Point blank engine shot is 60 munitions.
It's range of 5 is 3 times smaller than an at nade which is more than 2 times less expensive at 25 munitions and doesn't have a high risk of losing the unit associated with it. The 6 seconds long Shell Shock is not nearly long enough to guarantee an escape (even if we ignore that the stuart will target infantry first when Shell Shock is used, which causes a loss of already precious time). In order to try and save the stuart and get an engine shot off one will have to spend 105 munitions or the equivalent of 2 teller mines (or a little less then 2 m20 mines) or 4 at rifle grenades all of which have a higher chance to succeed and cause more damage without taking losses as valuable as a stuart.
Exactly what I was talking about earlier. Even its "Useful Abilities" are horribly over priced. I mean just Give it RAM. At least RAM will land 9/10 times and the end result is the same. Dead Vehicle. And it moves around like a T70 that took Valium. Combined with low HPs.
I am with Daspoulus though little buffs are needed. Make it OP and it WILL snowball. Either make its performance worth the fuel cost or lower the fuel cost and add some HPs. Even with 400 HPs it would just be a shittier Luchs that costs more and has EXPENSIVE abilities that can rarely be used successfully.
Its the M2HB of Light Tanks. Sure its costs more than its worth. Sure its horribly underperforming in its role. But just like ANY OTHER UNIT IN GAME it can be useful sometimes if the planets are aligned properly so there will be people all over the place that say its fine.
Stuart is crap. Plain and simple. For what it costs, when it comes, and how it can impact the game even in the very best hands.
Just for SNGs calculate the Muni cost of Stun plus Point Blank Engine Shot. It seems the two are meant to be used together. Its horribly overpriced. If anything the Stun shot should be free.
The Greyhound costs less and does the job so much better. I could accept the Stuart if it was a 40 fuel unit. Because thats how it performs.
And another comparison in which specific units are compared in a vacuum and at only one specific point in time of a game.
Don't do that, people.
Always look at the factions as a whole when discussing units and always have the map styles and the early, the mid, and the late game in mind.
1. "Vet 2 gren rifle nade range is insane."
Yes, it is. So what? They can never be used in CQC, even at vet 3, while Molos can always be used at CQC. Depending on the map, this can be a huge drawback.
2. "Rifle nades do insane damage, while Molos only do lackluster damage."
Yes, they do. But remember what they are being used against. Maxims have six men and a short teardown time, while MG42s have only four men and a long teardown time. Also, the price tag of replacements for these weapon teams is different. Killing 2 MG42 crew member and killing 3-4 Maxim crew members is cost-wise actually pretty equal.
If you make the damage output of rifle nades and Molos equal, it will make one faction suffer dispropotionaly more.
3. "Maxims are totally useless vs vet 2 LMG grens"
Yes, they are. However, that only becomes relevant in the midgame and beyond. Think about the early game, too. In the early game, the Maxims own the grens. What do you want? You want the Maxim do be strong in the early game and stay strong through the late game? That sounds OP to me.
The Maxim is quite different from the MG42. It starts as a good offensive and a good defensive weapon, but drops in strength from the midgame onward. The MG42 in contrast starts as a crap offensive and a mediocre defensive weapon (lower suppression rate). It only starts getting good with vet from the midgame onward. Sounds balanced to me.
Great argument! I mean that. Very good Logic. But there is one huge problem. You just did the same thing. Compared them in a vacuum. The Rnade is insane for more reasons then just the Maxim. At Vet 2 you can hit and whipe squads from outside their visual range that are not Maxims.
Rnades are the very best grenade in game right now. Mainly due to the cover mechanics. It as well as other AOE needs to be tweaked. As you have almost no time to react. Voice queues are not enough as there is a buffer for them. Built a tank tank says "Hi I hit the field!" now the Grenade! Scream comes late and you just lost your squad.
Stuart is leagues better than the werfer- not impressive, but it does its job, if only marginally.
Both of them have unjustifiably high Opportunity costs to field them. Too much fuel for the Captain Tier combined with the high cost of the Stuart puts you close to the price of a Panther to field it for a Mediocre borderling TERRIBLE unit. Same goes with the Pwerfer. T4 is too expensive and you get a unit thats only marginally useful.
I dont think folks are considering this as much as they should. Doctrine choice is also an opportunity cost that some of these units are tied too.
I use the WC51 quite a lot, and while it is overnerfed, it is by no means useless. I enjoy using it on large maps with the vet 1 to move reinforcements around at the speed of light (vaux farmlands). In 1v1, it is useful for pushing volks out of cover early and disrupting sturmpio pathing, as well as to chase down kubel and the HQ truck. I think the WC51 would be fine with a slight accel buff and maybe a weapon buff.
I dont have an issue with its acceleration. But it turns like a damn SU85. Its fine forward and backward. But if this thing needs to make a turn it pretty much stops and pivots in place.
So for almost the cost of a rifle squad plus a SIGNIFICANT amount of fuel yeah its pretty useless in the grand Scheme of things. The same could be said of the SU76. IT HAS BARRAGE! So therfore not useless. The Stuart has Stun therefore not useless! The Irregulars have an LMG so they must not be useless!
Its really really bad for what you pay vs what you get and the role it plays in its own doctrine. If it cost the same as a Kubel fine thats fair.
1
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
