Stug Vet

Jump back to quoted post18 Oct 2019, 22:56 PMSkysTheLimit

It's a 1 shot vet 1 ability, not a buff the to default fire. The m10 costs the same amount of fuel and can fire HVAP for 30 seconds, doesn't seem like a tall order

Jump back to quoted post18 Oct 2019, 23:12 PMBlueKnight

M10 is doctrinal costs 80FU which is dirt cheap, but it can bounce shots on vet 0 OST P4 and it fights targets that commonly run about 230+ armour.

Jump back to quoted post18 Oct 2019, 23:12 PMBlueKnight

Per comments above, the Stug penetration bonus would last for up to 4 shots, which is plenty.

M10 is doctrinal costs 80FU which is dirt cheap, but it can bounce shots on vet 0 OST P4 and it fights targets that commonly run about 230+ armour. It's more of a cheap unreliable tank destroyer that also takes a commander slot. It's decent for its cost as medium repellent and good for suicidal attacks on enemy rocket arty.

In other words allies can pick a cheap doctrinal TD that can fight axis stock vehicles, while Wehr would like to build stock cheap TD that can fight allied doctrinal heavies.

Jump back to quoted post19 Oct 2019, 02:06 AMporkloin

Just throwing this out there.

I think the stug in it's current iteration could fit in t2 quite easily.

It's quite vulnerable to infantry, and doesn't have much damage potential anyways.

Light vehicles can outmanuver them quite well, but the stug in that phase gives OST a fighting chance while opening up an easier path to t4.

Historically it's a infantry support vehicle, and so it would make more sense in the infantry heavy phase of the game than in the armored.

Jump back to quoted post19 Oct 2019, 04:33 AMMr. Someguy

I think a 7 minute StuG is a bit too quick. If they do that it should at least require Battlephase 2 to be researched. And heck, put the Panzerwerfer in T3 and have it require Battlephase 3. Then Ostheer has a consistently staggered tech that started with Panzergrenadiers.

Jump back to quoted post19 Oct 2019, 02:06 AMporkloin

Just throwing this out there.

I think the stug in it's current iteration could fit in t2 quite easily.

It's quite vulnerable to infantry, and doesn't have much damage potential anyways.

Light vehicles can outmanuver them quite well, but the stug in that phase gives OST a fighting chance while opening up an easier path to t4.

Historically it's a infantry support vehicle, and so it would make more sense in the infantry heavy phase of the game than in the armored.

Jump back to quoted post19 Oct 2019, 04:52 AMporkloin

What's too quick about it? It's a slightly more mobile, but otherwise worse AT gun which is available in the same time-frame, and building it would delay the p4 by quite a bit.

Pgrens could go to tier three with some sort of buff that would give OST a viable infantry late-game.

Jump back to quoted post19 Oct 2019, 05:14 AMrqd

Stug in t2? Then it will become a 120 damage per shot unit with 400 hp like su76. And for balance fuel cost decrease to 70 lol

Jump back to quoted post19 Oct 2019, 05:14 AMrqd

Stug in t2? Then it will become a 120 damage per shot unit with 400 hp like su76. And for balance fuel cost decrease to 70 lol

Jump back to quoted post19 Oct 2019, 05:39 AMMr. Someguy

Yeah pretty much this, if you want to deploy the StuG when the T-70 or M5 Stuart are hitting the field, then it's gonna need to take a hit to it's strength and end up looking about like the SU-76 without the barrage. That's why I suggested the earliest should be BP2 researched, so it'll come a bit later.

Jump back to quoted post19 Oct 2019, 06:49 AMmrgame2

I dont want Stug at T2, i just want Stug to do better against Allies armor.

TWP sucks
Pen sucks with no vet.

The outdated idea that Stug is to deal with medium allies is flawed. Allies are faster/more accuracy on move. There is no room for Stug at 50 range non-turret, even worse once 60TD hits field.

Stug is only useful for back tech to supplement against IS/KV and Churchill. Supplement because Panther are overworked against heavy Allies armor. Supplement because you expect 50/50 chance you will throw the stug to get enough hit for Panther to hopefully move in, stop-stop to kill.

As such i think Stug is too expensive and/or cost inefficient

Jump back to quoted post18 Oct 2019, 23:33 PMporkloin

IMO wher would like to build a TD that can fight allied heavies.

Jump back to quoted post19 Oct 2019, 07:21 AMKatitof

Its called elephant.
If they want it stock, panther has to go.

Jump back to quoted post18 Oct 2019, 23:12 PMBlueKnight

Per comments above, the Stug penetration bonus would last for up to 4 shots, which is plenty.

M10 is doctrinal costs 80FU which is dirt cheap, but it can bounce shots on vet 0 OST P4 and it fights targets that commonly run about 230+ armour. It's more of a cheap unreliable tank destroyer that also takes a commander slot. It's decent for its cost as medium repellent and good for suicidal attacks on enemy rocket arty.

In other words allies can pick a cheap doctrinal TD that can fight axis stock vehicles, while Wehr would like to build stock cheap TD that can fight allied doctrinal heavies.

Jump back to quoted post19 Oct 2019, 09:21 AMStug life

nah allies already have stock TD that deal with both medium and heavy easily

Jump back to quoted post19 Oct 2019, 15:37 PMSkysTheLimit

He said cheap TDs, it's literally in the part you underlined. And he wasn't even asking for stock m10 so idk what your point is here