Jump to content


Pz IV a bad joke with V0.8.0?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
299 replies to this topic

Epicolor #41 Posted 28 September 2012 - 06:07 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 511
  • Member since:
    02-15-2011
On patch day i did the following after seeing test server and patch notes of final 0.8.0:

1. Sold PZ4
2. Bought StugIII
3. Moved and trained crew from PZ4 to StugIII
4. Disabled assault game mode.
5. Pressed Random Battle with StugIII.

Alabamatick #42 Posted 28 September 2012 - 06:13 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 1,039
  • Member since:
    04-11-2011
I was going to sell it but i tried it and was having a very fun duel with a t 29 heavy around a building , which i was winning, until i got sniped in the back a couple of times from a stug, (i was haveing so much fun i forgot there were other tanks around).

I do agre that it needs some toughening up, (i've allways said it needed the hull sideskirts too-ARE YOU LISTENING WG) :Smile_honoring:

SeerEast #43 Posted 28 September 2012 - 06:14 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 285
  • Member since:
    11-01-2011
Wargaming doesn't give a single damn about their game and especially none about the people playing it. You are only relevant as paying customer.

ClassicFrog #44 Posted 28 September 2012 - 06:18 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 1,309
  • Member since:
    04-05-2012

View PostKellomies, on 28 September 2012 - 05:43 PM, said:

T-34 more or less has no meaningful armour *at all*

When I said I've mixed them two tanks up I was referring to the transmission location only.

FreakDC #45 Posted 28 September 2012 - 06:22 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 1,644
  • Member since:
    07-29-2011

View PostKellomies, on 28 September 2012 - 05:43 PM, said:

T-34 more or less has no meaningful armour *at all*.
Duh. Cannon aren't going to even notice a 5mm plate.
Nice attempt at a meaningless personal attack there... at a Pz IV owner.
Overperforming or not, it's a blunt fact that it was overgunned for its tier and class and it was solely a question of time before it'd lose the Hugeassturm and the L/70 as another step of the same reorganisation that already cost several Soviet tanks their more questionably powerful guns.
You do realize that the T-34 now has more then 80mm effective armor at the front thanks to the normalization nerf right? Now compare the sides and rear. Also better then most T5 meds (only III/IV has better armor).
It slightly more vunarable vs arty then some other tanks but the Pz IV is not one of these (most HE vunarable T5 med in the game).

The spaced armor is not 5mm it's not there at all. A 5mm plate would reduce the penetration of a shell that penetrates by roughly 20%, it also should negate HE and HEAT rounds (the acutal reason it was there in the first place).

I did not mean to personally attack you, just debunk the silly mantra "Pz IV was OP and needed to be nerfed". There is no evidence what so ever that showed that the Pz IV was OP. It had major drawbacks and the turret armor and gun were the ONLY advantages it had. It does not have a single advantage over the other tanks anymore. T-34 has DPM (and accuracy), M4 has the single best gun depression in game coupled with the best view range and best all round performance.

In a lot of T5 tournaments the M4 was the most used tank not the Pz IV.

The L/70 wasn't even that much better then the M1A1 e.g. only 10mm penetration. Actually now the gap between the M1A1 and L/48 is bigger then the gap between the M1A1 and L/70 in 0.7.5. IRL the L/48 performed slightly better then the M1 (longer version of the M1A1) due to the better shell cap quality of the German rounds.
Not talking about the ZiS-6 again just read what I wrote in my last post.

Murdeer #46 Posted 28 September 2012 - 06:28 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 1,040
  • Member since:
    04-30-2011
It is not a bad joke, just useless and pointless...

better to remove from game and give 1 free day premium...

Murdeer #47 Posted 28 September 2012 - 06:31 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 1,040
  • Member since:
    04-30-2011

View PostEpicolor, on 28 September 2012 - 06:07 PM, said:

On patch day i did the following after seeing test server and patch notes of final 0.8.0:

1. Sold PZ4
2. Bought StugIII
3. Moved and trained crew from PZ4 to StugIII
4. Disabled assault game mode.
5. Pressed Random Battle with StugIII.

they will do the same from the stug 3 too...

Rautaa #48 Posted 28 September 2012 - 06:36 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 3,645
  • Member since:
    06-08-2011

View PostFreakDC, on 28 September 2012 - 06:22 PM, said:

The L/70 wasn't even that much better then the M1A1 e.g. only 10mm penetration.

And here I was believing in somewhat higher accuracy and alpha...

T-25 has a bit of slope too, by the way.

xy876 #49 Posted 28 September 2012 - 06:39 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 1,129
  • Member since:
    04-23-2012
Higher accuracy for PzIV is true, but the lower alpha of M4 is almost compensated by the higher RoF.

GENERALnachocheese #50 Posted 28 September 2012 - 06:42 PM

    Junior Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 162
  • Member since:
    07-13-2010

View PostFreakDC, on 28 September 2012 - 06:22 PM, said:


The spaced armor is not 5mm it's not there at all. A 5mm plate would reduce the penetration of a shell that penetrates by roughly 20%, it also should negate HE and HEAT rounds (the acutal reason it was there in the first place).

the skirts didnt had any effect on normal shells, unless they got hit at an angle where the shell would bounce from something anyway, a 5 mm steel plate gets penetrated by a normal mg like the mg42 or the .30 cal. they where not designed against normal shells.
they where there to trigger ammo that relied on explosions to work, detonate at some distance instead of directly on the tank, like reactive armor today does.

i would say give the pz4 20% additional protection against HE and HEAT damage, on the turret, give it the skirts for the hull as a module to mount for additional protection. the extra weight made the tank a bit slower, but 2 km/h arent much compared to the protection against explosives.



Kellomies #51 Posted 28 September 2012 - 06:43 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 4,774
  • Member since:
    06-16-2011

View PostFreakDC, on 28 September 2012 - 06:22 PM, said:

You do realize that the T-34 now has more then 80mm effective armor at the front thanks to the normalization nerf right? Now compare the sides and rear. Also better then most T5 meds (only III/IV has better armor).
Never had much trouble shooting through it anyway. And, yes, the Pz IV (III too for that matter) always had appallingly flimsy sides IRL - the Shurtzen were originally added because Soviet infantry kept shooting through them with 14.5mm antitank rifles.

Quote

The spaced armor is not 5mm it's not there at all. A 5mm plate would reduce the penetration of a shell that penetrates by roughly 20%, it also should negate HE and HEAT rounds (the acutal reason it was there in the first place).
First, see above for their actual raison d'étre. Second, like assorted add-on sandbags and whatever they probably only *helped* HEAT penetration as period shaped-charge munitions lacked the nowadays standard elongated "nose probe" that ensures proper standoff distance for optimal jet formation - which such outer screens now duly helped achieve. Not sure about how HE would react, probably depends on exact make and fuze tolerances. If it didn't go off at the outer screen then it'd just plow right through and detonate on contact with the hull as normal. Never bothered to shoot HE at Pz IV turret sides so I've no idea how it goes in-game.
And I flatly refuse to believe 5mm plate would have any meaningful effect on serious antitank shells. Japanese tanks, flimsy as they were, nevertheless had thicker skins than *that* and Sherman gunners preferred to shoot HE at them because their AP shells tended to just plough right through the vehicle without even the bursting charge going off.

Rautaa #52 Posted 28 September 2012 - 07:08 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 3,645
  • Member since:
    06-08-2011

View PostKellomies, on 28 September 2012 - 06:43 PM, said:


Never had much trouble shooting through it anyway. And, yes, the Pz IV (III too for that matter) always had appallingly flimsy sides IRL - the Shurtzen were originally added because Soviet infantry kept shooting through them with 14.5mm antitank rifles.

Since you are well researched into the subject, can you think of any reasonable/historical way to buff the PzIV so that it could have a meaningful role in tier V? Or is the thing just supposed to be (historically accurate) KV fodder?

pagandk #53 Posted 28 September 2012 - 07:16 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 319
  • Member since:
    04-10-2012
You can all argue all you want.. it doesn't matter. This is not about balance. It's about cool cash for WG. They nerf the income on t5-t6s and introduce new T6 premiums.

xy876 #54 Posted 28 September 2012 - 07:17 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 1,129
  • Member since:
    04-23-2012
I don't know why is this "historically accurate" stuff matters at all. The game has tanks that never existed in the first place. How could they be historically accurate? What happens when they tweak the values of a tank to buff/nerf it? Are they changing history?

The whole thing doesn't make sense. Game balance is valid argument. Historical accuracy is pure bs in this arcade game.

Rautaa #55 Posted 28 September 2012 - 07:22 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 3,645
  • Member since:
    06-08-2011

View Postxy876, on 28 September 2012 - 07:17 PM, said:

Game balance is valid argument. Historical accuracy is pure bs in this arcade game.

In the end, balance is the only argument. However, sometimes history provides sensible solutions to present day problems, be they in the house, the garden, or in an arcade tank game.

FreakDC #56 Posted 28 September 2012 - 07:23 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 1,644
  • Member since:
    07-29-2011

View PostGENERALnachocheese, on 28 September 2012 - 06:42 PM, said:

the skirts didnt had any effect on normal shells, unless they got hit at an angle where the shell would bounce from something anyway, a 5 mm steel plate gets penetrated by a normal mg like the mg42 or the .30 cal. they where not designed against normal shells.
they where there to trigger ammo that relied on explosions to work, detonate at some distance instead of directly on the tank, like reactive armor today does.
i would say give the pz4 20% additional protection against HE and HEAT damage, on the turret, give it the skirts for the hull as a module to mount for additional protection. the extra weight made the tank a bit slower, but 2 km/h arent much compared to the protection against explosives.
Well I never said that skirts did reduce penetration of shells by 20%, ingame spaced armor does. If you penetrate spaced armor the shell loses a part of the penetration (according to some mod post roughly 20%, I think it was overlords post about module damage and normalization).

Realistically it should stop HEAT rounds because the metal jet is focused like light going through a magnifying glass. As soon as you leave the focal point (which is at a set distance from the detonation point the metal jet disperses quickly. Even a wire mesh was enough to detonate WW2 HEAT rounds and prevented them from detonating.
Modern HEAT rounds use mutiple warheads to "burn" (it's actually still more a punch) through multiple layers of armor.

View PostKellomies, on 28 September 2012 - 06:43 PM, said:

Never had much trouble shooting through it anyway. And, yes, the Pz IV (III too for that matter) always had appallingly flimsy sides IRL - the Shurtzen were originally added because Soviet infantry kept shooting through them with 14.5mm antitank rifles.

First, see above for their actual raison d'étre. Second, like assorted add-on sandbags and whatever they probably only *helped* HEAT penetration as period shaped-charge munitions lacked the nowadays standard elongated "nose probe" that ensures proper standoff distance for optimal jet formation - which such outer screens now duly helped achieve. Not sure about how HE would react, probably depends on exact make and fuze tolerances. If it didn't go off at the outer screen then it'd just plow right through and detonate on contact with the hull as normal. Never bothered to shoot HE at Pz IV turret sides so I've no idea how it goes in-game.
And I flatly refuse to believe 5mm plate would have any meaningful effect on serious antitank shells. Japanese tanks, flimsy as they were, nevertheless had thicker skins than *that* and Sherman gunners preferred to shoot HE at them because their AP shells tended to just plough right through the vehicle without even the bursting charge going off.
Exactly the Pz IV was designed for infantry support (early versions A-F1) and upgraded for long range encounters (F2-J). Why force it to brawl in WOT?

The HE protection was mostly from HE fragments not the HE shell itself. But depending on the fuse it could also cause the shell to explode prematurely.
Direct artillery were rare but the fragments could damage the tracks and suspension, optics etc.

However ingame spaced armor would offset the HE explosion from the actual armor and reduce the penetration of the shell. It would lower the chance of a penetration and reduce the HE damage you take.

There is no good reason not to give the spaced armor an ingame effect, other then lazieness because they have to rework the hitbox.

If you don't believe 5mm steel could render a HEAT shell ineffective think again or read a WW2 tank handbook. In German manuals like the Tigerfibel tankers are instructed not to use HEAT when the gun barrel is covered by e.g. tree branches (field camo) because even bush/tree branches can detonate a HEAT round.

That's why later in the war (and even today) most countries just use wire mesh or something similar (T-34 used bed springs :Smile_veryhappy: ).

Posted Image
Modern anti HEAT armor. Cheap and lightweight.

Edited by FreakDC, 28 September 2012 - 07:28 PM.


Claymored #57 Posted 28 September 2012 - 07:26 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 630
  • Member since:
    08-04-2011
PZ4 is now a joke no threat at all no match for M4 or KV's, my bet is within a month they'll become a rare sight and everybody will move to either the M4 or KV for a credit maker.

TIGERACE007 #58 Posted 28 September 2012 - 07:28 PM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 350
  • Member since:
    01-19-2011
yeah its shite but what can you do. The important thing is that in real life it was much much better and no amount of German tank hating can change the real facts

Mucker #59 Posted 28 September 2012 - 07:48 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 755
  • Member since:
    04-15-2011

View PostSeerEast, on 28 September 2012 - 06:14 PM, said:

Wargaming doesn't give a single damn about their game and especially none about the people playing it.

Yeah. If they would, the game would look something like that:

Posted Image

No thanks.

Killatomate #60 Posted 28 September 2012 - 08:28 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 1,811
  • Member since:
    05-13-2011

View PostRautaa, on 28 September 2012 - 07:08 PM, said:

can you think of any reasonable/historical way to buff the PzIV so that it could have a meaningful role in tier V? Or is the thing just supposed to be (historically accurate) KV fodder?
"historically accurate" would mean that the 7.5cm L48 gun would have 128mm pen and 130 damage instead of the fake crap that WG put on the PzIV.

but then KV-1 wouldnt be the unchallenged king of tier 5 that it was always supposed to be.