Tiger without claws?

No.

Its not.

It has greater range, RoF and penetration then most tanks in game.

You can't have a unit that can take a hit and punch hard at the same time, even IS-2 after the adjustment will still not be on pair when it comes to firepower.

Other heavies also will have less rear armor to the point where flanking meds will be a real, actual threat, should we buff IS-2 and comet then too?

And yeah, its easy to see how tiger will perform.
It'll perform as a heavy tank, not nazi super weapon.

At the end of the day, it doesnt matter how big a gun you have if you can't get in range to fire it. Have a high HP pool only means you can take more hits before having to lumber back to repair it.

IS 2 doesn't need to fear flanking mediums excpet maybe panthers since its almost as fast as them.

Speed > firepower
Cromwell is living proof of that.

At the end of the day, it doesnt matter how big a gun you have if you can't get in range to fire it. Have a high HP pool only means you can take more hits before having to lumber back to repair it.

IS 2 doesn't need to fear flanking mediums excpet maybe panthers since its almost as fast as them.

Speed > firepower
Cromwell is living proof of that.

Tiger has 4.7 speed.
IS-2 has 5 speed.
Slowest med has 6.3 speed.


Tiger is not even 10% slower then IS-2 while shoots almost 20% faster.
Moreover, Tiger can blitz.

Which means the speed when it actually matters, goes for Tiger, you still need vet1 for it, but it'll chew through infantry fast enough to get there quickly, as it usually does.

It has greater range, RoF and penetration then most tanks in game.

The range is the same as on the IS-2 with vet 2 and it´s lower than that of the Pershing. The 5 range more on Vet 0 and 1 are neglectable. 5 range won´t help you dodge and deliver shots with micro, especially with a lower view range.

Other heavies also will have less rear armor to the point where flanking meds will be a real, actual threat, should we buff IS-2 and comet then too?

This is actually funny. The IS-2 is going to be buffed with its better scatter values. So you answered your own question. Now the Tiger needs something.

The real question is: Why are Allied tank destroyers allowed to hard counter any Axis heavy tank, while StuG and Jagdpanther are left behind?

The range is the same as on the IS-2 with vet 2 and it´s lower than that of the Pershing. The 5 range more on Vet 0 and 1 are neglectable. 5 range won´t help you dodge and deliver shots with micro, especially with a lower view range.

You still have first and most likely last shot.
Vet2 on heavies doesn't happen within 5 mins of fielding them and advantage over meds and in closer encounters with TDs is permanent.
Other units in the past proven already that 5 range over equivalent and weaker units is a HUGE bonus.

This is actually funny. The IS-2 is going to be buffed with its better scatter values. So you answered your own question. Now the Tiger needs something.

For the 10th time, tiger just got range and penetration buff.
There is your "something".

The real question is: Why are Allied tank destroyers allowed to hard counter any Axis heavy tank, while StuG and Jagdpanther are left behind?

Yeah... I wonder why...

The real question is: Why are Allied tank destroyers allowed to hard counter any Axis heavy tank, while StuG and Jagdpanther are left behind?

L2P issue here, Stug hard counter anything Allies can field that is not IS-2. I don't know for the Jagpanther thus don't say anything about it but predator phasing ability is quite a good argument to get it and vet it.

for its cost the tiger doesnt have very impressive amounts of hitpoints, that along with every shot nowadays are nearly 100% penetration... i prefer coh1 system of less penetration but those shots still did a small amount of damage.

for its cost the tiger doesnt have very impressive amounts of hitpoints

I'd like to know what you think of Pershing then...

L2P issue here, Stug hard counter anything Allies can field that is not IS-2. I don't know for the Jagpanther thus don't say anything about it but predator phasing ability is quite a good argument to get it and vet it.

Not an Is-2? Pfff it just takes more Stugs! and you know...don't let them take the second shot...

Not an Is-2? Pfff it just takes more Stugs! and you know...don't let them take the second shot...

Wanted to say hard-counter, but yes stugs counter well IS-2 as well.

Make the tiger slower but give it better range and sight, that way 2-3 t34s can be deadly to a tiger with the low rear armour if they can get behind it.

Stugs are fine against IS-2s. 1 stug is not as good as 1 SU85, but you can get 3 stugs for every 2 SU85s. Costs matter.

After more thought I think the Tiger is going to struggle quite a bit if that changes in the balance preview go through.

Lower rear armour means it is now vulnerable to mediums (which is good) but it is also much more vulnerable to snares and, let's face it, shitty pathing often means your rear armour gets exposed through no fault of the player.

So while the unit isn't getting a major nerf to its performance, it will be more vulnerable to all of its counters except AT guns. The tiger isn't OP in its current state anyway, so it would be a shame to see such an iconic unit fall out of the usefulness.

Imo Tiger is fine in terms of balancing, decent in every perspective of a heavy tank. Maybe a bit durability buff since at guns and tank destroyers like su76 su85 are getting more penetration.

However as a fanboy I'd rather say, tiger sucks, though it sucks less than king tiger.

I'd like to know what you think of Pershing then...

riflemen > grenadiers already so fuck pershing... and pershing eats up grenadiers like no tomorrow, one shot easily kills 3 models which is 75% of the squad... i would like to see a Tiger constistently kill 75% of allied squads with a single shot then maaybe i would take you seriously.

riflemen > grenadiers already so fuck pershing... and pershing eats up grenadiers like no tomorrow, one shot easily kills 3 models which is 75% of the squad... i would like to see a Tiger constistently kill 75% of allied squads with a single shot then maaybe i would take you seriously.

Well, get yourself an adult diaper, because you're going to lose some shit now.

Rifles cost more then grens.
Grens have a variety of support troops from the get go, rifles are alone.

Pershing costs just as much as tiger.

Tiger gun is better vs infantry then pershing gun, it has greater AoE and fires faster before vet.
Scatter distance is 0.1 better for Pershing, but its not noticable.

They are pretty much equal if Tiger isn't better for AI.


Get a clue about the units you want to discuss and maybe I will take you seriously instead of treating you like rampaging fanboy you are.

riflemen > grenadiers already so fuck pershing...

If we're going down that route, Pak>57mm so fuck Tiger. PzIV > Sherman so fuck Tiger. MG42 > .50cal so fuck Tiger. Schrecks > Bazookas so fuck Tiger.

If we're going down that route, Pak>57mm so fuck Tiger. PzIV > Sherman so fuck Tiger. MG42 > .50cal so fuck Tiger. Schrecks > Bazookas so fuck Tiger.

Well, get yourself an adult diaper, because you're going to lose some shit now.

Rifles cost more then grens.
Grens have a variety of support troops from the get go, rifles are alone.

Pershing costs just as much as tiger.

Tiger gun is better vs infantry then pershing gun, it has greater AoE and fires faster before vet.
Scatter distance is 0.1 better for Pershing, but its not noticable.

They are pretty much equal if Tiger isn't better for AI.


Get a clue about the units you want to discuss and maybe I will take you seriously instead of treating you like rampaging fanboy you are.

Apparently the one who needs losing shit is you.
Rifles cost more then grens - of course they do and they worth their money until the last penny.
Grens have a variety of support troops from the get go, rifles are alone - in this blobbing game, that is actualy an OH's liability to be forced to combine arms. Yolo USF riflemen blobs are not giving a Fornication Under Consent of King on Oh's "supported" grenadiers and combined OH's game.

"Pershing costs just as much as tiger.

Tiger gun is better vs infantry then pershing gun, it has greater AoE and fires faster before vet.
Scatter distance is 0.1 better for Pershing, but its not noticable.

They are pretty much equal if Tiger isn't better for AI."

All these are negated by the fragility of grens. They must much more often retreat in order not to be wiped (while having no FRP as USF has) and get more often wiped, every COH school boy knows that. So Compared to Tiger, Pershing is a mp eater BY FAR.

"
Get a clue about the units you want to discuss and maybe I will take you seriously instead of treating you like rampaging fanboy you are."

Get a clue about how to remove those BIAS glasses of your red star eyes.

If we're going down that route, Pak>57mm so fuck Tiger. PzIV > Sherman so fuck Tiger. MG42 > .50cal so fuck Tiger. Schrecks > Bazookas so fuck Tiger.

pz4 > sherman LOL? basicly the same tank but sherman has HE shells aka lolwipes. Try again.

pz4 > sherman LOL? basicly the same tank but sherman has HE shells aka lolwipes. Try again.

ive used the pz4 a lot recently, it has horrible main gun accuracy, shitty pen (you even bounce often on t34 and shermans.. after missing 2-3 times in a row LUL!)

pz4 can kill inf very good, but for its costs to fight other tanks.. just no LUL


and the problem with the tiger is the comet spam, it feels like the comet is better in most stats, but still cheaper and you can get more of them..