tiger ii Panzerbefehlswagen Tiger Ausf. B

[CaID 8,996]

To be honest, the firepower is not reduced by the simple reduction of ammo, and in-game, no one smarth carry the full ammo load. 30-35 shells is enought to last a whole game with this tank. In fact the turret have no ammo would improve his in-game suvivability a bit, but on the down side it will reduce the reload time. 

 

I got to say no on this one as it bring little unique feature and design, and with all the tiger II we have, we do not really need this one i believe

[Chomusuke1 1,223]

On ‎14‎/‎10‎/‎2020 at 17:09, CaID said:

bring little unique feature and design

It would bring premium rewards, coax MG 42, rangefinder, and HL 234 since it is a late chassis. Unique enough for me

 

Edited October 16, 2020 by Chomusuke1

[GeneralArmchair 675]

On 02/08/2020 at 15:44, NoodleCup31 said:

HELL YEA SIGN ME UP

 

 

This.   Where do I give gaijin my money for a KT whose ready rack is replaced by a radio?

[_Vidarr_ 21]

While the idea of a Pz.Bef.Wg Tiger Ausf. B with the HL 234, rangefinder, and/or other modifications would be an interesting addition, I don't believe it would be feasible with the current state of War Thunder as no such vehicle was produced.

 

Given Gaijin's decision to remove the Tiger 10,5cm from the regular tree, I am doubtful that they would elect to introduce a new 'prototype/paper' vehicle featuring additions such as the HL 234, rangefinder, coaxial MG-42, bow StG 44, and other features that never ended up being made/put into production.
 

With that said, unless additional functionality can be made for 'command vehicles,' I suspect that there would need to be some form of incentive (beyond the removal of the turret ammo rack weakspot) to encourage players to purchase this premium tank. Given that the Sla.16 tank has the added bonus of additional "armor" in the form of track links in combination with the Sla.16 motor, it might make sense for an alternative premium to focus exclusively on the mobility. I will continue on the matter of motors below.

 

First, however, here are some "cosmetic" changes that existed either on production vehicles or in some other manufactured form.

 

The single-link tracks were introduced late in the war and can be seen, in limited quantity, on tanks such as those from s.Pz.Abt.506. They are accurately modeled on the "Tiger II 10,5cm" in War Thunder, but only on the turret. The animated track texture LOD uses the same texture as the regular tech tree tiger, which does not match those modeled on the 'late production' turret.

 

Alongside the change in track links, production changes to the turret included features that are seen in-game on the Tiger 10,5cm. On this turret, the AA machinegun ring mount is replaced with a simple post welded to a periscope on the cupola. The gunner's sight has also received a rain shroud.

One anomaly was an experimental modification to protect the air intake vents from potential damage via application of solid plates. This wasn't a factory production change, but could be implemented for cosmetic purposes.

 

This late-production Tiger shows use of the single-link tracks as well as new mudguards with reinforced ribbing.

 

 

At any rate, these would likely only be cosmetic changes in-game that, while perhaps appreciated by players, would likely not be worth the effort unless an overhaul of the existing models is in order for the future.

 

Regarding motors...

 

One issue is that the motors currently in the game do not have the correct respective performance figures.

 

The HL 230, to start, was governed to 2500rpm on the Tiger II. While I would be fine with the governor being "removed by the crew," the engine still produced 700 PS, which equates to ~690 horsepower. While this may be nitpicky, it's necessary to mention when discussing alternative engines.

Here is an excerpt detailing four proposed motors for replacement of the HL 230 in the Tiger II. Please pardon the page cutoff. The first passage is titled "a. Wassergekuehlter Maybach-Otto-Motor HL 234" which refers to the fact that the HL 234 was a water-cooled motor. The "Luftgekuehlter" motors for passages b and c are air-cooled diesel motors. Note that the projected 900 horsepower figure for the HL 234, if I recall correctly, would be governed down to 800-850 horsepower in practice Likewise, the Sla. 16, which has a figure of 750 horsepower in the game, would have had less power in reality when fitted with the necessary cooling equipment.

 

 

So where does this leave Pz.Bef.Wg Tiger Ausf. B?

In my opinion, this should be represented by a mid/late-production vehicle akin to the current Tech tree vehicle.

I would prefer to see changes made to the Sla.16 tank to make it more authentic to it's "late war prototype" status rather than as a vehicle produced prior to October 1944 (with zimmerit and all). These all boil down to cosmetic choices that Gaijin would make, but I do think that suggestions may be helpful for such decisions down the line.

 

My personal opinion:
-Introduce the Pz.Bef.Wg Tiger Ausf. B in the form of a vehicle that existed and saw service. Given that most photographs of these tanks indicate presence of zimmerit, the Pz.Bef.Wg Tiger Ausf. B should be portrayed in the form of a vehicle produced no later than mid-September, 1944. In terms of gameplay, it should be similar in performance to the tech tree Tiger II (H) with the exception of the removed turret ammunition and, perhaps, added "radio" functionality if that ever is implemented.

 

-Rework the Tiger II (H) Sla.16. Given the promising nature of the motors, replace the Sla.16 with the more powerful Mayback HL 234 or Deutz V-8 air-cooled Diesel. Adjust the appearance of the vehicle by removing the zimmerit and adding/replacing elements such as the telescopic sight rain guard, track links, corresponding late turret modifications, engine deck covers, etc. to give the appearance of a "mid-1945 production" tank.

 

Alternatively, rework the Tiger II (H) Sla.16 and Tiger 10,5cm both to more authentic representations of each vehicle. As before, replace the Sla.16 with either the HL 234 or the Deutz V-8. However, extensive changes to the turret should be made to enhance performance.

 

This is a drawing from October 1944 for plans to mount the S.Z.F. 3 stabilized periscopic gun sight.

and here is a brief excerpt discussing development of said sight. To clarify, this does not function like most "stabilizers" depicted in War Thunder do. The gun itself is not stabilized, only the view of the gunner to allow for observation on the move. However, there was stabilization that would allow the gun to fire when it lined up in motion with the periscopic sight. Essentially, the target would be designated via the periscope, then, while the vehicle was in motion, the gun would fire once the elevation lined up with the preset gyrostabilized position of the sight. In addition, the normal telescopic sight could still be used.

Regarding the rangefinder (which can be seen in game on the Tiger 10,5cm). There was a reduction in gun depression from -8 to -6 degrees when mounting this in tandem with a gun fume extractor, but as the latter would have no function in War Thunder (and the range finder could be mounted by itself without issue), it can be excluded. There were intentions to adjust the fume extractor later in production to regain the -8 degrees gun depression if need be. Both of these modifications have a substantial impact on the performance and capabilities of the tank. Combined with the use of the HL 234 or Deutz V8, this may be sufficient to justify an increase in BR to help lessen the overcrowding at 6.7. This is purely speculative, but it would be something to consider.

 

Additional changes were indeed to include the use of MG 42 as the coaxial machinegun and the replacement of the bow-mounted MG 34 with a StG 44. These could be implemented for the '1945' tanks as well.

 

To summarize (TL;DR):

Tiger II (H): remain unchanged
Pz.Bef.Wg Tiger Ausf. B: 1944 production vehicle as it existed during the war.

Tiger II (H) Sla.16:

A) Cosmetic overhaul with real-life modifications: including single-link tracks, gun sight rain shroud, armor plating over engine intakes, and late-style turret with mounts for new track links.

or

B) Complete overhaul with inclusion of S.Z.F. 3 periscopic gyrostabilized gun sight, Em. 1.6m R (Pz) stereoscopic rangefinder, coaxial MG 42, bow-mounted StG 44, and either the HL 234 or Deutz V8 engine (800-900 horsepower). (possible BR increase)

Tiger II (H) 10,5cm KwK:

A) Remain unchanged

or

B) Overhaul with inclusion of S.Z.F. 3 and cosmetic adjustments for inclusion of single-link tracks, gun sight rain shroud, MG 42 + StG 44, etc. Revision of output for HL 234 if necessary. (possible BR increase).

 

Edited October 18, 2020 by _Herr_

[_Vidarr_ 21]

On 14/10/2020 at 16:09, CaID said:

To be honest, the firepower is not reduced by the simple reduction of ammo, and in-game, no one smarth carry the full ammo load. 30-35 shells is enought to last a whole game with this tank. In fact the turret have no ammo would improve his in-game suvivability a bit, but on the down side it will reduce the reload time. 

 

I got to say no on this one as it bring little unique feature and design, and with all the tiger II we have, we do not really need this one i believe

 

Regarding this, indeed the ammo count would likely have no practical impact in gameplay.

 

However, the loading speed/survivability trade-off alone would be a distinction not shared with existing Pz.Bef.Wg tanks that are already in the game (for example, Pz.Bef.Wg IV Ausf. J). This change would be a significant alteration in functionality not present with contemporary premiums.

 

Personally, I would prefer to see the Sla.16 adjusted to be more appropriate and authentic from a historical context, even if just visually. However, there are options (options that aren't merely "paper," but saw testing and were close to implementation) that could be used to provide more variation among the Tiger IIs currently in-game both in terms of cosmetics and gameplay mechanics. The stabilized gun sight, for example, could make for an interesting new feature not only for Tiger II but also on tanks like Panther Ausf. F that otherwise are generally ignored by players.

 

For all I know, Gaijin might even take this idea of reworking the Sla.16 and turn it into an entirely new premium incorporating these concepts. If they were to do so, I imagine it would sell extremely well... However, given the direction the game has been headed, I am not sure if such an option would be considered.

illustration of turret fitted with the S.Z.F 3 and Em. 1.6m R (Pz)

 

At any rate, I believe that the Pz.Bef.Wg Tiger Ausf. B would be a good addition to the tree if for no other reason than "why not?". I maintain that it would best serve as a GE premium to offer an alternative to the Sla.16, but it is entirely up to the development team what sort of changes or additions might be made.

 

I am, of course, making quite a number of suggestions- what sticks or doesn't is up to Gaijin, but I have to throw said suggestions to have any hope of any sticking

[Chomusuke1 1,223]

Bump...Some drawings of changes on the Tiger II:

 

 

 

 

 

[Borotovas 4,500]

+1