From what I remember, the US did at least try, but the thing broke down after a couple of hours. The tale of its capture is interesting as well. A Sherman from the 740th Tank Battalion stumbled on it at night during the Battle of the Bulge. They noted that the Tiger was in a defensive position but didn’t really react to them. So to figure out what was going on, the Sherman crew fired a star shell at it. The Germans, thinking they were under attack, bailed out and ran; the tank was captured; and the commander and three of his crew boarded it, started it up, and drove it towards the front. The thing didn’t make it and broke down, and was later recovered. Nowadays, it’s enjoying its retirement in Georgia.
5 Likes
yeah that sounds about right for a Tiger
2 Likes
Even the common hauscat spends the majority of the day out of action (asleep). Imagine how much more unbalanced this massive thing’s work/sleep schedule must’ve been.
2 Likes
And thats the entire point!
both US and Germany have pretty much superior techs in tech tree at rank IV, and USSR is obliged to use event machinery if it wants to be HALF as effective at tier IV.
well, USSR`s KV-2-40 is premium at german tree, PT-76-57 got nerfed much and now aint that effective anymore tho (in my opinion, Fox or the Object 906 are now somewhat better light tanks), ant t-10A? Idk, it is better than IS-4 for sure, and its not in any way a bad machine, but to call it superior?
i own one tho and i would certainly prefer to play AMX-50-100 better
well, it sure should tho. Event vehicles are hard to obtain. Making them toy for maybe 10% of playerbase. So even if it technically can count as a lineup material, its hard to believe that it makes a huge difference to overall community, e.g. it does not show up much in games so it makes no difference to winrate or balance.
Making that point, i mostly base my sayings on Gaijin`s “We add Oplot-T to make japanese tree have different gameplay” (i only read that part in russian so i dont make a quote here, just rephrasing) and same said about hungarian subtree and Bhishma. So the same should be applied to USSR which operates somewhat worst machines on several battle ratings of an entire “big three”.
i mean, i certainly would as i already have all big three made to top tier.
And i would love to see that logic applied everywhere around teh game - if you want T-72, go play USSR. If you want 2a4 - go play Germany. Ect.
But it seems to me that USSR`s great machinery is being given to all and any country, and the USSR does not get the same treatment at ratings when it needs it.
idk. IS-2s base makes that gun pretty hard to use anyway, and it still underperformes if compared to KT 88mm. Not even talking about KTs base being far superior to IS-2s.
“niche” is not something hard to obtain, its something that is hard to master and use properly effective. PT16/14 is easy to use, so its not niche, but its hugely hard to obtain.
I would say that Challenger 2s are niche - their gameplay is unique and they are somewhat effective when played properly. But they are hard to master. However they arent hard to obtain so everyone can try their gameplay.
If i want a machine with great armor + great cannon + effective + at KT`s rating or less - what should i use?
USSR does not come close to such a machine. It has IS-2. IS-2 has bad cannon as it shoots slower, penetrates fewer millimeters, and shots likes to dissapear in tracks, and also has bad turret rotation speed and vertical aim angles.
IS-2 moves as bad as KT, and it has weaker armor and less survivabiity. Same being said can also apply to Obj.248, including the gun - it still has bad aim speed and angles, and underperforms with penetration compared to Tiger 2, thy its reload gets great.
Same goes for the US: they have T34 which has great cannon with a bit slower reload that KT but higher penetration, which also has a great T34 base. They have T26E5 which has top tier armor at its battle rating, but has weaker cannon that is still fast reloading and has great APHE and angles, they have T26E4 with a cannon easilly compared to Tiger 2 in effectiveness tho a bit slower reload (still shoots twice when USSR shoots once. And they also have premium T29 which is literally most OP tank at 7.0 ingame.
It is not if we talk about unique gameplay, but it is if we talk about balance. Event vehicles dont have massive effect on winrates after maybe two months after event end. And suggesting using an event vehicle (that maybe 10% of players have and/or use) as a counterpart of a tech tree (which is massively used and always seen in matches) is somewhat strange to do at my opinion.
Tho i may agree to use premium machinery as it is quite more affordable than event ones, and you meet them plenty.
It may be valid, tho thats not the reason USSR players want a KT. the main reason is that KT is OP machinery which meets USSR`s 6.7 lineup.
(for the same reason they removed the T-34 Prototype tho, meaning that has nothing to do with uniquiness of the machine)
75mm sherman was if i remember correctly a ground forces test preorder pack. So they made it unique reward as they did with T-34 prototype and some planes.
agreed
So that role would be a “universal great heavy tank to make USSR`s lineup stronger as USSRs own heavy tanks are either just bad or niche”, no?
Tho they have additions for it!
KV-1B has the same rating, KV-1-747 has higher but it brings a MUCH better cannon. The T-34-747 gets the higher rating than T-34-42 for additional frontal armor (and the T-34E in USSR`s tech tree has a weaker turret).
Good take but…
i grinded USSR with the IS-2 Revenge and t-44-122.
tho i have small amount of play on tech tree IS-2-44s because they are pain to play at stock and i already have higher rating. So why bother
No they arent? THey are in every way worse but still stuch at the same BR.
When i play KT, i dont even use my bain, and still have like 3 kd
Even the tech tree one which has worse KD as i played it when i was a newbie has GOOD kd ratio
Even the 105 isnt that bad after all!
And when i play IS-2s i need to think at least twice to have somewhat good kd ratio. And to have it same as KT one…
AND STILL! they provide less tactical mobility as their stats dont make them universal as KT.
May you show the example of it?
I know that the 100mm 412B shot has it, but never have i ever had more strange ricochets than with 122mm 412D and 412B
I would certainly do opposite. Tho i would prefer the IS-6 to Leopard 1 exactly because APHE and 13 second reload.
Kind of baffled by your logic here. So you’re saying that event vehicles don’t change winrates, and its “strange” to suggest an event vehicle as a solution to a missing kind of vehicle in a tech-tree… Isn’t this literally the core problem with suggesting a King Tiger for the USSR, and the entire point I was also trying to make? I can’t tell if you’re agreeing with me in a long-winded way, or if you disagree.
You also still seem to fail to understand what I mean by a niche. The battle-doctrine of the USSR did not produce a King Tiger equivalent. The solution isn’t to add a King Tiger as an event vehicle, it seems you at least agree with that. But if you want to play the USSR with gameplay comparable to a King Tiger, I was simply suggesting a vehicle I know is tried and true similar. When I said niche, I was specifically talking about a gameplay niche. For the USSR, anything akin to a King Tiger would be a niche in its playstyle, such as the 248. It has a faster reload than the T-44-100, which is arguably the closest thing to a King Tiger you can get for the USSR. It has a non-overpressure cannon/ammunition, but great pen, somewhat decent reload, and incredible frontal armor. Only reason its 7.0 instead of 6.7 is probably because of its superior mobility.
It sounds like these players should be making a discussion post begging Gaijin to nerf the King Tiger again then, rather than suggesting they get one as well. And I am not saying this from any malicious place, as despite being a Germany main I have more time spent playing Russia in all honesty. I’ve found in my years playing the game that Russian tanks require more movement and map knowledge than German tanks, but with good enough game-sense they can easily outclass them.
The King Tiger only feels OP because a lot of Russian players I’ve seen in my matches develop bad habits from playing earlier Soviet tanks. The T-34 and KV-1 both bounce rounds like its nobody’s business. The players get used to brawling as their main form of combat. Flanking or sniping are afterthoughts when your cannon can easily pen at close range from the front. However, when you get to 6.7, they start to struggle. The IS-2 is not a brawler, it serves best as a mid-range sniper. The T-44 is not a brawler, it does its best while flanking. The King Tiger is a brawler. Yes it can snipe pretty well, but its superior in close-range frontal fighting with its reload speed, penetration, and great armor. Every single weak spot it has (excluding the MG port since its hard to hit) is its side and rear armor. I’ve seen Germany players APLENTY not understand this. They overextend, get flanked by one guy, half the team dies, match is over. Competent Russian players lean into their vehicles’ strengths, and win at rates that clearly Gaijin thinks is more than acceptable, because I remember them a couple years back moving the IS-2 from 6.0 and 6.3 to 6.3 and 6.7, which I thought was overkill. I thought the T-44 should be 6.3, and the (FM) variant is overtiered at 6.3. Yet apparently they perform more than well enough at these battle ratings, despite serving different roles than the Tiger II.
Moral of the story is don’t underestimate a player who flanks with the IS-2, one shots a King Tiger, then rolls back into cover. Sometimes, that does more to win the game than a guy in a Tiger II who tries the same strategy, only kills the enemy’s turret crew, then gets killed by the enemy’s teammate before he can even get his 7.5 aced reload in. The IS-2 is no slouch, and also one of the most satisfying tanks to get kills with. You clearly know that judging by your stats.
Tiger II & IS-2 (1944) vs. M103
As you can see, the BR471D round is two times more likely to get a lucky shot through the hull on a tank that is infamously hard to pen the hull on, specifically because it is curved angled armor. The two green spots are guaranteed, while adjacent spots around them are yellow, but not shown by the protection analysis. For the Tiger II its basically impossible to go through the hull at that distance (500 meters).
Also I find it hilarious that you bring that up, I made an entire post about how it confused me the T29 got a reload nerf while the Tiger II 105 didn’t, despite having better ammunition, mobility, and even some may argue armor, all while still being at 7.0. They at least since then nerfed the ammunition a bit. Maybe if it comes back for the anniversary, like the Maus, the influx of players using it will encourage them to nerf the reload too, bring it on par with the T29. Because right now it has a much better argument for being OP than the standard King Tiger does.
i love how everyone says no to russia but no one says no to britain but me for copy paste
I didn’t say no, but I voted no. The French have a reason to get a Panther, theirs is kinda unique. The Soviet one is funny I suppose, and that’s about it for other countries getting Panthers. I think the Brits have plenty enough medium tanks. The Soviets definitely don’t need any more German tanks than they already have.
Also just for the record, I jumped into one match right after I made my reply, since I haven’t played the IS-2 in a while and was feeling nostalgic. It was a full 7.7 uptier on Breslau, did some mid-range sniping and held some flanks for my teammates. Got 12 kills and a nuke.
1 Like
britain is in a better state at this br range than france honestly why its okay for them to have that at that br
britain mains try not to claim the world challenge level impossible
1 Like
I personally like collecting vehicles with interesting histories. That said, Britain does have other options regarding Panthers. There’s always the REME Panthers built for the British Post-War and the Jagdpanther they uparmored. Those should probably be unique enough to satisfy the no C&P crowd. The real challenge is figuring out how to add something like Tiger 131, given that Bovington owns the IP/Copyright on it and probably has some say in where it goes.
1 Like
yeah tiger 131 will most probably never be added as i can bet they made contract with wargaming to not add it to any other game then theres
No? The tiger 2 is also proposed as a premium vehicle which would have GIANT impact on game balance, rather than it being an event vehicle.
I do inderstand what you mean, however i do disagree with that explanation of a term.
Yes, i do find that logic bad for the environment. I want trees to be different as much as possible. That being said, i do also get frustraited when gaijin adds USSRs or german techs (e.g. leopard 1/2 clones, T-72 and T-34 clones, YAK and Me109 clones, ect) to other trees covering that with “adding a gameplay difference to that tree”, “Making the completr experience in that tree”, or how do they call it in the EN version of the news.
And the reason im arguing here with you is because i never see any backlash in adding those machines from the foreign community, for example when they did thai subtree with particulary soviet (or chinese based on a gameplay) top tier machine, or when they added the eastern germany techs to Germany.
But if its adding something to USSR - its “no keep it unique”.
Tho the ones you suggest either event or just dont have similar to tiger 2 gameplay, or both.
The 248 is 6.7 tho its still not even close to a tiger 2 gameplay in my opinion. I have both and while playing king tiger is basically sweeping keyboard with my face and getting kills, the 248 is maybe even more skill based than IS-2.
I do agree with that tho they do it all the time. I mean, look at panzer 4s. Basically 4.7 machinery sitting 3.3-4.0 and no one does anything. Because idk, germans are so weak players? Or the wehraboos coming to play that game always choose germany as starting country making that tanks look weak? Or any other reason that somehow makes IS-2 as effective and universal as Tiger 2 in Gaijin’s eyes.
You can easily outplay german players, thats for sure. But outclassing a king tiger? Doubt its possible. Maybe the T34 of the US can do something with it, but there are hardly any machine found in the USSR’s 6.3-6.7 which matches the King Tiger’s universality and efficiency. At least that’s my opinion as of one who started with germans and now played each and every 6.7 lineup in game.
Taking as granted that “both players pmay equally good”, neither IS-2 or the Object 248 stands well against tiger 2. Tho i may agree that both those tabks can be efficient against an entire enemy lineups. Just that they take much more from a player to be so.
That actually has much sense put to it. I cannot disagree with that closely all of the USSR machines teach player to cut distance and play agressively at the start. Tho those machines mostly do this because of the weaker cannons, and taking their armor as ‘invincible’ even on high distances is quite generous.
Tho it is pretty bad even at that position, as it lacks shooting speed, frontal armor, penetration and angles. Yes, it can be used like that, but taking that Tiger 2 has point-and-delete gameplay as it plays mostly against weaker-armored machines mostly, the IS-2 still requires to aim for weaker spots while having huge reload while still required to play against top notch armor.
I do agree its best as flanker, but it also still requires to keep close to the enemy, making it similar to early t-34s
Now, that i just disagree with. Its not JUST brawler. Its a universal delete machine. Its equally good as a close-range offence machine a s it is good as long range defence machine. Some might even argue that it’s sniler options are even better than brawler.
Its not SO good tho as its turret remains a weak spot. Most of the cannons can penetrate it fromtally fron close range, including IS-2. Thy the point is, Tiger 2 has all the instruments to not let them do it.
And even when penetrated, it has high chances to either loose consciousness without loosing cannon, or loose cannon without being oneshotted… The one thing any IS lacks strongly
Basic is-2 still positions at 6.3, tho starting at 5.7 it still is crazy to see. And thats the only reason i think that USSR should get Tiger 2 - because either it will skyrocket in efficiency and show just how bad Gaijin’s game balance is based on how weak germans play, or it will just make USSR’s lineup more universal which it lacks now. Tho i still think that its really not necessary AND even bad for the environment if gaijin will somehow address that problem.
But for now i only see them copy-pasting everything everywhere except USSR. Which is grrat for the USSR as they get somewhat most unique machines, but also bad for them as their regulars get cloned everywhere and they obliged to play against both their strong machines and nato strong machines.
I suggest that thats entirely because of how stupidly weak german teams perform now. Because me muself playing Panzer 4s against Jumbos and Tiger 1s against IS-2s 90% of the time - i have never had any issues with that, and i saw both sides strong. But now Panzer 4s dont even MEET the jumbo, and the Tigers usually olay against t-34-85s. And still manage to loose easily!
Ah yes, thats the entire reason i got me nearly all 122s in that game. The kills with that cannon are much more satisfying than with long german 88mm. Tho, judging by the same stats, you might as well notice that my most beloved 122 is IS-6. Which plays against tiger 2s alot BUT has two weakness’s removed - weak armor and SUPER LONG reload, so it plays equally good sgainst tiger 2s and against Leopard-alikes and Pattons.
Tho i dont see a huge difference, and judging by my expirience using Both tiger 2 and is-2 i would certainly shoot cannon first. But then, if i use Tiger 2, i have all chances to flank it right there as it has 7 sec reload. And IS has some chances of reloading AFTER the M103 repairs its cannon.
As i got more expirienced i started hating playing Tiger 2s as they are just boring - slow, efficient, scary for newbies against them.
But the one tiger i always found stupidly ineffective was the Tiger 105.
It may just be me, but having practically same damage as tiger 88, it has practically the same penetration, but reloads twice slowly and sometimes has ridiculous ricochets. And moreover, it acts worse than basit tiger 2 against light armor. So i never got a hand of this tiger, even playing same efficiency as Sla16 makes me somehow feel underperforming.
+1, captured vehicles are a big part of the game, and its even more true in SIM battles.
I would love to see more and more captured vehicles in the game
1 Like
I’d say it’s 50/50 depending on the terms of the partnerships
-1; Let’s just give every tree a Tiger II, M4 Sherman and T-34-85 /s
2 Likes
already did with Sherman and coming close to with T-34 so…
Yeah, and it has been massively critiqued by a large portion of the player base. Why play one tree over another when they all have the same stuff, and every is shooting at identical vehicles. We are becoming World of Tanks with suggestions like this.
1 Like
Well, never heard a great criticism to shermans and 34s, but i do believe mass portion of players critiques them too.
And having that in mind, the only audience Gaijin seems to listen to are chinese atm