Should the Panzer IV (H / J) move up to 4.0 / 4.3?

Machinery of War Discussion Ground Vehicle
1

I’ve been having a blast playing the Finnish PS.221 (Panzer IV J), and I’ve noticed that it pairs really well with the KV-1 (1942) in the same lineup. As long as you don’t rush straight into close-quarters brawls and instead stick with your team or find a solid sniping position, the tank is incredibly enjoyable to play.

bild

The long 75mm gun has great penetration and solid damage. I’ve had good success dealing with the upper front plates of Tigers and the turrets of Panthers at around 500–800 meters. Shermans are usually easy to handle by simply aiming for the hull, and even Jumbos can be taken out reliably by targeting the MG port.

That got me thinking, wouldn’t it make more sense, BR and lineup-wise, to move the Panzer IV J (and maybe even the Panzer IV H) up to 4.0/4.3? They don’t perform nearly as well against 6.0 vehicles, so keeping them at 5.0 can feel a bit unfair in full uptiers.

My playstyle for the PS.221(Panzer IV J) is just like how you would play a Eventual Ps. 531(Stug III) Hang back with your team and make slow advances or simply stay along the borders of the map and pick off anybody denying access for your team, Be a Counter-Sniper if you will.

Opinions-?

4 Likes
2

H, yes, J, no

14 Likes
3

Id say the Side-skirts is more protection but i havent noticed it doing alot for giving the vehicle any further survivability anyhow- I guess they help with HEAT rounds but other than that ive not noticed the Side-skirts helping alot, The turret skirts seem to matter more to me for the 1st short anyway,

4

I think Panzers are one of the best tanks at their br even Spookston once take to br 5.7 and perfomed pretty well but sadly german mains dont use them pretty well

6 Likes
5

Sure, I don’t play tank battles but Pz. IVs don’t really care where you drop them.

6

H can go to 4.0, but J no due to turret traverse.

7

In short: No.

The Pz.Kpfw. IV’s are all at their correct Battle Ratings aside from the Ausf.J which is slightly overtiered. This version should be lowered to 3.3 where the Ausf.F2 and Ausf.G sit which are it’s equals.

The reason why they’re at their correct BR’s is because their American and Russian counterparts at equal BR’s are generally better (suited to the meta).

Quick break-down:

  • Gun handling characteristics: M4A1 > PzIV/T-34.
  • Armour: T-34 > M4A1 > PzIV.
  • Firepower: M4A1 > PzIV > T-34
  • Mobility: T-34 > M4A1 > PzIV.
  • Survivability: T-34/PzIV/M4A1

There’s no reason to put the Ausf. H at a BR where better vehicles sit.

3.7 is fine for it, especially when you’ve got the Sherman III/IV, M4 Sherman and Composito at those BR;s.

A tank being able to be up-tiered =/= A tank being under BR’d.

6 Likes
8

The “meta” argument only works if you define the meta as close-quarters brawling. That’s the flawed premise. Not every vehicle at a BR is meant to do the same job. The Panzer IV Ausf. J is not a breakthrough brawler — it’s a second-line fire support platform built around its long-range 75 mm KwK 40. Both it and the Panzer IV Ausf. H excel at 500–800 m with strong penetration and consistent post-pen damage.

By the same logic, you wouldn’t lower the M4A2 Sherman because its M3 75 mm isn’t ideal at long range — it’s designed for snapshots, mobility, and disabling shots before finishing. The T-34 (1942) is also strong, especially with its long-barrelled F-34, but it trades long-range precision for mobility and sloped armor.

Each tank has trade-offs. Sherman favors gun handling, T-34 favors mobility and armor geometry, and Panzer IV favors long-range firepower. Balancing the Panzer IV around the one role it performs worst in — urban brawling — isn’t a sound argument. In its intended rear-line and counter-sniper role, it performs exactly where it should at its BR. And if used properly it can go up.

Dont judge a vehicle where it is not designed or good, Look at the upsides it offers. If you do you can start to see the Pz IV is a brilliant kit capable of picking of opponents at range and using its decent mobility and gun depression do move around the edge of the map or flank enemies and take them out. The smoke launchers helps with retreat and obscurring sight for the enemy so it can relocate,

9

J is basically a taller StuG III F with a weaker gun, it’s fine where it is and it should be a sidegrade to the IV G

2 Likes
10

The map selection dictates the meta, unfortunately for the Pz IV’s, the map selection is not to their favour.

If every map were Fire Arc (or old Kursk) the Pz IV’s would be far more relevant and competitive in the meta, but alas, those are not the type of maps you consistently get at 3.3.

War Thunder as a whole rewards vehicles with high versatility and responsiveness which have the ability to quickly reach powerpositions and dominate large areas with consistent and lethal firepower.
Pretty much every online PVP combat game has a meta, War Thunder included.

You’re essentially admitting that the Pz IV’s fall outside of the meta here. That answers your question as to why they should not be moved up in Battle Ratings.

This is quite an oversimplification, because the Pz IV’s have far more drawbacks than advantages.

Let’s compare the M4A1 to the Pz IV G/F2:

  • Acceleration? M4A1
  • Reverse speed? Pz.Kpfw. IV
  • Hull traverse rate? M4A1
  • Turret armour? M4A1
  • Hull armour? M4A1
  • Side armour? M4A1
  • Reload rate? M4A1
  • Post-pen damage? M4A1
  • Penetration? Pz.Kpfw. IV
  • Secondary armament? M4A1
  • Stabilization? M4A1
  • Crew count? Pz.Kpfw. IV
  • Gun depression? M4A1
  • Turret traverse rate? M4A1

M4A1 will reach powerposition quicker, will get the first shot off thanks to it’s stabilizer, has better armour against the average opponent, reloads quicker, has higher one-shot potential via massively higher TNT equivalent, shreds SPAA, light vehicles and aircraft alike with it’s 50. cal and has far more responsive gun handling characteristics.

The stabilization alone already off-sets the Pz IV’s penetration advantage, having a stabilizer in a BR range where almost nothing else does is incredibly dominant.

You say that as if every playstyle is equally valid. It isn’t.

Certain players may find it enjoyable to sit back behind their spawns and eventually snipe an opponent that pushes up towards their side of the map, but that certainly isn’t a playstyle which will be rewarded with high impact on the outcome of battles.

Vehicles which suit this playstyle can be enjoyable to some, but we should not pretend that that makes them good vehicles.

7 Likes
11

Panzer 4 is just overated people think its op because of the gun while yes it can perform well at range 95% of lowtier maps focus close range combat which is fair as range is just not fun or fair

there not very armored armor is meta at this tier pretty easy to kill them even at the 4.7 T34-57 is you but basically better in every way as it has increased armor and better mobility as the panzer IV are slugs

panzer 4 is only OP when you flank the map find a good sniper spot and camp like those spots you see people abuse on youtube which are just unfair

in close range combat you will always have first shot first kill with the STAB of sherman and the T34 when angled can easily bounce it

there are more OP things that need to be raised such as JAGPANZER IV at 4.3 or the 4.7 KV1B which is just stupid op due to absurd armor being same br as ZIS 5 is absurd

personally there counter part like the japan CHI TO LATE which survives way more shots than it should sometimes are more viable than the panzer 4 as improved gun improved mobility and this is just my opinion better armor

it could maybe be 4.0 but at that point in a full uptier your facing M4A1 76s which just beat you unless your at range

3 Likes
12

  • H to 4.3

  • G to 3.7

  • Italian G to 4.0 (it has the L/48)

  • The F2s can stay 3.3 because they actually have thin armour, being vulnerable to low-penetration guns in the hull and not just the relatively small turret.

  • The Js can stay because of their turret traverse. They’re basically M10s with roofs. Could go up to 4.0 if the M10s/Achilles also go up but that’s not necessary.

The Panzer IV H has nearly the same firepower, armour, and mobility of the M4A1 (76). No stabilizer or .50 cal and slightly worse in armour and mobility which is why it should be .7 below, but not a whopping 1.3 below. Hell, the Chi-Nu II is 4.3 and the Chi-Tos at 4.7. Makes no sense for the Panzer IV H to be the same BR as the likes of the Cromwell or M24, or compare the G to the P40, T-34 '39, Chi-Nu, even Pz III M all at the same BR.

And while we’re at it, the Jpz IV to 4.7, it’s just a much better Hetzer and its frontal armour is insane for the BR.

And for people claiming that the Pz IV is useless in close quarters, are we talking about the same vehicle? Sure, it’s unstabilized, but it can also lolpen center mass on pretty much anything it faces short of a KV or Churchill. Meanwhile even with a stabilizer an M4 needs to aim for the turret while the Pz IV can just click anywhere, and the T-34 is just out of luck.

4 Likes
13

You can use a M10 at 5.7 and do well against German teams.

The only thing that the Pz IV has at that BR is a gun that pens as much as a US 76.

I mean it’s light years appart from the M4A3E8.

By the same logic you could put play the T-34-57 at 5.7 and do well.

Hardly any reason to change a vehicles BR.

I rather play a M24 at 5.7 than a Pz IV H.

7 Likes
14

both the T34 and M4 both have more reliable armor then the panzer 4 H

1 Like
15

Posts like these make me glad that Gaijin doesn’t always listen to community feedback.

A whopping 7mm penetration difference in apparently justification for a BR difference?

‘‘Small’’ ???

These Pz IV’s have some of the largest turret weakspots (well, the entire turret is a weakspot) of any medium tank in their BR range.

I’m at a loss for words here…

The Sherman III/IV, Sherman Composito and M4 Sherman are all better overall vehicles than the PzKpfw IV H is, yet you’re suggesting that a straight upgrade over all of these Shermans in the form of the 76mm version is somehow only marginally better than this Pz IV?

Japanese mediums (possibly) being overtiered =/= German medium being undertiered.

It does.

P40 is equal, T-34 is equal, Pz III M is overtiered.

Pz IV H cannot penetrate the vast majority of a properly angled T-34, not even at close range.

4 Likes
16

Sure, they have better armour than* the Panzer IV. But substantially worse firepower. Compare the protection the M4 or T34 provide against the Pz. IV vs the protection the Pz. IV provides against their guns.

17

didnt even wanna mention that one you angle in that your hull has really good chance of bouncing if the shot isnt placed extremely well

18

the STAB makes up for the sherman in CQC it immediatley brings gun on target the second you stop T34s at there tier get better armor then there sherman counter parts

19

The Panzer IV doesn’t even need to stop since it can penetrate center mass
I mean maybe you just can’t hit your shots and that’s fair, but in the hands of a reasonably experienced player it’s quite trivial

20

thats literally gambling if you dont place it well it will bounce only if there not angling will you guarntee pen the front plate the amount of times ive seen people shoot center mass on t34 just to bounce on drivers port

1 Like