Movility nerfs, holes in the TT, sniping and open maps removal, etc etc etc. Is that of magically just in one day every person playing germany become in a bad player.
1 Like
Because Germany dont have NOTHING for compete!!! they relay in Panthers and trash 3.7 Puma and after nerfs only the Puma.
Sure, if they were slower, their UFPs could be easily penetrated, and their rounds didn’t have explosive filler.
The Panther is fundamentally not a light tank if it has best-in-class armor as well. Germany should get other light tank options.
1 Like
They are struggling to reach 50% WR for years now, even before all that.
German WW2 players are far from good.
That’s not a valid reason.
Panthers have ridiculously BS armor for a medium tank with decent mobility and great shell. Wanting anything more is just too much.
2 Likes
It was sorta fine at 6.0, when the Tiger E, KV-220 (which should be 6.3), and Panther A were 5.7.
But the 76mm Jumbo is significantly better in CQC (which low tier tends to be mostly made up of) than either the Tiger E, and sometimes even the Panther A. Since they’re both now 6.0, there’s little to no reason for the Jumbo 76 to move down to 6.0.
You can just shoot their barrel / weakspots before Tigers can get a good shot on your turret chin, or machine gun port.
Panthers are more scary, but have a much worse reload and turret armour, as well as no stabilizer.
They can sometimes UFP the Jumbo (especially at very close range), but very slight angling and shooting first normally helps with that.
That being said, I think the 5.7-7.0 area is still quite compressed (because they moved up a lot of 5.7 vehicles to 6.0 etc.) and so it doesn’t really make sense why the Tiger II P is the same BR as the Tiger II H, or why the Tiger II H is just 0.3 BR higher than the 76mm Jumbo.
Same with how the M26 shouldn’t really be the same BR as the T26E5, or the T34, or the M26E1, or the T26E1-1 (for the most part at least), or the IS-2 (1944) being the same BR as the Tiger II H, despite being mostly inferior other than having the great post-pen damage, DSHK 50.cal, and slightly better reverse speed.
I agree with @Ion_Protogen:
2 Likes
I disagree, when im sort of happy its 6.3 atm the moment, as everyone tend to go for Americans better 6.7 lineup. It means you get 6.7 alot. Making only one forth of the match 6.7. This is better than eating a fat 7.3 game.
its my most played vehicled
Im suprised this is still a topic, i remember when gaijin announced it was going to 6.3 EVERYONE was annoyed, myself included though not because i thought it would be bad at 6.3. It is my favourite vehicle to play when i want to have chill matches and since the m4a1, panther vk and t3485 where 4.7-5.0 you had alot of downtier at 6.0. especially that america was really the only 6.0 nation at the time with the walker bulldog and 76 jumbo. I liked dominating in it, it still dominated if you play it like a meduim tank. With an ace crew i think you have a 6 second reload or something like that which is faster that everything.
But yes, please make it 5.7. I will be a very happy man
I agree it’s better armored, but that doesn’t mean it’s 6.3 material (mainly due to the gun). Personally I think they just need to nerf its reload to like 9s to make it balanced.
If the reload were worse than the Panthers, I could see it being 6.0, or maybe 5.7.
But 5.9s reload with a decent gun (against vehicles at close range, and knowing where to shoot) is quite devastating.
Can easily wipe people out with little to no effort.
Man, you really had to try to find an angle where the panther struggled to pen your ufp and side. Because at 20 degrees you get yellow pens all across the track area with a panther at 500m and at 10 degrees most of the ufp is yellow at 500m. You have a 10 degree window at 500m. Anything less distance and they get to go through you anyways. So you have to play near perfect.
You also have the turret ring on the jumbo that has a 100mm weak point in the middle and a shot trap into the upper hull at the bottom of the mantlet.
Meanwhile, the weak points of a panther at 500m are just about as hard to hit no matter how he angles. You get the UFP for a transmission kill (same as jumbo), mantlet shot that is a checker board of 2-3 layers of steel, and the the turret face outside the mantlet. The jumbo is compact, so single hit kills are common. Its hard to 1-shot a panther through the turret with a 76mm due to the space inside the tank.
Jumbo is easier to kill by AA and autocannons, which is a more and more common problem. Panther side has only a thin line of 45mm with mostly 65mm due to the interlaced wheels. Jumbo is 38mm.
Half the US and brit tree is over-br’d when compared to germany or russia. It has been since beta. Germany gets things like the VK3002. US get the jumbo 76 and T25 while brits get the ratel 90 and church VII.
This is definitely not the case with the Panther A. Panther G and F, sure, but that’s because they simply always had the “nerf” that the Panther A received, that being that the Panther A used to have a 700 horsepower engine, and it got nerfed to 600.
Beyond mediums like the M-51 and arguably the M26, the Panthers become actually around the slowest of their BR. They don’t have bad top speeds but their acceleration is noticeably worse than the likes of the M4A3, T-34-85 and British mediums.
2 Likes
Nah I’d always take the F over the G or A. Outright immune to all the smaller guns, immune to US 76 beyond 600m, likely to just bounce it anyway even at point blank, and of course NO MUZZLE BRAKE so pesky barrel shooters don’t ruin your day.
Definitely not immune, just has weakspots that people forget, like the ball-shaped rangefinder housings.
If I, with my Jumbo 75, can hit a Panther MG port from 500 meters away and get a kill, someone with the more accurate, higher velocity US 76 mm can hit these things.
1 Like
I’ve never had someone pen me through the rangefinder balls. I don’t think many players even know its a weakspot.
3 Likes
Except your armour is your last line of defense.
You should be able to shoot first in most cases due to the stabilizer.
Not to mention that there are a bunch of other factors that can take into account how easy it is to get a good shot near the corner UFP or lower side plate of the vehicle.
Where do you see this 100mm weak point around the turret ring???
It’s at minimum around 150mm thick, if not more when you take into consideration of how the armour is angled.
The only place where you’d shoot it with only 100mm of pen is the machine gun port or the small cupola:
I’d say the average engagment distance on most low tier maps is around 200-300m. There should be little to no reason for you to be engaging Panthers from further than those ranges, unless you see their side.
Take Alaska, for example:
See how a side of grid square = 200m?
And you then can clearly see that most engagements in the city area will be quite close to 200m, if not much less.
At far ranges, I agree that Panthers generally are better than the Jumbos, but most engagements aren’t at far ranges.
At closer ranges, Panthers become much more easy to kill:
Hell, take the barrel if you need to.
I 100% agree, but then that’s where the 5.9s reload comes to play.
You can juggle between targets and eventually kill them with little to no issues.
Use your 50.cal to track them so that they can’t run.
Use their smoke to conceal your push… etc.
That is true.
Jumbos are easier to kill with SPAA than Panthers. Though if you die to them (when you have access to a roof-top 50.cal, 5.9s HE, and a stabilizer) - then it’s really on the player.
Panthers have 45mm of side armour (if you include the side skirts), but they can be dismantled fairly quickly - and then it just becomes 40mm.
Still better than the Jumbo, but is still very fragile:
VK3002 is mostly fine at 5.0.
Maybe 5.3… but then you realize its armour is very crappy at that point:
And even against 76mm Shermans or Panzer IV guns, as long as they aren’t angled.
Just shoot the turret instead, if the VK is angling.
Jumbo 76 is fine at 6.3, whereas the T25 could honestly be moved down to 6.0.
The Brit’s Ratel 90 sucks, so I could understand it going to 5.7.
As for the Churchill Mk VII, I don’t really know how you’d balance it.
It’s sorta like the MAUS of 4.7, since it has great armour but an abysmal gun.
Any lower and then its gun is just about good enough to stomp 3.3s (as well as its armour equally as impenetrable, with no clear weakspot for most).
The difference in acceleration is only noticeable for a few seconds (at least compared to something like an M4A3). The difference in top speed is much more noticeable.
Also gets a rangefinder and a 6.7s reload instead of just 7.5s.
But I still kinda prefer the trollyness of the Panther A / G mantlet - since the F’s cheeks are not going to save you from anything other than those low-pen guns at 600m+.
Anything closer than that, and M62 (and similar rounds alike it) can easily pen it anywhere on the turret, other than the gun shield:
Idk Puma is pretty good, compare it to the EBR at 5.3 and ill take the Puma. The Puma has its strengths but you have to know the nap and be patient and move as most tanks have 50 cals, pick your targets, if you play it hoping to just kill a T34 or T26E5 you’re being dumb. Pick your targets and never stay still after getting a kill.
The Panther A takes 17 seconds to reach 42 km/h, compared to 12-13 seconds on the M4A3, and that is on a perfect, flat straight road (tested in the Cargo Port map).
So with that said, I disagree. Most maps will not have such high quality roads, and a lot will even have turns during which better acceleration will be even more important.
Tables
Time to speed (asterisk denotes removed add-on armor)
| km/h | M4A3* | M4A3 | Panther A* | Panther A |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.45 | 0.45 |
| 10 | 1.00 | 0.88 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 15 | 1.70 | 1.71 | 1.95 | 1.95 |
| 20 | 2.92 | 2.96 | 3.34 | 3.37 |
| 25 | 4.17 | 4.25 | 5.12 | 5.20 |
| 30 | 6.45 | 6.63 | 7.59 | 7.67 |
| 35 | 8.87 | 9.13 | 11.09 | 11.20 |
| 40 | 11.45 | 11.75 | 15.20 | 15.45 |
| 42 | 12.54 | 12.91 | 16.95 | 17.25 |
| 45 | — | — | 19.79 | 20.17 |
| 46 | — | — | 20.79 | 21.17 |
Time between speeds (asterisk denotes removed add-on armor)
| km/h | M4A3* | M4A3 | Panther A* | Panther A |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0-5 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.45 | 0.45 |
| 5-10 | 0.50 | 0.38 | 0.55 | 0.55 |
| 10-15 | 0.70 | 0.83 | 0.95 | 0.95 |
| 15-20 | 1.22 | 1.25 | 1.39 | 1.41 |
| 20-25 | 1.25 | 1.29 | 1.78 | 1.83 |
| 25-30 | 2.28 | 2.38 | 2.47 | 2.47 |
| 30-35 | 2.42 | 2.50 | 3.50 | 3.53 |
| 35-40 | 2.58 | 2.62 | 4.11 | 4.25 |
| 40-42 | 1.09 | 1.16 | 1.75 | 1.80 |
| 42-45 | — | — | 2.84 | 2.92 |
| 45-46 | — | — | 1.00 | 1.00 |
To point out, since the way I got these results was by recording videos and checking the frames (the frame which determines the “start” is when the driver shifts from neutral to 1st), at very low speeds the acceleration of the tanks is such that 60 FPS recording simply isn’t precise enough to accurately give the time, which is why you see the somewhat inconsistent results at very low speeds up to 10 km/h.
The second table exists because it gives a better look into the acceleration itself of the vehicles. You can tell that at no speed range does the Panther out-accelerate the M4A3 (except at very low speeds because of limitations of video recording).
2 Likes