Jump to content


Does this game do justice to the Tiger tank?


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

TocFanKe4 #21 Posted 14 February 2020 - 10:51 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 21410 battles
  • 24,924
  • [GIRLS]
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostCobravert, on 14 February 2020 - 03:26 PM, said:

So you're saying it's the tank, and I didn't get better... :(

 

Don't believe the tinfoil.

 

Scrambles The Death Dealer


Red Dough Boy #22 Posted 14 February 2020 - 11:11 PM

    Major

  • Supertest - Xbox One
  • 27929 battles
  • 5,753
  • [_POI_]
  • Member since:
    11-08-2013

View PostBrogueOne, on 14 February 2020 - 03:41 PM, said:

Based on my opinions on the Tiger in the contexts of this game and historical records I feel that the vehicle is given its proper dues.

Anecdotally, the Tiger was a machine to be feared when it first arrived on the battlefield. The vehicles it faced were by-and-large no match at the time. She became less feared as the allies gained more knowledge and advanced weaponry and tactics over the course of the war. Part of the reason for the King Tiger was the German reaction to the increasing vulnerability the Tiger was facing(though by no means an exclusive reason).

In game you could argue that this experience is mirrored... top tier battles simulating the Tiger’s arrival on the battlefield.... under-tiered battles signifying her eventual obsolescence(though still scrappy)... and same-tier battles being analogous to the true state of her reputation of being a fierce competitor worthy of a fight.

I’m definitely a fan of the tank and its variants in game. It’s rewarding to play it well.

 

Remember there was a time when the M3 Lee was considered good by the Germans. :D

 

View PostCORSAIR_CRAZY, on 14 February 2020 - 03:48 PM, said:

The one german tank that was actually “servicable” as in it was something a german soldier could depend on and use to fight with day in day out is completely overlooked, it was the panzer 4, the hands down best tank german had in appreciable numbers to make any significant difference, also on that list the stugs and the panzer jagers.

 

the tiger 1 (less than 2,000) and  tiger 2 (less than 500) where built in such small numbers that they barely made a dent in the barrage of tanks german was facing.  The panther numbers hit around 5,200 or so but when you factor in how incredibly undependable and unserviceable these vehicles were (so many destroyed by german troops alone).  When you take that into account you really have to wonder how many of them actually served long enough to make a contribution.  

 

YES, the big cats are gorgeous, they have big guns, and large tracks etc.. they look cool as heck.  But they are the most over hyped vehicles of WW2.  None of those three tanks honestly belong in the conversation when talking about the best tanks of WW2.  Here’s my list in order servicability, appreciable numbers, and overall effectiveness as weapons systems;

 

the T-34/85 (hands down best combination of firepower, mobility, armor, etc.),

 

the M4A3E8, considering the sherman design was only 3 years old compared to panzer 4 and T-34 which had been in development going on a decade by middle of WW2, the sherman is an honest to god marvel that being the first real attempt at making a tank, american engineers got that much stuff correct from the very get go and still innovated a bunch of stuff on top of that on the design.  

 

The Panzer 4 is number three on my list, it had the worse mechanical reliability of the three but it also featured the most accurate gun with the best optics.  So even though the turret rotation setup was complete garbage, it was still reliable enough, and a good crew could overcome it’s handicaps with the turret rotation issues.

 

The allies were fortunate that so many resources were diverted to tigers and panthers, had the  focus been on the stugs and panzer 4 production instead, I think the allies would’ve lost a lot more tanks and troops to german tanks.

 

IMHO, the big hyped german tanks were a investment that never paid off for germany.

 

Also a very good point, while the Tiger was the tank to beat the actual killers in the German armored divisions were more often than not Pz IVs or Stugs which were built on the Pz IV chassis. The Tiger by comparison made a rather small dent because while they were battle winners, they weren't war winners with the low number of tanks made compared with other countries putting out damn near hundreds of tanks a day. 


If I only had a Baneblade....

 

 

 


DrHorrible4Life #23 Posted 14 February 2020 - 11:17 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 13054 battles
  • 4,981
  • Member since:
    07-12-2013
It was my first tier 7, 6 years ago TODAY.  And I averaged blue stats in it when I was still a yellow player, so I think it's great.

killer etzi0 #24 Posted 14 February 2020 - 11:36 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 60151 battles
  • 19,323
  • [47R]
  • Member since:
    06-20-2014

View PostJARL VARYAG, on 14 February 2020 - 12:52 PM, said:

The in-game Tiger is a great tier VII tank. In the war it was facing a lot of tier V allied tanks so it still performs great against them.

 

This is what I was going to say. If you want any realism at all, game wise, one team would need to be made up of say 3-5 tigers. The other team would need to be made up of some combination of 15 Tier V Shermans or Comets, maybe throw in a Hellcat to "balance" things out.

Edited by killer etzi0, 14 February 2020 - 11:39 PM.

"When you can't make them see the light, make them feel the heat."

 

Ronald Reagan
 

 


Tempest fox3 #25 Posted 15 February 2020 - 12:47 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 21569 battles
  • 19,214
  • [JOCO]
  • Member since:
    08-22-2013

View PostCORSAIR_CRAZY, on 14 February 2020 - 09:48 PM, said:

The one german tank that was actually “servicable” as in it was something a german soldier could depend on and use to fight with day in day out is completely overlooked, it was the panzer 4, the hands down best tank german had in appreciable numbers to make any significant difference, also on that list the stugs and the panzer jagers.

 

the tiger 1 (less than 2,000) and  tiger 2 (less than 500) where built in such small numbers that they barely made a dent in the barrage of tanks german was facing.  The panther numbers hit around 5,200 or so but when you factor in how incredibly undependable and unserviceable these vehicles were (so many destroyed by german troops alone).  When you take that into account you really have to wonder how many of them actually served long enough to make a contribution.  

 

YES, the big cats are gorgeous, they have big guns, and large tracks etc.. they look cool as heck.  But they are the most over hyped vehicles of WW2.  None of those three tanks honestly belong in the conversation when talking about the best tanks of WW2.  Here’s my list in order servicability, appreciable numbers, and overall effectiveness as weapons systems;

 

the T-34/85 (hands down best combination of firepower, mobility, armor, etc.),

 

the M4A3E8, considering the sherman design was only 3 years old compared to panzer 4 and T-34 which had been in development going on a decade by middle of WW2, the sherman is an honest to god marvel that being the first real attempt at making a tank, american engineers got that much stuff correct from the very get go and still innovated a bunch of stuff on top of that on the design.  

 

The Panzer 4 is number three on my list, it had the worse mechanical reliability of the three but it also featured the most accurate gun with the best optics.  So even though the turret rotation setup was complete garbage, it was still reliable enough, and a good crew could overcome it’s handicaps with the turret rotation issues.

 

The allies were fortunate that so many resources were diverted to tigers and panthers, had the  focus been on the stugs and panzer 4 production instead, I think the allies would’ve lost a lot more tanks and troops to german tanks.

 

IMHO, the big hyped german tanks were a investment that never paid off for germany.

 

Germany would have been better off getting the PzIV to the point it could be mass produced. Upgun it to the L/70 that the Panther used and it would be able to take out everything it was likely to face. 


War is a Democracy and the enemy always gets a vote.

3 MoE's: E-25, M41 Walker Bulldog, E-50, Snakebite, E-75, T32, Tiger 131, Skoda T25, Boilermaker- In order obtained

 

Spoiler

Joco3000 #26 Posted 15 February 2020 - 01:04 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 27026 battles
  • 28,709
  • [JOCO]
  • Member since:
    08-22-2013

View PostTempest fox3, on 15 February 2020 - 12:47 AM, said:

 

Germany would have been better off getting the PzIV to the point it could be mass produced. Upgun it to the L/70 that the Panther used and it would be able to take out everything it was likely to face. 

 

I disagree. The design couldn't really be modernised much further, and was also quite expensive to build for what you got. A Panther was only marginally more expensive.

 

There was the Panzer III/IV, as well as the 9.B/W proposal, but the latter wasn't quite as good as it still used the basic Panzer IV suspension.

 

The best tank that the Germans could had built is the Panzer 38 (d), on account of its light weight and reduced resource cost. Technically could also be upgunned to a 7.5cm L/70, as it shared its turret ring with the Panzer IV (and thus Panther).


You can PM with with questions, if you wish. I don't bite.

Compilation thread of my ideas


Red Dough Boy #27 Posted 15 February 2020 - 01:09 AM

    Major

  • Supertest - Xbox One
  • 27929 battles
  • 5,753
  • [_POI_]
  • Member since:
    11-08-2013
Imagine if Germany had the near inexhaustible resources like the other countries producing scores of tanks. I don't include the UK in numbers since they made tanks but nowhere near the numbers of the US. 50,000 Panthers that actually ran well and had all of their design flaws fixed would have been a force. 

If I only had a Baneblade....

 

 

 


JAG THE GEMINI #28 Posted 15 February 2020 - 01:28 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 65810 battles
  • 2,445
  • [FAUST]
  • Member since:
    02-15-2014

Imo the tiger tank was a worthy combat vehicle even though it had flaws.

The FEAR FACTOR alone carried it's legacy beyondd the war and it was even in 1944 a formidable opponent to allied tanks.

If WoT was accurate, then it would brake down almost randomly but so would the Shermans catch fire after the first hit most of the time and sovjet tanks would be almost BLIND on the field and would brake down for good after every 50-100 km.

No tank was PERFECT :harp:


 

 

My youtube channel:https://www.youtube....w_as=subscriber


MrTrollPacMan #29 Posted 15 February 2020 - 04:44 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 19348 battles
  • 5,637
  • Member since:
    07-20-2013
The Tiger 1 in this game is far better than the actual Tiger 1 was in reality.

It has a better gun, far better mobility, and literally perfect reliability. The Tiger 1 in this game is what the Germans would’ve done even worse things for in WW2

ScottyDubs77 #30 Posted 15 February 2020 - 05:47 AM

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 17378 battles
  • 180
  • Member since:
    01-23-2016
I enjoyed the TT and the hammer, both perform well if you know what you’re doing

Ozgur72 #31 Posted 15 February 2020 - 12:02 PM

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 10812 battles
  • 26
  • Member since:
    07-27-2017
Tiger I's historical rivals were Shermans, T34 M43, T34/85, Churchill and Cromwell; all tier 5 or 6 tanks in the game. Tiger's tier is about game balance not historical justice. However the problem of the tiger is it was used as a long range sniper in the war. This makes it not an ideal brawler in wot.

CORSAIR_CRAZY #32 Posted 15 February 2020 - 03:22 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 35667 battles
  • 3,950
  • Member since:
    12-04-2015

View PostTempest fox3, on 15 February 2020 - 12:47 AM, said:

 

Germany would have been better off getting the PzIV to the point it could be mass produced. Upgun it to the L/70 that the Panther used and it would be able to take out everything it was likely to face. 

Not counting TDs based on the Panzer IV hull, Germany produced 8,600 Panzer IV gun tanks of all variants.  It was mass produced.  Germany just never thought they’d be fighting a war of attrition.  They never imagined that America would produce 50,000 tanks supplying everyone including the russians with (almost 6k) sherman tanks.  Then the russians kept afloat by American food and materials were able to duplicate that feat and produce another 70k tanks of all types.  Russia might’ve survived the German onslaught alone and eventually bounced back but half the country would’ve starved in those first couple of years without American intervention.  There is no guarantee they’d have pulled thru at all.  So if Germany would have had competent leadership they’d never have opened a war on so many fronts to begin with, they’d never would’ve done a variety of absurd nonsensical things.  

 

Take into account how much more expensive, time consuming, and required of more precious materials it was to make a panther, then multiply that again you have a tiger, then double that you have tiger 2, then quadruple that and you have Maus development program.  And there were even other projects in development like the E100.  We’re talking about folks that were already predisposed to delusions of granduer, self proclaimed “master race” etc.  it stands to reason that reality was in short supply, guderian was ignored when he asked for more panzer IVs, he hated the big cats, thought they were junk.  They went against everything that he believed about using armor correctly.

 

so how many more panzer IVs would germany have had in place of 5,200 panthers, take into account time wasted retooling factories already producing panzer IV tanks which removed even more panzer IV production.  Then 1,500 tiger 1, then 500 tiger 2, etc...  I’d venture to guess that germany could potentially have produced about 30-35k panzer IV tanks instead of under 9k.  That would’ve been three times more dependable and usable tanks german troops could have employed their superior tactics with.  Like I said, the allies caught a break when German high command began asking for the monster tanks.  And the man asking not only had no idea what the situation in the field was but was fundamentally unqualified to run a country let alone to dictate to engineers, career military professionals, and people generally properly educated and trained in their fields etc...


  

I am a farmable asset,  please don’t call me a potato


Albapfalzd3 #33 Posted 15 February 2020 - 04:00 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 23882 battles
  • 3,063
  • Member since:
    04-07-2017

View PostJAG THE GEMINI, on 15 February 2020 - 01:28 AM, said:

Imo the tiger tank was a worthy combat vehicle even though it had flaws.

The FEAR FACTOR alone carried it's legacy beyondd the war and it was even in 1944 a formidable opponent to allied tanks.

If WoT was accurate, then it would brake down almost randomly but so would the Shermans catch fire after the first hit most of the time and sovjet tanks would be almost BLIND on the field and would brake down for good after every 50-100 km.

No tank was PERFECT :harp:

 

Only the early war Shermans would catch fire easily and it wouldn't have been an engine or fuel fire either but an ammo fire. By early 44 most Shermans were coming out of the factories with Wet Stowage which greatly reduced the fire hazard making the Sherman the safest tank in the war. It is documented that it had the lowest death per loss ratio of any tank of the war produced and used in large numbers with a D/L ratio of less than 1. 

 

Roy



CORSAIR_CRAZY #34 Posted 15 February 2020 - 05:16 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 35667 battles
  • 3,950
  • Member since:
    12-04-2015

View PostAlbapfalzd3, on 15 February 2020 - 04:00 PM, said:

 

Only the early war Shermans would catch fire easily and it wouldn't have been an engine or fuel fire either but an ammo fire. By early 44 most Shermans were coming out of the factories with Wet Stowage which greatly reduced the fire hazard making the Sherman the safest tank in the war. It is documented that it had the lowest death per loss ratio of any tank of the war produced and used in large numbers with a D/L ratio of less than 1. 

 

Roy

This is all true and if I might add, crews themselves were part of the “sherman fire” issue.  Shermans could fire so quickly and expended  so much ammunition that crews would (against regulations) pack extra ammunition in any empty spaces they could find inside the tank.  Steve Zaloga has written at length about the studies done on the sherman and if memory serves me right his quotes of the pentagon investigations concluded that something like 97% of fires on Shermans were due to ammunition cook off and had nothing to do with fuel type.

 

I’ve had this discussion with the German fan boys that only repeat the talking points ad nauseam without getting educated on the subject, so many of them don’t realize that petrol is another word for gasoline and that ALL german tanks were gasoline powered too, it’s really interesting how little interest people have in the truth and how much they love and subscribe to the mythology of German superiority.   Turns out about about a 1/5 of sherman tanks (M4A2 used by Russia and USMC) used diesel  compared to none for Germany:teethhappy:

 

Like Zaloga said in his books, “you’d thing that American armored forces were soundly defeated by german armored forces hearing the revisionist historians talk about it”   He was referring to the stupidly absurd claims that it took 9 Shermans to kill a tiger and 5 Shermans to kill a panther, it’s a pile of hogwash and nazi propaganda still working decades after the catastrophic fall of the reich.

 

many more sherman tank loses came to emplaced guns and hand held weapons than to German tanks and that is basically the nature of the  situation when the attacking army advances against prepared positions.  The panther brigade attacks in arracourt and moncourt are clear evidence that when defenders are emplaced and they spot the enemy first they can inflict large loses on advancing armor with only a few tanks and anti-tank guns.  There was one sherman crew in arracourt that killed six panthers in one engagment and there are many accounts of shermans destroying panthers and tigers singlehandedly in tank vs tank combat.  

 

We rarely hear about all the times large german guns bounced off Sherman tanks saving their crews, but it happened all the time.


  

I am a farmable asset,  please don’t call me a potato


Pit Friend #35 Posted 15 February 2020 - 10:39 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 34495 battles
  • 19,175
  • [PTATO]
  • Member since:
    07-14-2014

The tier VI ones do, the Citadel, Tiger 217, and HT No. VI. They do quite well when they fight the tanks they historically faced, the tier IV and V tanks. They do okay when they face the tanks that generally evolved to face Tigers, the tier VI and VII tanks.  They fare poorly against the generally post war designs of tier VIII though. They have generally the correct mobility and guns and their armor performs as it should. 

 

The Tier VII Tigers are the optimized versions of Tigers that are upgraded beyond the historical vehicles. While their armor is the same they have upgraded engines that could (and do in the case of Tiger 131) work with them but were needed for other vehicles and/or the upgraded guns that all went to King Tigers and TDs instead of being fitted to the old Tigers. So they do in fact represent Tigers, but the very best version of them. 

 

I don’t care at all about things like them working perfectly and not breaking down in a video game. This isn’t a simulation after all. If it was many of the prototype tanks in the game wouldn’t be able to work at all or would even kill their own crewmen randomly, which is why they weren’t built or put into production in the first place. Also most tanks of the period were terribly unreliable. For example, the Soviet T-34-76 had a worse readiness rate than the “notoriously unreliable” Panther. There are even photos of those tanks driving into battle with spare transmissions strapped to their engine decks.  The Soviets just had so many of them they could easily replace broken down tanks with spares and when on the attack they could recover broken down ones so it didn’t affect them as badly. 
 


I don’t know how to act my age! I’ve never been this old before!


Turboclicker #36 Posted 16 February 2020 - 02:11 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 22110 battles
  • 34,740
  • Member since:
    08-20-2013

View PostJAG THE GEMINI, on 14 February 2020 - 08:28 PM, said:

Imo the tiger tank was a worthy combat vehicle even though it had flaws.

The FEAR FACTOR alone carried it's legacy beyondd the war and it was even in 1944 a formidable opponent to allied tanks.

If WoT was accurate, then it would brake down almost randomly but so would the Shermans catch fire after the first hit most of the time and sovjet tanks would be almost BLIND on the field and would brake down for good after every 50-100 km.

No tank was PERFECT :harp:

 

Are we still, in the year 2020, still saying that Shermans have some tendency to catch fire? 

Dollar Dog #37 Posted 16 February 2020 - 02:32 AM

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 15149 battles
  • 206
  • [12PZR]
  • Member since:
    04-13-2015
Tiger is easy to play 3 marked mine easy asf

MaximusBoonie #38 Posted 16 February 2020 - 03:09 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 66798 battles
  • 732
  • Member since:
    09-14-2013
Most of tanks in this game were built to kill the German tanks.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users