The mighty TIGER, or not so much?

[WWhiskey]

a little off subject but good reading anyway
 

Major General Harmann Balck
 
'If Manstein was Germany's greatest strategist during World War II, Balck has strong claims to be regarded as our finest field commander. He has a superb grasp of tactics and great qualities of leadership'
-Major-General von Mellenthin

 http://members.tripod.com/chiss_dude/germangeneralsofworldwarii/id3.html



 http://www.11thpanzer.com/dsp_balck.htm


 http://hosted.wargamer.com/Panzer/balck.html

   

[FLOTSOM]

a little off subject but good reading anyway
 

Major General Harmann Balck
 
'If Manstein was Germany's greatest strategist during World War II, Balck has strong claims to be regarded as our finest field commander. He has a superb grasp of tactics and great qualities of leadership'
-Major-General von Mellenthin

 http://members.tripod.com/chiss_dude/germangeneralsofworldwarii/id3.html



 http://www.11thpanzer.com/dsp_balck.htm


 http://hosted.wargamer.com/Panzer/balck.html

   

cool articles WWhiskey!

good reads thank you for posting them!

 

[Big Rat]

I agree with those that say that something has to be done with the Tiger1 or Firefly.  There's not many places a Tiger can hit a Firefly and not have it penetrate at the ranges we normally see in this game.  Firefly's were fairly rare vehicles, and weren't tossed out there in the way a normal sherman was.  They were used more like a tank destroyer rather then a regular tank.  They were high priority targets for the germans, and would be singled out if possible in any engagment as priority number 1.  If the firefly of the platoon was taken out the sherman 75/76's had little chance with a long range shooting match against a Panther, Tiger1, or something more deadly (anything with a 88m L-71).  The Firefly has one good feature, it's excellent gun. Very much on par with the panthers 75mm L-70.  But that's it, other then that it's armor was poor, and it's silloette was very high. I think the damage model as far as the Firefly taking out the Tiger in this game is fairly accurate, but the other way around is not.  Tiger should probably be about double the perkies of a Firefly, or a firefly half the perkies of a Tiger in late war to make it even out.  Either do that or make the Firefly a bit more fragile and keep it the same perkies.  I'd really like to see us get a regular sherman 75/76, how many Shermans did they make and we only have the rarest version in this game.  Now in Midwar the Tiger is still king by a large margin and deserves it's high perk price.

 
BigRat

[AWwrgwy]

  There's not many places a Tiger can hit a Firefly and not have it penetrate at the ranges we normally see in this game. 

 
BigRat

You realize, for the most part, the ranges we see in game are totally unrealistic.  We are shooting, hitting, and killing other tanks as ranges up to and beyond 2 miles.  Re-reading Death Traps By Belton Y. Cooper,

http://books.google.com/books?id=Yanu67Pf_usC&pg=PA149&lpg=PA149&dq=death+traps:++t&source=bl&ots=Zb3Zqv7l74&sig=JgSMR3fVp3Z9gc6XkHwjNM3n32U&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=5&ct=result#PPA329,M1,

engagement ranges seemed to be more around the 25 to 200 yard range.  You can almost never get that close to someone here.  You really want one hit kills, there you go.


wrongway

[E25280]

Firefly's were fairly rare vehicles, and weren't tossed out there in the way a normal sherman was. 

So about 2000 produced and a standard deployment of one Firefly per Troop (platoon of 4 tanks) means it was "rare?"

[RipChord929]

You realize, for the most part, the ranges we see in game are totally unrealistic.  We are shooting, hitting, and killing other tanks as ranges up to and beyond 2 miles.  Re-reading Death Traps By Belton Y. Cooper,

http://books.google.com/books?id=Yanu67Pf_usC&pg=PA149&lpg=PA149&dq=death+traps:++t&source=bl&ots=Zb3Zqv7l74&sig=JgSMR3fVp3Z9gc6XkHwjNM3n32U&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=5&ct=result#PPA329,M1,

engagement ranges seemed to be more around the 25 to 200 yard range.  You can almost never get that close to someone here.  You really want one hit kills, there you go.


wrongway

Very true,  
The tiger was so dangerous because it could kill at 1800yds,
and was virtually impervious to enemy fire at that range..
They racked up so many kills from the allied/russian tanks
having to endure and pass thru, that death zone, before
their guns reached effective ranges, 800 or less.. (round #s)

As the game sits now, we have MIRACLE guns, and sights..
Totally unrealistic... But, can you imagine the SCREAMIN from
the player base, if the game was made more "real"?  LOL!!!

  RC

[SD67]

You wouldn't get much screaming from me if it was made more "real"
If you used good teamwork you could easily defeat the tiger in close quarter combat with lesser tanks due to it's slow traverse rate and comparatively slow speed.
Trouble is, nobody wants to share.

[Belial]

And if only the clouds were made of marshmellows and the grass of lucky charms

[Big Rat]

So about 2000 produced and a standard deployment of one Firefly per Troop (platoon of 4 tanks) means it was "rare?"

Well maybe not considered rare among British armored units but rare overall considering it would constitute less then 5% of sherman production.

 
BigRat

[JHerne]

When you consider that roughly 50,000 Shermans were produced...and the major user of the Sherman was the US, which didn't use the Firefly but the 76mm M4A3, which we don't have, then yes, the Firefly is a rare variant.

The US 76mm could penetrate a Panther front or flank only at short ranges until the HVAP rounds were delivered, but most of those went to the TD units. The 76mm was basically on par with the German Kwk 40 L/48 75mm found in the IV Ausf F2. It was still inferior to the Panther's Kwk 42/L70.

Bringing the 76mm Sherman into AH isn't going to accomplish much. Tigers and Panzers will still punch holes in them.

As for the Sherman armor, I put 5 rounds into the deck of a Sherman from long range the other night. Five solid hits - and didn't even smoke him. The deck armor of a Sherman is only 9mm, a 75mm round coming down from a 45-degree angle should be a one-hit kill.

I also have issue with M8s killing Tigers - even shooting them from behind - shouldn't happen. Again, a lot of it comes down to player mentality - with no penalities or reprecussions for dying in a stupid manner, players are going to do stupid things, like attacking a Tiger with an M8.

Based on my data of armor and armament, here's how it should stack up...

Offensively:

Tiger
Firefly
T-34/85
Panzer IV
T-34/76
M8

Defensively (survivability)

Tiger
T-34/85
T-34/76
Firefly
Panzer IV
M8

Wirbels - are anomalies. A standard PzIV chassis, usually a recycled Ausf D or E chassis, that takes 5-8 hits to kill. A single turret hit should take out the gun. The argument of a shot passing through the turret is not without merit, however, there's a big honking gun mount inside that turret. M8s are also anomalies - a single 75mm round will completely disassemble an M8.

And for the record, I owned a 1:1 M3 White halftrack for nearly 10 years, and one of my buds owned a fully restored M8. These things aren't made like tanks...

J

[stephen]

Tanks should be modeld correctly.
No one new would grab a Tiger unless they thought it was the lord of battle... Perk the hell out of it, but im really sick of having them shot out from under me when I turn nose on with nme tanks.

Ever try to kill a sherman head on with a T-34? you might as well be using spit balls.

[JHerne]

I read back a bit - the German tanker who made that quote about 10 and 11 T-34s was Otto Carius. He wrote the book 'Tigers in the Mud'. He spent all but the last few weeks of his career on the Eastern Front. Great read, and it really emphasizes the Tiger's killing abilities against all sorts of Russian armor, including Lend-Lease Shermans used by the Soviets.

From what I gathered in the book, the Tiger crews feared mechanical failure more than any Soviet tank until the appearance of the JS-series on the battlefield.

As for US tanks, in truth, the only US tank capable of going 1 v 1 with a Tiger was the Pershing, but not enough of them entered service to alter the war.

That's not to say that other tanks weren't capable of killing the Tiger - but its not until the Pershing took the field that Allied tank crews were eager to go head-to-head against German armor.

I don't use Tigers anymore, I can't justify the cost in perks against the slight margin of survivability. That being said, I can't see how bringing another GV into the mix, like a Panther or Jagdpanther, is going to radically change things. Panthers were superior to Tigers in terms of armor protection (based on the sloped vs/ flat penetration formula), faster, more maneuverable, and with a gun that was just as effective as the 88mm in killing Allied tanks (the 88mm was truly overkill, when it comes right down to it).

Where would you put a Panther in the game, and what would you compromise? Protection, or main gun ability, to balance the gameplay? Would it be perked somewhere in between the Tiger I and Sherman, perhaps giving the Tiger a little more realisitic protection modeling and the Sherman a little less?

I dunno...all I know is that as long as a Tiger can be killed by a T-34/76 or Panzer IV, its not worth the perks to use them. There's no decided advantage to justify the cost. Not when guys are landing double-digit kills in Fireflys and T-34/85s.

J

[FLOTSOM]

I read back a bit - the German tanker who made that quote about 10 and 11 T-34s was Otto Carius. He wrote the book 'Tigers in the Mud'. He spent all but the last few weeks of his career on the Eastern Front. Great read, and it really emphasizes the Tiger's killing abilities against all sorts of Russian armor, including Lend-Lease Shermans used by the Soviets.

From what I gathered in the book, the Tiger crews feared mechanical failure more than any Soviet tank until the appearance of the JS-series on the battlefield.

As for US tanks, in truth, the only US tank capable of going 1 v 1 with a Tiger was the Pershing, but not enough of them entered service to alter the war.

That's not to say that other tanks weren't capable of killing the Tiger - but its not until the Pershing took the field that Allied tank crews were eager to go head-to-head against German armor.

I don't use Tigers anymore, I can't justify the cost in perks against the slight margin of survivability. That being said, I can't see how bringing another GV into the mix, like a Panther or Jagdpanther, is going to radically change things. Panthers were superior to Tigers in terms of armor protection (based on the sloped vs/ flat penetration formula), faster, more maneuverable, and with a gun that was just as effective as the 88mm in killing Allied tanks (the 88mm was truly overkill, when it comes right down to it).

Where would you put a Panther in the game, and what would you compromise? Protection, or main gun ability, to balance the gameplay? Would it be perked somewhere in between the Tiger I and Sherman, perhaps giving the Tiger a little more realisitic protection modeling and the Sherman a little less?

I dunno...all I know is that as long as a Tiger can be killed by a T-34/76 or Panzer IV, its not worth the perks to use them. There's no decided advantage to justify the cost. Not when guys are landing double-digit kills in Fireflys and T-34/85s.

J

thats the guy!!!

<SALUTE> thanx!

and i agree with the rest of your post as well.

[Cthulhu]

I read back a bit - the German tanker who made that quote about 10 and 11 T-34s was Otto Carius. He wrote the book 'Tigers in the Mud'.

Thanks JHerne. I shoulda known that. I have the book.

[E25280]

I also have issue with M8s killing Tigers - even shooting them from behind - shouldn't happen.

Really?

The ability to destroy a Tiger I from other than the front is described in a wartime report from the 7th Armored Division while in Belgium in December of 1944:

While northern and eastern flanks had been heavily engaged, the northeastern section had been rather quiet. The only excitement there had been was when an M8 armored car from "E" Troop destroyed a Tiger tank. The armored car had been in a concealed position at right angles to run along a trail in front of the MLR. As the tank passed the armored car, the M8 slipped out of position and started up the trail behind the Tiger, accelerating in an attempt to close. At the same moment the German tank commander saw the M8, and started traversing his gun to bear on the armored car. It was a race between the Americans who were attempting to close so that their puny 37-mm would be effective in the Tiger’s "Achilles heel" (its thin rear armor), and the Germans who were desperately striving to bring their "88" to bear … Suddenly, the M8 had closed to 25 yards, and quickly pumped in 3 rounds… the lumbering Tiger stopped, shuddered; there was a muffled explosion, followed by flames which bellowed out of the turret and engine ports, after which the armored car returned to its position.