Think They'll Rework Panzers?

[PimpyMicPimp]

With the new Anti-Tank weapons, do you think they'll give Panzers a differnet bonus? I remeber reading somewhere that the Anti-Tank infantry or whatever it is can be built before tanks and requires no oil. It seems to me that Panzers could use a revamp then :P

[GIR]

Panzers sucks.
I always mod them because in the most situations they are not better than tanks.

[turquoiseninja]

Yeah panzers should get an extra movement point, and like a +3 strength bouns.
Something like that.

Or maybe give 'em a chance to withdraw from combat, representing the mobility of the Blitzkrieg?

[Ball Lightning]

How were panzers different to tanks anyway?

[GIR]

+50% vs. armored units

[phantom59]

Originally Posted by Ball Lightning

How were panzers different to tanks anyway?

mabey the fact that it took 3 shermans to take down one panzer, IF the shermans had the right situation

basicly bb gun vs. high powered rifle

[RedRalph]

I suppose that makes the T-34 a Minigun

[diablodelmar]

If representative of real life, Panzer should have some extra movement bonus, or perhaps ignores movement penalties for all terrain to represent the speed of the Panzers.

[qwert]

The real strengh of Germanys panzer divisions was in their tactics against other armored units, in fact i thing the brittish had better tanks at the begining of the war (by the end of WWII ther were some really good German tanks, including one type whose frontal armor was never perfored, ¿the Tiger maybe?).
So i think a bonus against other tanks is a good way to represent this (although a speed bonus (to represent their enphasis on mobility) wouldn´t be bad either).

[Napalm102]

T-34 were nasty, especially the later models. In terms of engineering they were actually superior to german "Tigers" and "Panthers", because they used an intelligent armor layout (angled armor) designed to bounce off the projectiles rather than absorb the impact. German tanks by comparison were angular and used just the raw thinkness of their armor to defend against enemy shells (they were ofcourse quite frightening beasts, due to the size and weight that comes with such heavy armor)

[Say_my_name]

The real strength of german tanks during WW2 was, as qwert said, their superior strategy. While the allied countries used their tanks as infantry support and spread them thin all over the front, the germans massed them at the point of the front where they wanted to breakthrough. Once a breakthrough was archieved (not very hard with numerical superiority in term of tanks), the tanks would exploit their speed to disrupt enemy logistics and supply, and then encircle the enemy formation and destroy it in a "Kesselschlacht"(literally translated as "cauldron battle") once the slower infantry has arrived to battle the now weakened and disorganized enemy. But I don't really see how this could be modeled in Civilization, a movement bonus would come close.

[Swein Forkbeard]

Originally Posted by turquoiseninja

Yeah panzers should get an extra movement point, and like a +3 strength bouns.
Something like that.

Or maybe give 'em a chance to withdraw from combat, representing the mobility of the Blitzkrieg?

If the Panzer should be faster, than the American UU should be a Sherman that is even faster. Panzers were very strong but also dangerously slow. In my mind, the Panzer should remain the same that it has always been.

[madscientist]

Since Panzers come late they should have a pretty significant bonus. All tanks start with Blitz, I would suggest only the Panzers start with this and regular tanks can upgrade to Blitz right away. That would help on their speed compared with other tanks and be more agressive versus anyone NOT a tank. That way they would not have an edge against say a Russian tank straight up, just on the second attack.

[_alphaBeta_]

Originally Posted by Ball Lightning

How were panzers different to tanks anyway?

I believe they were faster, had better armor in the front and has superior range.

[kazapp]

Going back to the original topic, yes, I would say Panzers lose some of their edge if there now is an antitank unit.

I am going to assume the Panzer ability needs to change, if for no other reason the Antitank is probably an armored unit itself, with a bonus vs armored units (essentially a slower Panzer).

At least assuming this AT unit is contemporary with Armor (and not some post-WWII bazooka guy).

This means the Panzer must at least change from "+50% vs armored" to +50% vs Armor" if you see the subtle difference: german tanks were not inherently better vs. AT weaponry than the tanks of other countries.

To go off-topic, I would say the real strength of the german warfare doctrine isn't best represented by an armor UU with +50% vs armored. As has been said repeatedly, german tanks weren't the only good ones of the war.

No, what would best represent Germany would be an Infantry UU with Move 2 (simply a later Musketman), which can keep up with the tanks.

That would really represent the true strength of Blitzkrieg, and would much better convey the superior options available to the German player that so completely changed the way warfare was conducted at the outset of WWII.

[Solo4114]

If you're talking about real life panzers, it all depends on which model you're talking about. I wouldn't exactly call the Panzer I or even the Panzer II a powerhouse or anything to write home about.

German tactics were a major help for them, but they also are regarded as having had superior optics and armament. They could spot you and accurately hit you from a much longer range. Their doctrine was also superior to other tank doctrines at the time. That changed over time as other armies developed strategies to compensate for German strategy.

The later-war tanks like the Tiger I, Panther models, and the Tiger II were good, but (a) were expensive to produce, (b) were far more useful as defensive tanks or "overwatch" vehicles than as assault vehicles, and (c) were still vulnerable to artillery and air power, of which the Allies had plenty.

But again, as far as "What makes a Panzer better than a Tank", that's kind of a strange question because you have to consider a LOT of factors, most of which the game doesn't bother modelling because they're far too nuanced.

As far as what Panzers SHOULD be getting as a bonus....tough call. I'd say extra movement points and maybe a strength mod. Not something as limited as +50% vs. Armor, but maybe if a Tank unit has, say, 18 str., the Panzer has 20str and 1 more movement point.

[Thorbal]

Originally Posted by Ball Lightning

How were panzers different to tanks anyway?

Technically speaking, there is no difference at all... "Panzer" is just German for "tank" ( I hope I did not overlook eventual irony, I tend to do that a lot online ) .

I don´t think that Panzers will be rebalanced, perhaps in a later patch... after all, the exact AT statistics are not known yet. But I really would like the direction Kazapp is suggesting ( or perhaps Stukas that would be fun ) . But I think the "old" civs will stay as they are.

[phantom59]

Originally Posted by kazapp

Going back to the original topic, yes, I would say Panzers lose some of their edge if there now is an antitank unit.

I am going to assume the Panzer ability needs to change, if for no other reason the Antitank is probably an armored unit itself, with a bonus vs armored units (essentially a slower Panzer).

At least assuming this AT unit is contemporary with Armor (and not some post-WWII bazooka guy).

This means the Panzer must at least change from "+50% vs armored" to +50% vs Armor" if you see the subtle difference: german tanks were not inherently better vs. AT weaponry than the tanks of other countries.

To go off-topic, I would say the real strength of the german warfare doctrine isn't best represented by an armor UU with +50% vs armored. As has been said repeatedly, german tanks weren't the only good ones of the war.

No, what would best represent Germany would be an Infantry UU with Move 2 (simply a later Musketman), which can keep up with the tanks.

That would really represent the true strength of Blitzkrieg, and would much better convey the superior options available to the German player that so completely changed the way warfare was conducted at the outset of WWII.

I like that Idea... but what if panzers had an extra movement point and cargo space (1 or 2?) to carry infantry? This way I think realy shows the tactics of the Blitz. It might be overpowered to make it so that if anti armor attacks the panzer the inf pop out instead.

[PimpyMicPimp]

Originally Posted by phantom59

I like that Idea... but what if panzers had an extra movement point and cargo space (1 or 2?) to carry infantry? This way I think realy shows the tactics of the Blitz. It might be overpowered to make it so that if anti armor attacks the panzer the inf pop out instead.

Just a little overpowered >.< Tanks carrying infantry would be horrifying!

I like the suggestions in the thread, hopefully something along the lines of what is being suggested will be implemented. Starting them off with the upgrade that gives +1 movement (I can't think of the name right now >.<) would be fine with me. Faster Modern armor!

[Krikkitone]

Well actually I think it is a good bonus, because one of the primary problems with a Blitz is the counter attack (since only Tanks can move 2 at that stage, and can't have defenders with them), A Panzer Army could somewhat defend against the counter attacking Tanks of the victim, and if Anti-Tank Guns are also armored units, then Infantry/Marines will probably be the only threat, and some Pinch Panzers could cover for that. (Bombers would still be needed to get the walls down, but that's doable)