Please up front armor of panther G (like bef panther)

[DPK]

Hello folks!
IMHO, panther ausf G should receive same frontal armor as the Befpanther (fav 14) and the panther ausf A, which all of them cost 280pts, here's some reasons:

*Panther ausf G in game has the flattened gun mantle which nullifies the shoot traps (which is a huge deal) , US seasoned tank crews find this Achilles's heel and always trying to exploit it.

*Some may argue that German steel plate has dropping quality as the war progresses, but the German slightly increase the armor plate thickness for compensation (US document shows that panther's frontal plate thickness varied for 80~90mm).

*panther ausf G should have same armor protection as bef panther is not better!

Even the panther ausf A gots 14 FAV and cost as same as Panther ausf G (280pts) not to mention that it has one more unit per card.

Spoiler

PS: please stop derailing this thread to Buff 3AD or giving 12SS leopard 2 kind of topic

 

[DPK]

nobody cares about one of the greatest tank in WW2(another is T-34)? Panther ausf G should recive bef panther 's 14 FAV!

 

[Dongs Galore]

I agree, Panthers are underpowered and need a buff. Also at least 1 additional star of veterancy to reflect the elite LSSAH commanders assigned to 12 SS.

12 SS also should recieve more tank destroyers, 3xJagdpanzer cards do not represent their historical numbers

 

[Dongs Galore]

And where are 12 SS's Marders in Phase A?

really eugen something has to be done to make this division competitive against that Jimbo

 

[fightinheckfish]

1. Panther is fine as is. If anything they should add a "poor armor quality control" critical for it that kills the tank first hit from the front.

2. German crew quality especially on the Western front is vastly overstated as the poor results achieved by German armor crews can attest to.

 

[fightinheckfish]

I'm just stating that:

1. The Panthers performance in game is where it needs to be.

2. If you're arguing for historical authenticity there's a lot of "bad" Panther attributes we should add in for the sake of keeping it realistic too.

 

[Dongs Galore]

sorry but operational problems are out of the game's scope its not my fault allied death traps can't penetrate Krupp Steel with their "reliability"

Just kicking this out there: is there some way we can give 12 SS more 88s? I am thinking at least 3 for each card of Jambos

 

[fightinheckfish]

I see what you did there.

 

[rutger9]

Politically correct allyboos stay out of this thread please!! and take your Jimbos with you they are OP+ahistorical.

Now back to constructive discussion: why does 12 SS only get one Firefly?

Why doesn't the 12th SS have their leopard 2 tanks anyways? I feel there's some bias involved here.

 

[Kaszub]

I agree. The panthers (both D and G) should receive a slight buff to their armor by 1, or maybe 2 points to their frontal armor. I can't understand why M4A3 Sherman has only 1 point less armor. Panther D had 80 mm frontal armor angled at 55 degree in all places, which is effective 130mm armor. The Sherman had 65-105mm frontal armor depends on what place, angled at 47-55 degree which is effective armor 90-100mm. Panther G had even more armor at its turret (better gun mantlet). And I think that angled frontal armor of a panther shouldn't be equal to Sherman Jumbo's 90 degree side armor. It's just wrong.

 

[Max_Damage]

Jumbos need a card drop to 2 tanks total in a whole 3rd armored deck. Seeing 4-5 at the same time is ridiculous.

 

[rutger9]

So 80mm at 55 degrees gives effective 130mm
and 65-105mm angled at 47-55 degrees gives 90-100mm

What formula do you use to knock effective mm of armor off the shermans armor by it being angled?

 

[Dongs Galore]

real talk: if you want to buff the Phase B Panthers something has to be done about 3AD's antitank capability or tank avail at the same time. The Panther D outshoots and outranges the M4a3 75 so that armor superiority is already a buff it doesn't really need against the extremely rare phase B M4 76. Same against 2ID's minimal Phase B M10 avail.

 

[Kaszub]

So 80mm at 55 degrees gives effective 130mm
and 65-105mm angled at 47-55 degrees gives 90-100mm

What formula do you use to knock effective mm of armor off the shermans armor by it being angled?

The upper armor plate of a sherman's hull was angled at 47 degrees and the lower one was angled at 56. Both of them had the same thickness of 63mm. Only at the very bottom of it, there is a much thicker armor going up to 105mm.
As for the formula question, I used a piece of paper, a pencil a ruler and a protractor, drew the plates, check the numbers in different angles and did some basic math.

real talk: if you want to buff the Phase B Panthers something has to be done about 3AD's antitank capability or tank avail at the same time. The Panther D outshoots and outranges the M4a3 75 so that armor superiority is already a buff it doesn't really need against the extremely rare phase B M4 76. Same against 2ID's minimal Phase B M10 avail.

For me it's not a question if 12ss needs buff or not. The devs said that they want to make realistic units as much as the game design allows and that balancing is made by availbility and cost. So that's why I think something has to be done to correct the armor values of the panthers. And BTW, I'm not some wermacht funboy or anything like that. I like playing allies too.

 

[Dongs Galore]

The problem everyone needs to consider before buffing the Panther on the basis of historical characteristics is that it already outperforms its historical capabilities because of how the game models (or rather doesn't model) other aspects of tanks:

1. All SD tanks can turn on a dime and slew their turret rapidly to engage any threat that appears within a 360 degree field of view around the tank the instant it appears.

2. SD guns are ahistorically inaccurate and rarely hit their first shot.

The key real life tactical weakness of the Panther, which Allied medium tanks were able to exploit to defeat them, was that it could be outflanked and penned through the side. Even if the commander saw his ambusher, the tank was cumbersome to turn and the turret could not traverse as rapidly as the enemy's.

In the game this is not modeled. A Cromwell or Sherman which ambushes a Panther from the side will probably not even finish aiming before the Panther turns its front armor to face the attack. Even if it does, first shots normally miss because of the accuracy mechanic. Then the Panther, whose turret slews over just as fast as anyone else's, will shoot and most likely kill the Sherman or Cromwell with its more accurate gun.

Can you understand why without modeling things like this it is difficult to justify a further buff?

 

[Kaszub]

The problem everyone needs to consider before buffing the Panther on the basis of historical characteristics is that it already outperforms its historical capabilities because of how the game models (or rather doesn't model) other aspects of tanks:

1. All SD tanks can turn on a dime and slew their turret rapidly to engage any threat that appears within a 360 degree field of view around the tank the instant it appears.

2. SD guns are ahistorically inaccurate and rarely hit their first shot.

The key real life tactical weakness of the Panther, which Allied medium tanks were able to exploit to defeat them, was that it could be outflanked and penned through the side. Even if the commander saw his ambusher, the tank was cumbersome to turn and the turret could not traverse as rapidly as the enemy's.

In the game this is not modeled. A Cromwell or Sherman which ambushes a Panther from the side will probably not even finish aiming before the Panther turns its front armor to face the attack. Even if it does, first shots normally miss because of the accuracy mechanic. Then the Panther, whose turret slews over just as fast as anyone else's, will shoot and most likely kill the Sherman or Cromwell with its more accurate gun.

Can you understand why without modeling things like this it is difficult to justify a further buff?

Ad.1 To fix: reduce rotation speed of units. Alternatively they can change the way how the tanks fight. When an order is given to a unit to attack another unit, they will not rotate a hull, but only a turret.

Ad.2 To fix: increase veterancy of tank destroyers and self-prepelled guns like StuGs. BTW I like how the accuracy of all units works. It wasn't that easy to hit a target back then.

As for your argument about flanking doesn't work for allies let me ask a question: What should Panzer IV, or even a Panther do if they meet Sherman Jumbo? It's the same thing.

 

[Commiekiller757]

As for your argument about flanking doesn't work for allies let me ask a question: What should Panzer IV, or even a Panther do if they meet Sherman Jumbo? It's the same thing.

Laugh at it's popgun and panic it into retreating?

 

[Dongs Galore]

It is not remotely the same thing.

Panthers have both superior armor and a gun which will outshoot and outpen the medium.

Jumbo has superior armor, but a gun which is weaker and less accurate. IIRC at best it can frontally pen the Panther at the same range a Panther can frontally pen the Jumbo in return. The Jumbo cannot threaten it at range. There is really no comparison here.

 

[Dongs Galore]

Also if you upvet and upacc TDs and SPGs the 3rd Armored might as well be taken out of the game because 12 SS also gets Jagdpanzers where 3AD gets sweet fuck all.

 

[Commiekiller757]

Also if you upvet and upacc TDs and SPGs the 3rd Armored might as well be taken out of the game because 12 SS also gets Jagdpanzers where 3AD gets sweet fuck all.

Add to this that the StuGs are already insanely deadly with the turn speed issue, bazookas are literally my only consistent option against them in boccage. They just rotate and massacre whatever sherman flanks I attempt due their small size causing misses most of the time.