Tiger's perk price

[waystin2]

The armor and cannon were bar none some of the best of the best in the war.  I have no other supporting evidence to offer other than what I know.  My thinking that the damage model should be upgraded is based on constant complaints from folks getting hit and killed quickly in the Tiger by other tanks.  I do not use the Tiger very often, but it seems to be much softer in the armor department than it should be.

[stodd]

I agree something should be changed. I'd say leave the Tiger price as is and increase the m4 firefly to 10-15 perk points per.

Seems to me that it is not quite as fearsome as it once was in comparison to other vehicles out there.

Supporting evidence?

Evidence from stats page:

(Tour 111LW)
Tiger kills on M4 Firefly: 1,097
M4 kills on Tiger: 945

(tour 110LW)
Tiger kills on M4 Firefly: 1,201
M4 kills on Tiger: 1,027

(tour 109LW)
Tiger kills on M4 Firefly: 1,043
M4 kills on Tiger: 945

NOT FINISHED

[E25280]

The problem many of you seem to be having is that you are only comparing the Tiger and Firefly in head-to-head match ups.

For sake of argument, let us pretend the Tiger vs. Firefly was exactly 1 to 1.  When head to head, all even -- flip a coin.

The Tiger would still be worth considerably more.
Here is why (March Tour):

Tiger vs. Panzer:  5.42 K/D ratio.
Firefly vs. Panzer:  3.20 K/D ratio.

Tiger vs. T-34/85:  3.08 K/D ratio.
Firefly vs. T-34/85:  2.04 K/D ratio.

Tiger vs. T-34/76:  27.77 K/D ratio.
Firefly vs. T-34/76:  10.83 K/D ratio.

Tiger vs. M-8:  33.67 K/D ratio.
Firefly vs. M-8:  17.6 K/D ratio.

Tiger vs. IL-2:  2.13 K/D ratio.
Firefly vs. IL-2:  1.07 K/D ratio.

Tiger vs. A-20:  0.92 K/D ratio.
Firefly vs. A-20:  0.15 K/D ratio.

Against everything else, the Tiger is enjoys considerably better K/D ratios because it's armor is much better than the Firefly's.  It therefore should have a considerably higher perk cost.

I would agree with several who have said that a base 5 perks on the Firefly is too low, but IMO there is nothing wrong with the Tiger's base perk cost.  It is still king of the ground war.

[moot]

Agree to disagree then. I don't think those stats tell the whole story, don't think they refute the 1.4:1 ratio Brooke found in practice in a scenario (instead of random stats skewed by camping and crappy driving), and I certainly don't think the Tiger's King of anything but paper figures and bomb-proofness. 

[Belial]

You cannot base the merit of a tank on stats of people that drive them, half of tank drivers in AH suck sorry.  I myself have driven Tigers at 1200 yards camping which is going to get you killed. 

If you want the real test of tank toughness let me sit at 4,000 yards in a Tiger and a tanker of your choice in a Sherman, the Sherman if far less likely to survive the first hit.

[Lusche]

Agree to disagree then. I don't think those stats tell the whole story, don't think they refute the 1.4:1 ratio Brooke found in practice in a scenario (instead of random stats skewed by camping and crappy driving), and I certainly don't think the Tiger's King of anything but paper figures and bomb-proofness. 

Both your and Belials postings are not contradicting.

Brooke tested Sherman VC vs Tiger.
Belial pointed out Tiger vs other tanks in MA, where indeed the Tiger fares better than the Sherman. And that'S no surprise, because vs the gun of a Panzer IV or a T34/85 the Tigers thick armor matters more than vs a Firefly

And also Brookes test is actually also "random" stats - he's based on a lot smaller numbers of samples than a whole arena battling month after month . A small number of players in a single specific battle situation.

[moot]

You mean E25280?  You guys are saying the Tiger is better than the other tanks. Fine, but that's not my point. I'm saying the perk price and actual performance are disproportionate.

[Lusche]

You mean E25280?

Ooops, yes, of course 

[shreck]

Don't forget the tiger is the #1 tank sought after by bomb****s, I would say, when a tiger is in the area it will recieve 3-4 times the air to ground attacks!  I agree with moot, raise the perk value on the sherman! 

[Belial]

There is nothing wrong with Sherman perk price, it is as soft as a panzer and if I spend 15 perks on  a Sherman and some IL2 dweeb kills me I will be royally PO'd.

I know your thinking but BeLial the Tiger can be killed by IL2 too, boo on you only experienced IL2 strafers know the trick to the high angle Tiger pop.



Flame on, thats my story and i'm stickin to it.

[moot]

Yeah that's why I think it's the Tiger's price that ought to come down.  You can't really pay more than 5 perks for something with the M4's survivability.

[sethipus]

There is nothing wrong with Sherman perk price, it is as soft as a panzer and if I spend 15 perks on  a Sherman and some IL2 dweeb kills me I will be royally PO'd.

The Sherman is not as soft as the Panzer.  Nope.  If you really want to see this, it's not hard to test.  Just take up a T34/76 and have at it.  You will kill Panzers with frontal armor and turret hits in the T34/76 all the way out to 1200-1600 yards (not every shot, but the kills will happen on average with X number of such hits).  You will neither turret the Sherman from the front, nor kill it with hits into the hull from the front, at any range you choose.  From the side you will kill Shermans with the T34/76, but you won't do it from the front.  And you will kill the Panzers from the side even more easily.

Also, the T34/76 will rarely kill a Sherman from the rear - it will usually kill the engine, but not destroy the tank.  The T34/76 gun will, however, kill Panzers outright with shots through the engine block.  Just ask anyone who has camped a VH before.

Bottom line is that the Sherman is a tougher nut to crack than the Panzer, and has a monstrously powerful gun.  Both of those advantages, not just the gun alone, contribute to the Sherman perkworthiness.

[E25280]

Yeah that's why I think it's the Tiger's price that ought to come down.  You can't really pay more than 5 perks for something with the M4's survivability.

I'll disagree that perks for anything should come down.

Perk rides are perked precisely to keep them rare compared to the non-perked rides.  Right now the Sherman is anything but rare due to it's very low perk cost.

I say, increase the cost of them all.

[moot]

Disproportionate perk/performance.

[JunkyII]

Yea I think people forgot what M00t said at first, never was saying Tigr wasnt best but that it just had too high of perk price to it, which I would have to agree seeing that the K/D ratio Stodd posted is almost 1:1......