Tiger PzKpfw VI

Jump back to quoted post9 Feb 2019, 18:24 PMKatitof

You're insane if you think any heavy tank should ever have more then 50 at vet2.

Jump back to quoted post9 Feb 2019, 18:24 PMKatitof

You're insane if you think any heavy tank should ever have more then 50 at vet2.

Jump back to quoted post9 Feb 2019, 08:39 AMinsaneHoshi

All of which arnt late game units. Sturms arnt even strong past the first five minutes.

Jump back to quoted post9 Feb 2019, 18:51 PMWiderstreit

It is the Tiger I we are speaking about. It is no heavy tank anymore, or is the Comet a heavy too? It is forcing long-range tank-hunters ingame. Tiger I is way worse versus infantry than a Pershing, but Tiger has 2 more pop-cap and is a little bit more expensive.

so: a. make is as OP versus infantry (I don't want that, because also Pershing is OP) or b. give it more range, so it is a little bit easyer to Keep it alaive.

Jump back to quoted post9 Feb 2019, 19:23 PMthedarkarmadillo

Tiger 1 is the middle ground of all the heavy tanks. It doesnnt have the armour of the KT or is-2 but it's more reliable than both of them. It doesn't have the AI of the Pershing but it can take more hits. It doesn't have the health pool of the churchill but it's quick as hell as far as heavy tanks go.

The tiger isn't the pincle of any one trait but a potent blend of all of them.

55 range would be nuts as a passive, but maybe replacing the vet 1 blitz (which has no place on a heavy tank anyways) with a spearhead kind of ability might be interesting. Give it a trade off on the bonus so it remains an ideal combined arms center piece that the ostheer champions so well

Jump back to quoted post9 Feb 2019, 18:58 PMSander93

Give Ostheer a 60 range TD then so they can properly support it. As long as they don't have one, the Tiger needs to be bit more selfsufficient offensively than other heavy tanks because it has neither the armor (KT/IS-2) nor the hitpoints (KT/Churchill) to survive against a single TD.

Jump back to quoted post9 Feb 2019, 19:41 PMWiderstreit

Even 60 wouldn't make it a monster. Worse canon than all other tank-hunters, way more expensive. Even it's AI power is so bad, that on 60 range it would lose versus a PaK. Maybe at Vet3 with its hard reload buff it would become OP.

Jump back to quoted post9 Feb 2019, 20:04 PMKatitof

They have cheap, spammable, expendable TD instead.



We talk about Tiger 1, not Tiger 2.
Its AI power is lower only in comparison to pershing, every other generalist vehicle got worse AI.
Moreover it would massively buff its AT and it already has 2nd highest RoF out of all limited to 1 230 fuel vehicles.
60 range would make it ISU but with turret.

Jump back to quoted post9 Feb 2019, 20:14 PMShadowLinkX37

Losing units doesn't win wars

Jump back to quoted post9 Feb 2019, 20:42 PMdistrofio

"They have cheap, spammable, expendable,and UNRELIABLE in lategame, TD instead"

What? Did someome said to give stugs extra range and cloack by becoming immobile? An ambush ability?

Jump back to quoted post9 Feb 2019, 20:43 PMKatitof

Tell that to any soviet player trying to counter ele/JT by suiciding 3-4 T-34s as obviously, you're not going to kill it from the front.

Yeah, if there only existed an ability that could make StuGs immobile and give them 60+ range hmmm, hell, it could even boost their defence a bit.

Jump back to quoted post9 Feb 2019, 20:43 PMKatitof

Yeah, if there only existed an ability that could make StuGs immobile and give them 60+ range hmmm, hell, it could even boost their defence a bit.

Jump back to quoted post9 Feb 2019, 19:41 PMWiderstreit

Even 60 wouldn't make it a monster. Worse canon than all other tank-hunters, way more expensive. Even it's AI power is so bad, that on 60 range it would lose versus a PaK. Maybe at Vet3 with its hard reload buff it would become OP.

But 50 range would make a decent all-rounder at arrival, and then the +5 buff at Vet 2 would make 55 range. So it gets a small advantage.

Jump back to quoted post9 Feb 2019, 22:05 PMthedarkarmadillo

60 range would absolutely make it a monster. It would be the same as an allied TD, but with machine guns, armour, nearly double the health, blitz and aoe on the gun.
Don't get me wrong, I'm arguing the tiger is a bit squishy due to the potency of its counters but let's think about balance here while we make claims yea?

50-55 range isn't going to help the tiger quite against the thing that is pressuring it but turn the balance on its head against everything else that it isn't underperforming against.
Its just like buffing TDs because of the KT and panthers and ignoring that they now invalidate all armour values below 300 (which is most)

Jump back to quoted post9 Feb 2019, 22:17 PMTheGentlemenTroll

Maybe give it more health so it has more consistent staying power? Armor is too rng for my taste and the health buffs for the panther helped it a ton. So maybe a tiger health buff will help it against TDs also.

Jump back to quoted post9 Feb 2019, 23:58 PMWiderstreit

- IS2 should be a heavy-counter. But it has bad accuracy and bad pen. -> make it pen 100% and it would be useful.