No they weren't, they were tactically superior (Blitzkrieg, armoured divisions instead of tanks in infantry support role, interplay between air and ground forces, etc.). Technically the French tanks were superior to German tanks during the invasion of France. The T-34 and KV-1 Russian tanks were far superior to anything the Germans had once they got into conflict, the reason why Germany had such success at the outset of the war was basically because of the purges by Stalin in the military leaving its armed forces without any proper tactical command. The famous Panther and Tiger tanks only came as a response to these tanks later in the war, however never in the numbers needed to off set this technical imbalance. During most of the war the Panzer IV was actually the main German battle tank (inferior to the T-34's and KV-1's and on par with the American/British Sherman's) and panther's and tigers were limited in numbers.
In this I do agree with Muggy that tactics are equally important to technology and numbers. However I would never say tactics dictate who wins first, Germany was tactically far superior to its enemies for most of the war, yet they lost anyway as technology and numbers defeated them. Also (battle field) tactics is quite different from campaign strategy, I'd say Germany messed up there by eventually having to fight a three front war (French, Italian and Russian fronts).