The only thing that makes the Pz.IV’s gun accurate is the muzzle velocity being higher than most other cannons.
In actual dispersion, the KwK40 is identical to the 17 pounder (0.075° maximum vertical and horizontal dispersion), and almost 3 times worse than the US 76 mm (0.027° maximum).
Magic 50mm that bounces 6 pounder shells lmao
That’s true, but it’s also why they could probably be a bit higher in BR: it’s not like their armour is any less survivable at 4.3 than 3.7, it’s always going to be zero, they’re always going to be glass cannons. So long as the guns work, they work… A bit like glorified tank destroyers frankly.
I would get out of this habit of shifting BR in the old lower tiers .It should all be left to settle down and work should concentrate in truly broken areas of the game.That is why this game never feels complete or working 100%
All BR shift does is ruin line ups.
I think whether you take the Sherman,Panzer IV or T34 is down to personal preference and maybe the map design.You have all 3 running side by side with Sweden.Of those 3 I find the Panzer to be the worse in terms of surviving shots and firing on the move.
Panzer IV is nice if you can sit and pick a target which maybe why the OP got taken out.
The OP did not mention circumstances ,just a rant as he probably took an hour to get to the battle then got one shotted by a Panzer waiting or getting lucky.
The scenario is common ,you turn a corner and come face to face with a Churchill,your arse twitches like a rabbits nose and the Churchill fires ,doing little with it’s popgun ,then you take your time because you know you are in trouble if you mess it up and you aim for those weak spots which the Churchill VII does have.I would rather take the Panzer under those circumstances .With the T34 I might try to get to the side of him.
All speculation without knowing what happened.
All I know is if you play the Churchill then you will start with a very long and slow drive while your team mates are racking up kills ,so be very careful how you make your entrance or you will have wasted your time.
But that’s only in Arcade 🤔
The percentage increase between arcade and realistic is… identical (difference is due to rounding).
That’s because the engines get the same horsepower multiplier applied to them in arcade compared to realistic, which just cancels itself out in the fraction, giving the same result in both arcade and realistic.
What an odd comparison in game and in reality.
I’m purely talking in game. I have no clue what the dispersion of the KwK40 was like in real life.
However, in game, it is literally identical to the 17 pounder (which is really not that good, dispersion wise).
Yeah, my mistake. I only looked at the stock RB performance for some reason.
But why is the performance increase is so big from stock to spaded for the Chi-To?
The Pz IV goes from 10.17 hp/t to merely 11.36 while the Chi-To goes from 11.61 to 16.39
I’m actually not sure, whether mobility upgrades give the same performance increase for all vehicles but I always assumed they do.
It all depends on where you aim and how your angle your tank. For example, a lot of people cry and complain that the tiger shouldn’t be penned by a Sherman because of the 100 mm armor. But if you angled properly, you wouldn’t have died to begin with. Not to mention you can kill a jumbo by shooting the machine gun mantlet.
We have some random elements though and not forgetting crew skill.
By default they do.
However, Gaijin can actually change how much a specific upgrade impacts the horsepower on a tank if they want to. You can see this on the T28 premium heavy tank/tank destroyer, which has mobility upgrades that impact the horsepower a lot more than normal, although it doesn’t matter in this case as it is premium and comes spaded.
However the Chi-To’s case is much simpler: it got a buff in horsepower from 400 to 500 and whomever changed the spaded horsepower values on the wiki forgot to also change the stock horsepower values.
That does go to show, however, that even before the buff and with stock engine the Chi-To still has the same horsepower/ton as a spaded Pz.IV H.
That just sounds like players are being smart and have adapted to the threats they’re facing.
Unironically, aim better because the turret face is completely flat. That’s no exaggeration, it’s a big target on both sides and apart from clipping the mantlet there’s nothing for your shell to get stuck on.
6 pounder was an anti infantry gun for HE not really an anti tank gun and its not a great gun in the game but maybe with a higher muzzle velocity before they bored it out to the 75mm the Churchill VII had.
Either version are not brilliant guns for the BR.The Sherman gun fitted to the NA75 is probably the best Churchill.I presume I am preaching tot he converted here anyway.
Anti infantry or not, it can penetrate 50mm of flat armor to much greater ranges than 99% of players can shoot to.
I would not bet on a Churchill or Cromwell taking out a Panzer IV from the front before the Panzer IV got the UK tank.The chances of a 57mm bouncing off the front of a panzer turret are high so to me its a bad example.
The OP’s tank,the VII has a 75mm which actually had lower muzzle velocity and is a poorer AT gun.My point is the OP had nothing to moan about regarding facing the Panzer IV as far as I can see.The game played out as I might expect having played the Panzer IV so many times.
I love the Panzer IV and I think it is in the correct BR range but it wont take the hits like a T34 will or maybe a Sherman if you are aiming at the dome turret.I think all 3 of those tanks are as well balanced as this game gets.In fact I would leave the WW2 era alone and sort top tier out if I were Gaijin.
Like you say if you play the UK then you really do need to know where to hit.
You look at this image and tell me how 50mm of flat armor, even with T-34 tracks on top for another 15mm, is gonna stop a 6pdr. Because it’s not even close to stopping the 75mm and the 6pdr has more penetration.
Like I have said before ,we dont know the OPs circumstances. So if the enemy had bushes like your pick or was angling or moving the turret then anything can happen.I also dont know what point you are making? Are you attacking the OP or defending him? Are you attacking the Panzer IV or defending it? You want a proven Panzer killer then NA75 is the way to go if you want to avoid the big exchange you will most likely get when facing a P4 face on from any kind of distance in a Churchill .
I’m making the point that the Pz IV’s armor is shit. Sure it has a good gun and can kill most things it sees easily - the same is true in return. It doesn’t have in any way, shape, or form, “near Tiger level of protection” as was claimed by someone else. Even with bushes, you can still see the barrel and guesstimate where the gunner side is.
Sure we don’t know the situation OP was in, but we do know that the Pz IV has practically no armor. The same cannot be said for a Churchill 7 being shot at by one - angle it a little and outside of pretty small weakspots, it’s pretty much invulnerable.
I wouldn’t say that and there is a big difference in Panzer IVs across the board from early to late.Its a tank that has to be played a certain way.It has Tiger like similarities in some ways but at a lower level.Its a box so it can be angled. I don’t agree with calls for it to uptierd in any way though.
as for the Churchill I can only leave this
