Profile of Hannibal

The hole in the theory that they are not meant to fight each other, is that SU-85 is meant to counter the Panther and Ostheer have no stock vehicle to counter the SU-85 so when it comes to vehicles the Panther is their best bet.

Ost has an excellent Pak, even the Stug faires well on paper, and then there are Panzergrenadiers that can deal with TDs very well. The problem is that the last two units have their own problems and therefore are not build which reduces OSTs current options to Pak and Panther. The problem is not the Panther but Panzergrenadiere and Stug in my eyes. If we also look at 1v1 frontal assault scenarios only (like you implicated with the SU85), the Panther does well against Jackson and Firefly (cost-corrected).
To clear things up: What is your suggestion? How much do you want to buff Panther / nerf SU85?

I think it is better so spread out the AT capacity over multiple units. We can see with USF what happens if the AT gun is trash against actual tanks and the bazookas are only mediocre: USF must completely rely on the Jackson from the mid-game onwards.

I am not sure what method you are using to get the numbers but you are still missing my point.

Compare the units at vet 0 and at vet 2 you will probably come to the conclusion that SU-85 trades significantly better at Vet 2.

I do not argue with your stats, because there is nothing to argue. In a Panther vs SU85 engagement, the SU85 performs better at vet 2 than at vet 0 vs the same vet Panther, this is true and I never doubted that. I argue if your point makes that much sense, because your Panther should not regularly exchange shots with a SU85 in the first place.

(Exaggerated example
If your PaK40 faces off against the 6 pounder, and the PaK gets an accuracy bonus while the 6 pounder gets a pen bonus (just making this up as an example), then the PaK will win this fight. This does not mean that the 6 pounder would need a fifth man to become tankier, because it cannot fight off a PaK40. These units just should not shoot at each other.

Depends from which patch. The Panther at vet 2 used to have around 320 armor and 960 HP for years. The was changed for one patch when they removed the 10% armor bonus completely and in the next patch then they moved the 160 HP bonus to vet 0 lowered, the armor and reintroduced the vet armor bonus.

Even so your claim than Panther has traded Armor for HP in vet and thus it is buffed vs vet 2 Su-85 is simply false.

Bottom line currently the vet 2 Panther is the weaker version when it comes to durability.

Although patch history is interesting, it also rather irrelevant. What is important is that SU-85 vs Panther relationship changes from vet 0 to vet 2 drastically for no apparent reason.

The SU-85 at vet 2 can damage even a Panther vet 3 with 100% chance which translates it vets faster and better than Panther.

When it comes to facing vetted Su-85/M36 the armor bonus of the Panther is quite pointless and the unit would benefit more from a different bonus.

Your data is correct, but I disagree with your conclusion.

You say if a SU85 pens a Panther with 100% chance then we need to buff the Panther's armor.
Since both units are tank destroyers, we could turn the whole argument around and say: a Panther pens the SU85 (actually all Allied TDs) with 100% chance. Now do we need to buff the SU85 armor? I don't think so.
The veterancy concept for Allied TDs is "high damage glass cannon". So the Allied TDs get a pen buff, also because Axis armor is quite heavy.
A Panther does not benefit from pen buffs that much as Allied armor is quite light, so Axis vet follows the concept of a heavy brawler.

Basically:
Axis armor buff does not help the tank against Allied TD, but against all other AT weapons
Allied pen buff does not help against medium, but against heavy armored tanks (Tigers, but also Panther).

We can discuss about whether the current amount of veterancy buffs is alright or if the base stats should be altered slightly, but this would be best discussed in another thread.

Back to topic:
This thread is about StuG and JPIV penetration (vs medium tanks), not about Panther vs SU85

You're playing wrong game is your stugs are outspammed by MORE EXPENSIVE TANKS.
Not a singular allied med tank gets penetration, self repairs or damage.
Stats say that only allied tank that performs better at AI is HE sherman, all other meds perform WORSE because they have LOWER AOE and HIGHER SCATTER.
Rear armor is completely irrelevant for all med tank combat.

Seriously, what is up with you and constant lying about everything past week??

If you factor in the price, T36/76 is a very good AI medium tank, probably better than the P4s.

But back on topic:

Not just panther, Stug get outspam by T34 and shermans easily too.

So you just admit Axis tanks are overpriced for the performance finally?

I been saying, vet bonus for Axis tanks needs a revamp, either pen/range for stug and rear armor for panther and HE shell for P4.

Allies tank vet bonus are great for tank roles, penetration, speed, self repairs, accuracy, damages.
Allies tank perform stronger AI roles already, and with weaken rear armor of Axis tank, AT role have improved drastically.

Armor skirts vet is a joke now sadly.

Most of that is just plain wrong. The only tank that gets damage increase with vet is the Firefly. Most Allied tanks get penetration bonuses, while Axis get armor, which are two sides of the same medal. Technically, an equivalent armor bonus is superior because pen will cap at 100% penetration chance while additional armor will always help you.
In my eyes, Axis tank vet is fine for the most part. They could do with some more speed though.