I do agree with this. The playerbase blames the low BR of the Pz IVs on the noobs, but even looking at the performance of the Italian PZ IV G vs the Sherman I Composito makes it clear which of these is actually meta and which isn’t, in the hands of the same players.
The problem with Pz IVs isn’t even the fact that they have no armour, it’s that they’re slow. Mobility is so important to influencing matches.
Sure, they’re great TDs/snipers. Sniping doesn’t win matches in today’s WT tho.
Starting 4.3 onwards and especially 5.0 onwards is where the ground tree really starts cooking.
I’ve spent the past month telling German mains to move their fat asses out of their camping spots and to take the fight to the enemy. Map control is everything. Though, it hasn’t been helped with the KTs engine fix (aka nerf), but too many German’s fall into the pitfall of playing too defensively. Sure, you can farm kills that way, but it isn’t conducive for winning matches. Easy for me to say this in Flakpanzer, however.
I don’t care how good you are - whether you’re squaded or not, you still rely on your team to be somewhat competent more often than not. Sure, some games you absolutely carry the team, infrequently you can win losing battles via a nuke, but for the most part you need your team there forming the front line. It’s why one death leavers are so devastating to their teams, you just get outnumbered and destroyed.
@AurenKarach and I have had our games where we’ve tried our best to get a German team over the line and it just doesn’t happen:
Or maps with funnel kill-zones like Attica. Hate that map - in large part because I often end up on tentative teams that play not to lose, as opposed to playing to win.
Sherman is way better suited for moving.
Pz IV while moving gets basicslly even more vulnerable, as side weakspots show up, basically every horrible shot finds a way to go through.
On the other hand, Pz IV can’t really shoot back effectively
This means M4s feel more mobile, as they have better ways of making use of that mobility.
It’s not a rat vehicle, it’s a very speed and for its weight, very maneuverable tank with great armament. It’s everything you want. Good mobility, reliable armour, fantastic gun.
It’s not maneuvrable.
Total lack of reverse means if you find yourself on uneven terrain, turning will take ages. On flat it’s also not doing great.
Mobility is mediocre/bad. Gun is v. good, armor is solid.
Gun is not “fantastic” as it lacks post-pen, US 90mm is a better weapon overal, especially with vastly superior APCR that allowsnUS tanks to frontally tackle Jagdtiger within 400-500m.
That’s a cool story, no doubt. I can machine gun Turm III to death using Soviet 14.5mm:
But it doesn’t take that much away from how good the Turm III is because you’re not playing it for its armour. Same with T-34-100, it’s all about the gun and your ability to not get hit. It’s just a fun tank.
One thing I will say, I don’t know why some people prefer Whirbel over Ostwind. Ostwind all day for me.
One of my favourite prey in the Flakpanzer 341 are M18s. I feel like they’ve taken a big hit since 341 was buffed.
Yep. It’s a map that’s super inviting to snipe on. But if you lose the initial engagement, it is almost impossible to mount a comeback. It’s quickly becoming my least favourite map to play, because you either alpha strike it or you might as well go home, and I get really bored at the idea that I have to spawn something mobile in it to get a foothold.
And despite this, Italian players perform much worse in it than in the Ic. Meanwhile the H and J are in a late war overweight format that penalises their mobility even further.
Normally the later version of the vehicle offers improvements, or at least a lateral move.
But the loss of the turret rotation power drive is crippling.
The only worse version is the Swedish version, which doesn’t even get the chassis side-skirts or add-on armor.
I have no idea why someone might play the panzer 4 J version, except as possibly a meme tank.
It’s the latest Pz IV but also worse than the H due to the lack of power traverse.
So BR wise it should be lower than the H but it’s also kinda pointless, since why would you chose it over the G or H.
It would only work with less compression and maybe if flat layered armor was actually worse than single piece armor.
It was also the only Pz IV that didn’t have face hardened armor, which could be an advantage against M61 shot that in reality only penetrated like 90mm of RHA.
