Posts: 97
Ugh, it's a great unit for its cost. You do realize that you spend zero on teching and building infrastructure for this unit. And it's cheap as nuts.
It's adequate vs infantry and good vs light vehicles. It can even kill an engine damaged T70 far more reliably than a Pak40.
Posts: 332 | Subs: 1
so why would you ever get this over an ostwind?
and did you say early? by the time i get to my second or 3rd tank this thing becomes available.
Posts: 409
Posts: 97
Because you don't need to tech up to tier 3, which saves a lot of money.
And yeah, if you consider a infantry heavy strategy, where you go for Tier 2 with couple of PGs and your opponent tries to counter that with sniper + infantry of himself, these StuGs gonna hit your opponent really hard as he is only investing in anti-infantry.
And even if you get a P4 before you reach 3 cps, the StuG is still an awesome support unit, with quite a lot of potential to soak up dmg and snipe infantry.
Posts: 332 | Subs: 1
except it doesn't snipe infantry... sometimes it'll get a clump but that doesn't happen very often. it has the same anti-inf capabilities as the stug g.
oh and this thing does not soak up damage. it only takes two hits from a 76mm to destroy it. even guards take out chunks of health with each shot.
everything 3 of these can do 1 ostwind can do better.
Posts: 622
Posts: 950 | Subs: 1
I want stats
I can't even look them up myself because the patch seems to have broken the modding tools... would really like to compare it to the Su-76, they could fill comparable roles.
Posts: 337
so why would you ever get this over an ostwind?
and did you say early? by the time i get to my second or 3rd tank this thing becomes available.
Posts: 97
Because the ostwind requires T3 and a building, which is expensive. It also costs 2x as much and doesn't build instantly.
The Stug 3E is fine, great even. I can see them being very useful in 1on1. Weak/cheap vehicles will always suck in team games though.
Posts: 950 | Subs: 1
did you not read my other post
except it doesn't snipe infantry... sometimes it'll get a clump but that doesn't happen very often. it has the same anti-inf capabilities as the stug g.
oh and this thing does not soak up damage. it only takes two hits from a 76mm to destroy it. even guards take out chunks of health with each shot.
everything 3 of these can do 1 ostwind can do better.
Posts: 97
i say it suck because it have about same cost of T70 and not having nearly close to T70's effectiveness?
don't give "it don't need build a building and teching so this unit should suck reason"
KV8 is a unit don't need any buildings only cost 360MP 135FU and its german counter part brummbar which cost 680MP 140FU and require T4, follow that logic why the new Stug 3 should suck, brummbar should have better effectiveness than KV8 because it is more expansive and require teching and building. in the actually play, KV8 have way better performance than Brummbar, it instant wipe infantry like eating a snack, higher armor, higher HP, and less pop. yes Brummbar have more AT like 75 penetration vs KV8's 50 penetration....great for the price, tehcing and building requirement....
Posts: 97
your other post isnt really correct. the stug has a target size of 14 compared to the ostwind which has a size of 22. that makes it harder to hit with AT guns. the stug also has slightly better armor. ostwind does have more hp though, but it costs over twice as much and requires teching.
as for its weapon, the short barrel stug has about 1/3 of the distance scatter of the long barrel stug meaning its shots will hit much closer to infantry. on top of that, it has 2.5 AOE compared to the long barrels 1.5. the stug E also rotates 10% faster than the stug G. the stug actually has identical scatter and AOE as the ostwind, so if ostwinds snipe inf, so do short barrel stugs.
you should really know stats for the units youre comparing so you can avoid making false statements.
Posts: 950 | Subs: 1
"so it's only viable if you don't tech or construct any buildings all game.." isn't correct? did i miss something here?
Posts: 622
copernicus already updated the extractor
its better than an su76. the su76 has better penetration, but the stug has 20% more armor. the stug has the same scatter stats and aoe as an ostwind though, so thats much better than the su76 vs infantry.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApmrrrPr20ncdEpuSHcxNko1VGVFYjczYXpFZWhqOHc#gid=5
look at row 7
Posts: 97
thats a completely subjective statement.
im not denying that the ostwind is better, but its more expensive. the stug does 80 damage per shot though, so the radius of its AOE that will 1 shot infantry is larger. it can miss, but if it hits it will be more effective than the ostwind. the ostwind cannot 1 shot full health infantry.
it could still be viable if you dont have enough fuel for a more expensive tank and really need some armor in a hurry. it could also be useful if youre skipping t3 to fast tech to t4. its not as clear cut as you try to make it seem.
Posts: 337
did you not read my other post
you know, the one where i responded directly to you
Posts: 622
Yes, obviously it's best used in games where you DO NOT tech to T3. What's wrong with that? Nothing. For example, you should never tech T3 if I want to call in T34-85s either. It's just suboptimal play.
If you want to build T3, obvoiusly don't bother with the Stug E.
Teching costs ALWAYS factor into a unit's value.
Posts: 97
Yes, obviously it's best used in games where you DO NOT tech to T3. What's wrong with that? Nothing. For example, you should never tech T3 if I want to call in T34-85s either. It's just suboptimal play.
If you want to build T3, obvoiusly don't bother with the Stug E.
Teching costs ALWAYS factor into a unit's value.
Posts: 219
the t34/85 on the other hand does a great job as a general purpose tank. whenever i get that thing i never wonder "hmm... would it have been a better idea to get a t34/76?"
Posts: 97
Big difference in cost, man. And also, since there were comparisons to a KV-8 comes out fairly late in the game. There should be lots of AT on the field by then. Don't ya think?
 |
|
|
17 | ||
 |
|
|
166 | ||
 |
|
|
33 | ||
 |
|
|
13 | ||
|
|
|
|
13 | ||
 |
|
|
5 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
