Jump to content


M4 Sherman vs Panzer IV


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
23 replies to this topic

Keilor #1 Posted Mar 23 2011 - 14:35

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 19 battles
  • 157
  • Member since:
    03-10-2011
I can't seem to figure out why most people seem to like the M4 Sherman more than the Panzer IV.

Panzer IV has a slightly more penetrating derpgun (higher penetration on HE does increase the damage, right?), faster acceleration, much better front armor, and another good weapon besides the derpgun.  All the M4 Sherman has is a faster-turning turret, and very slightly better track traverse.

Does the turret speed really outweigh all of the Panzer IV's advantages?  Or am I missing something?

Elbow #2 Posted Mar 23 2011 - 14:39

    Captain

  • Players
  • 17418 battles
  • 1,071
  • [BRVE] BRVE
  • Member since:
    01-28-2011
Haven't played the M4 so I can't say for certain. I enjoyed the Pz IV for sure, the long 75mm is a nice weapon. When playing against Shermans I find they can bounce shots sometimes and are very agile which is a challenge when facing them. Agility in this game, when used well, can be an advantage.

Wrath_From_Above #3 Posted Mar 23 2011 - 14:41

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 740
  • Member since:
    02-21-2011
I am American and perfer playing the US tree and I love the Sherman. It's fast, agile, and can take a beating. You can do a lot of damage with 105mm gun (400+ damage) but with the high damage come less accuracy at long distances plus the fast turret gives you an advantage. The biggest reason I still play the Sherman even though I moved on to the T20 and T23 is I can gain a lot credits with it since your normally in the top 5 during a match. It's an easy credits griding tank.

__gabriel__ #4 Posted Mar 23 2011 - 15:02

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16054 battles
  • 5,930
  • [VILIN] VILIN
  • Member since:
    07-18-2010
I can't speak for others but having 200+ games in each

M4-
-Far superior gun elevation/depression and higher profile allows it to take up better positions around the map
-More mobility, the Dark Helmet turret offers better armor but really overloads the Pz IV drive train and engine (though the HP/TON ends up about even)
-The Turret traverse is almost 2x for the M4s uprated turret than the Schmalturm.
-The M4 also has about 10% better credit coefficient, which means if they play identical games the M4 will get 10% more credits for it.

Pz IV-
-Slightly better hull armor (taking into account the M4s slope the M4 is about 70mm effective)
-Better frontal Turret armor, however the turret is a large, easy target and only the small frontal section is well armored.
-Better "AP" gun, the 75 L/70 is better than the 76mm M1A1 , .7m more accurate at 100m and does 10mm/20hp more pen/dam

The 105mm HE guns they get are identical, in terms of stats and experience. The M4 rounds cost about 20c more and can't fire AP shells but no one fires the AP shells anyway.

Overall they're actually very similar, though in terms of playstyle it tends to translate a bit more into the M4 being a more 'medium' like vehicle, while the Pz IV is usually played like a tier V 'heavy medium'.

My stats in the M4 are considerably better but I chalk that up to having played most of those games after I had learned quite a bit about this game,

Ghosth #5 Posted Mar 23 2011 - 15:07

    Sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 5268 battles
  • 198
  • [LUPI] LUPI
  • Member since:
    09-21-2010
I have to agree with Wrath, M4 Sherman with the 105 is an awesome xp and credit farmer.

While the Pnzr 4 isn't a bad tank, for me it didn't seem to earn as well as the Sherman does on a regular basis. Although I did progress through the Pnzr 4 quickly using xp converted to free, it has no where near the victory percentage my M4 Sherman has.

For me M4 has 355 battles with 180 victory's.
Pnzr 4 has 17 battles and 5 victory's.

Pnzr 4 105mm 10.5 cm KwK 42 L/28  350/350/410 64/150/53 8.57   40,100
M4 Sherman   105 mm SPH M4L23      410/350   53/150 8.57   40,300

The guns are virtually identical, with the Pnzr 4 having the edge of being able to use AP.

PzKpfw-IV-Standardturm (standard)   50/30/30   50   380   8,500
M4 Sherman stock D51066 (standard)   76/51/51   45   380   4,800

This starts to show the tale, pnzr traverse on the stock turret is actually a touch faster, but look at the turret armor. M4 has 50% more turret armor across the board.

Pnzr 4
Mobility
Engine power 320 h.p.
Speed limit 48 km/h
Traverse speed 30 deg/sec
Turret traverse speed 50 deg/sec
Armor
Hull armor (mm) Front 80
Sides 30
Rear 20

M4 Sherman
Mobility
Engine power 350 h.p.
Speed limit 48 km/h
Traverse speed 35 deg/sec
Turret traverse speed 45 deg/sec
Armor
Hull armor (mm) Front 51
Sides 38
Rear 38

Top speed is the same, Pnzr 4 has the advantage in hull armor in front only.
Sides the M4 does better, couple that with the better track traverse, and better turret armor and you have a tank that survives more often.

Keilor #6 Posted Mar 23 2011 - 15:20

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 19 battles
  • 157
  • Member since:
    03-10-2011

View PostWrath_From_Above, on Mar 23 2011 - 14:41, said:

It's fast, agile, and can take a beating.

View Postgabriel, on Mar 23 2011 - 15:02, said:

-More mobility, the Dark Helmet turret offers better armor but really overloads the Pz IV drive train and engine (though the HP/TON ends up about even)

But that's the thing, their engines are the same, but the Pz IV weighs less, even with the second turret.  M4 Sherman actually feels kind of sluggish to me - even the T1 Heavy has a better power-to-weight ratio.  People kept saying it was agile, but it was kind of disappointing compared to the T-28: it did have the firepower, but not the agility to match.  It seems like there's no super-agile glass cannon with great firepower in Tier 5, maybe not even 6 or 7.


I can understand about the turret depression/elevation and credit coefficient, though.  Thanks, I guess those would do it for some people.

Wrath_From_Above #7 Posted Mar 23 2011 - 15:34

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 740
  • Member since:
    02-21-2011
You can't compare the M4 to a T1....one is a medium and the other is a heavy. Believe me, the Sherman runs circles around the T1. I would take the M4 over the T1 any day. Tier 7 is when you start getting into great fire power with the T29.....besides the KV with the derp.


Both of these tanks are just stepping stones to get to the Pershing and Panther 2 since they are almost identical. You really will only be in each tank 2-3 days before you have enough exp to open the tier 6 anyway. It really comes down to what nations tree you want to play.

Rustic_Dude #8 Posted Mar 23 2011 - 15:56

    Sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 341 battles
  • 182
  • [DSA] DSA
  • Member since:
    11-14-2010
For me, the main difference is that the Sherman can pen the PzIV's side armor with a High Explosive Round from the 105.

Which means that most often than not, it's a one-shot kill.

__gabriel__ #9 Posted Mar 23 2011 - 17:01

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16054 battles
  • 5,930
  • [VILIN] VILIN
  • Member since:
    07-18-2010
@ Keilor,

There are other variables that aren't obvious in the garage screen that effect 'mobility', mainly variables for the tracks.

-'Terrain resistance', which effects how much you slow down on difficult terrains (water, swamp, inclines etc), much better in the M4
-'brake force' , how well/fast you come to a complete stop (important when you need to stop, to aim)
- Tracks even have some determining how on  badly your aiming circle get's dispersed while moving.  (slight nod to the Pz IV here).

I'd post the specific values but I think that's a EULA issue,

I'd only say that just play a lot more games in them, get the crews well trained and the vehicles elited, then play them one after the other for an afternoon. A rather fun and profitable project if you ask me, they both are great credit makers if played well.

Quote

Both of these tanks are just stepping stones to get to the Pershing and Panther 2 since they are almost identical. You really will only be in each tank 2-3 days before you have enough exp to open the tier 6 anyway. It really comes down to what nations tree you want to play.

Rubbish, tier V is the tier to keep. :P , they'll make up a significant portion of anyones playing time, especially the non-premium users.
http://forum.worldof...ite-tier/    <- all the cool people agreeing with me

Keilor #10 Posted Mar 23 2011 - 17:09

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 19 battles
  • 157
  • Member since:
    03-10-2011

View Postgabriel, on Mar 23 2011 - 17:01, said:

@ Keilor,

There are other variables that aren't obvious in the garage screen that effect 'mobility', mainly variables for the tracks.

-'Terrain resistance', which effects how much you slow down on difficult terrains (water, swamp, inclines etc), much better in the M4
-'brake force' , how well/fast you come to a complete stop (important when you need to stop, to aim)
- Tracks even have some determining how on  badly your aiming circle get's dispersed while moving.  (slight nod to the Pz IV here).

I'd post the specific values but I think that's a EULA issue,

I'd only say that just play a lot more games in them, get the crews well trained and the vehicles elited, then play them one after the other for an afternoon. A rather fun and profitable project if you ask me, they both are great credit makers if played well.



Rubbish, tier V is the tier to keep. :P , they'll make up a significant portion of anyones playing time, especially the non-premium users.
http://forum.worldof...ite-tier/    <- all the cool people agreeing with me
Thanks, that sums it up well!

KillingMeSoftly #11 Posted Mar 23 2011 - 21:21

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 7729 battles
  • 1,358
  • Member since:
    10-04-2010
I find the M4 Sherman better unless you enjoy playing as a sniper, then the Panzer IV excels.  The Panzer IV has marginally tougher frontal armor and marginally more health (I think 20 hp more?).  It is, in my experience, less agile.  I find the 105mm howitzer a lot better than the 10.5cm howitzer on the Panzer IV, but I didn't use it extensively on the Panzer so that might cloud my judgment -- the M4's 105mm just feels better and hits harder.  M4 Sherman also plays as a better flanker with the 76mm.

They both have a "Derpgun" option, but the M4 Sherman is better at it.  The M4 Sherman is a better flanker, close range fighter while the Panzer IV is a better (considerably) long range fighter.  Both are Tier 5 Mediums, but they excel in their own feels.

I like the M4 Sherman more, but that's because I have other German tanks that are also great long range attackers.  I don't drive any other "derpgun" style tanks.  M4 Sherman also makes the best money out of any other Tier 5 I've ever driven; so the deal is pretty much sealed for me.

TheDude101 #12 Posted Mar 23 2011 - 22:51

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 5938 battles
  • 558
  • [-BNP-] -BNP-
  • Member since:
    12-09-2010
Haven't played a M4 Sherman, but have fought many. I love my PzIV with the Schmalturm and my Long 7,5cm. Now that my crews are maxed out 100%, and am working on Cammo....on top of having Binoculars, cammie netting and the vent for the crew...im invisible!

Only hard part I have facing shermans is when they flank me, the turret rotation is very slow on the PzIV with the Schmalturm and when they get to my ass with the quick firing weapons they use (not sure what) I'm toast!

Just last round I played on that snowy map with a castle on one side, forested hill on the other with the cap points in the middle - and sat at around 400-450m away from the cap point in open ground (no cover between) sniping 7 enemy tanks in the cap zone. I effectively stopped the cap and killed 4 people, damaged 3 others and when I asked - they said they had no idea where I was.

Enduring_Hope #13 Posted Mar 24 2011 - 00:41

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 12863 battles
  • 772
  • Member since:
    08-16-2010
They are very close together in terms of cost effectiveness.  But since neither is a particularly effective brawler (too fragile and large for that) I have to give the nod to the Panzer IV.

It has a far more accurate AP gun (long 75mm) which allows one to engage targets at 400m+ with pinpoint shots.

There are other nuances outlined above by Gabriel, which are all important, but for me personally the Pz IV gun pushes it slightly ahead of the Sherman M4.

Glythe #14 Posted Mar 24 2011 - 12:03

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 20761 battles
  • 1,656
  • Member since:
    11-12-2010
There's a lot of talk about comparing the two HE guns on these tanks and I am slightly puzzled by this. Once you get the L/70 on the PIV most people never take it off. At long ranges the Sherman just can't compete with that gun. The PIV's turret also allows you to crest a hill and hide the rest of your tank. The PIV turret isn't as weak as you might think as it can deflect shots from tanks tier 7 and above.

Really what we're talking about for these two tanks is which playstyle do you prefer? If you want to snipe then the PIV is better, but if you want to fight at close range the Sherman is better.

Keilor #15 Posted Mar 25 2011 - 06:37

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 19 battles
  • 157
  • Member since:
    03-10-2011
I went ahead and fully upgraded both.  At both close and far range, the Panzer's final 75mm is much better than the 105mm with both a higher accuracy and a seemingly higher DPS, since I can use the accuracy to aim at weak spots in the armor.  I do prefer fighting close-range, but the open maps I am stuck playing often force me to shoot at far-away targets.  That, plus the much better armor, and the comparable speed, makes the Panzer IV a much better tank for me (don't mind my stats, I play terribly with stock tanks and that really skews it =P).  I've played the KV a bit, so the turret doesn't seem that slow for me - it's fine if I "plan ahead" where to turn it, so to speak.

Thanks again everyone!

Ajatcho #16 Posted Mar 25 2011 - 10:15

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 16873 battles
  • 1,187
  • [MAHOU] MAHOU
  • Member since:
    12-22-2010

View PostKeilor, on Mar 23 2011 - 14:35, said:

I can't seem to figure out why most people seem to like the M4 Sherman more than the Panzer IV.

Panzer IV has a slightly more penetrating derpgun (higher penetration on HE does increase the damage, right?), faster acceleration, much better front armor, and another good weapon besides the derpgun.  All the M4 Sherman has is a faster-turning turret, and very slightly better track traverse.

Does the turret speed really outweigh all of the Panzer IV's advantages?  Or am I missing something?

M4 is far better than the Pz IV it runs faster and shoots faster and is more agile

Qyygle #17 Posted Aug 16 2011 - 18:49

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 17202 battles
  • 128
  • [VIKNG] VIKNG
  • Member since:
    05-22-2011
That only makes it better if you want to get in close...

As far as I can tell, I haven't actually played the Sherman, but what I do play, is a Pz IV with a derp gun. The funny thing is though, while most people wouldn't know, Derp guns are actually great sniping weapons with a good crew and a load rammer. HE shells don't get affected by range, and taking long range shots with a little patience and target leading has led me to kill lots of tanks or take large chunks of out them without them even knowing where I was. The fact that you've got a derp gun, also makes most close range brawlers think twice when closing with me, especially if they're already damaged as I can still one shot them close up.

In the end though, it's just play style. They both have their advantages, but I go with the pzr as I find the bigger guns give you at least something of a chance in higher tier battles, where closing is often risky...

Smilez91 #18 Posted Aug 17 2011 - 01:34

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 8530 battles
  • 164
  • Member since:
    06-13-2011
I haven't played Pz4, but I've played the M4 and will soon have my E-50. The M4 was quite agile and was really fun with the 105. Also the M4 (as do the other US meds) has really good gun depression which I found to play quite a big factor of my enjoyment of the tank, because you can do well in hilly terrain.

pooky #19 Posted Aug 19 2011 - 05:47

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 7735 battles
  • 68
  • Member since:
    04-27-2011
Shermans good but Pz4 is better IMO. They are extremely similar, but for me it comes down to accuracy and better penetration which puts the Pz4 ahead. Having gone down the Russian Heavy tree it has made me realise just how important accuracy is, and the Pz4 is a hell of a little sniper. My KV-3 can't hit the side of a barn with a fully aimed shot. Sherman is slightly more agile but in this game mobility isn't as useful as a powerful accurate gun, and the difference in acceleration isnt enough to make a difference anyway.

Zinegata #20 Posted Aug 19 2011 - 07:07

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 7289 battles
  • 4,542
  • Member since:
    07-27-2010
The Sherman has generally superior maneuverability. The Panzer IV has better protection and a better sniping gun. Both tanks are very close in performance.

I personally prefer the Sherman however, as I've found that the extra maneuverability aids a lot in keeping the tank alive even at close quarters; and using the 105mm gun is still effective even against heavily armored foes.

The Panzer IV also has the 105mm that has virtually the same performance, but its poorer maneuverability doesn't lend well to close-in derp fighting. It's really much better as a sniping platform thanks to the fantastic L70.