Sign in to follow this  
fliningwayn

Tiger II (10,5cm kw.k)

all i want to say in this discussion is that the tiger 10,5 does'nt belong to 7.0, i would like to know how it got there in the first place

i know that alot of players think that its a bit unfair for it to be at 7.0 and we would like to see it at 6.7 instead, we have the tiger 2 with the long 88mm gun that has almost the same penetration and a much shorter reload time and better turret traverse, soo can we talk about that please?

 

  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

with the penetration buffs of american heavy tanks that now exceed the performance of the 105mm by miles with a shorter reload, the 105 KT doesn't belong to 7.0 anymore. But it didn't belong there for quite some time already anymore.

  • Upvote 3
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fliningwayn said:

i would like to know how it got there in the first place

 

Because it used to be a monster of a tank, it's just that Gaijin is extremely slow to react to META-shifts.

 

  • Confused 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to add a comparison here, T29 and T34. Now due to recent penetration mechanic changes.... Have you see what buff they received? T29 279mm of pen, T34 275mm vs Tiger 10.5 249 mm. With that giant rounds and quite a lot of filler those things OHK most of the enemies that they meet. This is even more so true for Tiger 10.5 with its 185mm of unangled turret armor. To top it all up they have better armor and reload time plus 3x .50 cal to deal with anything unarmored, while the Tiger MG is insufficient to deal with most light targets, plus it lacs the roof MG for AA purposes. This is true for all german vehicles, not a single panther has a turret MG, all though they had them

. The only advantage for Tiger 10.5 is speed but not by that much. However the Tiger 10.5 is 0.3 BR higher. While one might thing that is not much, if you compare both vehicles even with their 6.7 Tiger II H counterpart, they still come out on top, vs 10.5 same.  

 

It often struggles to pen IS3 (which is ok) IS6 (which is usually pen proof against unaimed shot), it fails to penetrate T44 UPF while it should go through. DOn't get me started on the mobile T54, also facing FV series with their APSDF spam.... if you shoot and miss or bounce you are as good as dead due to the slow reload rate and bad armor profile for uptiers.

Edited by Drahau
Added stuff
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Necrons31467 said:

 

Because it used to be a monster of a tank, it's just that Gaijin is extremely slow to react to META-shifts.

 

it's not even a meta shift in this case. There are heavy tanks ingame that perform better in every regard apart from straight line mobility which are lower in BR. There is simply no reason anymore for 7.0 for this tank. 7.0 is a relict of 2015. Same goes for the Maus' 7.7 BR.

  • Like 1
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Rainbowprincess said:

it's not even a meta shift in this case. There are heavy tanks ingame that perform better in every regard apart from straight line mobility which are lower in BR. There is simply no reason anymore for 7.0 for this tank. 7.0 is a relict of 2015. Same goes for the Maus' 7.7 BR.

+Totally agree :good:

medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Drahau said:

I'm going to add a comparison here, T29 and T34. Now due to recent penetration mechanic changes.... Have you see what buff they received? T29 279mm of pen, T34 275mm vs Tiger 10.5 249 mm. With that giant rounds and quite a lot of filler those things OHK most of the enemies that they meet. This is even more so true for Tiger 10.5 with its 185mm of unangled turret armor. To top it all up they have better armor and reload time

 

The Tiger 2 105 has better post pen damage than the T34 (It only gets solid shot) and a faster reload, while yes the T-34 has more turret armor, its hull is much weaker and the Turret still isn't impenetrable. The T29 is 100% OP AF, better reload and pen than the T34/KT105 as well as better post-pen damage and even a lower repair cost (The T34 is the most expensive to repair at 7k SL in RB and 11k in AB). The KT105 could go down to 6.7 (The T34 is the only competent non premium heavy at 6.7, so it can't go up, otherwise 3 7.0 main tech tree heavies lul) and the T29 should go to 7.0 regardless.

 

Nah 7.7 for Maus is fine, there are already 7.0 tanks with guns that struggle against other 7.0s, against a Maus they are worthless. What we need is proper BR decompression so the serious post war cHeat-FS and APFSDS doesn't make the heavies completely worthless

Edited by Jhawk163
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maus at 7.0 would rock hard when top tier and still would have to be careful when bottom tier. It would be like a turreted T95.

 

But back to Tiger 10.5. Indeed it offers no relevant advantages over Tiger II H. It's actually a worse tank.

I'm not going to push for the E series here but an autoloading, faster and stablized Tiger II would rock my world.

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the only advantages theoretically are better postpen damage and a bit more mobility and the rangefinder. But the mobility aspect is 100% negclectable since it makes no difference at this BR because of enemy tanks that are so superior in mobility. The rangefinder is also okay but it does not justify a BR.

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rainbowprincess said:

the only advantages theoretically are better postpen damage

 

TNT equivalency beyond 130-ish gramms is completely useless anyways, the damage doesn't actually increase.

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Drahau said:

it lacs the roof MG for AA purposes. This is true for all german vehicles, not a single panther has a turret MG, all though they had them

German tanks didn't carry a third machine gun. The MG ring on the cupola was for fitting the bow gun when on the march. In combat it was mounted in the bow.

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Necrons31467 said:

 

TNT equivalency beyond 130-ish gramms is completely useless anyways, the damage doesn't actually increase.

that's true. It was just a comparison to the usual King tiger with the 88mm. The 105mm can one shot a T29/T34 through the lower frontplate thanks to the larger filler. The 88mm can't do it

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, LionTrack said:

German tanks didn't carry a third machine gun. The MG ring on the cupola was for fitting the bow gun when on the march. In combat it was mounted in the bow

 

masLJentzHilaryL_Doyle039kopie-vi.jpg

 

MGBarrelHolderSketch2.jpg

Edited by Chomusuke1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Chomusuke1 said:

 

masLJentzHilaryL_Doyle039kopie-vi.jpg

 

MGBarrelHolderSketch2.jpg

 

Aw yis. Finaly. But in all due respect, Americans are the scourge of german air as ANYTHING and I do mean ANYTHING mounts at least one .50 cal MG, which are borken at the moment. No one can justify that one AP .50 cal round to the wing simply ripps it off. The mauser rounds for the MG's also have wrong penetratiosn. Not being able to pierce 1cm of hardened steel is BS. Plus only a few grman tanks cary Mgs as AA guns. So , anything US, which is unable to join the Germany, carries a .50 cal that overpreforms in AA duties, while germans are stuck with only a few premoim tanks ((RU, SLA) that have AA MG... wtf.

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.