Login

russian armor

OKW Panther

11 Jul 2014, 17:29 PM
#41
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4

Panther sucks, never make it, ever given its current state. /thread

Also 1v1 has a higher skill cap than 2v2, sorry to tell you. I love 2v2 and play it more than 1v1 but it definitely does not require more skill.
11 Jul 2014, 17:31 PM
#42
avatar of Jaigen

Posts: 1130



It also has much, much more pen and 10 more range than the KV-1.

The panther is potent mix of traits. It has the armour of a low end heavy, the range of a TD, the HP pool of a heavy end medium tank and the usual german option for pintle MG's.


The buff to small arms has made the panther able to do something, at least, for AI- but it remains a great anti-tank option against mediums and TD's- and can also weather some infantry based AT in the process, which the puma simply can't do.

Pumas remain so good because of how cripplingly amazingly god tier Target Weak Point/Aimed shot are, as abilities. It's guard buttoning you can't interrupt and doesn't need a squishy infantry squad standing next to the tank to use.

Jagds are the usual turretless TD trade of firepower for mobility and flank death.

But panthers already give you everything you need to completely mop up medium armour. Fastest, heaviest armoured medium with great range- it's all you need to deal with any number of T-34/76. Allowing that firepower to come cheaper would invariably start pushing us back towards the good old days of beta panther rolling, which I certainly wouldn't want anyone to suffer through.

It could probably use a small accuracy buff to make the most of the low rate of fire, of course. A reduction on the penalty for moving would probably serve it best. After that, it's probably good where it is; a small AI buff probably wouldn't hurt make the cost a little more justified, I guess.



your wrong on every account mate . it doesnt mop up medium armor safe for the t-34 in fact it struggles against medium armor compared to the puma m10 jackson or jagd . i even lost a panther to an easy 8 courtesy of the rng gods.
11 Jul 2014, 17:40 PM
#43
avatar of austerlitz

Posts: 1705

Panther..i want to use it..but too often it fails horribly..either shot misses or its swarmed and its bullshit DPS loses the engagement.On top of that the addition of this tank to ur force adds absolutely zero to ur field pushing ability due to minimal AI,unlike tiger.Lost too much fuel on this unit too many times to bite that bullet again.Tiger or jagd for me.If as OKW supported jagd can't take it..hold out for KT.For OKW its too costly and i would rather take the jagd/dual p4 or go long haul for KT...because the price risk isn't worth it.
For ostheer absolutely out of the question teching cost..especially when tiger is the alternative.
T-34/85 with 130 fuel 360 mp.Why would u risk a shitty panther vs 2 of these beasts with it DPS and price against soviet.
11 Jul 2014, 17:45 PM
#44
avatar of Rocket

Posts: 728

I've yet to see an OKW have a hard time fielding a panther unless they lose the early game terribly. I think personally most German players can't drive there tanks or use insufficient protection with them. Let me get about 4 easy 8's with 1 regular early sherman wich is easily done with my rifle commander pz4 don't stand a chance and either does a panther or king tiger or multiples of any if they can't drive them right or protect with shrek blobs. Panther is probably the best tank overall in the game so I don't see what people are talking about when its used right.
11 Jul 2014, 17:47 PM
#45
avatar of DarthBong420

Posts: 381

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Jul 2014, 17:45 PMRocket
I've yet to see an OKW have a hard time fielding a panther unless they lose the early game terribly. I think personally most German players can't drive there tanks or use insufficient protection with them. Let me get about 4 easy 8's with 1 regular early sherman wich is easily done with my rifle commander pz4 don't stand a chance and either does a panther or king tiger or multiples of any if they can't drive them right or protect with shrek blobs.

right... say that to top tier 1v1 players they will laugh in your face.
11 Jul 2014, 17:57 PM
#46
avatar of Brachiaraidos

Posts: 627

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Jul 2014, 17:31 PMJaigen
your wrong on every account mate . it doesnt mop up medium armor safe for the t-34 in fact it struggles against medium armor compared to the puma m10 jackson or jagd . i even lost a panther to an easy 8 courtesy of the rng gods.


No, you're just an idiot.

The panther out ranges all allied medium tanks. Get a long view spotting unit and kite and you'll never take a hit- because you're also the fastest medium tank in the game.

Or let them start hitting and then draw back into your At guns.

Seriously, the only excuse for losing panthers to medium tanks in anything less than 3's in you suck.
11 Jul 2014, 17:58 PM
#47
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 1225

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Jul 2014, 17:27 PMKatitof


It wasn't really cost effective given how much resources, money and over engineering was pumped into it.

It wasn't as expensive as tiger, but it was far from cost effective in other sense then being able to knock tanks out from safe distance.

And guess what, IRL when you have compared its cost and performance, it was still much more expensive then allied tanks.

Huh? The Panther cost about 110 000 - 130 000 (depends on inclusiveness) RM to manufacture, compared to ca. 100 000+ RM for a late model P IV, while being much heavier and significantly more potent in virtually any relevant respect except maybe HE capability. The Tiger for comparison came in at about 230 000 RM. Now even if you allow for opportunity costs, the Panther was actually a very cost-effective vehicle, especially given its blend of superb frontal protection and firepower. The notion that the Panther was an "over-engineered" vehicle is IMO hardly correct when put in context. At a macro level the German approach to AFV production/production organisation in general was without a doubt pretty inefficient, but that should not be projected onto the vehicles themselves.
11 Jul 2014, 17:58 PM
#48
avatar of vietnamabc

Posts: 1063

At least give OKW Panther smoke at vet 2, currently everything Panther can do Jadgpanzer + Puma can do better and cost way less. It's the main problem of OKW, they no real "medium" tank. (I don't have elite armor so I can't comment on the PzIV Ausf J - but from what I hear this baby is a munition hog).
11 Jul 2014, 18:01 PM
#49
avatar of Brachiaraidos

Posts: 627

At least give OKW Panther smoke at vet 2, currently everything Panther can do Jadgpanzer + Puma can do better and cost way less.


Only not? A Jagd and Puma cost 215 fuel for the OKW.
11 Jul 2014, 18:54 PM
#50
avatar of Jaigen

Posts: 1130



No, you're just an idiot.

The panther out ranges all allied medium tanks. Get a long view spotting unit and kite and you'll never take a hit- because you're also the fastest medium tank in the game.

Or let them start hitting and then draw back into your At guns.

Seriously, the only excuse for losing panthers to medium tanks in anything less than 3's in you suck.


10 meters is not much and supporting at guns has nothing to do with the performance of the panther. cost analyse the difference between all the TD's and the panther is simply the worst unit at the moment, and yes puma and jagdpanther is 215 fuel however the performance of these 2 units combined is horrifyingly powerful and can destroy any medium armor under 10 seconds
11 Jul 2014, 19:10 PM
#51
avatar of Aerohank

Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1



Only not? A Jagd and Puma cost 215 fuel for the OKW.


Yeah but you don't need T4 for those.
11 Jul 2014, 22:36 PM
#52
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Jul 2014, 17:45 PMRocket
I've yet to see an OKW have a hard time fielding a panther unless they lose the early game terribly. I think personally most German players can't drive there tanks or use insufficient protection with them. Let me get about 4 easy 8's with 1 regular early sherman wich is easily done with my rifle commander pz4 don't stand a chance and either does a panther or king tiger or multiples of any if they can't drive them right or protect with shrek blobs. Panther is probably the best tank overall in the game so I don't see what people are talking about when its used right.


Funny.

The Panther is FAR from the best overall tank in the game.

First of all, it is a dedicated tank destroyer, so I'm not sure how you can classify it as an "overall" tank. The main gun of the Panther is absolutely worthless against infantry. Luckily you can mount on MG on it but it still essentially tickles infantry. The main problem with this scenario is even if you flank an AT gun, it is going to take your Panther about 3 minutes to actually de-crew it.

Secondly, the Panther costs an absurd amount for both Ostheer and OKW when you take into account the tech costs on top of a whopping 175 fuel. Sure a few other tanks cost more than 175 but they are all doctrinal - you can call them in without having to pay for extremely expensive tech. On top of that they're miles better than the Panther.

The Panther struggles against T34/76 and T34/85 because of its bad accuracy, and is absolutely helpless when those tanks are backed up by AT guns. If you want to counter T34s just get Stugs. They're cheap, they can actually kill infantry, they have more DPS than the Panther as well as an overpowered vet 1 ability - not to mention the fact that they vet faster and (assuming an even game) you will always have a numerical advantage. It's beyond awful against the M36 Jackson - which outranges it and has amazing mobility plus a whopping 240 damage a shot... Oh and the Jackson is CHEAPER, and the crew can repair the tank - meaning your Jackson is going to have about double the field time as a Panther.

The only unit the Panther is remotely good against is the SU85. Too bad that AT guns are better counters to SU85s, while being about 10x cheaper. Oh and the SU85 is awful anyways. So grats, your Panther gets to soft counter an already terrible tank.

Long story short - the Panther and the Su85 both really need some love. They're both essentially unusable in high level play.
11 Jul 2014, 23:21 PM
#53
avatar of miragefla
Developer Relic Badge

Posts: 1304 | Subs: 13

I think the Panther needs its reload speed reduced for starters. It's currently 5.8-6.7. The only thing it has offensive-wise over the T3 vehicles in penetration and 10 more range than the P4(tied with StuG), but that makes it generally worse against lighter vehicles and it trades for absolutely no splash damage. And the penetration only really kicks in versus heavies.




12 Jul 2014, 00:28 AM
#54
avatar of Kronosaur0s

Posts: 1701

Lol, Looks like Im not the only one that thinks that Panther's accuracy sucks. Good to know :D
12 Jul 2014, 00:32 AM
#55
avatar of VonIvan

Posts: 2487 | Subs: 21

Imo the Panther doesn't suck too badly for what it's worth, sure it misses from time to time, but when up against 2 shermans it does well.
12 Jul 2014, 00:41 AM
#56
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

To be fair, Panther vs Shermans is basically Tank Destroyer vs Infantry Tanks.
12 Jul 2014, 00:50 AM
#57
avatar of VonIvan

Posts: 2487 | Subs: 21

To be fair, Panther vs Shermans is basically Tank Destroyer vs Infantry Tanks.

Yes, but think of it as 220 fuel vs 170.
12 Jul 2014, 00:57 AM
#58
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4

Why not just get a jp4 if okw and double stug or tiger if ostheer...
12 Jul 2014, 03:42 AM
#59
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 236

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Jul 2014, 00:57 AMCieZ
Why not just get a jp4 if okw and double stug or tiger if ostheer...


Are stugs even good right now? Im afraid to get them because a while back they were slightly nerfed.
12 Jul 2014, 06:15 AM
#60
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4

Stugs are super strong against all of Soviet T3 and they're pretty good against USF tanks.

Against USF I'd rather hold out with double Pak40 until a Tiger comes. Jackons do a lot of damage, but even they have trouble actually finishing off a tiger before it backs up into range of Paks.

Their AT capability got slightly nerfed (less pen) but they still do 160 damage per shot, fire faster than P4s, have a freaking amazing vet 1 ability (for AT) and gained splash damage - while getting reduced in cost. (And they out-range anything that is not a tank-destroyer).

Basically, if you don't have a tiger commander going double Stug will probably be better AT and AI than getting a single Panther (while also being MUCH cheaper when you factor in the cost to tech to a Panther as Ost). Alternatively you can combine a P4 with a Stug, which is a nice combo. The main issue against USF is that Jacksons rip Stugs up - and are easily accessible from the Major (whereas if you see T34s, it is highly doubtful that you'll see SU85s).

So yeah, Stugs are good. Moreso against Soviet T3 than USF. But I don't think a Panther is a viable choice in a 1v1 (and probably not in team games) for either Ost or OKW. The alternatives are just much stronger.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

498 users are online: 498 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49062
Welcome our newest member, Mclatc16
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM