Pz 4 J destroys Jumbo more efficiently than t34 85
But in general, it is desirable that they fix the tanks(it is annoying when you see that the enemy is looking in one direction, but actually at you).
n-noâŚ
well, thatâs another problem for another time
I donât know,Iâd rather be on pz4 against jumbo than t 34.
You can leave jumbo, but not from t 34.
In fact, this model t34 (which in general most likely did not reach Berlin in reality) has a much lower tower armor
Although the back of her armor is as much as 2 mm thicker xD
And I also lied,the pz 4 has a thicker frontal body armor, but without a slope(Why did the Germans start using inclined armor only on the panther?)
1 Like
I did play pz4 for a few days on the start of the campaign⌠I didnât had a single problem killing t34sâŚ
But meh, itâs a pz4 after all. A sweet panther is waiting at level 12.isnt too high and acchivable in a few days worth
But thatâs just me.
1 Like
okay mate, listen up.
first the panzer IV J had 80mm of frontal armor, not 30 mm
and 80mm of frontal armor is about as powerful as 45mm of angled frontal armor.
second both tanks had a powerful enough gun to go through over 100mm like butter.
third, your statement that the 85 mm gun would deal more dmg than a 75mm is pure nonsense, both projectiles had enough power to create enough shrapnel to disable each other in just one center mass shot.
If I shot you with a 50.cal or with a 20mm you will die 100%, it doesnt matter that the other projectile is bigger.
4 Likes
itâs from the offical war thunder wikipedia.
which, to quote the enlisted one:
it says 80.
but over normandy, the stuart with a 37/35 mm can pen it frontally.
so unless they buffed the shells for the 35, i hardly think should be capable to pen 80 mms.
because the panther has a frontal armor of 80âŚ
surely not a pz ivâŚ
( which in real life does have, but apparently, not in the game ).
i donât know.
i ainât a tanker.
i just simply adapt when it comes to fight vehicles.
you should complain that to the devs or who made war thunder.
which, iâm not sure will change anything. but be my guest.
the 85 is somewhat designed to fight panthers and tigers.
which again, i hardly think you can do anything against the panther frontally due to itâs slopeness. but ideally, it goes through the sides like butter ( as it happens, and should. i guess ).
yes it matters?
size is almost everything.
thatâs why if you shot someone with a pistol itâs not the same thing than the same guy getting shot from a 7.92 bullet.
1 Like
Well, here are the results of one fight that I just played.I destroyed 2 t34.1 severely wounded and 1 time died from t34
A very funny traffic jam made of broken tanks,this is also a problem by the way.
This is also not on the topic,but the Germans do not lose a bit.
And over time, there were clearly problems on the forum, my last answer was 21 minutes ago,but the fight lasted 27 minutes, and I definitely didnât write anything during the game.However, this is again not on the topic.
And this is exactly why you are not thinking about what you say.
Tell me, why is a rifle round more powerful than a pistol round again?
9mm vs 7.92mm? because its bigger? are you serious?
Nobody gives a shit about Normandy, itâs the CoD kiddy playground.
because of the hitpower.
guns are differents you know.
2 Likes
my god, simple physics !
mass and velocity is what decides the penetration power of a projectile.
In the case of rifles and firearms, to make sure your bullet deals high amounts of dmg your rifle round are usually made with a soft core, that way a bullet deforms or fractures when entering your target, which will rip your enemy apart from the inside, as well as create devastating âexit woundsâ.
Now, the 8mm mauser was more powerful than a 9mm luger because of the much higher velocity. And this logic applies also in tank combat.
So you might compare the panther and the panzer IV and ask yourself: âwait both have 75mm guns, why would the panther be better?â
Velocity! Velocity! Velocity! Not only had the panther a âlongerâ barreled gun, which increased the velocity of the projectile⌠the panther projectile also had a much larger cartridge or âpropellant chargeâ. In fact the panther projectiles velocity was fast enough to outperform the Tigerâs 88mm gun.
So a nice example for this would be if we compare two bullets with each other:
7.62x54R (Mosin) vs 7.62x39 (SKS or AK47)
both are 7.62âs but the âx54â and the âx39â describe how big the bullet casing is, or how big the âpowderâ charge is, meaning the Mosin round had higher velocity than the AK round, making it more powerful.
So if we now, take all the intel and go compare the penetration power of our WW2 tanks we will find out:
Panzer IV F1 < Panzer III J < T34-76 < Sherman 75 < Panzer IV H < T34-85 < Tiger1 = IS 2 < Panther = Pershing = Firefly < SU 100 < Tiger 2 = Jagdpanther
Now that being said a better gun does not mean better tank, or better 1vs1 direct combat power.
some things needs to be said:
-The IS 2 had better armor but a much worse reload speed than the Tiger I
-some allied tanks like the firefly used âarmour-piercing discarding sabotâ shells in the end of the war, which could even penetrate the Tiger II
-A lot of german tanks were designed to be very effective at longer ranges, the panther for example was not suited for city combat because of very thin side and top armor.
-the high penetration power of the panther tank was not needed in closer ranges, because the Stug III or Panzer IV had enough penetration power to destroy most allied tanks at under 500m distance
-The IS 2 was not as powerful from a penetration perspective, however the mass of the projectile was often enough to âbreakâ the enemy tank even without a penetration.
-the very heavy german tanks like the Tiger II had poor steel quality, breaking often even against guns that should not penetrate on paper.
2 Likes
A few corrections, mass and velocity dictate kinetic energy, while things like shape, material and size improve contextual penetrative power. A more massive round tends to spread itâs kinetic energy around more, making a bigger hole but also making it harder to penetrate certain objects.
54 and 39 are indeed the sizes of the casings, but it doesnât inherently imply that one has more power over the other. Itâs actually pretty dumb, because the 7.62 denotes the bulletâs diameter, not the casingâs. Meaning that you have a bullet in the caliber of 7.62 and a casing in the length of 54mm, but we donât know what the casingâs diameter is, nor how much of the casing is occupied by the bullet. But in this example, the 54R round has a roughly 1mm bigger casing.
But yes overall, youâre right.
1 Like
call it âadditionsâ not cerrections : )
im aware of things like steel or tungsten penetrators, and since we are not initially talking about rifle rounds, i wanted to keep things âsimpleâ, even tho the topic is not simple to begin with
ISU 152 tore down the tiger tower, sort of.
1 Like
ture
1 Like
I meant casing diameter, sorry. ~11mm vs ~12mm. So alongside having a longer casing, it is also wider for more powder.
1 Like
Why u no post on Reddit?
Nice test info, wish people would do more of this - test it out in the real world, and show results.
But in regards to the topic - my T-50 in Moscow is also very OP, I barely even get scratched, frontal is extremely sloped. Nothing can touch me, except maybe the last unlock of the PzVI with 75 mil. But even that - I havenât been blown up, I think. You can quickly back out and run away, even if penned a bit.
Anyway, tank balance is a good topic for discussion. BUT we must remember the FUN thing, the fun factor. This is a video game, so itâs important to keep people entertained. So OPâing some things might be a good idea - cause itâs fun. Just make sure other side get itâs own OP thing, in something else.
Cheers