Good afternoon, dear forum
I am a player of the American nation, and I am very interested in one point.
Why are T34 and Tiger II (H) on the same BR 6.7 and T29, which is just right for Tiger II (H), has a BR 7.0
I will now compare the premium tank T29 and Tiger II (H) (all data was taken from the official website wiki.warthunder.com, and screenshots were taken in the middle of the game)
-
Price:
T29 - 40 dollars
Tiger II (H) - 0
-
Combat rating:
Т29 - 7.0
Tiger II (H) - 6.7
-
Smoke grenades
T29 - not available
Tiger II (H) - available
-
Armor and crew:
-
Т29:
Hull:
Front - 102 mm
Side - 76 mm
Back - 51 mm
Turret:
Front - 203 mm
Side - 158 mm
Back - 102 mm
Crew - 6 people
-
Tiger II (H):
Hull:
Front - 150 mm
Side - 80 mm
Back - 80 mm
Turret:
Front - 185 mm
Side - 80 mm
Back - 80 mm
Crew - 5 people
(Yes, everything is great on paper, but after switching to the analysis of armor protection, everything will not be so good)
- Mobility:
- Т29:
Speed:
Forward - 36 km/h
Reverse - 14 km/h
Weight - 64.2 tons
Engine power - 770 hp
Power-to-Weight ratio - 12.0 hp/t
- Tiger II (H):
Speed:
Forward - 42 km/h
Reverse - 12 km/h
Weight - 69.8 tons
Engine power - 700 hp
Power-to-Weight ratio - 10.0 hp/t
- Armament:
- Т29:
105 mm T5E2 cannon:
Ammunition - 63 rounds
First-order - 8 rounds
Reload - (basic: 16.2 s), (aces: 12.5 s)
Vertical guidance - (-10/15 deg)
Turret rotation speed - (stock: 10.7 deg/s), (aces: 18.0 deg/s)
- Tiger II (H)
KwK43 (88 mm):
Ammunition - 70 rounds
First-order - 22 rounds
Reload - (basic: 9.7 s), (aces: 7.5 s)
Vertical guidance - (-8/15 deg)
Turret rotation speed - (stock: 11.3 deg/s), (aces: 19.0 deg/s)
- Ammunition (I will compare only the main APCBC shells, at a distance of 500 meters):
- Т29:
T13 projectile:
Type of warhead - APCBC
Penetration 0 deg - 236 mm
Projectile mass - 18.59 kg
Velocity - 899 m/s
Explosive mass (TNT equivalent) - 177.38 g
Ricochet - (0% - 48 deg), (50% - 63 deg), (100% - 71 deg)
- Tiger II (H)
PzGr 39/43 projectile:
Type of warhead - APCBC
Penetration 0 deg - 222 mm
Projectile mass - 10.16 kg
Velocity - 1,000 m/s
Explosive mass (TNT equivalent) - 108.8 g
Ricochet - (0% - 48 deg), (50% - 63 deg), (100% - 71 deg)
I will not compare machine guns
That’s all the characteristics of the tanks that are written on paper, I also attached screenshots of how they pierce each other and one question arises
Why do they have different combat ratings?
Wouldn’t it be more correct to lower the T29 to a combat rating of 6.7? Yes, it would not be so fair to the T34, but at the moment there is a Tiger II (H) at 6.7 and a Tiger II (P) at 6.7, although the Tiger II (H) is much better because of its turret. So if you think that the T29 is better than the T34 because it has a combat rating of 7.0, then maybe you should do something similar with the Tiger II (P) at 6.7 and the Tiger II (H) at 7.0
I understand that players on German equipment will not be happy and will complain, but we must do it honestly
[What do you think should be done about this issue?]
- Increase the combat rating of the Tiger II (H) to 7.0
- Lower the combat rating of the T29 to 6.7
- Leave it as it is
- I refrain from answering
You fail to mention quite a few things.
-For starters, why not compare machineguns? The T29 has 3x .50cals, which can destroy both tracks on any tank in a few seconds, and can often destroy barrels too. That is a pretty big advantage and it’s weird to not mention.
-Why mention price? That shouldn’t matter when balancing a vehicle.
-Tiger 2 accelerates slower and won’t reach its top speed often.
-T29 turret is very likely to eat shots purely due to volumetric armor and the uneven mantlet, even then the penetrable area is smaller than on the Tiger 2. Shots from the side from less powerful tanks are far more likely to penetrate the Tiger 2’s due to its paltry 80mm of side armor.
-From the front, Tiger 2 is also much more susceptible to a turret ammo explosion, as there are big ammoracks located right behind the crew. T29 turret ammorack can only be reliably set off from its left side.
-Tiger 2 hull is better protected, but while the hull can be hidden with clever positioning, turret cannot.
-Both have very good cannons and won’t struggle against many targets.
The T29 could see 6.7 but it is pretty good at 7.0 as is. It has a set of advantages that often make it win an engagement.
5 Likes
Decompress the the 6.7-7.7 br range.
1 Like
Okay, let’s look at your arguments
- Machine guns, I agree that this is a powerful thing and I use it to break the caterpillar, but seriously, what about the cannon? I went to the range and fired all the ammunition into the Panther gun and it didn’t even turn yellow
- With the price like that I shouldn’t have said anything
- I can’t tell you about the speed because I don’t know how to compare them properly, I’ll just believe you
- As for the armor of the turret, I was repeatedly killed by Tiger 2 in the turret, as it penetrates from a kilometer even into the mask, and since there are shells all over the tank, it leads to an explosion. I don’t want to argue about port armor, since all BRs have a 160mm penetration that will destroy my turret.
- Of course, you can hide the hull, but considering that it is more difficult to target the turret, it seems to me that it is 1:1
- I agree with the guns, but the speed of reloading the gun decides a lot, the fact that Tiger 2 will fire 2 shells while I fire 1 is not very correct
The Tiger 2H feels good at 6.7, while another tank that is almost identical to the Tiger 2H is at 7.0, which is not very fair. And if you add in the T34 with its T14E1 projectile, which does not contain explosives, the problems become even greater.
I understand why you defend the Tiger 2H so strongly, as you have a large number of kills with it and do not want it to be reclassified to 7.0. However, we must be honest and objective in our assessment.
As you show, T29 has a superior gun.
So it should, and now what?
The Panther A/G/F has a superior gun and shell and is at 6.0 while the M4A3E2 (76) W is at 6.3, but we are not here to evaluate them
T29 is a fine 7.0 tank. It’s better than the T34 due to its superior gun, and T34 is on par with Tiger 2H.
If you throw a T34 head-to-head against a Tiger 2H, it doesn’t even stand next to it, only very even hands can win a fight against a Tiger 2H. With my T14E3 projectile (which does not contain explosives), I need to aim at important modules (ammunition, gun, gunner, etc.) and with a reload time of 14.9 seconds on the ace, the 2nd shot is a rarity. While the Tiger 2H can kill a tank with its PzGr 39/43, which has 64g of explosives, even by hitting more minor modules
Maybe that was changed, because I distinctly remember T29s and 34s doing that to me. From the front, no less. Good change though.
Tiger 2 has lower power to weight ratio, simply. It also rarely reaches its top speed.
T29 can do the same, and the Tiger 2 turret has a much larger penetrable area.
Sure, many tanks have 160mm of penetration. But if you’re not perfectly flat to them it’ll be considerably more.
Now consider if it was 80mm instead - even 3.0 tanks can easily shoot your ammorack for an easy one shot kill if you fail to spot them in time.
T29 has a much bigger shell with better filler and performance against angles, and more penetration at all ranges. It’s a tradeoff.
On top of that, the T29 actually has a VERY similar gun to the now removed Tiger 2 105 - same reload, caliber, and penetration is within a few mm.
The Tiger 2 105 is also 7.0, so the T29 seems balanced there. If the T29 went down, I’d expect the Tiger 2 105 should too.
See above.
It’s a good tank, but it’s not what it used to be. Plenty of HEAT-FS carriers at 6.7 will have no issues dispatching it from any range, like the ST-A3 I really enjoy - far more than the Tiger 2 now.
The T34’s T14E1 shot is quite good, it’ll go straight through the Tiger 2’s turret front and hit the large ammorack behind it.
