Just admit that people improve over time so they get better stats on recent vehicles. I dont think logs are p2w advantage that gives you 3 k/d.
Speaking of suggestion, I disagree because that extra protection doesnt change tigers survivability much. Jumbo will still go for cupola, t34-85 and long barrel guys for hull.
I’m enjoying those premium tigers, it’s like Seal club momentum with my Centurion mk.1
The hull. I’d say that additional armor can make more difference than you thought, especially when the angle is around 30 degrees. This makes angle a tactic easy to use and much more effective than before in many scenarios. 6.3 would be too high, I wrote that paragraph before tesing the vehicle in custom battle and realizing tracks are 0.5x, then I forgot to remove that paragraph. But 6.0 is fair, I’d say.
I only talk about KD after certain players start trash talking “skill issue” blah blah and ignore all the things I wrote.
And you ignore that The specific line I wrote was about pack tigers. Stop wasting my time.
Meanwhile, KV-1E have difficulty penetrating Pz4H’s hull at 3.7, not to mention Sherman I Composito at 3.7, Sherman III/IV at 3.7.All of which are 3.7 medium tanks. And tiger, on the other hand, can penetrate IS-2 1944’s mantlet and capula, as well as T34’s hull MG and lower front plate, Both of which are 6.7 heavy tanks. Same goes for T29, a 7.0 premium heavy tank.
And on the picture you post, it is obvious that this pack tiger has angled too much. With less angle the front armor would already be able to prevent any D-5T or M1 penetration. And that is why I consider pack tigers p2w.
If you don’t understand How much 15mm of armor could change the thing, check IS-2 1944’s lower front plate. Analyze it with Panther. Check the difference between the part protected by additional armor and the part that is unprotected.
Turret face is 50mm flat
No mention of the actually american shermans? They all struggle against the KV-1E’s armor more than the KV-1E against them.
*get stuck on volumetric
Lower plate only at a very favorable angle
It is maximizing front and side armor, being ~180mm effective on the corner.
Pretty weird you don’t show the impact angle or protection equivalent. You could just aim for the sections without tracks:
You know, the same way people have to aim for the KV-1E’s sections without add-on armor.
Or you could shoot the gigantic lighthouse on top of it.
Or just get closer like everyone else instead of complaining about a few extra degrees where the pack Tigers MIGHT stop a shell or two that the H1 might have stopped regardless
I’m indeed quite unhappy with the fact that M4 shares the same BR with Composito and Sherman III/IV. But at the very least, the Americans have M4A2 at 4.0 with 63mm front armor.
I’m so surprised that you ignore the Pzgr. round that overpressures post-pen. Try it again, plz.
Dude that’s 70.25mm of armor… What kind of angle could save that from 88mm cannon? You better check it again. You probably have mistaken it for T26E5, which also have weak points at lower front plate, but smaller.
You don’t need 180mm to protect your tiger from D-5T or M1… If you angle that much despite knowing you have 60mm side armor, I’d really feel sorry for you.
Didn’t I already mention that KV-1E is BIASED?? If it is needed to aim like people have to aim KV-1E then it is broken.
However “gigantic” it is, it’s still just around 1/4 the size of front plate.
I have said it over and over again that I really feel bored now. It’s not “H1 might have stopped regardless”. Test in custom battle please. Especially between range 100 meters and 400 meters.
I’m so surprised that you don’t know the overpressure stuff of Pzgr. round. Don’t tell me you use BR-365K rather than BR-365 with Soviet 85mm cannon. ffs…
I love this, so he come with a brutal skill issue but the problem are the Germany players LMAO.
Only garbage here are allies mains.
Well, I’m not sure about that. Jagdpanzer IV is the first vehicle in which I cannot reach win rate 60% with KD above 3 (my Jagdpanzer IV’s KD is 4 after 64 battles, but the win rate is only 59%). And my playstyle is not sniping, by the way. Pretty sure that German mains are worse than Russian mains or American mains. Those two groups are often garbage as well, but they are at least better than German mains who are just as useless as the majority of ARB USA prop players.
Nope. Just look a topic like that where a russian main fail in destroy a extremly easy to destroy tank like Tiger and come with a bunch of nosense demanding a higher BR.
Tiger Ost and West are fine in 5.7 just a few cosmetics and some tracks links is not enough for 0.3 BR more.
There have been like 10-15 people saying “skill issue” blah blah and ignore everything I wrote in the posts in this topic. Well, most of them just went mad after I went through their stats. Average War Thunder forum bruh. I hope your stats are really good to support your words. Otherwise, you may leave the topic and stop wasting my time.
Or, you could actually sit down and discuss this topic seriously. I’ve made my test in custom battle, briefly wrote my conclusion, and I decided that pack tigers are p2w, just like Sherman I Composito, Sherman III/IV and KV-1E. I have written a lot, you may check the posts above. You can also read others’ arguments.
In addition, you could ask a friend for help to perform a test in custom battle, whereby you could make your own conclusion. Maybe you could simulate real-battle scenario to see if the additional armor of pack tigers really works, now that I had only done a brief test(you’d need a skilled friend, though).
My test was mainly about D-5T 85mm/M1 76mm versus pack tigers, because these two cannons are influenced by additional armor the most among all the guns at this BR, and both guns are very widely used at BR 5.0-6.7. The smaller guns (F-34, M3 75mm etc.) are too weak to kill a tiger frontally, while the larger guns (D-25, M3 90mm and others) are powerful enough and they penetrate all tigers anyway.
And another thing. Just don’t say anything stupid like “just flank the tiger”. I’ve killed many tigers with T14, and I have just removed 3 tigers with stock Leopard 40/70 today. The last thing I need is some smart guys trying to teach me how to flank. No, I’m fine, thank you. Tiger I is the first WW2 tank I’ve ever known, why would I not know the lower part of Tiger I’s side armor is 60mm thick? The Soviets already wrote it in their AT gunners’ handbook.
oh god just seeing the armored kv gives me trauma
Why that one still sits at 4.0 will forever be a mystery.
During the battlepass that had the adamant award task i just parked in the open in the E model and let people shoot me and managed to get it in just a few games.
The KV-1E is just broken. Pretty sure Gaijin really earned a lot through selling then.
Because they are 3200 golden eagles each and no discount.
Dude im played with and against new Tigers and dont see any real difference. Is simple, they are fine in 5.7.
People: “I can’t lolpen an angled Tiger frontally on an uptier, that means it’s OP and needs to go up until its armor is unusable!”
People 2: “I can’t lolpen an angled KV-1E frontally on an uptier, that means it’s OP and needs to go up until its armor barely makes up for the fact that its gun won’t even be able to pen Light Tanks!”
Me: They are HEAVY TANKS, for Christ’s sake! How about we let then have functional armor LIKE THE HEAVY TANKS they are suppossed to be?
I am so tired that every time someone has the slightliest inconvenience penetrating a Heavy Tank from the front they want to remove its primary signature feature by forcing it to face tanks disproportionally more advanced.
KV-1E and the Tigers are some of the very few Heavy Tanks that can be played as such, instead of just slower Medium Tanks. Don’t try to ruin them just because you can’t kill them as easily as a Medium Tank, please…
A few days ago, I came across a 76mm Sherman completely frontally, zero angle at all, on my Tiger OST, at point blank.
It could have easily blown me to bits with its 149mm pen APCBC. After all, the upper front plate is just 102-117mm in thickness, the cupola is just 70mm effective, the gun occupies 1/3rd of the turret’s frontal profile due to the comically large muzzle, and even some parts of the turret are just 100-120mm thick, right…?
No. The Sherman shot, instead… At my lower front plate. Yes, the highest constructional slope angled plate, reinforced by spare tracks and backed up by the transmission. That’s where the Sherman decided to shoot, of all possible spots.
But Tiger OP, I bet that was the issue, and not the driving, positioning and aim of the Jumbo.
I really don’t see the problem with the tigers tbh. Yea they have some extra armour, but they are still an easy to kill target (and blind probably). As with all tanks in the game, you need to learn the weakspots and after that those little extra add ons don’t really do much. The 100mm of wood for example, it’s a “soft” armour module in the game seen on many soviet tanks for example, doesn’t act like steel and will let the average round throught it without effecting it much or at all. The extra tracks on the front (30mm extra) don’t create a big problem either because most of the time the transmission catches the round. Note that both can be shot of, leaving you with the good ol tiger H1. Plus it’s a heavy tank, which shouldn’t be as easy to kill as a light tank anyway. You want to kill a tiger, just aim for the capola or hull gunner.
Upping it to 6.3 as some have suggested above me will just create unnecessary scenarios and even more problems. That means that in the uptiers you have you’ll have to face things like the IS-3/T-32 or something like a fv4202 which would just be ridiculous overall.
Imo 5.7 is where it belongs, not above or below it.
And aim before you blindly panic fire.
