HEAT is an superheavy armor killer at Early coldwar…
No, he’s right. Gaijin literally said it themselves. Paraphrasing, “we note two efficiency outliers, the Tiger II and the T29, they should ideally go to 7.0 and 7.3 respectively, but since the tanks are very popular we’ll listen to the community and leave them at their current BRs”. It was in one of the response to feedback threads, some time last year.
As for the IS-3, you fire three times in the time it takes an IS-3 to reload. Barrel and flank it. You face far scarier opponents at those BRs.
Agreed.
Correct. Firepower-wise the Tiger IIs are amazing. Not just for the reload but also the gun laying which is superb, and the ballistics are also very forgiving. I disagree on the soggy bread though. The tanks respectively kind of have matching weakspots towards one another, and shoot each other in similar places. And the extra mobility is what makes them sit at the same BR.
However, both the Sla and the H sit behind multiple obtainable German Rank IV tanks in win rates, and for the H, in K/D too.
I also don’t think the difference between the Sla and Elefant player bases is as large as you’re claiming. Like you said earlier, the reason the Sla does better than the Tiger II H is that it is not played by as many zombies. Especially, people who have a bad time in the Tiger II H because of a skill issue, are unlikely to buy the Sla, and likelier to complain in the forums that their pet heavy tank suffers. At least imho.
3 Likes
It means nothing.
Except IS-3 will kill you with the first shot in the turret.
IS-3 has an actual armor that can withstand pretty much any conventional shell, unlike Tiger 2 which has only 185mm flat on the turret and 80mm on the sides angled inwards. It was also twice as mobile, now it’s like 3 times as mobile.
2 Likes
That happens to be at lower BRs than said superheavy armor.
Basically late WW2 to Early Cold war.
They have far more data than we do (even with Statshark) so I doubt it.
I really scratch my head at this discourse where the Tiger IIs are either described as a terror of the BR or as worthless pieces of junk. They’re very good tanks (a bit too strong for 6.7 pre-engine nerf, now fine for 6.7) in a limping lineup. That’s it.
So can the IS-2, what’s the point? You can’t point and click the IS-2 either, you have to aim for either the lower front plate or the turret cheek. Just like ad different BRs you have to aim for the Jumbo’s machine gun port, and how you shoot the IS-6 on the gunner optics, or the IS-4M in the drivers’ hatch, etc etc. The same way you can shoot any other weak spot in this game you can also shoot the barrel of the IS-3.
3 Likes
Why are you comparing tank made in 1944 to a tank made in 1945? If WW2 ever countinued longer it would have been the E-75 (Tiger III) vs the IS-3. More fair
1 Like
Yes, and? The IS-3 is clunky and has an awful reload. Barrel → driver’s port. You’re way more stable as well, IS-3 is bouncy as hell.
AurenKarach explained it better.
3 Likes
You’re actually insane
Because some dude wants to put one at 7.0 and the other at 7.3.
The “Tiger III” as a designation exclusively refers to the Tiger II we know from operational history. The original Tiger II, a Tiger I hull with a sloped front glacis and the pre-series Tiger II turret, was skipped over and never built. As for the E-75, that’s a bit of a fantasy. Upgrades to the Tiger II were proposed - a rangefinder, a rigidly mounted gun - but nothing revolutionary. The 105 was examined and discarded because of its low rate of fire.
A lot of the things you read online about E-series tanks are complete fabrications. In reality the German production plan had the war continued was to streamline production and increase numbers of just four models (getting rid of the bloat of so many different vehicles): Tiger II, Panther F, Jagdtiger, Hetzer 38D (not the T, which we have in game). That’s it, the end.
The Tiger II 10.5 cm can be dumped back to the game at 7.0 I know it an tank never existed but it hull did exist at least just like the E-100… better then the japanese Ho-RI which only has it gun existed.
Nope, I just play German 6.7 a lot. This is a summary of my matches in the Tiger II Sla between 27th July and today. You think I haven’t met any IS-3s in these matches? Or that none of them were uptiers? Come on.
German mains are saying “tiger is now worthless. actually weaker than a french rank 1. Gaijin hates germany and refuses to let the tiger be like how they talk about it on the history channel”
The others are going the opposite direction as a reaction to the crying. You will have to sort through this to find reasonable takes.
I agree with that.
I have played the tiger 2 a decent bit after the change. So far it is not nearly as bad as some are saying. It certainly is not some fast flanker but it has been working pretty well holding down flanks.
Would recommend using the narwal with HE belt. it greatly limits what tanks you can engage but it is very funny to overpressure open tops with it.
1 Like
It only existed on paper and I would have rather have the 12.8CM version of the E-75 using the KWK l44 which have already existed.
You play ONLY Germany. You don’t have ANY other tanks at rank 4 and 5.
You’re trying to argue that IS-3 is just a little bit better or even worse than a Tiger 2 or IS-2.
I kind of see what he means but maybe not.
If the is3 was at like 6.7 or something, i would 100% take it over the tiger 2. However, the experience of the tiger 2 at its br is better than the experience of the is3 at its br.
3 Likes
I got a nuke on 38th Parallel the day after the nerfs and narrowly missed a second which I threw away with a dumb mistake. So yes, the tanks are fine. Now with the mobility nerfs they’re also not 7.0 worthy and can imho stay where they are. Before that, it wasn’t the case.
I still contend there’s an issue with the lineup, which this nerf has worsened, and that nerfing the JT’s mobility is just being mean, but still, yes, nothing dramatic.
There is no 12.8cm version of the E-75 because as far as we can ascertain, no guns had been settled on for the E-50 and E-75 designs, which were primarily about streamlining production and maintenance. It is also worth noting that Germany really struggled to develop new guns in 44-45. For obvious reasons.
The 105 was turned down because of slow RoF, no way they would put a 128 in a turret with an even slower RoF.
I have grinded Germany first. I have gotten started on all other tech trees, but since I’m not doing them one at a time, it’s taking me a while. In any case, I fail to see your point. Yes, I have played thousands of matches at German 6.7 where the IS-3 was an opponent, that’s why I know that facing IS-3s in Tiger IIs is perfectly doable. Normally the “you’ve only played one tank” argument is used when the other guy claims the opposite tank sucks, because from the outside you don’t always see some of its flaws. Trying to use it when I claim you can deal with an IS-3 in a Tiger II is just bizarre.
They belong at their respective BRs. Before the engine nerf, the Tiger II was 7.0 worthy. Now it’s fine at 6.7. You think that’s “insane”. Go figure.
you can make the IS-3 having better gameplay like the Tiger II by putting it to BR 7.0.
I’m talking about Tiger 2 at 7.0 vs IS-3 at 7.3.
He argues that aiming for weakspots on the IS-3 is the same as aiming for weakspots on the IS-2 in a Tiger 2… dude is actually insane.
Tiger 2 is nowhere near as strong to be only 0.3 lower than an IS-3.
Tiger wont be going to 7.0 now so im happy with that.
Is2 for sure is easier to deal with. Is3 does have its cheeks which the long 75 can pen if you aim. But it is not nearly as easy as an is2.
2 Likes