How Bad Was The Tiger?

[@Spookston]

I've been asked about this a few times, so I'll clarify. The concept of a breakthrough tank existed long before the invasion of France, I meant that the Tiger as we know it did not take shape until afterwards, wherein the requirements of the program shifted drastically. My writing style can be very blunt so sometimes fine details like that don't get through.

[@aqui1ifer]

I’d argue it’s still worth mentioning; while requirements & features certainly got hectic toward the end of the program, Tiger 1 is still very much a product of that program. It’s design, capabilities, & EARLY use was indicative of the concept & the program’s end goal.

[@mr.astronuts3825]

Your writing style being blunt is a skill issue on your part

[@eagleone5456]

@@mr.astronuts3825 oh great... an expert.

[@Davi-yq4yv]

6.7 ALL BATTLE. Waffenträger is getting annoying, the game doesn't let me get into long range battles, and when I hit the target, there's no penetration until Tiger II H gets the kill. But that's not the problem. For some reason the team is making good progress, winning the match most of the time, which is generally bad because of the tank's mobility, not counting the endless times I get killed by P47s and AD4s.

[@jacobthibodaux1383]

Do you think for naval they should put the battleships into their own line ... Destroyers can have their own line same with heavy and light crusiers but they can put those two together or just fix the maps and get rid of conquest and encounter

[@aligohar2957]

“Daring today aren’t we?” lol

[@kinderfett5259]

XD

[@IvanTre]

equivalent of coming into the monkey enclosure handing out bananas laced with pcp. Doing a little trolling, he is.

[@nitsu2947]

i can already smell them those wehraboos

[@desperatepsycho]

@@nitsu2947 it smells like white monster and diesel

[@jerrymartin7019]

Imagine building a tank prototype so complex that even ww2 germany tells you to chill lmao

[@stefanwosinsky1935]

Well, if you or i had proposed something like this, even the mustache man would have said no, but ferdinand and he were personal friends. And this friendship eventually helped them lose the war, as valuable resources were allocated to projects like the maus and E-100. But yeah, imagine....

[@nahuelleandroarroyo]

@Jack the Gestapo electric transmission, long story short it works but it doesnt justify the extra weight and space

[@youraveragescotsman7119]

@Jack the Gestapo No, no. It just demonstrated the built-in Easy Bake Oven that the Tiger P had.

[@CLK944]

@@youraveragescotsman7119 if the british had to have a boiling kettle for their tea then the germans had to have an oven for their good ole pretzels!

[@jsn1252]

@@stefanwosinsky1935 No. The resource expenditure on those prototypes was so minuscule relative to the German war effort that it had no impact on the outcome of the war. Germany lost because they were buried under the ludicrous industrial might of the United States. Not only were they able simultaneously supply their own war efforts across two oceans, they were also supplying allies with vital war material. For example, the US seems to have provided the soviets the additives for making aviation fuel in their entirety, meaning the Soviets would have stopped having an air force altogether without american industrial might.

[@CetoFreakingKaiba]

I was reading a book about the Tiger I and, if I remember correctly, it was supposed to be one tiger for every bunch of panzer in an assault, doing the heavy lifting, breaking the enemy line and so on. After the assault had succeeded, the remaining tanks could carry one with the rest of the battle, while the tiger could stay behind and be maintained and repaired. On that regard you can understand that it was a pretty ok concept for the purpose it was supposed to be used.

[@Lehr-km5be]

Well that is true, but the concept is often far from reality - and that is exactly what happened when it comes to Tiger. We should remember, that Tiger started as a 30-tonne design, while it ended up weighting 54 or 57 depending on version - thats almost twice an increase. All that came without a required amount of changes for the suspension and engine. Sure, maybe the Tigers would have time to be repaired after the battle, but first they have to get to the battlefield and maneuver on it - and due to Tiger's issues even that was a problem. The nature of a lot of Panther or Tiger tank failures really made it impossible to repair them even in workshops close to the frontline in battlefield conditions. Such repairs had to be done in specialized places, far away from the front and took days to be done - for example, to remove the transmission and replace it in the Panther, it was a necessity to remove the turret - and that could only be done with a crane, and took around 2 to 3 days to complete (train transport counted in). Meanwhile, for example in a Sherman tank (which had tendency to soak up shrapnel from tank shells with it's transmission, which saved a lot of crews) replacing it could be done by it's crew with no specialized tools and was a matter of hours. Tiger begun it's development in 1939, but at the time it entered production (first models and prototypes already used in 1942, but mass production in 1943) the overall strategic position of Germany has already changed - it was no longer in attack, but rather defending it's gains. That kinda worked in Tiger's favor (because it did not have to move this much) but considering it's complexity and extremely high initial production cost (even after it's cost went down, you could still build 2 Panthers or 4 StuGs for the cost of one Tiger) and lack of spare parts it was really not the greatest choice for the germans in the defensive war and the war of exhaustion they found themselves in. So sure, some part of the idea which you described sounds reasonable, but seeing what Tiger eventually became I really do not think that such thinking is justified.

[@nahuelleandroarroyo]

Thats still pretty bad doctrine, it assumes the Tiger is like a deployable bridge, you use it once and its stays there for a whileu

[@fix0the0spade]

The Allies tried a similar doctrine to that with tank destroyers. The idea was to have heavier vehicles (Cromwells, Shermans etc) push the centre of an advance whilst tank destroyers (Hellcats) rushed the flanks. It didn't work for much the same reason using a Tiger as a centrepiece didn't. It's impossible to dictate when and where you engage the enemy with the level of precision those tactics need. Even if you could there's nothing to stop the enemy counter attacking your weaker forces then counter-flanking. Which was the fate of many Tigers in the end, encircled, overrun and abandoned..

[@simethigsomethingidfk]

Its alright for what it was designed for. but what it was designed for is completely stupid. so sorta by proxy the tiger is a pretty dumb idea.

[@revolrz22]

What in the world is this comment section lol. That wasn't the theoretical concept for the Schwehrpanzerabteilungen OR the U.S. Tank Destroyer Battalions.

[@Predator20357]

What if you wanted to repair yourself But the Furher said “Less Tanks, Higher Quality”

[@mango9602]

@@mohammadshehada267 Stalin’s the oposite lol, What if you wanted to survive a tank engagement but stalin said: “more tanks, lower quality”

[@Xiphactinus]

Nah, less tanks, less quality is the truth (le epic German transmission).

[@vaclav_fejt]

That's oversimplified.

[@mohammadshehada267]

@@mango9602 How i see lees tanks , higher quality to more tanks ,lees quality 😂😂

[@Predator20357]

@@vaclav_fejt Oh really? A meme is oversimplified? Hold on let me make it a paragraph long to cover every detail for a meme

[@Gre-unit]

" *But* with tanks it evolves into toxicity". Ah yes, because as we all know, sports disagreements are always cordial.

[@spiritualbeetle3904]

* looks at Hunduras and El Salvador *

[@mikaistvan9830]

I was quite taken aback when he essentially implied sports aren't as bad as WW2 tank arguments.

[@starliner2498]

@@spiritualbeetle3904 Brazil and Argentina too

[@imgvillasrc1608]

British football fans: *favorite team loses* "and I took that personally"

[@hbtm2951]

@@starliner2498 Not really, we destroyed Paraguay together so we kinda get along (To fellow Paraguayans, i cannot state how dumb and stupid that war was, i wish it never happened).

[@ohara8277]

"The heater pumping carbon monoxide into the turret" It did what?!

[@griffinfaulkner3514]

Carbon monoxide, actually, which is even worse.

[@ohara8277]

@@griffinfaulkner3514 Thats what I meant to say, Ik dioxide is fine

[@waterdotzable]

Vehicle heaters draw heat from the engine, so it makes sense this happened. Not good though lmao

[@DD-mp1kl]

imagine if that was added in-game. and just after driving your tiger for so long your crew suddenly started going yellow, orange, red and then just all died from the poisoning.

[@georgearrivals]

@@DD-mp1kl “Herr Rommel, I don’t feel so güt…”

[@michaelsalazar7331]

Military History Visualized has a video on the effectiveness of the Tiger 1 as well. Worth watching I think. But the biggest faults (aside from the other myriad of issues) ultimately of the Tiger, in my own opinion, was that it was used improperly most of the time. Both a good or bad tool will fail if you use it what it wasn't meant for.

[@Hedmanification]

I think they mostly did use it for what they meant to use it for, just that they did not understand what it should have been meant for. It would probably have fitted more in the role of an MBT if they spent more time on ironing out its problems.

[@Theo-vn9hm]

I am pretty much of the same opinion as the Chieftain. A tank that was pressed into situations it absolutely wasn't meant for

[@babamukuru666]

A tanks that's solely designed for a purpose that is basically nonexistent except that one line of bunkers in France and then some small fortifications near Kursk is just what us Germans do best: overspecification to the point of utter uselessness

[@kasparkannel3108]

@@Hedmanification dude, they literally didn't use it in their designed role most of the time and the tank suffered because of it, what are you even talking about

[@Hedmanification]

@@kasparkannel3108 it was designed as a heavy breaktrough vehicle, which is was used as extensively even though it was also used to fit other roles when needed. my point (being very clear tbh) is that they limited its usage to work with other kinds of tanks when that ultimately limited its capabilities in battle. The tiger could easily have fitted the several roles of a modern MBT if its issues had not been as debilitating as they were. Do i need to explain any further?

[@thundercho]

In the book "Tigers in the Mud" by Otto Carius, there is a section where he and his fellow tankers wrote up a list of mechanical problems of the Tiger I, and how they proposed each should be fixed. Its not only mechanical and technical situations that help or hinder a tank's performance, but the crew training and tactics they use can also make a big difference as well.

[@exallus_3958]

He did make comments about most problems needing a *skillful (crew position name)*

[@alessiodecarolis]

This is the better approach to the various issues a vehicle/aircraft could've, ask to the men that employ them, and try to fix at the best, but with Germany's situation they surely couldn't much, plus the problems were worstened with the arrive of Tiger II, a total waste of precious resources

[@23GreyFox]

@@alessiodecarolis Just your opinion, man.

[@jackzhang8677]

Lmao calling Hitler “moustache man.”

[@randomprojectsusa5196]

Yeah I know... that’s Stalin’s name

[@urbanmech8064]

@@randomprojectsusa5196 I mean can't they both be called "Mustache Man"?

[@m1a1abrams3]

if you say hitler on youtube, then your video will be demonitized

[@airbus_3209]

@@urbanmech8064 what about, angry mustache man?

[@desertdesmond6736]

mario = hitler = stalin confirmed?

[@flanker1659]

It's nice to hear some Subnautica music in the background and like always, thanks for a well made video

[@denisgrasso4831]

I think it is from halo

[@proofostrich9061]

@@denisgrasso4831 No, his outro is Rain from Halo 3 ODST, the music during the video is Into the Uknown from Subnautica. He names the music he uses in videos in their descriptions, so go look at that.

[@denisgrasso4831]

@@proofostrich9061 honestly I didn t hear any music during the vid

[@denisgrasso4831]

@@proofostrich9061 I meant the outro btw

[@proofostrich9061]

@@denisgrasso4831 Ahh ok, well the original commenter meant the main video lol. It was also very quite too, so I had to check the description to make sure.

[@whitneyward2452]

I HEARD THAT SUBNAUTICA MUSIC, brought back some nice memories

[@seabooks2960]

FACTS

[@commanderhyland5024]

@Mason Murchison I notice it from about 3:20 to the end

[@youraveragescotsman7119]

Oh this one will generate a hell of a reaction. Very brave, Spookston.

[@HanSolo__]

I would rather call it madness more than bravery. But hey throw-shit-war also can be fun! I mean from aside-ish point of view.

[@tomasrichtr9554]

Think there will be more hate cuz he is only hating

[@MyrMerek]

Only from some wehraboos MuH suPeRioR aRyAn NgiNeErinG! Should it be good, theybwould have won

[@ilovehihats]

who gives a damn about wehraboo smoothbrains

[@youraveragescotsman7119]

@Manuel - Mac 16. Gaze upon it in despair.

[@gaijin2162]

better question before even watching the video: 'How bad are the players?'

[@homiekitten6161]

They dunno how to angle their armor

[@Sigurdur_the_bumbling_idiot]

@@homiekitten6161 they only think it's a point & click game

[@nesyboi9421]

he did a video on this labeled the tiger problem, you should watch it sometime it was pretty good.

[@casematecardinal]

It really is a point and click adventure game. Also I've basically stopped playing the panther, the tiger is just so much more fun to play.

[@zarlev9083]

@@homiekitten6161 angling doesnt help that much against most of the heavy hitters tiger faces, 85mm and 76 example, but its better then facing straight, except against HE when they shoot side lower armor of the tiger( idk what its called, the down facing armor right above the tracks )

[@Real_Claudy_Focan]

Simple : "Tiger is as good as its crew" Summed like this by Sir Fletcher (also a known "moustache man")

[@jorgsobota2228]

That's up for any Tank. Bad Crew (training), bad performance. Perfectly shown by Arab countrys vs. Israel...

[@CavalierHorseman91]

@@jorgsobota2228 T55s taken out by Super Shermans pretty much exemplifies that.

[@car_rar]

Well doesnt that applies to pretty much every tank, so allies had better crews according to your point

[@hedgehog3180]

@@car_rar They mostly did, it's the same problem that Germany had in every area, crew training got rushed and there were few resources to train them and the good soldiers were mostly all already dead.

[@car_rar]

@@hedgehog3180 yep the aces were dead, that's legit

[@datpieceofbread9570]

From the reports I've had translated to me from old friends that are no longer with us, Porsche's 2 tanks actually out preformed Henschel's two in most areas except speed and production cost. The torque the Porsche machines put out meant it could climb hills faster but due to the poor copper quality and some teething issues that still had to be worked out, meant they had to let the tanks idle after climbing steeper gradians. However the ability to easily access and remove parts like the transmission, motors, and suspension I think is a very underappretiated aspect, even for the time of the trials. As for why the Henschel tank won has two sides from what my research has shown. Side one was that the main leaders of the German Board of Armor that were in favor of Porsche's design had suffered "Fatal automotive accidents" before final judgements. And second was the amount of copper used for the electrics, while making life easy on a well trained driver and spoiling trainees on how easy it was to shift and drive a tiger, was expensive, and very scarce on top of the aforementioned bad production quality. Not that the choice either way would've mattered that much at all, I do appreciate the fact you didn't mention the "Tiger(P) fire starting breakdown" which I've found no mention of in the reports of the trials. Other than that, I'd say a fair and fine video.

[@Hedmanification]

Didn’t the Porsche tiger also turn on fire during its “reveal”?

[@datpieceofbread9570]

@@Hedmanification Absolute none of the reports I have read or found mentioned that Porsche's tiger just caught fire. There might have been some fires during the very beginning of the making, before VK30.01(P) and there were some very poorly trained drivers of the JgPz6(P) assigned to the 654th PzJgr battalion, but not of the Tiger(P) on trials, nor in bfw 003 that saw combat, or 001 and 002 that got extensive use as training tanks. The whole "Tiger(P) catches fire" myth is just people using the JgPz6(P) to judge the Tiger(P), which is very unfair and erroneous. Like using the trials of M6A1 to judge M4A1 or T28/95 to judge M26 because they happen to use the same powerpacks for much heavier and very different machines.

[@gabutman6144]

@@datpieceofbread9570 wait, I thought a lot of Ferdinand we're breakdown and caught on fire before they even reach the frontline?

[@datpieceofbread9570]

@@gabutman6144 that was panthers. Ferdis had issues once pressure started to sink into crews as they hit second line or tried charging towards the front. They also struggled with overrevving when climbing hills, which caused that event where like 4 or 6 of them from 654th caught fire making an officer think there was an artillery strike

[@hedgehog3180]

@@datpieceofbread9570 That's the thing that seems to not make sense to me, how was the Porsche Tiger good at climbing hills when the Ferdinand was specifically noted to have many issues with it? Those fires were caused by the electric transmission overheating so how did the Tiger avoid that? It just doesn't really make sense especially when since then no tank using an electric transmission has ever made it into production because of overheating issues. So how did the Porsche Tiger not suffer from that in trials when the Ferdinand later did? Was the testing just not thorough enough?

[@Mark-es7bn]

“Most tiger players wanna be like wittman, well they end up like him, but without the kills and the wife…”

[@TheConservativeKnight6809]

And then cry about "Germany Suffers"

[@jor1456]

Holy Scheiße man! That's over 007 thousands Celsium kinda burn!

[@tylerk2533]

that comment was so golden I need to get me a PC LMAO

[@fluffytater1079]

I dont understand why people die in the Tiger so much. I usually average 4 kills with the Tiger in one go which isnt horrible but if you know how to use the machine its very practical and satisfying to use. L

[@juanmanuel9864]

@@fluffytater1079 because it’s really easy to kill it when not angled properly. Even so, much of the map design goes against the tigers. It’s not as mobile as the t3485 or m4 Sherman’s 76 variants. Tiger benefits in medium to long ranges. Not short ranges or maps where flanks are common.

[@n147258noah]

Yeah, Chieftain kinda covers about the same. It would've been a good heavy breakthrough tank, if maintenance-intensive, when it rolled out. The issue is the war went from offensive to defensive, and the Tiger wasn't updated to meet that. Because of this, even though its crews did the best with what they had, the Tiger suffered. Hitler, being Hitler, did not help either.

[@maxpayne7459]

They used the Tiger in a Way which he wasnt supposed to.

[@mr.abrams9885]

I mostly remember the tiger for having a really bad transmission

[@averagejohann8225]

That's what I remember every tank for, especially German ones

[@buckshot9113]

it's either that or big yellow monie sign

[@johnmarston6706]

Hey Mr. Abrams were you in ConeOfArcs group who was looking for the Panzer Of The Lake? I remember someone in there with the same profile pic you do

[@troutwarrior6735]

Always thought that was more of an issue with the Panther

[@Gunnar_Konig]

The "terrible" transmission myth comes from trials done by the russians, who had zero driving skill and broke them constantly. It was a relative weak point but not a huge issue.

[@Masonthebaconhair]

"Especially the mind of a certin mustache man" I lost it on that quote

[@johannes__-eq9yx]

If the tiger didn't die from engine failure it was a pretty good tank tbh

[@charcoal5104]

it was to expensive to produce and can be destroyed easy

[@pusheenthecat9264]

@@charcoal5104They were far from overpowered, but they definitely weren't easy to kill.

[@Demon-sh2wc]

If I’m not mistaken (I probably am) then a standard Sherman can pen a tiger from the sides at around 500 meters

[@narodwpsanialy1940]

@@charcoal5104 Saying that they could be destroyed easily is a exaggeration. MOST of the tanks had worse armor than Tiger.

[@narodwpsanialy1940]

@@Demon-sh2wc Sides are not as important as front. Early MBT's had as low as 40mm of side armor.

[@jakobc.2558]

How to remove the transmission on a Sherman: - Unbolt the lower front plate - Pull out the transmission. How to remove the transmission on a Tiger 1 (or any german turreted tank such as Pz.III, Pz.IV, Panther, Tiger 2 etc): - Remove the turret - Remove all the components between the turret and the transmission such as: > the drive shaft, > ammunition and ammunition containers/racks > Basicly the entire driving compartment with the drivers and radiooperators equipment, seats, controlls etc. > Litteraly everything else which is in the lower half of the tank. - Get a crane and hook it on to the tranmission threw the turret ring. - Pull the transmission out threw the turret ring.

[@lector-dogmatixsicarii1537]

Ahhh yes, you are the guy that doesn't unhook the driveshaft yoke and fucks up the whole vehicle with a lift...

[@hedgehog3180]

@@argumasch663 What do you mean? Basically all modern tanks have their transmission and engines housed in a single unit that can just be switched out on the fly. You just have to take off the engine cover and then you can pull it out with a crane, and yes a crane is necessary these days because good fucking luck making a 1000 hp engine that doesn't weigh a few metric tons at least.

[@garybhullar2110]

@@hedgehog3180 I guess the bugatti chiron's engine is made of black magic to accomplish 1577 HP while only weighing 436 kg.

[@logannicholson1850]

@@garybhullar2110 it’s not just the engine power but also the type remember most tank engines are diesel which are generally larger and more reliable also transmission sizes are big most tanks have 6+ forward and 4+ reverse gears

[@mails5054]

@@garybhullar2110 there is a big difference between a tank engine and a supercar engine lol

[@The-Red-Baron]

The one thing that really caught me off guard with the carbon monoxide poisoning inside the fighting compartment.

[@FPK___]

Poop jars are now 800$ on eBay

[@The-Red-Baron]

@@FPK___ XD

[@DeliveryTank]

@@FPK___ that was random

[@giaopx]

I remember the first time I played the tiger. I fucking hate it and regret so much. After some time, i learn to play heavy tank. Now i love the tiger soooo much.

[@LEEGOOVER9901]

I got so many kills with it, but teammates doesnt compensate good play i had... Had more lose than win playing gemran because teammates never want to wait, always rushing to cap... Imagine your tiger 2 p die to m4a1 76 or T-34 57

[@holeefuk6719]

The tiger is a good tank but I prefer Sherman’s over it any day

[@patchmoulton5438]

"Less tanks, higher quality" If I may take a quote from a certain old mercenary: "War is often not kind to the side that makes fewer guns."

[@nelsonsham2368]

That went pretty well for Finland in the Winter War and Afganistan vs USSR though

[@awesomehpt8938]

Another issue is fuel. Considering how Germany experienced severe oil shortages as the war progressed and how these heavy tanks required a lot of it entire offensives were halted because of this. Further hampering the performance of tanks such as the Tiger. Case in point the battle of the bulge which completely ceased due to fuel shortage and the plans success being contingent on acquiring allied fuel supplies. Although you could argue that this is not a fault of tank itself but the conditions of the war itself affecting the tanks battle record. Also the Tiger was not very well suited for fighting in Western Europe considering how the infrastructure such as bridges couldn’t support the weight and size of the tanks. Not to mention areas that aren’t open plains.

[@vukpsodorov5446]

@@donaldhysa4836 actual battle performance on it's own means practically nothing. i mean, yeah, it's great if your tank can kill 5 enemy tanks and survive, but it's a borderline useless achievement if it then breaks down catastrophically and during it's complicated and expensive repairs the enemy makes 10 more.

[@youraveragescotsman7119]

@@vukpsodorov5446 The enemy makes 10 more and completely overruns your position while you're still stuck fixing the damn thing.

[@sirendude]

@@donaldhysa4836 I think what he is trying to say is that mechanical performance is a huge factor, more so than actual combat performance.

[@fetilu0975]

@@donaldhysa4836 did you a actually watched the video ?

[@sirendude]

@@donaldhysa4836Many of your answers are literally covered by the video. Half the time the tank breaks down and the other half they make it to the front but have exaggerated combat performance or get knocked out after a few hours.

[@Nightwing690]

The Tiger was prone to transmission failure and its clutch was infamous for falling to pieces, not to mention when the Firefly showed up it scares Tiger crews to death because it would shred a Tigers front armor from up to 1000 yards away with the famous and extremely powerful OQF 16-Pounder 76MM anti-tank gun that could fire SVDS rounds.

[@thebbqbandito2868]

I just finished ODST an hearing your outro really hits the feels.

[@memeboi6017]

Personally, I love the tiger, not becuase of its combat performance or mythos, but that 𝕒𝕖𝕤𝕥𝕙𝕖𝕥𝕚𝕔, it just looks like pure coolness.

[@syncmonism]

Apparently the Tiger 1 was one of the most ergonomically well designed and comfortable tanks of WW2 for the crew (according to Nicholas Moran). Most WW2 tanks were extremely cramped, and often had terrible ergonomics. Given that it was a heavy tank, it probably shouldn't be quite as impressive that the designers were able to make it relatively spacious and comfortable inside, but ergonomics were definitely an under-appreciated aspect of design for a lot of WW2 tanks, and it seems like an important thing to highlight with the Panzer VI. One of the other WW2 tanks which was ahead of its time in terms of ergonomics was the M4.

[@homiespaghetti1522]

In summery, actually not that bad at all just over-stated, and the usual problems most WW2 tanks had

[@jameshodgson3656]

Most WW2 tanks didn't take 2 days to change a single road wheel...

[@Evey20000]

Most of them just blew up instead

[@hedgehog3180]

You really did not understand the video if that's your conclusion, these were not problems that every WW2 tank had. If you think they did because of the "if it was realistic" series then you are completely mistaken and have no reference for how to interpret that series. The Tiger DID have many more problems than other tanks in WWII, German ones too, because all of these things happened a lot more often than the issues that were noted about other tanks. Shermans and T-34 had issues noted about them in reports because the people making them were constantly looking for ways to improve the design but those issues did not impact the performance of the tank significantly, but with Tiger they did as sources attest to.

[@edwardkenway148]

@@jameshodgson3656 Nah man TrAnsMisSiON bRoKe lmAo

[@castor3020]

​@@hedgehog3180 T34's were NOT being constantly improved, only in the latter parts of the war they started doing that, and only to improve Firepower. ALL (except sherman and perhaps stuart) WW2 tanks had major issues with them, especially with engines, power trains and transmissions. Tiger was NOT an outlier in this respect. You people constantly forget that Tanking was a relatively new development in warfare and auto industry.

[@SubaruPieter]

The biggest reason I like the Tiger 1 this much is because of the way it looks. Its basically jusr a rectangle with a semi-circular turret on top, pretty cool!

[@randomguyingasmask]

"So the B1 bis was such an OP tank? Yeah sure maybe it had that great moment once, but overall it was only useful in a 1v1, and there was so few of them, that Germany made sure not to meet them only with 1 tank." "NOOOO YOU CAN'T DESTROY MY INVINCIBLE HEAVY TANK WITH PROPER TACTICS AND OUTNUMBERING IT WITH TANKS WITH WEAKER CANNONS. THAT'S TOTALLY UNFAIR. IT WOULD WRECK ANY OF THEM IN 1V1." -Propably a wheraboo

[@nahuelleandroarroyo]

"5 shermans vs 1 one german tank" another one disregarding doctrine and the third reichs lack of manpower

[@D3R3bel]

@@nahuelleandroarroyowe are back to 5 shermans? Glad the Sherman economy is stabalizing again

[@Guy_GuyGuy]

Fun fact: France had more B1s during the Battle of France than Germany had Panzer IIIs or IVs. They weren't that uncommon.

[@TheConservativeKnight6809]

We are Chad M18s and Shermans who make Wheraboos cry

[@maplearrow1842]

Wheraboos might be wrong, but how does saying “hahaha whrebabooo bad suck trash ahahah” make you any better. Ngl both of y’all are annoying

[@karmallarma5871]

I think what also bears mentioning with regards the Tiger's combat record is that by the time it was widely used in the field (first against the Soviet Union and later to repel the allies on the western front) Germany was almost exclusively in a defensive position, and the Tiger was used accordingly. This meant in most engagements it got to shoot first, had the benefit of concealment, and had its pick of targets at almost any range it wanted, giving it a massive advantage in the opening moments of combat. All of this made it more deadly than if it had been in an offensive role as originally intended.

[@shockblaster1201]

I always say about the Tiger and Panther: "It isn't the best, but it was the only option that didn't lead to immediate failure."

[@nbp92]

I really like the subnautica background sound!! Really good choice for an ambient sound, without distracting the viewer!!

[@mr.flipflop2630]

"The Sagittario 2 Experience" when??

[@jkahgdkjhafgsd]

3:25 actually, afaik that production vs spare parts issue was one of the "brilliant" ideas of Albert Speer, and part of the myth that Speer was so amazing

[@acgiantdad6474]

The transmission is likely a conflation of the Tiger I with the Panther, and even then it wasn't the transmission that was troublesome on the Panther but rather the final drive gears

[@samusalamu9271]

Some things I think you could have mentioned too are ergonomics, visibility and suspension. German tanks tend to be known for fairly comfortable crew conditions, and the typical style of cupola made it easier for the commander to see whats goung on. Those wheels on the side of the trach were very good as a suspension system, but they were so close together that they could get jammed by smallish rocks and maintaining them was a nightmare because to get to the back wheels you gotta remove the ones in front.

[@mattpinky7125]

Chad Matilda vs Virgin tiger

[@friedyzostas9998]

Was searching for this comment, thank you

[@cynicalfox190]

For anyone interested in a more in depth discussion on specifically the design and requirements of the tiger (what spook covered in the first part of the vid) I highly recommend the chieftains video it covers most aspects of the tigers development with a focus of how the tiger ended up being equiped with the 8.8cm gun that it is so famous for.

[@Krasnoye158]

Anything too difficult to repair and too costly to build is a burden. This is especially true in case of the Tiger.

[@Niemand_]

The channels "Military History non visualized" and "Military History visualized" are a good source about this topic. ;)

[@maxpayne7459]

Also "the Chieftains Hatch"

[@lewisdepatserlord4737]

Hitler's generals: "so should we go with quantity or quality?" Hitler: "neither >:)"

[@_aragornyesyes_7171]

Moustache man*

[@darklysm8345]

"nethier" **proceed to kill like 100 k enemy tanks until the end of the war.**

[@drinkyourwater1039]

@@darklysm8345 defensive war by 1942 also, not tigers, but stugs

[@darklysm8345]

@@drinkyourwater1039 both were effective tank killer

[@lewisdepatserlord4737]

@@darklysm8345 offended?

[@bananawarfareproductions5791]

Not to be rude, but the Tiger origins date back to around 1936-1937 when the Germans were figuring they needed a heavy breakthrough tank. France and the low countries helped with this belief but the VK 3000 series was well in development by mid 1940. Took the Germans along time to figure out exactly what they wanted in the breakthrough tank, as they went from using the low velocity 75mm from the PZ 4 to the Panther’s 75 to the 88. Originally they wanted to switch from the 88 to the long 75 but this was considered to impractical to make 50 or so tanks with the long 75 then switch to the long 88 as it was hoped the kwk L-71 would be ready by that point for tank use.

[@slimcheese4366]

In reality the Tiger was probably what Spooks said but in game, if u angle properly it’s a fun tank to play

[@Maxwell_Brune]

No. Tiger has a good gun, but is slow and has armor which doesn't do anything. Even if you angle the armor, players can still shoot the turret and kill your gunner.

[@Lehr-km5be]

Tiger really aint slow, compared to tanks at it's BR it's maneuverability is pretty damn good. And it actually has a decent reverse speed, something that british and american tanks at this BR can only dream about. Angled frontal plate pretty much invulnerable to damage (and only last patch it was fixed, as in some places it had 344 mm of armor), and the turret can still bounce a lot of shots - I even bounced shots from Super Pershing in it. The only thing you cant do anything about is your commander cupola, but thats a problem of many tanks - and in most cases a penetrating shot there wont kill you in one shot. Tiger is most definitely a great tank in game, the fact that H1 version it sits at the same BR as sherman 76 while having literally everything better is kinda hilarious.

[@pyrrhusofepirus8491]

The Tiger Porsche prototype is such an odd and bizarre looking machine to me, I don’t know exactly how to describe it. It has this, brutal mechanical look to it.

[@Charlietolemy]

It has autism

[@FaithRox]

I just can't see past the fact that in the middle of a battle, I'd rather be in a tiger than anything else at the time.

[@roguestriker8889]

Look up some survivability statistics for various WW 2 tanks and you might change your mind.

[@danteinouye6098]

@@roguestriker8889 like what? Early Shermans (M4s, M4A1s?) and T-34s? An M3 grant? Late model crusaders? You gotta remember the tiger is a '42 design. Not comparable to the masterpiece that is the HVSS Sherman, since those came out far later. Early Shermans were fine, but the hatches were hard to open (rectified on the welded M4A3 model) and the ammo was stored terribly (again rectified later).

[@liviuganea4108]

@@danteinouye6098 More like a '38 design.

[@jordangames2560]

@@danteinouye6098 to be fair the Sherman itself is also a 1942 design and was upgraded to be be much better by 1945 than where it started.

[@alessiodecarolis]

The problem with being a Tigers' crewman is that they were really a magnet for EVERYTHING your enemy could've trowm to you, artillery shells, rockets or bombs, all of these could ruin your day

[@guppiapfeljustleopardthing8756]

1:05 The idea and the first scetches of a brake through tank, out of wich the tiger evolved can be traced back to 1935 where the panzer 4 and 3 were only prototypes. Out of that the VK 34.01, VK 36.01, multiple other designes and then the VK 45.01 prototypes were either scetched or build. That is one of the reasons why Germany didn't angle the armor at more than 10°. The reason why they didn't angle was because they didn't thought it to be worth the effort/ cost of ergonomic advantages. The idea of placing the 88 flak on a tracked chassis can be traced back to the Spanish Civil War when the Germans realized that a more mobile 88mm, capable of keeping up with tanks and being armored enough to directly confront enemy armor ( bunkers, trenches and tanks) whould be something nice at the time but definitely needed in future conflicts (if the book on the 88 I have is correct). 1:35 While the 105 was a idea they had, it wasn't a primary. The primary idea was to fit the first batch of 100 vehicles with the 88mm and the rest of the tanks, that were build until the 3rd gun chosen was available, with the 75mm L70 from the panther. That gun was to stay untill the 88mm L71 or PAK43 got out of prototype phase and into production. The chassis were meant to sty the same but the obvious problem of switching between 3 guns was so apparent that they scrapped the 75mm idea and just went with the 88mm. When it became obvious that the turret ring of the tiger 1 whould probably be to small to support the 88mm L71 Gun, a new chassis needed to be constructed. The 105mm gun however was a gun that was supposed to go on a earlyer VK of the Tiger family and even that was supposed to be the short one used on vehicles like the StuH III. 3:05 While it was difficult to repau6tge transmission in any way shape or form, the design of the transmissions on both the tiger 1 and panther made it easy to split the transmission into 3 main parts. The gearbox itself and the left and right brake/ steering system. These parts were small enough to lift out of the tank by 3 or 4 men, out of the loaders side turret hatch. I couldn't find any case in which this happened in the field as usually tigers were either brought to repair shops or immediately destroyed when they were immobilized. 3:45 Not wrong but I can say the same about some planes and tanks too. A relative of a friend was a sherman driver. He had, in about 2 weeks a total of 5 tanks hit, 2 destroyed, 6 transport vehicles hit and 0 destroyed. He reported back to his squad leader and after the war he found that the record of his entire platoon was inflated, with most-all hit vehicles being counted as destroyed, and his SPG count inflated by double his hits. He didn't tell me why they did it but I suppose it was either so the squad whould look better on paper or for propaganda.

[@g.williams2047]

Tiger was good, the issue was it's hard to fight 7 Shermans/T34s with no air cover, no fuel, and lack of parts.

[@phoenixgn9655]

Yeah.. and its very surprising that even with this, we got commanders like Otto Carius that destroyed like 100+ enemy tanks, im glad that he survived the war but unfortunately he died in 2015 while he was sleeping

[@dlyonthescreen2657]

@@phoenixgn9655 whats your source for that claim?

[@modest_spice6083]

@@dlyonthescreen2657 Probably overinflated numbers from the German archives or their own memoirs. Panzer crews, especially those in SS battalions, often inflate kill numbers. My source for this is Glantz's numbers in The Battle of Kursk, and When Titans Clashed.

[@phoenixgn9655]

@@dlyonthescreen2657 Well, its that what the history says, but like the Modest_spice said can be only numbers from German Archives so we will never know the truth, but that ins't "impossible" in 5+ years of war

[@liviuganea4108]

@@modest_spice6083 The allies inflated waaay more. But nobody believes that since they won and the winner writes the history.

[@jackcausey1449]

Surprisingly the best thing about the tiger other than the 88mm was the transmission which gave it pretty stable driving on and off roads.

[@oliverrugg3732]

The fact that the Tiger was produced by a side that literally could not win therefore guaranteeing its destruction was probably its main issue.

[@wrathofatlantis2316]

Tiger I armor from late 1943 had a special heat treat that allowed 80% penetration with the last 20% holding out: It was the best armor of WWII, but so expensive it only existed for the Tiger I, not the II. From the side, the Tiger I armor outclassed the Tiger II... It had more protection on the sides than the Sherman from the front (the Sherman was sometimes poorly heat treated). The idea German armor was losing quality over the years (because of missing alloys) is also bunk: The heat treatment is what mattered, and it kept improving. A 1945 Panther gear part was analysed in 2006: Aside its square cut gears (a design forced by tungsten supply limitations) it was found to be as good as we could make it today.

[@otherscup]

Can you maybe check in on the rumor that Gaijin secretly changes SL and RP rewards of vehicles? I feel like some toptier vehicles have now up to 30% less rewards and other players as well feel like this

[@LEEGOOVER9901]

Actually yes... Ground vehicle has lower SL, except the premiums while planes stay the same

[@otherscup]

@@LEEGOOVER9901 I found the issue! They fucking decreased revenue ONLY for high tier vehicles! Tier 4 props make more money than tier 6 and 5 jets!

[@LEEGOOVER9901]

@@otherscup guess because i didnt play jets yet

[@Jonathan-fb1kj]

@@otherscup And this is why I am forever glad I quite when I did.

[@karstenseterbakken3617]

Maybach HL230 had 700 of horsepower and the 4 carburetors was a Solex double offroad carburetors which in total was 8 carburators that run on the engine. But a safety mechanism allowed only 2 (which it was 4) of them to run, the reason was not to get the engine over the max RPM rate of 3000 which the engine might had overcooked, it was almost inpossible to get a backfire and had also a Safety from Bosch which shutted down the engine if the raised max RPM and the cooling temperature of max over 130 where reached and booted into a emergency state which it still generated enough power to still move the turret or at least for not let the engine to complete shut it off (which can be a serious problem when fighting in the winter), A working temperature was from 80-85 celsius and in idle 70 but could be tweaked from the driver up 90. Which was also a gadget for operating in the Eastern front. overall it was a very powerful engine with lots of modulation in mind, almost 3 types of starting options, very small it took 24 % of the entire hull space, in the Panther 36%. And a Air filtering system which was combined with a Oilbath filtering, because they learned of having a simple airfilter would create intensive service windows for the engines. It had a dust removal efficiency of 99% of the production which also was developed for operating in harsh enviroments like the vast countryland of the East. Sure it had its issues that it was service intence but where almost entirely erradicated in 1944 and had despite of the resource shortages a approved service warranty of atleast 2000km (100hours), After that it needed regular service. But from eye witnesses it was not always the opportunity of keepin wiht the service book and the engines often times where pretty stable. The HL230 and 234 where then further developed by Henschel for the French TigerIIs and Panthers and also for the AMX 50 programm and it was the HL 294 which came out. It was a diesel engine and reached 1000 horsepower by 2800RPM. This engine type and the typical building method and design which where developed in 1948 are still in production and deployed on Tanks and other Heavy duty machinery still today. I personally dont believe these sources you are using on the engine part.

[@randomdude8101]

My dude, you just provoked a gang war

[@jyralnadreth4442]

Basically the Tiger was far to rushed in its development and wasn't built to be logistically friendly. I also think the Tiger gets a lot of its Glory reputation because the US Armed forces didn't have a Heavy tank through most of the war until the M26 Pershing (Which itself got rerated a medium after) and when the US forces did run into Tigers they usually would have Sherman's. Compared to the Soviet KV series Heavy Tanks and later IS series the allies on the western fronts only had a relatively small number of Churchills to slug it out Heavy vs Heavy like the Churchill III's did in Africa. So really the Tiger caught a break in that it faced fewer opponents that could survive its attacks...which then changed when the 17 Pounder AT gun was fitted to the Firefly Sherman's and 85mm Guns to T34-85s so the allies could at least shoot back with comparable weapons

[@Mr_Bunk]

3:07 In the chat on the bottom-left: “He gay and a furry, das bad” With allies like that, who needs enemies?

[@communismbad6236]

Is chat wrong?

[@Mr_Bunk]

@@communismbad6236 Yes.

[@communismbad6236]

@@Mr_Bunk no

[@Mr_Bunk]

@@communismbad6236 Why did you ask, then? Is it just to troll?

[@communismbad6236]

@@Mr_Bunk a little

[@TheArklyte]

1:00 Invasion of France was a huge influence, but you're forgetting that Germans had captured and studied french prototype superheavies, their mock ups and blueprints. That changed their perception on what a heavy tank can be and what they themselves might face in the future. Same thing happened when captured Ferdinand "created" IS-2 by proxy. And then both turned true, because while no such superheavies existed and Ferdinand remained a small scale vehicle, they faced opponents compared in protection and armaments to those. In face Tiger matches FCM F1 technical requirement of 100mm armor and 90mm gun based on AA one(in this case 88mm though). They came to this differently, but that was info they had and that had partially influenced their decision. The day germans captured those tanks was the day when "heavy" projects with 50mm of armor were cancelled.

[@awesomehpt8938]

Hans ze transmission broke!

[@aqui1ifer]

I’m surprised, almost disappointed that you failed to mention the Durchbruchswagen (Breakthrough Vehicle) series that was the true genesis of the Tiger. Much of what you said early is effectively “feature creep” added to the D.W. Program over time, I.e. the inflation in weight from the original DW prototypes, the VK. 30.01s, the VK36.01s until it finally came down to Henschels up-armored VK36.01H & Porsche’s Type 100 (Tiger P). The Chieftain has several videos on the subject.

[@liviuganea4108]

It doesn't match the winning point of view that says everything about Nazi Germany was crap. As such, German tanks "had" either difficult to service components (which is true somewhat) or horrible reliability (which is true only for a few models).

[@georgevasilopoulos5359]

The Germany mains are angry

[@TheArklyte]

For me there were several factors that made Tiger look weird: 1)its similarities to T-150, T-220, KV-3 projects and the fact that by that point soviets abandoned them and were well underway to IS; 2)it copies trouble of KV-1, but not its solutions. There is no Tiger-1S with lighter armor and new transmission; 3)lobbies and borderline sabotage in competition between Porsche and Wa Pruef 6, pupper of Kniepcamp; 4)personal pro-Allied bias that makes it hard for me to feel sorry that it has drawbacks that saved lives on our side; 5)weird development timeline that raises a few question about how much of independent thought was actually involved in this project and how much of its success can really be attributed to german designers; 6)the fact that it feels like an infantry tank compared to Panther and IS-1/2, not a heavy tank.

[@liviuganea4108]

1) There's nothing similar. The Tiger began in '35. I doubt the soviets even began thinking about a heavy breakthrough tank by then. 2) It copies nothing. They're totally independent and developed without regard for the other. 3) Where did you hear at? At the daily american propaganda piece? 4) Then you're an idiot 5) All of its success is attributed to that as it had a 7 years development, although not all of them in its final form. Hitler and other Army High Command personnel had little input that only involved specifying (not always though) armor thickness, desired gun (it almost had the Panther's gun, if they increase in pen for the 88 hadn't happened, we would know the Tiger as a long 75 mm equipped tank and Hitler's specification wouldn't have mattered. 6) It has nothing to do with infantry, not even in purpose or in how it's built. Infantry tanks are meant to accompany the infantry and such always have little speed and usually the guns aren't all that great. In contrast, the Tiger has a great gun, good mobility and good armor. It has a higher weight than the previous panzers but also a higher power and torque output with a suspension designed for higher weights.

[@evaneleven6521]

NO THE TIGER WAS THE BEST TANK OF THE WAR!, IM DISLICKING THIS VIDEO IT IS INNACURATE, I AM GOING TO GO WATCH 10 HOUR VERSION OF ERIKA

[@Robin_Olds_Creates]

Another point to add to repairing the transmission. The German military was built around an offensive-minded philosophy. While minor repairs could be completed at the front, they lacked the tools required to extensively service a vehicle. The same applied to aircraft: the Luftwaffe's dedication to staying on the offensive for as much of the war as possible meant that relatively small repairs could not be fixed at the front since they lacked the infrastructure to complete them. Thus, German aircraft were just left in "disrepair," and gave marauding P51's excellent targets.

[@countdoggo5026]

Ah yes the tiger 1 the only tank the Wehrmacht had from 1939 to 1945. And we all know it’s true from our dear friend holloywood who makes stuff that is 100% real and not made up

[@wavebird1374]

I don't know if I enjoy the video because of you saying tiger is a bad tank or because I love the subnautica song

[@gumduck2504]

Ah yes Porsche Tiger lost mainly due to "complexity" not like the fact that it literally burned during its showing

[@jidk6565]

Isnt that like Kinda a myth tho

[@gumduck2504]

@@jidk6565 It might be but I didn't really ever look for reports about that. But seeing how Ferdinand behaved which I think had the same engine I think we can have a nice idea of what had happened

[@friedyzostas9998]

@@gumduck2504 Ferdy is literally Porshe Tiger, but without turret. Whatever you believe about Ferdy, it's true about Porshe Tiger

[@gumduck2504]

@@friedyzostas9998 I know that's why I said we can expect Porsche Tiger to stay in flames on a small uphill

[@reecewestmoreland6137]

Like any tank when use improperly it suffered, however there were other General issues around the vehicle which where not it's own fault. A shortage of bridging equipment capable of taking a the tank, a lack of bridges in general that could handle it in general really meaning it had to risk fording rivers which i'm guessing stressed the engine and risked getting it stuck. Along side there was a shortage of vehicles which could tow a tiger 1 especially when they got stuck, and using another tiger normally caused the engine to overheat. I believe the transmission was more common on panther but I feel the same issue of lack of high quality metals need would have effected tiger as well especially on those produced in the late war. The German army basically built something they couldn't effectively support in the field, at least they made use of an ammo type they where already producing. edit: Also it wasn't just the B1 ,the Matilda 2 also helped spur them on as it proved immue to anything but their biggest AT guns and direct fire artillery. However they where working on a heavier hard to kill tank back in 37 with the

[@monyuancai3637]

Driver: smh I broke the transmission requesting repairs Moustache man: REPAIR ZE TANKS QUICK His wt account: not enough silver lions

[@holeefuk6719]

He don’t got 3k sl? Who am I kidding he’s playing Germany he sucks too much to make any

[@tompalmer5986]

I came across a program on the internet that said the Tiger was rushed into production for the Battle of Kursk, on the eastern front. The reason it had so many problems was becaused they rushed it into production before it was ready.

[@GatoConBotas403]

Tiger was good when they had parts and worked, same with panther

[@megaaggron9778]

Yea

[@Hello_there_obi]

One thing I think you missed was the psychological effect of the tiger. That added to its effectiveness and utility.

[@50centpb7]

Hot take: Hitlers ‘quality over quantity’ approach was the correct one because Germany did not have the fuel reserves to field massive fleets of cheap armoured vehicles.

[@videosmith419]

Yeah, thats a really good point. But still tho, germany could not have won ww2.

[@50centpb7]

Another hot take would be that the tiger was always intended to be produced in a small quantity to fulfill a highly specialized role and was never meant to be produced or serviced to levels of other more logistically viable vehicles, which make criticisms of low production numbers almost moot

[@dlyonthescreen2657]

I think the only 'good' approach to the question of how Germany should have gone about producing tanks is emphasis on the development of infantry AT weapons to counter the numerous Shermans and T34s. The Pz. IV chassis should have been the cut-off point as far as development of heavier vehicles goes. The chassis for IIIs and IVs could have been uparmoured, upgunned, or turned into self propelled AT guns or artillery according to the Wehrmacht's needs. This wouldn't have won Germany the war, but it maybe could have made Germany last maybe even another 3 months. The use of these chassis would have saved much resources, time, and would increase the availability of spare parts and if they had half a brain they would even universally standardise some or all parts. If the army wanted to deal with tanks, they should have poured more resources into creating more effective Panzerfaust and Panzerschreck style weapons.

[@50centpb7]

@@dlyonthescreen2657 I don’t necessarily disagree, but there’s still a lot more a tank can take advantage of on a tactical level that infantry and gun emplacements simply can’t. If your defensive strategy can’t be easily transitioned into an offensive strategy then all all you’re really doing is stalling a defeat, and infantry in ww2 just couldn’t press an offensive the way armoured vehicles can.

[@dlyonthescreen2657]

​@@50centpb7 Like I said, the Pz IV or III could be adapted to be more effective at particular tasks, such as offensive operations. I think that a demolition gun fitted to either of those vehicles could have been very useful whenever the Germans laid siege to cities, such as Stalingrad. Obviously a breakthrough vehicle could very much have been useful, but they shouldn't have been produced in such great numbers.

[@Wolfbrother6504]

Thanks again for the great video. Your knowledge and research is appreciated

[@blackorange5091]

muh Tigor the mighty furry weapon

[@Predator20357]

Tiger: UwU, what’s that? *notices smoller cannon* OwO *Pounces and nuzzles on Sherman* I whuv that Sherman:blow my brains out now

[@haveaverygoodday3366]

Lmao

[@BillyDaMarten]

My condolences for,your notifications EDIT: Nice loophole dance around the certain moustache man

[@TheConservativeKnight6809]

Wheerabos- Nooo, You can't just kill my Glorious Tiger!!!! Germany Suffers!!! Meanwhile Chad M18 and Sherman players- LeL, learn to Angle

[@liviuganea4108]

You do realise that "Chads" are mostly toxic guys (not the toxicity defined by feminism, mind you) that like to pretend they're the best, "hella smart" and can steal every guy's girl aaaand act like tough guys and overall bullies. Normal guys don't act like that and know their faults.

[@TheConservativeKnight6809]

@@liviuganea4108 ok )))

[@liviuganea4108]

@@TheConservativeKnight6809 Ah, so you're a toxic Chad yourself.

[@TheConservativeKnight6809]

@@liviuganea4108 Looks like you are one of those Germ fan bois who thinks GeRmanY SuFfeRs

[@liviuganea4108]

@@TheConservativeKnight6809 How about you fight an IKV 91 in a Tiger II H and then tell me how the Tiger II is better. Fucking burgerboo.

[@proofostrich9061]

I like the subnautica music in the background!

[@JoshLin17]

B-b-but muh Fury scene!!!1!!1!!1!1!

[@NokotanFanCentral]

The tank that survived (fury) could of penned the armour instead of closing the gap

[@Palkia8842]

In 2-3 days I'll finally be able to see Warthunder like this, no more stuck on minimal.

[@stephenlaarkamp7344]

Love the vid as usual, and the salt it will inevitably generate from wheraboos, just lowkey irritated when you pronounce Porsche's name wrong. It's Por-sha. I'm a car nerd, so that's why I say it lol.

[@ercanyesiltas]

It isnt por sha. That is the american way of saying it

[@jungletroll3844]

@@ercanyesiltas you just proved him right you rem

[@danielsteger8456]

more annoying than wehraboos are tank "experts" who will call anyone saying anything good about german tanks as a "salty wehraboo", and if state sources then they will say "watch spookston's video" instead of actually giving arguments. much harder to disprove while being equally annoying.

[@danielsteger8456]

@multiple internet personalities sure. just watch spookston's video

[@darklysm8345]

What salt lol? He literally defeneded its reliabilty which you allieboo normies always mock about.

[@Max_clc]

the subnautica music "in the abyss" make this vid so much better

[@panthera6750]

Does this mean I’m better?

[@tsardean7438]

Uhhhhhhhm more of you where made, you had better armor and had the same transmission problems but was faster and less expensive. So I’m gonna say yes, good job mate

[@BW-4012]

i woke up half asleep, when i saw this I thought I was dreaming and fell asleep watching it. figured out it’s real. I never get to watch spookston when he uploads

[@S.T.R.Y.K.E.R.]

3:06 look at the in game chat lol

[@spork3526]

He gay and furry lmaooo

[@vitalhygiene3546]

I take more interest in the Ferdinand and Nashorn than I do the Tiger. Two incredibly rare and incredibly devastating fighting vehicles that weren't commonly seen on the battlefield, but were an absolute shock to tank crews when they were.

[@AlexNV75]

“You’d be hard pressed to find anyone that hasn’t heard of the Tiger” the girls in my World History Class would like to disagree They came to the conclusion that flamethrowers were the most effective weapon of WW1 when we did a small study on weapons used in WW1 😂

[@troutwarrior6735]

Excellent video, I always get kinda annoyed when people say that the tiger was a crappy tank. No, it was not the wonder weapon that a lot of people make it out to be, but it wasn't crap either.

[@Captainkebbles1392]

As much as peope don't want to hear it, Fury showed the Tiger accurately. They often charged into gun lines and got themselves killed. People forget they trained in breakthrough, not long range gun duels. For great examples, the tank battles South of Caen show time and again this happened, initial salvo, then charge out of perfectly good positions and out of protection of flank support

[@joescorner4353]

I love how you playing subnautica music in the background lol

[@PinguThePenguino]

My wehraboo bois are on the way to ur floor.

[@dragonstormx]

I often wondered why the Tiger is so famous when very few Allied troops encountered it, the two cents I have heard is that since not many Allied troops encountered a Tiger, but had heard of one, they wouldn't always realize they encountered something different.

[@hhale]

Tigers were feared because they could bounce a bazooka round, they carried that 88 mm main gun, which meant that they could punch through any American tank, and their crews had a reputation for being well trained, which made the stories of large numbers of kills by Tiger crews believable.

[@DonovanPotatoBowl]

Oh no, the wehraboos are coming. Take cover.

[@BFF-xn9dx]

lol

[@darklysm8345]

The wehraboos winned in this video. Cope

[@spork3526]

@@darklysm8345 "winned"

[@darklysm8345]

@@spork3526 omg spelling mistake, won*

[@SilencedMi5]

Spookston - Great info here, and another well presented fact based video. Word of advise: please slow down in your speech and give yourself enough time to enunciate. Your videos are consistently highly researched and entertaining as well as informative to watch. With all the time and effort you put in to make these great videos, you deserve to be understood by as many people as possible. Cheers!

[@charmingcobra]

Loving that Subnautica music in the background.

[@Sicklehead88]

the way you talk i sometimes have trouble understanding you, but i still enjoy your videos. like the sober/neutral approach to these topics.

[@McSkumm]

The Subnautica music in the background is an interesting choice.

[@thomasdenney8859]

Loved the video mate! I love this kind of format