Is v7.0's Tiger invincible? PBM for test it

Gallo Rojo · Post by **Gallo Rojo** » Sun Dec 16, 2001 7:35 pm

I give a look at new armor system and OOB changes and I really don't like them.

I have the feeling that with its improved armor Tiger I probably have become some kind of invincible tank in this newest version, particularly in eastern front in 1943, which is my favorite year and front to play.

To test if I'm right or not I would like to play a PBM in 1943 with some good player.
My idea is to fight two battles at the same time, each player leading Soviets forces in one battle and Germans in the other one.

For the preferences and battlefield characteristics I usually do the follow:
· All preferences ON
· Around 3000 points for Germans (Soviets by default)
· Map: Relatively open country.
· Map size: medium of large (I am open to debate at this point)
· Note about Map: it could be a good idea using the same map for both battles (we can use a custom map or build one for this specific battle)
· Weather: clear (to allow good visibility -we are testing Tigers here)
· Air sections: no more than one (although not air sections at all could be a good idea)
· Artillery: no more than 15% of the points spent on indirect fire On Board Art and/or Off Board Art.
· Germans move first
· German Player must buy Tigers as a part of his or her OOB (of course not all German tanks have to be Tigers if he or she doesn't want, but some Tigers because that is what I like to test here)

If any one is interested in this please e-mail me <img src="smile.gif" border="0">

Don Doom · Post by **Don Doom** » Sun Dec 16, 2001 7:47 pm

Let me assure you they[tiger1] are not invincible.
While trying out the new features I had a SU-122 kill a tiger at six hexes on the front plate no less. I believe that is normal to me. <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0">

skukko · Post by **skukko** » Sun Dec 16, 2001 7:49 pm

bring it on Gallo <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0">

I do think that Tiger is actually more vulnerable than before... really, -don't hit me <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0"> LOL and T-34s are more effective against all other tanks but Tigers...as it should be. I've playerd with 7th betas and final now two months or so and I do like of what I've seen <img src="wink.gif" border="0">

mosh

Gallo Rojo · Post by **Gallo Rojo** » Sun Dec 16, 2001 9:06 pm

Originally posted by skukko:
bring it on Gallo <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0">

I do think that Tiger is actually more vulnerable than before... really, -don't hit me <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0"> LOL and T-34s are more effective against all other tanks but Tigers...as it should be. I've playerd with 7th betas and final now two months or so and I do like of what I've seen <img src="wink.gif" border="0">

mosh

I have a great respect for you Mosh, as a veteran and as a incredible hard opponent in PBM. I trust in your word --also yours Dom Doom <img src="smile.gif" border="0">

I will try a couple of Tiger scenarios to see what happens.
It seems to me (looking at penetration tables) that T-34/76 can only take a Tiger ussing APCR ammo.
I may agree that Tiger was a little weak at v6.1 (as well as all other tanks) and make it harder to kill is an improvenment... but I think that is a pity that to corret this matrix team had chaged the armor system.

Any way... if some one is interested in a tanks engagenmet involving Tigers&T-34 PBM in Russia 1943 just e-mail me. I really like to see how v7.0 goes against a human.

cheers all! <img src="smile.gif" border="0">

asgrrr · Post by **asgrrr** » Mon Dec 17, 2001 2:55 pm

Originally posted by skukko:
bring it on Gallo <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0">

I do think that Tiger is actually more vulnerable than before... really, -don't hit me <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0"> LOL and T-34s are more effective against all other tanks but Tigers...as it should be. I've playerd with 7th betas and final now two months or so and I do like of what I've seen <img src="wink.gif" border="0">

mosh

???? How can you say that? Did you notice the F-34 gun is down to pen 80, and the Tiger has armor 88 or more all round?

Mikimoto · Post by **Mikimoto** » Mon Dec 17, 2001 3:21 pm

Hi.

I have not here a copy of Spwaw (I'm at work) but can someone check the penetration value of the 75mmL38, the Sherman gun, Pleeeeeze? I'm suspicious man... <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0">

Charles2222 · Post by **Charles2222** » Mon Dec 17, 2001 6:30 pm

The USSR didn't make the T34/85 in such large numbers as they did, because the T34/76 stood a chance against the Tiger. Even that "medium" tank, the T34/85, doesn't come out with the advantage, because it was a stop-gap tank, which obviously wasn't built to take a Tiger on one-on-one. The best the USSR could do with such a matchup was the KV series. Try using heavy tanks against heavy tanks instead. Battling T34/76s against Tigers is as fruitless (V.7 or otherwise) as sending PZIIIHs against KVIs.

It's history, not every nation, and actually very few nations I'd say, had a "medium" tank which was as good as another nation's top-of-the-line "heavy" tank (With the possible exception of the Panther, assuming one would classify it as a 'medium' tank), so why are we expecting that?

asgrrr · Post by **asgrrr** » Mon Dec 17, 2001 8:09 pm

Originally posted by Charles_22:

It's history, not every nation, and actually very few nations I'd say, had a "medium" tank which was as good as another nation's top-of-the-line "heavy" tank (With the possible exception of the Panther, assuming one would classify it as a 'medium' tank), so why are we expecting that?

Nobody is saying that. I think nobody has ever said that on this forum since the beginning of time.

Charles2222 · Post by **Charles2222** » Tue Dec 18, 2001 12:12 am

Penetrator:

Nobody is saying that. I think nobody has ever said that on this forum since the beginning of time.

Technically nobody is saying that, but it has manifested itself before, very many times before, so perhaps you'll excuse me if I see such things as the motivating force. Wanting to know why a figure has dropped is one thing, but wanting it at a certain level so it can penetrate Tigers is quite another. It wouldn't be so bad if people didn't then expect Tiger prices to soar or Tiger stats to plummet with such expectations, but they do.

Charles2222 · Post by **Charles2222** » Tue Dec 18, 2001 12:22 am

Penetrator: BTW, if you think I have no clue here, look at the thread just started today by a different author (Version 7.0 is a fairy tale) who seems to be expecting miracles out of the USSR 76mm. Sheesh, it was bad enough when people were expecting parity between the T34/85 and the Tiger.

[ December 17, 2001: Message edited by: Charles_22 ]</p>

Nikademus · Post by **Nikademus** » Tue Dec 18, 2001 1:51 am

Originally posted by Charles_22:
The USSR didn't make the T34/85 in such large numbers as they did, because the T34/76 stood a chance against the Tiger. Even that "medium" tank, the T34/85, doesn't come out with the advantage, because it was a stop-gap tank, which obviously wasn't built to take a Tiger on one-on-one. The best the USSR could do with such a matchup was the KV series. Try using heavy tanks against heavy tanks instead. Battling T34/76s against Tigers is as fruitless (V.7 or otherwise) as sending PZIIIHs against KVIs.

It's history, not every nation, and actually very few nations I'd say, had a "medium" tank which was as good as another nation's top-of-the-line "heavy" tank (With the possible exception of the Panther, assuming one would classify it as a 'medium' tank), so why are we expecting that?

I would'nt go so far as to call the T-34/85 a "stopgap" anything. I mean, noone calls the Pz-IVH a stop-gap tank with it's potent new 75mm gun and uparmored snout. Instead its praisingly called the "backbone" of the Panzer divisions.

To me the 34/85 is in the same genre...a final development of a battlewinning (but not perfect, what tank is?) tank that allowed the USSR to drive (litterally) from Stalingrad to Berlin

As for taking on the Tiger. The new 34 was an attempt to address the "overall" problem plauging the Russian army in having the same aging and increasingly ineffective main tank gun arming both it's medium and heavy tanks. The KV-85 i'd call a stopgap since what the Russians needed for their own heavy tank was a bigger gun than a medium could carry, like the Tiger. Too, i always found it puzzeling that a medium tank like the 34 keeps always getting compared to the heavy tank Tiger. The two were in different leagues and in different catagories

The 85mm was powerful enough though to keep even a heavy tank like the Tiger honest in it's dealings. No more ignoring the laws of tank tactics for that particular

Mikimoto · Post by **Mikimoto** » Tue Dec 18, 2001 2:08 am

Originally posted by Charles_22:
Penetrator: BTW, if you think I have no clue here, look at the thread just started today by a different author (Version 7.0 is a fairy tale) who seems to be expecting miracles out of the USSR 76mm. Sheesh, it was bad enough when people were expecting parity between the T34/85 and the Tiger.

[ December 17, 2001: Message edited by: Charles_22 ]

Where do I say I expect parity between the T34/85 and the Tiger? Really expecting miracles of the USSR 76mm? It was that "silly" gun and others Soviet designs that defeated the 80% of German men and resources.. Your posture is pure American Chouvinism, you can't believe others did the long, real and hard job... hahaha

Panzer Leo · Post by **Panzer Leo** » Tue Dec 18, 2001 3:00 am

Originally posted by Mikimoto:

Where do I say I expect parity between the T34/85 and the Tiger? Really expecting miracles of the USSR 76mm? It was that "silly" gun and others Soviet designs that defeated the 80% of German men and resources.. Your posture is pure American Chouvinism, you can't believe others did the long, real and hard job... hahaha

You're absolutely right, Miki. And it was also the well trained Russian infantry-man, relying on his months and years of practicing in the worlds highest regarded infantry schools, who send the Germans back to Berlin. He was lead by NCO's full of wisdom and infantry tactics, just beaten by the glorious junior officers, the inventors of the most complex battle tactics the world had seen sofar...ofcourse, if it was not like this, how could they ever have beaten the Germans ?

<img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">

Mikimoto · Post by **Mikimoto** » Tue Dec 18, 2001 3:16 am

Originally posted by Panzer Leo:

You're absolutely right, Miki. And it was also the well trained Russian infantry-man, relying on his months and years of practicing in the worlds highest regarded infantry schools, who send the Germans back to Berlin. He was lead by NCO's full of wisdom and infantry tactics, just beaten by the glorious junior officers, the inventors of the most complex battle tactics the world had seen sofar...ofcourse, if it was not like this, how could they ever have beaten the Germans ?

<img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">

Hahaha... You know perfectly that tactic schools for the Soviets were more than three years of never-ending-receiving kicks in the ass... a bloody school, in my humble opinion.
Germany almost wins, but US entry in the war cancelled it definetively. But most real fighting was carried by British and Soviets... Do you love Revisionism?
Kv's and T-34's were more than a headache for the Germans...
By the way, I never play Soviets, I play mostly with Germans and US, but don't like this "official cheating"...

Panzer Leo · Post by **Panzer Leo** » Tue Dec 18, 2001 5:04 am

Miki, if you just had spent a bit of the time you're wasting here complaining, with looking over to the TO&E/OOB forum, you would have a better feeling for the new values and they wouldn't be such a surprise to you. What you're calling "official cheating" is the most impressive work on WWII ballistics a game has seen sofar. Every change in the values was made for a reason and several people tried to explain it several times, yet you didn't make a single arguement why things should be different, other then you don't like it, because you read it should be different <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
Normally, I would ignore such a low level debate, but for my taste the Matrix work get's hammered a bit too hard here...
If you've something important to say, say it, but as you mentioned in an earlier post, you're 38 years old, so try to behave like that...

Mikimoto · Post by **Mikimoto** » Tue Dec 18, 2001 5:15 am

Give me one source, other than Lorrin, that states PzIII had more gun punch that T-34, please.

Panzer Leo · Post by **Panzer Leo** » Tue Dec 18, 2001 6:02 am

"Handbook on German Military Forces", by U.S. War Department

Mikimoto · Post by **Mikimoto** » Tue Dec 18, 2001 6:35 am

Originally posted by Panzer Leo:
"Handbook on German Military Forces", by U.S. War Department

I dont own that book... can you give me an internet link, please?

Galka · Post by **Galka** » Tue Dec 18, 2001 7:06 am

Originally posted by Mikimoto:

I dont own that book... can you give me an internet link, please?

I own the book but cannot find any reference to a 50mm gun penetrating more than 56mm of armour @30 degrees at 1000 yards.

An interesting summary of the Tiger tank states:

In 1942 the Pz. Kpfw. VI or Tiger, appeared in Russia, and later in Africa. The Tiger was designed in the direct German tradition, and simply was armed more heavily and armoured more thickly than its predeccessors. It appeared out of its proper order in the line of succession, for the Pz. Kpfw. V or Panther, did not appear until a year later. The Panther was somewhat of a surprise, since it marked a departure from conventional lines of German design, and in the arrangement of its armour showed strong signs of Russian influence. Its great sucess in combat undoubtedly gave rise to the decision to redesign the Tiger, which to some extent had fallen short of expectations.

BryanMelvin · Post by **BryanMelvin** » Tue Dec 18, 2001 8:51 am

Hey guys don't argue, try the Touney Two player Kursk Scenario offered at the SP Arsenal.

http://www.militarygameronline.com/steelpanthers/

An all tank slugfight. T-34s vs PVIII's PZIV's and a few Tigers. Must play for PBEM. The Soviet player must be a good tank Tactcian! Please do this one PBEM as it was designed for.

Mosh and I are playing it and now, were in in the Punch drunk phase of the Game. Tank casulaties heavy for both sides. Yes, PzIII's do destroy T34's and Tigers are well - Tigers at Long range!

Playing the AI is one thing but another Human - the true SP improvments are manifest and many arguements are swept away in Human vs Human games!
The Too hit and Ballistics are more real life when playing against the AI and Human vs Human playing is far best!