Give All Stug IVs camo without vet requirements

Do you have a balancing problem or do you want to make a suggestion for the game? You are at the right place.
User avatar
Viper
Posts: 408
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 23:18

Re: Give All Stug IVs camo without vet requirements

Postby Viper » 10 Jan 2019, 04:30

Walderschmidt wrote:I don't think M10s should be behind a CP cost. It was produced from 1942-1943 when better options were available. So it'd make sense to me if it was immediately available and armor company, being armor focused had the hellcat immediately available.

So, what I am suggesting is M10 no CP cost. Stug camo at vet 0. And mayeb disable HE shot when in camo mode? Or make it so the vehicle can only target tanks in camo?

Wald

there is 1 problem with this suggestion.
this way whermacht and america will always have tank destroyers without command points. but panzer elite and britain will always need command points to bring any tank destroyers.......

thats why i think it is better if m10 would stay behind command points except in armor. and so stug4 would require some command points too. and yes. of course with camo right away. and no high explosive from ambush.

edit
did developers see this topic? so what is their opinion?

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 1583
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: Give All Stug IVs camo without vet requirements

Postby kwok » 10 Jan 2019, 06:34

Yes, I’ve been following this and the tiger topic very closely. Especially since a lot of these thoughts were actually included in a doctrine rework proposal way before this topic and the tiger topic was even discussed.

The problem is, I haven’t had a chance to write my entire idea (because it’s not JUST regarding this but within a greater doctrine rework) and show that to other devs and then you guys

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3436
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Give All Stug IVs camo without vet requirements

Postby Warhawks97 » 10 Jan 2019, 19:58

Viper wrote:
Walderschmidt wrote:I don't think M10s should be behind a CP cost. It was produced from 1942-1943 when better options were available. So it'd make sense to me if it was immediately available and armor company, being armor focused had the hellcat immediately available.

So, what I am suggesting is M10 no CP cost. Stug camo at vet 0. And mayeb disable HE shot when in camo mode? Or make it so the vehicle can only target tanks in camo?

Wald

there is 1 problem with this suggestion.
this way whermacht and america will always have tank destroyers without command points. but panzer elite and britain will always need command points to bring any tank destroyers.......

thats why i think it is better if m10 would stay behind command points except in armor. and so stug4 would require some command points too. and yes. of course with camo right away. and no high explosive from ambush.


I agree with wald.

PE has Marder so they do have 0 CP td.


CW is left out but lets be honest, they came only late with this td philosophy (unlike axis which soon learned about the importance of mobile AT as well as the US).

Technically, the 57 mm HT (and in reality the 75 mm) have been the first mechanized TD batallions for allied.

For gameplay i dont mind brits having no 0 CP td but in return they get a very powerfull one for just two cp so in some way its balanced.
Marder and M10 are far away from a 17pdr firepower.


The stug IV is tricky bc its cheaper than a JP IV/48 but would have a top mount MG and HE ammo. Why should hetzer cost CP at all or the IV/48. Their only advantage would be armor.

So i would make the stug IV costing 420 MP, 55 fuel, 0 CP and one ambush shot (that can fire HE or AP). So its role is afterall support for inf on the ground but with better defensive anti tank capabilities compared to stug III.


Return to “Balancing & Suggestions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest