• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

So, about tanks...

That its true. The game I think calculates your position to the enemy. Would you shoot from a hill, straight to a panthers armor at a 90% angle, you can penetrate it i think even with a T34/76. I could not say it for the 76 for sure, but at least its for the 58 true!.

Angle, hight and position of the shell does matter.


You could in a 76, I did on a version of Arad repeatedly at ranges of 600-1200 meters :p
 
Upvote 0
I can rember, that someone said, russian armor, even though that it was sloped, wasnt that effective with some tanks, cause of flaws in the material, compared to the german armor.

I just have to roll eyes at comments like these. Not only is it hearsay but also untrue. Russian sloped armor was the reason why Germans even created Panther in the first place. It was created to compete with T-34s because other German tanks couldn't.

Even General Heinz Guderian wanted Germany to make copies of T-34s with their sloped armor for his troops because he considered them to be superior.

yes i have read about that as well. But it was still superior compared to allied armor plates. Just below german standarts from past.

Below German standards from the past? Past German standards = no sloped armor. It wasn't "far superior" to allied armor plates. Panther was designed to compete with T-34. And even with all its complexity, it didn't have a balanced armor distribution, having about 110mm in the front turret, and only about 45mm in the sides, which was crazy.

T-34/85 could still compete well with Panther. Note that I said compete, not which one was superior. You can't tell with certainty which one anyway and any bias would be complete BS and you know it.

The reason why it could compete? I'll just quote an already excellent answer from a different discussion:

"...is because a T34-85 could successfully engage Panthers, and vice versa.

Your counter to that would be 'No, it can't, a Panther has superior optics and AP capability, and armour, and is therefore way too good for the T34'. Which is bull, of course. Singular characteristics aside, the T34 did not have serious difficulties with penetrating Panthers at engagement ranges. Furthermore, it was a more mobile, more reliable, cheaper, more resource efficient machine that could be maintained in the field with very few problems, and required relatively little training for reasonable crew operation. Now, for the armchair enthusiasts amongst us (I'm looking at you), the latter considerations might make the T34 a less 'noble' beast in your eyes... Fortunately, the Soviets had greater interest in actually winning the war than thinking about how they would look sixty years later to pasty teenagers dreaming of the exploits of the Waffen SS in their gleaming black uniforms in a conflict they couldn't possibly comprehend. "


Then there is IS2 with improved armor and firepower, and quite capable of taking out any German WW2 tank without a problem. What, you say that it was released after the Panther? Well, so was Panther after facing Russian armor.

Here are some additional quotes from Germans in regards to T-34s in WW2:

"It was the most excellent example of the offensive weapon of Second World War." - General Mellentin.

"Their T-34 was the best in the world." - Field marshal Kleist.

Anyway, this is an example of how an innocet thread with a simple question about sloped armor, and without specifically putting down any country's armor design, can turn into a childish:

"Mine's better than yours! I heard from someone, somewhere, can't remember where, that yours had some defects against some tanks, even though I don't know what defects and agaisnt what tanks. Therefore, ours are by far superior than yours (because I've read it somewhere, can't remember where)!"

The only thing missing is a link to a dubious Wikipedia article.

By the way, I'm not coming back to this discussion. I don't care that much. And I'm not into never-ending flame fests. Just take it as a second opinion and do your own research, if you're curious.

Cya! :)
 
Upvote 0
Simple:

angleza0.png

i see... I failed to understand thickness... damn I thought it is ment to be "more thin"... my bad :)
 
Upvote 0
Below German standards from the past? Past German standards = no sloped armor

According to British tests (Woolwhich trials) the Panzer IV 's frontal armor is 10% percent better than the British machineable quality plate and in some cases better than their homogenous hard
-Panzerkampfwagon IV tank by Ryan Perrett
Most German armor is sloped in the front but not completely like the T-34. Also the Panzer IV had face-hardened plates called Zusatzpanzer which were very high quality where as the T-34 suffered from poor steel quality.

It wasn't "far superior" to allied armor plates. Panther was designed to compete with T-34. And even with all its complexity, it didn't have a balanced armor distribution, having about 110mm in the front turret, and only about 45mm in the sides, which was crazy.

Its actually 50 mm upper side armor and 40 mm lower side armor for the Panther G. The T 34 only had 45mm of low quality sloping armor on the entire hull (front, side, and rear) which made it suspetable to most German AP rounds from 1942-1945. Sloping does not matter if:
1. You have a high velocity gun or high penetration gun.
2. The gun's ammuntion overmatches the armor thickness.

I just have to roll eyes at comments like these. Not only is it hearsay but also untrue. Russian sloped armor was the reason why Germans even created Panther in the first place. It was created to compete with T-34s because other German tanks couldn't.

The Panther G design was not designed to compete against the T-34. It was meant like the Tiger to vastly outclass the T-34 and anything else the Soviets created in secret and was to roll on to the battlefield. The Panther design was on the drawing boards well before the war. All the T-34 did was to actually make the Germans speed up the Panther development.

The T-34 was below German standards in steel quality, optics, and crew setup which according to accounts made the T-34's clumsy when they were being used. When the T-34 was captured and used against its former owners it was "moderized" to German standards by equipping radios, cupolas, new gun optics, side skirts, and thicker armor on some. (the Pz 747(r)3)

In 1941 when the Germans invaded Russia and encontered the T34 and KV tanks they were better than the German tanks because the Germans could not penetrate the T-34's armor with their early war 37mm's, short 50mm's, and short 75mm's except at close range with the 50mm and the 75mm.

By 1942 the Germans improved their tanks by adding longer guns to them. The Panzer III was now on relatively equal terms with the T-34 with its long 50mm L/60 gun and its thicker armor but the KV tanks still posed a problem. Later in 1942 the Germans released the long 75mm Panzer IV G which was designed to take on the heavy KV tanks. The Panzer IV outclassed the T-34 in firepower and armor protection and the T-34 could no longer penetrate the Panzer IV at long range. It would have to get as close as 200 meters to penetrate the Panzer IV's 80mm of frontal armor. This was one of the reasons for the development of the T-34 85.

The Panzer IV F2 was the first model to be fitted with the long 7.5cm gun. The Panzer IV F2 quickly earned a reputation as an effective fighting vehicle thanks to the excellent performance of the 7.5cm KwK40 L/43 gun.

Medium tank : Battle of Kursk]On February 7th of 1944, few remaining Panzer IV tanks from the 5th SS Panzer Division "Wiking" spearheaded the attempt to breakout from the Cherkassy Pocket against largely superior Soviet force. During the breakout, SS-Untersturmfuehrer Kurt Schumacher commanded two Panzer IVs, which counterattacked a Soviet tank company destroying in the process some 8 T-34 tanks. On the next day, Schumacher alone engaged another Soviet tank company and during both actions destroyed some 21 Soviet AFVs. For his achievement, he was awarded the Knight's Cross

noxbrood said:
T-34/85 could still compete well with Panther. Note that I said compete, not which one was superior. You can't tell with certainty which one anyway and any bias would be complete BS and you know it.

Not from the front it would have been a very bad idea to attack the Panther from the front because the T-34/85's round could not penetrate the front of the Panther except at less than 500 meters (even the IS-2's rounds were known to deflect from a Panther G) and the Panther was about as quick and maneuverable as the T-34/85 so the T-34's mobility and speed advantage would not exist in this engagement. The Panther G also wielded a much more superior gun when compared to the T-34/85: the 75mm KwK43 L/70.

On September 13th of 1943, seven Panthers from 1st Battalion of 2nd SS Panzer Regiment of 2nd SS Panzer Division "Das Reich", commanded by SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Holzer (turret number 101) fought with a group of some 70 Soviet T-34 tanks near Kolomak. During the 20 minutes long engagement Panthers destroyed some 28 T-34 tanks without any losses.

During the battle around Siedlce on 28/29th July of 1944, 2nd Battalion of 5th SS Panzer Regiment of 5th SS Panzer Division "Wiking", destroyed some 107 Soviet tanks (including T-34s, Shermans, and Valentines), while losing 6 tanks.

Panzerkampfwagen V Panther was a very successful design and two could be produced in the same time as a single Tiger tank. Panther revolutionized tank designs and influenced post-war western tank designs and is considered to be the first MBT (Main Battle Tank). Overall, Panther proved to be an excellent weapon when commanded and operated by people like Ernst Barkmann. Panther was liked by its crews, best summarized in statement by Lieutenant Berger of "Grossdeutschland" - "We were shot three times - I owed my life to the Panther


There were plenty of Soviet tanks that could go up against a Panther G effectively were the IS-2, SU-152, ISU-152, SU 100, and the ISU-122. The T-34/85's real German counterpart was the Panzer IV H and J which was pretty much on even ground with the 85 although in long range battles the Panzer IV H/J had the edge in firepower, optics, and armor thickness.

Oh yeah and stay on topic-:p
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Russian sloped armor was the reason why Germans even created Panther in the first place. It was created to compete with T-34s because other German tanks couldn't.

Below German standards from the past? Past German standards = no sloped armor. It wasn't "far superior" to allied armor plates. Panther was designed to compete with T-34. And even with all its complexity, it didn't have a balanced armor distribution, having about 110mm in the front turret, and only about 45mm in the sides, which was crazy.
What you seem to confuse is sloped armour with steel quality.

While sloped armour gets you along way, as already been shown (*hints at own illustration*), do you reckon that, depending on the metallurgy used to create steel (if you are unsure about the actual process, refer to a good metallurgy book or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steel ) one can create more "tough" and rigid steel that can better widstand the impact of an anti-tank shell, reghardless of the impact angle?

When talking about armour quality, one ususally refers to the quality of the steel, which, as an alloy, can be composed of quite different ingredients rather than how it is fitted on the tank.
Of course, we cannot neglect the sloped positioned armour effect, however, weak steel will neglect the added ricochet and thinkness potential if the steel bents/dents or even breaks.

Generally, I would say highest quality steel gets you further than extremly sloped one, however, achieving such a high quality alloy is definately a lot more costly than simply adding some protection by sloping the armour, which practically means more thinkness at no added weight.
 
Upvote 0
I. What, exactly, does armor slope do? Does it just richochet shells more easily?

II. Is there some way to calculate how effective a tank's armor is? (ex: Is the KV-1S's 75mm/30-degree-sloped front armor better than the T-34/76's 45mm/60-degree armor?)

I.Well the T-34 armor is 45mm of armor sloped at 30 degrees from (frontal hull) verticle which therotically makes the armor tantamount to 90mm which means an AP round that can not penetrate 90 mm of armor should not penetrate the front of the T-34 this however does not take into account if the round overmatches the thin 45mm of armor.

II. Most definitely because it is thicker.

Sloping armor has its limits: For example if the enemy tanks fires a round which over matches the sloped armor's thickness then the armor has a very good chance to be penetrated no matter how well sloped it is.

Armor resistance is mainly determined by the ratio between armor thickness and projectile diameter (T/d). The T/d relationship regarding armor penetration demonstrates that the more the thickness of the armor plate overmatches the diameter of any incoming armor piercing round, the harder it is for the projectile to achieve a penetration. On the other side, the greater the diameter of the incoming projectile relatively to the thickness of the armor plate which it strikes, the greater the probability of penetration.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
I just have to roll eyes at comments like these. Not only is it hearsay but also untrue. Russian sloped armor was the reason why Germans even created Panther in the first place. It was created to compete with T-34s because other German tanks couldn't.

Even General Heinz Guderian wanted Germany to make copies of T-34s with their sloped armor for his troops because he considered them to be superior.





Below German standards from the past? Past German standards = no sloped armor. It wasn't "far superior" to allied armor plates. Panther was designed to compete with T-34. And even with all its complexity, it didn't have a balanced armor distribution, having about 110mm in the front turret, and only about 45mm in the sides, which was crazy.

Guderian also wanted to stop panther productions in favour for the Panzer IV long barreld version. Doesnt mean though that the panther was useless or bad. Or that the T34 was good for german standarts. It was noth the less a heavy schock for german troops. In 1941-42. Later, not anymore.

And I was not talking about sloped armor. I was meaning technique for steel processing, where no doubts german industry had some advantage, like shown on the Tiger and Panther. I have no source, if Tiger II ausf. B armor was "worst", but compared to economy in 1944-45, where all materials like wolfram (tungsten), magnesium etc. have become harder to get, it would not be illogicaly if german armor also got a change for the worse, compared to their earlier productions and technique. Doesnt mean that it was useless. Just "less" dependable. I think the Tiger has been more known for its quality in armor, then any later (1944-45) german tank. Except the panther maybe, where the ausf. G was one of the best panther prodcutions I think.
 
Upvote 0
It is important to understand two things.
1.T-34 end Sherman it mass production. German tanks it is "hand made". Very high expenses. If it was possible to put the Panther on the conveyor, it would be very simple and cheap Panther. Most likely it would lose the lux transmission and other smart things. Pz-4 is better approaches for the conveyor
2. All people which could influence on manufacture of tanks in Germany , have been connected with different groups in a military-industrial complex. They protected their interests.

What variant was better? You it will never know it.
Expensiv Hi-Teck tanks in a small amount. It enabled with small investments to receive very effective tool. It worked? Yes.
Mass-production demands initially huge investments of money and devours huge quantity of resources. Result many cheap tanks. Many cheap tanks are aggressive tactics. It worked? Yes
 
Upvote 0
Don't worry about slope armor.

Just use my technique: Aim the enemy tank. Fire the enemy tank. If your shot doesn't penetrate, it's time for you to get some cover until your reload is complete. JUST KEEP FIRING THEM!!!! MOUHAHHAHAHAHA It's just like playing lotery.



or play the best part of Red Orchestra IMO: INFANTRY!!!!!!!
 
Upvote 0