Panzer IVH vs the M4A3(76)W

[brady]

GRUNHERZ, I would tend to agree, In fact when I heard HTC was thinking of adding a Sherman and Perking the Panzer IVH, I LOL so hard I think I hurt somthing. That is why I started this thread.


     

[AdmRose]

Add the IS-2, and perk that. The Panzie 4's shells will bounce right off the front of it The IS-2's 122 MM cannon will...well...you know...to the Panzie 4 Sure the IS-2 only has 28 rounds of ammo...if you want a lot of ammo, add the T-70...360 rounds of 40 MM ammo (I think its 40 MM).

Food for thought

[Karnak]

In no way can I see any justification of perking the PnZ IV H.

The M4A3, PnZ IV H and T-34/85 are good matches.

• PnZ IV H has  moderate speed, moderate armor, a good gun and very light AA.
• M4A3 has moderate speed, moderate armor, a weak gun and light AA.
• T-34/85 has good speed, good armor, a decent gun and no AA.

That looks like a good variety of choices, none standing radically above the others.

Panther V G should be added as the first perk tank.

[Kweassa]

.. and all those three would have a low alt Spitfire come strafe them, knock the tracks, turret and engine out, and leave it to become a big pile of junk.

 ...

 Sorry for the hi-jack, but without the armour severely toughened up, or granted immunity from small arms fire, no amount of tanks will make GV battles interesting, since no one will use it, and just take an Ostwind as an anti-GV + anti-aircraft + structure attack vehicle.

 

[Karnak]

Kweassa,

I agree that the armor model is lacking, but that is a different subject.  I think nearly everybody who has posted in this thread feels that tanks are not as tough as they should be.

But this thread was about tanks, how they compared and perking the PnZ IV H.

[brady]

It's cool Karnak,Kweassa, and you are both on the money, He appoligised for Hijacking, but he has a point, Any perk tank will always be at the mercy of aircraft theirfore any perk tank should be chep imo.

 Or maybe some day AH will adress the issue that every plane in AH is virtualy an effective anti tank platform, I think it would be cool to have planes like the Il-2 and other decated anti tank plane Huryy IID the only types capable of inflicting heavy damage on tanks other than those with bombs or rockets. much as it was in the real world.

[illo]

Originally posted by wulfie
Overall the 76L51 armed Sherman is a little better than the Pz IVH I'd say. Better mobility, a little higher silhouette but once you have the cast frontal hull Sherman with the 76L51 (i.e. M4A3E8) the bottom line is that a M4A3E8 has a noticably better chance of surviving a frontal 75L48 hit at 1000m than the Pz IVH has of surviving a 76L51 hit at 1000m.

Both will get clean frontal penetration from 1000m I would say. So it doesnt much matter. What matter most is who will hit first. And that would be most likely PzKpfw IVh with equal crew skill.

Why?
-PzKpfw IVh gunner has much taller target. (thats axis where corrections in aim are made)
-Because better sights less bracketing is needed.

I think PzKpfw IVh would be superior at longer ranges. Where Sherman gunnery becomes very hard.


About better mobility. Sherman was quite prone to bogging in...not having very good offroad mobility until wider tracks were installed. (in e8 for example)

If you compare ground pressure you will see PzKpfw IVh is much better.
Tiger and wide track easy eight HVSS (with wide tracks) included for comparison.


PzKpfw IVh 0.88kg/sqcm
M4a3(76)W  1.06kg/sqcm

PzKpfw IVe 0.98kg/sqcm
M4a3e8 HVSS 0.77kg/sqcm.

Sherman is faster on roads tho.


This thread was about PzKpfw IVh and a4m3(76)W, right?

I agree easy eight would be better than PzKpfw IVh in many cases. But thats completely different variant.

IMHO a4m3(76) is better match.

You are right that either wouldn't be historically correct counterpart for IVh.
So IMHO T-34/85 would be better choice.

[illo]

Originally posted by Karnak
In no way can I see any justification of perking the PnZ IV H.

The M4A3, PnZ IV H and T-34/85 are good matches.

• PnZ IV H has  moderate speed, moderate armor, a good gun and very light AA.
• M4A3 has moderate speed, moderate armor, a weak gun and light AA.
• T-34/85 has good speed, good armor, a decent gun and no AA.

That looks like a good variety of choices, none standing radically above the others.

Panther V G should be added as the first perk tank. [/B]

Hello, Karnak.

Those would be also historically best choises. Backbones of each nations armored forces in 1944.

I agree regarding Panther G. Panthers were almost as numerous as PzKw IVh in late 1944. And best tank of ww2 afterall. JS-2 might be also good perk...those reload times would be frustrating. 2rpm And ofcourse Sherman Firefly.

[Masherbrum]

Shermans were overrated.   Comparing a 75mm to a 76.

Masher

[bj229r]

they didnt call early shermans Ziipo for nothing--they lit up every time

[Sakai]

Why not model the M-3 Stuart?  It's a great representation of early war armor and lighter armor such as that fielded by the Japanese and Italians.  Would make for better scenarios.  Also,
if they could model the MkIV Pzkfw with the .5 cm gun it would mirror many of the early and Desert models.  Seems to me that would not require too much work.  Thus, you'd have a broad range of armor selections for scenarios.  

Sakai

[brady]

No MK IV had 5 cm gun's.

 Your thinking of the PzKfW III.

[Sakai]

That's right!  Thanks for that correction, it's been so long since I looked at armor, but you know, they look alike.

;-)

If you had a III, and a Stuart along with that IV you'd have an excellent representation of most of the armor from the war, no?

Now, shouldn't there also be a self propelled gun?  Like an M7 or a Wespe?  That would make the base raiders happy.


Sakai