Tiger<T34??!!??!!

[FONFALKS]

2)It could not do anything to Tigers front armor from distances of over 1 km, it is a simple fact and has nothing to do with crew.

Target: lower front. Distance: 1500 meters. Result: the plate cracked from previous impacts by the 85 mm gun. Two pieces broke off: 500 mm by 240 mm and 800 mm by 200 mm."

These are certainly some excellent results. They appear to be confirmed in practice, since a Red Army document on tactics of Tiger combat notes that it can be penetrated from the front at 1000 meters, and from the side at 1450 meters. It is not surprising that an 85 mm gun with similar ballistics was placed first in the SU-85, then in a T-34, to make a dangerous enemy for any German tank.

http://tankarchives.blogspot.com/2013/03/soviet-85-mm-guns-vs-tigers.html

So the T-34/85 could reliably penetrate Tigers from within 1000m range, and could still catastrophically damage it from 1500m range, so once again, I see nothing wrong with how it's implemented in gmae so far.

And as Drag said, the only real time Tigers struggle is against overwhelming firepower, ambushes, airstrikes or IS-2's.

This is utter and total nonsense. You found this here http://tankarchives.blogspot.com/2013/0 ... igers.html and it is complete and utter nonsense. Pictures there were from soviet propaganda and no T34/85 could EVER penetrate Tiger from distances of over 1 km in frontal armor, not to mention, IF YOU ACTUALLY PAID ANY ATTENTION, to the fact that in my case distance was well over 1.5 kms.
Some people, like you are what Aristotel call uninstructable, meaning no matter how many times you tell them simple truths, they will go on lying and misconstruing. Just stop.
Oh and BTW you also have to ask yourself how could it be that Tigers shots, MULTIPLE SHOTS did not kill those T34s? Is that also "normal". Tiger KILLED T34s of any modification without exception at distances of 2kms, so why is it that in this game Tigers shot is almost weaker then T34/85?????
Unit balancing is all wrong and that is a fact.

[Grabbed_by_the_Spets]

You're not all completely there are you?

[varis]

Again:

Ok guys...

Forum Rules

1. Message content must be the following:
   
   
   
   1. Constructive to the topic
   2. Respectful towards any other user on the board, regardless of how much your opinions differ.
   3. Readable (this means no all CAPS messages and usage of punctuation and paragraphing is obligatory)
2. Message content must not be the following:
   
   1. Abusive, disrespectful, harassing or hostile
      
   2. An attack on or bullying of another user

[Airborneguy]

I have already made posts about balancing units, but i just have to share this...
Had my first battle playing general mode in which Russians attacked my heavy tank battalion with their heavy tank battalion, in all my games this has never happened before, as i was careful to put my tigers behind entrenched infantry and thus it was usually walk in a park to defend maps, HOWEVER this time i did not have bunkers on my side and tanks faced each other and this is what happened....
So i had some Tigers up on hill, i think 4 in total and they had cover (yellow shield, i think it is best cover tank can have) and their position was just perfect - then T34/85 show up, not in flanks, but right there in front of Tigers, at close to maximums distances, so situation basically is a large scale tank duel front to front. And what happened?
I had 4(!!!) tigers at that flank, they were not suppressed by anything and had cover, vs 3 T34/85 with no cover. Result is that my 4 Tigers were dead and 2 T34 dead.... THAT IS JUST STUPID!!!!!!!!!!!!!
But ok, i had reinforcements, 3 more Tigers come up in that good spot with cover, again front to front tank battle 3v3 (T34s also had reinforcements), all my Tigers dead again and 2 T34s destroyed.
HOW ABSURD IS THAT. TIGERs IN GOOD POSITION IN COVER VS T34s IN FIELD AND T34s win!!!!!!
Balance of this game is just wrong. W R O N G. And once more, if anyone misunderstood - Tigers were not suppressed by anything and there was no hidden AT guns firing at Tigers as well. If this is how it is going to be then i simply do not see the point of this game, i can accept this result with PZIV but not with Tigers....

Yeah I need to see a video of that or it didnt happen

[Oddball_E8]

Well, the penetration of the BR-365A round at 2000 meters is just under 100mm... so, unless it was at EXACTLY 2000m, it certainly should have a chance to penetrate.

[gandamula]

I don't have this game, yet, but I own Normandy 44,and I also have the feeling that AI is cheating the game, mainly in the campaign, playing as German my StuG are hit, and destroyed, by tetrarch tank at maximum range,this happens to many times, and sometimes after I hit the target before. It's a 75mm vs a 40 mm gun.
I also noticed that the German infantry becomes pinned to quickly and for more time than the allied one, I don't know exactly what's happening in steel division 2, but the issues in the first game prevent me to buy this one,but for this post I guess that the flaws remain. Sorry my English.

[Wizzmann]

Here's a sheet with D5-T gun (wich was mounted on the T34-85) penetration values. And please note it uses a 50% success criteria:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/85_mm_air_defense_gun_M1939_(52-K)

Tiger I armor was 100 mm both frontal plate and turret (also gun mantlet was 120 mm), so on paper the T34-85 could have penetrated the Tiger I up to 1km away with slim chances on more than 1250m.

However, experienced Tiger crews would have angled their tank so as not to face the enemy frontally, thus maximizing their armor. For reference, 100mm armor angled at 25 degree is as effective as 110mm, while at 45 degrees would be 140mm. Probably this is why a T34-85 in reality would have come as close to 500m in order to reliably penetrate the Tiger.

Unfortunatley i don't think this game's physics accounts for armor angling so we only get the in game values.