To trash up the entire fighting interior with huge ass modules which will shut off entire tank after they been hit is “nicer looking” now?
2 Likes
Well said. Like Leopard 2’s and Abrams, full of stuff which disables the whole tank when a single spall fragment hits it.
I find it weird seeing the community crying about modules disabling the tank too fast, while that same community voted against APHE nerfs that would make tanks be more survivable.
Makes no sense.
7 Likes
People just don’t want the tank can not do anything,compared to this they may just want to die immediately
Bro, this is a vehicle with a ridiculous frontal weakspot - which cannot be hidden without also disengaging from a fight since it’s the turret - and first stage ammo sitting right behind it. It’s also too slow to reliably get into meta positions early on. You could remake the interior of the tank to be cardboard and its survivability will not worsen. Do you really honestly think this additional module is going to make a difference when your survivability from a turret shot is 0% to begin with?
Just enjoy the bling of the new model and play it for roleplay purposes. If you wanna be competitive you would be spawning in something else anyway, module or no module.
2 Likes
you are bawling your eyes out on nothing, just saying
1 Like
yep, its just crying for the sake of crying
i would rather cry and moan about something more meaningful - like ammo detonations being actually RNG
2 Likes
If you’re updating models, please, can we have remodeled cockpits instead of placeholders and low-res cockpits for old planes ?
6 Likes
Will the Tiger II H be remodeled as well, and will this result in a BR drop to 6.3 for the II P?
2 Likes
The devs should make the tracks on the turret unlockable, since almost none of the Porsche Tiger 2s had tracks on the turret.
4 Likes
Yeah, it’s silly that now every early Tiger II is driving around with tracks on the turret.
I think it’s fine that they do that of putting chains or armor on the tanks, but if it’s something that almost none of them have, the least they should do is leave it as an unlockable module. Another example would also be the M-60A3 TTS, which is in the American tech tree has the ERA installed, armor that was only used in a few and as a test, so the logical thing would have been to give it the ERA armor as an unlockable, and thus give the option of being able to use the M60A3 TTS as it was used in reality.
2 Likes
…
5 Likes
Expecting literacy on the internet is a big ask nowadays.
4 Likes
even after then engine correction they still do really well so probably not, theres also no way in hell 5.3 tanks should see a tiger 2
1 Like
While sure, Tiger II P has amazing firepower and powerful UFP, its turret is massive weakness. Most 5.3 tanks can pen the turret face of Tiger II P. 76mm Shermans firing M61 can do it up to 1km, provided they land a hit.
6.7 (or the theoretical 6.3) heavy tank that can be frontpenned by 5.3 mediums through what should be the strongest armor found on tank doesnt exactly scream “OP”.
1 Like
with the volumetric armour its a bit trolly, 17pdr APCBC is a bit hit and miss from random angles being super thick randomly. either way its one single small weakspot which is almost fully negated by not staying still. dont think its still a fair fight
3 Likes
I personally havent run into any issues with 17pndr firing the Mk.8 shot; it was only the production turret Tiger II that requires sabots to go through, and maybe if i ran into the prototype turret Tiger II at some odd angles. But god forbid a heavy tank whole BR higher requires some tactic on my part to be disabled.
Sure, but that only works at certain distance - at CQB ranges such as advancement to the rhine, it doesnt matter if the shot connects instantly.
The weak turret face also prevents the Tiger II P from playing hull down style.
Dont get me wrong, Im not saying Tiger II P should be at 6.3, im just trying to point out that it isnt exactly black and white balancing decision when it comes to this particular tank.
It is simply a victim of compression.
It pays a very hefty mobility price for very unreliable armour compared even just to its cousins at the same BR. Turret armour is more important than hull armour as you say, so it’s not the best camper either.
What’s left is the gun, which is godly. An experienced player can make it work by not being hit period. But competitive wise - which is what the BR system is for - it’s currently unjustifiable both at 6.3 (too low) and at 6.7 (too high). It will find a happy place eventually when there’s another major round of decompression. Most competitive 6.7s will go up together and it will stay where it is.
1 Like
Tiger P with that weak turret is a waste. The much better H has the same BR. Why should I play the P with less than 100mm turret armor?
But thanks for updating the model :)