those Tanks are still very lackluster and lack penetration power.
Just to clarify, their guns had at 1000 meters range STILL over 100mm of penetration power and in close combat should with a bit of aiming even still be able to take out IS tanks - and shouldn’t struggle with T34s at all.
So, since this has been an issue since the introduction of this tank, I am seriously questioning the devs knowledge about armor.
The German L43 cannon could pierce up to 83-110mm at 1km, T34s at the time had around 45mm frontal armor (90mm effective sloped) so it wasn’t aim whenever and it will penetrate 100% every time. At least at that range. Also APCBC or APCR, while technically capable of better penetration values didn’t have amazing performance against sloped armor. Also Panzer IV F2 didn’t get the 50mm frontal upper plate upgrade initially, decreasing it’s survivability if the soviet fired first. Also bear in mind that due to map design, close quarters, difficulty in identifying, taking aim and actually hitting a tank at those ranges is rather unlikely in this game. And with sloped armor, more powerful engine, more maneuverability and lower profile a “brawler” tank like T34 is more at home than the high profile, boxy “sniper” PzIV.
And the third and most important - tank models are horribly inconsistent.
Im kind of fine with “aim for weakspot” type gameplay but as its quite one sided often as in this case as well its quite shit.
To be fair, if the T34 would have to approach from 2km+ to 300-500m, and you had your german cannon and german optics it would likely be significantly less one sided. As it is right now, you have a stopgap measure Pz.IV with paper armor and slow turret traverse speed facing off the smallest and the most mobile T34 in close quarters. I don’t particularly like it either but it’s not supposed to be fair.
I mean, it’s arguably the best possible engagement scenario for the T34 and arguably the worst for the Pz.IV, and unless maps change no amount of reasonable buffs to PZ.IV will change that.
Pz4 having paper armor is “fine” but the fact that even with 75mm hv gun you need to aim for t-34 weakspots while t-34 kills you from any hit is quite shit.
Which is what I was referring with aim to weakspots gameplay being quite one sided.
I agree, but other than fixing tank models and or introducing more open maps that favor the German range and precision what would you suggest?
fix the penetration values of 75, way too often it bounces considering it shouldnt have hard time with t-34 even at long ranges.
Since spalling and what else after effects of penetration arent part of the game introduce the aphe for german guns that essentially does exactly what its currently missing.
Absolutely. Pretty please. For one it might make some Japanese tanks remotely playable with that change.
It should have a somewhat hard time front penning one. It did historically, and it should reflect that. These are not Pz.IVGs+ with the L/48 and hard cap ammo to handle sloped armor. What I agree with is that it shouldn’t have issues causing substantial damage when it actually pens.
Don’t they have it already? APCBC has an explosive filler unless I’m mistaken.
never heard of L48 having any issues with t34 variants.
If it does its way too random compared to soviet counterparts.
True. The F2, though, mounted a KwK40 L/43. They also changed the shells from soft capped to hard capped which immensely helped against sloped armor. Even early Panzer IVGs mounted the same gun but started refining the muzzle, improving the optics and gradually advancing towards what you’re thinking. The end result being Pz.IVs able to send a T34 back to stalin at ranges well up to 2km in 1943 with up to 140mm penetration as compared to 83ish-mm at 1km in 1942. Again, the T34 had around of 90mm effective armor up front and almost the same at the sides. It was a beast when it came out and even quite a few high ranking Germans proposed that they should adapt the design and improve on it.
According to Livingston & Bird (Which base their figures on German, US & British tests) the performance of the 7.5cm KwK40 L/43 & L/48 is as follows:
7.5cm KwK40 L/43
Muzzle velocity: 740 m/s (Pzgr.39), 920 m/s (Pzgr.40)
Penetration performance against 240 BHN RHA armour at right impact angles (0/90 degree’s)
100m = 133mm (Pzgr.39), 173mm (Pzgr.40)
500m = 121mm (Pzgr.39), 151mm (Pzgr.40)
1,000m = 107mm (Pzgr.39), 127mm (Pzgr.40)
1,500m = 95mm (Pzgr.39), 108mm (Pzgr.40)
2,000m = 85mm (Pzgr.39), 91mm (Pzgr.40)
2,500m = 75mm (Pzgr.39), 77mm (Pzgr.40)
7.5cm KwK40 L/48
Muzzle velocity: 750 m/s (Pzgr.39), 930 m/s (Pzgr.40)
Penetration performance against 240 BHN RHA armour at right impact angles (0/90 degree’s)
100m = 135mm (Pzgr.39), 176mm (Pzgr.40)
500m = 123mm (Pzgr.39), 154mm (Pzgr.40)
1,000m = 109mm (Pzgr.39), 130mm (Pzgr.40)
1,500m = 97mm (Pzgr.39), 109mm (Pzgr.40)
2,000m = 86mm (Pzgr.39), 92mm (Pzgr.40)
2,500m = 76mm (Pzgr.39), 78mm (Pzgr.40)
7.5cm PaK40 L/46
Muzzle velocity: 792 m/s (Pzgr.39), 990 m/s (Pzgr.40)
Penetration performance against 240 BHN RHA armour at right impact angles (0/90 degree’s)
100m = 146mm (Pzgr.39), 195mm (Pzgr.40)
500m = 133mm (Pzgr.39), 170mm (Pzgr.40)
1,000m = 118mm (Pzgr.39), 144mm (Pzgr.40)
1,500m = 105mm (Pzgr.39), 121mm (Pzgr.40)
2,000m = 93mm (Pzgr.39), 102mm (Pzgr.40)
2,500m = 82mm (Pzge.39), 86mm (Pzgr.40)
the results doesnt seem much different and tbh im not much of tank nerd the topic suggest due to rifling / ease of manufacturing / what ever reason is why they chose to go with L48 instead of L43
Alright. 
This means the test subject was flat, “soft” steel. BHN being the Brinell Hardness Number and RHA being Rolled homogeneous armour. Not hard to the point of being brittle and prone to shattering, but also more prone to deflecting like the type used on most period soviet tanks. T34 cirka 1941-1942 had about 430-480BHN sloped between 30* and 60*
Comparatively:
E22 steel plate
Feb. 1943, 30~50mm (PzKpfw.III, PzKpfwIV) → 279~324BHN
Feb. 1943, 55~80mm (PzKpfw.III, PzKpfwIV, Tiger) → 266~311BHN
Jun. 1944, 85~120mm (only Tiger) → 220~265BHN
PP793 steel plate
55~80mm (PzKpfwIV, Tiger), → 294~338BHN
From Jent’s Germany’s Tiger Tanks. VK45.02 to Tiger II: Design, Production & Modifications
And I appreciate the time to google those tests but bear in mind how there are quite a few conflicting ones. For example:
German tests with the 128mm L/55 gun against 30* sloped armor using APCBC/Pzgr.39/43: 500m=178mm / 1000m=167mm / 1500m=157mm / 2000m=148mm.
British tests with the 128mm L/55 gun against 30* sloped armor using APCBC/Pzgr39/43: 500m=215mm / 1000m=202mm / 1500m=190mm / 2000m=178mm.
Not sure about the Panzer 4 Ausf F2, but the later Kwk-40 L48 was capable of penetrating the T-34’s frontal armor up to ranges of 800-1000m. I have noticed that the Panzer 4 Ausf J does struggle a lot against the T-34-85 in the Berlin campaign, even at very close ranges (Hull frontal armor, aiming for the turret neck or turret front is going to penetrate all the time).
While not every shot penetrated and knocked out a T-34, at close range, the Kwk-40 should not struggle. I dont mind aiming for weakspots, but as long as the scope aim is so fast, its not working out too great.
I would suggest that they up the angled penetration of the Kwk-40, even just a little bit, as the raw penetration on its own is pretty good, its just that the angled penetration is too weak.
The experience in WarThunder is different, there the Panzer 4 with the Kwk-40 L48 has no issues whatsoever with penetrating the T-34s even at 1200m or when the hull is slightly angled.
I agree, although the stalinium can prove super effective there as well. What could be interesting though, is if they added some larger maps that allowed for longer range tank engagements, having the German tanks play on their strengths for once instead of almost always going into knife fights like they do now.
Yeah in WT the T-34-85 especially can even let Long 88s bounce off at times. Its all in the angled penetration.
T-34-85 vs Panzer 4 Ausf J on a larger map currently doesn’t work too great, as the Panzer 4 is an easy target, while the T-34-85 has to be taken out via weakspots that are hard to aim at with the current scope view sensitivity.
Should the aim sensitivity or angled pen of the Panzer 4 get improved a little, it would open up longer range engagements.