Login

russian armor

What good is the tiger tank?

PAGES (14)down
9 Jun 2015, 08:23 AM
#201
avatar of Burts

Posts: 1702

I honestly have no idea why people prefer the IS-2 over the tiger.


Except for the IS-2s higher armor, the tiger is pretty much better in every way.


IS-2 has slightly higher pen while the tiger has a higher rate of fire thus making it better againts tanks ( or at least all allied tanks except IS-2) , tiger also faces significatly weaker AT than the IS-2 and tiger is also significantly better againts infantry.


IS-2 is more durable, but that's about it...
9 Jun 2015, 08:37 AM
#202
avatar of JohnnyB

Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1



I'd rather see the IS-2 dropped to Tiger levels which makes heavies more vulnerable. Either an armour reduction, both front and rear, or make it slower. For some reason it's faster than a stock Tiger while having significantly more armour.


+1
9 Jun 2015, 13:48 PM
#203
avatar of Blalord

Posts: 742 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Jun 2015, 08:23 AMBurts
I honestly have no idea why people prefer the IS-2 over the tiger.


Except for the IS-2s higher armor, the tiger is pretty much better in every way.


IS-2 has slightly higher pen while the tiger has a higher rate of fire thus making it better againts tanks ( or at least all allied tanks except IS-2) , tiger also faces significatly weaker AT than the IS-2 and tiger is also significantly better againts infantry.


IS-2 is more durable, but that's about it...


Cause IS-2 will more one shot squads when he hit (even if he hit less), reinforce compare to recrut a new squad will still cost -50% less, and you dont lose veterancy.
And come with a nice flame barrage that "nullify" temporarly paks

IS2 Frontal armor is brutal ... :O

9 Jun 2015, 13:51 PM
#204
avatar of Iron Emperor

Posts: 1653

It's all because of the frontal armour...
9 Jun 2015, 14:08 PM
#205
avatar of austerlitz

Posts: 1705

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Jun 2015, 08:23 AMBurts
I honestly have no idea why people prefer the IS-2 over the tiger.


Except for the IS-2s higher armor, the tiger is pretty much better in every way.


IS-2 has slightly higher pen while the tiger has a higher rate of fire thus making it better againts tanks ( or at least all allied tanks except IS-2) , tiger also faces significatly weaker AT than the IS-2 and tiger is also significantly better againts infantry.


IS-2 is more durable, but that's about it...


Don't worry tiger will no longer be around in a few days,and lol i don't even feel any regret-its been an underwhelming embrassment for quite some time.And no ,no way in hell is it better against tanks.Infact its trash vs enemy lategame armor.I'm not talking abt a-moving into enemy position,it can't even DEFEND a position without pak babysitting.
10 Jun 2015, 03:48 AM
#206
avatar of Jason

Posts: 82



Don't worry tiger will no longer be around in a few days,and lol i don't even feel any regret-its been an underwhelming embrassment for quite some time.And no ,no way in hell is it better against tanks.Infact its trash vs enemy lategame armor.I'm not talking abt a-moving into enemy position,it can't even DEFEND a position without pak babysitting.


Nope. Especially when a cheap Jackson can snipe it to death. Or an IS2 steamrolls it.. meh.

The tiger is a kitten.
10 Jun 2015, 03:55 AM
#207
avatar of daspoulos

Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1

Permanently Banned
Tiger aint that great until it hits vet 2, then it has the range to make it less of a pinata. Overall I think the tiger is fine, wish it had s-mine launchers instead of blitz. A health buff to 1280 hp at vet2 would be a good idea IMO but thats it. Is2 needs higher reload and a damage buff. Looks stupid right now, a super speedy heavy tank with same armor as a king tiger firing its 122mm gun every 6 seconds at 160 damage that misses half its shots but the other half is prone to one shot wipes or puts them down low enough health where the dshk on top just snipes the low health models.
10 Jun 2015, 07:22 AM
#208
avatar of comm_ash
Patrion 14

Posts: 1194 | Subs: 1

Tiger is great. It is exactly what I think a heavy tank should be. A more durable, more generally effective medium that can be countered by AT guns and tank destroyers fairly easily. I would rather see the IS2 become more like the Tiger in terms of armor and damage.
10 Jun 2015, 10:46 AM
#209
avatar of QueenRatchet123

Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post9 Jun 2015, 08:23 AMBurts
I honestly have no idea why people prefer the IS-2 over the tiger.


Except for the IS-2s higher armor, the tiger is pretty much better in every way.


IS-2 has slightly higher pen while the tiger has a higher rate of fire thus making it better againts tanks ( or at least all allied tanks except IS-2) , tiger also faces significatly weaker AT than the IS-2 and tiger is also significantly better againts infantry.


IS-2 is more durable, but that's about it...


/thread
10 Jun 2015, 11:01 AM
#210
avatar of Jawohl?

Posts: 97

decrease cost to 590mp 210 fuel
10 Jun 2015, 11:19 AM
#211
avatar of QueenRatchet123

Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post10 Jun 2015, 11:01 AMJawohl?
decrease cost to 590mp 210 fuel


THEN NURF IT
10 Jun 2015, 11:34 AM
#212
avatar of Jawohl?

Posts: 97



THEN NURF IT


nerf what? ai capability? hp?

imo, it doesnt perform well for his current price
10 Jun 2015, 11:52 AM
#213
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 1225

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Jun 2015, 08:23 AMBurts
I honestly have no idea why people prefer the IS-2 over the tiger.


Except for the IS-2s higher armor, the tiger is pretty much better in every way.


IS-2 has slightly higher pen while the tiger has a higher rate of fire thus making it better againts tanks ( or at least all allied tanks except IS-2) , tiger also faces significatly weaker AT than the IS-2 and tiger is also significantly better againts infantry.


IS-2 is more durable, but that's about it...

IS-2 is not only more durable (and a good deal more durable at that with 390 to 320 frontal armour) its also faster and firing at smaller squads with the added benefit of a better MG, making it actually easily as strong in the AI department as the Tiger.

In short, it always baffles me why you would prefer Tigers over IS-2s.;) No seriously, there is no objective reason to do so, I use them both all the time, and the IS-2 is tangibly stronger, not in the least because its just clearly easier to keep it alive.
10 Jun 2015, 12:08 PM
#214
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8


IS-2 is not only more durable (and a good deal more durable at that with 390 to 320 frontal armour) its also faster and firing at smaller squads with the added benefit of a better MG, making it actually easily as strong in the AI department as the Tiger.

In short, it always baffles me why you would prefer Tigers over IS-2s.;) No seriously, there is no objective reason to do so, I use them both all the time, and the IS-2 is tangibly stronger, not in the least because its just clearly easier to keep it alive.


I like how you always jump on me like a rabid monkey, yet have no slightest idea what you're taking about yourself.
Educate yourself on armor values and stop pulling them out of your ass-we don't need more alexes spreading misinformation.
10 Jun 2015, 12:26 PM
#215
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 1225

jump backJump back to quoted post10 Jun 2015, 12:08 PMKatitof


I like how you always jump on me like a rabid monkey, yet have no slightest idea what you're taking about yourself.
Educate yourself on armor values and stop pulling them out of your ass-we don't need more alexes spreading misinformation.

Lol kid, shoo.
I keep jumping on you? Remember, I tried to talk to you nicely (as so many people have) and ask you to adjust your behaviour, you know, not behave like an douchebag all the time and heap abuse on your fellow posters left and right, but to no avail. You think its a coincidence that the only people that still can suffer you are your fellow fanboys? You're the most pathetic kind of bully, sucking up to the powers that be and hassling the rest, on the internet no less, kinda escapes me what you even look to get from that, especially as you don't even actually play this game. Why not find yourself a more productive outlet for your energies? But I digress.

Anyways, as this is probably a lost cause, I'd like to ignore you (but the forum does not let me), so: Fuck off and don't talk to me unless you want to behave like a civilised adult for once. Have a nice day.
10 Jun 2015, 13:11 PM
#216
avatar of Burts

Posts: 1702


IS-2 is not only more durable (and a good deal more durable at that with 390 to 320 frontal armour) its also faster and firing at smaller squads with the added benefit of a better MG, making it actually easily as strong in the AI department as the Tiger.

In short, it always baffles me why you would prefer Tigers over IS-2s.;) No seriously, there is no objective reason to do so, I use them both all the time, and the IS-2 is tangibly stronger, not in the least because its just clearly easier to keep it alive.



The armor values are 375 for the IS-2 and 300 for the tiger btw. I don't really consider the tiger to be better, but when i'm playing ostheer and i see an IS-2/shocks i'm generally relieved because it's not guards/t-34-85s.


Unless it's on stalingrad of course :snfPeter:
10 Jun 2015, 16:48 PM
#217
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

Default Tiger MG are better but the Dhska upgrade is a bit more expensive but better.
Note: this is all taken from http://www.coh2-stats.com/ may or not be updated.

12.755 8.046 3.503 Upgrade (Uses Panther MG) 50muni
6.456 3.619 2.048 Default
14.019 9.225 3.761 Default


36.419 20.298 11.361 Upgrade 60muni
6.005 4.325 2.293 Default
6.005 4.325 2.293 Default
10 Jun 2015, 20:28 PM
#218
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 1225

jump backJump back to quoted post10 Jun 2015, 13:11 PMBurts



The armor values are 375 for the IS-2 and 300 for the tiger btw. I don't really consider the tiger to be better, but when i'm playing ostheer and i see an IS-2/shocks i'm generally relieved because it's not guards/t-34-85s.


Unless it's on stalingrad of course :snfPeter:

Ye you're right about the armour values, was posting from memory, should have checked beforehand.

Stalingrad (and La Gleize) is one map I veto as OH. I still sometimes get to play on it though. :S
10 Jun 2015, 20:56 PM
#219
avatar of Squeaky Door 96

Posts: 192

Permanently Banned

Ye you're right about the armour values, was posting from memory, should have checked beforehand.

Stalingrad (and La Gleize) is one map I veto as OH. I still sometimes get to play on it though. :S


Same, veto sometimes doesn't work..
10 Jun 2015, 21:27 PM
#220
avatar of TheSleep3r

Posts: 670


You're the most pathetic kind of bully, sucking up to the powers that be and hassling the rest, on the internet no less, kinda escapes me what you even look to get from that, especially as you don't even actually play this game.


ayy lmao
PAGES (14)down
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 guests

Livestreams

United States 27
unknown 6
Russian Federation 5

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

865 users are online: 865 guests
2 posts in the last 24h
10 posts in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50010
Welcome our newest member, yresearcher
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM