Shermans vs. Panthers
- Thread starter Tank Girl
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
the US:GER armor rating balance actually seems really good to me. they seem to give poor ratings if a unit had huge weak spots; like the PZIV turret or the early Panther shot trap. Panther G is otoh virtually immune to US guns on teh front plate. I am less sure about UK:GER.
(Archive Awareness KT shot 150 times with the "penetration" being armour shattering / weld seam failure only prevalent on German AFV post sept 44)
Why is the speed so hugely different?
Why does the Tiger E has the same accuracy as a Firefly and worse than a Panther G? (As a matter of fact nearly all relative accuracy values seem to be way off)
1. Too be honest, that how I feel when I use shermans and try to kill panthers. Also when firing at tanks from far away the AP from your gun lowers and the Jumbo has thicker armor than regular shermans. That could be why you are having such difficulty penetrating Jumbos.
2. I agree that Panthers are too expensive, they should be more like 240 or around that. I have to wait 3 or more minutes of not calling anything in just to buy one Panther.
2. I agree that Panthers are too expensive, they should be more like 240 or around that. I have to wait 3 or more minutes of not calling anything in just to buy one Panther.
Actually it is sort of realistic that the Panther has more accuracy than the Tiger. The Panther used a smaller KwK 42 7.5cm L/70 and the Tiger used a larger KwK 36 8.8cm L/56. The Panther barrel length is 5.25 meters in length whilst the Tigers is 4.9. In addition to a longer barrel, the Panthers gun also had a much faster muzzle velocity at 932m/s compared to the Tigers 773m/s. The Panthers shell had more penetration and more accuracy due to these 2 things, length and muzzle velocity.
That image better not be for real. The tiger II having less front and side armor than the jumbo? So much for any shred of authenticity.
*Edit The tiger 1 being "Fast" and the tiger 2 being "Slow" is a good laugh to, really hope that image isn't real.
*Edit The tiger 1 being "Fast" and the tiger 2 being "Slow" is a good laugh to, really hope that image isn't real.
1. Penetration: Yes and no. As longer the range as better the 8.8 was.
2. Caliber-Length: Isn't so important in terms of accuracy to differ here within the scale used for Wargame. Optics are far more important here and they were nearly the same.
In terms of accuracy pretty much all German tanks were superior in comparison to the allies due to their optics.
We might argue about aim-time, we can even argue that on the combat-distances the difference wasn't so big anymore... but above 1000m it made a difference and the difference was still there.
I still don't get how the Firefly has a higher accuracy than a Panther D... I don't even get how the Allies have on average better accuracy.
It's not about Wehrabooism, since the Germans were pretty much the only nation to use widely milliradian-sights which seems to be completely ignored in this forum and by Eugen.
A German gunner was expected to hit on the first shot at 1000m and experienced crews could guarantee a hit on the 2nd shot even up to 2000m.
It is in no way understandable why German tanks have on average worse accuracy than their allied counterparts.
Not exactly encouraging then, don't get me wrong, I'm not some wunderwaffe fanboy but saying the jumbo is better protected than a KT sort of breaks immersion.
"Panther: Germanies quest for combat dominance"
from Michael Green and Gladys Green in combination with several eye-witnesses.
A US-Army report of 1946 had shown that the Panther was able to place all of its shots (a number was not said) within a 31cm-circle on 914m (1000yd). A report by the US-Army from 1945 showed that the gunner did not have to change his elevations for targets below 1800m (2000yd). To this comes the Milliradian-Gunner-Optic that allowed far better range estimations.
Thus I believe the eye-witnesses of German tankers in several documentaries and when I state an experienced crew can guarantee a 2nd shot hit on 2000m than it might even be an understatement since even 1st-shot hits are possible up to 2000m.
At the same time the following tables seem to be fine:
For Panther: http://www.panzerworld.com/7-5-cm-kw-k-42-l-70
For Tiger: http://www.panzerworld.com/8-8-cm-kw-k-36-l-56
For Tiger 2: http://www.panzerworld.com/8-8-cm-kw-k-43-l-71
Either the range of the cats is raised to 2000m (even when not being able to penetrate a Sherman frontally above 1000m maybe) or the accuracy must be adjusted in relation to allied tanks.
I have no problems when prices for them are adjusted accordingly.
Please all, bear in mind: I'm not making any statement regarding changes, neither positive nor negative, regarding allied tanks and I'm in favor of any change they deserve in relation.
They should have just arranged a system for armor and how it translates in-game, so we don't have this arbitrary 'feels right' stuff.
Since slope effects can't really be modeled in a game this simple, you can just use LOS thickness of the plate. 1cm rounded down to the nearest tenth = 1 point. Average for all plates on a given facing for final result. That should keep everyone happy.
Since slope effects can't really be modeled in a game this simple, you can just use LOS thickness of the plate. 1cm rounded down to the nearest tenth = 1 point. Average for all plates on a given facing for final result. That should keep everyone happy.
And even so you would still have the problem of having at-least 4 variables: Turret AV, Upper-hull AV, Lower-hull AV and amount of weak points in these. The debate would just shift to how the equation should be structured.
As I said, average all applicable plates.
Just to give an example of this:
M4A3 75(w) Front Turret = 76-mm@30° = 87.76-mm = 8-cm
M4A3 75(w) Gunshield = 89-mm@0° = 89-mm = 8-cm
M4A3 75(w) Glacis = 64-mm@47° = 93.84-mm = 9-cm
M4A3 75(w) Nose = 51-mm@56° = 91.2-mm = 9-cm
8 + 8 + 9 + 9 / 4 = 8
M4A3 75(w) front armor = 8
Panther G Front Turret = 110-mm@11° = 112.06-mm = 11-cm
Panther G Gun shield = 100-mm@0° = 100-mm = 10-cm
Panther G Glacis = 80-mm@55° = 139.48-mm = 13-cm
Panther G Nose = 60-mm@55° = 104.61-mm = 10-cm
11 + 10 + 13 + 10 / 4 = 11
Panther G front armor = 11
It gets most complicated when dealing with rounded surfaces, and those values aren't completely accurate. Just off the cuff as an example.
Just to give an example of this:
M4A3 75(w) Front Turret = 76-mm@30° = 87.76-mm = 8-cm
M4A3 75(w) Gunshield = 89-mm@0° = 89-mm = 8-cm
M4A3 75(w) Glacis = 64-mm@47° = 93.84-mm = 9-cm
M4A3 75(w) Nose = 51-mm@56° = 91.2-mm = 9-cm
8 + 8 + 9 + 9 / 4 = 8
M4A3 75(w) front armor = 8
Panther G Front Turret = 110-mm@11° = 112.06-mm = 11-cm
Panther G Gun shield = 100-mm@0° = 100-mm = 10-cm
Panther G Glacis = 80-mm@55° = 139.48-mm = 13-cm
Panther G Nose = 60-mm@55° = 104.61-mm = 10-cm
11 + 10 + 13 + 10 / 4 = 11
Panther G front armor = 11
It gets most complicated when dealing with rounded surfaces, and those values aren't completely accurate. Just off the cuff as an example.