Ostheer Update 6: Ostheer Army Troops

[Walentin 'Walki' L.]

Only a failure from behind .

[Ghost]

Panther wasn't that much of a failure.

i was referring to the battles when they first saw combat. e.g. ferdinands had weaknesses (poor mobility, tech problems, no mg) but were very effective vs. enemy tanks. i just wanted to say that you can't say XY was a failure because of its first engagement.

[Ruddersmarine]

[/quote]i was referring to the battles when they first saw combat. e.g. ferdinands had weaknesses (poor mobility, tech problems, no mg) but were very effective vs. enemy tanks. i just wanted to say that you can't say XY was a failure because of its first engagement.
[/quote]

+ 1
loads of tanks had problems, the Panther was the most unreliable German tank of the war apart from the experimental tigers like the Sturmtiger. An interesting statistic i found about the panthers first combat 'out of 200 Panthers in the 4th Panzer Army 160 were out of action on the first day, nine days later only 43 were in German hands, the majority had broken down between railheads on the way to the front' The german tanks were best used defensively. e.g the only major german offensive in the west (the Bulge) was lead by Pz4's cos they were more reliable

[Goober]

That is not actually true. I have read plenty things written by German Tankers that have said the Panther was as /or more reliable than the Panzer 4.

[Paladin88]

loads of tanks had problems, the Panther was the most unreliable German tank of the war apart from the experimental tigers like the Sturmtiger.

True, but the Panther was more reliable than the Tiger... I'm sorry, I can't listen unless you mention the Tiger's down points at least.

Yes, German tanks are best used defensively!

That is not actually true. I have read plenty things written by German Tankers that have said the Panther was as /or more reliable than the Panzer 4.

+1 

[GodlikeDennis]

I heard the panther was more reliable than even the P4 but it was far harder to change parts/repair when it did break down?

[Paladin88]

I heard the panther was more reliable than even the P4 but it was far harder to change parts/repair when it did break down?

"tick"

The German tanks were best used defensively. e.g the only major German offensive in the west (the Bulge) was lead by Pz4's cos they were more reliable

Has it every occured to you that they may not have had many of them available at the time. Remember that there was the red tide in the east, couldn't it just been that they couldn't spare any for the west?

[Zerstörer]

Reliability depends a lot on the availability of spare parts. A massive reliable supply structure makes even an M1 Abrams 'reliable'
Panther was a more complex machine meaning there were usually more things that you need to have a spare part for and at a time where German Industrial capacity was pummeled to the ground....it was a bit harder to get them.
That doesn't make the tank itself unreliable. On the contrary, german tanks in combat would take more punishment before suffering mechanical failures.

Panther 'unreliability' was more of a myth based on the poor showing of the very first 200 tanks produced and pushed into combat in Kursk before the issues had been ironed out

[pariah]

Haha, sounds like the Xbox 360.

[IJoe]

@Zersto:rer
I wouldn't call almost seven brigades forming number of vehicles' rather poor performance a myth, - that's safe enough to form a firm opinion about a tank. I'm not arguing it was, in fact, improved later on though.

[Zerstörer]

200 first production tanks that hadn't been put through the tests enough to clear the most basic 'teething' problems and pushed into the most vigorous/demanding tank battle ever...I'd call that the stupidest thing ever and certainly where the 'myth' came from. Anyone claiming the panthers were unreliable refers to that example.
Soviets praised and valued Panthers above any other tank which is why they kept captured ones in special units, regularly serviced and given to the best tank crews as reward. That's not a credit even given to Tigers...anyways....its all rather irrelevant to the game

[IJoe]

Let's put it this way: the debut model was such a failure, that it unfairly passed its reputation onto ones, produced later on. But its poor reliability is certainly not a myth.
Panther, when it was improved, became a very well-made, and quite reliable "medium" tank, though it's rather to be included it into the heavy category, fallowing the common sense, where it surely doesn't take the first prize.
Not that it means anything anyway.

[Ruddersmarine]

+1
Another reason for all German tanks decreased reliability later in the war  was the need to use a mixture of petrol and ammonia to increase the range because of shortages, this wrecked the engines and filters after prolonged use, and as Zerstorer says if they didn't have spare parts they had to blow up the tanks.

[Ghost]

1. soviet soldiers were told to use captured panthers whenever possible
2. while those first panthers were rushed into battle and had tech problems they still showed some of their potential. the version G of the panther is considered to be the best medium WW2 tank of all

[Versedhorison]

All of the German Panzers rushed into battle had problems on debut. Afterwards most reliability problems were fixed but the leading cause of tiger deaths was either break downs or air attacks.