Login

russian armor

Tiger without claws?

PAGES (7)down
10 May 2016, 21:28 PM
#21
avatar of drChengele
Patrion 14

Posts: 640 | Subs: 1

Tiger was nerfed for a reason. It was so good as to be a no-brainer. Its vulnerability to Jacksons and Fireflies is a good thing, it means there is no "top of the food chain". You could argue it gets penetrated too well for the relative cost, and I can see that as a valid concern; but please keep in mind who does the penetrating (nudge nudge). It's easy to rail on Jacksons but they come in a faction that has the weakest AT gun penetration-wise, and no equivalent of Stug or Panther (with a single commander that has a Pershing).

On the other hand the Su85 comes in a faction that has no medium other than t34/76, and no worthwhile handheld AT (admittedly with some call-ins to mitigate that situation)

Tiger I comes with a faction that has:
- the best AT gun
- Dual panzerschrecks
- StuG
- Panther

And all of that nondoctrinally. You could argue that this doesn't impact the tiger but the first mistake of balance is comparing units in a vacuum. The reason heavies were reduced in popcap and moved back is so that you can more easily support them with other units.
10 May 2016, 21:46 PM
#22
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1

Tiger in fact is what other heavies should be (I mean power level) -
can move in and cause some havoc,
will be forced away by dedicated AT,
will be easily brought down if overextended or used without proper support.

It should be used to cause bleed, not to annihilate things.

Say "No" to power creep.
10 May 2016, 21:49 PM
#23
avatar of Bananenheld

Posts: 1593 | Subs: 1

Tiger is fine
Ostheers repair capability isnt fine tho
10 May 2016, 21:49 PM
#24
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post10 May 2016, 20:46 PMsinthe
I think it just to weak against heavies. I use it like a big p4 for infantry, but if I need a tank hunter I go for Panthers.

Then you're doing it right, because that is exactly how its meant to be treated.

Generalist, bigger P4, not panther replacement.

jump backJump back to quoted post10 May 2016, 20:49 PMAlphrum
i always compare the tiger and is2 as to well asymmetrical balanced tanks, tiger having a better gun compared to is2's better Armour, but now is2's scatter is getting better improving its gun so imo tiger should get better Armour.

The thing about the tiger is atm, you dont even have to flank it, it gets penned so reliably from the front (yes overtime it got sight range and pen buff but so did many allied tanks). When ever i use the tiger, its mostly in base constantly repairing


So should we lower Tigers range and penetration to what it was before first, yes?

Tiger still has considerable better gun. It outranges IS-2 and fires faster.

And stock meds don't pen it easily at all frontally.
What you seem to forget is, allied TDs and ATGs are actually effective now.

Tiger isn't indestructible behemoth it used to be when only ost and sov were in game and there is nothing wrong with it.

There is only a single allied tank in game which tiger doesn't steamroll and that is IS-2.
10 May 2016, 21:53 PM
#25
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

A frontal armor buff would be great and would incentivize the use of the tiger as a spear head dat or give buff to tank behind It for limited time for munition
10 May 2016, 22:11 PM
#26
avatar of Kallipolan

Posts: 196

Tiger itself is in a very good spot IMO. Any better and we'd be stuck back in a call-in meta, where the Tiger is the only thing in the game that matters because it hard counters anything smaller. I believe the Mech Assault no-tech strat is already too good, and I don't want to see it get any stronger.

I think the real Tiger buff we need is a buff to Ostheer repair rate. It's so stupid that late-game you need 2 dedicated repair teams to keep the Tiger in fighting shape, and it still takes ages to get it back in the fight if it gets below half health. It's bloody annoying, takes too much pop cap and forces you to dump manpower into sqauds that are basically doing nothing half the time. I'd like to see an increased baseline repair rate for Pioneers with a further, much larger bonus at Vet 2, or alternatively (and preferably) a munitions-costing upgrade for Pioneers, unlocked with Battle Phase 3, that drastically increases their repair rate but maybe takes up a weapon slot or locks you out of other upgrades. I think this would be a better solution than relying just on veterancy because this way, freshly built squads in the late game can still do the job. It would also encourage players to keep teching up.
10 May 2016, 22:12 PM
#27
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

It's perfectly fine. It has exceptional range for a heavy, it is one of the most deadly AI units in game. It also deals with vehicles really well, what else do you expect from it?

IS-2 has better armour while Tiger has better gun, it ballances itself pretty well.
10 May 2016, 22:26 PM
#28
avatar of Gumboot

Posts: 199

It is like the ISU152 argument. People ask for more pen but the counter argument is it is a squad wiping machine.

Whilst the Tiger doesn't have the same squad wipe potential it is a far more versatile tank which most people would take over the ISU152. If Tiger needs more buffs then I would argue the ISU152 needs it first.
10 May 2016, 22:30 PM
#29
avatar of LuGer33

Posts: 174

jump backJump back to quoted post10 May 2016, 20:08 PMButcher
A heavy tank that can´t take hits is a bad heavy tank.

It gets penetrated frontally on a regular basis and the HP pool is quite low.

Pershing buff confirmed. 230 fuel for a tank that can be killed in one anti-tank air strafe.
10 May 2016, 22:53 PM
#30
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

Tiger is fine, EFA repair capabilities could see improvements.
10 May 2016, 22:56 PM
#32
avatar of Smaug

Posts: 366

Tiger is fine, EFA repair capabilities could see improvements.

+1000000000000000000000000
10 May 2016, 22:59 PM
#33
avatar of PanzerGeneralForever

Posts: 1072

jump backJump back to quoted post10 May 2016, 21:49 PMKatitof



There is only a single allied tank in game which tiger doesn't steamroll and that is IS-2.

And pershing, and FF and Jackson all which cost less than it. Tiger can't hunt cuz hes too slow. Just soaks up damage then crawls back for age long repairs.
10 May 2016, 23:17 PM
#34
avatar of drChengele
Patrion 14

Posts: 640 | Subs: 1

Tiger can't hunt cuz hes too slow. Just soaks up damage then crawls back for age long repairs.
A unit needs weaknesses. Speed is the Tiger's.
10 May 2016, 23:20 PM
#35
avatar of Smaug

Posts: 366

A unit needs weaknesses. Speed is the Tiger's.


and it should remain. even on vet3. thats why an armor increase on vet3 should be better then moblity and rate of fire increases.
10 May 2016, 23:54 PM
#36
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

A unit needs weaknesses. Speed is the Tiger's.


Tiger is second fastest heavy after pershing, isn't it?
11 May 2016, 00:11 AM
#37
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930



Tiger is second fastest heavy after pershing, isn't it?


the is2(5) and the pershing(6) are both faster than the tiger (4.7)


And pershing, and FF and Jackson all which cost less than it. Tiger can't hunt cuz hes too slow. Just soaks up damage then crawls back for age long repairs.


the tiger will win against the pershing. The tiger's 200 extra hp give it the edge.

the pershing can barely stand up to the panther as it is.

and both the FF and Jackson are specifically designed to hunt the tiger at range.
11 May 2016, 00:16 AM
#38
avatar of Vuther
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1


And pershing, and FF and Jackson all which cost less than it. Tiger can't hunt cuz hes too slow. Just soaks up damage then crawls back for age long repairs.

To be honest it always did bother me the IS-2 was tougher and faster, which was then entirely fine because IS-2s could only hit tanks to a remotely reliable degree. (And being slower is ahistorical)

If the Tiger does turn up suffering in comparison to the IS-2 after the IS-2's scatter buff, swapping their speeds strikes me as a fairly logical thing to do - the IS-2 would be tougher but slower while the Tiger is faster but weaker.
11 May 2016, 00:40 AM
#39
avatar of FalseAlarm

Posts: 182

Permanently Banned
Even without claws it is an I-Win against USF or the SU to some extent.

I would be very afraid if I faced a clawed-tiger.
11 May 2016, 00:45 AM
#40
avatar of PanzerGeneralForever

Posts: 1072




the tiger will win against the pershing. The tiger's 200 extra hp give it the edge.

and both the FF and Jackson are specifically designed to hunt the tiger at range.


Pershing can flank the tiger very easily and get away if need be. Tiger can't run and can't flank. Too slow.
PAGES (7)down
5 users are browsing this thread: 5 guests

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

179 users are online: 179 guests
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
35 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48966
Welcome our newest member, rr88market
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM