Panther or Tiger

[winkelried]

OTOH, the Firefly which was a lot cheaper to build also scored outstanding victories, like the CAN. firefly on june 7 which knocked out 6 panthers with 7 shots breaking the back of the German counterattack. Wittman himself was most likely killed by a CAN. Firefly during TOTALIZE.

Yes the firefly is quite good machine - when used with care it can achieve fabulous things. In the Wittmann scenario you get a good feeling for its strengths and weaknesses.

[baron Jacquinot]

Yes the firefly is quite good machine - when used with care it can achieve fabulous things. In the Wittmann scenario you get a good feeling for its strengths and weaknesses.

Damn I replay this scenario 100 times to win with SS.

[winkelried]

Damn I replay this scenario 100 times to win with SS.

And did you win?

[baron Jacquinot]

And did you win?

Yes I won and with heavy loses for Allies, on veteran level.

[baron Jacquinot]

I won almost all battles for my favorite SS troops, except for one.

[Sublime]

Ah but playing it over and over gives you an advantage Wittman and the SS didn't have.

You'd be be better off playing a human with no knowledge of their forces. Then if they're a good player, you can brag. =)

Also Joch - Villers was an outlier, and everything did go right for the Tiger. BUT it's a good example of what a Tiger with a good crew could do, and not in a situation that played to the Tigers inherent strengths such as on the Steppe. It was a close range battle, and Wittman chose the perfect time to withdraw. Really more than proving a point for the Tiger, Villers more shows what an experienced crew can do against green troops with surprise and a little luck.

I completely agree with you though, the Shermans were a way better investment. If you factor in things besides pure combat power, I'd much rather be in command of mixed Sherman platoons (fireflies and 75s) for reliability, speed, and mixture of AT/infantry killing power. Plus they'd cost a lot less than a Tiger platoon. In the game, once you become good with the shermans you can routinely defeat Tigers, and other cats. Usually you can have at least 2 shermans on each cat, and the trick is when near enemy armor to do what Sgt Schultz calls the 'dancing bear'. You fire, or pop smoke, reverse, reposition, repeat. over and over. Try to get flank shots, and be very careful with move orders, you dont want to be on a move other than hunt in sight of the enemy. A 17lber round will reliably kill everything the Germans have in game, except Jagdpanthers and KTs. Even then, you can usually kill them with a few rounds. It's all about getting that first stationary shot.

[WinOrLose]

So going back to my original question. Using Tigers in CMBN is a bit risky as.

A) there is a bug with the armour(?)

the ranges are so close that there would be a guaranteed penetration by a 76 and a pretty good chance by others.

[RT North Dakota]

When I was doing some work on Future AFV requirements, I asked the US Army to send me the German Army's Future Armour requirement of 1950.

The big take aways were that they considered the Tigers an utter failure and the Panther a complete mess. 9,000kgs over weight for a start, and far too complicated. They concluded they should have had a 30-35 tonne tank with a 75 or 76mm gun. By 1950, they want a 100mm gun.

Most operational analysts consider late German WW2 armour a bit of joke. The exceptions are things like the JgdPz 38(T) and the upgraded Pz IVs.

[siffo998]

So going back to my original question. Using Tigers in CMBN is a bit risky as.

A) there is a bug with the armour(?)

the ranges are so close that there would be a guaranteed penetration by a 76 and a pretty good chance by others.

I`ve just found an russian article at the lonesentry site about the vulnerability of tiger tank.

http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/ttt_tigervulnerability/index.html

i think it pretty clearly shows how dangerous this beasts were (given that a own article about how to destroy them was published) but on the other side it shows that the tiger definitely had weak points. for example the vision slits, tracks and the lower side armor. i think this is correctly modeled ingame. the armor modelling ingame seems also to be fine.

my guess is that most players simply use the tiger tank in a very wrong way:

1. the big strengh of the tiger is its long range killing ability (1000m+). at short ranges you will face the same problems as with other german cats: the enemy tank TacAI will use HE shells against your tank. this will damage the tigers internal systems (optics etc) even without a penetration. a unexperienced crew will also give up the position and retreat after such hits. also a lucky weapon hit will always take your tank out of action (look at the article, the russians were trained to shoot at the tiger gun).

2. a very often seen mistake is to use the tiger in a very bold way (thinking: "this beast can be defeated by nothing"). Solution: treat the tiger with care like you would do with a pzIV. Protect your flanks! Never attack without secured flanks! Only exception ingame is when you are running out of time and try to turn the tide because ingame you will not be punished on a operational level when losing a whole tiger platoon.

3. the biggest mistake in my opinion is to use a attacking tiger (or tank in general) alone and without the rest of the platoon. this will lead to a big expensive burning steel hull.

by the way there is no such thing as a guaranteed penetration of the US 76mm against a tiger at under 500m. it also depends on the angling of the tanks armor plate in the moment of impact. for example a 30° angled frontal tiger hull will even bounce off a firefly shell. i`ve even seen a stugIII "pig snout mantled" bounce of a sherman 76mm AP shell at 200m distance.

the crucial range at when the tiger becomes vulnerable against the US 76mm is around 700m. if you want to keep your tiger pretty safe keep him at ranges of 700m+.

[Vanir Ausf B]

So going back to my original question. Using Tigers in CMBN is a bit risky as.

A) there is a bug with the armour(?)

Possibly. I think something is amiss, but it appears that there is not universal agreement with that. It is being looked into.

the ranges are so close that there would be a guaranteed penetration by a 76 and a pretty good chance by others.

Um, no. Tigers are highly resistant to US and UK 75mm except at very close ranges i.e. 300m or less or if you can get a lucky hit on the side lower hull. US 76mm will kill it reliably except on the front turret where it usually will bounce, at least at 500m and longer, even with the possible bug. OTOH UK 17 pdr and usually 6 pdr will make mincemeat of them.

[RT North Dakota]

Um, no. Tigers are highly resistant to US and UK 75mm except at very close ranges i.e. 300m or less or if you can get a lucky hit on the side lower hull. US 76mm will kill it reliably except on the front turret where it usually will bounce, at least at 500m and longer, even with the possible bug. OTOH UK 17 pdr and usually 6 pdr will make mincemeat of them.

Generally concur. I am not seeing much of any armour modelling bugs in the game. Fact is you can only trust the data done from actual instrumented firing trials or derived from armour analysis software. I don't know what source data the game uses, or how the armour is modelled but it's certainly fit for purpose.

Most data I see published in a lot of the accepted books seems based on some pretty hokey sources corrupted by veterans memories of events that might not actually have taken place.

[siffo998]

Possibly. I OTOH UK 17 pdr and usually 6 pdr will make mincemeat of them.

the tiger is pretty safe against a 6pdr at ranges over 500-700m (just did a quick test). at least when the 6pdr is not using APDS shells.

the only reliable cannon to take out a tiger at ranges over 700m is the 17 pdr.

[Vanir Ausf B]

when the 6pdr is not using APDS shells.

But you are generally correct that US 76mm starts to lose its ability to penetrate the front hull around 700-750m. Unless it's using HVAP ammo

[MikeyD]

I recall doing one of the larger battles in the game recently. I found myself confronted by Tiger Is and made a special effort to protect and maneuver my few 6 pounder Churchills into prime position. 6 pdr with APDS can do things 75mm could never hope to do. 75mm is better at pretty much everything else, but 6 pounders are excellent hole-punchers. I recall someone called them the poor man's 17 pounder.

Oh, and about HVAP and APDS above 750m. Lets not forget the rounds were kind of erratic. They either flew true or they really didn't.There were suggestions/advice/orders a the time to limit special round ranges to 500m in the hope of actually hitting the target.

[siffo998]

But you are generally correct that US 76mm starts to lose its ability to penetrate the front hull around 700-750m. Unless it's using HVAP ammo

of course you are right!

[winkelried]

So going back to my original question. Using Tigers in CMBN is a bit risky as.

A) there is a bug with the armour(?)

Not sure about this. Even the Germans were aware of the vulnerabilities of the Tiger I.

Chart for the Sherman 75 mm - no penetration from the front, but danger up to 800m from the side and the back.

With the T-34 there was even a vulnerability from the front below 500 meters - they probably refer to the T-34/76 - although I am not sure about this.

On pages 84 to 86 of the Tigerfibel the Germans refer to the Mahlzeiten-Position which means that the Tiger commander tried to position the Tiger in a duel with one of the front corners showing towards the enemy. This meant that the LOS armor increased from approx 80mm to approx 130mm, but would expose at least one side with the more vulnerable wheels and tracks. IMHO this shows also that they knew or expected some stronger guns on the other side.

The Tigerfibel says : "If you turn your Tiger from 12o'clock to 1o'clock your armour increases by 2cm and your adversary has to close in by 1000m"

the ranges are so close that there would be a guaranteed penetration by a 76 and a pretty good chance by others.

Best is to get a flanking shot. Was also like this in CMx1 - i remember a QB where I killed 3 Tiger IIs in a row with a nice flanking position with a 76 Sherman - three times shoot and scoot at a distance of 700+m if I remember well. Same for the Tiger I.

In a QB not long ago my adversary had placed a Tiger in a perfect overlooking position. I called 25pdr artillery and immobilized the beast. The rest was exploitation of the terrain, so that the guy couldn't get a shot - and some smoke in situations where I feared a LOS on some of my units. In addition I tried to have fast lateral movements with short visibility times (e.g. sprinting from one cover to the next) - you have to know that it takes the Tiger I 60 seconds to turn the turret by 360 degrees.

[winkelried]

I recall doing one of the larger battles in the game recently. I found myself confronted by Tiger Is and made a special effort to protect and maneuver my few 6 pounder Churchills into prime position. 6 pdr with APDS can do things 75mm could never hope to do. 75mm is better at pretty much everything else, but 6 pounders are excellent hole-punchers. I recall someone called them the poor man's 17 pounder.

Fully agree to this. When on the defensive in a QB I like to get 57mm/6pdrs and place the in pairs (!!) to cover a certain area. Open fire at close distances and they wreak havoc - even against panthers. There is one scenario with Polish troops - something around Falaise where this worked perfectly (no Tiger's though, but Panthers).

[Vanir Ausf B]

Oh, and about HVAP and APDS above 750m. Lets not forget the rounds were kind of erratic. They either flew true or they really didn't.There were suggestions/advice/orders a the time to limit special round ranges to 500m in the hope of actually hitting the target.

That is true of APDS, but it is not modeled in the game, unfortunately. There was a lengthy thread on that subject a while back that C3K wanted us to keep alive but we have failed to do.

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?p=1347939&highlight=apds#post1347939

I have never read anything about erratic HVAP.

[Vanir Ausf B]

With the T-34 there was even a vulnerability from the front below 500 meters - they probably refer to the T-34/76 - although I am not sure about this.

Probably T-34/85

[winkelried]

Probably T-34/85

Interesting graph - but the rest of the Tigerfibel only speaks about the T34/76. And on page 86 explicitly mentions the T34/76 to be capable of penetrating a Tiger frontally at 500 meters ... probably just a safety margin?

[siffo998]

Interesting graph - but the rest of the Tigerfibel only speaks about the T34/76. And on page 86 explicitly mentions the T34/76 to be capable of penetrating a Tiger frontally at 500 meters ... probably just a safety margin?

well i`ve just found the tigerfibel online here:

http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/TIGER-1%20FILES/tigerfibel.pdf

and it seems you are right:

according to the Tigerfibel the T34 7,62 cm is more dangerous to the tiger than the sherman 75mm. ( like you said look at page 86). according the text on this page:

the T34 7,62 cm

penetrates the tiger up until 500m from the front

up until 1500m from the side.

also keep in mind that this tigerfibel seems to refer to the year 43 (there was no 85mm version in the year 43).

seems like those info in the tigerfibel is a mistake because every other source i`ve seen says that the t34 76mm is less potent than the sherman 75mm. maybe they used standard APC ammo for the US 75mm and APDS ammo for the T34 (must be BR-350p shells or something.

on this site http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/tiger1.htm is a statistic taken from JENTZ "Germanys Tiger tank". according to this, the T34 85mm is able to penetrate the Tigers Front Turret Hull (not the mantlet) up until 500m (shell fired at 30° angle) and up until 1600m the side turret (30°). so the penetration capability is even bigger at 0°.

well if that is not confusing than i dont know.

[Lee_Vincent]

"according to the Tigerfibel the T34 7,62 cm is more dangerous to the tiger than the sherman 75mm. ( like you said look at page 86). according the text on this page:

the T34 7,62 cm

penetrates the tiger up until 500m from the front

up until 1500m from the side."

No way does this seem correct.

[Michael Emrys]

Oh, and about HVAP and APDS above 750m. Lets not forget the rounds were kind of erratic. They either flew true or they really didn't.There were suggestions/advice/orders a the time to limit special round ranges to 500m in the hope of actually hitting the target.

I know about the APDS, but what was the problem with the HVAP?

Michael

[RT North Dakota]

Interesting graph - but the rest of the Tigerfibel only speaks about the T34/76. And on page 86 explicitly mentions the T34/76 to be capable of penetrating a Tiger frontally at 500 meters ... probably just a safety margin?

Not likely based on the 76mm ammunition I am aware of. The 85mm APCR rounds will perforate the Tiger turret front aspect at 750, and the hull at about 1,100m.

[baron Jacquinot]

Ah but playing it over and over gives you an advantage Wittman and the SS didn't have.

You'd be be better off playing a human with no knowledge of their forces. Then if they're a good player, you can brag. =)

Before playing scenario I watch film about Wittman last battle on youtube, so I knew that I had to do. I just intelligently use my recon units to find enemy ambushes, look movie I don't understood why Wittmann was ambushed, because not have rudimentary reconnaissance ? who knows?