People tend to think of tank balance in terms of main guns instead of the overall platform. The Panzer IV as a platform is obviously worse than the T-34 and Sherman, no one can argue against that, the only thing the Panzer IV has going for it is the gun. Sometimes you have to just play the vehicles to understand beyond WOAH BIG NUMBER OP!
6 Likes
It’s the same deal with the French 8.0s with 200mm APHE pen but crazy mobility, turret traverse and 4s reload.
It doesn’t matter that some tanks have 200-300mm armor at the front when you can still one shot them through the side or with cupola shots.
Pz IV → OP because gun can kill everything
Char 25t → Overtiered because it can’t pen some vehicles from the front
It’s not that simple.
2 Likes
The reason is volumetric armor and Sherman stabilizer. In real life, in laboratory conditions, the stabilizer has extremely poor accuracy. But the game gave them reliable fire on the move.
And M10/Sherman absorb penetrations. Apparently one of M10s armor layers was twice the real tank.
1 Like
No it’s fine as it is .Nothing to see here,move along !
Not just that, he’s also viewing the T-34 and M4 from slightly too high up which negates their UFP angle. Also I know for a fact that both can pen the Pz IV’s UFP even with track armor.
I disagree. The Panzer IVs are pretty good in a downtier, but are mediocre at best in an uptier / slight uptier.
Most maps require you to play close-range, which is not good for Panzer IVs, as you mainly rely on your gun.
An M4A2 (assuming same skill level) curbstomps them like ease, as well as the Ram, since they have a lot of benefits over the Panzer IV, including the short-stop stabilizer.
If anything, the M4A2, KV-1E/B, and RAM should all move up in BR, or even decompress the whole BR range.
There is no reason why the B1 TER should be facing KV-1s and Panzer IVs, whereas there is no reason why the Panzer IV should be at the same BR as the RAM, nor the M4A2 (if it were to move up in BR). It’s too squishy, and this is coming from a person who aced their M4A2 for free, and has played the KV-1 (L-11) a fair bit.
1 Like
Maybe it’s just me, but I think the Chi-Nu II is fine at 4.3.
The gun is much better than the Panzer IV’s, not only because of the extra penetration (although sometimes it’s quite negligible), but also because it gets 84.8 grams of tnt, instead of just 28.9 grams. This makes 1-shotting opponents much easier, which somewhat reduces the drawback of having a 6.5s reload instead of a 5.9s reload.
The Chi-Nu II also gets slightly better HP/TON over the Panzer IVs, and has better turret traverse speed, although the armour is quite similar between the two.
They both have similar reverse speeds.
Maybe a 0.3 BR difference makes more sense than a 0.7 BR difference, but I don’t seem to be doing too badly in it, despite it supposedly being overtiered.
Hmm, maybe I’m misremembering it, but always felt faster than the Pz IVs.
The gun has quite a bit better angled pen than the german one, armor is only comparable to the Pz IV F2 and inferior to all later models.
All that you mentioned just proves that it’s not really worthy of 4.3 IMO - slower reload especially.
Neither am I, but clearly I’m better than the average ground player.
Have you compared your performance with it compared to other vehicles, like the Panzer IV?
Chi-To used to be 4.3.
It got moved to 4.7 cause it performed “too good”.
I dunno if they’re directly comparable. I was a slightly worse player when I aced its crew, and it has stats back from when I was a noob. I’ll check it when I’m back home in a few days.
You can perhaps play 10 matches of each, record how you do, and see how they feel.
Although, a lot of other things can affect how well you do, like whether or not you have both of them aced / experted, and what crew level they have (as well as what you spent your crew points on).
10 matches isn’t a lot to go by either, as one match can be statistically significant (out of 10), but I think it’s generally enough to have a sense of how you do with them.
Nah, 10 matches is way too small of a sample size and I’m not nearly consistent enough to make it even somewhat fair.
I’ll just post my overall stats and you can see for yourself.
And I was wrong, I don’t have an aced crew for the Chi-Nu II yet. But I’m very close:
Well, your KPS for your Panzer IV H is 1.97 while your KPS for your Chi-Nu II is 2.31 KPS.
So you are doing better in your Chi-Nu II than your Panzer IV H, but I guess we don’t know how much of that is because of gained experience or not.
I played the Pz IV H a lot when I was a noob, so I’m blaming that lol. I aced it before even buying the Chi-Nu II if memory serves me right, so I’m not surprised that I’m doing better in it. I wish you could filter stats by time period, or get a graph for each vehicle.
This is also obvious if you check my stats for the german 109 E-4 and japanese 109 E-7. They’re completely identical, but I’m doing way better on the latter.
2 Likes
4.0 rank 2 and foldered imo after the IV J would be best imo.
Even at that, Pz.IV H at 4.3 would still be very strong.
Move up nerfed is a complete nosense. This old Gaijin tradition with germans tanks need to be stoped.
If ausf. H is moved to 4.0 need the rank 3 change yes or yes.
Leave ausf. F2 in 3.3 rank 2, ausf. J in 3.7, update ausf. G to KwK L/48 like italian one to 4.0 and rank 3 foldered with ausf H. with the same same BR and rank.
1 Like
A rank 3, br 4.0 Pz4H would be awasome. The problem is that 4.0 T-34’s aren’t rank 3 either.
2 Likes
Yes, M4A2 should be moved to rank 3.
1 Like
Yes, why not.