Tiger & Panther Accuracy
Moderator: MOD_SPWaW
Tiger & Panther Accuracy
I have been playing a long campaign and finally get to use Tigers and Panther tanks, Big disapointment. They miss more than the Pz-IIIJ and very rarely get first round kills. My understanding is that these tanks historically were very accurate and could penetrate nearly all opossing armor. I know they had a tendency to breakdown, is this lack of hitting part of that? Could someone fill me in on this problem and/or set me straight if i am wrong.
Hi, lets fight an online battle (most of the Tigers I fight do get those first and second and third round hit/kills) so I like your luck. Did you break any mirrors recently?
------------------
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction!
------------------
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction!
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
The odds aren't with any tank in World war 2 to get first round hits maybe 1 outta three times maybe if firing at a staionary target from the halt a kilometer and a half away ... Under what conditions are you talking about ??? what experience levels are involved ?? Tigers and Panthers do have higher rating on rangefinder and fire control but thats not the only stuff that effects accuracy .PZ III's have a better stab rating so if movement is involved I would expect higher hits from PZIII's you just upgraded to them that means you lost experience points and that would affect their accuracy negatively.. I think both Tigers and Panthers suffer from an inflated reputation from Hollywood and the Mythology of War that tends to make the Other Guys Good stuff Great ... Rate of fire on tigers is a 4 on panthers a 5 and on PZIII's a 6 so PZIII's are going to comeout ahead on a quck draw sitruation where the target is not in veiw a full turn especially compounded by the suppeior Stab on the PZIII's but the tactical situation has been changing to more things to suppress you did the national ratings change in '43?? i can't remember you may have lower national levels that could be affecting things ..explain further
"For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary periods, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which
I do get some first rnd hits but they even rarely kill, some recochet vs shermans. I know historically nearly all shermans went up in flames when hit, not in my case though when play AI.
AmmoSGT. where do you find a tanks stab value? I have Tiger tanks that are elite and when stationary or move a couple of hexes vs shermans that are stationary get 1 to 1 hit/kills at ranges from 5-20 hex against the AI. What are the national ratings? I know historaclly that a tigers kill ratio to a sherman was 5 to 1.
AmmoSGT. where do you find a tanks stab value? I have Tiger tanks that are elite and when stationary or move a couple of hexes vs shermans that are stationary get 1 to 1 hit/kills at ranges from 5-20 hex against the AI. What are the national ratings? I know historaclly that a tigers kill ratio to a sherman was 5 to 1.
Stab Ratings are on Pg 86 of the Manual ver 4.1 and can be seen on the OOB editor ..Historically Tigers got killed by air power and bazookas and artilery and all sorts of stuff Shermans didn't square up against Tigers that often against just Shermans and Just Tigers or Just any tank against just other tanks..all sorts of stuff is usually involved Gasoline powered tanks tended to burn more often than diesel powered tanks but tigers burned just as bad as any other tank if the ammo was hit ..so try and check your sources I think you have expectations fueled by legend more than facts and they are getting in the way of your enjoying what the units can do by focusing on what you are finding they can't.. German tanks are just tanks with whatever advantages armor and gun can give them over other tanks and as any of the Axis Players that have played against me will tell you Tigers die at about twice as often as American Armor try me at PBEM sometime
"For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary periods, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which
Hi ursus,
Try this - in the tutorial that Fabio made on using Tigers, he suggests after moving to NOT use op-fire, thereby giving the gunner longer to "line up" the targets. When I tried this, the hit percentage went up dramatically. If you'd like the tutorial I'll send it to you.
Another thing is using Tigers improperly - I'm an expert on this! As AmmoSgt points out, they will definitely get taken out, and I found that out the hard way - sticking them where the enemy fire was strong because they had the great armor. Doesn't work. Their strength is in the gun, not the armor. If you manuever so that you have a "firing lane" you can kill alot of tanks! But if you get into a fight with 4-5 tanks out in the open you won't last.
------------------
Don
Try this - in the tutorial that Fabio made on using Tigers, he suggests after moving to NOT use op-fire, thereby giving the gunner longer to "line up" the targets. When I tried this, the hit percentage went up dramatically. If you'd like the tutorial I'll send it to you.
Another thing is using Tigers improperly - I'm an expert on this! As AmmoSgt points out, they will definitely get taken out, and I found that out the hard way - sticking them where the enemy fire was strong because they had the great armor. Doesn't work. Their strength is in the gun, not the armor. If you manuever so that you have a "firing lane" you can kill alot of tanks! But if you get into a fight with 4-5 tanks out in the open you won't last.
------------------
Don
Don "Sapper" Llewellyn
don,
sorry about that. reedygg@yahoo.com
sorry about that. reedygg@yahoo.com
When i played campaign with the germans against Soviets I had nothing to complain but when I stated to play against Americans the probability of hitting the target deteriorated a lot even though the equipement was the same as well as the experience. Weird as the Soviet tanks are more mobile and thus should be harder to hit.
Also found that the american light tanks had better chance of surviving a hit of 88 than a t34. That is definetly not wery realistic. I must agree on shermans being unrealisticly good against tigers and panthers. The way they held their own against my tanks Allies would have had much easyer way to Germany as they had.
It came to my mind the thing I did not like in SP2, the exaggeration of the power of US equipement. So I did not play it allmost at all with US equipement. But I do not want to think there is such thing in this game.
Also found that the american light tanks had better chance of surviving a hit of 88 than a t34. That is definetly not wery realistic. I must agree on shermans being unrealisticly good against tigers and panthers. The way they held their own against my tanks Allies would have had much easyer way to Germany as they had.
It came to my mind the thing I did not like in SP2, the exaggeration of the power of US equipement. So I did not play it allmost at all with US equipement. But I do not want to think there is such thing in this game.
Tiger and Panther had REALLY slow turret traverse, making it difficult to track targets with a high crossing rate. Given enough time, however, an experienced gunner could get his weapon on line and USUALLY score a kill with the first or second round.
Perhaps Matrix is simulating this limfac by reducing accuracy/rof in opportunity fire. By NOT shooting in OpFire, you give your crews a chance to track accurately and get that round off.
Perhaps Matrix is simulating this limfac by reducing accuracy/rof in opportunity fire. By NOT shooting in OpFire, you give your crews a chance to track accurately and get that round off.
"...these go up to eleven."
Nigel Tufnel
Nigel Tufnel
We gotta do something and do it quick the heroic panzers of the vaterland just ain't livin. up to hollywood myths these days ..
A Browning Watercooled .30 cal at Guadacanal makes a Historic Heroic stand against human wave asaults and the GUY behind the gun gets the credit ...But a Tiger makes a Heroic stand with skill and deterimnation and knocks out waves of T-34's and the tank gets the credit ...The Tanks are just tools the germans were masters of tactics yeah their morale and their leadership and stuff was good .. but what made the Panzers great wether it was France 1940 or Bastogne was the tactics the interaction of the various arms the co-ordiantion and the excellant tactics ... not Many can be Guderian or even a Tanker Trained by Rommel ..That tanks were individually a little better in more areas than not is a fact ..But it was the tacticans that made the reputation that the tanks are being asked to live up to today ...
A Browning Watercooled .30 cal at Guadacanal makes a Historic Heroic stand against human wave asaults and the GUY behind the gun gets the credit ...But a Tiger makes a Heroic stand with skill and deterimnation and knocks out waves of T-34's and the tank gets the credit ...The Tanks are just tools the germans were masters of tactics yeah their morale and their leadership and stuff was good .. but what made the Panzers great wether it was France 1940 or Bastogne was the tactics the interaction of the various arms the co-ordiantion and the excellant tactics ... not Many can be Guderian or even a Tanker Trained by Rommel ..That tanks were individually a little better in more areas than not is a fact ..But it was the tacticans that made the reputation that the tanks are being asked to live up to today ...
"For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary periods, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which
-
Paul Vebber
- Posts: 5342
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2000 4:00 pm
- Location: Portsmouth RI
- Contact:
You're right there, Sarge. There are many of us who knew next to nothing of these tanks when we started with SPWAW, and after hearing about them for so long you expect that when you use them every shot will result in a spectacular fiery kill! They miss like all tanks do, and they get blown up like all tanks do. Tactics had alot to do with it, or the Soviets would have had sucess long before they did with the T-34. Soviet troops did not launch a well coordinated combined arms attack against Germany until the Stalingrad encirclement.
In SPWAW, if you want 80% shot probabilities with a Tiger, you must lay off the op-fire and let the elite crew and optics do their job. Also do NOT let AT troops near - I have a picture of a Tiger that looked like swiss cheese from AT rounds!
------------------
Don
In SPWAW, if you want 80% shot probabilities with a Tiger, you must lay off the op-fire and let the elite crew and optics do their job. Also do NOT let AT troops near - I have a picture of a Tiger that looked like swiss cheese from AT rounds!
------------------
Don
Don "Sapper" Llewellyn
Tactics can not help if the ammo will not penetrate the target or if the accuracy does not mach the reality. The tactics did not them selves kill any tanks in the war, They also needed to hit it with something.
My panthers that worked so well against the Soviets started look like bunch of idiots when against US. Here is an example why I got frustrated. I had an Elite panther firing sherman from ideal range and angle. Shot was 88%- miss. Next shot over 90%- miss. Next 2 shots over 90% missed again but the last shot hit the side of the sherman with no effect. This was a bit exeptional but many allmost as bad exaples were more of a rule than an exeption.
Also the AI had an interestingability to hit me with first shot wery often. I actually started to count these and came to mathematical realisation that the chacheof hit was about 2 to 3 times what the game indicated, so there is a bug somewhere. Same conclusion could be made from the infartry too.
My panthers that worked so well against the Soviets started look like bunch of idiots when against US. Here is an example why I got frustrated. I had an Elite panther firing sherman from ideal range and angle. Shot was 88%- miss. Next shot over 90%- miss. Next 2 shots over 90% missed again but the last shot hit the side of the sherman with no effect. This was a bit exeptional but many allmost as bad exaples were more of a rule than an exeption.
Also the AI had an interestingability to hit me with first shot wery often. I actually started to count these and came to mathematical realisation that the chacheof hit was about 2 to 3 times what the game indicated, so there is a bug somewhere. Same conclusion could be made from the infartry too.
I don't get it .. this comes up from time to time ...and to me ..just to me... a personal feeling on my part .. but it almost sounds like folks expect the Germans to win somehow or to be better point for point ...and despite all the hoopla about folks who think that the tiger should be as good as 5 shermans you never see them talking about how wrong it is for a HVSS M4e8a3 to cost more in the game than a panther or tiger .. I would think Logically if folks really really believe german tanks were better they would be insisting that the american tanks should be cheaper so the german tanks could show their stuff ...but nope ain't gonna happen .. Shermans cost as much as german tanks pretty much and yet all you hear is that the American tanks are too good that the German tanks Should be 5 times better but American tanks should cost the same as German ...I just don't get it ....
Well , maybe it is all the games fault ... who i am i to say
[This message has been edited by AmmoSgt (edited February 14, 2001).]
Well , maybe it is all the games fault ... who i am i to say
[This message has been edited by AmmoSgt (edited February 14, 2001).]
"For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary periods, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which
Hi AmmoSgt, the game does miss on a couple of points. The cost of the M4A3E8 is probably adjusted by rarity factor. The vast majority of Shermans in the allied forces at the end of the war were 75mm A1 or A3 models. These should be fairly helpless against Panthers and Tigers. Maybe the AI's upgrading of the ability of the US tanks is there to balance out the ahistorical tendency for the German forces to have all the latest and greatest hardware on the Western front (in good repair, full supply and units at full TO&E).
Something the game does not handle well is this: 90% of tank kills by Germans were by Tank/AT gun while only 30% of tank kills by the western allies were by Tank/AT guns. Note that my statistics may be hazy (I am quoting a PBS/History Channel special on the Sherman), but I am willing to bet they are not far off.
Chanman
Something the game does not handle well is this: 90% of tank kills by Germans were by Tank/AT gun while only 30% of tank kills by the western allies were by Tank/AT guns. Note that my statistics may be hazy (I am quoting a PBS/History Channel special on the Sherman), but I am willing to bet they are not far off.
Chanman
"As God is my witness, I thought that turkeys could fly"
AmmoSgt: I seems reasonable to me, since the pricing has been based on performance that the M4e8a3 is more expensive because of it's huge amount of armor. Are you saying ti's more expensive than the King Tiger? I don't think it is, but is probably is more so than the regular Tiger. The expense for the M4e8a3 is so much accounted fro by having so much armor all the way around and of course when people speak of 5-to-1 advantage for a German tank they aren't talking top-of-the-line Sherman, but rather whatever it was that the US officer was that said that. I would assume he was talking about Shermans in general and I believe he was actually using this with Panthers. Probably expense-wise, the performance basis is probably too far discriminating against armor, and not enough for gun power/accuracy, but their having to deal with a maximum cost of 255 for any one unit doesn't make pricing fair anyway.
I've been all through this pricing argument based on performance of these 5-to-1 type tests, and it just doesn't work. For example, when we pitted 20 T34/85s against 20 Tigers we found about a 3-to-1 Tiger advantage. Then we gave the T34/85s the 3-to-1 advantage against Tigers expecting, for some, an even result. Nope. If I recall correctly the ratio had dropped to only 1.5-to-1 for the Tigers.
Now, suppose if such contests determine pricing across the board, which figure do you go with? Triple the Tiger expense, up it 50% (to reflect 1.5-to-1), or compromise?
To further complicate matters let's assume the T34/85 was pitted against the Puma, with the T34/85 winning 20-to-1. Do you then make the T34/85 20X it's price? And if you do that, do you then jump the Tiger price through the roof again? Run the pricing like that, based on such silly AOE testing and you will see real quick how this would be impossible with a limit of 255 pts. I personally prefer a price based on tonnage. though tonnage may not be easy to find stats on (then again it may be real easy). I think it would work real well, because if battle results ruled the day, they couldn't be comparing battle results of tanks in completely different classes such as T34/85s against Tigers. Compare KV85s to Tigers and then maybe you got something, but one class compared to another cannot possibly work. You'd end up possibly with Tigers costing 2000 and Pumas, 2.
I've been all through this pricing argument based on performance of these 5-to-1 type tests, and it just doesn't work. For example, when we pitted 20 T34/85s against 20 Tigers we found about a 3-to-1 Tiger advantage. Then we gave the T34/85s the 3-to-1 advantage against Tigers expecting, for some, an even result. Nope. If I recall correctly the ratio had dropped to only 1.5-to-1 for the Tigers.
Now, suppose if such contests determine pricing across the board, which figure do you go with? Triple the Tiger expense, up it 50% (to reflect 1.5-to-1), or compromise?
To further complicate matters let's assume the T34/85 was pitted against the Puma, with the T34/85 winning 20-to-1. Do you then make the T34/85 20X it's price? And if you do that, do you then jump the Tiger price through the roof again? Run the pricing like that, based on such silly AOE testing and you will see real quick how this would be impossible with a limit of 255 pts. I personally prefer a price based on tonnage. though tonnage may not be easy to find stats on (then again it may be real easy). I think it would work real well, because if battle results ruled the day, they couldn't be comparing battle results of tanks in completely different classes such as T34/85s against Tigers. Compare KV85s to Tigers and then maybe you got something, but one class compared to another cannot possibly work. You'd end up possibly with Tigers costing 2000 and Pumas, 2.