Many many a time when ever there are talks about changes being made to tanks or a new patch is announced, it seems inevitable that anyone who owns a German tank comes out of the woodwork to whine about how they are completely UP (underpowered) and how they should actually rolfstomprapeface every other tank in the game cause thats "historically how they are". Well historically yes, panthers and tigers would destroy nearly every tank they came across, however the majority of tanks they faced were mere M4 Shermans, and if a tiger goes up against a Sherman in game its pretty easy to guess whos going to win that fight. with this in mind we can infer the reason German tanks did so well in the war, however if we face a Tiger tank against against say the concept T29, the tables are turned due to the fact that the tiger is facing a more equal opponent. now next time anyone tries to bring up how historically inaccurate the Tiger or Panther are remember the entire history of said tank.
Tiger/Panther tanks and why they technically dont suck
Started by
pwnedbyscope
, May 09 2012 - 03:15
13 replies to this topic
#2 Posted May 09 2012 - 03:17
-
- Players
- 16544 battles
-
12,173
-
Member since:
03-22-2011
Major
Well said.
For the sake of balance of this game.
For the sake of balance of this game.
#3 Posted May 09 2012 - 03:23
-
- Players
- 12561 battles
-
3,375
-
Member since:
09-25-2011
Major
*claps* I love my tiger it a lot of fun to play great post.
#4 Posted May 09 2012 - 03:23
-
- Players
- 14313 battles
-
601
-
Member since:
07-21-2011
First lieutenant
But then the M4s would whine that their in a tier 7 fight
#5 Posted May 09 2012 - 03:28
-
- Community Contributor
- 21645 battles
-
15,591
-
Member since:
09-02-2010
Major
Which they do already.
#7 Posted May 09 2012 - 03:32
-
- Players
- 12915 battles
-
2,548
-
Member since:
04-23-2012
Major
I like realism. There were about 5k Tigers produced in WW2. There were about 35,000 T-34s produced during WW2. There were somewhere around a measly 48k Shermans produced. Add in the Il-2 Sturmovik, and only the P-47, and a typical match might consist of 1 Tiger against 30 or 40 opponents.
Seriously though, this game does a great job of making hypothetical tanks possible, then matching them up. If they would only tweak the MM a bit more.....
Seriously though, this game does a great job of making hypothetical tanks possible, then matching them up. If they would only tweak the MM a bit more.....
#8 Posted May 09 2012 - 04:34
-
- Players
- 7218 battles
-
1,279
-
Member since:
03-08-2011
Captain
1. They don't suck in-game. They shouldn't be played as if they were KV-3s and T-43s. Which is where most players fail.
2. Historically, Tigers first went up against tank brigades comprised of 2 battalions of T-34-76s and 1 battalion of T-70s. In other words, Tier 7 heavies vs. Tier 4 lights and Tier 5 mediums. In stock configurations.
That is not what this game is about. For whatever reason, people can't deal with this.
I'm not even mentioning the whole issue of "what counts as a kill in tank warfare". That deserves its own 20-page post. But it's something else that 99% of posters screaming "kill count!" tend to ignore completely (or remain completely ignorant of - probably the latter more so than the former).
3. Jentz actually reports the following figures for Tiger and Panther production and losses (Panzer Truppen Vol. II, pages 284 and 286; also, page 268 of Vol. I for pre-1943 Tiger figures):
Tiger I
Produced (1942-1945) = 1,347
Rebuilt = 68+ (April 1945 data missing)
Lost (through January 1945; data for subsequent months is missing) = 1,146
-- These are, I believe, total write-offs - i.e. not tanks knocked out but repaired in the field. [Also, 68 of these tanks were ultimately rebuilt.]
Min-max end-of-month field strength: 1943 = 65-394; 1944 = 509-671; 1945 = started the year with 274, went downhill from there
-- In other words, there were never more than 671 Tigers in the field on all fronts (and some of these would have been in the shop or in transit, i.e. the number of "actives" should be meaningfully lower).
So immediately you can see that, one: there weren't that many Tigers produced to begin with (1,347 over 2+ years is not a high production rate); two, most of the Tigers produced were lost as total write-offs by January 1945, and keep in mind that some of these would have been knocked out and repaired multiple times, inflating the opposing "kill count"; and three, the number of "field actives" averaged at about 200-400, across thousands of kilometers of front (i.e. strategically, the Tiger had, at best, moderate impact - where Tigers were concentrated to use against a specific objective, like sealing a breakthrough or launching a limited offensive operation).
Panther (1943-1945)
Produced (prior to April 1945) = 5,984 [includes an initial production run of 156 that was rebuilt in April of 1943]
Rebuilt (excluding the initial production run) = 154 [which speaks to a pretty high "write-off" rate in the field]
Losses (through January of 1945) = 3,548
Inventory (min-max): 1943 = 273-989, 1944 = 1,177-2,304, 1945 starts at 2,135 and goes downhill
So, first, clearly there were a lot more Panthers running around. [Indeed, it was the standard German battle tank from 1944 onwards - that's when its monthly production began to exceed that of Panzer IVs, according to Jentz.] Mind you, these were Panthers with the 7.5cm gun (facing off against T-34-85s with the 85mm gun, so that should give you an idea of "balance" between the vehicles). Second, they seemed a lot more "survivable" - or, rather, I'm guessing, easier to drag back to base and repair whereas a Tiger that got knocked out in no-man's land basically had to be blown up or abandoned a lot of the time. But notice that even with this proviso, over three and a half thousand of them were completely lost by January 31, 1945 - and the war kept on going for some time after that.
2. Historically, Tigers first went up against tank brigades comprised of 2 battalions of T-34-76s and 1 battalion of T-70s. In other words, Tier 7 heavies vs. Tier 4 lights and Tier 5 mediums. In stock configurations.
That is not what this game is about. For whatever reason, people can't deal with this.
I'm not even mentioning the whole issue of "what counts as a kill in tank warfare". That deserves its own 20-page post. But it's something else that 99% of posters screaming "kill count!" tend to ignore completely (or remain completely ignorant of - probably the latter more so than the former).
3. Jentz actually reports the following figures for Tiger and Panther production and losses (Panzer Truppen Vol. II, pages 284 and 286; also, page 268 of Vol. I for pre-1943 Tiger figures):
Tiger I
Produced (1942-1945) = 1,347
Rebuilt = 68+ (April 1945 data missing)
Lost (through January 1945; data for subsequent months is missing) = 1,146
-- These are, I believe, total write-offs - i.e. not tanks knocked out but repaired in the field. [Also, 68 of these tanks were ultimately rebuilt.]
Min-max end-of-month field strength: 1943 = 65-394; 1944 = 509-671; 1945 = started the year with 274, went downhill from there
-- In other words, there were never more than 671 Tigers in the field on all fronts (and some of these would have been in the shop or in transit, i.e. the number of "actives" should be meaningfully lower).
So immediately you can see that, one: there weren't that many Tigers produced to begin with (1,347 over 2+ years is not a high production rate); two, most of the Tigers produced were lost as total write-offs by January 1945, and keep in mind that some of these would have been knocked out and repaired multiple times, inflating the opposing "kill count"; and three, the number of "field actives" averaged at about 200-400, across thousands of kilometers of front (i.e. strategically, the Tiger had, at best, moderate impact - where Tigers were concentrated to use against a specific objective, like sealing a breakthrough or launching a limited offensive operation).
Panther (1943-1945)
Produced (prior to April 1945) = 5,984 [includes an initial production run of 156 that was rebuilt in April of 1943]
Rebuilt (excluding the initial production run) = 154 [which speaks to a pretty high "write-off" rate in the field]
Losses (through January of 1945) = 3,548
Inventory (min-max): 1943 = 273-989, 1944 = 1,177-2,304, 1945 starts at 2,135 and goes downhill
So, first, clearly there were a lot more Panthers running around. [Indeed, it was the standard German battle tank from 1944 onwards - that's when its monthly production began to exceed that of Panzer IVs, according to Jentz.] Mind you, these were Panthers with the 7.5cm gun (facing off against T-34-85s with the 85mm gun, so that should give you an idea of "balance" between the vehicles). Second, they seemed a lot more "survivable" - or, rather, I'm guessing, easier to drag back to base and repair whereas a Tiger that got knocked out in no-man's land basically had to be blown up or abandoned a lot of the time. But notice that even with this proviso, over three and a half thousand of them were completely lost by January 31, 1945 - and the war kept on going for some time after that.
#9 Posted May 09 2012 - 08:15
-
- Players
- 3818 battles
-
2,932
-
Member since:
08-27-2011
Major
they don't suck, they are two of the best snipers in the game. For players who appreciate accuracy(such as me) they are awesome.
#10 Posted May 09 2012 - 08:17
-
- Players
- 3818 battles
-
2,932
-
Member since:
08-27-2011
Major
Kruzenshtern, on May 09 2012 - 04:34, said:
1. They don't suck in-game. They shouldn't be played as if they were KV-3s and T-43s. Which is where most players fail.
2. Historically, Tigers first went up against tank brigades comprised of 2 battalions of T-34-76s and 1 battalion of T-70s. In other words, Tier 7 heavies vs. Tier 4 lights and Tier 5 mediums. In stock configurations.
That is not what this game is about. For whatever reason, people can't deal with this.
I'm not even mentioning the whole issue of "what counts as a kill in tank warfare". That deserves its own 20-page post. But it's something else that 99% of posters screaming "kill count!" tend to ignore completely (or remain completely ignorant of - probably the latter more so than the former).
3. Jentz actually reports the following figures for Tiger and Panther production and losses (Panzer Truppen Vol. II, pages 284 and 286; also, page 268 of Vol. I for pre-1943 Tiger figures):
Tiger I
Produced (1942-1945) = 1,347
Rebuilt = 68+ (April 1945 data missing)
Lost (through January 1945; data for subsequent months is missing) = 1,146
-- These are, I believe, total write-offs - i.e. not tanks knocked out but repaired in the field. [Also, 68 of these tanks were ultimately rebuilt.]
Min-max end-of-month field strength: 1943 = 65-394; 1944 = 509-671; 1945 = started the year with 274, went downhill from there
-- In other words, there were never more than 671 Tigers in the field on all fronts (and some of these would have been in the shop or in transit, i.e. the number of "actives" should be meaningfully lower).
So immediately you can see that, one: there weren't that many Tigers produced to begin with (1,347 over 2+ years is not a high production rate); two, most of the Tigers produced were lost as total write-offs by January 1945, and keep in mind that some of these would have been knocked out and repaired multiple times, inflating the opposing "kill count"; and three, the number of "field actives" averaged at about 200-400, across thousands of kilometers of front (i.e. strategically, the Tiger had, at best, moderate impact - where Tigers were concentrated to use against a specific objective, like sealing a breakthrough or launching a limited offensive operation).
Panther (1943-1945)
Produced (prior to April 1945) = 5,984 [includes an initial production run of 156 that was rebuilt in April of 1943]
Rebuilt (excluding the initial production run) = 154 [which speaks to a pretty high "write-off" rate in the field]
Losses (through January of 1945) = 3,548
Inventory (min-max): 1943 = 273-989, 1944 = 1,177-2,304, 1945 starts at 2,135 and goes downhill
So, first, clearly there were a lot more Panthers running around. [Indeed, it was the standard German battle tank from 1944 onwards - that's when its monthly production began to exceed that of Panzer IVs, according to Jentz.] Mind you, these were Panthers with the 7.5cm gun (facing off against T-34-85s with the 85mm gun, so that should give you an idea of "balance" between the vehicles). Second, they seemed a lot more "survivable" - or, rather, I'm guessing, easier to drag back to base and repair whereas a Tiger that got knocked out in no-man's land basically had to be blown up or abandoned a lot of the time. But notice that even with this proviso, over three and a half thousand of them were completely lost by January 31, 1945 - and the war kept on going for some time after that.
2. Historically, Tigers first went up against tank brigades comprised of 2 battalions of T-34-76s and 1 battalion of T-70s. In other words, Tier 7 heavies vs. Tier 4 lights and Tier 5 mediums. In stock configurations.
That is not what this game is about. For whatever reason, people can't deal with this.
I'm not even mentioning the whole issue of "what counts as a kill in tank warfare". That deserves its own 20-page post. But it's something else that 99% of posters screaming "kill count!" tend to ignore completely (or remain completely ignorant of - probably the latter more so than the former).
3. Jentz actually reports the following figures for Tiger and Panther production and losses (Panzer Truppen Vol. II, pages 284 and 286; also, page 268 of Vol. I for pre-1943 Tiger figures):
Tiger I
Produced (1942-1945) = 1,347
Rebuilt = 68+ (April 1945 data missing)
Lost (through January 1945; data for subsequent months is missing) = 1,146
-- These are, I believe, total write-offs - i.e. not tanks knocked out but repaired in the field. [Also, 68 of these tanks were ultimately rebuilt.]
Min-max end-of-month field strength: 1943 = 65-394; 1944 = 509-671; 1945 = started the year with 274, went downhill from there
-- In other words, there were never more than 671 Tigers in the field on all fronts (and some of these would have been in the shop or in transit, i.e. the number of "actives" should be meaningfully lower).
So immediately you can see that, one: there weren't that many Tigers produced to begin with (1,347 over 2+ years is not a high production rate); two, most of the Tigers produced were lost as total write-offs by January 1945, and keep in mind that some of these would have been knocked out and repaired multiple times, inflating the opposing "kill count"; and three, the number of "field actives" averaged at about 200-400, across thousands of kilometers of front (i.e. strategically, the Tiger had, at best, moderate impact - where Tigers were concentrated to use against a specific objective, like sealing a breakthrough or launching a limited offensive operation).
Panther (1943-1945)
Produced (prior to April 1945) = 5,984 [includes an initial production run of 156 that was rebuilt in April of 1943]
Rebuilt (excluding the initial production run) = 154 [which speaks to a pretty high "write-off" rate in the field]
Losses (through January of 1945) = 3,548
Inventory (min-max): 1943 = 273-989, 1944 = 1,177-2,304, 1945 starts at 2,135 and goes downhill
So, first, clearly there were a lot more Panthers running around. [Indeed, it was the standard German battle tank from 1944 onwards - that's when its monthly production began to exceed that of Panzer IVs, according to Jentz.] Mind you, these were Panthers with the 7.5cm gun (facing off against T-34-85s with the 85mm gun, so that should give you an idea of "balance" between the vehicles). Second, they seemed a lot more "survivable" - or, rather, I'm guessing, easier to drag back to base and repair whereas a Tiger that got knocked out in no-man's land basically had to be blown up or abandoned a lot of the time. But notice that even with this proviso, over three and a half thousand of them were completely lost by January 31, 1945 - and the war kept on going for some time after that.
Of course they were lost. When you are retreating you don't really have time to recover disabled tanks. The attackers do.
#11 Posted May 09 2012 - 08:27
-
- Players
- 14738 battles
-
3,737
-
Member since:
05-30-2011
Major
They don't suck, at all. It's just people are playing them all wrong. They hear sniper and long range and think that this is the ideal situation all the time. Ideally it should be first strike, then move in to mid range with HP advantage.
People forget that both are also fairly slow and long range engagements often take a lot longer than mid range engagements. Long range increases misses and more importantly snipers can't force the enemy out of cover from long range. Whenever they're top tier by the time most German tanks are done sniping with their front the other side's already collapsed. Then they get destroyed and come complaining about Devs biased against Germans
Seen so many complaints where some Tanker comes in post a loss with six kills or more as evidence of fail team. Yeah it's typically because both sides were retarded but more importantly the tanker didn't risk pushing up. The enemy died, but stalled long enough for their teammates on the other flank to get to base. If the Tanker had pushed up he may have died but also would have put pressure on the enemy rather than have "support" all camping behind him.
Yeah, kinda off topic rant, but the main thing is German tanks don't suck. Just don't make the mistake of camping with them as highest tier.
People forget that both are also fairly slow and long range engagements often take a lot longer than mid range engagements. Long range increases misses and more importantly snipers can't force the enemy out of cover from long range. Whenever they're top tier by the time most German tanks are done sniping with their front the other side's already collapsed. Then they get destroyed and come complaining about Devs biased against Germans
Seen so many complaints where some Tanker comes in post a loss with six kills or more as evidence of fail team. Yeah it's typically because both sides were retarded but more importantly the tanker didn't risk pushing up. The enemy died, but stalled long enough for their teammates on the other flank to get to base. If the Tanker had pushed up he may have died but also would have put pressure on the enemy rather than have "support" all camping behind him.
Yeah, kinda off topic rant, but the main thing is German tanks don't suck. Just don't make the mistake of camping with them as highest tier.
#12 Posted May 09 2012 - 09:12
-
- Beta Testers
- 8567 battles
-
308
-
Member since:
07-09-2010
Staff sergeant
I love my Tiger! In spite of owning every tier 9 and 10 tank (except the French ones...haven't made it all the way up their heavy/med trees yet), I still own my Tiger, will not sell it, and play it more than anything else. I think I might have as many or slightly more battles in my Type 59, but that's just because I needed credits for the tier 10's I bought.
I also love my Tiger regardless of the match I'm in. Consider the following:
1. Occasionally, I get into the top tier of a match; I end up getting to play God, and penetrate any tank in the match, from any angle; it's easy, and a refreshing change from what usually happens.
2. I end up facing tier 8's, but being 2nd or 3rd in the matchmaker tree; no big deal. I can butcher most tanks with ease, and can punch holes in any tier 8; I just have to hit them in the right place. They also result in more xp/cash when I kill them.
3. Tier 10 match, I'm on the bottom. And not even a single s*** is given that day. I have a >200 pen gun; I'll probably die to something bigger, but I'm going to make them pay dearly for killing the bottom tank on my team, because I can land those 88mm shells right where I want them. The longer I can hold the attention of the big boys, the longer the rest of my team has to effectively outnumber them. The longer I can survive, the more damage I can deal to enemies of higher tiers...and if I play my cards right, I can be more valuable an asset to my team than the tier 8's sitting above me in the matchmaker tree. This is one of the most fun things to do in WOT, in my opinion, and people usually don't cry if my friend in his T95 platoons with me in my Tiger.
The Panther can suck if you don't have any chance to use its mobility for flanking against the heavier targets; it could use a little help in the penetration department, but the tank itself isn't terrible, really. My only gripe with it is that one must use the fake turret to be useful with a Panther; I'd rather use the historically-accurate one, but with a better gun.
Just my $0.02, of course.
I also love my Tiger regardless of the match I'm in. Consider the following:
1. Occasionally, I get into the top tier of a match; I end up getting to play God, and penetrate any tank in the match, from any angle; it's easy, and a refreshing change from what usually happens.
2. I end up facing tier 8's, but being 2nd or 3rd in the matchmaker tree; no big deal. I can butcher most tanks with ease, and can punch holes in any tier 8; I just have to hit them in the right place. They also result in more xp/cash when I kill them.
3. Tier 10 match, I'm on the bottom. And not even a single s*** is given that day. I have a >200 pen gun; I'll probably die to something bigger, but I'm going to make them pay dearly for killing the bottom tank on my team, because I can land those 88mm shells right where I want them. The longer I can hold the attention of the big boys, the longer the rest of my team has to effectively outnumber them. The longer I can survive, the more damage I can deal to enemies of higher tiers...and if I play my cards right, I can be more valuable an asset to my team than the tier 8's sitting above me in the matchmaker tree. This is one of the most fun things to do in WOT, in my opinion, and people usually don't cry if my friend in his T95 platoons with me in my Tiger.
The Panther can suck if you don't have any chance to use its mobility for flanking against the heavier targets; it could use a little help in the penetration department, but the tank itself isn't terrible, really. My only gripe with it is that one must use the fake turret to be useful with a Panther; I'd rather use the historically-accurate one, but with a better gun.
Just my $0.02, of course.
#13 Posted May 09 2012 - 12:37
-
- Players
- 4737 battles
-
68
-
Member since:
03-23-2011
Corporal
The only thing that makes me is when an M4 fills the sights of My Tiger and I slam an 88AP into him and it bounces. I wonder, just wonder how many actually bounced. That is the only thing that makes me 
Other than that, I think they've finally gotten it tweaked correctly. I die to higher Tiers, I strike fear in lower Tiers and even Tier it's whomever plays their tanks better. Sounds about right!
Have Fun Out There!!
~ WTR ~
is when an M4 fills the sights of My Tiger and I slam an 88AP into him and it bounces. I wonder, just wonder how many actually bounced. That is the only thing that makes me Other than that, I think they've finally gotten it tweaked correctly. I die to higher Tiers, I strike fear in lower Tiers and even Tier it's whomever plays their tanks better. Sounds about right!
Have Fun Out There!!
~ WTR ~
#14 Posted May 09 2012 - 15:28
-
- Players
- 8341 battles
-
283
-
Member since:
08-19-2011
Staff sergeant
Uxellinus, on May 09 2012 - 03:23, said:
But then the M4s would whine that their in a tier 7 fight
You should have heard them during the war. Man, I remember it was always "nerf that damn tiger", and "jesus, I can't pen that armor... can we give the M4 the French 90?". Patton wouldn't shut up about it.
Pubbies. What're you gonna do?
(with apologies to real tankers)
