I’ll make it simple.
The M26 is less capable against what it faces. The Panther is more capable against that it faces.
Bringing up low tier TDs just proves my point.
6 Likes
No, you’re confusing being able to penetrate tanks from the front with being more capable.
Like all this time, you are just focusing on one advantage and ignore the fact that the Panther is limited in other ways.
Don’t put some vehicles in some imaginary 1 vs. 1 and say: Oh this tank can pen more vehicles from the front and can resist getting penetrated through the front plate that’s why this vehicle is always better than the others. That’s not the reality of the game, it’s just one possible situation.
The whole existence of BR proofs that the M26 is not less capable, or how would it be at 6.3?
BRs are based on vehicle efficency. Getting kills and earning SL and RP.
You gonna have to explain that one, because I don’t see how that would be related.
The Jagdtiger is 6.7 because it’s extremely limited. Big gun, super strong armor but no turret, slow reload, low mobility. There is no relation between the BR of the M26 and the BR of the Jagdtiger.
1 Like
Because american mains was skilled players from another nations when US tree was first added in game so they fastly made good statustics for us tree. And because us vehicles with stab or speed worse pen and no armor requires more skill to use it probably most american players became more skilled with every rank. When hellcat was first introduced it was something super new for soviet and german mains and was super effective because they was accustomed to turretless armoured TD so M18 with unnerfed mobility and skilled players flanked and killed everyone. Another vehicles the same. So medium players like me still must lower statistics of american vehicles. With 0.1 kd results.
You’re the one that brought up Tigers and Panthers fighting an M26 at long range. I’m point out that Panthers are stronger at long range against Shermans and the M36 than the M26 is against Tigers and Panthers. Not sure how you saying the M26 at range is valid but the Panther at range is some imaginary 1 on 1.
US tanks are forced to flank, German tanks are not.
6 Likes
And what about it?
Very funny. You know it’s actually more like German tanks are forced to play at range.
You make it sound like fighting at range is the only possible way and that US tanks can only take out German tanks when they “flank” them.
The entire German Rank III is filled with big gun, weak armor TDs, armored TDs and of course Panthers and Tigers. All of them work best when staying at range and can point big guns or armor forward.
Did Gaijin ever state why they’re refuse to address 90mm ammunition problem as a whole ?
The data about shell performance are there. Report has already been made (some are as old as 3+ years now).
Because of their formula
tbh that a bit silly given that they did give some sort of modifier to some ammunition to make them perform better at angle. They even said that they will retain some ammunition with old modifier if i remember correctly.
T33 should get modifier too. I want to stop thar frontal rushes with T33 at ufp
1 Like
You made the claim the M26 is strong at range against the Tiger and Panther. The Panther is superior at range against its common opponents than the M26 is against the Panther.
The advantage of the Panther A and G at range is more significant than the advantage of the M4 at flanking.
1 Like
Pls quote me on that instead of telling me what I supposedly said.
Is it me or is the text below the second quote not showing? I can see it when editing but not in the actual post :(
Your opinion. I played 5 matches in the Panther A and G. In none did achive anything by having great frontal armor or high penetrating gun. In all cases I shot vehicles that I could have penetrated with the Pz IV, with the exception of a M4A2 at like 800m. Meaning in all cases I could have achive the same or more in another medium tank. In those matches I shot like 8 vehicles from the front and more than that from the side.
- Two T-34-85. One shot absorbed by the gun cradle the other bounced it with the driver port.
- Two M36 at around 500m right through the front, both not aware
- A PT-76B through the front
- A M6A1 at +1000m. First shot did penetrated the side but only turned ammo yellow, second didn’t hit because of RNG accuracy, third took him out.
- An M4A2 at 800m. First shot Gaijined between UFP and transmission housing. Second shot aimed higher, hit the same spot because of RNG accuracy, killed some crew. Third shot took him out.
- An M4A2 at 150m, he shot me while I was reloading but bounced, I shot him in the cupola and finished him off with a second shot in the turret.
The only time I survived getting shot, while my tank was exposed, was in the first match with some T-34-85 sniping at range. Bounced a shot, then got my traverse taken out by someone and then I couldn’t get out of the line of fire because of the crappy reverse.
At all times I felt like the Panther was actually holding me back. I don’t plan on getting shot so having better frontal armor for all the Panther related disadvantages is not worth it.
I rather have T-34 or Sherman frontal armor and good reverse speed or more engine power and a less “powerfull” gun for better traverse and depression angles, because I know it’s much more important to have a vehicle that can get into a position to kill than have a vehicle that can survive getting shot.
Getting shot accomplishes nothing. At best you survive and can shoot back but the enemy might be in a position to just avoid the fight.
A Panther isn’t a KV-220. Not looking at you? Still can’t penetrate its armor. Panther not looking? Dead.
Your opinion. I played 5 matches in the Panther A and G. In none did achive anything by having great frontal armor or high penetrating gun. In all cases I shot vehicles that I could have penetrated with the Pz IV, with the exception of a M4A2 at like 800m. Meaning in all cases I could have achive the same or more in another medium tank. In those matches I shot like 8 vehicles from the front and more than that from the side.
- Two T-34-85. One shot absorbed by the gun cradle the other bounced it with the driver port.
- Two M36 at around 500m right through the front, both not aware
- A PT-76B through the front
- A M6A1 at +1000m. First shot did penetrated the side but only turned ammo yellow, second didn’t hit because of RNG accuracy, third took him out.
- An M4A2 at 800m. First shot Gaijined between UFP and transmission housing. Second shot aimed higher, hit the same spot because of RNG accuracy, killed some crew. Third shot took him out.
- An M4A2 at 150m, he shot me while I was reloading but bounced, I shot him in the cupola and finished him off with a second shot in the turret.
The only time I survived getting shot, while my tank was exposed, was in the first match with some T-34-85 sniping at range. Bounced a shot, then got my traverse taken out by someone and then I couldn’t get out of the line of fire because of the crappy reverse.
At all times I felt like the Panther was actually holding me back. I don’t plan on getting shot so having better frontal armor for all the Panther related disadvantages is not worth it.
I rather have T-34 or Sherman frontal armor and good reverse speed or more engine power and a less “powerfull” gun for better traverse and depression angles, because I know it’s much more important to have a vehicle that can get into a position to kill than have a vehicle that can survive getting shot.
Getting shot accomplishes nothing. At best you survive and can shoot back but the enemy might be in a position to just avoid the fight.
A Panther isn’t a KV-220. Not looking at you? Still can’t penetrate its armor. Panther not looking? Dead.
1 Like
If I misunderstood your point here, then my bad.
I was talking about RL scenarious. The M26 can penetrate them at any range, hull down or not, and in RL one round through the turret would be enough to end the fight.
Of course the M26 in-game is also very effective against them at any range.
Just because the M26 can’t easily kill a Panther at range doesn’t make it less capable of killing tanks in general.
That’s like saying: Tank A can’t penetrate a Jadgpanther frontally and Tank B also can’t do that.
That’s why Tank B is not better than Tank A.
It has no relevance how effective vehicles are against a particular opponent or particular situation, it’s relavant how effective they are in general.
The Panther has advantages that make it great for fighting at range, other mediums aren’t that effective at that. However, a US 75mm will penetrate a Panthers side from 2km and so will a 76mm with a Tiger. Just because other mediums aren’t good at taking fights at range, doesn’t mean they can’t kill vehicles at range.
I don’t need a Panther to be able to kill a M18 or PT-76 from 1km or exposed medium or heavy tank.
A Panther just gives you some securitiy in specific cases where the enemy is going to be better armored or shooting back.
If I’m going to overwatch a 400m or longer path in a T-34 or Sherman, I’m gonna do it from a position that lets me quickly retreat behind cover. Maybe I will not penetrate every part of their armor like with a Panther 75mm but chances are the target doesn’t even need that much penetration.
If an SU-100P or 2S1 gets in your line of sight, I rather take the RoF and .50cal of a Sherman or the high velocity HE of a Challanger.
But M4 and T-34 must fight the Panthers and other german heavies and they need good pen. When Panthers fighting unarmored enemies
I think it should be noted that the Panther is a fairly common tank in the Br 5.3 to 6.7, so being with an American tank it would be quite common to face it, for all this I think it would be interesting if the 90mm cannon could pierce the Panther , since historically it could and so in the game it would give the M36 and the M26 a somewhat more frontal combat mode, because otherwise, for example, you are using the M36 in the same way as using a sherman but without a stabilizer and taking longer to reload in exchange for penetration that is not of much use to you since if you pierce the panther in the turret with the M36 you also do it with the M4A3 76W, the only difference would be that it does more damage, but you would have little more advantage.
The issue is the A and G fight tanks that are less capable of killing them at long range, while the A and G are more capable of killing them at long range and are still decently mobile to be threats in CQB. The Panther is certainly more capable at range than the M26, relative to what it fights.
The A and G excel at range and are decent in CQB.
The M26 is outclassed at range and is good in CQB.
The M4 is significantly outclassed at range and excels in CQB.
The M26 is not significantly better in any way that merits a .7 BR difference, especially with the nerfs in performance and the tanks it will fight.
7 Likes
Not to mention that the M26 has a lot more exploitable weakspots compared to the Panther. The lower hull buldges is thin enough for even a Panzer IV to shoot through and the machine gun port is a ginormous weakspot. The crew hatches are also reliable weakspots, especially when shooting through it the game doesnt model the turret armor to get you one shotted.
Meanwhile, the Panther only has the very trolly turret for the M26 to shoot through, one thats very volumetric prone and an exercise in frustration to hit in lone range.
5 Likes
It’s not an issue. You just trade better long range fighting performance with reduced CQB performance.
Except that CQB is way more important in WT and having an advantage at fighting at range doesn’t mean the competition can’t kill others at range as well.
You also seem to forgetting that the Challanger exists. It fires APDS with 1200m/s velocity that can penetrate the same targets the Panther can, but with nearly 50% faster RoF and super fast turret traverse. Infact you can penetrate more targets.
But I guess that doesn’t count right? Any tank can easily penetrate the Challanger so it’s not a problem at all. Because, if we just imagine that we’re in a position to shoot another tank, than there isn’t a problem right?
Wrong!
A Challanger has supreme mobilty and super fast traverse speed + a gun that can penetrate more than a Panther.
So everytime you are able to shoot a Challanger you would also have been able to shoot a Panther but evertime you were able to shoot a Panther, a Challanger would most likely have shot you first.
Like I said. You’re imaginy scenarios don’t make sense because the Panther is not capable to be in the same situations as the other vehicles.
A simple: Tank A can pen Tank B and B can’t pen the UFP of Tank A only tells you that.
That’s like comparing the speed of two cars without considering the acceleration or vise versa.
Jagdtpanther → Great armor, great gun. Yet the IS-2 is 6.3. Why? Because it can shoot and get into cover, which is still safer than reloading in half the time but get shot while doing so.
Not to mention that you can shoot and kill targets without having to change the direction you’re moving.
SU-100P → No armor but still higher BR. Why? Because you have some traverse and can kill before getting shot, while also being able to reverse into cover.
2S3M → Low muzzle velocity, bad traverse, long reload. Still higher BR. Why? I have no clue.
Maybe it’s because the hull while weak doesn’t knock out the vehicle when hit with APHE.
This makes it basically a Panther D that can reverse with big boom gun and +18hp/t ratio.
IT’S PROBABLY BECAUSE WHEN USED IN THE 5.X-6.X RANGE, IT’S VERY MUCH LIKE THE SOVIET HELLCAT.
DENYING THE SIMILARITIES BETWEEN THE TWO VEHICLES IS JUST DENYING THE OBVIOUS.
Sorry had to make that little running gag xD
1 Like
