OKW Panther
Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4
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.
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.
Posts: 1705
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.
Posts: 728
Posts: 381
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.
Posts: 627
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.
Posts: 1225
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.
Posts: 1063
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.
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
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.
Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4
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.
Posts: 1304 | Subs: 13
Posts: 1701
Posts: 2487 | Subs: 21
Posts: 4928
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.
Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4
Posts: 236
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.
Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4
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.
Livestreams
23 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.615222.735-2
- 3.35057.860+15
- 4.1110614.644+11
- 5.276108.719+27
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.918405.694+2
- 8.262137.657+3
- 9.722440.621+4
- 10.1041674.607-2
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Drummer
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM