Tiger(Pz)(VIE) heavy tank or not?

[Soddball]

Didn't tanks like the Tiger and Jagdpanther have a special mechanism for super-fast-turny-tank-thing where the body could rotate 90 degrees in a few seconds? Or did I dream it?

[Negrin]

On another point,the Tiger I cannot be compared to dedicated tank killer such as the Jagdpanther or Jagdtiger.Apples compared to Oranges!Tank killers role was to engage enemy armor at extreme range and decimate it before the distance could be closed and the enemy guns brought to bear.Limited traverse of tank killers guns made it easy prey for enemy tank killing infantry teams when used in a similar role as that intended for conventional tanks like the Tiger I.Look what happened to the Ferdinands at Kursk when the roles are confused.DISASTER!

To utilize the Tiger I correctly, the whole vehicle must be turned in conjunction with the turret to engage multiple targets quicker.In this fashion the thick frontal armor is always facing the enemies guns.Michael Wittman used this theory with great success.He obtained the idea from his vast experience with Stug assault guns on the Eastern Front in the early stages of the conflict.Only draw back from this practice was in the case of improperly tensioned tracks the chances of dropping a track were common.

[Negrin]

Sodball,wake up!HAHAHAHA.

The only means to turn the big tanks on the spot was the same as any other,one track forward one in reverse.......that is it!To rotate the Tiger on the spot too quickly and in soft terrain would result in a bogged down 6o ton pillbox!No magic bullets here...

[Redwolf]

I am pretty sure the optics model in CMBB only affects spotting and probably identification, but not hit probability.

[Taking as vacation off the CMBB forum, but as this is here... Who would have thought I would go back to tank-death country CMBO ]

[ November 29, 2002, 10:33 PM: Message edited by: redwolf ]

[Gaylord Focker]

I found the Tiger in CMBO very dissapoining, CMBB is where it's at!

[88mm]

The Tiger is very much underpowered in CMBO, i lost 5 tigers at ranges 1200 and up against 3 sherman firefly's. One thing i noticed which aint correct is the unbalanced mix of allied armor. 50% Fireflies of the allied armor is hardly correct. The firefly's were a minority in Britisch/American armor. Most of the time there was 1 flirefly as platoon-leader with 3 a 4 average 75mm shermans to fill it up. That's a 4 to 1 ratio. Take the 1 on 1 balance in CMBO and you see why the Tigers are not "so good". Also, the firefly itself is too powerfull itself compared to the tiger. That are 2 reasons why the Tiger isn't performing well where it should...

Historicle fact is that only about 5% of the tiger/panter kills were made by Allied armor. Most of the losses were made by Allied Airpower.

It took the Allied Commanders a long time to reconise the need for more then the moderate 75mm guns.....

[Redwolf]

Well, that is an issue with the scenario, not with the game.

[Negrin]

The Firefly could kill Tigers from combat range due largely to it`s Tungsten core shot.It was not uncommon for a Firefly to have multiple Tiger kills to their credit.I believe I read somewhere that an individual Firefly killed 5 Tigers in one engagement.The Firefly was by no means the magic bullet.With relatively thin armor, it for the most part faired no better than a regular M4A1 if caught out in the open.The crew experience and decisiveness usually made the difference between life and death for tankers on either side.Remember,by the time the Allies invaded Normandy experienced German tank crews were at a premiun due to attrition on the Eastern Front!The Allies had some very good crews by this time as well.

[88mm]

Indeed, they had the experience. And the knowledge "Thypoons" were in the area as well. These planes with rockets did rip the tigers to pieces with minimal losses on Allied side. The overwhelming airpower was a major player in combat these days (after D-day invasion). It limited Germans to move there armor only at night. At daylight it was simply a suicide mission. that's why you saw heavyly camuflaged German armor, it gave them a little more protection against those flying buzzers

The Allied armor was simply outclassed those days, the Firefly did atleast had a bit more chance to kill a Cat but most of the time they were in a underdog position. Thanks to overwhelming numbers of Allied Armor en more importantly the constant threat in the Air gave the Allies the upper hand. Without Air-supremacy they would have knocked out of Normandy without a hitch

[illo]

Originally posted by Negrin:

Sodball,wake up!HAHAHAHA.

The only means to turn the big tanks on the spot was the same as any other,one track forward one in reverse.......that is it!To rotate the Tiger on the spot too quickly and in soft terrain would result in a bogged down 6o ton pillbox!No magic bullets here...

Negrin, wake up!

Most allied tanks in WW2 couldnt do one track forward , one in reverse.(Ones beased on sherman chassis for example) So they couldnt turn in place.

However Tiger could.

[ December 05, 2002, 09:36 AM: Message edited by: illo ]

[illo]

Originally posted by 88mm:

Indeed, they had the experience. And the knowledge "Thypoons" were in the area as well. These planes with rockets did rip the tigers to pieces with minimal losses on Allied side. The overwhelming airpower was a major player in combat these days (after D-day invasion). It limited Germans to move there armor only at night. At daylight it was simply a suicide mission. that's why you saw heavyly camuflaged German armor, it gave them a little more protection against those flying buzzers

The Allied armor was simply outclassed those days, the Firefly did atleast had a bit more chance to kill a Cat but most of the time they were in a underdog position. Thanks to overwhelming numbers of Allied Armor en more importantly the constant threat in the Air gave the Allies the upper hand. Without Air-supremacy they would have knocked out of Normandy without a hitch

You might do a seach on forums. There was study on allied airpower efficienty in normandy. It shows that panzers were very rarely killed by air attacks. It also shows ratio showing how panzers were usually killed/taken out of action.

[Negrin]

Geez,Illo,thanks for the wake up call!

If you care to actually think about what I wrote istead of simply posting your knee jerk reaction you make not appear so ignorant!

Did I not write "big tanks"? If you consider the Sherman,in any variant, to a "big tank" aka HEAVY TANK,well then my friend you are in a small lonely group of uninformed individuals.The Sherman :eek: is classed as a Medium tank for all intent and purpose.When I was answering this post I had Tiger1,2 and Pershings as well as JS2 in mind not "thin skinned,puny Shermans!.Consider that the original post was refering to a Tiger 1 and you may now WAKE UP yourself.

[Negrin]

Illo,

You hit the nail on the head with the Allied Air power killing German armor.It was indeed a rather rare occurence.The Germans were masters of camouflage and did in fact move their armor at night.When the Allies carpet bombed the Normandy area before D Day as well as prior to Operation Cobra....breakout from Normandy,many Panzers were obliterated.Realize that they were not individually targeted,but rather the suspected location of tank formations was saturated with HE.The US bombing campaign was quite succesful.On one day they destroyed more of their own tanks and infantry than the Germans could manage!

The old saying from WW2 vets was " If the Germans were bombing or straffing us,the Yanks, Brits and Canadians ducked for cover.If the Brits were doing the same then the Germans ran for cover.But,if the Yanks were bombing,everyone ran like hell for cover"!HAHAHAHAHHA!

[ December 05, 2002, 01:21 PM: Message edited by: Negrin ]

[Silvio Manuel]

Originally posted by 88mm:

The Tiger is very much underpowered in CMBO, i lost 5 tigers at ranges 1200 and up against 3 sherman firefly's. One thing i noticed which aint correct is the unbalanced mix of allied armor. 50% Fireflies of the allied armor is hardly correct. The firefly's were a minority in Britisch/American armor. Most of the time there was 1 flirefly as platoon-leader with 3 a 4 average 75mm shermans to fill it up. That's a 4 to 1 ratio. Take the 1 on 1 balance in CMBO and you see why the Tigers are not "so good". Also, the firefly itself is too powerfull itself compared to the tiger. That are 2 reasons why the Tiger isn't performing well where it should...

It depends on what month your talking about. By later in the war I've heard (from tank grogs) that it was common for there to be half 17pdr (or 76mm for US) -equipped tanks in a Platoon. Have you looked at the Armor-penetration stats on the 17-pdr? It can quite easily handle the barely-sloped Tiger armor at most ranges, and that's with AP, not even Tungsten. With Tungsten they really shine, the t-rounds excel against low-slope armor. Tiger is pretty much outdated by June 44, let alone spring 45. It *was* cutting edge in late 42 (IIRC) when it came out. By June 44, US TD's w/ 76mm and tungsten can kill it, if they are lucky enough to score a hit w/ those rare shells.

One thing that the Tiger suffers from vs. Firefly (or any tank) is that in CMBO the superior German optics are not modeled. CMBO Tiger is mainly good for killing thickly armor tanks like Churchill VII and VIII, Sherman Jumbo ,etc. and also raping infantry w/ 88mm and 2 MGs. If you want a stand-off tank horrorists, pay 20pts. more and get a Panther or Jagdpanther.

Cheers,

Kevin

[88mm]

In CMBO It feels like the shermans are loaded with the "rare" tungsten

Ow well, it's a game rigth? right. Another anoying thing is the 3D engine. Heavy Metal tanks are merging with eacother ? Driving straight THROUGH a wall, or half into a house ?

Over there own troops etc.etc.

Well you get the point. This is a great disavantage and spoils the gameplay....

Also: why can't you control Panzer-platoons like the infantry. Very anoying and very unrealistic.

JBOP ? (just a bunch of Panzers )

[Jack Carr]

I have to give you my honest opinion on the Tiger in CMBO. Far too vulnerable against smaller caliber guns. I have lost too many Tigers vs 37mm guns. Frontal penetration. This is not modeled well in CMBO. Tiger is modeled much more accurately in CMBB. I can't tell you how many times I have had Tiger tanks knocked out by Stuarts who were reversing out at high speed to avoid getting clobbered by the Tiger. Stuart pops off a shot while reversing and knocks out the Tiger. Don't kill yourself with this dilemma. In my humble opinion this is a flaw in the game engine.

[Redwolf]

You didn't try a CMBB Tiger against a dozend 25mm AA guns

Are there actually savegames available on your Stuarts versus Tigers that show them penetrated without weak spot penetration message? We've seen a number of reports the last days and I wonder whether that is the usualy CMBO Tiger bashing or maybe something real.

[Jack Carr]

Redwolf - It's generally a "Frontal penetration at weak point". It seemed to happen so frequently that I just sort of gave up and accepted it as a problem with the game engine.

Any info you or others may have on this would be great.

Merry Christmas all!

[Silvio Manuel]

Weak point hits are supposed to only occur in 1% of all hits, IIRC. Dunno if this is affected by armor quality, though.

[Redwolf]

"Weak point penetration" happens witha probablity of 1% and reduces the armor by 30-50%.

if the vehicle has a shot trap then the probablity is higher. Steve once said itis 10%, my own tests imply more like 3-5%. The difference may be that it is 10% of all turret hits which would translate to about 3-4% of all front hits.

Armor quality has nothing to do with it, it only reduces the thickness of the plate.

Now, so much is fine and the Tiger does not have a shot trap. However, the following items make the Tiger zu vulnerable to Stuart fire:

- the Stuart has a very high ROF and much ammo. If you have several Stuarts in LOS you get to 100 hits soon and there you have it

- the hit probablity of moving shooter against standing target is broken in CMBO. The moving shooter, even if fast, has a very high hit probablity. The standing shooter shooting at the moving target seems to have correct, that means lower but not very low hit probably on a mving target

- the slow turet of the Tiger, no cover arc command and the slow ROF make it difficult to hit a Stuarts, especially when they pop in and out of LOS (like racing behind a bunch of houses)

So what happens here is that a Stuart, or several Stuarts, run around the battlefield like crazy, cannot be hit but hit themself very often, while going their high speed in difficult ground. Very soon you reach enough hits on the Tiger to statistically approch the 1% chance.

And that is even without the Stuart player being excessivly gamey. It is not gamey to run these Stuarts around with shoot-and-shoot tactics. If the Stuart player wants to get gamey he runs circles around the Tiger at 30 meter distance

It is small bugs and slightly off judgement for chosen parameters whch can turn one aspect of a game into a joke.

[[UF]fridericus]

NEGRIN:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Remember,by the time the Allies invaded Normandy experienced German tank crews were at a premiun due to attrition on the Eastern Front!The Allies had some very good crews by this time as well.

thats pure nonsens.

on german side were 1.SS-Pz-Div., 12.SS-PzDiv., later 9. and 10. too. heeresunits were at least 21.PzDiv. and PzLehrDiv.

These were the "creme de la creme" of german tankforces.

forget that nonsense of experienced allied units, exept the british from north-africa-campaign.

the rest of allied units were only green.

[KG ThorsHammer]

The Question was "Is the Tiger a Heavy tank".

The Allies classified the Tiger as A heavy tank because of its weight; they also classified the Panther as a heavy tank to for the same reason. The Germans classified the Tiger as a heavy tank because of its intended role to smash through enemy positions, and the Panther as a medium tank.

Is the Tiger an effective heavy tank in CMBO?;probably not as effective as it should be, especially compared to CMBB apparently. Gun optics are not as good as they should be, negating the Tigers biggest asset to a degree. Also, by keeping rigorous standards throughout the war, the Tiger (E) had armour of exceptional quality. It rated the highest possible score for non brittleness (the tendency of armour to flake off when hit), of any tank in the world, making it even better than its' thickness indicated. Despite these flaws in the game, I have noticed that many people over estimate the Tigers abilities. As has been stated, by the time the allies landed in June 1944, the Tiger had been in service since late 1942. The allies had time to come up with ways to defeat it, such as upgunned tanks, and new ammunition. *CONTINUED*

[ December 17, 2002, 08:27 PM: Message edited by: KG ThorsHammer ]

[KG ThorsHammer]

Tiger Ace Michael Wittman understood the dangers of vehicles such as the 17 pounder armed Firefly. Had he had known Fireflys were in the area on that fatefull day, he would not have ventured out in an offensive sortie. Many players lose Tigers because their slow turrets cant be turned in time to engage an opponent outflanking them, and once again I will use Wittman as an example. Knowing how slow the turret was, he wouldnt bother turning it; he would simply turn the whole vehicle in the desired direction, which was a lot faster, and kept the frontal armour towards the opposition. *CONTINUED*

[KG ThorsHammer]

This was easily done as Tigers could reverse one tread while the other tread went forward, allowing the Tiger to pivot on the spot, a feature that caught many an unsuspecting allied tank off gaurd. Keep your Tigers at a distance from the enemy tanks, and most shootouts should still be won:)