Will the Panzer IV F1 have HEAT?

[Stein_Grenadier]

The T-28 is an anti-infantry monster with its 3 independent machineguns.

It’s prime drawback is its paper-mache armor that even 20mm, or even PzB rifles can penetrate frontally, and its otherwise nerfed shrapnel shell.

Now, the T-28E will have better APHE and applique armor plates which would literally address these two issues, and the applique plates will result in multiple spots will result in armor being thickened from 20mm to 50mm due to the additional 20-30mm applique plates.

The new APHE shell would also defeat every German tank available in the combat ranges in-game.

My concern is, the standard AP shell available to the Kwk37 barely has enough penetration to go through the T-28E’s armor, unless aiming at weakspots.

The balance of P4E vs T-28 was that while the P4E is a great all-rounder tank, it doesn’t have the raw anti-infantry capability of a T-28, however, with the P4F1 vs T-28E, the F1 will result in being an inferior tank in most respects apart from rate of fire, and size, especially given how its performance will be neutered with the absence of HEAT, and the patchnotes does not explicitly state it will be added, unlike the T-28E, which is noted to have the new APHE shell.

The effective difference between the P4E and the P4F1 is making the entire UFP a single plate, and increasing the turret armor from 30-35mm to 50mm. However, the standard 45mm 20-K gun ubiquitously available to soviet tanks will still have more than enough penetration to ignore this, so it would only offer protection against PT rifles from the front.

With the introduction of Tanker III squads in Moscow, you’re effectively re-grinding a P4E from 3 crew again, for no effective difference. I’d argue that the slanted plate in the P4E makes the tank more survivable given how there will be a spot in the UFP that cannot be penned.

If you all thought that the T-50 is a monster, then wait until the T-28E shows up.

[_mortebianca]

dont worry in somehow the will find another idiotic nerf to do a the t28E

[W4rPig]

For me T-50 is still the best option till they bring smth better. T-34 (1941) or KV-1.

[Stein_Grenadier]

The T-28E does everything a T-50 does, but better.
It will resist everything that isn’t a 50mm, and 50mm will still need to aim for weakpoints.
The T-34 is worse in the anti-infantry department.

Regardless, why bring that up in a thread about the F1 vs T-28E?

[W4rPig]

Cuz T-28 E is just waste of slot imo. They could bring smth better not another version of ‘improved’ T-28.

[jancc]

T28 e is a pretty good upgrade
It can actally fight tanks and has very good anti infantry capability of its previous model
And it wont make the enire tree irrelevant, which is nice

[Stein_Grenadier]

It is better.

Far better than what the T-34’s early variants can effectively be in this campaign.

There’s nothing a T-34 will offer over a T-28E apart from being iconic. And the earlier variants only have 4-man crews.

[US_Matt_LT]

And have good mobility, and better armour and gun and lower profile. Aka is way better

[LostHacki]

But when the Pz.IV F1 has heat and aim at some week spots, it will still penn… because of the Funktion how Heat works. So when you not aim at the turret, and Mg-turrets, it will still penne, becaus so
extra armore.

[LostHacki]

Yes the early t-34 fariant is stronger, but the turret cheeks are still to week, to reflect/bounce a Pz.IV shell. I don‘t understand all your problems. The T28E has still the weakspoot on the Drivers place. When you shoot there with the Pz.IV shell it will almost kill the T28E and T28 directly

[jancc]

It would have weakspots, but would still powercreep almost everything else into irrelevance
Pretty much t50, with gun of t28 e

[Stein_Grenadier]

An angled 50mm “weakspot”. The driver port has been reinforced.
Against a tank with 52mm of penetration point-blank. It literally cannot go through.
Did you even look at penetration table?
Do you even know what the T-28E’s armor layout is?

@UsMatelisLT

And have good mobility, and better armour and gun and lower profile. Aka is way better

The T-28 and it’s up-armored variant are about as mobile as a T-34.
Gun is irrelevant because both will punch through current and future axis tanks, and there’s no armor presently available that would make the extra penetration meaningful.

Both will laugh at kwk37’s AP shells
Both will resist 50mm

Where’s the difference?

T-28 has independent machinegun turrets. You spawn in a tank to provide infantry support. Effectively, for the job you want them to do, the T-28E does the same job better.

I swear, no one seems to have a clue how powerful the T-28E is.

[LostHacki]

The heat shell of the Pz. IV F1 has around 80mm penn. And too the max armore of the driversheatch has max. 50mm so the normal APCBC shell has still 2 more mm more penn

(The lower pic shows the ammo of the Pz. IV F1

[Stein_Grenadier]

Yes?
And? Thank you for essentially reposting what I mentioned in the OP

It’s a gun with only 52mm of pen on a flat plate at point blank against a driver port angled at 20-22 degrees with 50mm of thickness. In ranges not practical to be fighting tanks in.

A tiny bit of angle already renders that useless. And the T-28E’s driver port will deflect P4E shots already due to it having a small construction angle.

[LostHacki]

I play the game where I get this Infos from. And this 50mm plate has in the ende max 55mm when your not angell it. So when you use heat you will penn it… and heat is still anti-tank. Yes with the APCBC you will probably not penn at the driverhatch, but on the turret you can penn… when your not penn on the hatch still shot on the turret, becaus the point where you have no extra armore From, is Not small.

[Stein_Grenadier]

I must point out that at point blank, these are the only two weaknesses you can exploit.

[Stein_Grenadier]

And at a range of 500 meters, the T-28’s APHE shell will penetrate every frontal part of a P4F1 except for the driver port and ball section of the hull MG.