Panzer 4s and Sweden and Italy

Ok so i think the long panzer 4s are undertiered, the F2 should be 3.7, the G at 4.0, and the H at 4.0 or 4.3.
Also im thinking of getting myself a lineup of 2.7 grb swedish tanks. I heard the l-62 is pretty good. I’m aslo thinking of grinding some italian tanks and using the P40 and the italian sherman and chafee because they don’t face germany that much right? Also how are the early italian medium tanks?


Why are they undertiered?

Their guns are very powerful, ive used them effectively at 5.7

1 Like

And everything else ?


Oh yes they are very powerful and my source is “cause I use it”.
So let me put it into a nutshell of what the Panzer IV’s became when their BR’s were 3.7 and 4.0 for a time.

Insert WII Music here


Early Italian tanks are good with mostly nice postpen, although they lack penetration. On the other hand for battles, where you encounter a lot of armored targets (like a spam of French B1s or just uptier), you can have Semovente in your line up. Hungarian Turans and Zrinyi are also very good.
There are some meme tanks in the tree: M11/39, L3/33CC and Csaba, which can be fun to use, but are usually not very effective.
Then apart from c&p M4A4 and M24, you have some very nice stuff like Breda 501 and Turan III, for which you can also make a solid line-up.
Later you can uptier Breda 501 to 5.0 and bring P-47 for CAS.

I’m currently trying to grind out Italian ground (as my first ground nation, I played mostly air before) and I’ve gotten through ~40% of the Italian tech tree thus far. My advice is:

Tier I: AB 41, M13/40 (I), M13/40 (III), M14/41, AS 42 (maybe). The rest either weren’t worth it or I just didn’t get to it (the only one that’s likely worth it being the AS 42/47).

Tier II:

  • 2.7 Lineup - CM52, Turan I, Zrinyi II, M3A3, 75/34 M42
  • 3.3 Lineup - Pz.III N, CM52, Zrinyi II, 105/25 M43 (or 75/34 M43), M3A3
  • Notes - Avoid the P40 like the plague if you want to keep your sanity, it’s essentially just a 2.7 vehicle IMO

Tier III:

  • 3.7 Lineup - M24, M4A4, M42 Cont. (or CM52 if you get annoyed by its tiny ammo count), 90/53 M41M (get this for the love of god, it is the best low tier vehicle IMO), 75/34 M43 or Zrinyi II
  • 4.7 Lineup - 90/53 M41M, Breda 501, M4 Tipo IC, M42 Cont. (or CM52), 75/46 M43
  • Notes - The Stug III G wasn’t really worth the 0.3 BR increase (you’re already going to get like 80% full uptiers). Oh yeah did I mention full uptiers? For 3.7 you’ll get like 80% full uptiers and for 4.7 ~65%. The M4A4 is by far the best Sherman we get, with the M4 Tipo IC coming in second and the Sherman Vc being third but massively worse than the M4 Tipo IC.

Tier IV: This is roughly where I’m at right now (the ones I have will be starred)

  • 5.7 Lineup - M18*, Sherman Vc*, M36B1*, Leo 40/70*, R3
  • Notes - My max BR is 5.7 right now, so that’s all I can do, but I can at least say that it is probably worth completely skipping the Tier IV vehicles lower than 6.7 (besides maybe the R3) as they seem to be completely useless and even more paper than the previous tiers (somehow).

Generally, you face Germany, the USA, and Russia equally-ish, although you somehow almost always end up on the worse team. Like not kidding, I’m not sure if I have a positive win rate for any of my vehicles despite usually being one of the last ones alive.

1 Like

Same, but I use them up to 6.7
They’ve also got good mobility and good hull armour, while the turret is thin it’s also a relatively small target which gives the Panzer IV an advantage in snapshots since it lolpens any other medium. They also of course handle heavy tanks much better than other mediums around the BR. Like, compare the M4A1 (76) to the Panzer IV H- they’ve got similar mobility, similar armour (though the M4A1 is better) and similar firepower though the M4A1 has a gyrostab.
Yet they’re a full 1.3 different in BR? The Panzer IV H is the same BR as the Chaffee, M4, Sherman II, and KV-1 L-11?

Here’s what I’d say for the long-gun Panzer IVs
F2 is fine, this one is genuinely very poorly armoured for the BR
G is a direct upgrade in armour over the F2, and significantly so as the hull front is no longer easily penable with most of the guns at the BR, so 3.7
J is good where it is because that hand-cranked turret; it’s basically a better M10
H further upgrades the armor over the G all-around and adds the moderately more powerful L/48. This thing is a beast, 4.3.

1 Like

I totally agree, the track armour on the H can make it pretty hard to pen with the 75mm M3 or the Soviet 76 if they hit a track, even at close range.

The long barrel Panzer IVs are unquestionably undertiered, however, they require more skill in positioning to do well in than other comparable mediums at the tier due to their weaker armor. Which, combined with the overall skill level of most new players who gravitate towards Germany (And the increase in CQB brawling maps), caused them to end up at frankly silly BRs.

Compare the G to the M10. The M10 has a couple extra mm of penetration (rarely enough to make a difference in game), and a .50 cal. In return, the G gets a massively better turret drive (Which is the critical weakness of the M10), as well as a closed roof to prevent strafes from killing it. It’s basically just a massively more flexible M10 at the exact same BR.

Then you have the Chi-Tos, both at 4.7, both very comparable to the Panzer IVs. Is slightly better explosive mass and marginally trollier armor really worth over 1.0 BR difference?

Personally, I’d say 3.3 for the J (A very close analogue to the M10), 3.7 for the F2 and G, and 4.0 for the H. And that’s being generous, IMO, the G could very easily survive at 4.0 with the H.

All my use was 3.7-4.3 and had a decent exchange considering I was new. PzIVs are hammered by an ever increasing bad use of vehicles.

Only of the PzIV/IIIs I had a “bad time” in was apparently the IV C, everything else was fine. And that was when US/UK were locked against DE/IT (and before IT).

Cromwell is not exactly a tough nut to crack. And that just has AP to shoot back with.

They never recovered after the major pen changes where the gun used to be extra good (Japanese). Then after the changes Japanese stayed the same and Germany had a few tanks jumped down, and notably the M10s and Achilles which I never understood (from own success with them).

So as usual there was a “nerf” then left at a higher BR for no decent reason that I can tell.

Try popping one at range with a Churchill VII from 4.7. A well played PzIV can be on par with the Church VII in these situations (well, it is an GB Infantry tank, so to be expected).

I was mostly refering to the other two of the “Big Three” (Since those are the nations new players tend to gravitate towards), meaning the T-34 and Shermans. Both of which have armor (And stabilizers on the Shermans) that will bail out the occasional misplay. The Panzer IVs, outside the near lol-pen gun, have no such handholds, so newer players will struggle more with them.

Ditto on this. The Achilles is a staple part of any British line I make up until 4.7, where it’s replaced by other 17 pounder equipped vehicles.

1 Like

Win rate does not really matter, just kills and deaths apparently according to Gaijin. Welcome to Naff Thunder xx

Effectively compared to what? A T-34-85 and a M4A3 (76) at 5.7 are miles better.

The Pz IVs have high penetration and decent armor but they are much more vulnerable compared to other mediums. Combined with the slow turret traverse speed they are much more easy to be killed by any other vehicle.

They would lose a fight against a Sherman, Cromwell or T-34 80% of the time.
Their sole advantage lies in being able to take out heavy tanks that would shrug off hits from weaker penetetrating guns.

Gun penetration alone is an irrelevant factor.

1 Like

They both rely on having a high penetrating gun. The M10 is excelent in the TD role, at long range and/or hull down. The Pz IVs can do the same but have weaker post-pen damage, worse turret armor and worse hp/t ratios.
Of course the M10 is way less effective in a mediumt tank role, since it is just much more vulnerable when exposed as well as having way too slow turret traverse speed to effectively brawl and flank.

The Pz IV is either a less effective medium tank or a much better tank destroyer compared to other medium tanks. If you get uptiered it makes little difference to spawn a Pz IV or a StuG G.

Yes. They also have better mobility, with the Pz IV H having pretty much the worst of any medium tank.

Odd… kept half decent exchange rates on my IIIs and IVs when I started RB. The foes would have been all Shermans/Croms/T-34s as this was during the US/GB DE/IT lock and before, and at 3.7-4.3, not low like they are now.

The Pz IVs would perform well at pretty much any BR. They have good pen even in full uptiers and poor armour even in full downtiers. In particular the massive flat turret cheeks are a big vulnerability.

In comparison, the Shermans and t-34s have great armour that can even bounce the KwK 40 with some distance and angling. Particularly in a hull down position the Shermans are very strong while t-34s are very fast and hard to hit. If you are having problem with them it’s really just a skill issue because it’s a matter of shooting first, which shouldn’t be overly difficult if you are using a stabilised Sherman or fast t-34.

1 Like