change the perks on the tiger

[Karnak]

Tiger doesn't need to be cheaper, Sherman "Firefly" VC needs to be more expensive.

[Beefcake]

For the record I would just like to state that Tigers are only worth 30 perks when you're attacking them. For some reason whenever I drive one I always lose the turret or engine in the first hit and I always get killed with the first bomb drop.

[Cajunn]

For the record I would just like to state that Tigers are only worth 30 perks when you're attacking them. For some reason whenever I drive one I always lose the turret or engine in the first hit and I always get killed with the first bomb drop.

OH, you must be using the cheep wal-mart version 

Jokes aside it varies I know a guy that has a film where he is in the Tiger and parks it right in front of a T34 and the T34 is shooting him at point blank range and he plays with this T34 for no less then 5 min. Until a friendly kills the T34. And I also seen this for myself, a Tiger parked and they drop bomb after bomb on him and after I know it was 5 or 6 min. they finally got him, I was killed by this Tiger a couple of times trying to get a shot on him in a Sherman. After he was killed, at least 8 or 10 people including myself got an assist on this guy.

[BigKev03]

I don't think the tiger should come down in perk points but I do think the M4 should come up in perks.  Historical data shows less than 2500 produced from late 1943 to the end of the war.  In a standard British tank platoon only 1 tank would be a firefly if they were lucky.  So in a two year period (1944-1945) only an average of 1250 M4's were produced to outfit all British armored units.  Production of the tiger which started in around early 1942 and ended in lat 1944 about 1400 were produced.  So only a difference of (an average of 1100 units) produced between the two tanks but yet we see an average of only 5-8 perks for a sherman and 25-47 for a tiger depending on country strength.  I think a sherman would be fair to perk starting at about 10-12 perks and maximum of about a 20-25 depending on country strength.  This way the historical production numbers reflect in the game as well as the effecdtiveness of its armament.  Still I say that a tiger in the hands of a seasoned tiger driver will outgun anything in this game.  Since the introduction of the sherman I have adjusted my tactics to engage at long distance and use the advantage of the tigers long range.  Historically the tiger could outgun even the firefly even though the M4's gun could penetrate more armour at 1000 meters but the round used at that time was not as accurate as the tigers.  I would also like to see in the tiger a choice of armor piercing rounds that were historically used in the tiger (PzGr.39 (Armour Piercing Capped Ballistic Cap), PzGr.40 (Armour Piercing Composite Rigid) ,Hl. Gr.39 (High Explosive Anti-Tank), and Sch Sprgr. Patr. L/4.5 (Incendiary Shrapnel.  But I understand this may be a bit much but at least have AP and HVAP as in the T34/85.  Just a thought please feel free to chop as desired.

Out,
BigKev

[JunkyII]

This is true.  What a different game it would be if HTC actually modeled historical mechanical failures for each and every plane and vehicle.

Maybe mud too so we would have ourselves a big pig pile in it 

[Cajunn]

This is true.  What a different game it would be if HTC actually modeled historical mechanical failures for each and every plane and vehicle.

Not to promote another game "I only play this game" but I was reading some of the Tech that went into the damage modeling on another WW2 online game for there Tanks and such, and it was really impressive. They took into account where every crew member sat in the tank, where the tank was most vulnerable, where the engine was and also where the tracks were.

[JunkyII]

Not to promote another game "I only play this game" but I was reading some of the Tech that went into the damage modeling on another WW2 online game for there Tanks and such, and it was really impressive. They took into account where every crew member sat in the tank, where the tank was most vulnerable, where the engine was and also where the tracks were.

We aint noobs in AH we operate are own tanks

[chris3]

I don't think the tiger should come down in perk points but I do think the M4 should come up in perks.  Historical data shows less than 2500 produced from late 1943 to the end of the war.  In a standard British tank platoon only 1 tank would be a firefly if they were lucky.  So in a two year period (1944-1945) only an average of 1250 M4's were produced to outfit all British armored units.  Production of the tiger which started in around early 1942 and ended in lat 1944 about 1400 were produced.  So only a difference of (an average of 1100 units) produced between the two tanks but yet we see an average of only 5-8 perks for a sherman and 25-47 for a tiger depending on country strength.  I think a sherman would be fair to perk starting at about 10-12 perks and maximum of about a 20-25 depending on country strength.  This way the historical production numbers reflect in the game as well as the effecdtiveness of its armament.  Still I say that a tiger in the hands of a seasoned tiger driver will outgun anything in this game.  Since the introduction of the sherman I have adjusted my tactics to engage at long distance and use the advantage of the tigers long range.  Historically the tiger could outgun even the firefly even though the M4's gun could penetrate more armour at 1000 meters but the round used at that time was not as accurate as the tigers.  I would also like to see in the tiger a choice of armor piercing rounds that were historically used in the tiger (PzGr.39 (Armour Piercing Capped Ballistic Cap), PzGr.40 (Armour Piercing Composite Rigid) ,Hl. Gr.39 (High Explosive Anti-Tank), and Sch Sprgr. Patr. L/4.5 (Incendiary Shrapnel.  But I understand this may be a bit much but at least have AP and HVAP as in the T34/85.  Just a thought please feel free to chop as desired.

Out,
BigKev

You are absulutly right! the Tiger is still the best tank in the game, he has always the option to own the fight, if you handel him right.
other kinds of rounds and maybe the option to fire smocke from the turet would be cool. cant understand why the tiger doesnt have the smocke option here in the game??.

cu chris3

[AWwrgwy]

You are absulutly right! the Tiger is still the best tank in the game, he has always the option to own the fight, if you handel him right.
other kinds of rounds and maybe the option to fire smocke from the turet would be cool. cant understand why the tiger doesnt have the smocke option here in the game??.

cu chris3

Tigers had smoke grenade launchers on each side of the turret, I believe.  It would be like the smoke from the Firefly.

Some other interesting tidbits I've found:

http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/ttt_tigervulnerability/index.html

From http://www.lonesentry.com/tigerflorence/index.html:

Sometimes the Germans used their Tigers with marked recklessness, the crews taking risks to an extent which indicated their extreme confidence in their vehicles.

A Tiger was observed about 3,000 yards away, engaging three Shermans. When it set one of the Shermans afire, the other two withdrew over a crest. A 17-pounder was brought up to within 2,400 yards of the Tiger, and engaged it from a flank. When the Tiger realized that it was being engaged by a high-velocity gun, it swung around 90 degrees so that its heavy frontal armor was toward the gun. In the ensuing duel, one round hit the turret, another round hit the suspension, and two near-short rounds probably ricocheted into the tank. The tank was not put out of action. The range was too great to expect a kill; hence the New Zealanders' tactics were to make the Tiger expose its flank to the Shermans at a range of almost 500 yards, by swinging around onto the antitank gun. The Tiger did just this, and, when it was engaged by the Shermans, it withdrew.

More stuff:  http://www.lonesentry.com/tiger_tank_intel/index.html

edit:  That was weird, direct links work with no HTML code


wrongway

[JunkyII]

Tigers had smoke grenade launchers on each side of the turret, I believe.  It would be like the smoke from the Firefly.

Some other interesting tidbits I've found:

http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/ttt_tigervulnerability/index.html

From http://www.lonesentry.com/tigerflorence/index.html:

http://www.lonesentry.com/tiger_tank_intel/index.html


wrongway

Links arent working for me bro, maybe its just me

[stroker71]

Quote
A Tiger was observed about 3,000 yards away, engaging three Shermans. When it set one of the Shermans afire, the other two withdrew over a crest. A 17-pounder was brought up to within 2,400 yards of the Tiger, and engaged it from a flank. When the Tiger realized that it was being engaged by a high-velocity gun, it swung around 90 degrees so that its heavy frontal armor was toward the gun. In the ensuing duel, one round hit the turret, another round hit the suspension, and two near-short rounds probably ricocheted into the tank. The tank was not put out of action. The range was too great to expect a kill; hence the New Zealanders' tactics were to make the Tiger expose its flank to the Shermans at a range of almost 500 yards, by swinging around onto the antitank gun. The Tiger did just this, and, when it was engaged by the Shermans, it withdrew.


So is the FireFly gun overmodeled?  Or tiger armor undermodeled.  I have switched to the T34-85 as my main tank because the tiger just isn't worth it anymore. 

[TheZohan]

i was over at A1 and i killed about 12 tigers. maybe we should keep them perked high..

[Belial]

I recently discovered that the panzer is better for killing Tigers than the t34-85, for some reason the t34 round bounces off tigers turret and the panzer doesnt, imagine my delight in this knowledge.

[bj229r]

Tiger doesn't need to be cheaper, Sherman "Firefly" VC needs to be more expensive.

That would be acceptable (Or make the Sherman die easier, which it ought to) I see no reason to spend 30 perks to up a Tiger when the Sherman is mebbe 4, and it 80% the tank the Tiger is (as modeled)

[AWwrgwy]

Quote
A Tiger was observed about 3,000 yards away, engaging three Shermans. When it set one of the Shermans afire, the other two withdrew over a crest. A 17-pounder was brought up to within 2,400 yards of the Tiger, and engaged it from a flank. When the Tiger realized that it was being engaged by a high-velocity gun, it swung around 90 degrees so that its heavy frontal armor was toward the gun. In the ensuing duel, one round hit the turret, another round hit the suspension, and two near-short rounds probably ricocheted into the tank. The tank was not put out of action. The range was too great to expect a kill; hence the New Zealanders' tactics were to make the Tiger expose its flank to the Shermans at a range of almost 500 yards, by swinging around onto the antitank gun. The Tiger did just this, and, when it was engaged by the Shermans, it withdrew.


So is the FireFly gun overmodeled?  Or tiger armor undermodeled.  I have switched to the T34-85 as my main tank because the tiger just isn't worth it anymore. 

It never says the 17-pounder hit the Tiger.  It never says the Shermans hit the Tiger.  The Tiger apparently hit only one of the three Shermans it engaged from 3,000 yards.  Or, is the Tiger's gun is over modeled begause it only killed one Sherman from that distance?

I've always believed we get too many hits, let alone kills, at much to far a range.  Notice the unsuccessful Shermans from 500 yards.  Point blank in AH2 terms.



wrongway