..... WHY!!!

[1Nicolas]

WHY THE M-18! WHY NOT THE CHURCHILL OR MATILDA WHY WHY WHY! 

[IrishOne]

 

you coulda summed it up by just putting that 

[skorpion]

Why no StuG III Ausf G? why no KV-1S? why no M26 pershing?

answer those and ill answer your question.

[Raphael]

because bar asked first.
that is just how law in real life works. that is why you learn since you are a child "I CALLED IT!"

[B-17]

I'm just happy I can finally do jeep speeds with a 75 mm gun on top

[Tyrannis]

Why no StuG III Ausf G? why no KV-1S? why no M26 pershing?

answer those and ill answer your question.

Because the Stug brings nothing new to the game. so theres no reason to have it added at this time.

[SmokinLoon]

Because the Stug brings nothing new to the game. so theres no reason to have it added at this time.

Nothing new?!?!  For shame!      A turret-less AFV for starters.  The Pzr III chassis for easily adding the Pzr II J.  Oh, and maybe one of the best things about adding the StuG III would be adding another EW tank if the short barreled 75mm was made available.  There was almost no change (or rather very little) to the chassis over the length of the war, just the gun.  There were over 9400 of the StuG III's built.  HTC could easily offer 2 types of main guns (7.5 cm StuK 37 L/24 for EW "A/B" version and 7.5 cm StuK 40 L/48 for the LW "G" version).

[skorpion]

Because the Stug brings nothing new to the game. so theres no reason to have it added at this time.

Nothing new?!?!  For shame!      A turret-less AFV for starters.  The Pzr III chassis for easily adding the Pzr II J.  Oh, and maybe one of the best things about adding the StuG III would be adding another EW tank if the short barreled 75mm was made available.  There was almost no change (or rather very little) to the chassis over the length of the war, just the gun.  There were over 9400 of the StuG III's built.  HTC could easily offer 2 types of main guns (7.5 cm StuK 37 L/24 for EW "A/B" version and 7.5 cm StuK 40 L/48 for the LW "G" version).

dammit smokin, you beat me to it.

obviously, you did your research as opposed to a certain someone...

[MachFly]

WHY THE M-18! WHY NOT THE CHURCHILL OR MATILDA WHY WHY WHY! 

Because Bar wanted it. 

[gyrene81]

geez you whiny girls. it's not that big a deal. htc just gave you the tiger 2 and panther, relax...just a matter of time before they get the documentation needed for other vehicles and get them in the game. i'd personally rather have more 1938-1941 aircraft but, whining about it is childishly useless.

[Tyrannis]

Nothing new?!?!  For shame!      A turret-less AFV for starters.  The Pzr III chassis for easily adding the Pzr II J.  Oh, and maybe one of the best things about adding the StuG III would be adding another EW tank if the short barreled 75mm was made available.  There was almost no change (or rather very little) to the chassis over the length of the war, just the gun.  There were over 9400 of the StuG III's built.  HTC could easily offer 2 types of main guns (7.5 cm StuK 37 L/24 for EW "A/B" version and 7.5 cm StuK 40 L/48 for the LW "G" version).

As so many before me has stated, you want a stug? up a Panzer IV and dont move your turret. theres your stug. wish granted.

Plus we already have a turret-less TD. (M3 TD).

Like i said, it brings nothing new to the game. not saying it shouldnt be added. i'd just like more important things to be added in its place. like say, the m3 lee. that tank is LONG overdue to be added.
 
Besides, i dont think the G model would qualify to be added to EW. Wiki has its Entrace date as  December 1942, thats pushing the limit of EW arena's timeline. so ether, it wouldnt be added, or it would be added but have a perk limit, in which case no one would use it simply because there aren't really any major EW tank battles to begin with.

Id rather have the Panzer III before the stug.

[skorpion]

Like i said, it brings nothing new to the game. not saying it shouldnt be added. i'd just like more important things to be added in its place. like say, the m3 lee. that tank is LONG overdue to be added.

you want a tank with a crappy 37mm top gun, and a limited range 75mm side gun on a tank with less armor than a M4?

heres your M3 lee, up a M4/75 and only turn the turret about 10 degrees to the left/right.   

[Tyrannis]

heres your M3 lee, up a M4/75 and only turn the turret about 10 degrees to the left/right.  

not even close to an accurate substitute.

someones a little sore their stuggy's getting downplayed.  

Edit: Please tell us how the m3 is "Crappy". In its timeframe it did rather well, and was beloved by both the british and american tankers who used it. as well as feared by the Panzer III tankers who came up against it.

[skorpion]

not even close to an accurate substitute.

someones a little sore their stuggy's getting downplayed. 
Edit: Please tell us how the m3 is "Crappy". In its timeframe it did rather well, and was beloved by both the british and american tankers who used it. as well as feared by the Panzer III tankers who came up against it.

wow, that right there screams ego boost. the M4 is alot better than the M3 lee in the ways of more armor, a better gun and better suspension/engine. the ammo load is bigger IIRC and the panzer 3 was a very well placed match against the lee. you need to do alot more research. now time to place you on the ignore list. you cant go 1 minute without talking from your backside.

[Tyrannis]

wow, that right there screams ego boost. the M4 is alot better than the M3 lee in the ways of more armor, a better gun and better suspension/engine. the ammo load is bigger IIRC and the panzer 3 was a very well placed match against the lee. you need to do alot more research. now time to place you on the ignore list. you cant go 1 minute without talking from your backside.

Yes the m4 is a better tank than the LEE, but the m4 isent an EW tank now is it?

like i stated before, IN ITS TIMELINE, the lee was a very good tank against its opponents.  you cant tell others to do more research when your yourself dont even have your own facts straight.  

Edit: i bolded that part to make sure you see it, you seemed to of overlooked it last time since you were so eager to get your opinion in.