Are Tigers an exploit?

[Tennozan]

All I know is I'm currently in a PBEM battle (Tunisian front, N. Africa April 1943) and my opponent has four Tigers that are mauling my British force.

In trying to stop these brutes -I feel like I'm trying to cut down an oak tree with a wiffle bat.

I realize now that I should have at least insisted on hobbling his forces somewhat - by April of 1943, his Afrika Korps would have been at critical levels of fuel and ammunition.

At least I've appreciated all the smoke the British AFVs carry. Just wish they had something that could actually kill a Tiger when I get in close.

[Bigduke6]

Bone Vulture,

The point is of course, human wave got results. When you don't have enough trained infantry and the Wehrmacht is knocking at the doors of Moscow, human wave is right fine tactic. I would rate operation Typhoon as a success.

I would add the Russians in general used human waves only as long as necessary. You may remember the Germans had a pretty high casualty rate at Stalingrad. You have to admit Stalingrad is not the best arguement for German infantry superiority over the Red Army infantry. Not a lot of German records of Red Army human waves at Stalingrad - not that I know about anyway.

Which makes me wonder, why the entire Red Army tank corps was trained to deal with Tigers by close-range flanking fire? Pretty silly thing to do, considering the Soviets were pretty focused on getting results. Seeing as flanking fire on Tigers didn't work and all.

[Code13]

The point is (unless I am missing your irony - which I may well be) is that IRL flanking shots worked, but they just seem to bounce in CMBB...

Well actually not always true, but the example I had was depressingly extreme.

[Bigduke6]

What? Me ironic? Nah. I think it will be FUN in CM2 to dismount my T-34 crews, to use Molotovs to attack the Tigers.

But don't worry. There are whole threads explaining why the ueber-Tiger is a figment of our groggy imaginations.

[dieseltaylor]

Tennozan.

I see that there are four British armoured that can take a Tiger head on at 500 meters in April. Most of them can kill a Tiger side on at 1000+ easily and there are another 7 mobile weapons that can ..... what is the problem? : )

Admittedly I played someone once - and presumably slightly earlier and he had 4 crack Tigers - unfortunately it took most of my ammo to gun damage 2 of the 4 and I was playing on to small a map to flank him so I declined to sacrifice my tanks in a mad charge.

People buying Tigers is no problem really as long as the map is big enough, and or lumpy enough to get around the flanks. Also remember that smoke can allow you to get real close - and he is going to hate you for that : )

[Code13]

Originally posted by Bigduke6:

What? Me ironic? Nah. I think it will be FUN in CM2 to dismount my T-34 crews, to use Molotovs to attack the Tigers.

But don't worry. There are whole threads explaining why the ueber-Tiger is a figment of our groggy imaginations.

hehehe true enough.

To be fair I have and had no issues with Tigers or King Tigers, I am just sulking at seeing all my vet crews massacred by two big cats :confused:

Not stopped me trying though,

[Beta1]

One of the best ways of dealing with a big cat is to not deal with it. Stay the hell out of its way, never give it a tank to shoot at. It has to kill a lot of infantry to make it worth its points. Making it wave it turret back and forth by exposing/hiding targets at opposite ends of the map can work wonders too. But if you avoid giving it high value targets often a human player will move it to find them and the more it moves the more the chance of a bog or a possible ambush.

Just dont play people who insist on unrestricted games on big flat dry maps...

[Bone_Vulture]

Originally posted by Bigduke6:

Which makes me wonder, why the entire Red Army tank corps was trained to deal with Tigers by close-range flanking fire? Pretty silly thing to do, considering the Soviets were pretty focused on getting results. Seeing as flanking fire on Tigers didn't work and all.

As it has been said, the only edge the T-34 had was its superior mobility over the Tiger, and I assume that in real life, the gun of the T-34 could penetrate the Tiger's side with a point blank shot.

[MikeyD]

Soviets were also trained to aim for the tracks and especially those big front-mounted drive sprockets (the placement of which they considered a substantial flaw in German armor design). The plan was to break one track - the remaining track would continue to push the vehicle around to expose the flanks. Once again, this tactic assumes they'd be able to do some damage once the flanks are exposed.

[Generaloberst Guderian]

An immobilized tank is better than a mobile one, sure, but in the case of the bigger tanks, confronting a stationary piece of heavy armor can still be a difficult task, especially if there are other enemy units still available to provide cover.

If you set up a test scenario, however, you'll find that "hail" fire from 7-8 tanks almost always results in in immobilization, followed by a bailout, making that perhaps a better "symetric" solution than the all out charge.

[Tennozan]

Dieseltaylor:

My Churchill's are all knocked out and I don't think I've got anything left to hit him with. Perhaps my move from left flank - Cromwells, and a couple of Valentines. I think my Sherman IIIs are ablaze now as well. I used a lot of smoke and got in close but those 4 crack Tigers just sliced me to ribbons quick.

Unless my infantry can get them - he's ignoring them and they're all around his tanks.

[Panzer76]

I don't friggin believe this. Less than 3 weeks after we had the Tiger disussion last time (and we've had it before) it rears it's ugly head again. Please, if you have questions about this, do a search, trust me, it has been answered (well, discussed to death anyway).

[Code13]

spoilsport

[Bone_Vulture]

Has any mod ever considered stickying them "groundbreaking" threads, or perhaps form these threads their own section in the forums?

[sztartur]

I do not see why certain topics cannot be discussed again from time to time. I liked this thread.

Artur.

[DTrill]

Yes there are some of us who do like this topic. Some of us have a love hate relationship with the big tin cans - pray I never see them, but can't wait to try to open one up when I do see one. The problem is that one of them is bad enough, but two or more with infantry support is another matter. I do agree with a post back a bit, that the larger maps give the Allied attempts to hunt one a better chance. Back I go to my PBEM where I just spotted the second one my opponent has....

[Panzer76]

Originally posted by sztartur:

I do not see why certain topics cannot be discussed again from time to time. I liked this thread.

Artur.

Suit yourself. Have you read the other threads on this topic? They are much more informative than this one and after having read them, tell me if you want to rehash it again.

[Code13]

Trafling back through archives to find out if and when an old topic may or may not have been discussed is a complete an utter waste of time.

I am not advocating the starting of multiple threads on the same topic, but if a particular topic isnt easily findable then chances are it was some time since it was last discussed, and on a DISCUSSION board it seems a bit counterproductive to try and stifle that discussion.

I liked this thread, I had things to say (even if it was a petulant grumble at my latest game) but there is no way I would have trawled back throuh ancient threads on the offchance one was about the topic I wanted to pass a comment.

[Panzer76]

Originally posted by Code13:

Trafling back through archives to find out if and when an old topic may or may not have been discussed is a complete an utter waste of time.

I am a bit taken aback of this arrogant attitude. If you do a search fot "Tiger" you get over 50 hits. Condidering that people that have authored books on the subject has contributed in these threads, I find it strange, to say the least, that you find it a utter waste of time.

Originally posted by Code13:

I am not advocating the starting of multiple threads on the same topic, but if a particular topic isnt easily findable then chances are it was some time since it was last discussed, and on a DISCUSSION board it seems a bit counterproductive to try and stifle that discussion.

But IT IS easily findable. What is the point of "discussing" something that has been answered many times over if you do not supply some new sources/evidence on the matter? Do you, or anyone for that matter, anything NEW to add to this discussion, or is it just the same old stuff over again?

Originally posted by Code13:

I liked this thread, I had things to say (even if it was a petulant grumble at my latest game) but there is no way I would have trawled back throuh ancient threads on the offchance one was about the topic I wanted to pass a comment.

Offchance? Hardly. And you've had your comment, and I pointed out that you can read all about it in the multiple discussions on this board. I hope you value information over posting just for the sake of posting.

[Code13]

I do indeed value information rather than just posting for the sake of it, however simply trawling through previous posts for information frequently leaves the person seeking information no better off.

Searching for "Tiger" may well get 50 hits, but each of those hits will have been a different discussion to this one, with different information and different viewpoints.

The whole point of a board and community like this one is to share knowledge, debate the points and generally engage with our fellow gamers.

If and when you might go to a pub, bar or cafe with your friends do you tell them they cant talk about xy or z subject, but instead must refer to a previous conversation on the matter?

This is a Forum not an encyclopedia.

[Panzer76]

Originally posted by Code13:

If and when you might go to a pub, bar or cafe with your friends do you tell them they cant talk about xy or z subject, but instead must refer to a previous conversation on the matter?

Well, you are not talking to your mates on this BBS. My point here is:

What you are discussing here had been discussed before by very knowledgeable people. You want information? Its right there in front of it, use it.

Seems rather you just want want to chit chat (as with your mates on the pub). That's fine but don't expect to get much useful information as most people that has contributed to this subject before are tired of rehashing the arguments, ok?

[Code13]

Well, it seems we are at opposed ends of how we view BB's like this.

I view it as an online community where like minded people can get together, discuss things, ask questions, debate topics and generally engage in conversation about our hobby.

You on the other hand think it is a library where all form of communication other than obsequious requests for information from our betters is forbidden.

The question was: "Are Tigers an exploit".

The answer is: "No".

Well that was a pretty dull and pointless thread wasnt it, this thread however has been entertaining and ammusing;

"Are Tigers and exploit?"

"No, but here are some examples where I have had the snot kicked out of me by these devil tanks, curse them to hades."

[MikeyD]

"What is the point of "discussing" something that has been answered many times over"

I agree. Now let's all turn to the topic of ancient Vedic poetry in the original Sanscrit (the last remaining topic not prevously discussed on this site).

... then again, has anyone brought up the topic of Paul (Pee Wee) Reuben's legal troubles yet?

[Panzer76]

Originally posted by Code13:

You on the other hand think it is a library where all form of communication other than obsequious requests for information from our betters is forbidden.

No, not at all. I simply point out to you that the information is there if you want it. And discussions are always best when one has something new to add

As I said, seems you just want to chat about the Tiger and that's fine. A more pertinent point in this context would perhaps be to ask if the cost of the Tiger reflects it's battlefield abilitiues and if the cost scheme shoudl be altered. This has also been discussed before ( ), but on this point every Joe Doe can have a brilliant new idea

[imported_KG_ThorsHammer]

got to love that nickle hardened homogeneous Kruppe steel lol.

Tiger was just an excellent tank. As stated earlier, they are expensive, and if someone puts all their eggs in one basket, the basket usually gets knocked over.