Tiger PzKpfw VI

Which TDs can the panther run straight at and win? And get by snares and AT guns too?

And which heavy tank can TDs down before PaKs will rip them apart?

Stop using argument of "supporting units" exclusively when it fits your scenario, either both sides have support, or none.

The Tiger's a generalist: its penetration values are a hair below dedicated tank destroyers, and its Vet 0 main gun AoE is comparable to the HE rounds Sherman.

Yes, the Panther outclasses it as a tank killer, but if you want an efficient tank killer, get a Panther! You get the Tiger instead of the Panther for the same reason you get the P4 instead of the StuG: you want a unit that can fight off enemy armour while still inflicting manpower bleed.

If you keep the Tiger in your base and only roll it out for tank battles, it's not going to pay itself back. You need it on the front lines taking pot shots at infantry.

Think of it like a slower, tougher Pershing.

so your point is to use the most famous AT gun in ww2 to snipe 1 or 2 models at a Tank battle ?

And which heavy tank can TDs down before PaKs will rip them apart?

Stop using argument of "supporting units" exclusively when it fits your scenario, either both sides have support, or non

"Which heavy tank can TDs down before PaKs ..."

Any of them? They sure as shit can force them back. King tigers don't have pak support and as evidenced by this thread the tiger too.

Sure we can give both sides support but a unit that has to advance to 50 range to fire, Is harder to support that a tank that fires at 60 range and kites.

One out paces its support and the other draws into its support. Tell me, can a mine support a panther when it's running straight at a TD?

Ergo when you have the range advantage, you don't have to flank.

Having such a biased story keeps you from pretending that you are not playing any faction other than OKW.
turret, fast speed, high penetration or high moving accuracy; Panther has everything you said.

Panther has high moving accuracy? Do tell.

Which TDs can the panther run straight at and win? And get by snares and AT guns too?

Panther can deal with firefly or a single Jackson easily. You are acting like panther only has 30 range or something...

In okw case you don't need to flank and trade, you just sit back and vet while your obers and jaegers turn into terminators backed up by panther.allies are the ones that need to get aggressive late game, not axis

so your point is to use the most famous AT gun in ww2 to snipe 1 or 2 models at a Tank battle ?

No, my point is don't to use the Tiger as a dedicated tank destroyer. The Tiger's good in a tank battle, but if that's all you want it for, get a Panther instead.

No, my point is don't to use the Tiger as a dedicated tank destroyer. The Tiger's good in a tank battle, but if that's all you want it for, get a Panther instead.

The whole thread is about that this is NOT the case.
The Tank battle u may think of is sherman against Tiger. The regular is that Jacksons and SU 85 stomp the Axis Tanks while they cant fight back. The only Tank that trade ok is the Panther. And thats the reason why u see so much Panther`s in the current Meta.

The whole thread is about that this is NOT the case.
The Tank battle u may think of is sherman against Tiger. The regular is that Jacksons and SU 85 stomp the Axis Tanks while they cant fight back. The only Tank that trade ok is the Panther. And thats the reason why u see so much Panther`s in the current Meta.

Tank destroyers hardcounter tanks.
That's their one and only job.

Big tanks are still tanks.

You want Tiger to counter its own hardcounter.
You're running into a wall here.

The whole thread is about that this is NOT the case.
The Tank battle u may think of is sherman against Tiger. The regular is that Jacksons and SU 85 stomp the Axis Tanks while they cant fight back. The only Tank that trade ok is the Panther. And thats the reason why u see so much Panther`s in the current Meta.

A Tiger'll beat a Jackson in a 1v1 brawl. Similar reload speed, Tiger needs to hit four times, Jackson needs to hit about eight.

It won't beat two Jacksons, but if you think 640 MP 230 FU of generalist vehicle should beat 800 MP 280 FU of dedicated anti-tank vehicle then I question what you're doing on the balance forum.

The whole thread is about that this is NOT the case.
The Tank battle u may think of is sherman against Tiger. The regular is that Jacksons and SU 85 stomp the Axis Tanks while they cant fight back. The only Tank that trade ok is the Panther. And thats the reason why u see so much Panther`s in the current Meta.

Jacksons stomp every axis tank i agree, there but the su85? no, su85 is VERY venerable to flanks unlike the jackson. Before any buffs to the tiger, id rather specifically look at the clearly OP jackson. imo they defo need a moving accuracy nerf, they no longer a TD u have to flank with and make them more vulnerable getting caught out.

The amount of times i flanked and caught a Jackson with my panther, only for the panther to miss every shot while the jackson moves and hits all of its shots, ridiculous.

Point is every 60 range TD has strong advantages and strong disadvantages, however the Jackson's advantages greatly overshadows its weaknesses.

Jacksons stomp every axis tank i agree, there but the su85? no, su85 is VERY venerable to flanks unlike the jackson. Before any buffs to the tiger, id rather specifically look at the clearly OP jackson. imo they defo need a moving accuracy nerf, they no longer a TD u have to flank with and make them more vulnerable getting caught out.

The amount of times i flanked and caught a Jackson with my panther, only for the panther to miss every shot while the jackson moves and hits all of its shots, ridiculous.

Point is every 60 range TD has strong advantages and strong disadvantages, however the Jackson's advantages greatly overshadows its weaknesses.

All factions also have a vehicle that is able to take a beating, either stock or doctrinally.
All but USF.

See a pattern here?

You start to figure out what it might be, or more hints are needed?

A Tiger'll beat a Jackson in a 1v1 brawl. Similar reload speed, Tiger needs to hit four times, Jackson needs to hit about eight.

It won't beat two Jacksons, but if you think 640 MP 230 FU of generalist vehicle should beat 800 MP 280 FU of dedicated anti-tank vehicle then I question what you're doing on the balance forum.

How many games u played where u got 1 Jackson and the enemy 1 Tiger ....?

This is no test ground here. U cant simplify this with "compare the cost" and than its done.

The whole game is abaout timing and minutemarks where something can hit the field.
The Map design... Inf support.. Doctrines.. and so on.

Now u bring the Tiger and there are 1-2 Jacksons with Vet on the field. What do you thing will happen?
The Tiger will be outranged and get rekt. One other Thing is, that u dont go T4 when u want to play the Tiger. U go for the weaker T3. Wich get also rekt by the Jacksons.
As USF u go for the normal Inf blobb into the Jackson... and u have anything u need to win.
The Jackson is just to good and denied the Heavy Axis Armor.

Lets look at the current Meta. Is there any Heavy Aixis Tank play ? NO! all u get i the Panther because this is the only Thing that can keep up and be nearly cost efficient. This will not change soon, so u will see rarly any Heavys in 1vs1 and 2vs2.( The Meme Tanks Jagdtiger,Ele,Tiger and KT)

Jacksons stomp every axis tank i agree, there but the su85? no, su85 is VERY venerable to flanks unlike the jackson. Before any buffs to the tiger, id rather specifically look at the clearly OP jackson. imo they defo need a moving accuracy nerf, they no longer a TD u have to flank with and make them more vulnerable getting caught out.

The amount of times i flanked and caught a Jackson with my panther, only for the panther to miss every shot while the jackson moves and hits all of its shots, ridiculous.

Point is every 60 range TD has strong advantages and strong disadvantages, however the Jackson's advantages greatly overshadows its weaknesses.

Its more the "selfspotting" Stuff. Another Unit where u get Maximum efficiency by 0 micro.

Tank destroyers hardcounter tanks.
That's their one and only job.

Big tanks are still tanks.

You want Tiger to counter its own hardcounter.
You're running into a wall here.

Yeah! rly ?? Then why gets the Brum a nerv?

Anti Infantry Tanks hardcounter Infantry
That's their one and only job.

No i dont want to counter it but there is a difference between being a counter and make the Unit useless before it hits the field.
But why all this "talking"... just look at the Metagame. I cant remember a game against USF wich had no Jackson.

Lets vote for the TigerI as a premium "TANK DESTROYER"
It will have a long range gun profile and penetrationt.
This way there is no BS of "hard counter being countered" nor "its just a heavy generalist tank"
Remove its AI and focus on beefy AT.
Its limited to 1. It cant get out of control.
Also Axis need more reliable AT rather than AI.
/Thread

Tank destroyers hardcounter tanks.
That's their one and only job.

Big tanks are still tanks.

You want Tiger to counter its own hardcounter.
You're running into a wall here.

The point is that a tiger IS a big tank, an expensive tank, but is no more effort to counter than a little one. It takes a few hits more. That's it. Allied TD pen is too high. It should have a chance to bounce, because it's not a panzer 4, it's a tiger. It's not 120 fuel, is 230. The counters shouldn't be the exact same with damn near the exact chance to pen. THAT'S the issue. Not that it has a counter, but that the counter invalidates it.

Also usf tanks can heal themselves, a tank that can take a beating then pull back and heal itself would be broken beyond belief. You can't have it all.

The point is that a tiger IS a big tank, an expensive tank, but is no more effort to counter than a little one. It takes a few hits more. That's it. Allied TD pen is too high. It should have a chance to bounce, because it's not a panzer 4, it's a tiger. It's not 120 fuel, is 230. The counters shouldn't be the exact same with damn near the exact chance to pen. THAT'S the issue. Not that it has a counter, but that the counter invalidates it.

Also usf tanks can heal themselves, a tank that can take a beating then pull back and heal itself would be broken beyond belief. You can't have it all.

Basically Katitof is playing with anyone arguing his logic.

He oversimplifies in his favour but also he is not incorrect.

Just point out that jacksons can kite easly and then the effective shots needed to bring a Tiger down comes easly. As long as you can lockdown it, because you get easy frontal armor penetrating shots.

The point is that a tiger IS a big tank, an expensive tank, but is no more effort to counter than a little one. It takes a few hits more. That's it. Allied TD pen is too high. It should have a chance to bounce, because it's not a panzer 4, it's a tiger. It's not 120 fuel, is 230. The counters shouldn't be the exact same with damn near the exact chance to pen. THAT'S the issue. Not that it has a counter, but that the counter invalidates it.

Also usf tanks can heal themselves, a tank that can take a beating then pull back and heal itself would be broken beyond belief. You can't have it all.

In most cases, TDs need sight assist to kite their range. Except in some special cases, most baseline infantry will be responsible for this task.
If the Armor of the heavy tanks is too high, the TD can not retreat the heavy tank before the baseline infantry suffers a great deal of damage.
If this is the case, then the axis can do frontline collapse very easily by dragging the Heavy-tanks to the frontline, hunting only the baseline infantry, retreating and repairing.
This is a very big problem.
This is because TD, the sole countermeasure, does not effectively deal with Heavy tanks.

The penetrations of Allies TD are not excessive at all. The problem is that pushes the heavy-tank into allies TD, the only heavy-tank countermeasure for allies.
No one complains that the MG is perfectly in front of a infantry squad.
Even the 240 Manpower MG34 can easily pindown 400 Manpower Rangers.
But this is because of counter relationship, not because MG34 is OP.

But why all this "talking"... just look at the Metagame. I cant remember a game against USF wich had no Jackson.

Ummm, you DO realize Shermans can't fight even P4s and Jackson is the ONLY non doctrinal TD for USF?

That's like complaining that you can't remember a game against USF where you didn't see Rifles.

Now u bring the Tiger and there are 1-2 Jacksons with Vet on the field. What do you thing will happen?

The same thing that'll happen if you field an IS-2 against two Panthers.

If your opponent's gone all in on tank destroyers why are you calling in a Tiger?!

A double Jackson build has thrown ~40% of its popcap into vehicular anti-tank. You beat it by exploiting its relative anti-infantry weakness, not by building the things its good against.

Lets vote for the TigerI as a premium "TANK DESTROYER"
It will have a long range gun profile and penetrationt.
This way there is no BS of "hard counter being countered" nor "its just a heavy generalist tank"
Remove its AI and focus on beefy AT.

That's the Elefant.

The same thing that'll happen if you field an IS-2 against two Panthers.

If your opponent's gone all in on tank destroyers why are you calling in a Tiger?!

A double Jackson build has thrown ~40% of its popcap into vehicular anti-tank. You beat it by exploiting its relative anti-infantry weakness, not by building the things its good against.




That's the Elefant.

Nice theory but it completely wrong.

M36 can be disembarked in which case the total pop is 8.

(even when crewed M36 has a pop 16 so the total is 32% not 40%)

How many games u played where u got 1 Jackson and the enemy 1 Tiger ....?

This is no test ground here. U cant simplify this with "compare the cost" and than its done.

The whole game is abaout timing and minutemarks where something can hit the field.
The Map design... Inf support.. Doctrines.. and so on.

Now u bring the Tiger and there are 1-2 Jacksons with Vet on the field.

If we talk about timings...

So, in presented scenario, assuming both players have exact same fuel income - USF player just builds Jackson first then sits with it around doing mostly nothing (maybe wrecking a LV or two), waiting for you to accumulate your extra 125 fuel (or whatever the difference between Jackson and Tiger costs), then you call in Tiger and he builds 2nd one?

Where did they got vet?

Why would you go for a Tiger if there is counter for it on the field already?

Its more the "selfspotting" Stuff. Another Unit where u get Maximum efficiency by 0 micro.

If this is what you really think than it is obvious that you've NEVER in your life tried to micro 2 SU-85 and utilize self-spotting ability.

Nice theory but it completely wrong.

M36 can be disembarked in which case the total pop is 8.

(even when crewed M36 has a pop 16 so the total is 32% not 40%)

I'm sorry, I don't get it -

What is "completely wrong" in theory that you shouldn't invest 230 fuel into unit which hard counters are already present on the field?

Having opponent to have 16 pop and 720 MP and 270 FUEL (don't remember exact cost of M36, but it doesn't matter here) sitting without job, since they don't affect your infantry in any way, is completely wrong strategy?

If we talk about timings...

So, in presented scenario, assuming both players have exact same fuel income - USF player just builds Jackson first then sits with it around doing mostly nothing (maybe wrecking a LV or two), waiting for you to accumulate your extra 125 fuel (or whatever the difference between Jackson and Tiger costs), then you call in Tiger and he builds 2nd one?

Where did they got vet?

Why would you go for a Tiger if there is counter for it on the field already?



I'm sorry, I don't get it -

What is "completely wrong" in theory that you shouldn't invest 230 fuel into unit which hard counters are already present on the field?

Having opponent to have 16 pop and 720 MP and 270 FUEL (don't remember exact cost of M36, but it doesn't matter here) sitting without job, since they don't affect your infantry in any way, is completely wrong strategy?

Since jacksons hardcounters every vehicle, and jackson is build nearly every game..you should not build any tanks anymore?
I have problems winning the infantry game against vetted, double equipped rifles, but could be my lack of skill