King Tiger & Tiger Aims -1 reply

Please wait...

Mazz

BFE-WAW

50 XP

16th November 2003

0 Uploads

1,245 Posts

0 Threads

#41 15 years ago

dont listen to Lukav lower the turret hatch on the IS2. theres nothing better then owning people by shooting them in it :D. especially when its Lukav, Bum or Cyan in it ;)

Most of the gunsights are off a tab but u get used to them. the KTs is good enough but the Tigers is really wierd at long range. But then again I hate the Tiger in this mod anyway. I like tanks with speed and tanks I can do shooting on the move with. The Tiger provides neither. I know a lot of people who prefer a Panzer 4 to a Tiger in FH.




Smokybear

Contradictor

50 XP

21st May 2004

0 Uploads

9 Posts

0 Threads

#42 15 years ago
Ply3r_17Well, I dunno about the others but the King Tiger was well known for its poor quality armour. There have even been many accounts of even hand held AT weapons knocking them out, and thats not from a roof shot.

..............It is so funny, that because some websites exist, people beleive religously what is says. Of course, there must have been some diversity of the alloy they used in the late war (because of running out of resources), but one russian testing on one kingtiger does not prove anything. Just as, you cannot use only one person to test a new medicine's effectiveness. I did some extensive search about this before even trying to post anything, and most(!) of the websites counters the one you are referring to about the king tiger's armor. deal.gif So far, the best source obtaining some info was my grandfather, who was fighting against the russians (he was with the germans (hungarian) , up in Russia somewhere (he isn't sure where exactly, but not far from the polish border), It was about 1943-44 and the Russians were pushing the german army back. Cutting to the part that's interesting, that he remembers when the T34s were rolling across the great plains and he saw one lonely German Tank (he didnt know its name) holding a large field against the russian tanks. The germans were (and him) were putting a fierce fight and as they saw the Tiger sitting inmobilized but holding up the russians, was very motivating for them. By the time they (germans) were disengaging, T34 junks were laying everywhere. He said (grandf) there were at least 20-25 russian tank junks laying in a weird arch line as they entered the king tiger's range. he also said, the Tiger got shot many times, all over the place, but it kept firing, like nothing happened. He wasn't there by then,when the tiger got defeated, but he said, if there were at least another 10 of those (Ktigers), the russians woulldn't even try to cross that way as they had shitty morale already. Also to be noted, he didn't know the name of the tank, because all he remembered, that it was enormous, bigger than any tank he ever seen. When i showed him a picture of the KoenigT, he said, that was it. p.s., he was a combat medic and got shot twice in the arm by a russian machinegunner. He passed away 4yrs ago he was 86.




MkH^

FH tester

50 XP

25th September 2003

0 Uploads

2,286 Posts

0 Threads

#43 15 years ago

Since we now are on the topic, does the StuG IIIG have real tank sights in .62? I love the tank (ok, ok, assault gun), but the lack of real tank sights bothers me.




tvih

The Village Idiot from Hell

50 XP

30th December 2003

0 Uploads

718 Posts

0 Threads

#44 15 years ago

Doesn't bother me, really, since at least the current view gives the StuG SOME advantage over normal tanks, since you see more in the aiming view. Normal tanks can just turn their turret a bit while moving to see more, StuG can't. Still, it would be nice to have them. I'll use the StuG either way :)

Smokybear, yes even with the bad armor quality the King Tiger still was fearsome, and the bad armor by no means made it gun any less deadly. With the amount of frontal armor, even if it was bad quality, no T-34, or even T-34/85, had much of a chance to kill it, except when shooting to the sides.

It's possible that some King Tigers did have better armor than some others, but a fact is that there were King Tigers with bad armor. Just because one is a King Tiger fan, is it too hard to accept this? I'm a T-34 fan, and I know and accept that the Soviet steel wasn't exactly top notch. If it had been, the T-34 could've taken much more punishment. If the 57mm gun would've been more widely used and the armor of better quality, along with applied applique armor, the thing would have been something for the Germans to really fear. Especially if they could have used the special AP ammunition that they removed from use because it destroyed the gun barrel too soon...




Exel

The stubborn Finn

50 XP

26th March 2004

0 Uploads

542 Posts

0 Threads

#45 15 years ago
MazzMost of the gunsights are off a tab but u get used to them.

They still put the western Allied tanks to great advantage, even if you "get used to" the German sights pointing way off. Especially so on maps with wide open spaces with good visibility, allowing long range tank combat. With the current state of things, I will opt for Firefly instead of Tiger any time. American and British tanks shoot dead on (British tanks even have minimal arc in their rounds) to the sights, while the German and Soviet tanks all have their sights more or less off.




Dancing Jesus

Eats IS-2s for breakfast

50 XP

23rd November 2003

0 Uploads

85 Posts

0 Threads

#46 15 years ago

We all talk about the armor penerating ability of this gun, and the armor thickness of that tank, and for the most part tank tank combat is pretty accurate and well represented (there are exceptions, tiger vs anything, panther to some extent, uber pz4H armor, etc). However, i think that the quality of tank optics should also be represented, and for some reason the allies (non USSR) have the ultimate advatage here. I think the germans should have the best tank sights with the most accurate turrest fire, whereas other tanks should be off a smidge. As it is now, not only are germans facing numerical inferiority, but their optics are second rate too. I also think the tiger should be able to kill all tanks with one shot except the very late war tanks, and right now it doesnt.




Smokybear

Contradictor

50 XP

21st May 2004

0 Uploads

9 Posts

0 Threads

#47 15 years ago
tvih Smokybear, yes even with the bad armor quality the King Tiger still was fearsome, and the bad armor by no means made it gun any less deadly. With the amount of frontal armor, even if it was bad quality, no T-34, or even T-34/85, had much of a chance to kill it, except when shooting to the sides. It's possible that some King Tigers did have better armor than some others, but a fact is that there were King Tigers with bad armor. Just because one is a King Tiger fan, is it too hard to accept this?..

I'm no fan of the Ktiger, actually i don't play it often, bcuz it's usually taken by someone and even if i have the chance, i choose to take something quicker instead, because it's so slow. And not even in real life, i think it's kinda ugly compared to the Tiger I, which just looks better and functions better even in the game. p.s. Also to be noted: By towards the end of the war the germans had some pretty good tank crews, well-trained and battle-hardened soldiers against the soviet tank batallions which weren't as good using their fairly new T34s, pretty much "noobs" driving the tanks. So i contribute a lot to the experience of the tank crews, why they had such a high kill ratio. Correct me if i'm wrong.




Legi0n

Hier kommt die Luftwaffe

50 XP

18th January 2004

0 Uploads

131 Posts

0 Threads

#48 15 years ago

Adding zoom to the Tigers and Kings would be pointless, for one major reason: at the distances you're talking about, the fog effect in most maps would mean you wouldn't see any targets -- and neither would any enemies, human or bot, see you. The standard maximum distance for any stock AI tank is 500 meters, tops. I increased medium tanks to fire at targets 450m away, and heavy tanks like the King Tiger and IS2 only engage out to 650m, and my Ballistik AI isn't even available yet. The other thing to keep in mind is that even on a large land-based Battlefield map, you'll never see a control point more than 1000m from any other control point, so we still come up with zoom being pretty much useless on tanks. And if you're engaging a tank in a close urban map like Berlin or Stali, that zoom is actually going to be a bigger pain in the ass than a help.




Admiral Donutz VIP Member

Wanna go Double Dutch?

735,271 XP

9th December 2003

0 Uploads

71,460 Posts

0 Threads

#49 15 years ago

loz27 any progress yet? did you already told your parents about it? and if so: did you decided what to do? ow and just ignore those censored.gif that claim that your just some teenager trying to get attention.