Profile of sinthe

Maybe to let its prey having a chance to escape? You know, keeping it balanced.
You can't lose vs anything in a 1vs1 fight with a Panther, even more if your target is already damaged and you want on the top of that making sure you can simply rush it and kill it on the move?

If you had asked the same for the Pz4, I would have say yes, but the panther...

That's not true. Both more mobile comets and t34/85s can win 1v1 over 30% of the time against panthers front armour.

-T-34/76 struggles with most medium armor
-Cromwell effective against ALL medium armor
-PZ IV struggles with ALL medium armor

Let me guess OP, you got flanked by a cheaper tank and now you are here whining about how every allied faction is OP, and how relic should nerf them!

No other tank gets free armor with veterancy. PZ IV will win a frontal fight with ANY of those allied tanks. You got flanked? Then L2P.

Also PZ IV has very good AI, it is not decent. On par with sherman but has much better AT.

L2P OP.

That's not true. Pick the tanks and vet and I'll post a video with at least 30 samples once I'm done camping.

T34/85 is better than Pz4 but Pz4 has higher chances to win agasint T34/85 than T34/76 has against PzIV.

Talking about OST vet 0 Pz4 becasue once vet 2 or OKW...

Vet 2 vs vet 2 the p4 loses

The youtube test is a good idea. However the execution is flawed:
- Why is the P4 engaging shocks troops whereas the T-34 is engaging Pfussies? You know that Shocks are extremely resilient to small-arms fire. Right?
- You need to keep Hull MGs faced towards infantry; for some tanks, they deal a significant amount of damage
- When you use attack-move, the tank will engage at max range (40), which is well out of range of their MGs. You can see that in your test, the T-34s happened to be in range with their MGs, while the P4s weren't.
- Not all Hull MGs have the same DPS profile.

To get a better idea about a profile, you can compare commando SMGs to PGren assault rifles. At point-blank range, commandos deal more DPS. However, their DPS drops off steeply after range 10, whereas PGrens still deal pretty good damage up until range ~25.

T-34 MGs seem to have been overbuffed. That's it.

Since T-34/76 and T-34/85 share the same MG, both tanks have received the buff. This puts their MG DPS on an equal level to a fully-upgraded OKW Panther (The OKW Panther has higher MG DPS than the MGs of OST P4. Go figure).

If we disregard the MG shenanigans. The comparison between P4 and T-34/76 is a bit flawed. The cost difference is justified because:

1) The P4 is better than the T-34 in every single aspect (bar MG damage).

Some stuff you've missed:
- You have mixed up the scatter values for T-34 and P4
- P4 has better AoE (with better reload, that becomes even stronger)
- P4 has 6.3 speed. With Blitzkrieg that becomes 8.5
- Same with acceleration (P4 acceleration almost equal to T-34, but with Blitzkrieg, forget about it)

When you take the time to cite stats, please also put the effort to doublecheck what you post.

- Not everybody on this site has the ability to doublecheck what you are posting is correct.
- It's not a nice thing to spread misinformation.

2) You are neglecting Veterancy stats. Again.

Since P4 is more durable than the T-34, it will have an easier time attaining/retaining that vet level.

3) The T-34 comes later than what its combat abilities would imply. In order to have any hope of being relevant on the battlefield, it has to be efficient.

Micro tax is the most important resource in this game.
Second to that comes Manpower (especially in the late-game)
Then, comes fuel (or munition for certain doctrines/factions)

Have you ever tried playing Soviets, and tried to counter Panther spam with T-34 spam? Try it 1-2 times, and you will see what I mean.

4) The T-34 is an end-game unit for the Soviets. There is no OST T4 option for the Soviets; you are stuck with T-34s and SU-85 until the game ends.

Would you ever build an OST P4 60 minutes into the game?
- Hell no; you would build Brummbars/Panthers/Stugs, depending on what you face
- The Soviet still has to build T-34s because there's nothing else on their T4 (and SU85 can't hurt infantry)

The difference in units it to show the relitivity of the units. You can't heads up dps if one is killing 4 man squads and the other is killing 6 man squads. I believe every 10 samples was a different unit.

I did notice the mg thing but the point of the test are to engage at max range. Where I'm pulling my stats from says they both have max range of 40, so that could be where the stat errors are coming from. I need to learn to pull my own stats. Where do you pull stats from?

I don't understand why vet stats matter so much, the armour bonus only changes it's chance to penetrate by 11% but the reload rate of the t34 becomes 4.631.

I don't believe that the P4 is better in every single aspect, there is a major difference in cost for a minor performance difference, as where the t34/85 costs roughly the same but outperformes the P4 in literally everything.

Using blitzkreig for the arguement is a bit weak. It's not like I can mash that button all the time and it cost munitions. Like, having the ability to go faster than something else shouldn't be considered in the cost of the unit if going faster requires a cost.

I'm really liking the youtube testing, personally I'm lookinng at the game in a whole new light. But it surprising how close axis armour is to their counter parts with such a huge cost difference.

I absolutely agree with your points 3) and 4), except for the panther spam part.

The game favours allies more than axis now...

I think the "YES" votes reflects how much the players are willing to play a certain faction.

Every allied bias player voted yes to being satisfied as the axis factions.