The Tiger – An endangered species…

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[AmPM]

KT already fights m18s who stay at a distance, as long as it has line of sight.

Discussing Tiger/Pershing to 45.

[Hicks58]

Excepting ATGs, 45 range would allow it to fight back vs TDs. It would also make the Pershing much better vs a Panther. No reason that it would cause issues other than needing to balance costs.

Panther and Pershing are already pretty well balanced tbh.

Close range, Pershing will usually win outright. Long range, Panther will usually win outright.

[Tymathee]

Excepting ATGs, 45 range would allow it to fight back vs TDs. It would also make the Pershing much better vs a Panther. No reason that it would cause issues other than needing to balance costs.

so how would my pershing fight back against gwagons, 50mm ht's and marders with my pershing? I say give it 50 range.

[AmPM]

Those are easily killed ATG's Tym.

That is their role in the mod. And since you are against making the PaK36 a decent ATG they are the only ones that PE gets.

Would be like saying you need 55 Range Panther to fight Firefly.

Give STuG 45 range and see how your Pershing likes it.

[Tymathee]

Those are easily killed ATG's Tym.

That is their role in the mod. And since you are against making the PaK36 a decent ATG they are the only ones that PE gets.

Would be like saying you need 55 Range Panther to fight Firefly.

Give STuG 45 range and see how your Pershing likes it.

and m10s and m18 are easily killed tank destroyers, do you see the invalidity of your argument? We're butting heads here, clearly the allies have strong counters against tigers and axis strong counters against pershings, so to buff either unit to make up for the strength of those counters makes no sense.

oh btw, you know what atgs allies and axis gets? The ATG's....pak38, 57mm, 6pdr, 17pdr, pak40 etc. and they're not nearly as mobile as the 50mm, marder and gwagon.

marders, gwagons and 50mm can respond quicker than atgs, dont die to small arms and can't be flanked by tanks to die quickly.

[Demon767]

Yeah, and they can fail in their role as ATG as having just a single allied ATG negates marders and gwagons. Why did you bring up this fail comparison -.-

[AmPM]

Yeah, and they can fail in their role as ATG as having just a single allied ATG negates marders and gwagons. Why did you bring up this fail comparison -.-

Because Tim thinks they are TDs, not ATGs on tracks that can't be recrewed....

[Demon767]

I offer an eye for an eye resolution. Ban tym from balance and ban me. makes me sick trying to comprehend his logic.

Nothing is going to be tested on the axis side with him cock blocking every axis thread. I mean even the pak 36 thread. He wants it deleted so there is one less weapon he has to face when he plays.

[ALLiDOisWIN]

Tbh... i didnt read this forum at all... but whats wrong with tiger? I mean its great but not cost effective

[AmPM]

Tbh... i didnt read this forum at all... but whats wrong with tiger? I mean its great but not cost effective

Hint: I bolded it for you

[ALLiDOisWIN]

Well.... I mean before the last patch when i would use it i had 2 repairs and 2 tigers. I had mobile repairs and Panzer aces. I would have 60 kills on the first tiger. I would use panzer faust spam. Also this was in 3v3s

[ALLiDOisWIN]

But also it took me 30 mins to do that so i couldnt call out 2nd tiger and do much with it

[AmPM]

Who was it against? The most I've racked onto a Tiger was about 110 kills, but it was against some random noobs. Against good players, it can be shut down pretty easy.

[Demon767]

It's because you can have less pop tank unit, say a P4, and support the p4, and be more effective both cost and quantity of how many more units you can get then you can get for just 1 tiger.

It could be just the meta game though, but im inclined to think its not.

[ALLiDOisWIN]

It's because you can have less pop tank unit, say a P4, and support the p4, and be more effective both cost and quantity of how many more units you can get then you can get for just 1 tiger.

It could be just the meta game though, but im inclined to think its not.

 Rather have 5 p4s then 2 tigers...

[Demon767]

I would to, you can have a many more efficient strategies, and flexible at that, with 5 p4s as a rough example.

The only reason why i suggested a range increase is because its simple, you dont need any complicated buffs going along with it because it'll stuff go with the heat rounds and panzer aces. And i also remember... that we werent going to give range buffs again to units, im very well aware of that period of eirr history. I just wanted to put that info out there that the slow moving under performing expensive unit, a range increase wouldnt be that scary.

But thanks to idiots, people start bitching about other units.

[Shabtajus]

But thanks to idiots, people start bitching about other units.

looled 

[Demon767]

oh you lol 

[Shabtajus]

demon.. wtf dude? those oh u becoming very suspicious -.-

talk to smokaz if u need homo internet friend

[3rdCondor]

Tiger doesn't need a buff at all, lol. I just needs to not be treated like a kamikaze fighter.