Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: BALSUR on February 15, 2005, 06:31:20 PM
-
Something needs to be done about these invincible tigers. It's getting absolutely out of hand. When 1 tiger can fend off 10 or more tanks and take dozens of shots to the side , rear, turret and keep on fighting it's crazy. Oh, and as for realism the real deal took 18 secounds to reload, slower than the T34 something to think about fixing with these rapid fire tiger tanks.
-
Hell, I don't seem to have a problem killing them with a 1K bomb.
-
hmmm my tiger always dies from 1 shot.
-
I don't have a problem taking a Tiger out with one shot.
You just have to understand angles and know that just like a plane, you have to hit it in the right spots.
-
Originally posted by BALSUR
Oh, and as for realism the real deal took 18 secounds to reload, slower than the T34 something to think about fixing with these rapid fire tiger tanks.
Got a source for that?
-
Watch me. I die with one or two shots froma panzer I took a shot at first, lol
-
I have terrible problems with GVs. I've been in a T-34 and shot Panzers from point blank range at all angles with AP and HE and not killed them. I've killed ONE Tiger in a T-34, it was a one shot kill, from the right front, an AP round hit where the turret sits on the body. It exploded and disappeared. I've hit Panzers and Tigers there before, from the same range, and done zero apparent damage. Just last night, I was trying to shoot a T-34 from behind a group of trees, with my barrel appearing to stick through the trees. I could not shoot out of the trees. But the T-34 hit me once through the trees, and killed my Panzer. I make no claims as to what is right and what is wrong, the only claim I make is I don't understand what happens, and why, at all. I've had an M-16 literally kill a T-34. It took out the turret from behind before I could move or turn to shoot back.
-
less then 10 seconds was the average reload time, 18 if the gun was fully elevated
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?p=503067
interesting discussion here, by people who seem to know what they are talking about
-
Originally posted by BALSUR
Something needs to be done about these invincible tigers. It's getting absolutely out of hand. When 1 tiger can fend off 10 or more tanks and take dozens of shots to the side , rear, turret and keep on fighting it's crazy. Oh, and as for realism the real deal took 18 secounds to reload, slower than the T34 something to think about fixing with these rapid fire tiger tanks.
he have supplies?
-
Fly a plane.
:D
-
Originally posted by Gooss
Fly a plane.
:D
Aww shut up.:D
-
I read that BB flit, some good stuff there. I noticed they did alot of testing on tank destroyers. I saw that an average of 10 sec for firing and when working out of the "G" rack its was 17.8 secounds. I happened to come across the Tiger gunner's manual. It is stated that expected performance was to have 1 hit outta 3 within 30 secounds. So, an average of 10 secounds. Just did alittle test and AH's tigers firing rate of 4 secounds. Which is the firing rate of the Flak 88 but not the Tiger's 88. So, I dont know if this was overlooked but can it be fixed?
-
I'm sure it will be fixed if it's correct.
-
Yea, I imagine if you have a chat with Pyro about it you can see what he thinks.
Regarding the T-34/76 vs the Tiger... the Tiger is and should be practically invulnerable with the ammo we've got modelled for the T-34.
The T-34 we have in the game is able to penetrate the side and rear turret from point blank range, you have to hit the exact same spot 3 times to do any damage, based on my testing anyway.
-
Well if that's the case the perk cost for the thing needs to go down considerably. I really don't think there that uber anyway. Sure I've ran across quite a few that just wouldn't die.( Like Balsur's in tank town a few times) And have even drove a few that seemed weaker than a m3.
But as of latlely I really have no problem killing them. Or being killed in one. Just 3 or 4 days ago I tracked one with the mg of my m3 while on a resupply run for my squaddie. Sure he finished him off in his panzer but I got the kill. :lol . But then the ditch bug got me so it was only worth a little over 14 points.
Then on the other hand I have the film ( around somewhere) of the end of a good long range battle between my tiger and another where I had to run him out of ammo. Then I had to shoot him from the dead 6 to get him to die.
I'm just saying with the reload time more than doubled. The Tiger would probably be used alot less. Especiallly at the current perk price.
-
Originally posted by BALSUR
I read that BB flit, some good stuff there. I noticed they did alot of testing on tank destroyers. I saw that an average of 10 sec for firing and when working out of the "G" rack its was 17.8 secounds. I happened to come across the Tiger gunner's manual. It is stated that expected performance was to have 1 hit outta 3 within 30 secounds. So, an average of 10 secounds. Just did alittle test and AH's tigers firing rate of 4 secounds. Which is the firing rate of the Flak 88 but not the Tiger's 88. So, I dont know if this was overlooked but can it be fixed?
"It is stated that expected performance was to have 1 hit outta 3 within 30 secounds"
Perhaps you don't know how a tank crew and the firing process works but from how I read this they are talking about the process not just the act of reloading the weapon system.
This process includes identifying target, confirming targets, the sighting process for the gunner and shot. Follow up is ammo load ident, ie; he or ap the loader clearing the tube and shoving the next round into the chamber and telling the crew he is cleared of the recoil path.
As far as strictly loading, if the loader knows what to expect next you can bet that he will have already have pulled the next shell off the rack and have it ready to slam home once the shot is made. The process could easily take 3-4 seconds in a well trained crew.
-
I thought the Tiger was uber tough in reality. Just have to gang up on em.
-
Your right Madbull I've been in a tiger before that seemed to take alot of damage. Most things in tank town I write off to the fact that tank town has really weird things going on. It's during the normal field battles that throw me. I've seen a Tiger take a ton of bombs and nothing then I've been in a tiger and have a 100 lb drop 200 yards behind me and kill my tank. Which brings me to the next topic of my next thread. Air fire power on tanks. It has been discovered that the allies exaggerated kill statics to defeat the "tigerphobia". Only 2% of tanks destroyed where with rockets and only 4% with bombs. 60% where scrubed by their own crews because repairs couldn't be easily made or they ran outta supplies. But thats for the next thread.
As far as loading , aiming and so on. The gunner could stay on target while the loader loaded the next round. Thus eliminating aim time. The loader could not have the next round waiting because he had to clear the breach of the used shell casing and visaully clear the breach and barrel to prevent explosions from fouling.
-
Balsur,
On the reloading issue. There are always written policies and procedures and then there is how it is actually done in combat conditions. Do you think the loader, with his life on the line by the second is going to waste his time to look up a barrel after a shot to check for fouling? nope...
To open the chamber it just a pull of the lever, the shell pops out then slam the new one home, close the chamber. 4 seconds is optimistic but reasonable from what I understand and from personal experience.
-
The Tiger's 88 shell casing had to be removed by hand. So, it wasn't an issue to look up the breach.
-
well, I think I made my case. All I want to know now is Pyro going to change the time table or leave it. Even though we have alot of old cav men here. The manual is all we have to go by. Especially since I can't seem to find any living Tiger Commanders around. there is the documentation by the Brits who put the tiger through its paces, posted by flit also.
-
Originally posted by BALSUR
Your right Madbull I've been in a tiger before that seemed to take alot of damage. Most things in tank town I write off to the fact that tank town has really weird things going on. It's during the normal field battles that throw me. I've seen a Tiger take a ton of bombs and nothing then I've been in a tiger and have a 100 lb drop 200 yards behind me and kill my tank. Which brings me to the next topic of my next thread. Air fire power on tanks. It has been discovered that the allies exaggerated kill statics to defeat the "tigerphobia". Only 2% of tanks destroyed where with rockets and only 4% with bombs. 60% where scrubed by their own crews because repairs couldn't be easily made or they ran outta supplies. But thats for the next thread.
As far as loading , aiming and so on. The gunner could stay on target while the loader loaded the next round. Thus eliminating aim time. The loader could not have the next round waiting because he had to clear the breach of the used shell casing and visaully clear the breach and barrel to prevent explosions from fouling.
Been saying that for a while now
That number goes down even farther with gun, cannon fire from AC
As far as load time.
Once you have acquired target reload and aim time goes down considerably.
Not to mention the added incentive one has to reload with speed when ones life is really on the line.
I'd say the 3-4 second time is probably pretty accurate.
On the other hand, Last night I witnessed a tracked tiger taking rounds from at least 3 other tanks as well as no less then having bombs dropped on it from no less then 10 aircraft. I personally saw this same tiger get hit dead center by bombs and sit in the center of a bomb crater and not so much as smoke and kept on firing.
A direct hit even if it did not destroy the tank would have been enough to scramble the brains of its occupants.
One of the tactics we used against the concrete pillboxes was to hit it with a couple of rounds from a tank destroyer. It didnt destroy or often didnt even penetrate the pillbox but the concussion alone was enough to as I said scramble the brains of and render incoherent, its occupants,
THAT being said I have had bombs hit many yards from my tiger and disable/destroy me also.
A direct hit on a tiger from a bomb should be enough to at least disable it and /or wound the crew (good case for pilot wounds in GVs) Anything less then that should depend on the distance and size of the bomb dropped
Also I believe the M8 AP rounds are also slightly undermodeled.
While no match for a tigers armor it should at least be able to with a direct hit knock the tread off even a tiger.
-
Not to disagree since I don't know better but they had to remove the spent casing by hand? I figured they would have retained the lever mechanism used on other versions of the gun since pulling a several hundred degree piece of brass out of a breach sounds painfull at best.
-
Now wait a minute. I'm not totally convinced yet with your case.
First off I would like to see a copy of the manual.
Second those military manuals are made from data collected from firing ranges of some sort.
I was not a tread head myself when I was in the army but I have been to a couple of their firing ranges for their tanks. And as their running down the "trench" there are target's to the left and right. Which would mean they would have to include turret rotation time in the equasion to come up with the " 3 in 30 sec." And we all know how slow the tiger turret turns.
This would also mean that the whole sequence of events that should take place to fire a round would have to be included for each shot on each target.
And in you other post you say the brits tested 4 different people in their timing mesurement without aiming. But these people's lives were not on the line during the test. And they did not have the repetitive practice a actual crew would have nor the adrenaline rush factor.
So being an ex-military man myself I would have to agree with rabbidrabbit. Those manuals are more than often wrong when it comes to actual man time. The crew they usually use to collect the data off of is usually a bunch of out of date desk jockies. With no repetitive training. And they follow the manual to the " T " And in live combat hell no you don't follow the manual to the " T ". That thing would get you killed.
-
Just make the perk cost a little higher.
There are some problems with the modeling. I have seen tigers sit on a VH base and take salvo after salvo from planes and never die. I'm talking about many, many bombs with no apparent damage.
I think the impact of a close call round is next to nothing on a tiger, and maybe it should be. ??
However, a spawn camping problem is a problem. Because of the unrealistic nature of spawning, you can take a invulnerable tiger and get kill after kill. Its just crazy.
However, there is nothing better that to kill a tiger trying to get back to his base with 43 kills from spawn camping.
hehe.
Make it more costly, but the modeling should be realistic.
-
My Tiger's fold up like cheap suits...
I'd love to have one that could take 18 rounds... Heck, I'd settle for 3 or 4.
I agree the perks required are out of line with the capability.
-
As for the manual u may find it on the internet under "how to shoot" tiger gunner's manual If i could figure how to post it here I would.
Now, since we have so many exmilitary who obviously didn't use a manual and therefor never received any formal training I can understand their unwiilness to accept change. But, since the only information we have available are field tests and manuals then we have to assume the time tables giving are accurate.
-
Now, since we have so many exmilitary who obviously didn't use a manual and therefor never received any formal training I can understand their unwiilness to accept change. [/B]
Don't be an ***, it does little to forward your position.
-
Hey, I am not the one saying throw out the manual and the other data. That's the only information available that I know of. Just because someone drove an M60 tank in 1980 doesn't mean they know anything about a Tiger tank in 1944. SO, inclosing this thread for me. All I want to know is Pyro going to adjust the reload time to the information we have or is it going to be left at 4 secounds?
-
Just because you read something does not mean it must be right and the world must revolve around your desires based on your interpretation of some stuff to read.
Here is another example of the manual being wrong. At the Expert Infantry Badge test series one has 45 seconds to deploy and fire a AT4 law. One would think that it's a cumbersome and complex process but in fact it was not. I would have no problem prepping and firing the weapon within 5 seconds with a bit of practice. Am I super human? no... many others would be able to do the same with practice. Most manuals are written by folks who have little or no experience with the system in practice. In practice , trained and experienced personel often find ways to refine the process considerably. That is my point.
You might be kinda right but don't just trash folks who bring up valid points. To do so is quite sophmoric. If you find a few statements from experienced crews it would help your position. But to insist you are right when you have such limited evidence and no experience with anything of the sort is a mistake. To deride others just because you think you are right is a reflection on your character not theirs.
-
Ok I think I found the website you are referring to. And it doesn't really give you a leg to stand on.
First off it gives no copy of the manual only tips of what the manual says. Which is not hard reliable data.
Second you should quote and read a little more of that paragraph you are referring to.
" But the Tiger I was not to fire at moving targets at ranges greater than 2000 meters. The EXPECTED performance of a Tiger I gunner on a PRACTICE range was one hit out of three rounds fired within 30 seconds at a tank traveling 20 kilometers per hour across the front at ranges from 800 to 1200 meters."
So this means the target is moving not stationary. Traverse time of the turret along with aiming must be included in this time. Along with alot of unknown factors of the test.
For instance since the turret could be operated by Hydraulics or hand. Wich was used for the test ? We'll assume hydraulic. So then what rpm was the motor running at? Seens how the rpm of the motor directly affected the speed the turret swings. Was that tested on a early model Tiger or late model? It is a fact that the Tiger was constantly modified and improved on almost a monthly basis. And what was the layout of the range. Was it flat, Hilly, lots of shrubs? What. Again their lives were not on the line. And this is a EXPECTED time that the gunner is suppose to meet to qualify on the range. Like minnimal standards of sort. Which means it can be done faster.
As far as you thinking there indestructible. Well sir you have a case of "Tiger - phobia" The fact is they almost were to a point. Here are some examples
" The rule applied by the British concerning the engagement of Tigers was that 5 shermans were needed to destroy a single Tiger. But only 1 sherman was expected to return from the engagement. "
"On July 7th 1943 a single Tiger commanded by Franz Staudegger engaged a soviet group of some 50 T-34's around psyolknee. He used his entire supply of ammo destroying some 22 soviet tanks while the rest ran. "
" On Aug 8th of 1944 a single Tiger commanded by Willie Fey engaged a British tamk colum destroying 14 out of 15 shermans. And then destroyed 1 sherman later that day with his last 2 rounds of ammo."
And the list of facts goes on forever.
I agree with you that some of the modeling for the gv's seem wrong but I do not think this is one of those things.
You don't see me yelling for the snorkel kit the first 495 Tiger's had do you. Wich would enable me to drive through water 4 to 5 meters deep for 2.5 hours wich would mean I would no longer get stuck in the water when I'm not paying attention. Or the later model wading kit that would allow me to drive through 1.3 meters of water constantly. Nope I just auger and grab another 1.
Face it they are uber cause the're supposed to be hence the perk price. But their not indestructible. Killed 2 in my panzer last night.
As for you personal attack on my formal training in the military. Unless your in you'll never know. And if you are in. Your either a officer or a idiot if you think that manual followed to the "T" in combat will save your life. And think that everything it says in there is set in stone.
Your just looking to start a argument that will not help your case only hurt it.
-
ok, as for attacking folks, I started this thread because something needs to be done about the tigers in AH. Asking to adjust the reload time is a viable request considering what information is available. Madbull & Rabbidrabbit then decided they would pick my post to peices. So, who attacked who here? You guys were the ones who said based on your experience the manual would be wrong and the british data is crap. YOU brought your military experience into this not I. Now, have either one of you been in a tiger tank? Has either of you seen one fire? If not then that data and information is what we have available.
As for starting arguments and insulting people you 2 must be on the payroll then. Because you have been nothing but insulting since your 1st response. It's no wonder people tell me they don't post or even read these anymore. It's because of people like you!
Madbull, I didn't personally attack your training you let it hang out there when you posted your experience. You don't want people to comment on it then don't bring it up. The same goes to you rabbidrabbit. As, for me understand, YES, I am medically retired 18BB4. YES, I am victor and papa qualified, if you were in the Army then you should know what that is. YES, I earned my EIB in 1989 and my first CIB in 1989 also. I achieved my 2nd award in 1991 and 3rd in 1993, although the Army doesn't authorize stars on your CIB anymore. You should also know that the manual is the base for performing tasks and setting the standards. You can cut some corners and sometimes you can't. Thats not the issue here. None of us have any combat experience in a Tiger tank so, why trash the only information available. That just shows me your unwillingness to be flexible in any eviroment.
So, in closing here I will state once agian. Can it be changed or not. I think Pyro is the only one that needs to respond to that since he is the one who will make the change or not.
PS. Madbull I was not an officer and the only idiotic thing I have done is post anything here. My days in this forum are counting down thats for sure.
-
Well, historically the Tiger was a very tough opponent.
I know the T-34 we have is just about completely impotent against it. As far as the Panzer IVH vs the Tiger... the Tiger should be vulnerable frontally from <500 meters. To the side from <1000 meters, from the rear also <1000 meters.
The Tiger would pop the Panzer IV like a grape from within 2000m+ if it hit the turret (which only has 50mm of armor on the front), and probably merely kill it from ~2000 yards with a hit to the front hull.
I don't really have a problem with the Panzer IV vs Tiger matchup, a smart Panzer driver with good aim would probably be able to work himself into a position to kill the Tiger.
The T-34 vs Tiger matchup on the other hand, I find completely imbalanced, and I think we really should have 3 or 4 tungsten rounds in the T-34 just because the T-34 literally cannot kill a Tiger 1v1 (at all, from any range or angle) unless the Tiger driver is mentally retarded, AFK, or both. It take 3 hits to the same "panel" (either left front, right front, left, right, or rear) on the turret at exactly 90 degrees incidence (if you are even a smidge off, all the rounds will ricochet) to disable the turret. After the turret is disabled it takes a seemingly random (but high) number of shots to actually kill the Tiger (to the side or rear, same rules for hitting as for the turret). In my tests, this number was between 8 and 12 additional hits.
Now, our T-34 takes ~12-13 seconds to reload. So, even assuming you manage to get yourself into a perfect spot at 5 yards on an unsuspecting Tiger... it would take you ~40 seconds to kill him. The Tigers turret takes a full minute to spin 360 degrees (well, IRL anyway, no idea in game, I've never timed it). The requirement for 3 hits on the exact same panel of the turret means you will never have time to disable the turret on a Tiger before he brings it around to kill you, no matter where you are relative to the turret when you start shooting.
-
First off,
Thanks for your service Balsur.
Second, don't ever take a BBS debate seriously enough to get mad over. Your setting yourself up for disappointment. I for one, would be disappointed to see you go over something so trivial. All things in context.
My point from the beginning was that knowing what I do know and seeing what evidence you found does not make a conclusive arguement. As Madbull pointed out, it is far from conclusive and if anything shows that fire rate to most likely be nearer the outside of the standard than the average of a well tuned crew.
That being said, what is the standard that HTC wishes to use? You could make the same arguement for the PNZR too since they have the same rate of fire now. It's all up to them what they use since in real life there are a large number of factors that would affect the reload time in a tank so it would be a variable not any particular constant especially since we are argueing 3-4 seconds. One could clearly argue that a tank in motion will be much slower to load since the crew is getting bounced around for instance.
In my experiences, a well trained crew can load shells as fast as 3 seconds but as I said , thats an ideal, as in it's not likely to be any faster due to the laws of physics and you can pick any arbitrary number above that and make a somewhat credible arguement the closer to the ideal the better the arguement.
My only arguement to you is to not hang your hat of a few limited pieces of information as being the authority and denounce all others based apon your interpretations. I don't think any less of you for it since it really does not matter. Good luck and I hope to see you about.
-
Well first off let me say thank you for your service Balsur.
And rabbidrabbit is right once again. You are getting angry over something you should of known was going to be debated. You shouldn't let him nor I get under your skin so much. Espeacilly over a topic on the bbs. And yes I know I can come off as a jerk but it is not intentional. I just love to argue.
It may seem that we may be picking apart your evedince. Well I guess we are. But then again The evidence you are basing the reload time on is inconclusive.
You stated that you came across a Tiger gunner's manual. I got excited and was anxcious to read it to be honest. Only to be dissapointed.
It is a tip quoted from the Tiger gunner's manual. Not a copy of the manual itself. Like you had originally said. Bummer. I would really like to read a copy of the whole manual.
We are just trying to get you to look at it from another perspective.
Did you completely ignored the data I posted from the same web page you got your info from.
Expected performance is a minimum standard that has to be met on the range. You cannot argue that point. It is like the running time set forth by the military to run your 2 miles in a PT test. There is a set time you have to make it in. But you can do it faster.
And the cold hard fact as quoted above is that this was a moving target on a practice range. So again, at the very least the travel time of the turret must be calculated in the equasion. Even if the the range was flat level ground. And there was not a tree or shrub or hill in sight. And all the factors that I mention above and the few that I didn't were in your favor. This would still not give us a accurate reload time of a experienced Tiger crew shooting at a stationary target. Not to mention war time adrenaline.
But I will say that the 3 in 30 time is about accurate when I'm in my stationary Tiger shooting at a moving target from 800 to 1200 out. Even longer if it's a slippery little m3 or m8. By the time I get the range adjusted and then the lead time adjusted. Then get that slow turret turning. And finally to score a hit on the 3rd shot. It is probably more than accurate.
It is nothing personal. You can make quite the enemy on the field of battle. It is just to debatable with not enough information or evidince available to support it. But more than enough to debate it.
JMHO
-
I am done with this
Madbull, Rabbidrabbit.
BTW, I live in germany and have been actively seeking out any WW2 material I can find over here. I do have copies of alot of manuals and other material. I suggest the best place to look for German WW2 information when searching the web you go to .de of course you'll have the language barrier to cross. it's truely amazing what you can find in european web sights. I actually picked up a "cricket" from D-Day for about $3.00.
Also, THANK YOU! MADBULL/RABBIDRABBIT for you service!
-
Actually Tigers were often outnumbered 10 to 1 during the war. And they often won those fights, as they do in the game.
-
Actually, as I read Balsur's post I was thinking to myself that an allied tanker in '44 could have repeated Balsur's first line pretty much verbatim.
We are talking about a Perk Vehicle which really and truly was uber (give Tiger Aces of the Leibstandarte a read sometime, they really did wax 40 T-34s or Shermans in a good afternoon.) As others have pointed out, the Tigers out of control problem won't be fixed by changing the Tiger, it will be eliminated when we have the T-34/85 and Sherman Firefly or better yet Jumbo Sherman.
Sad fact is though, we'll probably get the plain old M4A1 which will introduce another "happy time" for the Tiger Experten until players realize that its even more of a garbage can than the T-34/76.
- SEAGOON
-
Originally posted by Raider179
hmmm my tiger always dies from 1 shot.
Punt
-
No doubt about it... it seems that the gv armor issue needs adressing.. good luck with that. It's currently way over simplified and inaccurate.
I think we need a few models of the Sherman because it will enable many more options in scenarios.
-
seems to me the tanks are modeled under optimal terrain conditions. Throw a 5 square mile muddy field into a tiger and t34 battle an see who has the advantage. Its hard to guage gv's in particular unless the terrain is modeled as to favor what the tank was designed for. Didnt the german get the holy hell kicked outta them at kursk? (not sure if thats the right spelling)
-
Well, in AH, even if we had "mud" or soft terrain (which we don't), the T-34 would still be helpless against the Tiger.
The Soviets got around the fact that their tanks couldn't win head to head confrontations with German tanks by going around them... there were only so many Germans to defend that gigantic frontier. Go around the strong areas, cut them off from their supplies, capture strategic areas and set up anti-tank guns, etc.
In AH, you really don't have that option, it is slightly out of the scale of the game. If you are in a T-34 attacking a field, and someone ups a Tiger to defend it, they just ended your "mission", whether you know it or not. I've played cat and mouse games with a Tiger for 20 minutes before he finally got me, but there was never any chance of him taking any damage.