Panzer 4s and Sweden and Italy

chi-to on 4.7 (literally japanese pz4) is another?

No I just think you are a novice player. Give it another six months and see how you feel. They are fine we dont need any more silly BR moves thanks. Low tier is safe haven from much of the WT stupidity currently.

1 Like

I played the Panzer IV back when it was 4.7 or so in 2019-20. While not bad, the Sherman and T-34 were way better choices typically at lower battle ratings. While the Panzer IV does get a really good gun, the armor is pretty thin. The T-34 has really good armor and a good gun while the Sherman has a good gun and good armor with a stabilizer.

The Panzer IV wouldn’t be able to fight a Jumbo either.

It doesn’t really matter except for being considered ‘good’ (could be important depending on the person) and the extra RP, which is the main reason I mention it. It took me like 1.5 hours yesterday to get the last 10k RP for the R3 purely because the team I was on would lose so often.

Never played it. Is it that good? Got no issues when I came across in a battle.

Because gaijin biasedly decided one day that they knew better than actual history and proceeded to nerf the combat power, effectiveness, & post penetration damage of the KwK 40 L/48 equipped Panzer IV Ausf H/J (& Stug III Ausf G) in this game to a mere Rank II status, even though in reality, these L/48 vehicles were considered to be superior to the 75 mm M3 Sherman & 76 mm F-34 T-34, being more at the level of the later 76 mm M1 Sherman & 85 mm D-5T T-34. Furthermore, to add insult to injury, gaijin then proceeded to introduce a fake, incorrectly depicted, non-combat, developmental prototype named the VK 30.02 (M) complete with questionable armor thicknesses in order to fill in the vacancy left by the inexplicable neutering of the Panzer IV Ausf H/J to Rank II. Or, in other words:

So what?

The Pz IV had a more powerful AT gun than the T-34 and Sherman but what is that going to prove?

It was clearly superior to the T-34-76 with it’s two men turret and inadequate visibility and crew comfort but the M4 could destroy a Pz IV more easily than vice versa, not to mention that the Sherman had much better frontal protection that made the 50mm PaK 38 quite ineffective, compared to a Pz IV that remained vulnerable to US 37mm and British 2pdr guns using APC ammo till the end of the war.

Even the long barreled Soviet 45mm could penetrate a Pz IVs turret from like 300m and the face-hardened side that protected against 20mm AP rounds didn’t do it any favours against 45mm blunt shells.


The Type-4 Chi-To had better velocity you know it could go farther. With less of an issue compared to the Panzer IVs who’s drop was heavier.

A 100m/s is worth a 1.3 BR difference?

1 Like

Idk man, i love the Chi to’s i did really well with them at 5.0 with chi ri. Id say 4.3 is better for them. Idk but i bounced some really dumb shots in them and the gun feels great

149 vs 152 mm penetration? 3mm are really worth to raise br by 0.7?

It’s funny they say the Cromwell was 2 years behind, as Cavalier (the precursor to Cromwell) was intended to be fielded in 1942. Though to a whole host of issues it was delayed time and time again. Though, not mentioned here is Comet. Which hit the battlefield roughly 6 months later than Cromwell in November 1944.

28 g of explosive vs 84 g its a massive differece in post pen damage thats why Chi-To is 4.7.


G/H and J are 3.7.

The Type-4s used to be 4.3 if I recall with 153mm of pen however because of this they dominated their BR.

In reality of game that means nothing. Japanese pz4 is by 1.0 br higher than his german analogue.

4g is at 3.3. chi to = pz4g

So most post pen damage means nothing ??? APCR is btter than APHE then???

In Italy and Sweden G and J are 3.7 .


1 Like

Pz4 does the same oneshots as chi to.
Strange that after lowering pz’s br from 4.7 to 4.0, they didn’t lowered Japs.

Yes. In some ways better, in some ways worse, but analogue.

1 Like

No, the Chi-to have much more choices of one shot due the massive explosive filler.

When Panzer 4 stayed in 4.7 Japan GF are not even planned.

Yes, both are medium tanks with turret and tracks. Please stop this nosense. Chi-to is comparable to other 4.7 medium tanks and better than Panzer 4s.
This stupid topic remember me when people start saying Waffentrager and SU-100P were similar.

Another funny thing is read how US players are demanding the old 90mm APHE with less penetration but more explosive filler because his better potential for one shot and here people are denaying more explosive filler is not a real adventage LOL.

1 Like