Late WW2 heavies

Game Discussion Realistic Battle
,
46

Please, don’t take it the wrong way, take it in the constructive spirit it is intended as.

The fact that you think these two guns are the same is very telling of the fact that you need to rethink your position on this discussion.

The KwK43 is one of the most exceptional guns you’ll find in this game, at any BR. If you’re not penning anything with it, it simply means you don’t know where to shoot your opponents. 6.7 is not the sort of BR where there’s a lot of margin for error, you simply have to know where to shoot what. Firing centre mass is not something you can rely on.

I honestly really can’t fathom why people think the Tiger II suffers. Last year’s round of decompression has done wonders for 6.7 heavies for all nations.

What you have with the Tiger II is an incredibly powerful gun with a 7.4s reload (which is an outstanding level of firepower for a heavy) and fast turret rotation. It means you can move aggressively along a flank to play anti-flanker, or get to a meta position and defend it tooth and nail, because your reload and turret rotation make you incredibly reactive. You’re lethal at basically every conceivable combat range. You can snipe and you can brawl. You have a working reverse gear. You can sidescrape. You can take out someone’s barrel, and follow up…

It’s a nuke machine. One of my nukes with it has come at 7.7 on Normandy… most heavies in the game are traditionally useless in a full uptier, but not this one, because the gun still works. You just become a very slow medium tank.

Seriously. I used to think poorly of the Tiger II too, but a combination of learning to play it, and the BR decompression around it, has opened my eyes to just how damn good it is. Maybe even 7.0 good.

The two tanks Gaijin brings up as being marginal and probably worth it of a 0.3 BR increase are the Tiger II and the T29, there’s a reason for that.

Now, if you want an example of heavy tanks that actually suffer from their placement, the Jumbo 76, the Tiger II P, the Ferdinand, the very late Soviet heavies are better examples imho. But not the Tiger II, since its gun allows it to effectively multirole in a way that most heavies simply can’t do.

3 Likes
47

Dude when I look at them I see 88mm but I know the Tiger 1 uses the Kwk36 and the Tiger two the Kwk43.

48

You’re the one who said that the Tiger II can be put lower in BR because it has the same gun as the Tiger I.

Either you meant that literally, in which case you have been corrected; or you meant that since they have the same calibre, the Tiger II can be lower in BR, which is a really strange argument. The Dicker Max and the Tiger II 105 both have a 105mm calibre, do we put the latter at 3.7?

When you move up from the Tiger E to the production variants of the Tiger II, you’re giving up a bit of mobility and the overpressure round, in exchange for an incredible upper glacis, 84mm more of penetration for the same reload, and a much faster turret rotation. They’re basically incomparable platforms. They also play very different too, not much relation there, since the Tiger I was a rushed job/evolutionary dead end in Gerrman armour design.

If the Tiger II was any lower in BR than it currently is, it would be a monster.

1 Like
49

I meant because they are the same caliber.

50

That’s not the point. It doesn’t matter if you’re doing something wrong it the fact that you broke the ToS. I’m not going to say anything about it, idc, I’m just advising you about it.

1 Like
51

Most heavy tanks have an issue where they are Too strong in a full downtier and too weak in a full up tier… i dont really see this being fixed.

About the only thing they could do is make it so heavy tanks can only slightly up tiered (.7 or lower) , but they could do that for all vehicles/matches too.

Ultimately tho, i think things are mostly fair and situated in a “good enough” position. Most things that have heat and that can pen heavies, can themselves be one shot/wrecked by the heavy tanks sooo, its more just… play smart and play good.

52

It seems gaijin dont you to play heavy tanks at certain brs like they dont want SP guns anymore.

53

No they don’t.
All vehicles have the same issue…
On a full uptier, your gun needs to be enough to kill most enemies. As armor will probably be useless.
On a full downtier your armor can make you very tough too kill. As gun will probably be enough for most targets.

SO…heavy tanks with good guns are ok…as ALL VEHICLES with good guns. This includes all Tigers, most US heavies and most Russian heavies.
There are heavy tanks like KV1, Churchill and some others that have bad guns…and these will struggle on a uptier. As ANY vehicle with bad guns…but this is also true for some LIGHT vehicles that do well at their BR with low pen autocanons…

IN SHORT…some vehicles are better on uptiers and/or downtiers…not necessarily heavy tanks.

1 Like
54

Guy…the most played tanks where i play are heavy tanks…Tigers (all), M26 family (some are heavies). And back in the day there were Jumbos, IS series, Zis5 and many heavies that were very strong at their BRs.

There is a SPECIFIC BR range where some WW2 heavies start to struggle, but even then it is only WHEN FULLY UPTIERED…and they can usually kill most opponents. History made the heavy tank obsolete…so it happens in WT.

The real issue is that some players think the heavy tank can only exist on a world where it is the toughest thing in the battlefield…and this would create havoc in matchmaking on a game that tries to make all opponents somewhat matched, independent of their manufacture date.

If you want scenarios where WW2 heavies are only fighting WW2, game will be miserable for anyone NOT on a heavy…and they would not play.
If only heavies are allowed, you ditch out several nations.

Short version…most WW2 heavies are fun to play. You have to “accept” that on some scenarios there will be opponents with “too fast” vehicles that make no historical sense…
Full historical matchups are NOT VIABLE in this game system…and any proposal to that effect is actually not well accepted by players. Everyone wants to be the “bully”…

1 Like
55

History made them obsolete but Warthunders version of History compounds that further.

1 Like
56

This is what i dont get on the complaint…
If anything, WT makes late WW2 heavy tanks MORE viable than they were supposed to be…
When you play with a King Tiger you ARE NOT supposed to find WW2 targets only…you are too strong for that. You have to be on a mixed environment with modern vehicles, particularly from nations that had nothing comparable to KT in WW2.

War Thunder makes King Tiger or T26 able to fight on battlefields with WW2 and early cold war vehicles…(this is true for ANY heavy tank with a decent gun)
On occasion some modern vehicle with a very powerful gun or ATGM will kill the King Tiger with one shot…but that same modern vehicle will die to almost anything on the battlefield…

I personally also dont like the WW2vsModern “realism”…but i dont see how it could be implemented differently AND STILL ALLOW players to play all vehicles on a balanced manner…

One of the BEST 7.0 vehicles you can play is KT…you want it to be even better…at the cost of what?

2 Likes
57

We both know what you said is not really true, is it? The turret on the Tiger II is not that fast and it’s a rolling trap. And the tank itself is slow. Not Maus or T95 levels of slow, but it’s slow.

58

Right, I just said it for the lolz.

You have almost exactly the same turret rotation as the Panther A, meaning that nearly every tank in the German tree before (and including) 6.7 has worse targeting speed than you. And you have a 7.5s reload, which almost no other heavy in your BR range can approximate or beat. And mobility is more than enough if you know what you’re doing.

It’s much easier to use a Tiger II at 7.7 than it is to use a Jumbo 75 at 6.7, and that’s a fact.

1 Like
59

Yes, they absolutely do.

Most of the “op” tanks suffer from having the most armor in that BR, and then having guns that are on the weaker side, since if they have the most armor, and can therefore bounce/take the most shots, it doesnt make sense for them to have the best, or even Very good guns.

So no, your logic is wrong. If Heavy tanks have better armor than their respective similar BR’ed vehicles, and have guns/rounds that are as good as, or better, then they would be simply better. So with your logic, All vehicles are the same and so they basically dont account for (a lot) more armor.

When in Fact they Do account for More armor. Which is evident in how they Raise the BR of the vehicles to account for the Extra armor/tankiness/survivability.

So, jumping back, tanks like the Jumbo, (most) KV’s and the MAUS (and others) suffer from a problem of having armor that will bounce a lot of shots, which light/medium and SPG’s can rarely do as efficiently.

meaning that heavy tanks will perform Much better in full down tiers, compared to Most other vehicles types and can even be labeled as “unkillable” , or Extremely difficult to kill, and then if the heavy tanks are in a Full up tier, most vehicles and their rounds simply overmatch their armor, making it more of a liability, since it comes with reduced speed, and Weaker than most guns at that BR.

60

It’s a matter of decompression. This is what the rest of us are saying. Decompression means it will not have to face vehicles it cannot effectively perform against. Heavy Tanks are meant to be heavy hitters which means frontally->Expose their armor and absorb shots. Forcing them to face HEATFS, APDS, and other such rounds forces these formidable beasts into tank roles they were not designed for which means their performance is sub-par. Which is an issue for many vehicles in the game.

61

It’s not a fact. It’s another drivel by a low skilled US main. You want facts? The Tiger II is NOT enough “If YoU kNoW wHaT yOu’Re DoInG”. Slow acceleration, turning kills your speed etc.

7.5 is spaded, it’s like arguing Leopards have a 6 second reload so they’re better than the T-80U when in fact, most Leopards will not have a spaded crew so their reload is not 6 seconds. Best I got is a 7.9 seconds reload with a maxed crew (150) just not spaded. Heavy tanks with a longer reload also have a round that’s more destructive and/or pens more.

Regarding turret rotation, it’s obvious you’ve never played Germany and only looked at the stat card. The difference between the Panther and the Tiger II (H) is that the H has a shitty turret that even slightly turned will give your opponent a guaranteed kill. The Panther does not have this issue. Neither does the T29, its closest competitor (which in fact IS faster and has a better gun, also more armor).

62

A US main? Lol.

Screenshot_2024-05-13-19-12-54-325_com.gaijinent.WarThunderCompanion
Screenshot_2024-05-13-19-12-54-325_com.gaijinent.WarThunderCompanion1080×2340 425 KB

Yes, and? Unless you move on the moment you finish spading a vehicle, you will spend most of your playtime with it in a spaded configuration. If you want to judge the Tiger II in stock configuration then you have to do the same with all its opponents as well.

Firepower is not flat pen. Most of the time you’re better off firing twice with the KwK43 than once with the PAK 44, even if the latter has more pen and more filler (which is way more important than pen).

Yes, it’s obvious. Just look at the screenshot above.

The triangle shaped plates next to the mantlet are a weakspot, the mantlet is a shot trap, and so is the cupola. By the way, none of this pertains in any manner to the fact that we were discussing targeting speed, which is an offensive aspect, not a survivability aspect.

You can pen the T29 in the gun mantlet, just as it can pen you, which typically results in a one shot on both sides. You can also frontally kill it through the MG port or the corners of the lower front plate. As anyone who’s ever played the Tiger II against T29s knows perfectly well.

But what do I know? It’s not like German 6.7 is my most played BR in this game, or anything.

1 Like
63

Yeah, everything you just said points to you not knowing anything and that ss being fake. As in not yours. First of all, to get a spaded Tiger 2 H you need 570K RP. Unless you’re addicted or a masochist, most players get it complete and move on. And I meant a crew spade, since no module affects crew reload on the Tiger.

Whenever did I say flat pen? And yes, firepower DOES include flat pen. Because flat pen does indicate, to a degree, how much armor you can pen. And I never mentioned anything about the Pak.

We’re discussing the effects of turret rotation, in case you can’t figure it out. The Tiger II is far more affected by the turret rotation speed. And yes, turret rotation speed is also a survivability aspect. If you’re pointing the wrong way, even a much weaker opponent will kill you.

And no, just because you think you’ll pen the gun mantlet, does not mean you will. The T29 mantlet is a notorious troll. The Tiger 2 turret is just a wall, you can pen it pretty easily. Let’s see how you’ll target the hull when you can’t kill it. And a rushed shot (for example you fighting 2 opponents) can still bounce off the hull. Nice try, I guess.

Exactly, you don’t know anything. Go back to complaining the american props are overtiered.

64

Dude, stop embarrassing yourself. We here in the forum have literally the same usernames as we do in the game. You can look me up for yourself using my username, either in game or on TS. Here you go. Try and tell me I’m a US main now.

Or - and there’s a third option - you simply enjoy playing the vehicle, so you keep doing it. Or do you really think everyone just races to top tier? 6.7 Germany is my favourite BR and I’m hardly the only player to stick to a tier they enjoy rather than keep up the grind.

You said there are guns from other heavies at that BR with higher penetration. Which is true. But you neglected to add they have slower reloads. Which is a significant factor of firepower where the Tiger II shines and that you’re choosing to neglect because it punctures your argument.

Desync affects everyone. In the Tiger II, I’ve survived shots that should have killed me, just like I’ve been screwed out of shots that should have killed my opponent. The point stands. Never had an issue penning the gun mantlet of a T29.

Check how many matches I have with US air, please. Make my day. ❤️

2 Likes
65

Desync? Are you kidding me? It’s not about desync and you know it.

Can you read? I said this (literal quote): “Heavy tanks with a longer reload also have a round that’s more destructive and/or pens more”. So no, I did not neglect, I specifically mentioned this. Nice selective reading. The Tiger 2 doesn’t shine, it’s average when it comes to reloads. I’d rather take the T29 over the Tiger II any day.

The rest of what you say is, again, us main drivel. GL, you’re going to need it with that low IQ.