Stugs and panzer 4 H are too expensive

[IronHat]

14 AP 10 AV is a pretty decent stats spread, but certainly not worth 165 pts.

the 91 luft and the 17th SS both count on the stug for their mid-late game punch, and the two division are crippled having to deal with the high price on their stugs.

the panzer 4H is similarly too expensive, even if the 4 axis armor division eventually get better armor in phase C (or even B). The upcoming 9th panzer is going to especially need cheaper panzer 4H since their best tank is going to be the tiger 1 tank.

 

[Herr_Robert]

Agreed. They are only worth using out of necessity, and not because they are actually cost-effective. Sure, the StuGs get veterancy and can perform pretty well because of that, but we don't pay for vet for any other unit, so we shouldn't pay for it when it comes to the StuG (it would never be worth taking without the vet). I think $150 for the StuG IIIG and $130 for the Panzer IVH would be more reasonable prices.

 

[Grobi]

I'd consider them quite overpriced aswell, here's why:

1000m range, useless for long range sniping.
Insufficient armor against basic allied at guns.
Insufficient HE capabilities for their price.

Basicly to deal with enemy tanks they lack the range and as an infantry support tank (like the sherman) they're too brittle, lack HE and are overpriced.
I barely use them, and i don't feel like these are generally much used in high level play... which is kind of sad because historically Stugs and Pz4s were the workhorse of german armor in 1944.

 

[Aeon221]

I agree, I'd like to see a pretty hefty price cut on these suckers.

The various Marder and Marder-like variants should also get a small chop. 1.2km is nice, 3fav is crap.

 

[IS-2]

I'd consider them quite overpriced aswell, here's why:

1000m range, useless for long range sniping.
Insufficient armor against basic allied at guns.
Insufficient HE capabilities for their price.

Basicly to deal with enemy tanks they lack the range and as an infantry support tank (like the sherman) they're too brittle, lack HE and are overpriced.
I barely use them, and i don't feel like these are generally much used in high level play... which is kind of sad because historically Stugs and Pz4s were the workhorse of german armor in 1944.

the panther was more workhorse than the stug in normandy by about 200 tanks fun fact.. .. .

the StuG F could go to 140, StuG G to 150, pz iv H to 135

dont think it is even necessary for the p.IV H to go down it will just make taking the p.iv J a more difficult choice and that tank doesnt need to be cheaper

 

[Aeon221]

the panther was more workhorse than the stug in normandy by about 200 tanks fun fact.. .. .

cool fact bro fact cool fact bro fact cool

the StuG F could go to 140, StuG G to 150, pz iv H to 135

dont think it is even necessary for the p.IV H to go down it will just make taking the p.iv J a more difficult choice and that tank doesnt need to be cheaper

All of these tanks are over priced against the new Sherman m4a3 at 130.

Better question isn't "what tanks in isolation need to be cheaper" but "what division could benefit from cheaper medium tanks"

Windhund, 17, 91, Lehr and (still) 716 would all be better and more fun decks if their medium tanks were cheaper.

 

[dmdelor]

I don't feel like the 17th SS- one of my favorite divisions- is especially "crippled". The first Stug III they get is good for phase A and comes at elite, and the Stug IV is a fine vehicle at its price because FAV 12 bounces most of the AP the Allies can field. A few of the Allied divisions can't even reasonably penetrate it without ambushing it at a closer range during phase B when it first becomes available.

That said, the various Stug IIIs and Pz4s could probably all use a small price cut. This applies to a lot of vehicles of the high AP + low AV description; being more successful at killing other vehicles is useful, but that won't do you any good when you hit an infantry AT gun and is frequently a lot less valuable than being able to ignore or at least probably not die to a significant chunk of the enemy's anti-armor weapons.

Of the various permutations of FAV + AP sums- balanced, high FAV, high AP- I usually find the high AP ones perform the worst relative to the (FAV + AP) metric in Steel Division.

 

[Aeon221]

Stug 4 are nice vs US decks where nothing can reliably pen them at max range, but struggle against the abundant heavier guns of British decks. Making them a little cheaper would be a good way to nudge the deck toward using more of the tank tab and less of the support tab.

Agree re: the importance of baseline FAV. My personal baseline is12 for axis and 11 for Allies. Below that and you become very vulnerable to the first tier of AT gun (11ap for Allies, 10ap for axis).

 

[IronHat]

Insufficient HE capabilities for their price.

actually, the HE on the pz4 and stug are almost as good as the HE on the sherman.

name; phy damage; phy radius ; sup damage ;sup radius ; dispersion
75mm sherman/cromwell/chuchill ; 1.2 ; 82; 130 ; 265 ; 20
75mm panther; 1.02 ;71 ; 112 ; 229; 20
75mm pz4 H and J ; 1.12 ;78 ; 122; 249 ;20
tiger 1 & 2 ;1.1 ;90 ;130 ; 265 ; 20
17 pdr ;0.81; 58; 91; 187; 20
76mm (sherman); 0.88; 62; 98 ; 201; 20

There's actually very little difference in power between the HE on the sherman and HE on the panzer4. In addition German HE are on average better than the Allies counter part.

Historically the german under-load the propellant on their HE round to allow for more HE filling, and the resulting slower HE round is dialed to the same distance as the MG.

by comparison both western Allies use the similar/same propellant for both their HE and AP. It give the same ballistic property for both the HE and AP but at the cost of explosive power. This is why the panther have better HE round than the Firefly or m10.

Stug 4 are nice vs US decks where nothing can reliably pen them at max range, but struggle against the abundant heavier guns of British decks. Making them a little cheaper would be a good way to nudge the deck toward using more of the tank tab and less of the support tab.

Agree re: the importance of baseline FAV. My personal baseline is12 for axis and 11 for Allies. Below that and you become very vulnerable to the first tier of AT gun (11ap for Allies, 10ap for axis).

even with a Low chance to pen, it's a bad idea to just let the enemy take free pot shot at you. It's not like the jumbo where the enemy have no chance to pen you. The m10 is also faster than the stug so it can just kite your stug all day while firing parting shot.

in addition, there's still Suppression to worry about. Armor value decrease the amount of suppression you take and vice versa. The stug will panic.

dont think it is even necessary for the p.IV H to go down it will just make taking the p.iv J a more difficult choice and that tank doesnt need to be cheaper

the panzer 4j retain the exact same armament and FAV as the H despite the slower turret and weaker side armor. a 10 pt difference make it too much of a no brainer to take the J.

 

[Herr_Robert]

the panzer 4j retain the exact same armament and FAV as the H despite the slower turret and weaker side armor. a 10 pt difference make it too much of a no brainer to take the J.

Really? I have never used the Panzer IVJ, but if the turret traverse speeds in the game are correct, it should take roughly one minute to fully rotate its turret compared to something like 20 seconds for the Panzer IVs with electric turret traverse. Add to that an AI that's not perfect, and it can cause issues. I find the M10 to be a very cost-effective unit, but I often lose engagements because of its slow turret. I would say that it's definately worth paying $10 for the faster turret traverse. However, the main problem I see with it is that it comes with no veterancy, and it's only available in the 12th SS deck. Panzer IVs are close to useless in team games as it is, and I don't think it could be put to much use compared to the Panzer IVHs in 1v1s because of its lack of vet.

 

[Aeon221]

even with a Low chance to pen, it's a bad idea to just let the enemy take free pot shot at you. It's not like the jumbo where the enemy have no chance to pen you. The m10 is also faster than the stug so it can just kite your stug all day while firing parting shot.

I'm not sure how you play, but I tend to expect the occasional AT round to ping off or peg a tank. They're sneaky and cheap, so one will eventually get in range and land a shot. Having armor sufficient to ignore the cheap AT guns at range is important for keeping tanks alive.

Also, I tend to arty AT guns shortly after they fire while backing off and dropping mortar smoke. Maybe you don't do that? It'd explain why you think I'm talking about leaving a tank sit and take pot shots.

Kiting and range aren't super important in a game with smoke and omnipresent bushes. I mostly use M10 at short range where accuracy+ap scaling turns it into monster and turret issue is less critical.

 

[bottle228]

should stug get 1200m anyway?

 

[Aeon221]

should stug get 1200m anyway?

Forget 1.2km, it should get a cup holder and spinners.

 

[roirraw]

Maybe the HE and AP should have different ranges for these units? 1200m AP shots and 1000m HE, it would have some historical impact too - as the HE rounds were much heavier and couldn't travel so far or as accurate(IIRC). This would give AT guns the ability to ambush still, where the vehicle combat would take place at max range. You could do the same thing with Shermans too, just make the gun not so accurate at max range to make up for the short barrel 75.

 

[IronHat]

I'm not sure how you play, but I tend to expect the occasional AT round to ping off or peg a tank. They're sneaky and cheap, so one will eventually get in range and land a shot. Having armor sufficient to ignore the cheap AT guns at range is important for keeping tanks alive.

Also, I tend to arty AT guns shortly after they fire while backing off and dropping mortar smoke. Maybe you don't do that? It'd explain why you think I'm talking about leaving a tank sit and take pot shots.

Kiting and range aren't super important in a game with smoke and omnipresent bushes. I mostly use M10 at short range where accuracy+ap scaling turns it into monster and turret issue is less critical.

I am not a gambling man, unless the odds are stacked in my favor.

the aim time on a howitzer is 20s. On a mortar is 10s. That's usually enough time for the atg to take 2-3 shot at their targets, more if it's aided by a ldr. (ironically atg and howitzers have probably the best veterancy bonus in game).

it's worth noting that the extra range on the m10 end up helping the m10 at close range as well. It's +1 ap for each 100m , and +1 accu for each 25% of your range. The 200m range end up helping the unit at close range even if you're not taking long range shot.

I also suspect that the "true" accuracy is actually higher than what the dice show you. Most tank gun show 20 meter dispersion at max range. If that dispersion decrease with distance and a stray shot is still "live", it's another bonus to 1200m gun.

Really? I have never used the Panzer IVJ, but if the turret traverse speeds in the game are correct, it should take roughly one minute to fully rotate its turret compared to something like 20 seconds for the Panzer IVs with electric turret traverse. Add to that an AI that's not perfect, and it can cause issues. I find the M10 to be a very cost-effective unit, but I often lose engagements because of its slow turret. I would say that it's definately worth paying $10 for the faster turret traverse. However, the main problem I see with it is that it comes with no veterancy, and it's only available in the 12th SS deck. Panzer IVs are close to useless in team games as it is, and I don't think it could be put to much use compared to the Panzer IVHs in 1v1s because of its lack of vet.

the turret speed of a panzer 4H in game listed as .349. Assuming it's in radian that's 20 degree (per second).

by comparison, the turret rotation of a panzer 4J and m10 are both listed as .174. assuming it's radian that's 10 degree.

in game testing show that it take about ~18 second for the turret on the m10 to make a 180 degree rotation, so 10 degree per second is about accurate.

the slower turret on the m10 and panzer4 J are not as bad as it was historically.

 

[Aeon221]

I am not a gambling man, unless the odds are stacked in my favor.

the aim time on a howitzer is 20s. On a mortar is 10s. That's usually enough time for the atg to take 2-3 shot at their targets, more if it's aided by a ldr. (ironically atg and howitzers have probably the best veterancy bonus in game).

Which is why part one of that process (as I mentioned) is back up.

Even with perfect play tanks are gonna get shot with AT guns. Gotta respond appropriately.

Pretty sure aim time is lower than 10-20s for some pieces (40-60mm mortars for example) but who knows.

it's worth noting that the extra range on the m10 end up helping the m10 at close range as well. It's +1 ap for each 100m , and +1 accu for each 25% of your range. The 200m range end up helping the unit at close range even if you're not taking long range shot.

That is why I said I prefer m10 at short range and explicitly mentioned AP and accuracy scaling lol. The turret traverse hurts it at that range, but there are ways to manage that.

 

[IronHat]

Which is why part one of that process (as I mentioned) is back up.

Even with perfect play tanks are gonna get shot with AT guns. Gotta respond appropriately.

Pretty sure aim time is lower than 10-20s for some pieces (40-60mm mortars for example) but who knows.



That is why I said I prefer m10 at short range and explicitly mentioned AP and accuracy scaling lol. The turret traverse hurts it at that range, but there are ways to manage that.

actually the light mortars HE also take 10 seconds to fire. smoke rounds have 50% aim time of HE. On a howitzer, HE take 20 second but smoke takes 10 seconds. That's probably where you get the impression 50mm mortar fire faster.

using tactic to mitigate a mechanical disadvantage doesn't remove the disadvantage. the entire reason of taking weaker and cheaper unit is being able to mitigate its weaker stats through combined arms.

let's put out a more concrete proposal. 150-160 for the stug 4 and 130-140 for the stug 3G.