Jagdpanzer IV vs Jagdpanther

[TheLotusEater]

Hi, I just have a few questions.

I want to know the difference in armour thickness and slope on the Jagdpanther and the Jagdpanzer IV. Was there that much difference in protection at all?

Is the Jagdpanzer IV with the L/70 in this game?

What is the real difference between these two SPGs as in in-game performance wise?

What's a good website that shows WW2 tank details like armour thickness and slope? Wikipedia doesn't have enough details like that.

Thanks for your answers

[skogtroll]

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/introduction-to-achtung-panzer

I think this is good enough for the beginning. Enjoy.

1) All basic information you find on site above.

2) No it isn't.

3) Someone with CW module?

Pay attention to differences between version A and V of /70.

[GLynn41]

The CW module has the IV in early-mid and late

The book tank gunner is a good read and he was at times in PZ IV with the L70-- which while like was at times a problem--due the extreme frontal length of the gun tube

[skogtroll]

Jagd PzIV was in the base game. In CW module BF add Jagd Panther.

[Redwolf]

The Jagdpanther has a thicker plate but unfortunately Battlefront has chosen to obscure the exact model used behind a "curved" rating in CMBB and CMAK. They never got quite the protection they had in CMBO.

In the end the bigger hammer on the Jagdpanther is what counted in the war.

The Jagdpanzer IV had a much smaller silhouette but it isn't clear how much of a practical advantage that was for the Germans that late in the war.

[winkelried]

The JPz IV in the game is the JPz IV/48 with the 7,5-cm-Pak 39 L/48. The tank destroyer was delivered with muzzle break but this was often removed in the field as it is on the 3 models in CMBN.

The JPz IV/70 was delivered in two variants - the JPz IV/70 (A) - A stands for Alkett - had a high profile and was an emergency measure to get the the L/70 gun out quickly - some 280 were built between August 44 and March 45. Too late for CMBN probably. The production of 930 pieces for the final model - the "flat" JPz IV/70 started in August too.

So - if at all we could get the JPz IV/70 in the Market Garden module.

[MikeyD]

I recently read a German report from the time that actually gave low marks to Stug and Jagdpanzer in Normandy. The low-mounted gun combined with roof-mounted sight really was not amenable to small fields with build-up hedgerow divides. Jadgpanther at least has the benefit of a gun a couple feet higher off the ground than the jpz IV.

[TheLotusEater]

Thank you skogtroll for that link to achtungpanzer.com it's just what I was looking for.

So how does the Jagdpanzer IV compare in-game to the Jagdpanther and how much better does the Jagdpanzer IV perform compared to a Stug III ?

[c3k]

Performance? How about looks? Jagdpanther wins that one hands down.

[TheLotusEater]

Yeah it does, especially with Aris' mod

[skogtroll]

You're welcome TheLotusEater:).

[xian]

Do the Axis forces have a tank destroyer that has a rotatable turret?

[Serk]

Because of it's gun bad HE performance, Panther might fit in that category

[skogtroll]

No. They didn't do things like this . First tank destroyers were built to fight with heavy armoured allied tanks (for example Char B or T-34). They must be implement very fast. Very cheap constructions like panzerjager I or marder(with big or quite big guns). Later Germans produce a few heavily armoured vehicles but still without turret. Vehicles without turret was cheaper, you could bigger gun and thicker armour. Good example is Jagd Panther. Original Panther has 80mm armour on the front hull and 75mm cannon (I love this gun:)). JP has 100mm armour and 88mm cannon (same as in Tiger II).

[Fuser]

JagdTiger..., but only 10 degrees to the left and ten to the right ,

[siffo998]

Thank you skogtroll for that link to achtungpanzer.com it's just what I was looking for.

So how does the Jagdpanzer IV compare in-game to the Jagdpanther and how much better does the Jagdpanzer IV perform compared to a Stug III ?

the jagdpanther is the much more advanced tank hunter !

overall: thicker frontal armor and better sloped (especially in comparison with the IV early and mid model, because they have only 60mm maximum frontal armor) AND it uses the 88mm Pak 43/3 L/71 gun (just like the Tiger II "Kingtiger") which is able to penetrate any allied armor even at ranges up to 2000m ! Just for better understanding this is not the same gun as mounted in the Tiger I ! The Tiger I uses the much shorter and less powerful 88mm Flak 36 L/56 gun !!!

the only problem is that the jagdpanther was very rare at these times at the western front.

I`ve done multiple tests ingame and i would prefer a jagdpanther over the jagdpanzer IV in any situation !

but you should keep in mind that any jagdpanzer needs to be placed and used properly to be effective ! ALWAYS keep them away from direct enemy contact !

At best place them far behind your attacking units in a overwatch position to take out counterattacking enemy tanks !

[TheLotusEater]

Thank you siffo998 for explaining everything for me. I guess it's Jagdpanther all the way then. Or maybe KIng Tiger?

Of course it's far more expensive and with rarity point restrictions it's even costlier. I wonder at times if it would be better to swarm the battlefield with little Stugs.

[c3k]

In general, the tank destroyers were a stopgap solution.

First, you build a tank. The turret limits how powerful the gun can be. You design it to defeat the enemy.

Next, the enemy uparmors their tanks.

Your solution is that you need a more powerful gun. Your turret is limited. Therefore, you remove the turret and weld a fixed superstructure in place. That fixed structure can take a more powerful recoil, hence a more powerful gun.

Now that you've "plused up" your gun, you design a new tank with a turret that can hand that gun.

You introduce your new tank into combat.

The enemy up-armors their tanks.

Repeat the above.

(Example: Pz III -> StuG III -> Pz IV Lang: Panther -> Jagdpanther -> Tiger II

Okay, they're not perfect examples, but that's the lifecycle.)

Ken

[skogtroll]

You must also remember that Germans had many captured chassis and tanks of foreign production (for example Marder I on French Lorraine 37L chassis) or their own old vehicles(like PanzerII --> Marder II) .

[Redwolf]

Thank you skogtroll for that link to achtungpanzer.com it's just what I was looking for.

So how does the Jagdpanzer IV compare in-game to the Jagdpanther and how much better does the Jagdpanzer IV perform compared to a Stug III ?

Who knows? Unit data not available.

[JonS]

So how does the Jagdpanzer IV compare in-game to the Jagdpanther

Who knows? Unit data not available.

Yes. If only there were someway we could do head-to-head tests in-game against a standard target, and against a standard shooter, in order to see how the JPz IV compares in-game to the JPanther.

But, alas, no. An empirical test like that would be impossible. And silly, anyway. The only way to compare in-game would be to look at tabulated data extrinsic to the game.

[SnakeTheFox]

JP has 100mm armour and 88mm cannon (same as in Tiger II).

JP actually had the same hull armor as on the Panther at no alteration of thickness or slope (80mm at 55 degrees). Not trying to be anal or anything, just wanted to mention.

Anyhow, on topic, the early model Jagdpanzers (with the short L/48 gun) had 60mm armor at 50 degrees, which is respectable. Later V models with the L/70 gun (not featured in-game IIRC) had 80mm armor at 50 degrees, which is nearly identical to the Jagdpanther. The fact that they had almost identical armor is forgotten in most games, as the Jagdpanther just has that "cool" factor going for it, aesthetically.

As far as gun performance is concerned, the L/70 75mm, while definitely not as strong as the long 88, was definitely enough to tackle any allied tank of the war at combat ranges with the exception of a few such as the Soviet IS-2 (and maybe the Sherman Jumbo at longer ranges). The main drawback of the long 75 vs the long 88 is the long 75 has a pretty poor HE shell (comparable to the poor HE shells in other high-velocity guns of a similar caliber like the 76.2mm M1 or 17 pounder) and so makes a worse infantry support tank. But like I said, the L/70 Jagdpanzer isn't in the game anyway.

And how much of this is actually modeled in-game? I have no idea. Hopefully a good amount, though.

[skogtroll]

OK you are right:). Can you explain phrase: "Not trying to be anal"? I don't understand this.

[siffo998]

JP actually had the same hull armor as on the Panther at no alteration of thickness or slope (80mm at 55 degrees). Not trying to be anal or anything, just wanted to mention.

And how much of this is actually modeled in-game? I have no idea. Hopefully a good amount, though.

well you are both right ! the upper frontal hull of the jagdpanther has 80mm at 55 degrees but the gun is protected by a "saukopfblende" ("pigsnout mount") with 100mm.

and from what i`ve seen ingame the armor modelling is very sophisticated and MUCH MUCH MUCH better than in cm1 (where the angle of the tank vs. the impact angle of the shell wasnt taken into account at all -> for example in the cm2 engine you can place your tiger in a 45° position to the enemy and therefore it can withstand even 17 pounder shells because of the extra angling of the tank)

I`ve even seen a stugIII bouncing of a 76mm sherman shell from 200m range ingame so i would say the armor modelling ingame is really really sophisticated and compareable to the very good "Achtung Panzer Series" from Graviteam. The only problem is that gun elevation isnt modelled at all in cm2 but maybe this will change with future releases.

by the way the whole marder series was an attempt to place the mighty 75mm PAK (at least back in 1942 it could be called mighty) onto a mobile chassis so that the infantry stands a chance to properly defends themself against the mighty russian T34 (at least in 1941 and 42 it was mighty -> until the germans had the panzer IV F2 and G).

[Thomm]

... than in cm1 (where the angle of the tank vs. the impact angle of the shell wasnt taken into account at all .

Of course it was.

Best regards,

Thomm