KING TIGUHHHH

[Tank-Ace]

I think to make it fair, it should be just like the first Tiger II's ever given to the Panzer-Lehr Division and only have 1 in 6 T2's you spawn actually work. Seems fitting since the first five issued broke down and were destroyed before they could ever fire a hostile round.

This is a later Tiger II with the production Heinschel turret protected by 180mm of armor, instead of the Porsche turret. And if you look at the actual statistics, there weren't significanly lower percentages of operational Tiger II's as opposed to Tiger I's. If you abused your engine, didn't take care of it, and tried to do things it wasn't supposed to do, then of course you're going to have reliability problems.

[MK-84]

Almost -->>ALL<-- Tiger II had the heinschel turret

I wont even get into how you you think its unreliable because of your "sedan" analogy.  Thats  almost sig worthy btw.

[Tank-Ace]

Orders were issued to Tiger and Tiger II units not to tow other tanks, guns, ammunition limbers, etc. precisely because it put added strain on the already strained engines.

I only used that analogy because I saw it happen yesterday and so it was fresh in my mind.

[Karnak]

Tyrannis,

You must have a different definition of "duke it out" than most people.  I wouldn't count madly dashing forward, praying the Tiger won't hit you, desperately trying to reach short range so your HVAP rounds have a chance of penetrating his armor all the while your armor is just useless weight to be a "duke it out" situation.  Fact is, the Russian heavies were far, far more significant than the American ones.

Also, take a Sherman V C.


Tank-Ace,

Tiger II's drive train was badly overstrained just by the Tiger II.  They were horribly unreliable.

Not saying that should be modeled, but from a historical standpoint it was a complete boondoggle.

[Tank-Ace]

They were overstrained yes, but they weren't the absolute beasts people make them out to be when the were well maintained, and weren't asked to do anything too strenuous. It wasn't like the drive trains were just crapping out in droves during a moderate paced drive on reasonably flat ground.

[Karnak]

Problem was that due to the German war situation at that time they were rarely well maintained or not asked to do overly strenuous things.  Based on the Soviet testing, they weren't well made either.  The Soviets found the armor to be improperly tempered rendering it much weaker than it ought to have been.

[Tank-Ace]

Again, production flaws. If were going to play that game, the B-29 would be modeled on-fire, zekes would be modeled on-fire, the 262's engines would randomly go, and sometimes your 163 would explode due to a bad fuel mix.

I believe what the russians said was that, dispite exelent craftsmanship, the armor was of exceptionaly poor quality, and welds were often shoddy. By spring of '45, the Wermach was on its last legs. It simply couldn't obtain and manufacture all the materials needed to do things perfectly. So even though the tank wasn't all it should have been, its still more than they would have had if they had waited to make better armor.

[Karnak]

Tank-Ace,

The A6M series had no tendency to catch on fire by itself.  It was actually a pretty robust aircraft design.

It did catch fire when shot, but it does that in AH too.


I wasn't advocating the Tiger II's flawed manufacturing be modeled, just speaking of it in a historical context.

(Ki-84 does seem to have some manufacturing flaws modeled.  At least that is the only reason I can think that it sheds ailerons and such)

[Tupac]

The Tiger IIs were sabotaged on the assembly lines by the people building them.......

[bangsbox]

American Pershing says hi.

i agree with a russian "animal killer" (su152) well before pershing says hi the pershing got in to 2-3 tank and tank combats before wars end. is1 and is2 were in the thick of it for along time

[SmokinLoon]

i agree with a russian "animal killer" (su152) well before pershing says hi the pershing got in to 2-3 tank and tank combats before wars end. is1 and is2 were in the thick of it for along time

The King Tiger would have many advantages over the ISU-152.  A bigger gun doesnt mean better.  The Su-100 would have a better chance vs the King Tiger in AH.  The Pershing would get sent back to the bench in most cases as well.

[Martyn]

I think HTC could model tanks to break down if attempting to climb to steep a gradient - drive train stress. It would need a vehicle supply to 'repair' and continue. That way anyone trying to climb even a shallow gradient in a Tiger II would break down, whereas the Sherman would be more maneuverable. Not realistic maybe, but it would sort of model the reliability of the drive train to some extent.

BTW - Where's my Bren Gun Carrier?

[bortas1]

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)
(Image removed from quote.)

looks great 

[Kazaa]

I can't wait to get camped by one of these.

[R 105]

 Thank you AKP for the King Tiger post. It even has the correct 360% late war pindel gun on it unlike what we have on the Panther.