World of Tanks - Bad Panther 

😂

😮😂

That was a good series

The good old days. I remember when Jingles actually played WOT. Miss those videos!

@@TraderDan58 🤣 I remember when he played Airsoft! Are we getting old yet? 😂💜

Never let the truth get in the way of a good story 😊.

@@gavinhammond1778 EXACTLY!!

At the Battle of Kursk, one of the major Soviet victories of the war, the highball estimate of German armor losses was literally half the lowball estimate of the Soviet losses, which was was fairly typical of Soviet victories trying to break the Nazi momentum. Even if the quote didn't happen, it's certainly appropriate to the situation.

The russians built 54,000 T-34 tanks the US build 50,000 Sherman's while Germany build 8, 000 Panzer IVs and 5,000 Panthers. So yeah German forces literally "drowned in butter"

or driving over tank obstacles which would STOP a tank.... or driving through a house with a cellar and not ending up down there....

Same gripe man.

The main problem with keeping the Panther in the fight was the terrible German repair and spares system, many tanks were lost simply because the spares needed to keep them running were not available. The panther was so prone to final drive failures that even relatively short distances would be done by train, however as the war progressed the reliability improved, and train transport for shorter distances was more due to fuel constraints than breakdowns. The allies did not generally fight broken down tanks, If the Germans could not recover them then they would generally destroy them.

Well the panther Was probably one of the fastest tanks in development and it got pusched hard in service so the inital Batch was bad and broke down on the way to the front but they fucking build a tank in 2 years and half a year later the panther was on pare with the sherman T34 and pz4 with breakdowns Also the french used the panther after wwii for same time but they never build New parts aka used the leftovers out of Germany and for sure the force Labor and fucked economy Shows in the quality of these parts and therfore they had shity lifetime and most reports about the final drive are from french Tankers (and too be fair German drivers may have been the more care full drivers but I wouldn't point too the french man and say he broke it 😅)

@@TheLtVoss wasn’t there a thing with the panther where they had to many turrets built but not enough hulls/chassis’s built so they ended up using the excess turrets as fortifications?

Typical Russian bias in games

Well yes, because irl, allied tanks (without infantry and air support) rarely stood a chance against German armor. So of course they’re gonna get uptiered, because a Tiger 1 fighting 75mm Shermans every game is not fun

@hazardous401 yeah and it's supposed to be a simulator and you end up playing against cold war era tanks and 40s German tanks have no chance which goes back to my Russian bias remark which is fact

@@simonkennedy4230 It’s not “supposed to be a simulator”, you have a specific game mode for that where you can play like historically accurate battles. The thing about ww2 vehicles facing cold war ones is not strictly a German problem, but a whole other problem regarding BR compression - The T-34-85 can face cold war SPGs; the IS-2 (1944) can face a fucking M48 Patton etc. So before you go crying about russian bias, maybe try out other tech trees besides the German one.

@@simonkennedy42306 day war had panzer 4 and stugs fighting Pattons so it could be worse if you want real historical battles

Hence why I don't buy the 'Germany should have built only Pz.IV's' idea. Fuel, crews and steel simply were too precious. Reliability issues were a crippling blow for sure, but they were more so caused because the Germans released the tank undercooked, out of desperation. Thats also why I think the original Tiger was pretty much as good as the Wehrmacht got, as aside from weight problems the tank actually was pretty reliable and of course had a fearsome reputation if used correctly. Not nearly enough to win the war of course, and a fuel gobbler to boot, but together with the later Panthers pretty much the pinnacle of 'bang for buck' for the German Army. And much, MUCH more effective than the actually over-engineered Tiger II.

Yeah, the Nazis had 99 problems, but thinking ahead thankfully wasn’t one of them.

In my humble opinion, this would've been worse for Germany. Let's face it - Germany could not out-produce the United States, USSR, *and* the Commonwealth on their own. Germany still would have found itself massively outnumbered. The idea, in *theory,* was to operate a smaller number of much higher-quality vehicles, thus reducing overall crew requirements and allow Germany to focus their high-quality vehicles into important areas to have the most impact. As far as an overall strategy goes, I think it's a damn good one. Of course, in reality, it's much more complicated than that. Not like this was anything other than a borderline-unwinnable scenario to begin with.

@@the_tactician9858 I would like to shine the limelight on the King Tiger since you mentioned it. It's my favorite tank of WWII, despite its negligible impact on the war. As far as the design went, it managed to sort out, to some degree, a lot of the problems that tanks like the Panther and Tiger had. Of course I still wouldn't deem the Tiger II a *reliable* vehicle, even if you don't count the lack of adequate materials for construction in latewar Germany + poor crew pools. The KT had the best tank gun of the war, the best armor of the war, and it actually wasn't all that sluggish, either. It's kind've interesting to see a proper evolution and addressing of core issues with the Panzer Corps's tank design even so late into the war in desperation-mode. To me, the Tiger II represents the finality of Germany's quality-over-quantity doctrine to its best example. A lot of good it seemed to do them in the long run, though.

@@the_tactician9858 Dont forget Stug III

"... or circle back and kill you."

I find them to be great fun, and great tanks. In a pinch you can brawl, at it's tier, and if you manage to break into the enemy rear.. Sniping from behind, that't right up my alley.

Yup

I guess changing your mind over time is illegal?

"This is the cable you'd bring to work - but THIS" [slaps cable bolted to side of Panther] "This is the kind of cable you'd want to get your girlfriend."

Just because the panther isn't a good tank in WoT doesn't mean he doesn't like the kitty. I do remember that chain comparison to this day

There we go. Finally someone said it.

No kidding, that gun was longer than some tanks with their gun barrels included.

hmm, tell the commander : while moving turn the turret so that the barrels isnt turned into a banana and killing the loader inside the turret because you hit a house while trying to yield the gun as a hammer against THAT house ! The same goes for trees.... and driving over anti-tank obstacles - 60 % chance getting stuck for the game.

That sounds like War Thunder with extra steps.

Combat ready the Panther actually cost 143,912 RM and took a minimum of 2000 man hours to build (Spielberger - Panther and its variants). The Panzer IV cost 115,962 RM combat ready . vastly superior clearly does not take into account the numerous problems with the Panther.

And considering Germany had to cancel many projects because of lack of steel for example, it's a myth that they could easily produce 10x the amount of other tanks when they would be easier to manufacture. Sure, the numbers would go up. But probably not to huge amounts. Maybe UDSSR and America could also produce more tanks because their country was much larger, had more resources and with a larger population? Crazy idea, I know. PS: your production quality also is not going up when your factories get hammered 24/7 and you force people to do the labour.

@@freddieclark So the Panther was about 25% more expensive, as opposed to 14% more expensive. Ok, but that doesn't really disprove my point. It was vastly superior in its basic design, based on several years of wartime experience. It had problems because they rushed it into service, but by 1944 most of these had been solved (with the notable exception of the weak final drives). By 1944 the Pz IV was obsolete. It had a reasonably good gun, and literally nothing else going for it.

@@onepunchbud1472 The big limiting factors for the Germans in tank production was actually the Allied bombing of the engine factories. The Maybach plant was shut down for 5 months at one point. This also severely limited the production of spare parts, which made keeping the tanks operational in the field _much_ more difficult.

One has to keep in mind that the Germans didn't really have a tank similar to the Sherman or T-34. The Panzer IV was designed as early as 1937. It was a very solid 1937 design, but by 1941 the design had already about reached its peak efficiency, outside of having a bigger gun or more armor slapped onto it.. The Panther meanwhile was designed from 1942, as a direct response to encountering modern tanks from the Allies, and was rushed into service so that it was 'ready' in 1943, ready in the same way a modern AAA game title is ready for launch. In fact, the only tank that was a somewhat direct German competitor in terms of design age with the Sherman and T-34 is the Tiger, which had been slowly cooked up and was finalized in late 1942. And interestingly, the Tiger was actually fairly reliable mechanically, except when it came to its weight. It was a bugger to repair once it broke down tho.

The Panther is not really bad. It has a good gun and good DPM - which lots of people struggle to bring to bear.

@@belacqua2424 yea, but the Panther II is a 40% tank. Play vs tier 10s with that and you'll know pain...

Agreed, but IMHO, the E50's actually are worth the pain. You know... aside from the whole having to play at tier 10 part

Panther II is great. Hell I'd say even the Panther 88 is great though not for everyone. Honestly the biggest struggle is the E50 constantly getting over matched on its side.

I love my Panther, and the Panther II. 3 marked each, and they remain a couple of my most played tanks, and also get featured the most in my own videos. I love the DPM playstyle, but it's not for everyone.

"Quite OP" is kind of an understatement as the PZ V/IV is generally viewed as the most OP tank tier for tier in all of WOT...

@MrLBPug I mean every ww2 book I have, including various accounts from German soldiers and officers all agree it was shit not to mention post war assessments. I attribute that lack of repair parts getting to the tanks as a major factor into why we now perceive them as unreliable in my original comment. Maybe you misread it? Or are you arguing that late war German logistics were superb?

@MrLBPug The overwhelming majority of people in the tank fandom know nothing about logistics, heck most Sherman fanboys don't know shit as they all love to repeat the claim that the Sherman can't weigh more than 30 tons because no crane could hold it, that is utter nonsense as the Liberty ships themselves had a 50 ton crane and dockcrane could do even more. Reliability of WW2 tanks is a very complicated and grey area, not least because a lot of factors outside of the tank's design contributed to whether the tank would be in the repair shop or not. Tanks were maintenance hungry beast in WW2, every tank, including the Sherman, needed periodic maintenance to keep it working.

@@Dreachon Logistics is an extremely complex topic that can have a massive amount of variation depending on where/when/what. That said I really don't understand how people can conflate the reliability of a tanks design for the logistical capability of a country to maintain it. A Panzer III might have had minimal issues in North Africa, Italy, and France, but had to be abandoned outside Moscow due to a lack of fuel. Again I reiterate that I myself pointed out that Germany had logistical issues causing the perceived reliability issues which seems to be upsetting people. Why I am being accused of "not understanding logistics" is a bit confusing TBH.

@@enoughrope1638 My comment was directed at LPbug. I agree with you as there are so many outside factors that can and will influence how quickly that tank will be in the repair shop. Even something as basic as the quality of the oils to lubricate pieces can have an effect. Or the quality of the gasoline. Or what if it was a simple repair job that the maintenance crews could not do because they have a whole bunch of anry Russians breathing down their necks. What I always find weird is that the Sherman fans never seem to ask themselves how the Sherman would had suffered had it been in the same situation as the Panzer IV and Panther. It would have suffered, and by a lot.

Praise from a very high place ❤❤

​​@@frainebaxter6437I love a good medium game! Not a fan of heavy games though. they just find the closest hull down spot and spam the gold.🤮

The T-34 barely ran, at least the models from the first years of the war were utter shit sometimes. But if they had a gun and could shoot it, who cares if the tank breaks down outside of the factory, a new tank is ready in the same time you needed to break down the old one. Different ideas on logistics. US had to ship tanks over 1000's of miles, so their tanks had to last for years and the crew had to live for longer than even that. The USSR had to fight literally on the doorsteps of their factories sometimes, so they needed tanks that a retard could learn to drive and that could be built in 3 hours by a college dorm household. Meanwhile Germany needed a tank that gave the most buck for the least amount of fuel, manpower, steel and ammunition, preferably one that could be built enough to make a difference. Hence why they got 3000 different modules with all kinds of specialties while the US and USSR just ended up slapping different modules, armor and weapons on their M4's and T-34's and called it a day (obviously oversimplified)

I have to stand against you here; the T-34 was probably one of the most *un*reliable tanks of the war. T-34 tanks could seldom travel more than ~50km under their own power on average before suffering various failures. The Soviets managed to keep a large active force of tanks due to a sheer volume of produced units and spare parts. The Soviets could afford to produce unreliable tanks because they could afford to endure the consequences of that disadvantage.

But they weren’t. Tanks were really hard to kill from the air - only a direct hit from a rocket or bomb would do, and rockets were famously inaccurate. Allied pilots may have claimed hundreds of tank kills, but post-battle analyses determined that maybe 3 or 4 percent of German tank kills were actually due to air attack.

That Panther player wouldn't have by chance been me would it have (NA server, mongoosejake username)? I only ask that because I've done exactly that thing against a Tiger 1 and on Mines and it turned out to be a game winning engagement. I had the health to eat the Tiger's shots, and even then he bounced one or two. Just burned him down with the Panther's DPM and then went on to win.

@@MongooseJakeGames it was so many years ago that I would really have no idea what any username was back then. It was definitely on an NA server, I think that was back when there were two servers, so it would have probably been NA East, since that is what I played on. I know it was more than 8 years ago, since that was when I was in a Jingles video. I'm pretty sure we did win the game.

yeah, he was depending on the Panther to keep the flank locked down, while he can support from behind bushes he probably wasn't expecting that the Panther would allow the Cromwell to drive through the open without taking a single hit, because the Panther player shit the bed with his aim

Well, everybody hates artillery mechanics in this game (except they play nothing but artillery I guess), but you got a fair point.

Naaaa, arty sucks. Except that Leaf Blower that can burn in the fires of hell for eternity.

The Panther player also didn't anticipate that the Cromwell would be visible when it crested the hill in front of the artillery. I would have been pre-aiming there at least. I couldn't see what kind of hit points their scout had but couldn't understand why he was playing back so far, especially then. Yeah, yeah....sky cancer blah, blah, blah. It's still a gun on the field.

@@seaninness334 Its not so much about, if artillery is good for the game or if the Panther driver did something wrong but about jingles blaming the artillery for sitting in the same spot the whole battle. the Artillery driver did nothing wrong at all.

It was entirely shit, more often than not they couldn't make it to the fight

world of tanks likes donig weird things..... I think this one has an 88mm it never had...

Considering all the calls of Russian bias in WOT and WOWS, and that German vehicles in both games tend to be not as good as they probably could be, it does seem like WG doesn't like making German equipment good, especially when compared to the way they treat Russian equipment. It likely is due to a bit of animus against Germany from WWII and earlier.

@@NRSGuardian I fully agree

Germany was pretty much lacking everything except actual weapons and ammunition. But it IS true that the German production line was a mess, if only for the spare parts that had to be meticulously crafted for each different model, not to mention the dozens of different designs captured from other nations. Once it got streamlined tho the German industry actually overtook the British industry in sheer output despite bombing campaigns. Didn't stop them from running out of fuel and other logistics tho.

even if germany had produced more tanks, there was no fuel to use them... actually most self destroyed german tanks were blown up not because of some final drive problems or other flaws, they just run out of fuel