CombinedArms Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 OK. With rarity turned off, a platoon of 4 Tigers with two vet and two reg tanks costs 795 points. Two platoons of regular T34/85s (six tanks) cost 802 points--pretty close. So which would you rather have, 4 Tigers (2 vet & 2 reg) or 6 regular T-34/85s? And in what circumstances? Let the deliberations begin! [ March 06, 2003, 09:52 PM: Message edited by: CombinedArms ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KursruK Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 I would rather play with rarity on. But under general circumstances (there are so many variables), the 4 tigers used properly will surely win. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nippy Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 So which would you rather have, 4 Tigers (2 vet & 2 reg) or 6 regular T-34/85s? And in what circumstances? It all depends on the map. If it's flat as a pancake take the Tigers. If it's full of forests and hills take the T-34's. Lets not forget the size of the map too. A huge map with lots of hills and valleys will be utter hell for the Tigers to fight in. The speed and turret rotation rate (Late Mod T-34/85) will leave the Tigers at a large disadvantage. In fact, I have a game called "The Nippy Challenge" along those lines. Here is how you play it. Oct 1944 - Meeting engagment - 2000 points Huge map with light tree cover and modest hills Player is Soviet but buys forces for both sides Soviet Forces X2 T-34/85 Platoons (Vet) X2 Sharpshooters (1 rides on each command tank of the T-34 platoons. Don't let them get very from from the tank, they are supposed to represent the Tank commander scouting on foot) And depending on how hard you want it you get X1 Platoon of T-34/76s (easy), or X1 Platoon SU-76 (medium), or X1 Platoon T-70 (Hard) (All Vet by the way) Germant Forces X1 Platoon of Vet German Kitties (Panther, Tiger, ect) This is a great teaching aid on how to best use the Shoot and Scoot command and is great pratice on how to cordinate tank movments. Nothing looks better than a poor Tiger coming under fire from three sides at once. Then there was time I jumped a JagdPanther with a Platoon of SU-76s. Hehe, good times. Edit: I fogot to mention the benifit of Huge maps with small forces. You can really see the T-34s speed advantage. I can run rings around the Tigers and Jagdpanthers given enough cover. That's how I suckered a Panther Platoon into a game of "Wack-a-mole" with a Platoon of T-34/85s and send a lone T-34/76 charging into the rear of all the Panthers. He got two kills and lived to tell about it. As for the other 3 Panthers, well, when they turned to face the T-34/76 they exposed their sides to the T-34/85s and... [ March 06, 2003, 10:19 PM: Message edited by: Nippy ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbertles Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 In general I agree with Nippy - it depends on the map. You want sullen possession of ground - take Tigers. You want to grab territory - take T34/85s. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike the wino2 Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 Well since I just waxed the Ruskies in von Lauchert(?), I feel up to the "Nippy Challenge". Let's see how the drunks fare. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Rosenrosen Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 Check out this link for a discussion of T34/85 tactics to take out German Tigers. Helped me out a lot. Dr. Rosenrosen 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KV-2 Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 Hi, Which is better? Tiger vs T-34? That is a very old question. Let's talk about that, not from a gamer's point of wiew. Honestly speaking the games can give a very bad service for your knowledge of the subject. For me it was very funny to read the kid's opinions like "I think the Tiger is better because in a game I desroyed 5 T-34 on it". Or: " Russians can easily stop the Germans on their borders in 1941 because I did it in a game". Trying to compare the guns or armor looks like the teenagers are comparing their penises. My strong opions are: 1. It is stupid to find the best tank of WW II - all the tanks have their advantages and disadvantages. 2. 90% of success depends on a crew. Concerning CMBB. The developers did a good job because: 1. T-34-85 is much cheaper then Tiger. The real cost of one Kingtiger is equal to 4 T-34-85. 2. Kingtiger is excellent in defense. It is some kind of "Moving Pillbox" but in offensive operations they usually carry a very high losses like durng the battle for Balaton in Hungary. 3. T-34-85 was not the superior tank as well. Usually the weak poits were the gunsight and the rest optic device as well as the driver's hatch. 4. German tanks were too high in comparsion to Russian ones and were a good target. I can give you more arguments for both AFVs but I think enought. Please note: In a game we can create a fantastic battlefield like a table and put there 5 Tigers and 10 T-34-85. I am absolutely sure that Tigers will win. But in reality there were no such battlefield and these tanks have to get to this battlefield. I think 2-3 Kingtigers will be broken during this movement. Now who will win? That is just a game guys 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nippy Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 That is just a game guys Yes, but a game based on reality. This is why we pour over all sorts of books and sites and have discusions like this. You charge T-34s across and open field in real life, they get/got hammered (check out the Kursk thread), you charge T-34s across an open field towrads waiting Tigers in CM:BB and they get hammered. As for the whole "Best tank" topic, I think of the tanks as sorts tools. You bring the best tool for the job. What to root out infanty? Bring OT-34s with Canister rounds. What to knock out scores of tanks? Get an Elite JagdPanther. Nothing is really a "catch all" Von Lauchert - As the Germans, that battle is more "self stimulation/gratification" than anything else. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KV-2 Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 Hi, As for the whole "Best tank" topic, I think of the tanks as sorts tools. You bring the best tool for the job. What to root out infanty? Bring OT-34s with Canister rounds. What to knock out scores of tanks? Get an Elite JagdPanther. Nothing is really a "catch all" Yes, but tank is a very expensive tool and it should be only in a right hands. I will not give my expensive Black&Decker drill to 13 years son of my neighbour. At the beginning of war Germans easily knocked out excellent T-34 and KVs, becuse Soviet tankers have not a good combat experience. On the other hand an experienced infantry veteran can easily destroy the tank using the hand anti-tank weapon. Even the flammpanzer cost 2 cents if it will come into an enemy trenches without the infantry support. Cheers, 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCrow Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 Kv2. I´m not agree. "1. It is stupid to find the best tank of WW II all the tanks have their advantages and disadvantages." - Of course all tanks has a value, but their armor-gun ratio are essential in armor combat. "2. 90% of success depends on a crew." -Not at all, In armor warfare green-regular tank crews (the more numerous) has similar perfomance. Their perfomance it´s vital when their fight each other with similar vehicles, example: one crack m4a2 sherman has little chance versus one green Tiger, but it will won the game versus a regular PzIV (not always ). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KV-2 Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 Hi Crow, I can not agree with you. Do you know for example, that one Panther was knocked out by 45mm shell penetrated the gun's mask during the Kursk battle? The photo is available in this book: http://www.armybook.com/summary.html?code=0103006g72 Cheers, 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCrow Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 Well :eek: , It´s pretty, but I don´t think that´s luckey shot, refute my opinions :confused: . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CombinedArms Posted March 7, 2003 Author Share Posted March 7, 2003 Originally posted by KV-2: 1. It is stupid to find the best tank of WW II - all the tanks have their advantages and disadvantages. KV-2, Have you ever heard of a straw man argument? It's one of the basic logical fallacies. That's when you attack a proposition that your opponent has not advanced. Straw man arguments generally attack very weak propositions that are only tangentially related to your opponent's point and they are easily attacked because they are inherently weak and also because no one is attempting to defend them. In this case, I would submit, you're advancing a straw man argument against a question I didn't ask. I didn't ask which was the best tank of WWII. I asked, in this GAME (note the recognition that it is a game), which was the better combination, 4 Tigers (including two vets--note the attention to the crews) or 6 T-34s. Note also that I was careful to add the words "and under what circumstances." I've used the word "opponent" in this discussion because that's the tone you have taken, treating the other posters as opponents, but I was really hoping to inspire friendly rational discussion, not opposition. At the moment, your posts are making it hard to sustain that friendly rational discussion. I would humbly suggest that advancing straw man arguments while using words like "stupid" will not gain you a lot of respect in this forum. On the other hand, a careful reading posts and a friendly (or at least respectful) and thoughtful response to them will. I will close with one of my favorite sayings, with thanks to Earl Weaver, "It's what you learn after you know it all that counts." [ March 07, 2003, 09:48 AM: Message edited by: CombinedArms ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KV-2 Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 Sorry, That was not the personal attack. Just the my private opinion about a wargames and resumes which some people often do after playing. I mean only the kids I talked to in different places. I am absolutely sure that you, like Pofessor are agree with me. I just want to draw your attention that wargames -even such great like CMBB are just the games and not the reality. I am absolutely sure that even in 100 years it can not be a game which can be like real war. Best Regards, KV-2 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CombinedArms Posted March 7, 2003 Author Share Posted March 7, 2003 KV-2, Understood and no harm done. It seemed from your member number that you were quite new to the forum and might need a little helpful orientation. I think you'll find that there's widespread recognition here that while CM is an unusually realistic rendering of certain aspects of war, it's by no means an equivalent (thank God!) Anyway, welcome to the forum and I hope you enjoy it. I think you'll find a lot of good reading and discussion. Cheers, CA 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Rosenrosen Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 Originally posted by Nippy: Want to root out infanty? Bring OT-34s with Canister rounds. This got me interested in finding other tanks that have canister. I know that the T34/75s usually do, whereas the T34/85s do not. I checked out the Soviet tanks described as "Infantry tanks", expecting lots of canister. To my surprise, the Valentine III, Valentine IV and Matilda II (all infantry tanks) don't even have HE! They only stock AP ammo! What gives? What makes a tank an infantry tank? Also, anyone know which tanks (German and Soviet) stock canister? Thanks, Dr. Rosenrosen 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Carr Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 I'll take the Tigers. Better protection and better main gun accuracy. They may be slower but if maneuvered correctly, however much slower, they will prevail against the T-34/85 opponent. Just an opinion. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CombinedArms Posted March 7, 2003 Author Share Posted March 7, 2003 Originally posted by Jack Carr: I'll take the Tigers. Better protection and better main gun accuracy. They may be slower but if maneuvered correctly, however much slower, they will prevail against the T-34/85 opponent. Just an opinion. My own feeling is that it depends to a great extent on terrain. On a flat map or on rolling steppes with open fields of fire, I'd definitely take the Tigers. On an urban map that was anything but very small-- I'd just as certainly take the T34/85s. The greater the combination of cover and freedom of movement, the more I'd take the T34/85s. The more open the map, the more I'd take the Tigers. Similarly, for drier conditions, Tigers. For wetter conditions, T34s. What makes this particular matchup so interesting--too me, at least-- is that the T34/85 can actually kill the Tiger even frontally, if it can get close enough. But the Tiger's better optics and more accurate gun make that difficult. Anyway, I'd like to try Nippy's battle mentioned above. It sounds like an interesting test. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetchez la Vache Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 Human opponents can somewhat mitigate the Tiger's disadvantage of the slow turret traverse by clever use of cover arcs. In human hands (as opposed to the AI) I personally think the Tiger platoon might have the edge on all map types. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Carr Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 Let's add another element into this discussion. The topic of terrain keeps coming up. Let's say you have no idea what the terrain will be like. - Now - What tank are you going to pick? I'll take the Tiger. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 Originally posted by Jack Carr: Let's say you have no idea what the terrain will be like. - Now - What tank are you going to pick?Well, supposing there is an equal chance for any of the two being favoured by the terrain and these tanks are all that both sides have, I don't feel like being (dis)advantaged with either. But let's say I'll pick the Tiger, if the forces are not just T-34's and Tigers. Tiger is more safe against ATG's. Or just wait a minute, having twice as many T-34's... arrgh, I can't decide! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpl Carrot Posted March 8, 2003 Share Posted March 8, 2003 Originally posted by Dr. Rosenrosen: What gives? What makes a tank an infantry tank? Thanks, Dr. Rosenrosen An infantry tank was designed to protect infantry from enemy tanks. So there was no need for a HE loadout. Of course the 2 lb gun may or may not have had HE built for it/used in WE but that is an entirely different thread. They were well armoured - not much can get through a Matilda in the early war. They were also slow as they only needed to keep pace with infantry - not breakout though breaches in enemy lines. As for Tigers v T 34's. Doesn't matter. I would lose using either [ March 07, 2003, 05:09 PM: Message edited by: Cpl Carrot ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted March 8, 2003 Share Posted March 8, 2003 Originally posted by Cpl Carrot: As for Tigers v T 34's. Doesn't matter. I would lose using either Holy ****, the final truth came out! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpl Carrot Posted March 8, 2003 Share Posted March 8, 2003 Not sure it that really deserves to be sig material but I don't mind. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Tacticus Posted March 8, 2003 Share Posted March 8, 2003 Cpl Carrot...does this mean I'm going to win? You've got the T34's... 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.