Jump to content
Welcome to the virtual battlefield, Guest!

World War II Online is a Massively Multiplayer Online First Person Shooter based in Western Europe between 1939 and 1943. Through land, sea, and air combat using a ultra-realistic game engine, combined with a strategic layer, in the largest game world ever created - We offer the best WWII simulation experience around.

Tiger shell penetration.


dandare9
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have noticed, and reported, that the Tiger has trouble penetrating enemy Shermans. I hit a standard Sherman 16 times frontally at 600m the other day. He was not behind a berm btw. He continued firing up to the last shot which made him explode. I'm no noob to this game (19 years continuous service). Yesterday, Smithy in a Firefly, took out a sh.tload of armour at an fb. he could not be killed easily. I lost 3 or 4 Tigers to him. Firefly turret armour was only 75mm yet I couldn't kill him even when I sneaked up to 400m from him! He took 6 shots before he spotted where I was and in 1 shot killed me. 

Why is it we are having to rely on sapping or shrekking Shermans to kill them when the Tiger had the best gun in ww2 AND awesome armour protection. Tiger vs Shermans is hard work and something like using a 3H against a Matty. I noticed Stankyus worrying about top armour penetration with a BAR and it's been ticketed. I wonder if our concerns about the Tiger will be noticed. 

  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dan i refer you to my other post for the problem with the Sherman tanks in game and why they are punching way higher than they should have historically, any amour in the game with a good slope is exceeding RL performance, if they put the Panther or Jagdpanther in the game the front plate would be mental strong. 

Until they code in the real amour data effects Scotts has given them it won't change! A real engagement between the Firefly and the Tiger  would be who landed the shot first.

One other thing the Firefly should nuke anything in the game with the gun it has, its likely the best at the moment in the game, the end ATGs are then likely next then the Tiger, if the game ever gets the Panther its gun is even better than the Tigers for pure penetration, then the KT would top them both.

 

 

SrfBSQ1.jpg

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, dm79 said:

any amour in the game with a good slope is exceeding RL performance,

yep 100% correct

Plus the tiger has all sorts of problems, mind you I have not played in a year...decided to stop playing after my tiger gunner was killed by a Crus3 at over 1500 meters while tiger was frontal and at a 45 degree angle to it.  Told me there is an issue with it so i stopped playing.

Guess we will never know about the advantage of having sloped armor, i don't expect the panther anytime soon. Its quite a joke they spend time developing worthless aa guns on a truck, now at guns on a truck, and the pz1...all of which can be taken out with a singler rifleman

After firefly and achilles were introduced they should have put all effort into the panther...but no, let's throw aa and at guns on a truck instead haha...also it should be looked into whose decision that was...the house has been leaning one way for awhile now...looking at career sorties on CS&R can tell u alot 

8 hours ago, dandare9 said:

I wonder if our concerns about the Tiger will be noticed. 

Noticed...yes. Time spend reviewing playerbase concerns or comments for years now...no

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 6pdr is, in some circles, considered to be a better weapon than the Panther's L/70 75mm. Even the non-sabot regular AP round from the L/50 6pdr (as fitted to the Crusader III) had a 2.1 inch penetration, the APBC round (from 1943) some 3.1 inches, and the discarding sabot round a whopping 4.9 inches at 1500m. Those values in metric are 68-70mm (sources quote both), 79mm for the APBC and 124mm for the discarding sabot (Spring  1944), although it lost some accuracy with this round, as do all sabot rounds.

So, even if we're looking at the APBC round, with the middling 79mm penetration at 1500m, and allow for the Tiger's front hull armour being struck at 45 degrees obliquity, then the effective armour thickness is circa 140mm. I'm not sure how WW2ol deals with spall, but as the round would have penetrated over half that value, you've got to think there's a risk at least of spalling. Also possible is that you were hit on the turret side or roof, either of which might also have allowed a penetrating or spall hit on your poor gunner. So far as I'm aware the 6pdr doesn't have the sabot round in game, however, if you asked a 1944 onwards 6 pdr crew if they could penetrate a Tiger frontally at 1500m, then the answer would be yes.

At the risk of repeating myself, the Tiger is well armoured, but by no means is it immune, nor should be. The problem lays predominantly with the relatively short ranges for tank v tank fighting, especially in the flat northern areas. Given the ability to take on targets at 1700m plus, it's a fearsome weapon, but it really cannot be used under 1500m whilst expecting complete immunity, not even with the rather under-rated 6pdr using middling shell types such as APBC, let alone sabot rounds.

The 6pdr QF Anti-Tank Gun – The Armourers Bench

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes it was flat terrain, he might have had a little elevation on me but no more than 100 meters and that figure is on the high end. also note this was from a very good and experience tanker 

i was stationary, he was moving perpendicular to my north at a good  speed, i took a few shots but he got behind a berm and trees and i lost him...waited 10 mins or so then i moved out to the NE away to gain extra distance...my commander up saw the first round fired, moved hull and turret to the nw to face him and then the 2nd round got gunner.  possible spall but from 1500+ meters not sure about it

if a cru3 can frag a tiger from 1500+ frontal turret and hull at 45 degree then not sure what else i can say 

with this and the sherman75s ability to degun the tiger at will, it gets tiresome

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

goreblimey

I wouldnt expect a 6pounder at that range to do anything more than announce its presence. maybe just maybe if your commander was up there was some weird down the hatch ricochet happening , otherwise its a WTF moment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yea commander was def up since i was on the move trying to get some extra distance and i knew he was still out there. like i said above, it was a very good and exp tanker 

however i do think there is an issue on the right side of turret (when facing tiger) something just seems weak over there

when i come back i will just use stugG from now on, just had too many wtf issues with the tiger

9 minutes ago, goreblimey said:

I wouldnt expect a 6pounder at that range to do anything more than announce its presence.

agreed, however he would not have fired on me unless he knew he could frag a tiger at that distance in the cru3...so that tells me they know a certain spot to aim for even at that distance and even in a cru3

on my flank...no problem i deserve it but not from this direction

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

undercova
On 10/23/2021 at 2:17 AM, goreblimey said:

I wouldnt expect a 6pounder at that range to do anything more than announce its presence. maybe just maybe if your commander was up there was some weird down the hatch ricochet happening , otherwise its a WTF moment. 

Tier 1 and higher guns easily kill the Tiger frontally

Try M1 ATG from CP or a 6pdr ATG ... at distances 1000-1500m ... no problem

Try the same situation with Pak38 .... vs. Churchill or Shermans

 

it is funny how so many allied players didnt realize how uba their guns are vs. a Tiger or Pz IV G/H

Whenever i went on Training Server or even on live it always worked with a few shots or even then first one

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/23/2021 at 1:17 AM, goreblimey said:

I wouldnt expect a 6pounder at that range to do anything more than announce its presence. maybe just maybe if your commander was up there was some weird down the hatch ricochet happening , otherwise its a WTF moment. 

I would have to agree - if it was at 1500m. And there's the rub, I know from my own experience that it's not always possible to correctly range an enemy and I've frequently both under and over estimated ranges to targets. Even if he's just 200m out, the likelihood of spalling would be fairly different to that at 1500m. it needs testing.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, undercova said:

Tier 1 and higher guns easily kill the Tiger frontally

Try M1 ATG from CP or a 6pdr ATG ... at distances 1000-1500m ... no problem

Try the same situation with Pak38 .... vs. Churchill or Shermans

 

it is funny how so many allied players didnt realize how uba their guns are vs. a Tiger or Pz IV G/H

Whenever i went on Training Server or even on live it always worked with a few shots or even then first one

Are you talking about firing plunging fire onto Tiger deck from a distance?  DEFINITELY possible for a 6lber.

Used to do long range naval type shots with H39s onto PzIIIF decks.  The optics aren't cooperative and the PzIII needs to hold still, but the plunging shot can be done.

As for Pak38, if you can get your shot incoming perpendicular to the Sherm's front slope plate, should be able to do some damage that way.  Turrets is going to be a bit rough to get around, I'd tend to want a shot from the side plunging into the engine.  Churchills are just going to be tough, that turret is really going to stop a lot of shots.  But otherwise shouldn't be more then 20mm.

Either way, the Pak38 should be able to do top deck plunging at 600-1100m, and distant arced shots from further out.  Gonna need a good angle to come in perpendicular enough, tricky cause I'm not sure you can keep up gunner observation for some of that.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/22/2021 at 8:20 AM, dandare9 said:

I have noticed, and reported, that the Tiger has trouble penetrating enemy Shermans. I hit a standard Sherman 16 times frontally at 600m the other day. He was not behind a berm btw. He continued firing up to the last shot which made him explode. I'm no noob to this game (19 years continuous service). Yesterday, Smithy in a Firefly, took out a sh.tload of armour at an fb. he could not be killed easily. I lost 3 or 4 Tigers to him. Firefly turret armour was only 75mm yet I couldn't kill him even when I sneaked up to 400m from him! He took 6 shots before he spotted where I was and in 1 shot killed me. 

Why is it we are having to rely on sapping or shrekking Shermans to kill them when the Tiger had the best gun in ww2 AND awesome armour protection. Tiger vs Shermans is hard work and something like using a 3H against a Matty. I noticed Stankyus worrying about top armour penetration with a BAR and it's been ticketed. I wonder if our concerns about the Tiger will be noticed. 

Best WWII guns aren't in the game, that would be the Tiger II's 88 with the advanced ammo, the 17lber HVAP, and the Panther/Jagdpanther 75.  What made Tiger I awesome was the gun AND the armor package.  The latter requires distance to operate.

Hard to say where the Soviet AT superguns fit in, they were huge and powerful but Soviet QC wasn't all that when it came to ammo.

Friend of mine and I dueled during an intermission, he in a Tiger and I in a Sherman 76.  I specifically WAITED until 600m, we ended up trading, and he got a little respect for the 76mm.  If you are closer then 1km in the Tiger you aren't doing it right.

The Panther may suit most players moreso, killer gun and absolute killer sloping, point the tank towards the enemy and dominate.  It's going to disappoint on the side armor.  Think better then 88 gun, better then Churchill sloped armor front, not much better then IVH sides with the skirts.

Edited by Kilemall
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

A story about an engagement of "1500m" slightly elevated/45 angled front, with multiple rounds fired.... is not nearly enough to go searching for a problem that may or may not exist.

Im all for audits for equip that are experiencing provable issues. Criteria for this needs to be specific, measured ranges/angles with conflicting penetration values noted. Tested and repeated.

Tested and repeated. recorded.

Then you can actually present evidence of your method in identifying the issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Kidd27 said:

A story about an engagement of "1500m" slightly elevated/45 angled front, with multiple rounds fired.... is not nearly enough to go searching for a problem that may or may not exist.

Don't mind my comments, just look at what Dan said as the original poster of this thread. Plus DM's comments...both those guys have plenty of exp and very good players. Like i said above, i have not played for a year

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ain't the testing team of CRS responsible for that?

You got all the info out if the post , sure you don't have the exact location where it did happen , but you got the info.

1500 meters ( easy to do Tiget has a range finder)

Slightly elevated ( hell give flat ground a test 1st then find a berm that will give you that slight elevation)

And you got 45 degree angled , what more do you testers need?

A video I assume , well even with a video actually 3 of them I was told no issues here, it only got a 2nd look after I got a bit nasty and said what I thought of a certain person ( where actually both posts of mine got deleted)

But that warranted a 2nd look and it was said then yes there is an issue.  Amazing!  does it take to call out people ? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dre21 said:

Ain't the testing team of CRS responsible for that?

You got all the info out if the post , sure you don't have the exact location where it did happen , but you got the info.

1500 meters ( easy to do Tiget has a range finder)

Slightly elevated ( hell give flat ground a test 1st then find a berm that will give you that slight elevation)

And you got 45 degree angled , what more do you testers need?

A video I assume , well even with a video actually 3 of them I was told no issues here, it only got a 2nd look after I got a bit nasty and said what I thought of a certain person ( where actually both posts of mine got deleted)

But that warranted a 2nd look and it was said then yes there is an issue.  Amazing!  does it take to call out people ? 

CRS has done its work. theyve tested.

If YOU want to dispute characteristics of that, its YOU who needs to SHOW/PROVE/DEMONSTRATE of said issue.

what more do testers need? they need the actual testers. Go test it dude, be the tester.

If you can replicate ANY circumstance that conflicts with CRS current values/numbers they want to know and see.

Telling CRS to go find a problem to a vaguely perceived notion of "something is off" doesnt help., it wastes CRS time.

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, kazee said:

Don't mind my comments, just look at what Dan said as the original poster of this thread. Plus DM's comments...both those guys have plenty of exp and very good players. Like i said above, i have not played for a year

your comments and concerns are as valid as anyone else that plays/posts.

My issue is not with what you experienced or posted, but of how tracking down suspicions of "somethin's wrong" needs to be very specific, very finite in the factors involved.

Using your related experience as the example,

distance of 1500m (because not actually measured) could easily be 1400m or 1327m or even 1640m.

All of which would change the equation in calculating correct penetration values.

Same applies to the angle of 45 degrees- could it have been 38 or 62 degrees?

and again with elevation being a guestimation, con volutes the equation with too many variables to have a legit shot at tracking down problems.

Some believe  you can by pass the logistics of getting from problem to solution by posting the same unhelpful parameters.

 

Edited by Kidd27
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kidd27 said:

CRS has done its work. theyve tested.

If YOU want to dispute characteristics of that, its YOU who needs to SHOW/PROVE/DEMONSTRATE of said issue.

what more do testers need? they need the actual testers. Go test it dude, be the tester.

If you can replicate ANY circumstance that conflicts with CRS current values/numbers they want to know and see.

Telling CRS to go find a problem to a vaguely perceived notion of "something is off" doesnt help., it wastes CRS time.

 

Well  sorry that I'm rather cynical about that after giving video proof and I was told nothing to see here , when the tank I was testing it on took both tracks off on a 3h with a mere 5 shots but it took tons more just to finally knock off 1 of the Stu , mind you that the 3hs track is 4times the width of a Stu .

But my test is not what we are here for just pointing out that let's say I go due test , am I going to be told once again all seems normal nothing to see here , we tested over and over and what you are showing us is not the norm cause like the STU I was told too , we took the track off but I yet have to see that video .

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Dre21 said:

Well  sorry that I'm rather cynical about that after giving video proof and I was told nothing to see here , when the tank I was testing it on took both tracks off on a 3h with a mere 5 shots but it took tons more just to finally knock off 1 of the Stu , mind you that the 3hs track is 4times the width of a Stu .

But my test is not what we are here for just pointing out that let's say I go due test , am I going to be told once again all seems normal nothing to see here , we tested over and over and what you are showing us is not the norm cause like the STU I was told too , we took the track off but I yet have to see that video .

Dre, I understand the feeling.

Sometimes you can invest alot of time, and not get the end result because of factors out of our control.

If its wrong, i want it fixed too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

undercova

Ive done numerous testing with Saffroli some time ago ... in well planned and set up locations. exact ranges (thanks to waypoints and landmarks) ... and it was just ridiculous how easily the Tiger died to ATGs/Tanks that would never have a chance under same conditions in RL

But posting those results or reports here on forums is sometimes a waste of time because even then allied players and CRS question it or say it shouldnt happen.

I am a QA staff member in another project and i know how to break things !  i love to do the weird things where suddenly bugs pop up ... so i know what i am talking about. The latest report i did about those critical hits not being registered and causing rounds to disappear is the best example. Me and Saffroli did that report/testing and also discovered all those 20mm spots to kill/blow up most allied tanks. Glitches in the damage models and/or just badly modelled

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Kidd27 said:

CRS has done its work. theyve tested.

If YOU want to dispute characteristics of that, its YOU who needs to SHOW/PROVE/DEMONSTRATE of said issue.

what more do testers need? they need the actual testers. Go test it dude, be the tester.

If you can replicate ANY circumstance that conflicts with CRS current values/numbers they want to know and see.

Telling CRS to go find a problem to a vaguely perceived notion of "something is off" doesnt help., it wastes CRS time.

 

I was going to query the range-finder as a potential source of the problem. If it's over-reading where there's a difference of elevation, or similar bug/feature, then that might reinforce an erroneous claim. I know I suck at guessing range, so if that's not uncommon, and there is an issue with the ranging in certain conditions, then that might affect both experience in regular fighting, and indeed in testing too...

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • CORNERED RAT

This stops here. Dre, your case was given due attention and explained in detail. Please reread the explanation and understand that the case applies to any number of vehicles developed by CRS-1. 

Further CRS-bashing will not be tolerated. 

WRT ammo vs plates at any distance, all I can say is that both are researched and implemented to a very high standard. What actually happens can be seen in extremely detailed weapon logs that you the player are not privy to. What you expect or experience may or may not tally with the actual result. When errors are encountered, and we are still finding many such, they get proper attention. This however is a rather arduous and time-consuming task for a small crew of volunteers who are wholly engaged in bringing new content forward. I trust you see the conflict here.

Now, we can divert attention to the Tiger experience here expressed, using assets sorely needed elsewhere, or you can accept the fact that the Tiger/Sherman/whatevs has its historical armor in place without leaks and that the opposing guns are loaded with rounds that do not overperform in the slightest, to the limits of what our engine can deliver.

I will leave this thread open for now, contingent on your good behaviour.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, berzerkr said:

a jester you still play the game?

What's up brother no not actively playing just popping in to say hello now and then, if you use Discord the squad is still together and very active, something like 40-50 people in our discord many former WWIIOLers. I can PM you the invite if you'd like!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...