Jump to content


Why does germany not have a tier V heavy?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
198 replies to this topic

Billymays #41 Posted Nov 11 2012 - 08:36

    Major

  • Players
  • 10606 battles
  • 4,193
  • Member since:
    11-17-2011

View PostTishler, on Nov 11 2012 - 08:10, said:

You're nuts if you think 20 damage and three penetration mean ANYTHING when the Tiger would have MASSIVE advantages over its peers. Statistically that's an 8% disadvantage in damage and a 3% disadvantage in pen, along with an accuracy, RoF advantage for the gun and literally every part of the tank being better in every single way.

It has the gun of the BDR and the armor of the KV-1. The BDR is sitting at a 48.83% win rate. The T1HT is at 48.71% and the KV-1 at 49.63%. With a gun as good as the BDR's and armor like the KV's... Do you honestly think it won't be horribly broken?

Just go with the VK6501(h). It fits without being broken.

I said earlier that the VK6501 would be ideal, if poorly armed c:

It doesn't matter what you say about the 88mm L/56, it's no more than a glorified 90mm gun by stats. Perfectly acceptable at tier V if it's stats are worked a little.

It has the gun of the bdr, AND THE MOBILITY of it as well, while having the KV-1's armor. And it's still entirely kill-able by the other tier V heavies.
If it can still be killed, quite easily, it's more than a tier V match. I'd bet you anything i could circle one to death one-on-one with my M7 c:

My vote is still for the 3001P, as it requires the least ammount of work to make fit tier V, and it's all around fit for tier V already, from it's history to ingame performance.

Haides #42 Posted Nov 11 2012 - 15:55

    Major

  • Players
  • 9246 battles
  • 2,166
  • [IOC] IOC
  • Member since:
    08-14-2011

View PostBillymays, on Nov 11 2012 - 07:16, said:

"Better" is a matter of opinion. STATISTICALLY, with some minor modifications, it makes for a good tier V. Of course, everything is better than a BDR lol.
And i like the BDR's mobility honestly, its one of the few tanks that actually drive smoothly c:

It has similar armor to the KV1, THE EXACT SAME TOP SPEED as the BDR, and a gun that fits between the russian 85mm and the BDR's 90mm.

And 20 damage DOES make a difference, since penetration largely influences damage dealt. A gun with higher penetration will do "Fuller" damage than a gun with lower penetration. A good example is the 75mm Mk1 and the vickers HV. Both have the same average damage, but the vickers  HV achieves it more constantly and reliably than the faster firing, lower penetrating 75mm Mk1.

So having slightly lower penetration and damage than the BDR is actually a pretty palatable thing. 20 less damage, times how ever much less the shell penetrates (Which can be anywhere from not affected at all, staying 20 less, to being MAJORLY effected like doing 70 less).

And given the general low rate of fire for the 88mm L/56, a A tiger can still be outgunned by any of the tier V heavies in rate of fire alone.
It's not a matter of opinion. The Tiger would have more and better armor than the KV-1, more mobility than it by far, a better gun, and would be impenetrable to tier 5s if angled correctly.

Quote

"Better" armor is somewhat of a lie, since it's mostly vertical armor, 100mm thick at the thickest (No, gun mantle on the turret does not count).
KV has a frontal effective armor of about 95mm, so it's the same (As does the T1 in places, which frustrates me to no end lol) and the KV is only behind on side armor by a whopping SEVEN MILLIMETERS   . Even on the backside it's only off by 12mm :L. And when you factor in angling your hull, the reclined KV1 frontal armor is
And the KV1's, T1 HT's, and BDR's armor also isn't mostly vertical? The only heavy tank at tier that isn't would be the T14. And even 12 mm of armor is a lot more to have at tier 5, it can sometimes mean the difference between bouncing or penning.

Quote

I have no idea what you're talking about on the front of the turret. Speak bettar english pls c:
There is no "Doing it wrong" about it. Thin turret sides means flanking is desirable against heavies. It's not about "Doin it right", is about the tiger being vulnerable to teir V tanks. Which it plenty is.
I don't think you understand how hard a well positioned tank is to flank, and how fast the Tiger turns.

Quote

Tiger's side and rear armor can be penetrated by the stock gun on the M4 (consequentially the top gun on the lee), even at a slight angle. I would know, i ran my M4 with it for at least 90% of the matches (M1A1 never worked for me, 105 is just lol). So if i can kill a tiger, or at least horribly wound it, with a stock gunned teir V, your qualms about it being over-armored for tier V are unfounded.
And then if the Tiger knows what the hell he's actually doing, he'll angle 40 degrees until his corner is pointing at the enemy M4 or other tier 5 and be nigh impenetrable by it. I know this, I've done this against tier 6 mediums of all flavors in my Tiger.

Arrowfoot #43 Posted Nov 11 2012 - 16:33

    Captain

  • Players
  • 36204 battles
  • 1,766
  • [1-63] 1-63
  • Member since:
    02-27-2012
If there is no anti-German bais in WoT, why after all these new line have come in and the many updates, do they, one of the base nations, remain the only ones with out tier 5 and tier 6 heaveis. There and many good ideas for the tier 5 out there yet we continue to here "they didnt have any good haevies to use before the tiger, funny that most of the US, Brit and French tanks never saw battle either, but that didnt stop WoT from giving them not just tier 5 and 6 heaives but FULL heavy lines. They say there is no anti-German bais, and I just say let the facts speak for them selfes!

Haides #44 Posted Nov 11 2012 - 16:43

    Major

  • Players
  • 9246 battles
  • 2,166
  • [IOC] IOC
  • Member since:
    08-14-2011

View PostArrowfoot, on Nov 11 2012 - 16:33, said:

If there is no anti-German bais in WoT, why after all these new line have come in and the many updates, do they, one of the base nations, remain the only ones with out tier 5 and tier 6 heaveis. There and many good ideas for the tier 5 out there yet we continue to here "they didnt have any good haevies to use before the tiger, funny that most of the US, Brit and French tanks never saw battle either, but that didnt stop WoT from giving them not just tier 5 and 6 heaives but FULL heavy lines. They say there is no anti-German bais, and I just say let the facts speak for them selfes!
Allow me to retort with this: What does a tier 5-6 heavy actually bring to the table and why is one so desired? A heavy is never necessarily better than a medium.

Arrowfoot #45 Posted Nov 11 2012 - 16:46

    Captain

  • Players
  • 36204 battles
  • 1,766
  • [1-63] 1-63
  • Member since:
    02-27-2012

View PostHaides, on Nov 11 2012 - 16:43, said:

Allow me to retort with this: What does a tier 5-6 heavy actually bring to the table and why is one so desired? A heavy is never necessarily better than a medium.

allow me to report this IF there is no deffernce, then why does every other nation have them? it seems pretty important that every one else have them, its just not important for the Germans, smells fishy to me

ComradeHX #46 Posted Nov 11 2012 - 16:47

    Major

  • Players
  • 13810 battles
  • 5,791
  • Member since:
    12-02-2011

View PostLert, on Nov 10 2012 - 20:43, said:

No need to upgrade the gun at all. If you look at tanks like T29 / T32, they make do with the same gun. T32 is a far better platform for it, with more hitpoints, better effective armor and higher ROF, making it a far stronger tank.

A tier 5 VK with bad soft stats and a slower firing 88 L/56 would fit, and a tier 6 VK with better soft stats and more ROF would also work.
T32 with same gun is rather underpowered at tier because accuracy is worse than Russian gun at-tier.

Legiondude #47 Posted Nov 11 2012 - 16:49

    Major

  • Players
  • 20522 battles
  • 23,192
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

View PostArrowfoot, on Nov 11 2012 - 16:46, said:

allow me to report this IF there is no deffernce, then why does every other nation have them? it seems pretty important that every one else have them, its just not important for the Germans, smells fishy to me
You seem focused on Germany getting a tier 5 and 6 heavy for the sake of getting of heavy, instead of understanding the balancing implications for the German tree if mid tier heavies sprung up

View PostComradeHX, on Nov 11 2012 - 16:47, said:

T32 with same gun is rather underpowered at tier because accuracy is worse than Russian gun at-tier.
The T32 was just fine with the 105mm. Lackluster, but fine

Arrowfoot #48 Posted Nov 11 2012 - 17:03

    Captain

  • Players
  • 36204 battles
  • 1,766
  • [1-63] 1-63
  • Member since:
    02-27-2012
agian, if there is no defferance then WHY are the germans the only ones with out them. Yes the germans have some good tanks tanks I know my germans line is fully reasurched and i have 30 of them in my Garage, the VK3601 is my feveret it is a monster tier 6 med. that still does not explame the lack of low level heavis. Even more so when you look the the EXTREME means the WoT went to give all othe nations  (except the Russains they had the heavies) those low level tier heavies one must ask"Why then is it some important that the Germans NOT have them"?

Arrowfoot #49 Posted Nov 11 2012 - 17:17

    Captain

  • Players
  • 36204 battles
  • 1,766
  • [1-63] 1-63
  • Member since:
    02-27-2012
As long as the Germans are the only nation with out tier 5 or 6 heavies the "anti-German bais" has a very strong case. It can not be explamed away. YOu all say "why is important for them to have tier 5 and 6 heavis" and we say "Why is it so important that they dont have them". Some of the other issues I raise from time to time can be explamed away as glitches or differances of oppion, but there is no oppion here the fact is that for some reason WoT seems intent on keeping the Germans the only nation with out those low tier heavies. i mean even the Chinesse line will have them, and as long as WoT keeps this up the anti-German bais idea has traction!

Legiondude #50 Posted Nov 11 2012 - 17:19

    Major

  • Players
  • 20522 battles
  • 23,192
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

View PostArrowfoot, on Nov 11 2012 - 17:03, said:

Even more so when you look the the EXTREME means the WoT went to give all othe nations
Extreme means? Only stretch of the imagination I see is the BDR, since the Char G1 project was more for developing medium weight tanks.

Quote

those low level tier heavies one must ask"Why then is it some important that the Germans NOT have them"?
That's the whole point of this topic

Legiondude #51 Posted Nov 11 2012 - 17:20

    Major

  • Players
  • 20522 battles
  • 23,192
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

View PostArrowfoot, on Nov 11 2012 - 17:17, said:

As long as the Germans are the only nation with out tier 5 or 6 heavies the "anti-German bais" has a very strong case. It can not be explamed away. YOu all say "why is important for them to have tier 5 and 6 heavis" and we say "Why is it so important that they dont have them". Some of the other issues I raise from time to time can be explamed away as glitches or differances of oppion, but there is no oppion here the fact is that for some reason WoT seems intent on keeping the Germans the only nation with out those low tier heavies. i mean even the Chinesse line will have them, and as long as WoT keeps this up the anti-German bais idea has traction!
You're not even trying to sound educated on this subject are you?

Arrowfoot #52 Posted Nov 11 2012 - 17:25

    Captain

  • Players
  • 36204 battles
  • 1,766
  • [1-63] 1-63
  • Member since:
    02-27-2012

View PostLegiondude, on Nov 11 2012 - 17:20, said:

You're not even trying to sound educated on this subject are you?
and you are? Have you explamed the reason? can you show how there is a good reason for the lack of those tanks,. can you explame why it continues? No all you do is say "its not important" or "they didnt have any good tanks for those tiers" (which is wrong) . I lay out a simple case. There must be a reason that the Germans remain the ONLY nation with out those tanks, and as fact or history has never stopped WoT from putting in Heavies for other nations, they the only reason left is they just dont want to do it. Hense the "anti-German bais" beliefe.

Legiondude #53 Posted Nov 11 2012 - 17:57

    Major

  • Players
  • 20522 battles
  • 23,192
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

View PostArrowfoot, on Nov 11 2012 - 17:25, said:

and you are? Have you explamed the reason? can you show how there is a good reason for the lack of those tanks,. can you explame why it continues? No all you do is say "its not important" or "they didnt have any good tanks for those tiers" (which is wrong)
Please point out where I said Germany not having a mid tier heavy was unimportant

Arrowfoot #54 Posted Nov 11 2012 - 17:59

    Captain

  • Players
  • 36204 battles
  • 1,766
  • [1-63] 1-63
  • Member since:
    02-27-2012

View PostLegiondude, on Nov 11 2012 - 17:57, said:

Please point out where I said Germany not having a mid tier heavy was unimportant

then please piont out why you are argueing with me over it!

Legiondude #55 Posted Nov 11 2012 - 18:11

    Major

  • Players
  • 20522 battles
  • 23,192
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

View PostArrowfoot, on Nov 11 2012 - 17:59, said:

then please piont out why you are argueing with me over it!
Because your previous posts are demanding a mid tier heavy just for the sake of a heavy. I'd like to have a mid tier heavy that fits the tier, the history, and has a capable armament(Which is why I'm supporting the VK6501 idea)

You take a colossal dump about anti-German bias, when we're here to choose, design, and theoretically balance a mid tier heavy for the tree. We don't have time for tinfoil hat conspiracies, we're here for tanks.

Billymays #56 Posted Nov 11 2012 - 20:51

    Major

  • Players
  • 10606 battles
  • 4,193
  • Member since:
    11-17-2011

View PostHaides, on Nov 11 2012 - 15:55, said:

It's not a matter of opinion. The Tiger would have more and better armor than the KV-1, more mobility than it by far, a better gun, and would be impenetrable to tier 5s if angled correctly.

And the KV1's, T1 HT's, and BDR's armor also isn't mostly vertical? The only heavy tank at tier that isn't would be the T14. And even 12 mm of armor is a lot more to have at tier 5, it can sometimes mean the difference between bouncing or penning.

I don't think you understand how hard a well positioned tank is to flank, and how fast the Tiger turns.

And then if the Tiger knows what the hell he's actually doing, he'll angle 40 degrees until his corner is pointing at the enemy M4 or other tier 5 and be nigh impenetrable by it. I know this, I've done this against tier 6 mediums of all flavors in my Tiger.

But it is entirely YOUR opinion, since the armor is effectively the SAME as that on the KV. With mobility similar to that of the BDR, and a powerful, but slow firing guns. And the KV1 is impenetrable to tier V's when angled correctly. Heck, i've bounced a shot from an ISU off of mine xD.

The tiger is but ONE tank. If you cant flank a single tank, you're one bad player lol.
And the tiger has a slow turning turret and a slow reloading gun, so flanking it is FAR easier than you're making it out to sound.

The KV1, T1 and BDR have a reclined frontal slope, whereas the tiger lacks it almost entirely. In spots the T1 has 100mm effective armor (That lower, more raked bit) as well as the KV1 (The entire damn front of it lol), as well as the churchill I. The BDR has lousy armor no matter how you cut it, although it's bounced many a 2pdr littlejohn and vickers HV for me(makes me lol every time).

The T14 has 101mm effective frontal armor. So yeah, you're wrong buddy :P.
And 12mm of armor is NOTHING, since a gun is either going to penetrate, or not penetrate, depending on how the situation may have it. The only thing it would be impenetrable to is the bloody 5cm L/60 and french 47mm guns, and even it's weakpoints would still be vulnerable to them. Each tier IV medium/td has a gun that can achieve penetration over 100mm, save for the panzer III (The lee maxes out at 113 with the top gun), so since it's entirely possible to penetrate a KV frontally, it's entirely possible to penetrate a tiger frontally with a lower tier tank.

Also, the tiger's armor has a massive flaw. Every time you come over a hill your lower glacis, being raked FORWARDS (lol), becomes readily penetrable, albeit being a small target. And since you cant really aim down with the tiger I, you're going to get shot up every time you come over a hill (and tracked, more than likely).

And good for you, you know how to play your tiger. Unfortunately, every player is not you, and you're liable to get swamped by faster, plenty capable tanks at low tier who can all fire 2-3 times as fast as you can, being able to penetrate your armor. And it's not always viable to angle your hull so extremely since being a tier V would remove the neutral pivot, and you'd have arties CONSTANTLY on you. And since you weigh 15 tons more than a KV, you're not going anywhere fast. And you're one big, broad, boxy target, with thin roof armor.

So yeah, you're just making up more excuses. :P
If you're going to say the Tiger I is horribly OP at tier V, then you might as well complain that the KV1 is as well since they're all around the same, from armor to DPS, to mobility and speed.

Oh and it's worth mentioning that, historically, the Tiger I came about exclusively because of the KV1. So not only are they extremely similar, one inspired the other.

Billymays #57 Posted Nov 11 2012 - 20:56

    Major

  • Players
  • 10606 battles
  • 4,193
  • Member since:
    11-17-2011

View PostHaides, on Nov 11 2012 - 16:43, said:

Allow me to retort with this: What does a tier 5-6 heavy actually bring to the table and why is one so desired? A heavy is never necessarily better than a medium.

Because they have more armor and health than the similar tier mediums, while still boasting good mobility and generally higher rates of fire on heavier guns. They can withstand getting shot, at least a handfull of times, whereas the equivalent medium would be horribly hurt or dead under the same treatment.

View PostArrowfoot, on Nov 11 2012 - 17:17, said:

As long as the Germans are the only nation with out tier 5 or 6 heavies the "anti-German bais" has a very strong case. It can not be explamed away. YOu all say "why is important for them to have tier 5 and 6 heavis" and we say "Why is it so important that they dont have them". Some of the other issues I raise from time to time can be explamed away as glitches or differances of oppion, but there is no oppion here the fact is that for some reason WoT seems intent on keeping the Germans the only nation with out those low tier heavies. i mean even the Chinesse line will have them, and as long as WoT keeps this up the anti-German bais idea has traction!

Noobs still cry anti-german bias? LOL.

View PostComradeHX, on Nov 11 2012 - 16:47, said:

T32 with same gun is rather underpowered at tier because accuracy is worse than Russian gun at-tier.

I guess this is true? :3

VirgilHilts #58 Posted Nov 11 2012 - 21:22

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16650 battles
  • 3,417
  • Member since:
    07-31-2010
The VK3601H is likely to end up as the German tier VI heavy tank, the developers have been alluding to that for quite some time. Probably the next time the German tree sees a significant update, possibly 8.4 or so.

Haides #59 Posted Nov 11 2012 - 21:23

    Major

  • Players
  • 9246 battles
  • 2,166
  • [IOC] IOC
  • Member since:
    08-14-2011

View PostBillymays, on Nov 11 2012 - 20:51, said:

But it is entirely YOUR opinion, since the armor is effectively the SAME as that on the KV. With mobility similar to that of the BDR, and a powerful, but slow firing guns. And the KV1 is impenetrable to tier V's when angled correctly. Heck, i've bounced a shot from an ISU off of mine xD.

I fail to see how similarly (un)sloped armor where the Tiger has 25 more frontal and 12mm more side is effectively the same.

The tiger is but ONE tank. If you cant flank a single tank, you're one bad player lol.
And the tiger has a slow turning turret and a slow reloading gun, so flanking it is FAR easier than you're making it out to sound.

There are tanks that are so and easy to flank with impunity. The Maus, T95, T28, Churchill VII. The Tiger is, however, not one of these.

The KV1, T1 and BDR have a reclined frontal slope, whereas the tiger lacks it almost entirely. In spots the T1 has 100mm effective armor (That lower, more raked bit) as well as the KV1 (The entire damn front of it lol), as well as the churchill I. The BDR has lousy armor no matter how you cut it, although it's bounced many a 2pdr littlejohn and vickers HV for me(makes me lol every time).

The frontal slope on the KV-1 compared to the Tiger is the same on the lower plate but the increase on the top plate is so small it only brings it up to around 80mm effective if that. The T1 HT can't angle at all less your sides get penned.

The T14 has 101mm effective frontal armor. So yeah, you're wrong buddy :P.
And 12mm of armor is NOTHING, since a gun is either going to penetrate, or not penetrate, depending on how the situation may have it. The only thing it would be impenetrable to is the bloody 5cm L/60 and french 47mm guns, and even it's weakpoints would still be vulnerable to them. Each tier IV medium/td has a gun that can achieve penetration over 100mm, save for the panzer III (The lee maxes out at 113 with the top gun), so since it's entirely possible to penetrate a KV frontally, it's entirely possible to penetrate a tiger frontally with a lower tier tank.

The T14 also doesn't have as powerful of a gun as your proposed Tiger would nor does it have the ability to aggressively angle as much either. The 12mm more on the sides of the Tiger over the KV allows it to show more of its side when angling which, overall, increases its armor protection. It's not about flat protection.

Do you understand what angling is? Can you comprehend the concept?


Also, the tiger's armor has a massive flaw. Every time you come over a hill your lower glacis, being raked FORWARDS (lol), becomes readily penetrable, albeit being a small target. And since you cant really aim down with the tiger I, you're going to get shot up every time you come over a hill (and tracked, more than likely).

Oh yeah except the KV has this issue too, except with an even thinner plate and the same gun depression.

And good for you, you know how to play your tiger. Unfortunately, every player is not you, and you're liable to get swamped by faster, plenty capable tanks at low tier who can all fire 2-3 times as fast as you can, being able to penetrate your armor. And it's not always viable to angle your hull so extremely since being a tier V would remove the neutral pivot, and you'd have arties CONSTANTLY on you. And since you weigh 15 tons more than a KV, you're not going anywhere fast. And you're one big, broad, boxy target, with thin roof armor.

The KV-3 at tier 6 proves that you didn't need neutral steering to angle, same with the Churchill and KV-1.

So yeah, you're just making up more excuses. :P
If you're going to say the Tiger I is horribly OP at tier V, then you might as well complain that the KV1 is as well since they're all around the same, from armor to DPS, to mobility and speed.

Except they're not, hello, the Tiger with the midgrade engine is still more mobile than the KV-1, the armor is all around still better, and the Tiger would have higher alpha and somewhat similar DPM to boot. The difference is this, the KV-1 would not be able to angle to reliably bounce the Short 88 if the Tiger knows what he is doing. The Tiger can angle and become completely immune to the KV-1's 85mm even if the KV-1 knows how to aim.

Oh and it's worth mentioning that, historically, the Tiger I came about exclusively because of the KV1. So not only are they extremely similar, one inspired the other.

Then would it not be a tier 6 as it was designed in response?

Edited by Haides, Nov 11 2012 - 21:27.


KnightFandragon #60 Posted Nov 11 2012 - 21:25

    Major

  • Players
  • 4617 battles
  • 6,732
  • Member since:
    05-06-2011
Haides, you prolly shouldnt use red...

So you guys are comparing KV1 Vs T5 Tiger?  The Tiger would absolutely dominate T5 to the point of needing T30 levels of nerfing.  Its L56 would absolutely obliterate stuff in that tier, including any and all heavies.  Mediums wouldnt stand a chance and even that tier arty might not pose as big a threat.....Tiger more or less belongs in T7.

KV1 vs Tiger?

The Tiger with hte L56 has 132penetration? (it should actually be like 150, but thats a moot point)
240alpha and its 5.45 Reload(which im sure would be nerfed to hell in T5)
Its got good accuracy and the armor of the Tiger would put the KV1 to shame.
The KV1's 85mm would do alot of frontal bouncing..........

The Germans do not have a T5 heavy because everything they have is OP as shit if it was put in it;s proper tier..hence why WG has nerfed down all RL german values and put the tanks in tiers that puts them at the brink of uselessness.

Edited by KnightFandragon, Nov 11 2012 - 21:30.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users