I’d add that only the most hardcore German fans play the VK or Maus at this stage of the beta, and dedicated players tend to be good players–ie, they’ll get every erg of efficiency out of their crappy machine. Whereas the IS-4 has a well deserved uber reputation, and players of all calibers are drawn to it.
It has the highest survival rate though.
However, like any stats, these numbers can be misleading and don’t really mean much. Win ratio is not a good number to judge the combat effectiveness by - a team could have 1 IS-7, 2 IS-4, 1 VK45 and 2 IS-3 or something like that, it would win, the VK45 would write down a win for the stats but clearly, its contribution would most likely be minimal or close to it. A better number to compare would be exp/credits made, since these numebrs directly depend on a tanks combat effectiveness. A lonely Maus sitting in defence is not as useful as 3 IS-4’s killing 70% of the enemies.
Although I have to admit that I did see some awesomely played Mauses and VK45’s due to a better “good players ratio” as mentioned by Dave.
In other news, the Ferdi is pretty much the king of the battlefield stat-wise. :)
ShivaX
1883
Thats cause its sitting in a corner somewhere the whole match not doing anything most of the time.
I didn’t mention this earlier, but it’s something I’ve noticed in all kinds of multiplayer games, from Diablo 2 to MMO’s. Average and bad players are drawn to overpowered builds/tanks/classes/whatever in higher percentages than good players. Some of them realize they’re bad and hope to compensate for it (yours truly may well fall into this category), some of them delude themselves into thinking they’re good by playing uber toons, and some of them just want to pwn.
By contrast, when I see an underpowered and generally reviled avatar, I expect it to perform better than its reputation. Those playing builds that are known to be inferior are either looking for a challenge (and therefore pretty much have to be better than average since normal builds don’t challenge them) or they’re very dedicated to the build’s concept and thus are highly motivated to do well with it.
Developers who are trying to balance their games need to take this into account. The stats Overlord is posting are somewhat skewed by the propensity for good players to drive bad vehicles (and vice versa), but I don’t think he realizes it.
I was surprised to see the Panther has a very low win rate. My win rate in the Panther is something like 11% higher than the average. The Panther is generally considered worse than the T44, but I prefer it over the T44. Would I be one of those people dedicated to the Panther’s concept? I was initially drawn to it based on how bad ass they are in Company of Heroes.
The T44 was definitely considered to be the superior vehicle before the warping fix, but that’s no longer the case. The Panther’s rep is rising fast now that hitting things at longer ranges is doable. That makes it hard to evaluate what’s up with your win rate, but yeah, you may well be one of those great players who drives what was once a sub-standard machine.
Well, I played more of the Panther before the warping fix, for what it’s worth, but I never really had much trouble hitting things at range with it then either. Prior to the warp fix and the shell speed reduction, I think I largely had good success because the long 88 may be the fastest projectile in the game. Before the last patch it was practically hitscan.
KT vs IS-3
Honestly, I might give the KT the edge. The 10.5 has a higher rate of fire, the aim time is lower, and it’s more accurate. The IS3 is decent with the third and final cannon but you need to grind to get there. The KT doesn’t have that issue, even the stock 88 will punch through 200mm of armor.
I’ve maxed both, and I agree that it’s close. The KT does have advantages, but so does the IS-3. The IS-3 bounces more shots, has a somewhat smaller profile, maneuvers better, and is faster. While the KT has slightly better guns, the IS-3’s perform well too, and the KT’s stock turret is a joke. Whenever I see a KT without an upgraded turret, that’s my aim point. On the whole, I give a slight edge to the IS-3, but it’s arguable and playstyle may well determine which is “best”.
The deciding factor for me is that the KT is a dead end, since I hate hate hate the VK45 and the Maus.
Yeah - I have a much better win loss ratio (10% between them) with my Valentine than my T44. T44 I drive it like a rental, care if I make a difference or not, charge when I get bored, and basically meh.
But getting any damage in with a Valentine feels an acheivement, so I play it with far more care and attention.
Same with the T34 or M7. Every game with these T5’s I try and make a difference to the outcome of the match.
So I finally got my Tiger and I honestly can’t see what you guys are complaining about. Granted, I’ve spent a lot of time in a Ferdi lately, so anything feels like a racing car now but after reading you guys I was expecting something trully terrible and what I got was a very decent tier 7 tank.
The stock version was meh just like anything else but every upgrade brought some noticable improvement and I really enjoy the fully upgraded Tiger now. What probably also helped though is that my upgrades didn’t take that long - lots of stuff have already been researched on other tanks and I had some surplus of gold and elite exp. I can see how driving a stock Tiger for 30 battles could be less fun. OTOH nothing compares to drving a stock Ferdi. Well, maybe a stock KV, except when it’s in its tier.
The only thing I find strange is that it costs the same to repair a fully destroyed Tiger as a Ferdi - around 10K. Ferdi with its awesome gun is THE main moneymaker for me right now, second only to (maybe) the Hummel (but I don’t enjoy the Hummel’s gameplay that much). Tiger’s long 88 is an ok gun for tier 7 but it doesn’t bring as much money and as a result, moneymaking is much slower with the Tiger.
Dejin
1892
I agree. I’ve been generally happy with my Tiger I. Although I’ve never driven an IS for comparison, so I’m not arguing that the Tiger isn’t inferior to the IS, just that it’s a reasonably enjoyable tank to use. In contrast to a lot of people I’ve had virtually no fires – I think I’ve had three in somewhere around 200 matches. So clearly I’m doing something different from a lot of other Tiger drivers – no idea what it is.
I’ve had 1 fire in about 20 matches (after a direct hit from an arty), certainly not worse than any other tank I’ve driven.
I’ll save comparisons to IS until after the softwipe - I’ve tried to level up a T-28 but it’s just too painful nowadays.
I haven’t had a Tiger yet, but I like my IS a lot. I’m still grinding up to the 80K or whatever it needs to go to the IS-3 but with the middle 122 and most of the other upgrades (sans the last engine I think, or radio, can’t recall right now) it’s a solid, stable performer. Slow rater of fire even with a rammer makes it a bit frustrating but it has good all around performance in general.
On the German side I am still stuck in my 3001 P or whatever it is, one step below the DB which is one step below the Panther. Mostly upgraded, sans the last engine, it’s a decent tank, but not spectacular. My Jagdpanther, though, is pretty fun. I have the first tier of upgrades, and am now working on the long 88. Even with the regular 88 it’s a solid killer and reasonably mobile.
My favorite though is still my Elite T-34/85. Fast, decently powerful, decent protection, it’s simply fun to play. I sold my T-43 about halfway up the grind to the T-44 (it’s a beta, so I don’t care much) because frankly it wasn’t nearly as fun as its lighter cousin.
On the arty side all I have is my, um, Grille. I’m about 20k from the Hummel, which can’t come soon enough. The Grille is pretty abysmal, though I’ve had some good matches with it.
I haven’t played the IS, so while I can’t directly compare, I don’t feel crippled in my maxed Tiger II. I very rarely catch fire, although I do have a wet ammo rack installed.
The Tiger was patched, it’s not quite as vulnerable as it used to be. Overall I actually prefer the Tiger to the IS. It can’t take as much punishment but it can see much further and the cannon has a higher rate of fire and better penetration numbers. Oh, it’s also more accurate too. This falls apart at close range where the IS will just wallop you so bear that in mind.
Yeah, long range shooting in an IS is kinda futile. You can do it, if you hit slow targets in the flank when they cooperate by not moving much, but mostly it’s more in-your-face. Where it does pretty well.
Most of the impressions about the Tiger and the IS are a holdover from before the warp fix, when brawling and very close ranged shooting was the norm. The IS excelled there and the Tiger did not.
Now it’s a very different game, where penetration and accuracy matters, while getting close is usually a bad idea. And it just so happens that while the IS gun packs a whallop, it has poorer penetration, rate of fire and accuracy than the Tiger’s gun. Oh and the shells cost four times as much.
Don’t get me wrong, though, the IS is still an excellent machine, but its disparity with the Tiger is nowhere near as severe as it used to be.
Of course the US T29, with its superior gun and hull down capability, puts both the Tiger and IS to shame. But it’s a very painful grind through the M3 Lee, T1 Heavy and M6 Heavy to get to the T29.
Very true. The IS is a good tank, but it is not markedly inferior, if at all, to a well-equipped Tiger, and at range the guns are definitely in favor of the Germans. If I had to change one thing on the IS it would be getting it a more accurate gun I think. That 122 isn’t as powerful as its size would indicate and, worse, it has a pretty large slop factor when aiming.
ShivaX
1900
Don’t forget it’s magical armor that bounces shells it has no reason bouncing, even to the hull many times.
As far as IS vs Tiger, I’d give the edge to the IS. It can compete at long range, but it also has sloped armor that actually deflects shots, whereas the Tiger is just a big box thats easy to penetrate. Russian guns are just better for the most part. They have comperable penetration and much more damage, but tend to fire a little slower. If you run into something you can’t reliably penetrate your HE actually does decent damage.
I haven’t used the Tiger myself, but I’ve spent plenty of time Platooned with one. Its not a bad tank, but I think the IS has a slight edge. Maybe if they ever fix spotting issues it will be a bit more balanced, but in those cases the Tiger is likely to get spotted itself and penetrated from long range pretty easily.
And the 3001P is a giant pile of shit. It has nothing on my T34/85. The T34/85 can hang with big boys and even solo a Heavy. The 3001P turns and accelerates so slowly that it can’t take a heavy and its guns are pretty much crap as well. It can do okay in a straight line, but even there its not really any better than the T34/85 - which can actually turn if needed.
And you couldn’t pay me to drive around an Ausf B or Maus. If they gave me one for free I wouldn’t drive it. Hell if they gave me 100 gold every time I drove it, I’d be hard pressed to drive one.
