Tiger range

[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

[Mysthalin]

Firefly still would outrange it with 55 range,  but it's just silly that m10 and m18 outrange tiger.
When a tank that costs 3 times less , you can buy as much as you want of them and can hit tiger constantly without taking a hit it's not working as intended.
With the accel and speed i can put a lockdown on any Tiger with m10 in that 5 range and be hitting him constantly.

Except it is. The M10 will die to 3 shots from the tiger, the Tiger requires at the very least 10 before it will succumb to the M10 (assuming every hit penetrates, which it won't).

If the tiger is getting raped by the M10 at long range - it's the tiger user's fault for not using a single pak to support the tiger, and he deserves to lose it to the M10.

[Tymathee]

some of you are basing the tigers effectiveness on your play style. Some people are great with Tigers, I've seen a Tiger in a certain players hands with minimal support absolutely wreck a game and then i've seen a tiger in someone else's hands look totally lost. I know me myself am marginal at best, i'm just not a tank guy but that doesn't mean i'm going to call for pershing, sherman, tiger, etc buffs just cuz i can't play with it.

A tiger with 45 range would break the game, not because of tanks but because of the AI. Being able to fire 10 units out of most units sight range would be a game breaker and Tigers would kite all day against most targets. m10s and m18s would lost most their effectiveness because they wouldn't be able to get a first shot, shermans would not only be useless as they are but completely useless because they couldn't be a damage soaker.

does anyone remember improved barrells and how ridiculously stupid it was to face p4's and tigers back then? just that +5 range made them OP. Same with the +5 on SE for the IST. Give +5 range on shermans and watch how many shermans you start to see on the field, same with pershing. It's just not releasable.

[smurfORnot]

why is P4 with 45range so OP while hetzer with 50 is not?

[nugnugx]

A tiger with 45 range would break the game, not because of tanks but because of the AI. Being able to fire 10 units out of most units sight range would be a game breaker and Tigers would kite all day against most targets.

5 units not 10 ,   KT has 45 and you don't see it kiting inf all time


 

m10s and m18s would lost most their effectiveness because they wouldn't be able to get a first shot,

lol their effectivness is not on first shot.  It's either them kiting tiger or getting close and circling.
It's the tiger who needs first shot vs them.

shermans would not only be useless as they are but completely useless because they couldn't be a damage soaker.

hetzer with 50 range,  marder , 50 mm ht  , jagtiger with 45 , KT with 45 , panther with 47,  and yet people still use shermans.


As you can see Tym all most tanks have been brought to 45 standard atleast.

Back in pre-OF m10 had 40 range same as Tiger.

[Smokaz]

Dont use tigers vs tanks unless you have no choice!

/thread

[LeoPhone]

the reason why medium tanks, tiger & pershing have 40 range is because they are AI.
infantry has 35 range.

The reason why tank destroyers have 45+ range is because they are AT.
tanks have 40 range.

They are designed to fight a certain type of unit. the extra range is part of that design.
KT is shit against infantry and really slow, thus the 45 range.


Now if a moderator could lock this topic & ban nug if he makes another balance topic this month. thank you.

[nugnugx]

the reason why medium tanks, tiger & pershing have 40 range is because they are AI.
infantry has 35 range.

That's no excuse, GMC and stummel are AI and they have 50 range. By your logic how OP is that ?

[LeoPhone]

shut the fuck up nug

[nugnugx]

shut the fuck up nug

Policy violation nr 3  and 5

3. Nerdrage

Some users love to base their arguments only on stats and throw "counter-counters" to the previous arguments, Nerdrage has only caused havoc among the threads in the Balance Forum and will be closely moderated to not allow threads go beyond 5+ pages or more just because 2 users can't agree they are just talking about probabilities.

5. Politeness

This is a very simple rule, if you can't be polite or keep a neutral position with everybody in this forum then we don't need you, we will not waste our time with you, we have lost enough good players thanks to this.

[deadbolt]

shut the fuck up nug

oh snap  

[Demon767]

shut the fuck up nug

+1

[Mysthalin]

That's no excuse, GMC and stummel are AI and they have 50 range. By your logic how OP is that ?

GMC and Stummel lack three very important things that the Sherman and P4 possess (and, by extension - so does the Tiger).

I'll let you figure that out yourself.

[Mister Schmidt]

This thread is funny

[deadbolt]

lol last 2 people to reply in this thread before you have retired now

[DarkSoldierX]

Somebody call misty and tell him nubnub got banned. He might comeback.

[zaclee]

Yep.

Heavy tanks should have longer range than  medium and light tanks so they can defend themselves because they don't have the speed nor the range currently.

Mediums and light got the advantage of speed and can circle strafe them.  I would even drop the range of m18 and m10 to 40.  Their speed and pen is enough to get close and circle strafe. No need for them to out snipe a heavy tank.

SO true! German tanks had better optic so they had better range!

[Hicks58]

Somebody lock this thread before history repeats itself...

Please?

[Mysthalin]

Somebody call misty and tell him nubnub got banned. He might comeback.

No, uni grades actually count towards my degree this year, and I have a job. No time.

[Tymathee]

die thread die.

[AmPM]

Just used Tiger, it's ok, AI still sucks balls for it though. Seems to have gotten worse since that last Relic patch.