I didn’t ask for proof, I am waiting for you to admit you got bested. Guarantee he was hull down and you were out in the open huh? You shot at him hit his gunners optic he shot at you and you came here to forums from that incident?
Go ahead try again
Better yet post the reply i want to see what happened
I did if he can’t hit the muzzle or hatch, he ain’t going to be able to hit the gunners sight.
I don’t care about sturmtiger, honestly I’d never play it anyways, they can model it for StuTi as far as I am concerned.
‘‘It’s funny that Jpz 4-5 is essentially the same as M56 but better in every way bar acceleration speed yet sits at 6.3 comfortably…’’
Sorry but no. firstly, m56 is a smaller target, albeit a little taller. secondly m56 has a horizontal drive. fourthly, m56 doesn’t have a turret superstructure, thus shrapnel can’t bounce around it upon impact. fifthly a jpz 4-5 has exhaust on top giving away it’s location. lastly do to it’s nature an m56 can go hull down better than jpz 4-5. also m56 is 6.0, WITH heatfs and 185mm of pen on it’s APCBC.
there is no conceivable reason why should 4-5 be moved, even if it wouldnt have made a difference to me frankly.
that’s a logical fallacy, the mantlet is considerably easier to hit than the gun or the hatch.
Just because you don’t play it doesn’t mean it should get a nerf that essentially makes the gunner exposed to 30 cals as if the tank isn’t already very limited in effectiveness.
M56 is slightly wider and taller, Jpz 4-5 is longer (just use the tile to compare the dimensions, also ignore the toilet papers).
M56 has twice the horizontal limits and slightly better depression than Jpz 4-5.
Both doesn’t really matter all that much since you’d be moving all the time anyway.
Yeah, because it literally just dies… Your entire crew are sitting outside having a picnic, anything literally kills them, be it CAS, arty, HE even with near miss, 50 cal, 30 cal, or even smoke shell…
Yes… having all 3 crews vulnerable to MGs is better for hull down alright… All while they’re sitting on top of the hull.
…in AB, RB and SB are 6.7.
‘‘Just because you don’t play it doesn’t mean it should get a nerf that essentially makes the gunner exposed to 30 cals as if the tank isn’t already very limited in effectiveness.’’
You are right there, but that’s a discussion for a different thread don’t you think?
‘‘M56 is slightly wider and taller, Jpz 4-5 is longer (just use the tile to compare the dimensions, also ignore the toilet papers).’’
Doesn’t look wider to me at all, but I do suppose it’s thinner than I thought, though frankly the pic does seem like it was taken from slightly different distances, but i suppose not enough to make that much of a difference. still though, hull down the m56 is a smaller target.
‘‘M56 has twice the horizontal limits and slightly better depression than Jpz 4-5.
Both doesn’t really matter all that much since you’d be moving all the time anyway.’’
That’s on me I thought it actually turns fully, my bad.
‘‘Yeah, because it literally just dies… Your entire crew are sitting outside having a picnic, anything literally kills them, be it CAS, arty, HE even with near miss, 50 cal, 30 cal, or even smoke shell…’’
Plenty of times I have shot an m56 with it being saved by the shrapnel not bouncing around, this is especially egregious with hits that don’t hit the center mass.
‘‘Yes… having all 3 crews vulnerable to MGs is better for hull down alright… All while they’re sitting on top of the hull.’’
They are not vulnerable frontally though, at least not all of them. especially not hull down. oftentimes I only see the upper edge of the plate and that’s the only clue that something is there, mostly I only find out an m56 is somewhere because it just shot at me and the enemy is suspiciously absent. 4-5 is in 6.3 because of the stupid exhaust and the fact it has to expose itself more to shoot hull down because of the gun’s nature being fixed in the front. the m56 is much better suited lobbing rounds while remaining almost entirely in cover which is probably the best attribute to have in wt.
‘’…in AB, RB and SB are 6.7.‘’
You are correct on the RB, I had arcade air battles selected when I looked into the tech tree
btw I just read the official dimensions on the vehicles and jpz 4-5 is indeed wider over the fender. however the official statistic doesn’t mention the width of m56’s gunshield. google ai estimated it to be around 188cm, which to me sounds reasonably corrrect, eyeballing it it can’t be wider than two meters, and given this is the only part you will see on a hull down m56, it means that I was correct on the width difference before, even if we considered the gunshield to be the same width as the vehicle, which it really isn’t.
Another thing to consider that while m56 is 6.7, so is m50 and m50 is VASTLY superior to jpz 4-5, there isn’t even any competition there.
Well except this thread basically already going off places anyway. :v
Their stomach aren’t covered by the gun shield, the gun shield can be penetrated by 30 cals even at 500 m away (it’s only 5 mm), and commander is fully exposed on the side.
Besides, that is provided you’re able to get to a spot and didn’t get gunned along the way and you can’t even stay on the spot for too long since you’re extremely vulnerable to begin with so you’ll have to run somewhere else after a moment. You can’t survive MG bursts during transit.
It’s a sidegrade. M50 has issues with parallax due to the placement of the guns which makes aiming somewhat difficult (not to mention the fact that it fires left to right), the low velocity doesn’t help it either. Also, the entire 6 guns are counted as 1 breech so any hit to the massive structure will disable it. It is also vulnerable to 50 cals.
That’s the first thing I did after spading my T26E5.
72% slower acceleration to 35 km/h is truly atrocious given that the T26E5 is quite slow itself.
That 38 km/h top speed of the Tiger II might as well be fictional. There are few maps where you’ll be on a paved surface driving in a perfectly straight line for 30+ seconds.
The traverse rate of the hull is also extremely poor which isn’t helped by it’s already sluggish turret traverse rate, it makes it really poorly suited to reacting to light vehicles on it’s flanks.
No, it’s not more sensical, because the Tiger II and T26E5 don’t exist in a vacuum where they only face one another.
The Tiger II’s mobility should be compared to, and be relative to all vehicles within it’s BR range, because that’s precisely what it faces in practice.
Obviously a Leopard 2A4 is faster than a Tiger II, but that’s not relevant because they’ll never meet eachother in battle.
The ratings are relative to other vehicles the Tiger II’s meet.
Because they’re not.
Also, I said ‘‘T-34/85’’, not just ‘‘T-34’’.
That doesn’t somehow mean it’s armour is any good.
Let’s give the Leopard 1 a UFP of 180mm sloped at 60 degrees, are we then going to pretend that the Leopard 1 is suddenly well armoured? Despite everything still lolpenning it’s turret front?
As I already said: Strong turret, weak hull > Strong hull, weak turret.
Besides, none of the T26E5’s weakspots are as large as the Tiger II Early’s turret weakspot.
Whatever the cause, the point remains: It gets one-tapped by 5.7 tanks frontally, even with 95% of your profile hidden.
The armour isn’t good.
Yes you can. Shoot the cupola. It will nuke the entire crew. Alternatively shoot the muzzle brake. Old universal tactic.
Neither is the gunsight of the Tiger II… or most other tanks.
You need to sidescrape in a Tiger II in order to minimise this weakness.
Much trickier to hit compared to American MG ports, you have to pixel hunt in order to punch through. Moreover, if your hull is empty of ammo, that shot is very unlikely to kill you.
You gonna say the same thing to me?
I love, love, love, love the Tiger IIs. They are my favourite vehicles to play in the entire game, and as you can see, I know how to use them. Trust me when I say this ain’t it, my man. Compared to what they were in real life, the King Tigers are insanely coddled, and they are incredibly competitive still.
If you’re playing correctly, you have nothing to fear from a T32. You’re gonna be snacking on those for breakfast.
Corners of the lower front plate will kill all of them, as will the MG port. You can also pen the mantlet of all of them aside from T32 and T32E1. The T26E5 is a bit iffy but you can still get the breech/gunner with correct shot placement. Finally you can get a kill through the classic cupola exploit on all tanks with a cupola; the T34 etc lack a cupola, but they have a triangular plate above the mantlet which you can pen, and you can also overmatch the roof if you have even the slightest bit of elevation advantage over them.
Seriously, think before you write statements that are outright false.
I would give it a higher score on gun handling tbh. The horizontal targeting speed is actually very good and the gun is very stable. I feel like I could fire the long 88 with my eyes closed.
I think the T26E5 and the Tiger II are complementary, in the sense that they have mirroring strengths and weaknesses. Both are excellent.
Ah, sorry, I missed you were talking about the pre-series version. Yeah not a fan of that one.
In a 1v1, maybe, but in most GRB maps these days the Jumbo 76 fits the meta more closely.
Agreed.
You can kill the Ratel’s gunner by pressing spacebar. Yes, even without a .50.
Nah man, Frozen Pass is great. You can overwatch the church with the Jagdtiger straight outta spawn. If you spawn south and flank C, the fact that you’re going downhill allows your Tiger II to get to the fight much earlier than on most maps, mitigating your mobility disadvantage. Gotten my fair share of Tiger II nukes on Frozen Pass, it’s one of the better maps for German 6.7.
I beg to differ, I am a menace to the Tiger II with my easy 8. No need for nerfs. The game does not need to be 100% accurate.
‘‘Yes you can. Shoot the cupola. It will nuke the entire crew. Alternatively shoot the muzzle brake. Old universal tactic.’’
Again, such things do not work at long range given the ballistic arc, it’s much harder to hit a target that protrudes from the objects and moves around, and a cupola hit requires a very speciifc angle, few centimeters above and below and you do nothing.
‘‘Neither is the gunsight of the Tiger II… or most other tanks.’’
The gunsight of the tiger 2 is weaker by 30mm. I get freequently penned there.
‘‘Much trickier to hit compared to American MG ports, you have to pixel hunt in order to punch through. Moreover, if your hull is empty of ammo, that shot is very unlikely to kill you.’’
The MG port is actually bigger than pershing, it’s also placed on a higher profile vehicle making it protrude out more.
Funny you have played the game for so long and yet you don’t know the gunsight has weaker armor.
‘‘If you’re playing correctly, you have nothing to fear from a T32. You’re gonna be snacking on those for breakfast.’’
This is nonsense and you know it, it’s faster, lower profile, has more armor and 300mm pen.
‘‘Seriously, think before you write statements that are outright false.’’
well if they are so easy to defeat then it won’t be a problem for them to have the historical gunsight weakspot, not like it’s gonna make any difference in your opinion right?
‘‘Both are excellent.’’
One is lower, faster, it’s mantlet is volumetric hell and has amazing APCR and it sure as hell isn’t the tiger 2. do me a favour, go into the game, look up the T26E5 and check it’s protection analysis against tiger 2, most notably the mantlet and you will see that it’s so ridiculously inconsistent it’s basically a coin toss whether you are gonna do any damage or not.
My man I beg of you use quotes or blockquotes please. What’s with the quotation marks?
Yes, they do. The ballistics of the long 88 are incredibly forgiving. If you can hit their MG port at 1000m, you can hit their cupola or their gun barrel, too; and if you can’t, then you need to work on your aim.
I am saying this in the kindest, most supportive and non-mocking way possible: you have a lot of room to grow as a player. The things you’re complaining about are not balance problems, they are obstacles that you need to overcome with experience and by cultivating your skill.
All you’re telling me is that you do not know how to use the protection tool properly. Place it correctly and you will get a value of 172mm the size of literally a single pixel, in an otherwise uniform plate that most of your opponents can pen anyway.
The part you need to hit in order to actually do damage is much smaller. And said damage is largely negated if you’re not bringing full ammo in the Tiger II.
My brother. My dude. You didn’t even know the plate was angled. 172mm is not a proper modelling of the gunsight and it’s not the only part of the plate that’s slightly weaker due to normalisation.
You have a negative KPS in Ground RB. Your average score suggests that you’ve been aggressively one-death-leaving:
You have a negative win rate in the Tiger II, the Tiger II Sla, and the Jagdtiger. When a better player with more experience in the relevant vehicles gives you advice, you should listen to it instead of getting sassy. The difference in our performance with the same tanks is not down to coincidence. Just like I learned, you can learn too.
You have the faster RoF and the amazing APHE. You need nothing else. I know this because I fight T32s and T32E1s all the time, with the results you have seen.
Not all of WT is a 1v1. These heavies can pen each other just fine, but they are relatively well protected against other tanks they encounter. A properly modelled gunsight would negate their protection completely.
WT is not real life. Compared to real life we have an uncanny precision and the ability to pixel-hunt. This is why it’s realistic to not model some weakspots as it slightly reduces the arcadeification of our engagements.
Your APCR can also negate the turret armour of the T26E5, in case you didn’t know. All you have to do is shoot right next to the mantlet.
The T26E5 is the better brawler, but you’re the better sniper. APCR is only good against flat armour, which you won’t find much outside of the German TT at this BR. I will take the APHE of the long 88 any day of the week over the 90mm APCR.
Earlier in my previous reply, I said:
Now, fortunately for you, I can do you an even bigger favour than “checking protection analysis”. I can show you how you pull off that shot while being on the move. It’s at 00:43 on this video, I killed his gunner:
Of course, this was a snapshot. Had I not been on the move I would have shot the MG port and bro would have gone back across the Atlantic.
‘‘I am saying this in the kindest, most supportive and non-mocking way possible: you have a lot of room to grow as a player. The things you’re complaining about are not balance problems, they are obstacles that you need to overcome with experience and by cultivating your skill.’’
No, you are searching my stats in the most condescending underhanded way possible completely ignoring I have around 1.5 kill death ratio with the tiger 2 sla 16 and that my stats include several breaks I took throughout playing this game, but you aren’t going to post my recent stats because you couldn’t weaponize that now could you?
Sure, you can hit their mg port on their trolly inconsistent mantlet. or, OR, bear with me here, or they will use their gun with almost 300mm pen aphe or their apcr and dome you straight through the turret face while you are trying to hit their weakspot. the issue is not what you CAN do, the issue is how much effort it takes for one party to defeat the other.
‘‘All you’re telling me is that you do not know how to use the protection tool properly. Place it correctly and you will get a value of 172mm the size of literally a single pixel, in an otherwise uniform plate that most of your opponents can pen anyway.’’
You are one pathological liar aren’t you? is it terminal?
‘‘The part you need to hit in order to actually do damage is much smaller. And said damage is largely negated if you’re not bringing full ammo in the Tiger II.’’
That’s not the point the point is that the hull is taller and thus harder to hide and easier to aim at.
‘‘You have the faster RoF and the amazing APHE. You need nothing else. I know this because I fight T32s and T32E1s all the time, with the results you have seen.’’
Sure, I killed them too, more often than not however they will simply use their superior pen and trolly mantlet to heavily skew the odds in their favor. this isn’t about what I can or cannot do, but about them receiving the historical advantages of their vehicle without the historical disadvantages.
‘‘Not all of WT is a 1v1. These heavies can pen each other just fine, but they are relatively well protected against other tanks they encounter. A properly modelled gunsight would negate their protection completely.’’
you mean like the 154mm gunsight modelled on the king tiger?
‘‘You have a negative win rate in the Tiger II, the Tiger II Sla, and the Jagdtiger. When a better player with more experience in the relevant vehicles gives you advice, you should listen to it instead of getting sassy. The difference in our performance with the same tanks is not down to coincidence. Just like I learned, you can learn too.’’
ah yes, because winrate depends ENTIRELY on one player doing well, hilarious how ONCE AGAIN you don’t mention my 1.5 kill death ratio on sla 16, oh no, you mention my WINRATE because I am of course responsible for my team mates getting themselves torn apart three minutes into the match. you are a conniving little rat I’ll give you that, a fool would be almost convinced by your skewed views.
‘‘WT is not real life. Compared to real life we have an uncanny precision and the ability to pixel-hunt. This is why it’s realistic to not model some weakspots as it slightly reduces the arcadeification of our engagements.’’
that’s just an excuse so that american and soviet whales can farm german players with impunity, lately by making them do 20kph on even terrain in realistic stretch of distances. it’s completely blatant to give a pershing model enough pen to kill a tiger 2 frontally, make it immune frontally except for a cheek weakspot and hull which they can easily hide and put it on the same BR calling fair. it’s not realistic in the least there is a fist sized gunport hole which should be modelled to compensate for the otherwise extremely heavily armored and trolly mantlet.
‘‘Your APCR can also negate the turret armour of the T26E5, in case you didn’t know. All you have to do is shoot right next to the mantlet.’’
No it cannot, go take a look at the protection map and you see that german APCR doesn’t really pen more areas than aphe.
‘‘Now, fortunately for you, I can do you an even bigger favour than “checking protection analysis”. I can show you how you pull off that shot while being on the move. It’s at 00:43 on this video, I killed his gunner:’’
I can also hammer down a scrub with a lucky shot and perform side shot kills. I have in fact posted a replay of around 10 or so kills here myself, that speaks nothing of your actual skill, but you of course aren’t going to post the times you missed in your zoomy circlejerk videos.
You know people, I genuinely enjoy how you claim it would be too easy to destroy pershings with a historical weakspot then turn around and add ‘‘well you see, king tiger NEEDS that 15’4mm weakspot on that almost flat 185mm turret face sweeaty, you should just aim for their guns or their tiny mg ports while they have acpr and aphe that on later models still within 6.7 bracket completely negates your turret armor’’
It’s neither condescending nor underhanded. The point is not to stat-shame you, because we have all been inexperienced at some point. It is to highlight the fact that you have a lot of room to improve as a player. You are further behind the curve than you think you are. Once you become better at playing these tanks, your opinion of balance will change. It is as simple as that.
It’s an unremarkable stat when paired with the terrible win rate. Mind you it is better than having a negative K/D, but the point is that you are just not having an impact on matches with the Tiger II. Your low kills per battle in the Sla just confirm this further.
When a player with 62% win rate in the same vehicle, double your K/D in it and almost three times kills per battle in it gives you advice, you should not feel offended or get defensive, you should take it as an opportunity to reconsider some of your opinions and improve as a player. It is sad to say but you simply sound like the average German main.
And yet, here I am with my stats.
If I can do it, you can do it too. The fact that I can do it proves it can be done. The fact that I can do it, proves that you can do it too.
Like, think about what you’ve just said for a minute. “Sure, you could win the encounter, but you could also lose the encounter” - bro, no shit? This is what balance looks like. They have ways to kill you in one shot. You have ways to kill them in one shot. Therefore skill will determine who wins that encounter. Work on your skill instead of asking for unwarranted nerfs.
6.7 is as much an armour meta BR as it gets. If you’re uncomfortable shooting weakspots or think it takes a lot of effort, it’s because you need to work on your skills.
You don’t know how to use the protection tool. And I don’t need to insult you to make my point. You are covering yourself in ridicule.
Thanks to Necrons for putting this together:
Get a positive KPS in GRB and then maybe you can start calling people names.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the key to utilising the armour of the Tiger II effectively is to side-scrape.
So they are playing to their strengths. Why aren’t you playing to yours?
Do you think it’s a coincidence that the player with 3.2 K/D and 3 kills per battle in the Tiger II Sla has a 62% win rate in it, while the player with 1.5 K/D and 1.4 kills per battle in the Tiger II Sla has a 42% win rate in it?
You’re not having an impact in matches.
It’s because a (frankly unremarkable given the great tank) K/D obtained by playing passively and/or 1DLing is not impressive. Stay in a match and carry your team to the win, and the K/D will be a consequence of your efforts.
So if I’m a conniving little rat with skewed views, does that mean you are being comprehensively outplayed by a rat with skewed views? Jeez. Must be tough.
Sure. That’s why the person telling you this is the one with three thousand matches in the Tiger II Sla.
Unlike you, I have actually killed the turret crew members of hull-down T26E5s using APCR, so I don’t need to “go check” anything. There is a section of turret armour behind the mantlet which normalises enough for APCR to pen it.
Yeah. I must be the luckiest player on the planet since apparently the number of scrubs I’ve encountered when playing the Tiger II Sla is this high:
Oh my god! Universal ground RB skills apply when you’re playing the big German Wunderwaffe too??
I don’t need to:
This is what I post if I want to make a point. The videos are useful visual reference to show the execution of something, and in this regard of course they are cherry-picked. If you don’t cherry-pick and just look at the whole numbers, this is what you get.
There are only two possible interpretations for this disparity of results between us.
One: I am a better player than you in the Tiger IIs. I became so over time and you can work to achieve the same level (or beyond).
Two: I’m just luckier consistently over a period of literal years.
If the former is true, you need to work on your skill. If the latter is true, go to the supermarket and see if you can buy better luck, I suppose.
Your suggestion is to single out the Pershings by giving them a big hole in the mantlet that you could pen frontally with a Panzer IV. Yes, that is definitely too easy.
EDIT: forgot to address this gem. I was looking at your recent stats. This is you in GRB last month, not all time. You can literally see the option toggled at the top.
This is all time:
You have posted the same stats that I’ve been quoting…
Also, despite your attitude and your insults, there is no weaponisation here. I truly do not mean any of this in a malicious way. If I did, I would have just said “skill issue” and moved on, instead of writing an entire essay twice.
If I wanted to insult you I would not be going to these lengths.
I got to the Tiger IIs way too early in my time playing WT and I guarantee you my initial stats in them were no better than yours.
I love this lineup and I’m happy to help people appreciate it more, precisely because it was a steep learning curve for me (I actually dropped down in BR the first time I got to 6.7 and only returned to it once I felt I had a better grasp of the game’s mechanics).
The problem you have with the arguments I’m presenting is that you can’t just handwave them away by saying I just want to farm Tiger Timmys (since German 6.7 is my most played lineup) and you cannot square away your claims of balance with the evidence of what I’m doing in this tank. Which, again to reiterate, is no self-aggrandisement. Check my stats in the German M41 and you will see they are much worse than my stats in the Tiger II, for example. This is a good, good tank.
In a game based on cultivation of skill, you have no reason to feel defensive when you’re told to get better. Getting better is literally what the game is about (barring of course other personal priorities like I dunno, LARPing a bit, or spading different vehicles, or casually having fun with mates).
Play other tech trees and you will quickly realise the grass is not, in fact, always greener on the other side.
Dude, you are one of the atrocious team mates. We’ve all been there, and it is fixable, but if you want to fix it, you have to start worrying less about nerfing the opposition and more about being a better player.
You don’t need to get 10 kills per battle to carry teams. Try getting to 2, then eventually to 3. It will suffice, as you can see from my own situation.
Nah. They are standards attainable by anybody.
I said kills per battle.
The relevance of this is that K/D is a very easy stat to manipulate on its own. For example, you could in theory have a 10:1 K/D by playing incredibly passively in 10 matches and getting 1 kill each match, but almost never dying.
This is why you get much more info by looking at all aggregate information: average score, win rate in a vehicle, KPS/KPB/KD in a vehicle.
You kill more enemies in the Tiger II Sla than enemies that kill you (again, unremarkable given the good tank), but you get few kills per battle and you lose 6 matches out of every 10 that you play in it. You are not having a positive impact on your teams at 6.7 man. I don’t know how else to put it.
No, because you think you don’t need advice. However, the very question of the thread sadly indicates that you do need advice and everything else I’ve seen confirms it. You are the average German main asking to nerf every vehicle you struggle to deal with. You can choose to disregard the given advice, no problem for me I suppose. I’m not the one doing poorly in the relevant vehicle.
So, right next to your stats?
You have already received your answer. Plenty of vehicles in WT are missing historical attributes because of balance reasons. For example you don’t have to worry about your King Tiger’s transmission giving up the ghost mid battle, you don’t have to worry about rotating the turret at a lower speed to minimise deterioration of parts, you don’t have to worry about tungsten shortages, etc.
The problem is that only a player with a skill issue at 6.7 would ask for a giant hole to be cut in the mantlet of American heavies. So this is no thread derailing. Your opinion on balance is a direct product of your lower skill level, combined with your belief that you’re already good enough and any problem you encounter in the game must be external in nature; the problem is never you. It’s the teams, it’s the whales, it’s evil Gaijin, it’s ahistorical modelling, everything and anything that isn’t you.
Whatever helps you sleep better at night man.
You just pulled those numbers out of your ass lmao. The T32 and T32E1 are heavies at a higher BR than you (which is justified by the advantages they do have), and if you’re a good player you’ll eat them for breakfast.
Yes. For example I understand that a 6.7 team with you in it has a 58% probability of losing the match. Funny how that works.
Your statements so far indicate otherwise.
Only if you count APCR. Your APHE is far superior and is more useful against 90% of the opposition. Only inexperienced players focus on raw pen over post-pen and angled pen.
Yeah, it’s the disability that gives me double your K/D in the Tiger II Sla, so I can at least console myself that there is always someone less fortunate than I am.
Except I’m not. You will find plenty of armour dimensions on the Tiger II’s turret face that are individually even smaller, they’re just not the gunsight. In literally one of my first replies to you I told you straight up that there are normalisation areas on the angled plate which are weaker (it is why a skilled T-44 player can frontally pen your turret if they know where to shoot, although it is difficult and RNG) without bothering with your gunsight.
Tiger II weakness is front turret armour, fork found in kitchen, more news at 11.
A vehicle so good it can give even you a positive K/D, and you’re complaining about how weak it is. The only tanks you have a K/D in that’s above one are the Tiger II and the Jagdtiger. Maybe it’s not they that suck.
You need to sidescrape the whole tank. Some weapons will be able to overmatch your turret armour which requires you to be extra careful. However, it’s your best strategy to bait shots that will ricochet, giving you plenty of time to peek, aim, and kill.
You can call me genius ten times in a row, I still play the Tiger II better than you, so your words are as empty as your statistics.
Unfortunately for you, skill is not something you buy. Practice, watch videos, learn positioning and weakspots.
The two Tiger IIs fire the same APCR. It is rarely useful because almost nobody other than Germany is using flat armour at this BR, and even then, you are usually better off with the post pen of APHE. But it has edge cases, and a hull down T26E5 is one of them.
It’s completely relevant because this is fundamentally a discussion of balance.
To make an example, early T-34s lack a cupola and had a horrible RoF IRL because the commander was simply overtaxed. In game, they have good reload and suffer no negatives for having a two person turret with no cupola, but it’s fine this way: if they got severely nerfed in dispersion and/or RoF they would plummet down to a BR where their hull armour would be a very serious problem for anyone without a high velocity AT gun. Combined with the fact that lower BRs have less experienced players, it’s no wonder that Gaijin prefers giving the tank an “unrealistic” performance but a higher BR.
The Tiger II is the same. If it was the piece of garbage that it was IRL, it would be much lower in BR, with extremely annoying results for everyone involved.
And that is why you lose more often than you win. If you’re not willing to make the difference, you won’t make a difference.
Sorry man. Numbers beat words.
As already stated the video was literally meant to just show you the shot. If you want to look at non-cherry-picked data, my global stats in the Tiger IIs are available above. Do I really need to repost them?
I must be doing a good job of that since I play the KTs much better than you.
My profile is public and you can easily check it. I am a German main. I am playing through and spading every other TT bar Israel in ground, air, and naval, but I’m at 2.3 to 2.7 in most of them because I’m doing so simultaneously. I have never played any lineup at or around 6.7 other than Germany’s, with the exception of Japan recently because I had to grind to the Ho-Ri Production like everyone else that didn’t already own it.
Numbers are black on white and they say something very clear.
It’s not tiny at all. It is a vertical strip either side of the mantlet. It’s narrow, but tall. Hardly the worst weakspot you have to hit in this game.
Admittedly, having this type of good luck is amazing:
One could even say it’s… unbelievable.
Worse players have warped opinions on balance. “Skill” is not a magical attribute, it’s a combination of game knowledge, experience, and muscle memory. You are mistaking the obstacles generated by your still-developing skills for balance problems. This is incredibly common in WT, we’ve all seen it a thousand times over.
The Tiger IIs are doing just fine. The only one that sucks is the pre-series version.
You can very easily pen the turret of both from the front if you know where to shoot, and you have better RoF (much better in the case of the T34). You can also easily destroy them in one hit to the corners of the LFP, or the MG port, both are very easy and consistent shots to make. They have a muzzle brake meaning you can barrel them (and follow up quickly thanks to your good RoF). The T34 additionally has a triangular plate atop the mantlet you can pen, and from some angles you can overmatch the roof. Last but not least you can trivially disable the vertical drive of the T26E1 as well.
It is not.
Correct. You can frontally take each other out through the turret. What else do you need?
Nah, it is not. You can already pen the turret with the long 88 just fine.
Done, and I’ve just repeated to you what I said in our very first interaction. So now what?
Videos sure, but self gratifying stat pics? Brother, you need to be able to put your money where your mouth is. Your opinions on Tiger II balance are skewed by your low skill level. My opinions on Tiger II balance are backed up with facts. When I say it can do something, it’s because I can demonstrably do it (and so anyone can). When you say it can’t do something, it’s usually because you don’t know how to do it reliably, at least not yet.
Fortunately, I enjoy the Tiger IIs a lot (more than you, it seems) so I have no issue. If you’re content with how you’re playing them, by all means carry on. Just don’t expect Gaijin to nuke the mantlet of American heavies to coddle your ego.
Can’t have it both ways mate. Either it’s fully historical (and that line of thinking does not end well for us playing late war German tanks, believe me) or the historicity is subject to balance considerations. If it’s the latter, then the current state of American heavies at that BR is only relevant when related to their stats, and if the stats are too good, the first thing you would do is not to change the damage model, but to send them up in BR.
Both the T26E5 and the Serienturm Tiger IIs have been singled out by Gaijin as potential 7.0s and both times they avoided sending them up because of community feedback (i.e. people who do well in them wish to continue doing well in them). Nothing new under the sun.
I have spent enough time on this discussion. You know why gunsights are different in WT than IRL, you know why the Tiger II is doing fine, and you know why things won’t change the way you want to. What you do with that information is up to you. Meanwhile, this conniving little rat will add you to the ignore list. Have a good one!
I have already addressed your stat shaming so I will be ignoring your continued efforts to do so.
‘’‘I forgot this gem lol :)’’
‘‘I truly do not mean any of this in a malicious way’’’
You must come from a truly low trust society. And for the record you did not post the stats for the individual vehicles previously.
‘‘I got to the Tiger IIs way too early in my time playing WT and I guarantee you my initial stats in them were no better than yours.’’
I don’t care about your personal life or your gaming history, tell that to someone who cares.
‘’ The problem you have with the arguments I’m presenting is that you can’t just handwave them away by saying I just want to farm Tiger Timmys (since German 6.7 is my most played lineup) and you cannot square away your claims of balance with the evidence of what I’m doing in this tank. Which, again to reiterate, is no self-aggrandisement. Check my stats in the German M41 and you will see they are much worse than my stats in the Tiger II, for example. This is a good, good tank.‘’
jerks himself off to no end in replies and constantly bases personal game stats as an argument to everything
‘‘is no self-aggrandisement.’’
It’s actually pretty insulting you think I’m stupid enough to actually believe that. who do you even have me for?
‘‘This is a good, good tank.’’
this isn’t even about the tiger 2 why do you keep derailing the thread?
‘‘Dude, you are one of the atrocious team mates. We’ve all been there, and it is fixable, but if you want to fix it, you have to start worrying less about nerfing the opposition and more about being a better player.’’
sometimes I am, often times I kill twice as I die, you have seen the stats for my SLA, why do you still pretend like the 0.8 kd total is actually legitimate? If the crew lock wasn’t a thing I wouldn’t have to detonate my vehicles to deal with it.
‘‘You don’t need to get 10 kills per battle to carry teams. Try getting to 2, then eventually to 3. It will suffice, as you can see from my own situation.’’
more self promotion
‘‘I said kills per battle.’’
personally I’m not really often interested in playing anything else, if I feel like the odds are stacked against me I’m simply not gonna play. that means detonating my vehicles to get around crew lock.
‘‘No, because you think you don’t need advice. However, the very question of the thread sadly indicates that you do need advice and everything else I’ve seen confirms it. You are the average German main asking to nerf every vehicle you struggle to deal with. You can choose to disregard the given advice, no problem for me I suppose. I’m not the one doing poorly in the relevant vehicle.’’
this is literally a thread about a certain line of vehicles not being subject to historically modeled weakspots, you gotta have something wrong with your head because an actually intelligent person would understand that and actually discuss the thread. Go and read what the thread name says.
‘‘You have already received your answer. Plenty of vehicles in WT are missing historical attributes because of balance reasons. For example you don’t have to worry about your King Tiger’s transmission giving up the ghost mid battle, you don’t have to worry about rotating the turret at a lower speed to minimise deterioration of parts, you don’t have to worry about tungsten shortages, etc.’’
No vehicle in the game is subject to logistical and material circumstances, so your point is moot, however, they are subject to differing weakspots and gun penetration capabilities.
‘‘The problem is that only a player with a skill issue at 6.7 would ask for a giant hole to be cut in the mantlet of American heavies. So this is no thread derailing. Your opinion on balance is a direct product of your lower skill level, combined with your belief that you’re already good enough and any problem you encounter in the game must be external in nature; the problem is never you. It’s the teams, it’s the whales, it’s evil Gaijin, it’s ahistorical modelling, everything and anything that isn’t you.’’
You do realize that for 6.7 US heavies except for the T26E5 the whole turret face of the tiger 2 is a giant hole, correct? And why would it be a problem for it to be modelled? afaik US heavies have the guns and penetrations to prevail anyways. Tiger 2 has the hole for the gun sights modelled as well, on top of having flat turret face, therefore the pershing having it’s optics port modelled is perfectly fair and legitimate. The only thing that prevents it is the skill issue of US players who are so used to their trolly mantlets saving them that they would be incapable of succeedinng with actual historical weakspots.
‘‘You just pulled those numbers out of your ass lmao. The T32 and T32E1 are heavies at a higher BR than you (which is justified by the advantages they do have), and if you’re a good player you’ll eat them for breakfast.’’
obviously, it was specifically hyperbolic for you to understand I am speaking that 6.7 pershing players and tiger 2 players have different probabilites of success because the game balance and nature favors the faster, lower and better armed 6.7 and above pershings except for the T26E5, which still retains the trolly mantlet.
‘‘Yes. For example I understand that a 6.7 team with you in it has a 58% probability of losing the match. Funny how that works.’’
This is the dumbest thing you have said today honestly. I guess you don’t understand the concept of ‘‘correlation vs causation’’ either.
‘‘Only if you count APCR. Your APHE is far superior and is more useful against 90% of the opposition. Only inexperienced players focus on raw pen over post-pen and angled pen.’’
Raw pen is objectively the only thing that matters. Since there is no post-pen without pen. As for angled pen that isn’t really a concern working the favor of german vehicles as they are mostly flat and boxy. Your mechanical skills may be good but your game sense is lacking as hell.
‘‘Except I’m not. You will find plenty of armour dimensions on the Tiger II’s turret face that are individually even smaller, they’re just not the gunsight. In literally one of my first replies to you I told you straight up that there are normalisation areas on the angled plate which are weaker (it is why a skilled T-44 player can frontally pen your turret if they know where to shoot, although it is difficult and RNG) without bothering with your gunsight.’’
You have LITERALLY tried to sell me in your response that the VERY spot I have shown you is 173mm, even though it’s almost TWENTY milimeters thinner.
this is literally what you said
‘‘All you’re telling me is that you do not know how to use the protection tool properly. Place it correctly and you will get a value of 172mm the size of literally a single pixel, in an otherwise uniform plate that most of your opponents can pen anyway.’’
if you don’t even have the guts to come clean on when you get proven wrong we have nothing more to discuss.
‘‘A vehicle so good it can give even you a positive K/D, and you’re complaining about how weak it is. The only tanks you have a K/D in that’s above one are the Tiger II and the Jagdtiger. Maybe it’s not they that suck.’’
it’s literally a regular tiger except faster, literally exact same armor, gun, ammo and weakspots. the vehicle doesn’t play itself.
‘‘However, it’s your best strategy to bait shots that will ricochet, giving you plenty of time to peek, aim, and kill.’’
your best strategy is not getting into close quarters peeking matches at all.
‘‘The Tiger II is the same. If it was the piece of garbage that it was IRL, it would be much lower in BR, with extremely annoying results for everyone involved.’’
Sure, I’ll take random chance of transmission breakdowns if the toughest tank I have to face is an occasional IS-2 and never face a cold war tank.
‘‘It’s completely relevant because this is fundamentally a discussion of balance.’’
Objective balance isn’t a question of personal skill. The nature of the word balance implies both sides are competing on equal footing with two equally skilled players being matched.
‘‘And that is why you lose more often than you win. If you’re not willing to make the difference, you won’t make a difference.’’
This was never a thread about my winrate, this was a thread about pershings not having a historical weakspot.
‘‘Sorry man. Numbers beat words.’’
numbers beat numbers too sometimes, like the number 154 beats number 173 in certain circumstances.
‘‘As already stated the video was literally meant to just show you the shot.’’
A singe cherry picked shot isn’t the proof of anything. if I aim my gun up near the start of the match, fire and accdentally end up hitting another player in the cupola does that mean the tank that the player was playing when I shot him is underpowered?
‘‘Worse players have warped opinions on balance. “Skill” is not a magical attribute, it’s a combination of game knowledge, experience, and muscle memory. You are mistaking the obstacles generated by your still-developing skills for balance problems. This is incredibly common in WT, we’ve all seen it a thousand times over.’’
I have literally given you stats and metrics that prove otherwise but you completely ignore everything I tell you and throw your stats around like it’s an argument to everything. it’s not.
‘‘You can very easily’’
hitting specific weakspots isn’t equal to having your turret penable, so no, it’s not very easy. You are just incapable of estimating something without a personal bias. It goes without saying no US player is going to expose the lower half of their vehicle. That can easily be achieved by going hull down.
‘‘Last but not least you can trivially disable the vertical drive of the T26E1 as well.’’
You are compensating for fighting an uphill battle with personal skill, cool, but that isn’t objective balance. for any average player hitting T26E1-1’s weakspots is not gonna be easier than a T26E1-1 player can hit the easily pennable flat turret face on the tiger 2. I’m not sure what is so difficult to understand for you here.
‘‘Correct. You can frontally take each other out through the turret. What else do you need?’’
Whole turret face doesn’t equal a couple of small spots. sorry if this is too difficult for you to understand.
‘‘Videos sure, but self gratifying stat pics? Brother, you need to be able to put your money where your mouth is. Your opinions on Tiger II balance are skewed by your low skill level. My opinions on Tiger II balance are backed up with facts. When I say it can do something, it’s because I can demonstrably do it (and so anyone can). When you say it can’t do something, it’s usually because you don’t know how to do it reliably, at least not yet.’’
I’m not saying it can’t do what you claim, I’m saying that the effort and skill it takes is fundamentally higher for tiger 2 players than for the T34 and T26E1-1 players.
‘‘Can’t have it both ways mate. Either it’s fully historical (and that line of thinking does not end well for us playing late war German tanks, believe me) or the historicity is subject to balance considerations. If it’s the latter, then the current state of American heavies at that BR is only relevant when related to their stats, and if the stats are too good, the first thing you would do is not to change the damage model, but to send them up in BR.’’
Except you literally can, the tiger 2 gunsight is a clear example of it.
‘‘I have spent enough time on this discussion. You know why gunsights are different in WT than IRL, you know why the Tiger II is doing fine, and you know why things won’t change the way you want to. What you do with that information is up to you. Meanwhile, this conniving little rat will add you to the ignore list. Have a good one!’’
Good, don’t let the door hit you on the way out, I tire of constantly proving you wrong with hard facts and empirical evidence and you handwaving everything by posting your game stats and a bunch of self gratifying videos, you can’t debate worth a damn.
Since the mantlet armor correction would apply to the T26E4 as well, it would only have ~187.4 mm of effective armor at the flattest part of the mantlet excluding a few spots around the gun and trunnions.
A KT should have little issue going right through, even from some distance.
