Jump to content


Yet another suggestion for the tiger 2 buff

TigerII Buff Suggestion

  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

Happyfrags #1 Posted 31 December 2018 - 01:26 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 13177 battles
  • 136
  • [U-EAT] U-EAT
  • Member since:
    04-16-2012

Currently, the Tiger 2 is the worst performing T8 heavy with only 48% Win Rate. 

Its main default is that it is supposedly have almost all its stats on its gun but in combat it's merely above average (good accuracy, bad alpha, all other stats are standard).

Tiger 2's main con are its bad mobility and bad armor (for a heavy) :

  • The turret frontal can be penetrated reliably at short range by T7 without using gold or aiming for weakspot and at long range by any T8 or above, especially the 122 gun that autopen the roof.
  • The tank is unrealistically huge when compared to IS3 : IG the tiger 2 is 1,5 time the size of the IS3 while IRL it's supposed to be only 1,25 time its size (2,45m vs 3,09m)
  • Due to its high size you can't cover its lowerplate effectively. 
  • Its poor mobility allow it to rarely go above 25kph on a 5% uphill and only hit its max speed of 38kph after 300m on flat and if you're on hard terrain.

 

That's why I suggest to buff its DPS, reduce its size to 1,25 IS3 high (yes, it's an unit of measure) buff its armor reliability at long range while keeping its weakspot at short range. 

  • Increase its DPM to 2200 (from 1925) should be enough to help tiger 2 do its support tank role.
  • For its turret armor buff, I suggest to buff its roof armor to 45 or 50mm so it will be 122-proof and add spare tracks almost everywhere so it will cover most of the turret front and cheeks. 
    • Spare tracks will cover 75% of the turret frontal cheeks (no spare track on the turret rear cheeks)
    • Place one spare track on each side of the mantlet so 40% of the surface will be protected by the mantlet, 30% will have extra armor and only 30% of the surface will be vulnerable at "only" 185mm. 
    • Schematic with extra track armor (track are paint in yellow and add 20mm armor)

Tiger2-current_turret2.PNGTiger2-buff_turret2.PNG

 

 

I'd prefer not to buff the mobility of the Tiger 2 as it will steal the role of the VK4502 asuf.A.

And while the idea to make the tiger 2 a T7 with its historical canon sound good, it will be a real mess in the tech tree and the tiger 2 armor will be too good for a T7 (O-Ni and churchill BP will be outclassed by far).

 

And you, what's your point of view on the Tiger 2 status ?



barison1 #2 Posted 31 December 2018 - 02:13 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 41657 battles
  • 1,478
  • [MEME] MEME
  • Member since:
    01-14-2012

seems pretty decent idea altough i would just say; make the turretfront 220mm, which makes it about 50/50 chance to pen for tier 8 but not utter unpenable. as you mentioned the roof being 50mm, altough 52mm wouldnt harm either so it could ricochet 150/152/155mm TD guns. upperplate minor buff to 240ish effective, keeping lowerplate as it is. for the tracks on turret side that seems fair aswell

gun wise i didnt really saw problems myself as handling is kreygasm, but minor dpm buff wouldnt harm

 

 

and well.. vk4502a can use some gun buffs, 200mm pen as tier 8 HT is kinda... pathetic to say

 



Darky1029 #3 Posted 31 December 2018 - 02:21 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 14317 battles
  • 1,006
  • Member since:
    11-24-2010
Comrade, then KT wouldnt be utter trash compared to is-3, no blyad cant do

Robbie_T #4 Posted 31 December 2018 - 02:33 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 19082 battles
  • 692
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    07-08-2016
Yeah tiger 1 and 2 need a little love just like some other mid tiers in the german tree

Darky1029 #5 Posted 31 December 2018 - 02:48 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 14317 battles
  • 1,006
  • Member since:
    11-24-2010

View PostRobbie_T, on 31 December 2018 - 03:33 AM, said:

Yeah tiger 1 and 2 need a little love just like some other mid tiers in the german tree

 

The tiger 1 got some love, and i think is good now, same thing needs to be done to toiger 2

Hedgehog1963 #6 Posted 31 December 2018 - 02:52 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 52696 battles
  • 7,858
  • [DIRTY] DIRTY
  • Member since:
    04-26-2011
Tank is fine.  People who drive it are the problem.  They thought they were superior and would rule the world.  How wrong they were.

TurnedToDust #7 Posted 31 December 2018 - 02:56 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9802 battles
  • 214
  • [JUICE] JUICE
  • Member since:
    03-29-2011

View PostHedgehog1963, on 31 December 2018 - 02:52 AM, said:

Tank is fine.  People who drive it are the problem.  They thought they were superior and would rule the world.  How wrong they were.

 

If we judge it on the people who drive it then every tank is "fine".



Hedgehog1963 #8 Posted 31 December 2018 - 03:08 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 52696 battles
  • 7,858
  • [DIRTY] DIRTY
  • Member since:
    04-26-2011

View PostTurnedToDust, on 31 December 2018 - 01:56 AM, said:

 

If we judge it on the people who drive it then every tank is "fine".

 

I drove it once. It was OK.  Fortunately it didn't matter to me that the nazi tanks weren't the best.

Edited by Hedgehog1963, 31 December 2018 - 03:09 AM.


PoIestar #9 Posted 31 December 2018 - 03:27 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 32639 battles
  • 4,195
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    05-02-2013

Give it the E 50's gun with less RoF. Same pen as IS-3, same alpha, same DPM. Turret front needs to be increased to 220 mm and make the roof quite thick. Sides should also be buffed so that not the slightest angle makes it paper thin. Also buff the LFP to make it less pennable while angling, but not being mega thick. For the rest, don't touch it. 

 

What it is now? A mini-E 75. As it should be. It's too big and lumpy for the sniper tank that the Tiger I is, so make it a more heavy tank. 



Desyatnik_Pansy #10 Posted 31 December 2018 - 07:26 AM

    Bartender

  • Player
  • 17459 battles
  • 26,361
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

View PostHappyfrags, on 31 December 2018 - 12:26 AM, said:

  • Place one spare track on each side of the mantlet so 40% of the surface will be protected by the mantlet, 30% will have extra armor and only 30% of the surface will be vulnerable at "only" 185mm. 

 

I don't think even the single tracks will fit vertically on the turret front without hanging off slightly at the top, not to mention actually mounting them would be questionable since they're otherwise held on by hooks on the sides rather than bolts. I believe on the left side of the gun (facing from the turret) it would also block a viewport (not an actual in-game viewport, but y'know what I mean), so it wouldn't make any sense at all for the crew to have applied it as such. Besides that, it'd look pretty ugly, but that's kinda personal taste.

 

I don't disagree with the other stuff though, just didn't agree with this one. Purely buffing it for reasons is better than that suggestion IMO.



panter22 #11 Posted 31 December 2018 - 09:25 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 15184 battles
  • 472
  • Member since:
    05-23-2011

View Postbarison1, on 31 December 2018 - 01:13 AM, said:

seems pretty decent idea altough i would just say; make the turretfront 220mm, which makes it about 50/50 chance to pen for tier 8 but not utter unpenable. as you mentioned the roof being 50mm, altough 52mm wouldnt harm either so it could ricochet 150/152/155mm TD guns. upperplate minor buff to 240ish effective, keeping lowerplate as it is. for the tracks on turret side that seems fair aswell

gun wise i didnt really saw problems myself as handling is kreygasm, but minor dpm buff wouldnt harm

 

 

and well.. vk4502a can use some gun buffs, 200mm pen as tier 8 HT is kinda... pathetic to say

 

 

it dos not mater haw much they buff the tank tier 10 russian tanks will always one shot (ammo rack) the tank

HussarKaz #12 Posted 31 December 2018 - 11:10 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 6583 battles
  • 209
  • Member since:
    02-21-2016

The "armor made of tracks in front of the turret" idea is nonsense in my opinion. It looks nice "on paper" but in real world tracks put there would fall easily, there was in fact no place to put them.

 

The more important thing is to increase penetration on top gun, because when the "gold nerf" changes in 2019 will be made, this gun will be a total rubbish with penetration comparable with IS-3/Defender but significantly worse damage. 240-245 mm on AP will make it a nice supporting tank once again, from a distance the frontal turret armor is not that painful.



Happyfrags #13 Posted 31 December 2018 - 01:52 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 13177 battles
  • 136
  • [U-EAT] U-EAT
  • Member since:
    04-16-2012

View Postpanter22, on 31 December 2018 - 08:25 AM, said:

 

it dos not mater haw much they buff the tank tier 10 russian tanks will always one shot (ammo rack) the tank

I see no problem here : a T8 being killed by a T10 is normal. The purpose of this thread is to make the Tiger 2 good enough to have 50% WR again and to have a fair chance to win against other T8 HT. 

 

View Postbarison1, on 31 December 2018 - 01:13 AM, said:

seems pretty decent idea altough i would just say; make the turretfront 220mm, which makes it about 50/50 chance to pen for tier 8 but not utter unpenable. as you mentioned the roof being 50mm, altough 52mm wouldnt harm either so it could ricochet 150/152/155mm TD guns. upperplate minor buff to 240ish effective, keeping lowerplate as it is. for the tracks on turret side that seems fair aswell

gun wise i didnt really saw problems myself as handling is kreygasm, but minor dpm buff wouldnt harm

 

and well.. vk4502a can use some gun buffs, 200mm pen as tier 8 HT is kinda... pathetic to say

For the VK4502a, it's clearly not the best tank, but its mobility allow it to have more than 50% WR. If you play it like a VK3002D, it does its job pretty well since 200mm pen is more than enough to penetrate side armor. That said, a DPM buff wouldn't harm. 

 

For your Tiger 2 armor buff suggestion, while it look good won't it make other HT like the O-NI and the KV4 obsolete ? If that's the case, I'd better keep the current 185 turret frontal armor and have an HP buff to 1800 (same as T9 HT) on the tiger 2.

That said, I like your idea to buff the upper plate. Why not buff it to the same as the VK4502a ? 150mm @55° (from 150mm @50°;) so the EA will be 235 instead of 210.

 

View PostHedgehog1963, on 31 December 2018 - 01:52 AM, said:

Tank is fine.  People who drive it are the problem.  They thought they were superior and would rule the world.  How wrong they were.

If the tank is fine if the driver are good, then why its OP rating (good) is lower than some T8 HT's OP rating (bad) ? https://www.noobmeter.com/tankStats

 

View PostDesyatnik_Pansy, on 31 December 2018 - 06:26 AM, said:

I don't think even the single tracks will fit vertically on the turret front without hanging off slightly at the top, not to mention actually mounting them would be questionable since they're otherwise held on by hooks on the sides rather than bolts. I believe on the left side of the gun (facing from the turret) it would also block a viewport (not an actual in-game viewport, but y'know what I mean), so it wouldn't make any sense at all for the crew to have applied it as such. Besides that, it'd look pretty ugly, but that's kinda personal taste.

 

I don't disagree with the other stuff though, just didn't agree with this one. Purely buffing it for reasons is better than that suggestion IMO.

Well you're right, track everywhere might be not the best solution, but at least I've tried. 

If the turret frontal stay at 185mm effective armor then I think the tiger 2 could use a HP buff to 1800 (same as russian T9 HT)


Edited by Happyfrags, 31 December 2018 - 01:52 PM.


barison1 #14 Posted 31 December 2018 - 01:57 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 41657 battles
  • 1,478
  • [MEME] MEME
  • Member since:
    01-14-2012

View PostHappyfrags, on 31 December 2018 - 01:52 PM, said:

For the VK4502a, it's clearly not the best tank, but its mobility allow it to have more than 50% WR. If you play it like a VK3002D, it does its job pretty well since 200mm pen is more than enough to penetrate side armor. That said, a DPM buff wouldn't harm. 

 

For your Tiger 2 armor buff suggestion, while it look good won't it make other HT like the O-NI and the KV4 obsolete ? If that's the case, I'd better keep the current 185 turret frontal armor and have an HP buff to 1800 (same as T9 HT) on the tiger 2.

That said, I like your idea to buff the upper plate. Why not buff it to the same as the VK4502a ? 150mm @55° (from 150mm @50°;) so the EA will be 235 instead of 210.

doubt it would make oho/kv4 obsolete, tiger 2 still has paper sides and the massive lowerplate then. angle turret bit and it is autopen, overangle the hull tiny bit and it is autopen, which isnt the case for kv4/oho. atleast they way i see it

 

 



Ceeb #15 Posted 31 December 2018 - 02:00 PM

    Major General

  • Beta Tester
  • 31801 battles
  • 5,747
  • [BULL] BULL
  • Member since:
    01-14-2011

Make it Tier 7..

 

There, fixed it.

 



HussarKaz #16 Posted 31 December 2018 - 02:19 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 6583 battles
  • 209
  • Member since:
    02-21-2016

View PostCeeb, on 31 December 2018 - 02:00 PM, said:

Make it Tier 7..

 

There, fixed it.

 

 

They will never do it :sceptic:



TankkiPoju #17 Posted 31 December 2018 - 02:35 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 22172 battles
  • 6,827
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    05-20-2011

View PostHussarKaz, on 31 December 2018 - 11:10 AM, said:

The "armor made of tracks in front of the turret" idea is nonsense in my opinion. It looks nice "on paper" but in real world tracks put there would fall easily, there was in fact no place to put them.

 

Funnily this is exactly how WG ninja buffed IS tanks.

 

Even tier 7 IS has track links in front of hull than count as 20mm armor.



Happyfrags #18 Posted 31 December 2018 - 03:19 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 13177 battles
  • 136
  • [U-EAT] U-EAT
  • Member since:
    04-16-2012

View PostCeeb, on 31 December 2018 - 01:00 PM, said:

Make it Tier 7..

 

There, fixed it.

 

 

As I said in my first post, while it look like a good idea at first, it won't work that great as it will be a real mess in the german HT tech tree past T6.

Lets say Tiger 2 is now a T7, you'll have to move Tiger H and tiger P to T6 for obvious reason. Then what T8 tank will take the place of the tiger 2 ? Of the tiger P ?

Also a T7 Tiger 2 mean it will have more armor, mobility and gun than the O-Ni and Churchill BP.



HussarKaz #19 Posted 31 December 2018 - 03:24 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 6583 battles
  • 209
  • Member since:
    02-21-2016

View PostHappyfrags, on 31 December 2018 - 03:19 PM, said:

 

As I said in my first post, while it look like a good idea at first, it won't work that great as it will be a real mess in the german HT tech tree past T6.

Lets say Tiger 2 is now a T7, you'll have to move Tiger H and tiger P to T6 for obvious reason. Then what T8 tank will take the place of the tiger 2 ? Of the tiger P ?

Also a T7 Tiger 2 mean it will have more armor, mobility and gun than the O-Ni and Churchill BP.

 

Also there would be a problem with VK 45.03 which is significantly worse than even stock Tiger II.

(but, there is an easy solution - preferential MM for VK 45.03)

 

Still, WG will never move Tiger II to Tier 7. The only possible option is a premium tank in a historically accurate configuration, like https://tanks.gg/tank/tiger-ii-h

I hope it will enter the game someday.



Bordhaw #20 Posted 31 December 2018 - 09:01 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 13572 battles
  • 3,867
  • Member since:
    01-29-2017

View PostHedgehog1963, on 31 December 2018 - 01:52 AM, said:

Tank is fine.  People who drive it are the problem.  They thought they were superior and would rule the world.  How wrong they were.

 

 







Also tagged with TigerII, Buff, Suggestion

2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users