What good is the tiger tank?

With this sort of stuff, I think we need to see replays.

So much of the game is how people use their units that theory crafting is close to useless.

The IS-2 is an awesome tank, but if I drive it backwards into a line of Paks, then of course it's going to die, horribly.

Likewise with the Tiger.
I'm sure Austerlitz is capable of not doing things like I've described (though given some of his posts, maybe I shouldn't be so sure), but we absolutely have to see replays so we know what really happened to his Tigers.

Maybe it was stuck in mud, maybe it was caught out in the middle of the entire Soviet force. Maybe it was gangbanged by fast moving Jacksons.

But in this thread all we see is Austerlitz saying Tiger's aren't good enough. Personally, I think Tigers are fine, especially given the overload of support options available to it, but we need to see how Austerlitz is using them. If he's playing stupidly with them, then it's not an issue and his arguments are void.
If he's playing effectively with them, using them effectively and reasonably and they're still getting smashed, then we have an issue.


So, Austerlitz, let's see some replays, then we can get some debate going.

Watch the following game: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyrcIeY0bLw

You can clearly see that the IS-2 is (way) more durable than a Tiger Tank. Pak shots are bouncing on it. You don't need Austerlitz, but Looney for you to show it.

Watch the following game: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyrcIeY0bLw

You can clearly see that the IS-2 is (way) more durable than a Tiger Tank. Pak shots are bouncing on it. You don't need Austerlitz, but Looney for you to show it.

Because the Tiger never bounces Zis shots, right?

Because the Tiger never bounces Zis shots, right?

Ofcourse I'm not excluding bounces from a ZiS, but I know for 100% sure, that when you shoot 100 shots on a Tiger with a ZiS and 100 shots on a IS-2 with a Pak, you will get more hits on the Tiger than a IS-2. Even when you consider RNG it will,

Ofcourse I'm not excluding bounces from a ZiS, but I know for 100% sure, that when you shoot 100 shots on a Tiger with a ZiS and 100 shots on a IS-2 with a Pak, you will get more hits on the Tiger than a IS-2. Even when you consider RNG it will,

What if told you that TTK is equally while using Pak vs IS2 and Zis vs Tiger.
IS2 has an edge of 2.8s at far and 6.3s at near against the Tiger.

True OP. Tiger needs a buff. For a legendary tank it gets taken out way too easily.

^^ and for its price.. I think a small armor/health buff will go Nicely... Keep its other stats. I saw a tiger the other day with my t34/85s and I have zero fear. Paks were dealt with by Katy.... And tigger dealt with by my 85s. I lol'd

True OP. Tiger needs a buff. For a legendary tank it gets taken out way too easily.

It wasn't legendary when SU-100 and better and 76mm sherman and better and 17 pounder showed up.
It was a legendary target practice then.

Its not its performance that got it to legendary status, but propaganda really.
Over engineered, breaking left and right, few and perfectly countered by late war allied guns.

Stop with the myth that german tanks broke down like.. all the time already. Yes many of their new tanks that was rushed had early mechanical problems but the amount of lossed T-34 due to mechanical problems is astronomical. In 1941 (the year the german army kicked soviet ass hardcore) more T-34 was lost to mechanical problems than enemy fire.

Replay or L2P OP

It wasn't legendary when SU-100 and better and 76mm sherman and better and 17 pounder showed up.
It was a legendary target practice then.

Its not its performance that got it to legendary status, but propaganda really.
Over engineered, breaking left and right, few and perfectly countered by late war allied guns.

And you wonder why others, myself included, consider you a fanboy?
Yes, there is no shortage of nonsense floating around concerning the Tiger, but you adress a passing remark with aggressively hyperbolic bullshit?
Did you ever consider the casualty exchange ratios by Tiger Abt. even late in the war? They were very favourable, despite usually engaging under conditions of strong numerical inferiority, logistical difficulties, and enemy aerial superiority. Yes of course, the Tiger was far from invincible, not to mention it had been fielded mid-war and was no longer produced from mid-1944 onwards, as it was becoming an obsolete design, and had been a niche design for a niche application to start with. Still, it tended to perform well in every theater it was fielded. So much for target practice.
Over engineered? Arguably. Breaking down left right and center? Surprise: When properly serviced, the Tiger was quite possibly the most mechanically reliable tank in the German arsenal apart from the Pz 38(t) and the Pz III.
You consider the T-34 or the KV1 merely "legendary target practice" because the Germans traded very (with a capital V) effectively against them, or because the Germans eventually developed and fielded weapons that reliably breached their respective armour?

All this katitof hate WutFace

Nope, tiger is good.

Over engineered, breaking left and right, few and perfectly countered by late war allied guns.

If they weren't over engineered they were under engineered. The rest applied to every tank on every side of the war.

Lol, fanboys like always, thay always need axis buff xD.

I honestly dont think the Tiger is the real problem here. It works pretty well for what it is meant to do in this game - being a breakthrough damage sponge.

Using Tigers as AT is not really that good an option anymore. It can certainly still deal a good punch to medium tanks, especially with Pak support, but it performs way better at AI than AT. With the current rampant use of blobs, the tiger is actually really useful to ward said blobs off.

It bounces the occasional Zis shot but overall it has gotten realtively easy for allies to penetrate it from the front. It is still a bit of an rng fest for T34/85 to penetrate it from the front, but overall they reliably manage to do so. Same goes for the IS2 and allied AT guns. Jacksons manage to hand out a good punch too. It certainly has enough weaknesses while not being completely helpless.

I think the real problem here is the IS2. It performs way too good for its cost, leading ppl to believe the Tiger is lackluster when in all reality it isnt.

Now lets, just for the sake of it, look at those 2 tanks in a vacuum. They have the same price but overall, the IS beats the tiger in every category except scatter.

Of couse, in a real environment a vacuum will almost never be the case and germans tend to have more and better AT options, but ppl tend to forget that IS doctrines synergize really well. Fire barrages can clear Paks or force them to move and thus make them not shoot at the IS2. With the tiger being busy shooting at the IS2, shock troops with their squad size and armour can often manage to get close enough to Paks to clear them out, especially considering that by the time Tigers and IS2s arrive on the battlefield those shocktroops are likely to be on vet3 already, making them even more survivable and ensuring they will make it to the Paks.

This is by no means supposed to say that german doctrines suck. CAS poses a real threat to slow tanks like the IS2 and can often shift the battle in favour of the germans but unlike a fire barrage it can be warded off by building an AA halftrack, which most players should do imo, considering how popular CAS is atm. With an AA halftrack close to the IS2 the CAS plane will likely be shot down after its first pass or even before that in some rare cases. Add to that that you can minimize the damage taken by simply reversing(just like germans can against P47 strikes) and it has alot less impact that a fire barrage rendering your Paks useless. Smoke is very useful aswell, but theres this thing called attack ground. Add into that that it is alot easier for the tiger to catch a burning engine(due to cheaper mines on soviet side and generally lower armour of the tiger, allowing more consistency for at nade penetration from the rear) and youve got an almost immobilized kitty cat tank thats surrounded by smoke but wont really be able to leave and will likely be taken out by attack ground.

Now all this rambling aide, of course it is also a question of skill and micro skills. A good player with decent micro will still be able to defeat the IS2 and its support with his tiger and own support, but this requires alot more skill and micro on the german side than it does on the soviet side(just like it was and in many cases still is the case with most allied units against german ones).

What I would propose is to lower the tigers rear armour further to 160 to make it easier and more consistend for allied tanks to penetrate it from the rear, overall rewarding a good flank. I would also propose doing the same thing to the IS2 and lowering its rear armour to 160 aswell, finally giving german medium tanks the chance to take it out if you managed to flank it. This will put an end to reckless overextending of heavy tanks that rewards reckless play when it really shouldnt. The IS2 should also have its frontal armour brought down in line with that of the tiger, or somewhere close to it - 300-320. 375 armour is simply too insane. This change would also see weapons like the Raketenwerfer finally being more useful against heavy tanks. Furthermore, while it is true that the IS2 hits alot less consistently than the tiger, vs infantry, it is also true that when it hits the hit often results in a squad being wiped or being left with only 1 guy, who is likely gonna get wiped on retreat anyways. Considering german squadsizes, I would bring down the AOE of the IS2 below that of the tiger but to compensate for it, lower its scatter drastically, similar to how the Jacksons damage was nerfed but it has gotten a penetration buff for more consistent damage and less dice rolls. This would result in consistent damage vs german infantry without dooming it completely. I feel the tiger is in a good spot with its 1k hp. And so is the IS2. Lowering the armour of the IS2 to something like 300 might(it doesnt necessarily have to) result in it becoming too weak, considering stuff like TWP. So maybe raising the HP of the IS2 by 100 might be in line with its armour nerf.

Overall I feel that the IS2 should remain as good/better than the tiger but it has to become more consistent. Consistent in dealing damage to infantry without wiping it and also consistent in taking damage from AT weapons(especially when it comes to rear hits) without dying like an insect the moment it sees a Pak.

T34/85 is an entirely different problem that I dont really wanna get into here. I believe the tanks are fine for what they cost, but their synergy with mark target completely messes shit up.

tl;dr
The IS2 is the problem, not the tiger.

Lower rear armour of tiger and IS2 to 160. Lower frontal armour of IS2 to Tiger level. Lower AOE of the IS2 below tiger level, but buff its scatter, maintaining lethality vs infantry but giving it more consistent damage output without wiping squads when it gets a lucky shot off. Maybe raise the HP of the IS2 by 100.

It wasn't legendary when SU-100 and better and 76mm sherman and better and 17 pounder showed up.
It was a legendary target practice then.

Its not its performance that got it to legendary status, but propaganda really.
Over engineered, breaking left and right, few and perfectly countered by late war allied guns.

Bias, ignorance and grudge towards the best tank in WW2. To many '70s - '80s Hollywood war movies wached. Get a taste of true history. These forums only provided you with enough links and info to change your narrow mind. But you are hopeless.

Bias, ignorance and grudge towards the best tank in WW2. To many '70s - '80s Hollywood war movies wached. Get a taste of true history. These forums only provided you with enough links and info to change your narrow mind. But you are hopeless.

Except that during the 70-80s was exactly the time when the ignorant and biased tiger myths were born.

Bias, ignorance and grudge towards the best tank in WW2. To many '70s - '80s Hollywood war movies wached. Get a taste of true history. These forums only provided you with enough links and info to change your narrow mind. But you are hopeless.

I'm sorry, but since when Tiger was the best tan in WW2?

I'm sorry, but since when Tiger was the best tan in WW2?

Since it blasted to pieces every allied piece of crap it met. And with style, from at least 1000 meters. And it was operated by the best crews in war, too. See, allied crews didn't survive enough to gatter the experience of german crews... someone published a table with WW2 tank aces around here. Look at it, and you will understand.