knew it.

One other thing: Rounded turrets, such as on the Sherman and T34, are cast. Although significantly easier to manufacture, casting are notorious for having internal voids, cracks... all sorts of flaws. The rounded shape may be a plus, but the quality of the steel is greatly diminished by casting.
"Think of Tetris as a metaphor for life:  You spend all your time trying to find a place for your long thin piece, then when you finally do, everything you've built disappears"