Tigers were armoured the heaviest in the front, you could shoot at the front of it all day and not to much
Ehhh... depends on the gun your using and the angle your hitting that front armor at. Their armor is thick in the front but is designed at the worst possible angle for incoming shells. One major flaw to the Tiger's armor over other tanks of that era was that it was very box-shape (which at the start of the war would of been fine, but with huge advances throughout the war on both sides in higher-velocity and better armor piercing guns/ammunition, you did not want to stop those shells with nothing but the pure thickness/mass of your armor like the tiger was designed to do, rather take that thick armor and angle it so most of an incoming shell's energy was deflected instead of absorbed). One common strategy was having your enemy at a 1 or 11 o'clock position, this resulted in the thick front armor deflecting the shells instead of trying to "eat" the shell with the pure mass of the front armor. But again due to the very box-like shape, this exposed the large and broad sides of the tiger to the enemy (though at a very steep angle, but still made it so a flanking tank didn't have to flank you as much to get a clean 90-degree shot to your side/rear.)
Look at the difference in the hulls of a Tiger and a King Tiger and you'll see they made changes in these flaws. The front armor is sloped/angled/not-as-flat-as-a-brick-wall. Also, imagine yourself facing a king tiger from it's 1 or 11 o'clock, you'll notice the slanted/angled armor on the sides in the rear so that it's weaker sides are a much lower profile than on a tiger and pretty much just gives you the thick front armor (or turret) to hit at a bad angle.
