Any angled armour is an improvement, its basic physics.
Actual basic physics tells you that angling your tank exchanges the angle of your side armor for additional angle at the front.
The Pz.IV’s side armor is so weak to the point that it cannot make this exchange to any meaningful level. Angling the front just slightly exposes the side armor to cannons that previously would even struggle to penetrate the front of a Pz.IV H without angling.
Edit: I give up, you’re literally just replying for the sake of replying, without even reading what I’ve posted.
5 Likes
The physics applies to any thickness of armour ,it would apply to peice of paper.
you can only angle the PZ.IV armor an insignificant amount before you start exposing the weak side armor
EDIT: I am mostly thinking about short range engagements, maybe its useful at >800m fights
2 Likes
If you increase the front angle, you are decreasing the side angle. That is the entire point. Some vehicles can make that trade, others cannot because their side armour is too thin.
Unless you are stretching your vehicle through magic, it’s impossible to increase the angle of every part of the machine at the same time, if you angle one part more you are by definition angling another part less.
2 Likes
I doesn’t matter how much you change the angle,the fact is you slope the armour.M18 armour is incredibly thin but sloping it helps ,there is no question there.
A depends on the range and what is firing at you ,if the tank suddenly turns as you fire it may deflect, you know this
Sorry ,yes this has all become very vague and sunk on to basic physics
Angling, and barely so, only does anything for the Panzer lll/lV at longer ranges. Within medium and close ranges it does nothing because the armor is so thin and the enemy projectiles still retain almost all of their penetration ability.
Though I’m not sure why a " medium " tank is being discussed over heavy tanks.
3 Likes
Yeah that would be so nice.
But I also won’t them to fix the issue of weakpoints, like MG ports or driver optic, having more armor protection then the rest of the vehicle, instead of less.
Also the issue where a mantlet like on a Panther or Tiger gets penetrated and has no effect just because the round is stopped on the underlying turret armor.
With a round stuck or the mantlet deformed, it wouldn’t be possible to elevate the gun anymore.
4 Likes
Hello, I bought tiger 2 p and played for a while.
I think I can answer you now.
First of all, it’s not bad. It was fun to play rather than E and H series. At least you feel a little like you’re driving a heavy tank. It does not explode with a single damage always. According to my own playing style, I destroyed 5 tanks in one match. Of course, this is not always the case. For example, by the end of the game I can destroy 1 or 2 tanks or only deal a few critical damage. Sometimes the tank explodes, but this is very normal.
At least the tank can fight. You don’t feel like it’s an unfair game. But when I come across the Tiger E and H series, I can easily kill them. (That was what I wanted to say before for those tanks. They should make those tanks slower and decrease rotatation speed and they should send where they belong Br level.)
Usually the ones that shoot me are Soviet tanks. For example, when I use Tiger 2 P, or other tigers, my tanks are mostly exploded by Soviet tanks. I don’t have much to say about this either. After all, this is a Russian game.
I tested the tank only in the Ab. I gave up testing in Rb because I don’t think I’ll be playing rb anymore. I think Rb is a game about camping and seeing. (I mean I don’t have a rtx4090 and 4k monitor, lol.) Strangely, I noticed that my combat abilities were impaired when I entered AB mode after playing some RB. Because you are always waiting in it. Because if you move you get hit by a camper. But that’s not a question for me. I’m not interested in Rb anymore, I just wanted to share.
Sometimes less is more. When Gaijin updated the armour models of MG ports and drivers view ports to a more complex geometry, it added very little value to the game but created a lot of issues with them eating shells they have no business stopping.
4 Likes
Nah, KV-1 and T-34s are super strong with good to great armor and good to amazing mobiltiy.
The guns are just perfect for the meta with super strong APHE that penetrates side armor with ease, even at high obliquity.
Both are waaaay better then they should be compared to other medium tanks.
Mostly because their RoF is way higher then it should be.
On the topic of Pz IV side armor:
Even the weaker stock APHE is still able to penetrate the 30mm of side armor with ease.
It’s also my prefered anti-German shell because it one shots a Pz IV 9/10 times with the 150g of TNT compared to the round with less filler, that might only knock out the turret crew.
6 Likes
My exact thought.
What’s the point of accurate armor modeling when it results in unrealistic armor penetration behaviour?
3 Likes
I don’t play arcade.
The only “exception” is “dependant on terrain/features”. Places that allow you to angle what is exposed while limiting access to the otherwise vulnerable sides. And of course depends what the foe is throwing at you as some work on angles and some don’t.
3 Likes
That is not what was being discussed: if you angle, you increase front horizontal slope but decrease side horizontal slope. For example, if you angle your tiger at 45°, the side armour will also be at 45° from the enemy (because it’s a box). If you don’t angle, the front will be at 0°, and the side will be at 90°.
One increases, one decreases. You are basically just changing the distribution of armour exposed to the enemy.
With the Pz IV, angling the front more (and by extension the side less) can get you killed because even a minor reduction in side armour angle can lead to overmatch.
That’s something I use whenever possible to angle the Befehlswagen Tiger. Anything that hides one hull cheek is a godsend.
1 Like
Without proper context you dont know that is the case
Can also be dependent on what kind of shell the enemy is throwing at you - Though to be fair that bit is the most nuanced of the equation.
What actually is being discussed here ? It’s a badly made OP and just sounds like a rant ,but about what exactly? People seem to be agreeing then disagreeing and quoting physics that both agrees and disagrees with certain people at certain times.
That statement would be shot down if it were an era separation post which I think some people thought it was.Saying a tank in your approximate BR should not be able to harm you is vague and odd.The OP gives zero circumstances to how he was killed and provides no footage yet 24 people liked it.
I agree about heavy tanks but put a post on here about the Tiger being bullied by cold war artillery it should never facing and opinion turns.
without any context you still have this physics as you say
So people saying angling does not help for a Panzer IV ,well yes it will of course help but how much is the issue,not much at all in most cases but you can see the increase a 50 degree slop gives so to say angling does nothing is incorrect.Put the tiger in the game in a full uptier at 7BR and it too may find angling does little but it is a tank that supposedly should angle for better protection.
as for the discussion on the Churchill VII and it’s gun ,it’s an old one and swings all ways this from a long time ago.