Unrealistic game Tiger 1 vs churchill

[Marc]

This game is supposed to be realistic but the tiger 1 we were just driving got done by a churchill from the front which in realistic terms is impossible tiger 1 can only be killed from the rear and if you don't believe me go look up the story of the solo tiger 1 in ww2 that killed 50 T34's and survived its last crew member died in 1995 if that helps.

[Marc]

I would also like to point out that you cannot have low detail players and high detail players playing together because the low detail player is a cheat as they have all the trees an bushes turned off.

I just played Jagpanther and the enemy tank killed it before i had even emerged from the bushes.

This is the same problem as they have in warthunder you cant play it because of low detail cheats.

[Marc]

The only way they can fix this game is to have one detail level in the game that cant be altered or tuned off.

[Marc]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMDWWFKQgLQ

[Marc]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raAx57MHH7k

[Marc]

Tiger tank hit 252 times with all sorts of rounds and portrayed in this game hit once DEAD!

[Andy]

Tiger would be easily killed by a British 6lb gun from the side aswell as rear. And, from close range, the front aswell.
Especially, as we're talking late war and discarding sabot rounds were becoming available for the 6lb gun at this time.
It may be smaller caliber, but it was shifting. So, comparisons to T-34s with thier 76mm isn't accurate to what we're seeing. The tigers never managed the kill ratios on the western front that they managed on the eastern front either.

Tigers frontal armour was 100mm, (120 for mantlet)
Between 60 & 80mm on the side.

6lb pentration figures.

100 m (110 yd) - 500 m (550 yd)

AP 135mm - 112mm

APCBC 115mm - 103mm

APDS 177mm - 160mm



With Churchill tanks, the British kept 1 in 4 of them with a 6lb gun due to superior armour penetration over the 75mm.


Actual Russian firing test data vs Tiger with many different guns. Including 57mm from western allies.
http://community.battlefront.com/topic/39030-russian-firing-tests-results-against-tiger/

original material
https://www.fronta.cz/dokument/testy-nemeckych-tanku-tiger

From wiki

6-pounder gunfire accounted for the first Tigers disabled in North Africa; two Tigers being knocked out by towed 6 pounder AT guns, while the 48th Royal Tank Regiment knocked out the first Tigers by the Western Allies in tank vs. tank action with their Churchill tanks, destroying two Tiger I (the same unit also knocked out the first Panther tanks by the Western Allies in May 1944 in Italy)

[Marc]

So how do you explain the field full of 6+ dead superior churchil's after a confrontation in ww2 with three jagpanthers.

[nolaJeff]

Great story but the tank actually only took out 22 T-34s. And certainly the T-34's 76.2mm gun is a lot weaker than the British 6lb. As Andy generously provided above, all 3 rounds of the 6lb could penetrate a Tiger's frontal armor. However, the T-34's F-34 cannon could only penetrate 92mm at 90 degrees. That's barely enough to penetrate the side of the Tiger.

[Trem]

Marc eredeti hozzászólása:

So how do you explain the field full of 6+ dead superior churchil's after a confrontation in ww2 with three jagpanthers.

Jagdpanthers are not Tiger I's, not at all. Sloped, heavier armour for starters.

nolaJeff eredeti hozzászólása:

Great story but the tank actually only took out 22 T-34s. And certainly the T-34's 76.2mm gun is a lot weaker than the British 6lb. As Andy generously provided above, all 3 rounds of the 6lb could penetrate a Tiger's frontal armor. However, the T-34's F-34 cannon could only penetrate 92mm at 90 degrees. That's barely enough to penetrate the side of the Tiger.

Penetration that is only about the same as the Armour itself won't be able to penetrate. It would require a perfect 90 degree angle shot and that ain't likely to happen. Subtle angle differences from facing and the height difference between the vehicles would rule it out.
Even the AP shell at 135mm has a quite low chance to go through that front armour. It exists but it would actually have to be pretty perfect.

The APDS would be reliable against a Tiger up to 500m, probably up to nearly 1000m, but beyond that would not. So it's probable a Churchill firing only the APDS rounds had a chance to tackle the Tiger in moderately short ranges (for a tank) of <1000m.

The other two rounds - the APCBC would basically never do it, and the AP only at under 100m with a very straight shot.

[Marc]

The churchils got owned and never even got a shot off.

[nolaJeff]

Marc eredeti hozzászólása:

So how do you explain the field full of 6+ dead superior churchil's after a confrontation in ww2 with three jagpanthers.

Marc, a Jagdpanther has extremely sloped armor while the Tiger's armor is nearly vertical. It also had a better gun. The Churchill's 75mm is no contest to the Jagdpanther's armor.

You must also realize that in real life the Churchill did not field the 6lb gun, so the historical account that you're referencing is where the Churchills had 75mm guns which were not as powerful as the 6lb for armor penetration.

[nolaJeff]

Link to the Jagdpanther's gun: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8.8_cm_Pak_43

[nolaJeff]

Marc eredeti hozzászólása:

The churchils got owned and never even got a shot off.

And what do you expect when going up against a gun that can penetrate over 200mm of armor?

[Andy]

Marc eredeti hozzászólása:

So how do you explain the field full of 6+ dead superior churchil's after a confrontation in ww2 with three jagpanthers.

I didn't say Churchill tanks were superior.... But that doesn't mean, they 'couldn't' do it.
And, every tactical situation being different. Sees different outcomes each time.
And, if your referring to the incident in Normandy involving the Scots Guards. The Jagdpanthers were left with one on fire and another captured in tact.
And, they again had weak sides.

Often battles can be swung by things like better reconnaissance, being in good ambush points. Pointing out that Jagdpanthers did well in a single battle. Mabee even 2 or 3. Doesn't mean in every battle they fought against Churchills they came out on top. And, just what context that brings to a 6lb gun being able to penetrate a Tiger 1, i'm not quite sure. But what you described in the OP, given the close distances generally seen in game. Could well be accurate.

nolaJeff eredeti hozzászólása:

Marc eredeti hozzászólása:

So how do you explain the field full of 6+ dead superior churchil's after a confrontation in ww2 with three jagpanthers.

Marc, a Jagdpanther has extremely sloped armor while the Tiger's armor is nearly vertical. It also had a better gun. The Churchill's 75mm is no contest to the Jagdpanther's armor.

You must also realize that in real life the Churchill did not field the 6lb gun, so the historical account that you're referencing is where the Churchills had 75mm guns which were not as powerful as the 6lb for armor penetration.

1 in 4 Churchills retained the 6lb gun due to it's better AP.

Similar to Shermans having 1 Firefly in every troop. Churchills had a 6lb gun tank in every troop. (exception of these 'specials from 79th armoured)

[Marc]

Simple facts are this game is not realistic in any sense i shot twice into the churchill not killing it. It fired once and killed me. Plus I'm getting killed before i even exit the bushes by players using low detail.