Elefant opinion

[Overlord8K8]

Just played a few games with the 20. Panzerg. using the Elefant tank destroyer (my most awaited tank for this game besides the Jagdtiger) and I have a few thoughts about it.

The current implementation feels like it is a slightly cheaper Kingtiger, I have actually no historical sources for this but in other games the implementation is more understandable (I know you don't like this comparisons...).

1) Reloading speed (the main problem)
The current reloading speed is 5 rounds/min which is the same as the Kingtiger. However, the Elefant has an additional crew member used as a second loader and a more accessible tower.
Therefore, it should have the same reloading speed as the Nashorn or the PAK43/41 (7 rounds/min).

2) Frontal armor
The frontal armor is rated with 190mm which is definitely true for the turret but the lower front hull is thinner (same as the Bef. Tiger (P)?). Basically I would say the overall rating should be 160-170mm.

3) Price
The price of 180 points is ok for the current performance but if the armor rating is lowered it should cost 150-160 points making it a more a tactical unit.

Overall I think it should balanced to be played more like a deadly long range sniper than an undestroyable heavy tank like the Kingtiger or IS-2.

[seashell]

armor is irrelevant when it will die to ob-25 spam anyway

[Japanese Schoolgirl]

I agree, it needs a higher fire rate, less armour and to be cheaper - it's basically to provide a base of fire for an armoured spearhead.

[Sgt. Walker]

Armor of the Elefant is actually too weak, should be 200mm at least (historical perspective) since it uses the Hull of the Tiger P with 200mm frontal Armor at 90° flat and the Casemate ist also 200mm with a slight slope.

The Tiger P has less than 200mm because of the Turret which is around 100mm flat. The Hull however is 200mm on the Command Variant at least, it got reinforced with another 100mm plate compared to the base version.

[Name]

it's an ambushing tank destroyer meant to be placed in medium cover. simple as that. think of a jagdpanther on steroids. using it as a "KT" is the improper use . also when I use the elefant I pick 1 chevron veterancy and up vet it to lvl 3.. it becomes pretty deadly at that point.

[Corsair]

Originally posted by Hauptmann:

it's an ambushing tank destroyer meant to be placed in medium cover. simple as that. think of a jagdpanther on steroids. using it as a "KT" is the improper use . also when I use the elefant I pick 1 chevron veterancy and up vet it to lvl 3.. it becomes pretty deadly at that point.

that's not the point. the point is adjusting the unit's stats accordingly with what it historically was.

[badgerjelly]

Historical accuracy and gameplay are what seems to divide many people about SD2. The game is unique because it straddles both the ‘simulator’ feel of gaming and the rts style honed purely for multiple strategies.

For me it hits the sweet spot well enough.

As for the Elephant ... not really played enough with it (maybe 2 games?) to see how it works.

[DasaKamov]

Originally posted by Corsair:

the point is adjusting the unit's stats accordingly with what it historically was.

The devs aren't opposed to adjusting unit stats based on historical documents, but you actually will need to show them legitimate historical documents that support the changes you want.

[Bastables]

Originally posted by Sgt. Walker:

Armor of the Elefant is actually too weak, should be 200mm at least (historical perspective) since it uses the Hull of the Tiger P with 200mm frontal Armor at 90° flat and the Casemate ist also 200mm with a slight slope.

The Tiger P has less than 200mm because of the Turret which is around 100mm flat. The Hull however is 200mm on the Command Variant at least, it got reinforced with another 100mm plate compared to the base version.

Yeah, the Elefant had 100mm of base armour and had bolted on another 100mm of armour, as they found with the StuG's and PIV bolted armour did not act as equivalent to the total thickness. simply the 100+100 acted less than just a solid 200mm would have for protection. This is why in production PIV went from bolted 8cm, to welded, to single 8cm armour, because the Nazi's found that applique armour was weaker than single thickness.

[nord2hammer]

Originally posted by Bastables:

Yeah, the Elefant had 100mm of base armour and had bolted on another 100mm of armour, as they found with the StuG's and PIV bolted armour did not act as equivalent to the total thickness. simply the 100+100 acted less than just a solid 200mm would have for protection. This is why in production PIV went from bolted 8cm, to welded, to single 8cm armour, because the Nazi's found that applique armour was weaker than single thickness.

They found it simpler for production to go with a single solid pc of armor rather than the expedient of a bolted on pc of applique armor.
They also found the value of spaced armor when using applique armor.

Also applique armor is very much in use with today's modern militaries.

Back to the game-

The Sdkfz 184 'Elefant':
Superstructure front armor: 200 mm at a 25 ° slope. - This was the largest surface area & likest to be hit. And it was single,solid pc of armor.

It's:
Hull Front Upper Plate Armor:100 + 100 mm at 12 ° - A smaller surface area than the front of the superstructure.

190 mm is the Dev's choice for game play balance .

[Bastables]

Originally posted by nord2hammer:

Originally posted by Bastables:

Yeah, the Elefant had 100mm of base armour and had bolted on another 100mm of armour, as they found with the StuG's and PIV bolted armour did not act as equivalent to the total thickness. simply the 100+100 acted less than just a solid 200mm would have for protection. This is why in production PIV went from bolted 8cm, to welded, to single 8cm armour, because the Nazi's found that applique armour was weaker than single thickness.

They found it simpler for production to go with a single solid pc of armor rather than the expedient of a bolted on pc of applique armor.
They also found the value of spaced armor when using applique armor.

Also applique armor is very much in use with today's modern militaries.

Back to the game-

The Sdkfz 184 'Elefant':
Superstructure front armor: 200 mm at a 25 ° slope. - This was the largest surface area & likest to be hit. And it was single,solid pc of armor.

It's:
Hull Front Upper Plate Armor:100 + 100 mm at 12 ° - A smaller surface area than the front of the superstructure.

190 mm is the Dev's choice for game play balance .

You’re full of ♥♥♥♥.
layered armour resists penetration less than a single plate of equal thickness vs solid shell or shot.

Any of the three methods described in Bird & Livingston (2001, pp 38-39) of calculating the “effective” thickness of layered armour always has the plate effective thickness act as less than a single plate.

US navy Statistical analysis
US navy rule of thumb
Nathan Okun


"D. Laminated Plate Formulae.
Laminated plates are always parallel, which simplifies things. Also, they are tightly
bound together so that to reach the later plates you have to punch through the earlier
plates. This supports the earlier plates where they try to push material backward to get
out of the projectile's path, since the later plates' material prevents that from moving back
easily, if at all. Thus, the earlier plates end up resisting the projectile penetration simply
due to the fact that their material that would usually be pushed out of the way is now
partially trapped unless it wedges itself into the cracks between the plates or is physically
pushed through the later plates by the force of the projectile's nose. Thus, resistance is
greater than completely spaced plates, but less than a single solid plate, assuming, as we
did above, that the DeMarre Formula is good enough for a rough average accounting for
the resistance of the thick plate and for the resistance of each thinner plate, if it were
spaced. "
(2008 Okun http://www.navweaps.com/index_nathan/Multi-plate_discussion.pdf)

[Billaud-Varennes]

Honestly it doesnt matter if you change up ROF/armour because mobility is the biggest issue by a long shot. Elephants are just too damn slow. Kingtigers are already arty fodder but at least you can kind of keep them alive if you make use of their relatively decent mobility. With elephants your success/failure basically is dependant on the amount of artillery in the enemy team. Just for that single fact I think its price should be decreased to 160 points.

[Pete]

Originally posted by 76561198051378461:

2) Frontal armor
The frontal armor is rated with 190mm which is definitely true for the turret but the lower front hull is thinner

The frontal armor is 200mm. It rather should be buffed.

[Kyso4ek]

It has 190 armor because it should be destroyed by 122 mm and long 88 mm weapons (honetly 152 mm as well but oh well).

It did not have homogenous 200 mm and it did not have 100+100 everywhere and it had weak spots like the lower transmission. Also it should be taken out by weapons with high muzzle energy regardless of penetration especially after multiple hits.

Panther in game also has only 130 mm armor when it had like 190 mm upper hull armor effective. It cant have 190 mm armor value in game because it will not be destroyed by 85 mm and 76m american guns but in fact it should be because the turret allows that.

[Punisher_Reb]

Panthers are overpriced and anemic.

[DasaKamov]

Originally posted by Punisher_Reb:

Panthers are overpriced and anemic.

They're some of the best long-range "sniper" tanks in the game. Use them as a tank destroyer - that can actually take return fire - and they'll prove their worth many times over.