Welcome to The Few Good Men

Thanks for visiting our club and having a look around, there is a lot to see. Why not consider becoming a member?
Register

StuGs

L

Larsen

Guest
Hi everyone,
I am curious how many people actually use StuGs in QB playing for Germans?
And a similar question - does anyone go beyond the basic M4 when buying 75mm Shermans?
 
I can't recall the last time I used Stugs in a QB. Mostly because, like most people I guess, I like value for money (or points in this case).

Taking September 44 in CMBN as an example, I can get a Pz IVJ (early) for 241 points with 0 rarity, or a Stug IIIG (mid) for 299 points with 0 rarity.

The advantages of a Pz IV are, a turret, a second MG, 42 rounds of HE & AP, 3 of smoke, and 3k+ rounds of MG ammo. Also having a 5th crew member means if your tank commander gets headshotted, another crew member can slip into his place - although this loses you the hull machine gunner.

In comparison the Stug III has 27 & 22 of HE & AP respectively, 5 smoke, 600 rounds of MG ammo and only a single MG, one less crew member, no turret, a lower profile, and arguably better stealth characteristics?

If all I want is something stealthy and anti-armour focused, I'm more likely to use a Marder, as I can get two for the price of one Stug and still have change left over. Yeah they're more vulnerable than a fully armoured vehicle particularly from mortars and artillery, and have far less ammo and no MG, but their stealth and spotting are excellent.

Of course, if we're talking about value for points, it's hard to go past the Panther, virtually invulnerable from the front except through the mantlet which is a small target, an insanely good gun, and all this for only 100 points or so more than a Pz IV - which is probably why we see a disproportionate number of them crop up in QBs! :)
 
Rico said:
I choose the StuG Life ... but then I don’t win many QB’s :D

The QB points system is a bit of a mystery to me.
Click to expand...

I wish there was another setting to rarity like 'random', whereby random vehicles may have their rarity reduced for that particular battle - not to the point that you get King Tigers for zero rarity, but something of a discount, this would alleviate the 'sameness' that we tend to get in QBs for the reasons I mentioned above.

This is of course a problem with ladder battles more specifically, people will tend to cherry pick OP or best value for points units, personally, if I'm playing a friendly I rather like picking something out of left field just to shake things up a bit, even if it's not optimal.
 
I started a thread on a BFC forum in CMBN forum arguing that StuGs are the way too expensive using pretty much the same arguments as Stafford. I am at a point where I think StuG pricing is a bug.
Also M4s are priced the way too cheap. You can get a basic one in a formation for something like 180 points. I don't understand why anyone playing Allies would not being a those + some M10.
 
Stafford said:
In comparison the Stug III has 27 & 22 of HE & AP respectively, 5 smoke, 600 rounds of MG ammo and only a single MG, one less crew member, no turret, a lower profile, and arguably better stealth characteristics?
Click to expand...
I don't think it has better stealth - if both StuG and PzIV are hull down, it should be about the same.
 
Larsen said:
I started a thread on a BFC forum in CMBN forum arguing that StuGs are the way too expensive using pretty much the same arguments as Stafford. I am at a point where I think StuG pricing is a bug.
Also M4s are priced the way too cheap. You can get a basic one in a formation for something like 180 points. I don't understand why anyone playing Allies would not being a those + some M10.
Click to expand...
I completely agree with both you and Stafford, but good luck convincing anybody on the official forum about anything.

Shermans seem to be priced based on the myth that they were poor tanks with thin armour and prone to catch fire. That myth has been thoroughly debunked, both by various tank experts and by their actual performance in this game. They are in fact pretty good tanks and should be priced accordingly.
 
In the world of CM it is completely irrelevant if a tank catches fire after being knocked down or not.
I see Pz IVJ early and M4 as roughly the same in terms of what they can do in the game and should be priced similarly. In fact I would argue that those should be used as references for how the rest of tanks and TDs are priced in the game.
 
I assumed that Sherman 75s are priced so cheap because they were very common in the timeframes that we play.

I agree that Sherman 75s are an excellent tank, I don't see them as an equal match to a Pz IV except under 500m, with the disparity increasing as range increases, of course, you can get more Shermans than Pz IVs for a given number of points so that makes up for it somewhat.
I also consider Shermans to be superior anti-infantry tanks than Pz IVs too.
 
Larsen said:
In the world of CM it is completely irrelevant if a tank catches fire after being knocked down or not.
Click to expand...
Not really, because sometimes the crew bails after a hit that did very little actual damage, and in some situations, it's possible to re-crew the tank.

Also, sometimes a hit does little damage, and the crew decides to stay inside and shoot back - in that case, it's useful that the tank is not on fire.
 
Stafford said:
I agree that Sherman 75s are an excellent tank, I don't see them as an equal match to a Pz IV except under 500m, with the disparity increasing as range increases
Click to expand...
Hmmm I tend to disagree, since at long ranges, the Panzer IV can't reliably penetrate the Sherman. But the Sherman can kill the PZIV - it just needs a couple more aiming shots before it hits.
 
I don't think point value reflects how common certain tanks were or were not. There is rarity for that I think. Points supposed to reflect the overall value of a tank.
I think Shermans are better against infantry - more HE, more MG, faster turret. For most QB battles the engagement ranges are somewhere between 200 and 800m. At those ranges it seems M4 and Pz IV are about the same.
By the way, do you know if spotting is different for different tanks?
 
Larsen said:
By the way, do you know if spotting is different for different tanks?
Click to expand...
Both yes and no. I don't think there are any real differences between most basic tanks when it comes to spotting. Panzer IV, Sherman, Panther.. I think they are all the same. As long as they are 5-man tanks with cupolas, they spot the same.

However, other AFVs are different. Open-topped Tank Destroyers seem to spot better. StuGs spot worse than tanks, too, in my experience.
 
Bulletpoint said:
Hmmm I tend to disagree, since at long ranges, the Panzer IV can't reliably penetrate the Sherman. But the Sherman can kill the PZIV - it just needs a couple more aiming shots before it hits.
Click to expand...
Bulletpoint said:
Hmmm I tend to disagree, since at long ranges, the Panzer IV can't reliably penetrate the Sherman. But the Sherman can kill the PZIV - it just needs a couple more aiming shots before it hits.



I'm tempted to set up some testing now, or maybe I could cajole/coerce/flatter @Drifter Man into doing one of his whiz-bang automated tests! :p



Since the 75 on the Pz IV is high velocity it has better armour penetration and is quicker to land on target, all other factors being equal.

Yes the Sherman has a sloped front, but I don't think that comes into play until well over the 1500-2000m range.

Conversely a Sherman 75 can take an agonising amount of time to hit the target at long range, and if both tanks have spotted and begin firing at the same time (yes I know, unlikely but go with it), the Pz IV should be hitting the Sherman first, causing the latter, even if not penetrated, to be rather unhappy due to the ongoing significant emotional event.



I know you've been keeping an eye on @Drifter Man s DAR, consider when he killed my firefly with his Stugs, IIRC that was at a range of over 1 km, but they had no problem punching through the armour, they were also on target within a minute, and the crew quality is only regular.
Click to expand...
 
Sorry that came out all fucked up, I'm on mobile at the moment in an area with horrible connectivity - it's taking up to a minute just to refresh a page! :rolleyes:
 
I don't quite understand why when speaking about tanks the discussion always turns to tank vs tank performance. That is just one aspect of the battle. And I would argue that for the vast majority of maps in QBs the engagement ranges are under 800m.
There are other aspects - HE load and blast,number of MGs and the ammo for them, tank speed, turret and turret speed, the chance to bog down etc.
While I believe that at longer ranges Pz IVs probably are somewhat better than M4s at the typical ranges of engagement in QBs they are somewhat equal, maybe a little bit better but not by much. In terms of everything else M4 offers more - more HE, faster turret, 1 more MG.
They are very similar tanks and should worth about the same for QBs.

I am glad that we agree that StuGs are not just overpriced, they hugely overpriced to the point that it looks like a bug.
 
Stafford said:
Since the 75 on the Pz IV is high velocity it has better armour penetration and is quicker to land on target, all other factors being equal.

Yes the Sherman has a sloped front, but I don't think that comes into play until well over the 1500-2000m range.

Conversely a Sherman 75 can take an agonising amount of time to hit the target at long range, and if both tanks have spotted and begin firing at the same time (yes I know, unlikely but go with it), the Pz IV should be hitting the Sherman first, causing the latter, even if not penetrated, to be rather unhappy due to the ongoing significant emotional event.



I know you've been keeping an eye on @Drifter Man s DAR, consider when he killed my firefly with his Stugs, IIRC that was at a range of over 1 km, but they had no problem punching through the armour, they were also on target within a minute, and the crew quality is only regular.
Click to expand...

I think that Firefly was a bit of a lucky shot, as it's at the far end of where the 75mm KwK 40 can penetrate a Sherman. In my own game against Drifter, I had several shots bounce from his Shermans at around the same range.

Apart from discussing how to define long range, I generally agree with what you're saying.

I'd just like to add that as far as I can see, there's only a pretty narrow range window where the Panzer IV beats the Sherman. It's from about 800m to 1000m where the faster gun will land a shot faster and still have a high chance to penetrate. Closer than that, the Sherman can get a shot on target very fast, and at longer ranges, shots start to bounce off the Sherman.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top