Re: Operational Discussion
 

I actualy gave you the info so you could make a good guestimate if you disagree.
If look up thickness then add a bit for hardness (about 15-20% better than comparable British stuff for the time) you have your answer. As its only slightly off vertical could probably ignore slope calculation.
The hardest part of the info to find tends to be the Brinell rating (toughness) which might give it +1 on the armour rating if not factored in.

Re: Operational Discussion
 

I don't quite know why I am bothering here but it may intrest you.
I have never looked at the models before but checked a few.
IIIj IIIL PantherG Tiger
The game does a nice job of modeling diffrent guns both on penetration & accuracy the Panthers gun being top dog & is in fact more accurate than most modern guns having a long barrel & high velocity. German engineering.
I would say the Tiger armour could be increased by 1 if you take mantlet (120mm)
25 degree off vertical slope of lower front hull section & quality of the plate into account.
I would have given it 13 for the front turret as mantlet Brinell rating is 280.
Also penetration levels listed for ISU-122 from Jentz (unconfirmed by me) list need to be a lot closer.
Panther & L spot on so stopped looking.

Conclusion the game is near enough right generaly if you mod it by more than that rename it because its not a Tiger anymore.

Re: Operational Discussion
 

I think the gun manlet was worth 100-120mm alone! But as it's been a while since I knew what I thought was the correct amount, I will have to pass on discussing it until the day comes that i use them or face them. It seems most people want to say that the armor of the Tiger and the KTiger were the worst instead. The KTiger it seems, was more armored but with less dependable armor. Probably still better overall than the Tiger, but if the Tiger is seriously underrated in armor then the KTiger should at least present a vicious force. I don't think I have any problem with the KTIger ratings. The blasted Panther, not an armored juggernaut exactly, actually has 2pts. more in the FT area. Just not right that 12 Tiger FT, but that's my problem alone.

Re: Operational Discussion
 

I'm sure you know well that there are better German guns than what you listed, though those are very good. Don't make the mistake of thinking the 88 on the Tiger is a real good one, because the KTiger, Nashorn, Elefant, AFV's all carry the 88L71, quite a bit better than the 88L56 of the Tiger, and quite a bit better than the 75L70 I think it is of the Panther's, JPZIVL's etc. The 88L71 combines the best punch, range, and accuracy of any gun. I guess the 128L56 is close, but isn't as accurate and the ammo is limited.

Re: Operational Discussion
 

Ignoring "best" results where the WH size adds extra (and are not there to bet the farm on) - the 88L71 and the 128kwk are both reliably producing 18 at 1400m (but both 20 at 1100, though 18 for the 88 and 20 for the 128 then till 1400) . Then the 88 starts to fall off more noticeably. So marginal over 1000, about the same under it, and real advantage to the 128 only starts at 1400.

A specialist gun for plinking Stalins at the longer ranges. I would prefer a straight Tiger 2 over Jagtigers in 97% of all cases. More stored kills.

Cheers
Andy

Re: Operational Discussion
 

Good grief yes there are better guns & I trust the game model I checked stuff I could get data for easily to check Tiger for you, Then checked its stats were in keeping with similar vehicles, they were.
If you want to push it give it 13 on both fronts but the Panther is the better tank faster accurate high penetration stronger front hull its only weakness is its not a sqaure tank like the Tiger.
The Tiger is unusual in that it has very high all round protection so if want to be gamey buy some & use on flanks.

I am not sure but I believe the Tiger was the first tank designed from the ground up as a tank killer because the Germans found a need. Probably started designing after ran into French stuff & MatildaIIs. Because it was an early design quality of parts was paramount as its a flat sided & insanely expensive tank to produce.
Then the Russians came along with the T-34 & sloping armour & design philoshpy changed for ever as the same thickness of armour is far more effective at an angle even if you ignore the increased ricochet effect, the Panther was born.

I am going to bow out of answering your posts now unless you specificaly title to me.
But if you do want help advice think before ask me your last post for instance.
Do you not think if I am looking up real life data I might just have an inkling that there are better guns out there & thats whithout defining a better gun for what exactly.

Please dont come back at me saying the Tiger was the better tank or some such unless you can justify it. From ease of use playability you do not have to worry about its flanks & thats about it.
Oh if you had to put 1 of them in a confined enviroment like urban I would choose the Tiger for its all round survivability & so as not to squaunder the Panthers FC acc

Re: Operational Discussion
 

I suppose the info you just related is history and not game data correct? Because I had no idea the game would have guns declining in accuracy at different ranges unless one had longer range than the other. IOW, all 40 range guns would lose the same percentage from the highest accuracy, if they shot at the same hex. For example two guns of 40 range, fire at hexes 20 away. They both lose perhaps 40% accuracy, despite what their accuracy rating is. The one with the higher accuracy will always fire more accuractely, but they both lose the same percentage when they have the same maximum range. A range 50 gun, would lose less of a percentage than those two at hex 20.

Re: Operational Discussion
 

I didn't ask you anything, merely pointed out what you probably already knew. You sure are testy aren't you (asked rhetorically)? And I will present data as I please, so quit trying to bully me around. Go it (asked rhetorically again)?

Re: Operational Discussion
 

Charles because this is just getting antogonistic I am not going to reply again period appologies for any grief it only started because I thought you were misleading Gila I think it was in a post ages back by saying theres only one way to play why have trucks. In fact its a strength of the game that the only thing to get right is tactics & even they should be adapted to what you have at hand. This is why letting the computer buy your stuff can be fun but I digress.

I sometimes have trouble understanding what you are saying & we just seem to be jumping from subject to subject often with vague assumptions.
At least your reply to Mobhack was on point & made sense.
Except as I said stop just keep coming back with stuff & think.

He refered to 2 diffrent guns & given what he said my summary would be the Jagtiger has the big one & is marginaly better at range because it has a longer range (maybe FC to) But in his view its not enough to offset the more limited ammo loadout.

Sorry but you just asked another question to which you probably know the answer by not reading his response to you.
Most posts are short people do not just come back with "stuff" once they have an answer. Its not a discussion group as such join a WW2 site for that but you had better get your facts in order first.

His facts could indeed be based on real life, the game or indeed both & bearing in mind he is one of the games designers which do you think it might be.


Enjoy the game
Life is short! Break the rules! Forgive quickly! Kiss slowly!
Love truly, Laugh uncontrollably
And never never regret anything that made you smile

John over & out

Re: Operational Discussion
 

Imp: What is this thread called? I think the forums are to discuss the game. Do you see me talking about my personal life? Do you recall RERomine started it because the ammo truck thread got too sidetracked? Since RERomine and I were the last conversing on that thread, and you keep saying that you're going to butt out, and do not (not that anybody asked you to butt out) and this thread was set up to handle the sidetrack, and it says "discussion" up there, just what is your problem? To harangue me? Look up at the very top of this page, not the name of the thread, but the words under .com.unity. Do those words sound any more discouraging of discussion than the name of this thread? No matter if you like the direction I go, or go lock-step to your ways, it's still a GAME discussion.

I don't mind talking to you, but you got to stop being bossy and become more aware of what appears to be the purpose of these forums. I don't see any of the mods dressing me down, though they were concerned that I played a part in sidetracking the ammo truck thread (not because of my ammo truck discussion, but because it went off in other directions too much, but they still didn't say anything to me). "THIS" thread was made to cover that sidetrack and it's still 100% about the game. This thread is a lot more open, as 'operational' covers a lot more ground than 'ammo truck'.

If you still don't understand us being allowed to discuss as we have (with sidetracking being somewhat a stain, but not in this thread, until you started policing me that is) look at the AAR's and tell me what that has to do with 'discussion' or 'asking questions' (interesting how before you were giving me problems for asking questions) or whatever you keep condemning? Do you see me or anyone else telling people these forums aren't for discussion, or asking questions, or trying to bully people around (though you have seemed to make I guess a bullying charge when you claim I said something had to be only one way) when you're not even the mod? I've seen these mods in action before, they have no qualms about stating their mind if need be, and they're not absent from it very much, so I doubt they need you policing it. Now, if you want to put your foot in your mouth again, feel free, but my ears will start to become more and more closed to you (not that they have been yet).