slysniper Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 Does it sound like a good match up. Well I set up a little test scenario to see how balenced the two tanks were to each other in a duel. So one tank head to head at 1000 meters, ran 5 battles in the test map and watched the action. Each crew is Vet. with a high morale At first it seemed that it was pretty even, but it appears the better tank in game terms at that range is the Panther. My results was 14 wins To the Panther vs 6 for the Tiger. Now I know some math grog will get on here and tell me I need to run hundreds of test to get a result that means anything. But out of the 4 runnings I did, The panthers had 60/40 win ratio minimum and the one run was 100/0. So I feel safe in saying it has at least a 60% chance of winning the duel. Sounds like the clear winner to me. What do you think? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 Not surprising, considering that Panther's frontal aspect is better protected due to the sloped armour and its gun has a higher velocity. Tiger's main strengths are all-around good protection, not just front, and bigger HE shell. OTOH Panther is faster. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZPB II Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 Long before the game was released, I said to my friend that it's cool that we'll be able to do Axis vs. Axis matchups. My prediction was that the Panther will stomp the Tiger in pure tank vs. tank dueling due to what Sergei mentioned, slope and MV. The Tiger would fare better in an environment that presents plentiful light AT threats such as infantry AT and ATGs from multiple directions due to it's armor distribution and better HE. I still haven't gotten around to battling Axis vs. Axis, but it was fun reading that my prediction might have been to the right direction... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 In real life, of course, a tiger would eat a panther alive. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hister Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 In real life, of course, a tiger would eat a panther alive.You sure about that? I'll bring my panther and if you have a tiger the duel is on - where you at? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 With animals it's always relative - a panther would catch a maus easily, but the maus would scare off an elefant which in turn could trample the panther. The thousand dollar question is, which one would have won the duel, Iosif Stalin or Churchill? Grant or Lee? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryB Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 Basically, in a standoff battle at long range with both tanks facing each other you are setting it up so that the Panther has all the advantage. The Panther's gun has better armor penetration and it's front armor is harder to penetrate than the Tiger's. The Panther's weakness is from the side and rear; I've killed one with a Stewart from the side. The Tiger's armor protection from the side and rear is far superior to the Panther's, and as has been said earlier, it's gun does greater High Explosive damage. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thejetset Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 Panthers were about a third of the cost to manufacture as compared to a Tiger. They were also a lot faster to manufacture. Panthers also had better frontal armor (but were more vulnerable on the sides, rear etc ...) I'm glad that Germany didn't just focus on building more Panthers instead of focusing resources on Tiger I's, II's and JagdTigers ... It wouldn't have been a game changer ... but it would have probably resulted in more Allied casualties on both the Eastern and Western fronts ... (I know I'm speculating ... but would you rather have 3 Tiger I's, 1 Tiger II or 8-9 Panthers????) .. I'll take the 8-9 Panthers any day. But the results you are getting from straight-forward Frontal Shot to Frontal Shot battles between the Tiger 1 and Panther are probably very correct. Also, the Panther was a lot lighter and more maneuverable than the Tiger tanks due to the reduced side armor and the smaller caliber gun. (but the 75mm Panther gun had a higher velocity than the Tiger 88mm rounds ... Therefore, the AT rounds had more penetrating power ... but the 88mm HE rounds were hell on soft targets) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heliodorus Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 You only need to run 30 tests to get a probabilistic normal distribution in a sample size. Not hundreds. Didn't the panther's gun have greater muzzle velocity over longer ranges? Even though it was a 75mm versus an 88mm, it was a better tank-killing round, I thought. Also, the Panther's turret armor was not materially better than the Tiger 1's turret armor, and it had an infamous shot-trap at the mantle that sent rounds ricocheting downward and through the deck-armor into the crew compartment. However, in a hull down position, the Panther turret was a good bit smaller than the Tiger 1's. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuirassier Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 With animals it's always relative - a panther would catch a maus easily, but the maus would scare off an elefant which in turn could trample the panther. The thousand dollar question is, which one would have won the duel, Iosif Stalin or Churchill? Grant or Lee? Kliment Voroshilov could take them all on. At the same time. Still pondering how a firefly would fare... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZPB II Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 Bob Semple. 'nuff said. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slysniper Posted January 29, 2012 Author Share Posted January 29, 2012 Personnally, I would take the panther any day. As for comments about the Tiger side and rear armor advantage, very true, but most any tanker knows that that is a bad situation for them anyway, the whole point is to not get yourself in that situation. keep the front to the enemy. The Tiger is one of very few tanks that can take a hit from the side. But is it trully worth it with the speed it lost in having all that armor. (Maybe so - since they were always so outnumbered. Also wanted to mention that when I was running the test, there was a fair amounts of misses before the tanks found their range. I really do like the new game as to how it works out the aiming and hits on the tanks. It is much more realistic to me than the old system. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killkess Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 What should be taken into account is that currently the tac-ai of CMBN doesnt use any kind of "angling" the vehicle. While the Tigerfibel highly values the use of "Mahlzeiten", the Pantherfibel doesnt and is much more focused on pure frontal protection. The reason is that the Tiger has such strong side armor that its not of a great threat to present it to the enemy at a low angle. On the opposit the Panther shouldnt try to expose its flanks at all. This would greatly increase the hull protection of the tiger. The Tigerfibel states an armor protection of up to 18cm for the frontal "Mahlzeiten"-positons. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Childress Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 W While the Tigerfibel highly values the use of "Mahlzeiten", the Pantherfibel doesnt and is much more focused on pure frontal protection. The Tigerfibel seems to value cheesecake if this reprint available on eBay is any indication: http://www.ebay.com/itm/WWII-German-Tiger-Tank-Manual-Tigerfibel-/390379132010?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5ae468d46a#ht_6455wt_757 'A top-quality reprint of the basic instruction manual issued to Tiger tank crews. The manual covers basic maintenance, , how to prevent engine fires, engine warm-up, removing road wheels, ammunition, wiring schematics for the intercom and much more. Some panzer tactics are covered as well. In order to appeal to the increasingly younger recruits a buxom babe is included in many of the instructions, which would help keep the recruit’s attention. This is a great item for the armor enthusiast. These are stock photos. This German language manual reprint measures 9.25" x 6.5" with 44 pages. (4525)' 9.99 plus 3.20 shipping. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killkess Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 What´s your point? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeeDog Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 So-called "Mahlzeit" might have well been a good tactic against 76.2mm and 85mm rounds on the Russian front, and 75mm and 76mm ETO. But I'm not sure whether it would do much good in a hypothetical engagement of a Tiger I vs. a 75mm/L70. Because they were originally designed to defeat the highly sloped armor of the T-34, the 75mm/L70 AP projectiles generally did a very good job of "grabbing" and penetrating sloped plate. Also, while turning the hull at an angle does increase the effective slope of the frontal plate, it also substantially increases the overall silhouette, meaning the Tiger presents a larger target. And while turning to Mahlzeit might give the Tiger's front armor some chance of deflecting a 75mm/L70, it also brings in the possibility of side hits, where the 75m/L70 will penetrate fairly easily, even at high angles. And, of course, it does nothing for turret hits. And the Tiger turret is quite a large target. It's hard to say, because it's not like there are a lot of German gun vs. German armor tests out there to use as benchmarks. In contrast, there's all sorts of real world test data on what happens when various contemporary allied ordnance hits a Tiger frontal plate. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slysniper Posted January 29, 2012 Author Share Posted January 29, 2012 What should be taken into account is that currently the tac-ai of CMBN doesnt use any kind of "angling" the vehicle. While the Tigerfibel highly values the use of "Mahlzeiten", the Pantherfibel doesnt and is much more focused on pure frontal protection. The reason is that the Tiger has such strong side armor that its not of a great threat to present it to the enemy at a low angle. On the opposit the Panther shouldnt try to expose its flanks at all. This would greatly increase the hull protection of the tiger. The Tigerfibel states an armor protection of up to 18cm for the frontal "Mahlzeiten"-positons. This is a good point, It might swing the odds some. I can run the test with the Tigers at the angle and with covered arcs set and see what happens, it might affect it for awhile, I can try to maintain it also with commands during the test. It might help get a few deflections. That was one thing for sure that was not happening before other than for the panthers once in awhile. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 Just to clarify, are you saying the AI doesn't take into effect the increased protection being at an angle to incoming fire gives? Or are you saying that the AI doesn't angle its tanks properly to provide that extra protection? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slysniper Posted January 29, 2012 Author Share Posted January 29, 2012 Ok, I just ran the test twice, I have to go, but that was interesting. If I set the tank at the angle, the AI generally will leave it alone. Good thing I found for some reason facing to the left seems to be better than right. Before I give the results I want to mention a few things. First I had two tank battles that lasted 15 minutes with no clear winner and basically out of ammo. Second, the amount of rounds bouncing of tigers increased a ton Third, Tigers started becoming immobilized much more often (not a good thing) Results. (Panzers still ruled) first test 3 tigers killed/ no panthers (two somewhat undesided. but one tiger was down to one crew man and really could do nothing second test 3 tigers killed / no panthers (but there was a chance that one battle looked to be going the Tigers way. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vark Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 Also wanted to mention that when I was running the test, there was a fair amounts of misses before the tanks found their range. I really do like the new game as to how it works out the aiming and hits on the tanks. It is much more realistic to me than the old system. At a 1000m with both guns having virtually flat trajectories, excellent optics with integrated range finders and relatively large target areas to aim at, I would have expected first round hits most of the time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 It's a dumb tactic in practise because it means that you're exposing your flank to enemy units to that side. You only ever are facing lone enemy tanks in theory. A more typical scenario for a German commander would be enemy tanks to your front, left and right. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wokelly Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 The panther is interesting in that it does well against the Tiger but in reality the Tiger proved more formidable against Allied tanks. Panther works well in a High Velocity environment but in the medium velocity environment it found itself against most allied tanks the front armor proved no better than the Tigers, and its side armor proved a big Achilles heel. The British studied some 60 KOed panthers in Normandy, concluded it took roughly 2.5 hits to kill one. The Tiger in contrast (though the samle size of 5 was small) took 4.1 hits to kill. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killkess Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 So-called "Mahlzeit" might have well been a good tactic against 76.2mm and 85mm rounds on the Russian front, and 75mm and 76mm ETO. But I'm not sure whether it would do much good in a hypothetical engagement of a Tiger I vs. a 75mm/L70. Geometry is simply a matter of fact: As the "Mahlzeit" is at 10.30 and 13.30 the angle is 45 degrees. Los thickness at 45° for the frontal armor is about 140mm. Side armor is 80mm at 45° which means about 113mm LOS. Penetration of the 75mm/L70 with APCBC at 500 meters is somewhere near 160mm at 0°, 123mm at 30° and 61mm at 60°. So judging a value for 45° you might end up somwhere at 110-100mm. This could well mean that an angled Tiger is a quit hard nut to crack. And this without any slope effect! Looking for slope effects, at a T/D-ratio of about 1 you will have a slope effect at 45° of circa 1,75. This means that the front gives a protection of 175mm and the side of about 140mm at 0°. Thanksfully the Pantherfibel gives a german judgement of slope effect: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sublime Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 a lot off topic, but i really hope someone makes a US vs Brit scenario onces the CW mod is out =D 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slysniper Posted January 30, 2012 Author Share Posted January 30, 2012 At a 1000m with both guns having virtually flat trajectories, excellent optics with integrated range finders and relatively large target areas to aim at, I would have expected first round hits most of the time. Dont say that, too many think the hits are to common now in the game, but they are going off games from that past, which many I felt had too many misses. now I think this model is pretty good, I like the fact now that when they have the range, you do not see more misses. In CMX1 it would still give misses after hits "that made no sence to me" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.