Lets talk Stuart

So I am messing around trying to infer the vision Relic had when they thought that adding the Stuart to the game was a good idea.

Thinking that Relic must have had something in mind I have been investigating possible uses for this useless piece of crap.

So we all know its AI isnt anything to writehome about, Its AT is just not there, Its HPs are low, It costs 70 fuel and its in the Captain Tier which is overpriced.

So now that we all know and agree on its weaknesses lets look at its strenghts:

It gets a modest amount of vision at Vet1. It gets a large amount at the Unicorn phase of Vet 3. It can stun armor when it feels like shooting it instead of Deter or Franz and it can cause Engine damage.

So it seems to me if I were relic I am thinking"

"Ok we will make the Stuart the Perfect buddy for the M36! He can spot for it and protect it with its AWESOME AI and then if anything gets too close it can stun it! Then come back around to ass hugging distance and cause engine damage! Then the Jackson can get the KILL!"

Ok well great idea. However there are a few small problems with this.

1.) The Stuart is hardly fast or nimble for being a light tank.

2.) The Stuart has very low HPs like a light tank getting close is BAAAADDD

3.) To pull off that Maneuver I just brought up costs 105 Muni! WTTTTFFFFFFFFF

45 for the Stun ok I could kinda see this if the Stuart say had other good qualities like T70/Luchs level AI (which of course it doesnt) but 60 damage for LIGHT ENGINE DAMAGE!? Holy Munitions Batman what was Relic smoking?

Point Blank Engine Shot has to be the highest Risk lowest reward and overall most expensive vehicle snare in the game.

Its like the Old RAM T34s but not as good. Because you better bet on it blowing up when you do it.

So what do you guys think Relic was thinking when they had the Stuart in mind?

Couldn't agree more about the point blank engine damage ability, Heartless. Maybe if that shot also stunned the enemy tank for a breif moment, like the way the stun shot does, just so it can actually escape a situation like that, it would work. Otherwise, going in for that engine damage ability will almost always result in a dead Stuart vs a P4 or anything heavier.

There are some things in USF that are OP, some things that are fine, but the Stuart could really use some loving.

PS, love your signature. MVGame

Couldn't agree more about the point blank engine damage ability, Heartless. Maybe if that shot also stunned the enemy tank for a breif moment, like the way the stun shot does, just so it can actually escape a situation like that, it would work. Otherwise, going in for that engine damage ability will almost always result in a dead Stuart vs a P4 or anything heavier.

There are some things in USF that are OP, some things that are fine, but the Stuart could really use some loving.

PS, love your signature. MVGame

Great minds think alike I suspect!

But what do you think Relic was thinking on how it could be used is more my questions. I think I understand it based off of my post. But I am curious what other think. Obviously Relic made some VERY SPECIFIC design choices with that unit and did thing to prevent it from being a T70 clone or Luchs clone on Purpose it seems. Almost if they thought there would be a Stuart Abuse Meta or something.

Obviously Relic made some VERY SPECIFIC design choices with that unit and did thing to prevent it from being a T70 clone or Luchs clone on Purpose it seems. Almost if they thought there would be a Stuart Abuse Meta or something.

Yeah I really don't know myself... I think the idea might have been to give a viable and strong mid game counter to OKW T3, while being able to defend against Ostheer T3 decently; Sprinting Cpt. + Stuart Stun can put down Pumas and 251/17, and AT gun support can defend vs Ostheer T3 before your Jackson arrives, particularly if you plan on getting a Sherman as your first vehicle to help you win map control.

I wish I could love the stuart more, not going to lie.

It can arrive wonderfully early, keep in mind. Fuel for the captain and stuart combined, as your first investment, keeps its arrival nice and timely. Against an OKW player that's thrown some nades it can be kinda neat.

But it's certainly not good, just an option to capitalize on a fuel advantage and possibly chase down some flack HT's/222's. Which is a shame, yes.

I wish I could love the stuart more, not going to lie.

It can arrive wonderfully early, keep in mind. Fuel for the captain and stuart combined, as your first investment, keeps its arrival nice and timely. Against an OKW player that's thrown some nades it can be kinda neat.

But it's certainly not good, just an option to capitalize on a fuel advantage and possibly chase down some flack HT's/222's. Which is a shame, yes.

Yes I am seeing that which is a shame. I would like one aspect of the whole Scout/Light Tank functions to work better. I love the Luchs as a Scout and the T70 even more so. One sees farther the other can cloak. Both are viable and both can punish infantry but neither can do anything to real armor. The Stuart has abiltities to deal with real armor but they are just too expensive and too risky for the cost of the unit and its Tier.

If Relic doesnt want it to be an early arrival infantry eraser I could understand that but allow it to be a better scout or lower the cost of its abilities ALOT. 60 Muni for engine damage is the same as an M20 mine that immobilizes armor and does really good damage.

Understanding that the Mine is part good placement and part luck and should be better I see nothing wrong with the Engine shot doing a nice large damage buff along with light engine damage. Or lowering the cost of both abilities to 30 per.

30 to get the stun so you CAN do engine damage then 30 for the Engine damage since its high risk.

Remove it from the game and put in a better unit. Putting this thing in there is insanity, might as well give Soviets the T-26 so nobody can ever build that to.

It's a 1944 game, yes Stuarts were used in 1944, but in this game were light armor needs to be fast and hit hard in order to be useful the Stuart is just blehhhhh.

Give USF a HT with an AT gun in it that has medium damage but a fuckload of pen.

Stuart could get a kind of anti ober accurancy buff just like the puma had against rangers in coh1. That wouldn't make it overpowered but it would create a unit that is desirable on battlefield.

As for current usage you can use mechanised commander to send it back after it's window of opportunity getting 75% of resources invested. Ofc it is mostly viable vs heavy okw t2, luchs rush or good micro on 222.

Stuart could get a kind of anti ober accurancy buff just like the puma had against rangers in coh1. That wouldn't make it overpowered but it would create a unit that is desirable on battlefield.

As for current usage you can use mechanised commander to send it back after it's window of opportunity getting 75% of resources invested. Ofc it is mostly viable vs heavy okw t2, luchs rush or good micro on 222.

Yes I have experimented with that a bit but still couldnt get good use out of it. It was risky and sometimes I lost Stuarts and couldnt refund them. Overall their impact wasnt worth the risk and the rest of that doctrine is garbage save for the Offmap.

Withdraw and refit could be excellent if it was more along the lines of 80-90% so you could exchange Jacksons with Shermans without losing a ton of fuel (it adds up another thing I have tried).

pretty much same sentiment here.

trying to use pack howi lately and tried stuart a lot of times. and it has got no umph to it.

only way for me to use it is stay close to a part of the frontline where paks or other AT arent there and just try to pick squads off. or catch lone squad, which isnt as rewarding as when catching lone squads with t70,luchs, or whatever. basically, it is like catching a lone squad with a panther. the squad will have to fall back, but it is going to live for sure almost always.

the most agreeable part is its nimbleness. it doesnt move or feel like light tank. feels chunky and slow.

but i guess the catch is its stun and engine damage ability on wheels, which might be game changers themselves in right situations.

pretty much same sentiment here.

trying to use pack howi lately and tried stuart a lot of times. and it has got no umph to it.

only way for me to use it is stay close to a part of the frontline where paks or other AT arent there and just try to pick squads off. or catch lone squad, which isnt as rewarding as when catching lone squads with t70,luchs, or whatever. basically, it is like catching a lone squad with a panther. the squad will have to fall back, but it is going to live for sure almost always.

the most agreeable part is its nimbleness. it doesnt move or feel like light tank. feels chunky and slow.

but i guess the catch is its stun and engine damage ability on wheels, which might be game changers themselves in right situations.

For half the Cost of a P47 they better be game changes in certain situations!

The Stuart was never meant to be an AI tank to support the jackson, it's a tier 3 unit to fill the gap before medium armour to help you deal with OKW tier 3 but primarily to counter the Luch and doctrinal/light OH vehicles as otherwise US would lack a real mobile platform to do that (greyhound is only good as an inf gibber and AAHT dies too easy).

Americans need more indirect options, just get rid of the Stuart and replace it with a HT howitzer.

I don't see why we need a light tank that isn't good for killing infantry.

the stuart sucks, don't use it. i have no clue what relic had in mind when they designed it nor when they neglected it. i once tried to use the crew tompsons with it but never had an opportunity.

Americans need more indirect options, just get rid of the Stuart and replace it with a HT howitzer.

I don't see why we need a light tank that isn't good for killing infantry.

Americans have enough indirect fire units, it's just that half of them are of questionable performance (namely mortar halftrack and pack howitzer).

As for the stuart, I'd trade the gimmicky abilities for better base stats so it could snipe infantry time to time and maybe even circle strafe pIVs in the best of circumstances.

The Stuart was never meant to be an AI tank to support the jackson, it's a tier 3 unit to fill the gap before medium armour to help you deal with OKW tier 3 but primarily to counter the Luch and doctrinal/light OH vehicles as otherwise US would lack a real mobile platform to do that (greyhound is only good as an inf gibber and AAHT dies too easy).

See but this doesnt add up. There are alot easier ways to make it deal with Light Vehicles and Luchs then to give it Stun and Point Blank Engine shot. This is by the way one of the very very few snares USF has available to it.

If thats all Relic wanted it for then just make its gun 100 Pen with a high ROF and let it roll around the map erasing vehicles (which it can really already do pretty decently)

Who would blow 105 muni to just kill a Luchs anyway? Not this guy. A quicker Sherman does just fine (and building a Stuart GREATLY delays a Sherman on two fronts because Craptain and the 70 fuel it needs.) In fact what you spend on Craptain and Stuart is the Tech cost of LT plus Major.....

Point blank engine shot is merely a 70 fuel + munitions at grenade. I have no clue what genius thought this would be a great ability. I have never heard of or witnessed this ability being used by anyone in a real game.

I remember on official forums at WFA release some people were pissed that the m5 was present when they expected a m24 chaffee... Too bad.

The captain wouldnt be any less desirable if the stuart simply did not exist. 9/10 times USF will and should be going Lieutenant first. The stuart is merely a tank for AA, ATM nowhere worth for multiplayer.

And also, stuart on release had no armor and would get owned by a flak halftrack. Next patch they smacked a handful of armor on it to make sure it never happens again; it seems to have trivial purpose in design given that it seems to be unable to have some sort of role.

Compared to the luchs and t70, stuart acceleration is barely slower and speed is about the same, yet the thing still feels like a pile of trash when it drives.

The thing is that the tank could be made very good against infantry without making the gun into an unfairly good one shot boomstick. Just do one simple thing;

Introduce every machine gun the Stuart had as fully functional.

One .50cal on the roof, and five (yes, five) 7.62mm brownings? That should mulch infantry all day.It has more machine guns than crew members, that's how much it loves MG's baby.

The thing is that the tank could be made very good against infantry without making the gun into an unfairly good one shot boomstick. Just do one simple thing;

Introduce every machine gun the Stuart had as fully functional.

One .50cal on the roof, and five (yes, five) 7.62mm brownings? That should mulch infantry all day.It has more machine guns than crew members, that's how much it loves MG's baby.

That i did not know LOL. Or worse...suppresion platform....

But i would stick to Infantry destroying Dynamo.

Of course with it hitting so Early Ost would be in a bad way. Which is why I think its not as good as a T70. But it should be good at SOMETHING at least.

The thing is that the tank could be made very good against infantry without making the gun into an unfairly good one shot boomstick. Just do one simple thing;

Introduce every machine gun the Stuart had as fully functional.

One .50cal on the roof, and five (yes, five) 7.62mm brownings? That should mulch infantry all day.It has more machine guns than crew members, that's how much it loves MG's baby.

While the idea of that gave me a most normal boner, I'm regrettably reading that it only had 3 .30 cals make it to production and it didn't use a .50 (initial M3 Stuarts did have 5 M1919A4s, but it got reduced to three definitely by the time the M5A1 got made. Any variants that I could find which had a .50 cal had it in place of its gun turret)...probably because it couldn't fire them all off at once anyway, like you said.

I do agree with making it better against infantry with its MGs though. The less main guns squad-wiping the better, but that's no reason to keep the Stuart bad.