How Well Do Tigers Fare?

[CSO_Darter2]

Before I go “willy-nilly” and unleash my Tigers, how are they faring against other tanks in games being played by other folks? Are Stuarts blowing them with one shot? Do mortars disable them? How badly do they suffer the tank shuffle that drives us all crazy?

Any experiences with them (or Panthers) would be interesting to hear.

[MeanMrMustard]

Maybe its just luck, but I have found they are much more susceptible to Airstrikes than other tanks, in my GC vs the AI I have destroyed 2 or 3 through airstrikes alone, whereas it tends to just damage or immobilise other tanks (or miss completely, that's alway annoying). Could also be down to the fact they are larger?
Harry

[Uberdave]

Larger, and the fact that their top armor values are thin (mm), so they are vulnerable to bombs and (large) mortar shells.

In my experience, they can be destroyed easily by a well placed 17 pdr gun or Firefly, but often only crippled/damaged by Shermans and lesser tanks (Stuarts with 37mm guns).

PIATs often have good luck against them, but only at close range (less than 50m).

[Merkstra]

Funny, just had this subject on the BoB forum yesterday.

Let's put it this way: Tigers are not the superweapons in CCv that I used to think they were.
Shells bouncing of Shermans, shermans blowing up Tigers (while shooting at their frontal armor). A Tiger which needs like 10 shots on a Stuart, which in turn disables my Tiger and than drives of.
But in the next turn it's a regular killing machine again.

In short, I never use them in a frontal attack, but scout first and shoot from the safest distance.

Merkstra

[kgvonmenng]

Agree 100% with the previous poster. Tigers are limited (more so than other panzer types!), so I usually employ them as SP guns of sorts. If at all possible I put them hull-down behind a hedgerow with good LOS in front. That way if it gets immobilized it can still serve as an AT gun of sorts. Just wish I could pull a Wittmann...

[pvt_Grunt]

Historically the Tiger's main advantage was at long distance. The 88 gun and the frontal armour made it a "super" weapon over 1000 M against Shermans. Unfortunately. CC doesnt show this well.

Grunt

[Rodya]

The first and only thing I tend to do with my tiger battlegroup is to put them into position at Abbeye d'Ardenne. This way, they'll have clear, open fields of fire and are well protected (hull down) behind those hedgerows. Long range defence is about the only thing you can do with them; the infantry supporting those tigers is far to weak (no MGs, few schrecks, low-quality grenadiers) for assaults and tigers themselves are unbelievebly sluggish in close-quarter fights. Also, a firefight between tiger and allies tank isn't alwyas such a safe bet: a one-shot knock-out rarely occurs, especially if the tiger was busy manouvering and hasn't gotten a chance to line up its gun properly. In a duel between tiger and firefly or achilles, I'd bet on the firefly for sure... That said, once these big cats are wedged into a solid defence on large, open maps, it will take one hell of an assault to dislodge them

[Dima]

Originally Posted by Merkstra

Funny, just had this subject on the BoB forum yesterday.

Let's put it this way: Tigers are not the superweapons in CCv that I used to think they were.
Shells bouncing of Shermans, shermans blowing up Tigers (while shooting at their frontal armor). A Tiger which needs like 10 shots on a Stuart, which in turn disables my Tiger and than drives of.
But in the next turn it's a regular killing machine again.

In short, I never use them in a frontal attack, but scout first and shoot from the safest distance.
Merkstra

Tiger wasn't superweapon in real life.
It could do v good against most allied tanx at long ranges, but at close ranges it lost most of its advantages.Tiger's turret was v slow, gun has lower ROF than most US/UK guns.In 1944 most of allied guns could penetrate side/rear armor of Tiger at close range.

In real life as well as in CC Tiger's perfomance is just a matter of tactics.

[shasadou]

FIGHTING THE BIG CAT!!

i always try to severrely vandalise a tiger by all possible means lol mortars air naval everything just dam it everything (as well as panthers), to evade facing em if the range is longer than 200m or the force ratio is less than 3 to 1. by and by they r getting disapperead lol.

the other thing: i move some bg onto the map occupied by big cats bg and set up an echeloned defence in my area of entrance. if he attacks i inflict be astly losses, if not, then even better - i block his bg thus preventing him from maneuvring and crashing my bgs. dam cats!!!!!!!!!!

[CSO_Darter2]

LOL.. UbberD had the same method. Here an airstrike tries to take one of my Tigers... scratched the paint he did!

[Uberdave]

Airstrikes still suck in GJS.

Historians suggest that a majority of German armor in Normandy (especially heavies like the Tiger) were destroyed not by Allied tanks, but by tank-busting aircraft.

Doesn't seem to be the case here, as Ive targeted about 6 tanks so far, and only one was hit...and immobilized.

[Atilla]

Historians suggest that a majority of German armor in Normandy (especially heavies like the Tiger) were destroyed not by Allied tanks, but by tank-busting aircraft.

Most popular books on the western front battles tell indeed that a lot of German armor was destroyed by aircraft.

There are some however who claim the opposite - Zetterling did some good research into this very subject. Check out his article online:

Effects of Allied airpower

[mooxe]

I find Tigers most unreliable. Dont dare take them 1 on 1 with any heavy allied tank, the risk of losing the main gun or immobilization is to great, and if you do get immobilized you may not get the tank back the next day. Panthers are much more useful for some reason.

The ABT101 BG in GJS while looking very strong with all the Tigers is probably the biggest let down in the game.

[MeanMrMustard]

The Battle Of Normandy 1944 by Robin Neillands also disputes the number of actual tanks taken out by tactical (or is it strategic? I always get them mixed up) air attacks. According to his sources only 11 out of the 129 captured and abandoned Panthers in Normandy and the Ardennes were taken out by aircraft. Interrogations of veteran German crews apparently gave the general view that the safest action when under attack by Typhoons or Thunderbolts was to stay inside the tank and wait for it to pass. The real contribution of the airforce was in the thousands of smaller and lighter vehicles they destroyed, thus cutting off supplies to the Panzer regiments. Saying that vehicles in CCV seem even less susceptible to Airstrikes than tanks...
The Neillands book is a fantastic read by the way, and takes a very refreshing view of events, seeking to question the myths surrounding the battle (namely that the Americans did all the work whilst the Brits and Canadians sat on the beaches drinking tea) rather than just churn out the same old story.

Harry

[fj stiener]

i have mixed feelings about the tigers in GJS......i do not believe they stack up any where near to what they were like in actual combat. there is a reason that every german tank in normandy was a tiger and feared by the alled tankers.
one must remember what wittman and other tiger aces did on a constant basis with them. villers bocage is a prime example, and if it was so easy to knock a tiger out from hitting it in the side ,then those alled tankers in villers had lots of oppertunity to do it.....but didnt seem able to at the time....wierd eh?
in the game im of the oppinon as others here that in a duel you will lose the gun or be imobilized more than is normal. piats do work well against the tiger for some reason..at least imobilizing them.
its too bad really........as someone here said the tiger BG is a large dissapointment.