COH: Europe In Ruins

Just wanna know whats general opinion of people,which one do they prefer?

After using them both,I kinda like Panther more.Much better mobility,better range,better AT,not bad AI at all. Only thing Tiger has advantage is better:
AI ,you can easily get 10-20 inf kills with panther. Yes,you can get 40-50 inf kills with Tiger,but it doesnt happen that often.
Health,but with Panthers mobility and range you can get around that,since you will get hit less in return,and you can escape easily if you are being pursued which cant be said for tiger.
Another thing is,Tiger becomes dead useless with eng dmg,panther is also bad with it,but not as bad as tiger is.
Panther is not T3 doctrinal choice.,and isn't as bad as tiger is without Tiger aces.
Maybe I am just better with Panthers,but do so many people suck with Tiger? Cuz most people who I spoke with, just dont like him.

(This is not Tiger is UP,buff him etc. topic)

I like both just as much, using the panther too snipe ATGs and AT infantry and making sure in the late parts of games the enemy has so little AT to properly counter the tiger and giving me the upper hand in future engagements.
Granted in the current meta game the panther is the perfect balance in AT and AI making it not only more cost effective and stronger in almost everyway but it lacks the hard hitting force of instant gibbing squads like the tiger can.

The problem lies with the fact that the Panther can do all of the Tiger's roles to a competent level.

A Panther can reliably kill infantry as well as being an extremely solid AT piece that can regularly bounce ATG rounds. It has good health, good speed, good AI, exceptional armour and exceptional AT. The Tiger has high health, slow speed, exceptional AI, good armour and reasonable AT.

A Tiger can gib half a squad, but a Panther can pull it to pieces from stand-off range with much less fear of being counter-attacked by AT assets.

A Tiger can penetrate every Allied piece of armour outright with the exception of the Pershing, but is still reliable at a 70% chance (Not accounting range mods). The Panther can also do this, with a lower chance against the Pershing, but has the benefit of outranging all Allied armour besides the Firefly.

The list just goes on. In a nutshell, you can either get a Tiger and have to follow a strict set of guidelines for it to work out, or you can grab a Panther and do the same thing yet also have flexibility should something start going astray. The problem isn't the Tiger being bad, it's the Panther being better.

If this is true something is clearly wrong. The Panther should not be better then the tiger for obvious reasons!

Lower pen modifiers for every weapon vs tiger so he gets less penetrated and it will be more usefull.

The problem of the tiger is that, that he gets outranged by everything and penetrated thus you lose hp very fast. Giving him more range *could* make him op, not saying it would 100%.

Lowering pen would give him more survivability, you could field him longer before repairs.

increased range then be done with it

remove the infantry sniping option of the panther or give the tiger more range

lol when i made a thread about tiger and giving him more ranged i was jumped by everyone , love it  ::)


http://forums.europeinruins.com/index.php?topic=20675.0

Giving the Tiger more range is stupid on a LOT of levels.

The problem isn't the Tiger, it's the Panther.

Therefore, the Panther needs to stop taking the Tiger's role and have it's accuracy against infantry knocked down.

then nerf panthers long range sniping ability.

well as a US player.
I dont have much problem rushing my AB or rangers or inf toward a panther. Yes it does uncanny damage to infantry at a long range even though it also destroys the fuck out of tanks, has great speed and mobility, and frontal armor. But you might only lose 1 or 2 inf if you rush a panther. Rushing a tiger ya you could lose a whole squad.

erm no, Panther is ok, Tiger is the problem. You do not fix a problem by making a viable unit weaker, because Tiger will still be geting outranged by everything and getting killed fast.

This way you will have 2 bad units, and braking panther to make tiger better will still not  fix its basic issue.

And how much range can the range of the tiger increase before it hits stupid on a lot of levels?

It cant. The Tiger is primarily an AI tank with AT being it's secondary role. If it's range goes up to 45 like everybody's suggesting... Well shit, just take a look at the Tiger Ace. You'd have to be severely handicapped not to rape face with it.

With 45 range, you'll be able to effectively counter one of your hard counters - M10's/M18's. Kiting will no longer be a viable tactic and their effectiveness will go right down the shitter for dealing with Tigers. Not only that, you'll be comfortably outranging any hand-held AT with a large gap to move around in.

It's the equivalent of saying that Pershings can get owned by Marder's so we'll give it 60 range to let it fire back. No. What you do, is realise that units have their counters, and that no unit should ever be truly and utterly effective in a vacuum. Not even the big scary tanks.

Stuh and ostwind are AI tanks, Tiger is a heavy all purpose tank like KT just not as heavy.



m10 and m18 is not a counter to heavy tank, atgs are. 45 range was not present in vcoh and 1st expansion, its one of later inventions of ToV when m18 came to be. M10 had 40 range, also both has speed, use it.

.
As above, m10s were never kiting tanks but to rush in and circle your enemy.



It still has same sight.

45 range is not 60 range.

this is stupid poll imo, they are two diff tanks that fill 2 diff roles :P

too late been many times in the past.
stopping now can be bad.

you know when you start seeing like 9+ panthers in 1 game, they might be too awesome for their own good.  Their ability to solve many problems and take a beating is tiresome.

If p4 and tiger was better you'd see more of them and less panthers.

This shit again..

Tiger is fine, panther maybe a little too good, but tiger doesn't need changing tbh

I posted a pool to see what people like better,not to cry that tiger is UP. I just like panther better,and find it more cost effective,as apparently a lot of people do.


yea,because Tiger ace only difference compared to normal tiger is 45range,has nothing to do with a speed,his abilities(nades and stuff) or his better AT ability than normal tiger.

hmm kinda agree with this. The problem with p4s and tigers is the range and the speed. If like m10s, m18s and atguns can shoot at them while they can do nothing is just dump. So why do i choose a tank that is slow, has not the range to even defend itself against any allied tank (yea p4 cant handle shermans and pershings too) and tiger might also can just beat the sherman (that is rare on field these days). Okay u might say, u dont use the p4 to fight those tank, then i say: but the panther can and fills most of the roles p4 is doing. Okay i lose some ai capability but i still have speed armour firepower and a decent ai at the same time. Same with the tiger. Any tank except the sherman can push it back or u get too much damage while the tiger deals nothing to them coz of lower range.

Panther has always been better than the Tiger. Only now you people start to notice it?

well as an allied player i normally expect the axis players to complain lol

okay in history panther was the best tank in ww2. But the tiger represented in coh has no historical accuracy. Tiger would even beat panther in a 1v1. Only fuel and it beeing slow as hell were the downsides of it.

I am joking,lol
Tiger still had shitty design,vertical armor is no no!

just make tiger be able to bounce more atg shots. tigers are so easy to kill now once you see one you bring on atg's and just laugh at it as it dies...

panther is fine, if they changed it in anyway i would leave, if you did make it shittier at killing inf i would expect to pay 100 less fuel for it.

Konigstiger fixed that, and even the original still had the Allies wetting themseves over it.

yea,but because it had 100mm of steel,if this was sloped,you could make it more lighter and get all benefits of being tons less weight.

Tigers just need to be buffed again by the whole panzer aces buff. I don't know why they took it out because it made the tiger what it should be on a normal basis.

well microed panther with dual t3 doesnt have nearly the ai capability of a tiger, but the amount of extra AT power it has over the tiger is well worth it, while it still sports some good infantry killing power if you micro it well enough

you get panthers + 2 free(4) uses of blitzkrieg over tigers. Whats not to like?!
it's just easier to keep panther alive,and thus,do more dmg with it. I am starting to like them more and more!!!
3x Panther coy is what seems to be the magical number!
(won 4 games,MAYBE lost 1 since I switched to panthers...with Tigers was 50:50,rest of the coy is pretty much same). On a korean hunting streak,with loyal nugnug guarding my back!

Tiger

Tiger suffers from general problems. This is the speed. It is a slow tank in every single area. It is too slow to respond to any form of threat on the other side of the map. In real life Tiger served as a breakthrough tank, In gameplay it serves as a fat P4 with a slightly better armor but for some very odd reason I don't see it. The Tiger also suffers from bad accuracy, its moving accuracy is terrible which is understandable but even when standing still it'll miss quite a lot. Yes its accuracy is good but when it comes on taking out Anti tank guns head on (Slow Speed, flanking 80% impossible) it'll trade off quite a lot of health for the destruction of anti tank gun.

This also comes at a Price of 3 Doctrine specialition points which means you have to skip either Blitzkrieg or German engineering from your Tiger or you can take T1s or T2s. The cost is also massive and God be with you if you get a engine damage on green health. You will, never, get it back to full health. That trollface 1 HP left from fullhealth always strikes in.

In any tank vs tank engagement this fat P4 can trade shots but if you manage to get it from different angle, you can pop shot and retreat. If you got a speedy vehicle you can circle strafe a Tiger. One tetrach is sufficient enough for the task or one M10 or a M18. It resembles a slightly speedier King Tiger in all honesty.


Panther

Speedy vehicle, has the speed to move quickly around the map, turret rotation is fast and possesses superior range and accuracy compared to Tiger while it trades off its splash. It has better armor and better penetration values altogether. Gentlemen, Panther appears to be like the upgraded Tiger, superior in majority of the cases except in anti-infantry. Comes cheaper too and costs no points.

The tiger is the only 'truly' well-rounded tank (King tigers are mainly just for fun). Panthers can snipe inf and crush, but they don't have the killing power that the tigers do vs infantry. The tiger is well-rounded, but it's expensive and slow... which it probably should be. If you want an all-in-one tank that you are willing to protect and invest in, tigers ftw. If you are more interesting in killing enemy tanks with some big tanks of your own, panthers ftw.

Actually,I find KT much better than Tiger. It can soak and bounce so much shit,unlike Tiger.

This is the panther: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fKvsZ_NdWo&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fKvsZ_NdWo&feature=related)

This is the Tiger: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQfd0W7I3vM&feature=fvsr (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQfd0W7I3vM&feature=fvsr)

I am unable to believe hicks that the main role of a Tiger in EIR is AI. Its a next gen tank, a main battle tank. having vcoh stats shouldnt skew your opinion of a uni just because it was pre set to target infantry in vcoh, doesnt mean it can be changed into a better performing panther for AT duties, and less accuracy against infantry

or for its cost and limitated numbers just increase its at capabilities, just throwing it out there

tiger needs some serious love to be even close to the usefulness of the panther

It would be interesting to see him if his main role became AT,which it was irl. Them again,most axis heavy tanks are heavy AT designated,so it would be a little bit of mirror balancing. And then again,you already get stuh for designated AI duty with blitz. hmmm . But unless you would make it better AT than panther,while crippling his AI ability,there still wouldnt be that much point in taking him over panther to fight enemy tanks. Slow speed and turret rotation still make it inferior to fight tanks compared to panther.

Tigers main role is Breakthrough. It is a slow, breakthrough tank, a steel wall that soaks up hits and cracks through defences while supporting infantry. It had indeed a good gun so it could engage multitude of targets. That's what Tiger is. What it is in EIRR? It is a pos that can't perform in breakthrough role without blowing to bits. What does Tiger do 60% of the game?

It sits behind frontlines behind a building waiting for mortar to kill up the anti tank guns.

in real life maybe is....... in coh it's KT

had you bothered to read rest of the post you wouldn't have picked that line only ;D

(http://s16.postimage.org/do664r4dx/panther.png)

now this is why panther speed counts for so much,you can RUN OVER stuff in smoke etc. and not sit useless while you try to move your fat ass around.