The Panzer IV is the new T-34

[Sarkis.]

I had a particular piece of music come up on my playlist while playing around with it, and it matched so well I felt compelled to run with the idea
RO2: First-round kills on T-34s - YouTube

That's a very funny video Mekh. I really mean it.

I wish it was like this in game. The fact is that in game, against good Russian Tankers, the Panzer IV stands very little chance. For the various reasons people brought to this thread: The bug that makes russian gunner die and spawn at the same seat, allowing quick return fire. The T34 drivers hatch being a completely impenetrable area, which would be ok for the first shots it received, but not for ever. The T34's weakspots being less exposed and the fact that the game's system is not taking into account the internal explosions and the hassle that would take place inside a tank once a round penetrated and exploded. And also the fact that the Panzer gun sometimes seems unable to penetrate the T34 when it should, or do the same amount of damage that it generally would. Compared to real war reports of what those guns did to T34s

The problems become really strange when Antitank rifles are involved. Currently a Panzer can't hardly maneuver of his spawn area without getting shot to death by Russian ATRs, many times blow in the first or second shot, hitting it frontally from more than 100 meters. A situation that the PTRS round would never penetrate a Panzer, let alone completely take it out of a fight. However the tables turn when it is the 50% stronger german PTRS agains the T34, where the ATR can only hit the tank in its tracks, or the lower hull, and is also not very likely to get a kill.

Now, are you willing to deny that?

From your video and from a lot of Bot Gumrak myself I can safely say that yes, it is not very hard to blow up a T34 from the side, if you know where to aim, also not so hard from the front, specially if it's frontal glacis is angled in favor of the german gun and you don't hit the hatch by accident.
But in combined arms maps, with both tanks facing off at very close distance and mostly frontally against each other, the T34 is clearly superior right now.

Do you not agree?

This is what Nezzer was talking about with: ''The Panzer IV is the new T-34''

 

[Golf33]

After doing some testing, it appears to me that the Pz4 still has the edge in the game when it comes to armor modeling. It's oddly durable for having what was, by mid war terms, terrible armor protection.

The AI sure seems to think the Pz4 has the upper hand. I left my test server running overnight on Gumrak. 10 hours later, the results are pretty lopsided, about a 6:1 kill count in favor of the Germans. That is, at least, a lot better than before the big patch, where it was closer to 40:1.

But in combined arms maps, with both tanks facing off at very close distance and mostly frontally against each other, the T34 is clearly superior right now.

Do you not agree?

This is what Nezzer was talking about with: ''The Panzer IV is the new T-34''

Doesn't sound like it.

I put 5 rounds into a PzIV on Ogledow - he was heading down a hill towards me, so I was firing into his top armour - then boom! He kills me on the first hit.

Maybe he knew something that others haven't worked out yet?

 

[Mekhazzio]

I can't comment on ATR performance. I haven't given them anything but cursory testing and I rarely see them employed in-game. I fooled around with them briefly after the big patch and left them in the same category I them in before: "waste of time". Their many bugs and technical problems don't help, but I found them largely incapable of bothering either tank unless the tank helps you out by driving into a really stupid position...at which point, you're often still better off just using an AT grenade or satchel on them.

From the opposite perspective, I can't say I've been particularly bothered by ATRs while driving a tank, either. The few people that actually manage to get one deployed in my direction go fump-fump a few times, usually netting them no result but a return coax (or a teammate's rifle) shot in the face. I'm sure none of them had any idea where they needed to aim to cause damage, but that's kind of my point: experienced players don't seem to ever bother with the ATRs. When you see a veteran going tank hunting, they're using Engineer.

Maybe ATRs truly are amazing against the Pz4 now...I'm skeptical, but I haven't got the data to either support or contradict that. If I can find an easy way to spawn tanks at will with a mutator, I'll post it so people can poke around with it.

But in combined arms maps, with both tanks facing off at very close distance and mostly frontally against each other, the T34 is clearly superior right now.

Do you not agree?

This is what Nezzer was talking about with: ''The Panzer IV is the new T-34''

No, I don't agree. I realize what the phrase is meant to imply, that the relative capabilities have been reversed from what they were before, but that doesn't at all correspond to my experiences in game. What we had before was a case where one tank (the T-34) was so grossly outmatched that by a few minutes in, it would always be rigidly spawncamped by the enemy tanks, while the other tank was so durable that it was free to roam the map with near impunity. This was a consistent result across every map and regardless of the skill of the players in the tanks.

I'm not seeing anything like that these days. Just the other night, I was on Fallen Fighters with a pretty good player in the T-34, and I was having to throw smoke for him so that he could move into position without getting nuked by the newbie-controlled Pz4. This isn't even remotely similar to the behavior you would see before the patch, where Pz4s would frequently be seen sitting in the middle of the park for long stretches of the game. There was basically no point even playing the Soviet side on a combined arms map unless tanks were disabled on the server, which they often were (and rightfully so)

Even if there is a superiority for one tank now, the magnitude of it is unquestionably far different from before. Personally, I think the Pz4 still has the upper hand. Its armor modeling is still a bit wonky and there are still angles where it will bizarrely bounce shells off what should be very vulnerable areas. The T-34 much more consistently takes penetrations and the attendant HP damage. (as an aside, why they still use hit points at all is beyond me...) The commander/gunner split and larger barrel depression means you get better situational awareness and better positioning with the Pz4. A good hull down placement is worth more than anything else, and you have a devil of a time getting one with the T-34.

(Also, I've not seen a difference in casualty replacement behavior, but it may be because I'm always in the commander's seat in both tanks. There may be something messed with going from driver->gunner in the Pz4)

 

[Mike_Nomad]

------ snip -----

(Also, I've not seen a difference in casualty replacement behavior, but it may be because I'm always in the commander's seat in both tanks. There may be something messed with going from driver->gunner in the Pz4)

Not only does the animation take too much time driver>gunner in the PZ4, the gunner is first to die along with the Turret Ring with the first shot and the second shot finishes the PZ4. The PZ4 is far too weak.

The PZ4 should be restored to its former self and the T34 remain upgraded. That'll make for some fantastic tank battles.

 

[Holy.Death]

An astute observation.

If you have nothing to say about the topic on hand then don't post at all. Making personal response to a post not even directed at you adds nothing to this debate and can only be the cause flame war and off-topic. Focus should be on-topic, not on co-disscutant. Co-disscutant shouldn't be the first and only reason to make a post that's completely off-topic, either.

Making it personal isn't the right thing to do.

Please, keep personal matters to personal channels.

 

[ro2player]

The PZ4 is far too weak.

The PZ4 should be restored to its former self and the T34 remain upgraded. That'll make for some fantastic tank battles.

I think Mike is rigth. Gun of Panzer 4 was powerfull and armor of Pz 4 was good. So "panzer IV is the new t34 ?" i am afraid it's rigth !

I think we should talk about another concept of tank : I mean comfort of panzer crew, noise of motor, and easiness of optic. We should see shock of panzercrew when tank is moving so quickly. (for panzer IV and T 34). T 34 do more noise with motor than panzer 4. Panzer 4 had better optics than T 34.

 

[Sarkis.]

I think Mike is rigth. Panzer 4, it's a good tank.

Well it had a big gun!
But that's about it..

 

[Mormegil]

Not only does the animation take too much time driver>gunner in the PZ4, the gunner is first to die along with the Turret Ring with the first shot and the second shot finishes the PZ4. The PZ4 is far too weak.

Yeah, that's definitely a change from a few patches ago. Before, when gunning in the T-34, if you got killed, you hot spawned into the driver, and had to crawl back up (I preferred to swap to the living hull MGer, then crawl up, so I could maintain driver control). As stated, now you instantly respawn back in the gunner position, short one crewmember. No more travel time. I haven't played the Panzer IV enough to see if the same thing happens in the commander position, but it definitely doesn't happen in the gunner position.

Either way, I think it should go back to the original, realistic design where the player should spawn into an occupied position, and have to travel to the gunner spot.

The PZ4 should be restored to its former self and the T34 remain upgraded. That'll make for some fantastic tank battles.

If that involves reinstating the bug where several of the armor plates were impossible to penetrate, I say no way.


Honestly, I usually play T-34, but when I do take the Panzer IV, I do at least as well (which isn't bad for somebody who isn't very familiar with it). Anecdotally, I think the tanks would be fine and well matched if the spawn issue is fixed. I'd like to see the data based on real player numbers (not bot matches), before I make a final call.


I suspect the months of playing T-34s, having to overcome the challenges may have made better T-34 tankers. Now that the tanks are more evenly matched, those better tankers have an experience advantage. You just have to know where to hit, and looking at peoples critiques on where they're hitting shows they're aiming for the wrong spot.

Another thing that may be an issue, is map balance. The previously underpowered T-34, and/or overpowered Panzer IV got the mappers to move the spawns around to give the Soviets a better chance on Gumrak. With evener tanks, this gives the Soviets too much of an advantage if the spawns weren't moved back (I'm not sure if they were, as I rarely get to play Gumrak).

 

[Nezzer]

I suspect the months of playing T-34s, having to overcome the challenges may have made better T-34 tankers. Now that the tanks are more evenly matched, those better tankers have an experience advantage. You just have to know where to hit, and looking at peoples critiques on where they're hitting shows they're aiming for the wrong spot.

Yeah, that was the main reason I used to love to play in a T-34. Because of the liabities of the old T-34, destroying a PzIV felt like destroying 10 T-34s form a PzIV. But having such a weak T-34 didn't feel realistic to me, so I joined the crusade for a better T-34 in these forums and they gave us something much better than what we asked for.

It's possible that people don't know where to hit anymore, but the PzIV has much larger weak spots, that are much easier to hit than the T-34. The frontal weak spots of the PzIV cover almost 20% of the frontal armour area and half of the lower armour plate, and when confronting one frontally, the chance for deflection is almost zero. In the other hand, the frontal weak spots of the T-34 cover less than 15% of the frontal armour area, with a very large chance of deflecting your round. So you have to deal with both a smaller weak spot are and a very high chance of round deflection when you are in a PzIV, while your enemy, with his T-34, doesn't have to worry about it that much.

The new T-34 is like the RO1 tanks with their ping pong armour, but it does not require angling anymore

 

[[Mad_Murdock]]

Now, i dont tank in HOS if i can avoid it, just like I did in OST. But here is how I see it.

The PZIV was OP on release and pretty much has been until the recent patch. The Allies tankers complained about this, and rightfully so, the imbalance was gross at best.

They did, however, find ways to make do with what they had.

Now with the T34 buffed, theAxis tankers are starting the same argument. If TWI decides to change things back, it will be the Allies again. This argument will be repeated ad nauseum.

I say, let the tanks stay as they are a little longer, the Allies have dealt with the Pz for months, and they got around it. Im sure the Axis can figure it out. 1 Pz lost to 10 T34s should be the exception, not the rule. After all, isnt that what the superior training of German crews sought to accomplish? Well, those crews put in the time and effort to become so.

 

[Mike_Nomad]

Now, i dont tank in HOS if i can avoid it, just like I did in OST. But here is how I see it.

The PZIV was OP on release and pretty much has been until the recent patch. The Allies tankers complained about this, and rightfully so, the imbalance was gross at best.

They did, however, find ways to make do with what they had.

Now with the T34 buffed, theAxis tankers are starting the same argument. If TWI decides to change things back, it will be the Allies again. This argument will be repeated ad nauseum.

I say, let the tanks stay as they are a little longer, the Allies have dealt with the Pz for months, and they got around it. Im sure the Axis can figure it out. 1 Pz lost to 10 T34s should be the exception, not the rule. After all, isnt that what the superior training of German crews sought to accomplish? Well, those crews put in the time and effort to become so.

Not only does the animation take too much time driver>gunner in the PZ4, the gunner is first to die along with the Turret Ring with the first shot and the second shot finishes the PZ4. The PZ4 is far too weak.

The PZ4 should be restored to its former self and the T34 remain upgraded. That'll make for some fantastic tank battles.

I hoped my suggestion was clear..... I wish that the T34 retain its GOTY upgrade... and that the PZ4 be restored.

Again, that would make for some fantastic Tank Battles for those of us who enjoy tanking and play regularly.

 

[Nezzer]

Now, i dont tank in HOS if i can avoid it, just like I did in OST. But here is how I see it.

The PZIV was OP on release and pretty much has been until the recent patch. The Allies tankers complained about this, and rightfully so, the imbalance was gross at best.

They did, however, find ways to make do with what they had.

Now with the T34 buffed, theAxis tankers are starting the same argument. If TWI decides to change things back, it will be the Allies again. This argument will be repeated ad nauseum.

I say, let the tanks stay as they are a little longer, the Allies have dealt with the Pz for months, and they got around it. Im sure the Axis can figure it out. 1 Pz lost to 10 T34s should be the exception, not the rule. After all, isnt that what the superior training of German crews sought to accomplish? Well, those crews put in the time and effort to become so.

Well, I just think they could slightly reduce the chance for an instant kill on the PzIV and the chance of round deflection on the T-34, as well as stopping the instant seat switch once the gunner is killed in the T-34. These would probably be enough for me.

 

[Mormegil]

No, it was that easy. The starboard ammo storage was always the most vulnerable area of the Pz4. One-shot ATR kills were not only possible, they were easy, if you could get a good angle on that storage from close enough range. I did a very large number of them while debugging ATRs for Antilag, because I used Commissar's House for testing and the infantry spawns always land you on that side of the tank spawn. I was actually getting annoyed by it, since it meant I had to wait on the tank to respawn

What changed between then and now is that other parts of the tank can take damage too. An awful lot of areas and angles on the Pz4 were literally invulnerable, due to issues in the armor zone layout. You could bang away at almost any part of the turret, and even most angles on the rear of the tank, all day long, even with another Pz4 (aka: the strongest AT weapon in the game) and never deal any damage whatsoever.

Mek, do you happen to know if there were any substantial changes to the T-34? Mike's premise is the Panzer IV should be restored to it's "former glory" - which from what I understand was a bugged armor zone layout, with adamantium panels. And the T-34 should be kept in it's new more buffed configuration. But if no changes were made to the T-34, then I can't see how changing the Panzer IV back to the bugged/unrealistic/better gameplay to some configuration could work.

 

[Mike_Nomad]

Yosh made mention of the upgrades to the T-34......

 

[Mekhazzio]

Mek, do you happen to know if there were any substantial changes to the T-34?

Oh yeah. Both tanks were severely broken, just in opposite ways.

"Put the Pz4 back the way it was" is a rather naive thing to say, considering that it was literally invulnerable on most of its surface area. It doesn't take rocket science to work out what the result of invulnerable-vs-vulnerable is going to be.

 

[Golf33]

Oh yeah. Both tanks were severely broken, just in opposite ways.

"Put the Pz4 back the way it was" is a rather naive thing to say, considering that it was literally invulnerable on most of its surface area. It doesn't take rocket science to work out what the result of invulnerable-vs-vulnerable is going to be.

I have changed my mind, and now I agree with Mike. The PzIV should be put back the way it was, since invulnerable German tanks makes for much more fun combat.

While we are at it, German infantry should also be given bulletproof heads, arms, legs and stomachs. That'll make for some great infantry battles!

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

Just give the Pz.IV its' BDZ equipped PzGr.39's that it came equipped with in real life, instead of those terrible solid shots that it's obviously using in RO2.

One successful penetration by a 7.5cm PzGr.39 on a T-34 and the tank would be out of action, either by fire or explosion.

In the words of a StuG commander who fought at Kursk:
"With our rounds you only had to hit them once and they burned. Our rounds only exploded shortly after they had penetrated the armour, therefore the destruction of the tank and its crew was guaranteed"

As for the Russian 76.2mm AP rounds, they were mostly BR-350SP solid shot rounds with no bursting charge, with the exception of the BR-350A APHE round, however this round exhibited poor penetration performance and the bursting charge mechanism, eventhough of a large 155 gram size, proved unreliable.

 

[Sarkis.]

Just give the Pz.IV its' BDZ equipped PzGr.39's that it came equipped with in real life, instead of those terrible solid shots that it's obviously using in RO2.

One successful penetration by a 7.5cm PzGr.39 on a T-34 and the tank would be out of action, either by fire or explosion.

In the words of a StuG commander who fought at Kursk:
"With our rounds you only had to hit them once and they burned. Our rounds only exploded shortly after they had penetrated the armour, therefore the destruction of the tank and its crew was guaranteed"

As for the Russian 76.2mm AP rounds, they were mostly BR-350SP solid shot rounds with no bursting charge, with the exception of the BR-350A APHE round, however this round exhibited poor penetration performance and the bursting charge mechanism, eventhough of a large 155 gram size, proved unreliable.

I will have that with fries please!

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

I will have that with fries please!

I aim to please:

 

[Sarkis.]

*Silently accepts offer*