Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: THRASH99 on March 27, 2010, 03:30:04 PM
-
I really don't get how the tiger's armor really sucks now, I got hit in the hull by a panzar's round from 2400 yards out and it killed me. Then I got hit in the hull another time by a T-34/76 that was the same distance and he killed me. There is absolutely no reason why these rounds are killing me in one shot, especially when the Tiger has 110mm armor in the front hull. FIX it plz! :furious
-
The answer to your statement is very simple.
The front of the Tiger is not surrounded by a solid metal plate of armour 110mm thick. The overall armour may be 110mm, but there will be places where it is thinner and therefore weaker. If you get hit in one of those places where it's weaker, you should expect to take damage. From what you said, it's almost certain that this is what happened, and therefore you should be blaming some bad 'luck' (or skilful aiming by your opponents) instead of the modelling of the Tiger in Aces High.
-
Ok, that's great, I'm talking about the full front of the Tiger, not the weakness of it. If I get hit from 2400 yrds out from the front and die in 1 shot shot, that's stupid. Yet when I hit a Tiger in the front that far, it always bounces off no matter what kind of round it is. So it has to be something screwed up in the tiger modeling if it happens to them but not me. :headscratch:
-
Ok, that's great, I'm talking about the full front of the Tiger, not the weakness of it. If I get hit from 2400 yrds out from the front and die in 1 shot shot, that's stupid. Yet when I hit a Tiger in the front that far, it always bounces off no matter what kind of round it is. So it has to be something screwed up in the tiger modeling if it happens to them but not me. :headscratch:
?
:noid
wrongway
-
Ok, that's great, I'm talking about the full front of the Tiger, not the weakness of it. If I get hit from 2400 yrds out from the front and die in 1 shot shot, that's stupid. Yet when I hit a Tiger in the front that far, it always bounces off no matter what kind of round it is. So it has to be something screwed up in the tiger modeling if it happens to them but not me. :headscratch:
maybe they are hitting the drivers hatch where you are hitting the thickest armor... aim is very important with the rounds.
-
It is very difficult to determine where you yourself were hit by watching an incoming round. I've had several times a round appear to go past me or over me only to hear the hit and take damage/get killed a fraction of a second thereafter.
Lucky shots happen. I've managed to hit a Tiger on the turret ring from some 1500 yards away before and insta-poofed him. But it was just that -- luck on the hit location. A little higher and it most likely would have bounced off his mantlet, a little lower and it most likely would have bounced off his hull.
There is also something missing in your post, and it is any reference to elevation. Especially for a T-34/76 to hit you from anywhere near 2400 yards, he must have had an elevation advantage, which very well could mean a hit to your top armor, which is only about an inch thick.
Or maybe you are just a poor judge of distance. Without film, hard to say.
-
Ok, that's great, I'm talking about the full front of the Tiger, not the weakness of it. If I get hit from 2400 yrds out from the front and die in 1 shot shot, that's stupid. Yet when I hit a Tiger in the front that far, it always bounces off no matter what kind of round it is. So it has to be something screwed up in the tiger modeling if it happens to them but not me. :headscratch:
I look forward to your completely accurate in every way game. I hope it doesn't take you too long to design and get it into production. How could those bastages at HTC have gotten things so wrong!
-
It is very difficult to determine where you yourself were hit by watching an incoming round. I've had several times a round appear to go past me or over me only to hear the hit and take damage/get killed a fraction of a second thereafter.
Lucky shots happen. I've managed to hit a Tiger on the turret ring from some 1500 yards away before and insta-poofed him. But it was just that -- luck on the hit location. A little higher and it most likely would have bounced off his mantlet, a little lower and it most likely would have bounced off his hull.
There is also something missing in your post, and it is any reference to elevation. Especially for a T-34/76 to hit you from anywhere near 2400 yards, he must have had an elevation advantage, which very well could mean a hit to your top armor, which is only about an inch thick.
Or maybe you are just a poor judge of distance. Without film, hard to say.
On flat land it shouldn't be possible, that's why they need to add the freakin hills back in BY THE NEXT PATCH. Everytime I hit people's tiger in the front, every round, even HVAP still bounces off and doesn't do anything,( sometimes if I get lucky). 1700 yrds is close to any target, but 2400 yrds and someone kills a tiger in one shot while in a T-34/76, come on, that's bs
-
(http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/Tiger-2-2002-Picz/Armor_Scheme_Tiger2.png)
-
but 2400 yrds and someone kills a tiger in one shot while in a T-34/76, come on, that's bs
HVAP
-
HVAP is less effective than AP at ranges beyond about 1200 yds (according to HTC). Use HVAP only at close range.
I find it highly suspect a T34/76 did anything to a Tiger at 2400 yds. Try it offline. The T34/76 can only kill a Tiger at point blank range using HVAP, and then only hitting certain areas.
-
HVAP is less effective than AP at ranges beyond about 1200 yds (according to HTC). Use HVAP only at close range.
I find it highly suspect a T34/76 did anything to a Tiger at 2400 yds. Try it offline. The T34/76 can only kill a Tiger at point blank range using HVAP, and then only hitting certain areas.
I don't agree as I have done it at greater distances.
-
Then it only highlights the issues with hitting and damage in tanks in AH.
It should NOT, yet it DOES, therefore there's a problem somewhere.
-
(http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/Tiger-2-2002-Picz/Armor_Scheme_Tiger2.png)
Looks a lot more like the Tiger II to me, we have the Tiger I. Though I can't say how much the armor thickness varies, there is a distant difference in armor slope.
-
Looks a lot more like the Tiger II to me, we have the Tiger I. Though I can't say how much the armor thickness varies, there is a distant difference in armor slope.
Oops, try again.
(http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/Tiger1-2002-Picz/Armor_Scheme_Tiger1.png)
from http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/tiger1.htm
-
are u a knight :noid and HVAP is useless outside of 20 range
-
I have never seen any mention of hit cells on the tanks in this game or how the programer could compensate for long range shots when the target is just a tiny dot. If the target is close then its possible to hit different hit cells but when its just a dot you hit the dot but not individual hit cells. 2400 yards (1 1/2miles) is a rather ridiculous distance to kill a tank at anyway in real life. The commentary from some of the old timer tank crews on the history channel and elsewhere indicated that Panzer (high velocity 75mm) and Tiger (88mm) commanders liked to close within a 1000 meters before firing. Allied tankers said that the Germans would usually fire at about a half mile (800m) and that allied rounds just bounced off them at that range. Most of the allied tankers said they had to get within 400m to have a chance at all. Anyway I don't think that there are individual hit cells for all the different thicknesses of armor in this or other online games. I would advise reading as much history as possible. I recall one tiger in the African campaign that was hit over 100 times according to a crew member. They drove the tank for something like 15 miles before it finally seized up.
-
There, in fact, are different hit zones on all vehicles in the game. If you kill tanks with a Hurricane IId, you know that there are very specific areas you have to hit to kill specific vehicles. Just like in ACM, in this game kill ranges are much much longer than IRL, aiming is much easier.
-
I think that we just have to get used to the fact that no matter how "accurate" a game may be there are always going to be sacrifices made to the playability side. Having sat in a T-34/76 and peered through the optics I find it hard to beleive that you could hit much less see a tiger at 2400 meters. In a Sherman most models have a fixed power sight which required them to close to well within 500 meters to ensure a hit. There are way to many factors to take into account to get an accurate firing solution for just a game. So hits that kill at that distance while not the norm in REAL life are far more common in games.I can tell you from experience that on the GAS sight in an M1 that it is almost impposible to pick out a specific area to aim for on a target out side of about 1500 meters. It can be done but higly unlikely. Most engagements in WWII started at around 1000m but finished in a dog fight of around 300meters due to allied tanks having to close to that distance to get penetration even with AP and HVAP on tigers and Panthers and then succes was minimal unless the shots were to the flanks or rear unless able to attack from higher elevation and hitting from above where the armor on any tank is minimal at best. In the end we have to take the good with the bad and realize that it's a game and will never be the real thing...To be clear the Gas sight is the Auxillary sight coaxially mounted on the main gun in the abrams which is a fixed power scope pretty much as would be found in most vehicals of WWII era..
-
I believe it was Hans Bolter a Tiger ace with over 140 kills in a Tiger. His Tiger in a two day close range fight with British tanks. Destroyed 29 tanks in one day while taking 261 hits on his tank. Only after a track came off of his Tiger did he and his crew have to abandon the Tiger. Read Tiger aces and you will see that type of licking and keep of ticking Tiger toughness was common. Now that is a Tiger worth the perk points. I never use Tigers any more because they are near worthless except for bombs from planes. You are better off using the M-4. The armor seems about as good as the Tiger now. The turret moves faster and the gun is just as deadly. I would rather see the Hans Bolter Tiger type damage model myself.
-
I captured this 2 Weeks ago ,General Patton Memorial Museum,Chiriaco Summit,California, interesting place to see for GVers. I love the statue ,Patton walking his dog over panzer tracks. They have this Sherman tank, i was surprised how small it is, i wouldn't fit in it, looks like was hit by some small caliber rounds, i noticed also the default skin in AH looks very similar with real paint color.
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4027/4489885968_f71bd2109c_o.jpg)
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4048/4489141925_d0f3d4322f_o.jpg)
-
It is a fact that the tiger was feared by both sides, especially at long ranges do to the highly potent 88 as its main gun. Tiger commanders have spoken highly about the protection they were provided by this tank. In the game, it does seem relatively weak as a tank. It is slow in speed and turret movement. The armor hardness should be beefed up, as the sherman and t-34 were no match for the tiger at long range; no matter how good of a shot. Proof is in the pudding they say, read about it.
Bring the King Tiger IV and the HE-111 for petes sake. Spent how long developing WW1 and now only 20 people choose to fly? I say spend more time molding the WW2 arenas and provide more rides for everyone.
<S>
-
It is a fact that the tiger was feared by both sides, especially at long ranges do to the highly potent 88 as its main gun. Tiger commanders have spoken highly about the protection they were provided by this tank. In the game, it does seem relatively weak as a tank. It is slow in speed and turret movement. The armor hardness should be beefed up, as the sherman and t-34 were no match for the tiger at long range; no matter how good of a shot. Proof is in the pudding they say, read about it.
Bring the King Tiger IV and the HE-111 for petes sake. Spent how long developing WW1 and now only 20 people choose to fly? I say spend more time molding the WW2 arenas and provide more rides for everyone.
<S>
Amen to that speak, that's exactly my point there. <<S>> :salute
-
I look forward to your completely accurate in every way game. I hope it doesn't take you too long to design and get it into production. How could those bastages at HTC have gotten things so wrong!
To be fair I constantly hear people in game complaining that this or that isnt right in terms of this plane is faster than that and it shouldn't be this tank killed that tank when it shouldn't.
My experience is that everything is pretty much modelled as it should be. A plane or tank may be expected to shine in a praticular area but not in reality in every circumstance and every time. If you use the vehicle or plane enough and do a bit of research I have nearly allways found the modelled behaviour is close to our best guess of the reality. I fly with A squad and people still cry about the behaviour of their chosen ride when they die unexpectedly. The rest of the squad can 9 x out of 10 give a pausable explanation and then it is up to the individual whether they want to be "a man" about it.
I have been playing allot lately and can't think of anything which is incorrectly modelled. I have no bias one way or the other that's just how it is imho.,
-
Seems like this whole topic is just a bad case of :cry. Tigers are not invulnerable, if you don't want to
risk your perks <only reason I can think of for this thread> don't up one.
-
(http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/Tiger1-2002-Picz/Armor_Scheme_Tiger1.png)
if you spend some time trying different guns against the offline tiger, the armour seems to be modelled almost exactly as the diagram above. Ive spent alot of time shooting the t34 and tiger offline to find the softest parts to aim for and comparing different guns, and the results are very consistent. this doesnt always seem to be the case online though...
-
(http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/Tiger1-2002-Picz/Armor_Scheme_Tiger1.png)
if you spend some time trying different guns against the offline tiger, the armour seems to be modelled almost exactly as the diagram above. Ive spent alot of time shooting the t34 and tiger offline to find the softest parts to aim for and comparing different guns, and the results are very consistent. this doesnt always seem to be the case online though...
this may be due to different connectivities of the players? in 1st person shooters people live due to lag or die due to lag. could it be the same here? :headscratch: or am i way off base here?
-
It is a fact that the tiger was feared by both sides, especially at long ranges do to the highly potent 88 as its main gun. Tiger commanders have spoken highly about the protection they were provided by this tank. In the game, it does seem relatively weak as a tank. It is slow in speed and turret movement. The armor hardness should be beefed up, as the sherman and t-34 were no match for the tiger at long range; no matter how good of a shot. Proof is in the pudding they say, read about it.
Bring the King Tiger IV and the HE-111 for petes sake. Spent how long developing WW1 and now only 20 people choose to fly? I say spend more time molding the WW2 arenas and provide more rides for everyone.
<S>
ROFL. Let me start with this: I would bet dollars to donuts the Sherman kills your referring to ingame, arent M4A1,2,or3 Shermans, etc. You're being killed by a firefly, which is specifically a TANK KILLER. Why didn't we hear about Tigers being shredded like this in real life? There just plane weren't as many Fireflys as Shermans. The T-34s you hear of being pathetic? the old 76s. You're not getting killed by a 76 in game, you're getting killed by an 85. BIG difference in armament. You're consistently quoting statements of people "who were THERE man!" but you're forgetting several key facts: First, just because you were there doesn't mean you have any clue what happened. Combat is VERY chaotic and I find it hard to believe anything said by someone about something that happened in a firefight 60 years after the fact can be taken as fact itself. Eye-witnesses are not as useful as sources when looking for technical information as you may think. And you cannot compare apples to oranges like you are trying to do, intermingling T-34/76s and T-34/85s, M4A3s and Fireflys.
-
A lot of what you read is slanted and gives certain misconceptions. IRL the Tiger was deployed in a predominantly defensive role normally in somewhat open terrain or at a natural choke point. Further the Tiger was normally screened with supporting infantry and AT guns allowing the Tiger units leader tremendous flexibility with regard to timing and tactics. The Tiger suffered similar attrition when used in any offensive role or caught in transition as all tanks did. During defensive actions in the aftermath of St Vith M-10s destroyed 17 German tanks including multiple Panthers and Tigers with no losses. A single T34/85 attacked a column of tanks caught in retreat and took out a number of Tigers and Panthers in the confusion before withdrawing. There is a famous encounter between a 76mm sherman and a panther at the arc de triumph thats been written up numerous times. The Panther fired 1st and missed and the commander or gunner remembered the plaza was 900 meters (or something similar) and ranged the Panther at just under that and took him out 1st shot face to face.
The reality is that the Tiger is the premier "stand off" weapon in the game with the firefly 2nd, the moment you elect to close with the enemy in a Tiger your going against the design concept...
-
ROFL. Let me start with this: I would bet dollars to donuts the Sherman kills your referring to ingame, arent M4A1,2,or3 Shermans, etc. You're being killed by a firefly, which is specifically a TANK KILLER. Why didn't we hear about Tigers being shredded like this in real life? There just plane weren't as many Fireflys as Shermans. The T-34s you hear of being pathetic? the old 76s. You're not getting killed by a 76 in game, you're getting killed by an 85. BIG difference in armament. You're consistently quoting statements of people "who were THERE man!" but you're forgetting several key facts: First, just because you were there doesn't mean you have any clue what happened. Combat is VERY chaotic and I find it hard to believe anything said by someone about something that happened in a firefight 60 years after the fact can be taken as fact itself. Eye-witnesses are not as useful as sources when looking for technical information as you may think. And you cannot compare apples to oranges like you are trying to do, intermingling T-34/76s and T-34/85s, M4A3s and Fireflys.
serenity, look at the date you took that quote from :aok and also to add to this. it seems that tigers only get killed by the T-34/76 and /85 and the M4A3/76 and /75 if its less than 2500 yards. i have never been killed by any of these at a longer distance. Tigers even real ones were meant to stay away from the enemy and shoot them before they got close. yes in AHI there were just tigers and pnzrs but even then you still needed to stay off at a small distance in order to keep momentum up in an assault upon the enemy. also... LIKE ALWAYS, study your GV tactics and learn to use your best armor and the terrain around you to your advantage. Trees give cover for you AND the enemy...and also if you are engine on and you hear the enemy's engine still, they are in killing range on your freaking tiger!!! that means kill them before they get you!
-
serenity, look at the date you took that quote from :aok and also to add to this. it seems that tigers only get killed by the T-34/76 and /85 and the M4A3/76 and /75 if its less than 2500 yards. i have never been killed by any of these at a longer distance.
"Less than 2500 yards"
In WW2, 2500 as a rather extremely long combat distance.
Remember or little engagement today? Your M4A3 with the 75mm M3 cannon was able to penetrate my Tiger's frontal armor easily with a single shot at 487yds.
Now according to http://gva.freeweb.hu/weapons/usa_guns5.html the armor penetration of that gun firing AP is 76mm... the Tiger has 100mm of armor there.
But all Sherman's turrets are way more difficult to destroy in AH, even for a Tiger (I hit your turret 2 times at 1k without) any effect.
And this effect doesn't work against me only. When I'm facing an enemy Tiger I always aim for the turret face, because it's quite easy to penetrate...
-
... strange thing is I can fire an entire load of APs from the M4s 75mm offline at the tigers frontal armour at 100yd and get nothing at all ...
-
I'm just waiting impatiently for H2H coming back, so I can really do some extensive testing with all GVs.
-
... strange thing is I can fire an entire load of APs from the M4s 75mm offline at the tigers frontal armour at 100yd and get nothing at all ...
I can... 300yds, 75mm AP. Two hits to the turret - first one get's it smoking, second one blows it up.
-
"Less than 2500 yards"
In WW2, 2500 as a rather extremely long combat distance.
Remember or little engagement today? Your M4A3 with the 75mm M3 cannon was able to penetrate my Tiger's frontal armor easily with a single shot at 487yds.
Now according to http://gva.freeweb.hu/weapons/usa_guns5.html the armor penetration of that gun firing AP is 76mm... the Tiger has 100mm of armor there.
But all Sherman's turrets are way more difficult to destroy in AH, even for a Tiger (I hit your turret 2 times at 1k without) any effect.
And this effect doesn't work against me only. When I'm facing an enemy Tiger I always aim for the turret face, because it's quite easy to penetrate...
you're right i noticed this after that engagement. the panzer cant even shoot the tiger turret out at that range. I looked at your thread posted before this one and quoted the same engagement there. 75mm sherman shouldnt have done this at all. and the tiger needs an armor remodelling
-
Quote from: 715 on March 31, 2010, 06:52:26 PM
HVAP is less effective than AP at ranges beyond about 1200 yds (according to HTC). Use HVAP only at close range.
I find it highly suspect a T34/76 did anything to a Tiger at 2400 yds. Try it offline. The T34/76 can only kill a Tiger at point blank range using HVAP, and then only hitting certain areas.
Quote from Lyric1: I don't agree as I have done it at greater distances.
I did some offline testing again. I believe something has changed: in the past (before HVAP was added) the T34/76 AP could only kill a Tiger at point blank range hitting broadside with 9 shots (hitting the little cross on the hull). It can do it now with 3 AP shells. However, I tried to kill the offline Tiger using a T34/76 at ranges of 1200 and 2800 yds at a broadside angle of 90 degrees (ie side on). I rarely got any penetrations at either range (virtually everything bounced off) and could not kill the Tiger with even the entire AP load (or HVAP in addition). I hit all over the Tiger, including lobing shots down onto the turret top and engine compartment top from 2800, as well as hitting the junction between the turret and hull. Never killed it. Maybe I don't know "where to hit" but then I hit virtually everywhere. I still find it doubtful that a T34/76 killed an undamaged Tiger at 2400. Perhaps a lucky shot at very long distances where the shell virtually drops vertically down onto the turret or hull top might do it.
-
you're right i noticed this after that engagement. the panzer cant even shoot the tiger turret out at that range. I looked at your thread posted before this one and quoted the same engagement there. 75mm sherman shouldnt have done this at all. and the tiger needs an armor remodelling
There is a thread from Moot where he, some others and I discuss the ranges on which tanks can seemingly kill in here. I posted some data that clearly showed that the Firefly was capable of kills at ranges that would have been impossible in real life.
ack-ack
-
Remember or little engagement today? Your M4A3 with the 75mm M3 cannon was able to penetrate my Tiger's frontal armor easily with a single shot at 487yds.
Now according to http://gva.freeweb.hu/weapons/usa_guns5.html the armor penetration of that gun firing AP is 76mm... the Tiger has 100mm of armor there.
In the past there used to be a small gap right under the mantlet where the turret ring was exposed. An AP hit here always seemed to pop the turret. Lucky shot perhaps?
Regardless, I believe the Tiger used to be too tough (12 shots from the IV point blank into the rear with NADA result while the tiger's turret s l o w l y turned around and killed me was seriously annoying), and perhaps they over-corrected when they re-did the damage components for it.
But all Sherman's turrets are way more difficult to destroy in AH, even for a Tiger (I hit your turret 2 times at 1k without) any effect.
The mantlet on the Sherman is its thickest armor at 89mm. Granted, it has almost no slope, but it is substantially thicker than the front hull's 51mm. The Sherman's turret is also much thicker all around than a PzkwIV's turret. I still wonder if some of the perception of the toughness of the Sherman's turret is due to the conditioning many of us had with the IV's soft turret relative to its hull?
-
In the past there used to be a small gap right under the mantlet where the turret ring was exposed. An AP hit here always seemed to pop the turret. Lucky shot perhaps?
Quite possible.
However, I can penetrate the Tiger's turret frontal armor flat on the face with the Sherman 75mm. Not every shot, but I was getting the necessary 2 penetrating hit on about every 10 shots.
Which is perfectly in line with my AH combat experiences, both fighting in as well as against the Tiger. Aim for turret front!
I always felt the Firefly was the only tank benefitting from a hull down position, and the T-35/85 has an even weaker turret in AH than any other tank...
-
. . . and the T-35/85 has an even weaker turret in AH than any other tank...
I agree that this one seems off.
-
Did further offline testing. I can reliably pentrate the Tiger's turret frontal armor at 500yards with the M4 75mm M3 gun. First penetration disables turret, one or two additional and the Tiger is no more. It takes me between 2-15 shots on a fresh Tiger, but I can reproduce it all the time.
According to all data, tables, descriptions I have read so far, this should not be possible? :headscratch:
(http://img203.imageshack.us/img203/8482/clipboard01ny.jpg)
With the 76mm cannon, I was repeatedly able to pentetrate & disable & kill Tiger frontal armor, hull & turret, at 1.2k.
(http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/8434/tigerpenetrm476hull.jpg)
M4(76) round penetrating the driver's front plate at 1.2k yards, triggering explosion. The turret is smoking from an earlier penetrating hit at same range.
-
However, I can penetrate the Tiger's turret frontal armor flat on the face with the Sherman 75mm. Not every shot, but I was getting the necessary 2 penetrating hit on about every 10 shots.
Actually, you can't get a penetration on the frontal flat armor of the Tiger with the Sherman 75mm. In testing this out though I did duplicate your experience and what is actually happening is that the Sherman sits high enough that it can actually put a round onto the top armor of the Tiger superstructure. The strike angle is so flat that it shouldn't matter and the round should ricochet off but that wasn't happening and a penetration was occurring. On further investigation it turns out that penetration angles were not being calculated beyond 70 degrees(with 0 degrees being straight on) so those hits coming into the roof were acting like they were made at 70 degrees. Still a very high angle but not quite enough to prevent a penetration of the thin top armor. That will be changed in the next patch.
-
Actually, you can't get a penetration on the frontal flat armor of the Tiger with the Sherman 75mm. In testing this out though I did duplicate your experience and what is actually happening is that the Sherman sits high enough that it can actually put a round onto the top armor of the Tiger superstructure. The strike angle is so flat that it shouldn't matter and the round should ricochet off but that wasn't happening and a penetration was occurring. On further investigation it turns out that penetration angles were not being calculated beyond 70 degrees(with 0 degrees being straight on) so those hits coming into the roof were acting like they were made at 70 degrees. Still a very high angle but not quite enough to prevent a penetration of the thin top armor. That will be changed in the next patch.
thank you pyro <S>
-
Actually, you can't get a penetration on the frontal flat armor of the Tiger with the Sherman 75mm. In testing this out though I did duplicate your experience and what is actually happening is that the Sherman sits high enough that it can actually put a round onto the top armor of the Tiger superstructure. The strike angle is so flat that it shouldn't matter and the round should ricochet off but that wasn't happening and a penetration was occurring. On further investigation it turns out that penetration angles were not being calculated beyond 70 degrees(with 0 degrees being straight on) so those hits coming into the roof were acting like they were made at 70 degrees. Still a very high angle but not quite enough to prevent a penetration of the thin top armor. That will be changed in the next patch.
Thank you very much sir.
-
That will be changed in the next patch.
Thank you. :aok
Will be back to the proving ground after next patch :)
-
Have you tried any online testing in the DA's Tanktown?
-
Have you tried any online testing in the DA's Tanktown?
Yes I have, me and a squaddie went to the DA and did a match-up of a T-34/76 vs Tiger, he killed me in one shot from 3000 out. now that this new patch has come in, the tiger is back the way is was before, armor still screwed up a bit.
-
I really don't get how the tiger's armor really sucks now, I got hit in the hull by a panzar's round from 2400 yards out and it killed me. Then I got hit in the hull another time by a T-34/76 that was the same distance and he killed me. There is absolutely no reason why these rounds are killing me in one shot, especially when the Tiger has 110mm armor in the front hull. FIX it plz! :furious
There are weak spots on the armor (although you CAN'T get a hit that doesn't ricochet with the M4A3(75) so don't both trying to perk farm by hunting tigers) that can give kills at 1500-1700yds out, but I've never heard of a tiger being oneshot killed at 2400yds by anything but a firefly or another tiger.
And I believe the TURRET has 110mm armor with the hull having 100mm armor, but I could be wrong. And something that may help is to put your tank at a 23degree angle to your opponent (creates a slope to the armor, adding strength and increasing the likelyhood of ricochets).
-
Tigers & Pzrs had the same penetration up to 600m. This was proven by Russian tests.
Myself I would like to see gv battles as they should be. Fought around the 1000 range. Not this long range bs stuff from 3 or 4k or more out which is ridiculous anyway.
Tigers basically were the only long range tanks & could kill at 2000. Therefore the kill range for tigers should be about this distance & for for all other tanks set at a their distance.
It is more of a challenge to hunt a M4 with a pzr & close the distance to get a kill at 400/600 than to stand off & fire from 3k+ away.
With the hills added back in there is no reason why gv battles cannot be fought within the ranges that reflect the actual gv battles.
It becomes more of a tactical & stratergy process & should improve game play IMO.
-
Not true, now we just have an increased percentage of people spending the time to climb hills. They then procede to exchange fire with the tanks on the next hill over. The only thing thats changed is the location of the fights, and the tanks used (fireflys no longer make up 40% of GV's used in long range fights. The numbers are now more like 45% M4A3(76)W's, 35% T-34/85's, and 10% Tigers).
For those those that are capable of using cover, terrain, and movment, the fights have become much more fun. The ONE thing that irks me is that I can no longer compete with Dr7 (can't get close enough to kill his tiger before I explode, even with the hills, and can't beat him in a long range fight), so I now have to rely on the flyboys to take care of him.
-
i already play to the new sherman (75) tactical advantage when flanking an nme cause it seems stronger when shooting people from behind and the side
-
Oh yes, I love the crys of anger when I take out someones Firefly with my M4A3(75)