Stug IV late version and normal

Do you have a balancing problem or do you want to make a suggestion for the game? You are at the right place.
Post Reply
MEFISTO
Posts: 175
Joined: 18 Jun 2016, 21:15

Stug IV late version and normal

Post by MEFISTO »

Afther alot of game playing the beta I realize that stugs IV needs to be fixed, it is hilarious to see how everything bounce, bazookas, 76mm shermans etc.. plus those camouflage bonuces that make the situation even worse (the only bonus a tank destryer should have is a better accuracy since they have better time to aim before shoot). Axis just make 2 or 3 of them and sit to wait for tigers, panthers and rocket artillry to wipe everything down.
What do you guys think about it?
Attachments
6p_bloody_gulch_v08.2020-07-24.22-09-32.rec
(2.48 MiB) Downloaded 4 times

User avatar
CGarr
Posts: 417
Joined: 16 Apr 2018, 21:39

Re: Stug IV late version and normal

Post by CGarr »

Been saying this for a while, although the issue is more with camouflaged TD's just generally not having a good counter. Although honestly, if the camo gets put behind a sufficient CP paywall and inf AT gets buffed a bit globally (better pen, damage, and accuracy, less range to compensate), it really wouldn't be as big of a deal and I'd even be fine with Stugs being 0CP. Last time I suggested the inf AT change to deal with this though, it didn't get much attention, although 2 of the 3 that responded to it were in favor of the change and the third didn't really give much of an argument for why he was against it, simply stating "i dont think X is broken" without refuting any points suggesting otherwise.

viewtopic.php?f=15&t=3588

Think about it this way:

Realistically, how do you counter a Stug or other TD in camo? Arty is an option but costs a ton, expecially for how ineffective it is at actually finishing the tank off rather than just pushing it back for a few seconds. AT inf would be the natural counter to a camouflaged TD, but for some reason TD's like the StuG IV and hellcat have HE and/or an MG, thus trying to use AT inf is an extremely risky venture (and that doesn't take into account the possibility of enemy anti-inf support being present). AT guns don't outrange a camouflaged stug and wouldn't be able to see it anyways, and it's not like they're mobile enough to get close so they can detect it.

Solutions:
1. Buff the natural counter, AT inf, in the ways I described above. Essentially, insure that if they manage to close the distance and get a shot off, their effort is not in vain. Panzershrecks are pretty much a guaranteed pen to everything short of heavies, so why can't bazookas? Both fire HEAT projectiles with incredibly good penetration. The damage is fine where it's at but an increase wouldn't hurt (still just a 2 hit on mediums/TD's still but it wouldn't be an exercise in masochism to try using them against a Tiger ace or KT if they manage to live long enough to actually get the shots off).
Alternatively,
2. Buff range on 76mm AT guns and 17 pounders further. They're slow as shit, incredibly vulnerable, and they have pretty bad pen against heavies, often bouncing even with camo and AP. A range increase would at least let them outrange camouflaged Stugs, thus allowing them to fire from a safe distance while another unit pushes the stug to reveal it.

We could also remove the arbitrary ass range increases for camo TD's but I think wehraboos would probably flip so I'm not going to seriously try pushing that.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 4075
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Stug IV late version and normal

Post by Warhawks97 »

Idk how in reality ambushes were countered. I think they used smoke, arty and slowly creeping in.

The prob is, lets say you come in with two or even three shermans as i just had recently. The stug damages the first sherman, that pops smoke, the others return fire which is fine, but they bounce quite often. It took minutes before the stug was down in three attempts. One sherman died and others damaged. Just that its engine got destroyed allowed the shermans to kill it finally.

And here is the prob. I dont think we have to change too much about infantry AT power.
Also yes, Bazooka used HEAT like schreck but it wasnt as effective. 80 mm pen and later 100 with M6A3C missiles.
Also skirts where there to to make HEAT ineffective like reactive armor.


So whats wrong about armor doc vs countering TD´s like stugs in particular:


1. 76 shermans bounce quite often, though not as often as against Tank IV´s. And for some reason the F2 is harder to pen than a stug with skirts which is very weird. That shows btw how insane OP Panzer IV armor is.
2. The Jumbo is way too easily penetrated and lacks rear armor like tiger or churchills have. Thus even a flanking 50 mm AT can counter it.
3. The Jumbo 76 needs to be in armor doc as well. So that you have something with which you can engage at least the stug IV spam better which, lmao of, is currently the main stay TD of the german forces.
5. The Stug IV is quite cheap compared to JP IV/48. JP has better armor but stug has HE, slightly better gun and costs way less. 400 MP compared to 500 of the JP IV.
6. If the Stug IV had 600 HP (Stug III has 580) it could get killed a bit easier. With its 636 HP it will survive one pen it. So calculating accuracy, which isnt that good and even lower vs Stug and even lower vs JP IV/48 (which is lower vs stug), penetration and damage, it takes a while for a group of shermans to take down a stug and even much longer to take down a JP/48. I think the accuracy drop against most TD´s of 25% is big and makes you failing to hit even when you already closed in a bit.

7. When it comes to infantry AT weapons, things get weird:
The Bazooka does not suffer accuracy penalty vs Stug, but does so vs JP IV´s. Thats why you see so many bazooka fails against them.
Whats also weird is the fact that stug skirts for some reason does not provide protection against them but only vs Tank shells.

So when it comes skirts they are way too effective in countering incoming Tank shells. But for the Stug it doesnt help vs incoming HEAT rounds.

I would reduce the effect of skirts against tank shells and instead making them more a protection against inf AT weapons.
This would also help to address the issue of 76 mm Fails and thus making Armor doc a bit less dependent on Zooks and the RL jeep (which btw is the best AT weapon in US Arsenal with a 72% chance to pen a Tank IV H! The 76 gun is less than 50% at max range.



Solutions:

1. Lower Stug IV HP to 600
2. Lower JP IV HP from 650 to 636. I dont get why they have more HP than Tank IV H.
3. Bazooka accuracy penalty shouldnt be so big vs JP IV´s.
4. Fix the 76 mm gun.
5. Add Jumbo 76 to armor doc and fix Jumbos armor, esspecially rear.



CGarr wrote:
25 Jul 2020, 06:26

2. Buff range on 76mm AT guns and 17 pounders further. They're slow as shit, incredibly vulnerable, and they have pretty bad pen against heavies, often bouncing even with camo and AP. A range increase would at least let them outrange camouflaged Stugs, thus allowing them to fire from a safe distance while another unit pushes the stug to reveal it.

We could also remove the arbitrary ass range increases for camo TD's but I think wehraboos would probably flip so I'm not going to seriously try pushing that.

AT gun ranges are fine and i tont think we need super range AT guns that can be used for the offense. Their role is to be last resort defense. Slow, immobile but good enough to prevent enemie tanks from deep penetrations.

Post Reply