I hate PzIVs

[Weasel]

They suck the big weenies! I have never had them win a tank vs tank duel yet even when hull down. I had the drop on a Sherman that was moving towards me while I was sitting still for turns and at 300m the round went flying way over the Sherman but his first round (while moving) clobbered that piece of junk. I know others have not been too happy with them other, I wonder if they are coded wrong, how are they in CMFI?

How about when you tell a tank to back up (down a road in this case) and he feels the need to drive forward, spin around and then try backing up. In some ways Cm1 is superior.

[cargol]

I think it's your bad luck that it's responsible :)
I won several tank to tank duels with a PZIV but still cant tell you if it's superior or not compared to a Sherman.
I agree though that in CMX1 the outcome of a tank duel was more predictable in the terms that if you had first LOS and a crew of descent quality normally you d have been the victor.

[Streelnieks24]

By the looks of it Sherman managed to get a lucky hit on you. Even in hull down position part of the tank is still exposed (turret). One lucky hit on that and Pz. IV is done for due to it's weak armour (which is explained here by Charles in Battlefront forums: http://www.battlefront.com/community/sho...tcount=303).

Just need to understand Pz IV in 1944 isn't the hippest tank around and have to re-adjust method of usage from head on fights to long range engagements or hit 'n' run approach. And of course cope with CMx2's TacAI which can, in a "elaborate" way, decide how to interprate your orders.

[Jobu88]

Honestly I have found that whoever shoots first usually wins a tank-v-tank engagement in CMx2 (assuming their gun can penetrate the target tank). I haven't kept track, but it sure seems like the first-round hit numbers in CMx2 are a LOT higher than in CMx1. If I had a dollar for every time in CMBB that my T-34 got off 3 misses against a Panther at 300 meters and then got drilled, I could retire next month. Not so in CMBN.

In regard to the PzIV, it has a good gun and a good ammo load, and that's about all you can say for it.

[Cogust]

If I had a dollar for every time in CMBB that my T-34 got off 3 misses against a Panther at 300 meters and then got drilled, I could retire next month. Not so in CMBN.

But then there's no T-34s in CMBN either, so I'm not surprised.

[Weasel]

You are all wrong, they suck and no one will tell me different! It can't be my play, how could that be??

Honestly I lost 3 of 5 PzIVs to moving allied tanks while I was stationary and hatches open, all one hit kills from a Sherman.

Just a post out of frustration. I have noticed that armoured skirts don't seem to protect the tanks against rockets (bazookas and piat) which the skirt is designed to defeat. It seems the game is either treating it as just armour or it is just there for graphic purposes.

[A Canadian Cat]

Well my Shermans seem to be constantly going up in smoke to those dam PzIVs :-)

I agree that usually it is the tank that gets the first shot off that usually wins but even then sometimes not.

[BBrus]

I think C2C played a big role here. Before moving my armor I tried to be sure he had the latest spotting information available so they wouldn't even had to scan for targets, just aim and fire.

Could morale have something to do with it, too? Perhaps nervous or rattled units fire without aiming that properly.

Anyway, I'd take a Sherman over a PzIV anytime!

[Weasel]

My PzIVs have sucked in all my games. I have finally learned one thing though, trying to move your tanks up to support your infantry is bad mojo, best to leave them in the rear with hopeful LOS.

[A Canadian Cat]

Yeah definitely the further back you can keep them and still support the better.