jagdpanzer IV 70 (v)

[glock89]

Yup, I think it has to do with the StuGs apearance to other tanks of the day, it was short, fat, and had a really short and blunt nose (only a couple feet long cannon barrel at most) compared to the taller, sleeker hulls and longer protruding barrels (longer than a man is tall, typicaly) of the tanks.

But still good.

[glock89]

If were going to add TD's it should be for the Germans Stug Russia Su-85 or Su-100 American M-10. Just a thought.

[P1Tiger]

it only looks like the gun aims up and down only, is it like artillery, or does it turn 360 degrees?

[glock89]

The Stug only aims up and down same with the Su-85 and Su-100 the M-10 doesn't it turn 360 degrees. But allowing the TD's such as the Stug and the Su-85 without the turret save weight and time to build them and make them harder to see at long range.

[Masherbrum]

M-10 would be cannon fodder in this game.   

[theNewB]

Sorry to say any american TDs without a covered top....is more useless then the StuG. I believe they had a 38* side traverse (probably wrong its 6:34am) If TDs are added (mainly germ/rus) then wed have to give them an edge, since most TD use would be defence and rear guard actions a few things need to be bumped up for them. Such as more magnification to commander/pintle and more bushes/grass to conceal yourself in. And if the StuG was so useless then why did Michael Wittman learn most of his tactics in them? (along with scout cars in the beginning and later a PIII then Tiger) the StuG is very underrated. Look at WW2 OL, the most success's i had in that game wernt tigers, PIVGs, or IIIH's it was in the StuG IIIG (then again they have a lot of ground "clutter" then well ever have. Id vote for anything russian or german...american... i like that their fast,good gun but thats where it ends.

[SmokinLoon]

Quite an elementary arguement, sorry to say.  

Remember, how the Germans used the StuG in WWII would be very different vs how they could be used in AH2.  It offers *nothing* that the current Pzr4 cant do better.

You mentiojned "battlefield survivability"... stop and think just how quickly our current line up gets knocked out.  I mentioned the M18 because it offers something we dont cuurently have: high speed, medium gun (better than current Pzr4, less than 17lb'er), and low armor (but better than M8).  The M18 would be able to stand up vs the auto ack better than the M8, but not much else above it.  It isnt designed to stand and fight, it is designed to shoot-n-move.  I could see a JgdPzr IV being used as a legit TD in this game, but even then it would be handicapped.    

The StuG would get owned in this AH2 game.  Stop and think how often one can sit and only traverse their main gun 15d and do anything worth while.  To start up the engine to turn the tank 45d or 90d to get a shot would be suicide.  I try and mix up what tanks I tank in the game, and if the StuG would be introduced it would be considered a Pzr4 without a turrent.  Would you take a Typhoon or La7 up and only use %50 of its throttle?  No... why do you think anyone else would do the same in a Pzr4 vs StuG choice?

You mentioned the Sherman vs Churchill vs StuG????  and you picked the StuG???  There are far more perameters to think about than just for me to be able to blurt out "this one!" as a preference.  Each of those tanks did something better than the other and the StuG was the most limited, imo.  

The problem with the 2 American choices is battlefield survivability. they would be no better than the current firefly. The stug was in fact the most important piece of armor to the German army. It was basically the back bone of both infantry and panzer divisions . To say it did nothing well is not correct. If I were a tanker and my choice was a Sherman , Churchill or Stug I would go Stug everytime. The Tigers turret traverse is very slow and starting it's engines rather than wait for the barrel to go around 180deg makes more sense to me, besides in lw TT where this would be used there are engine noises coming from everywhere so what's the big deal about leaving your engine running. You could use this thing to sit in the trees concealed and fire from standoff range where it's limited barrel traverse would be just fine. I'm sure that some of the games best tankers would find a use for it and be quite deadly with it.

[BigPlay]

Yup, I think it has to do with the StuGs apearance to other tanks of the day, it was short, fat, and had a really short and blunt nose (only a couple feet long cannon barrel at most) compared to the taller, sleeker hulls and longer protruding barrels (longer than a man is tall, typicaly) of the tanks.

Once again the late models had the long barrel 75mm

[BigPlay]

Quite an elementary arguement, sorry to say.  

Remember, how the Germans used the StuG in WWII would be very different vs how they could be used in AH2.  It offers *nothing* that the current Pzr4 cant do better.

You mentiojned "battlefield survivability"... stop and think just how quickly our current line up gets knocked out.  I mentioned the M18 because it offers something we dont cuurently have: high speed, medium gun (better than current Pzr4, less than 17lb'er), and low armor (but better than M8).  The M18 would be able to stand up vs the auto ack better than the M8, but not much else above it.  It isnt designed to stand and fight, it is designed to shoot-n-move.  I could see a JgdPzr IV being used as a legit TD in this game, but even then it would be handicapped.    

The StuG would get owned in this AH2 game.  Stop and think how often one can sit and only traverse their main gun 15d and do anything worth while.  To start up the engine to turn the tank 45d or 90d to get a shot would be suicide.  I try and mix up what tanks I tank in the game, and if the StuG would be introduced it would be considered a Pzr4 without a turrent.  Would you take a Typhoon or La7 up and only use %50 of its throttle?  No... why do you think anyone else would do the same in a Pzr4 vs StuG choice?

You mentioned the Sherman vs Churchill vs StuG????  and you picked the StuG???  There are far more perameters to think about than just for me to be able to blurt out "this one!" as a preference.  Each of those tanks did something better than the other and the StuG was the most limited, imo.  


First, Tigers dont or shouldn't get knocked out by anything at range other than by a firefly or another Tiger. Standoff suviverability is what I am referring to. The Stug or any German or Russian TD would be able to kill tanks at distance while being able to withstand  hits from lets say a 76mm from a T-34 even a panzer. What did the Sherman do to any late war German tank other than chip it's paint. Not until they were equiped with the 76MM gun were they affective at killing tanks however they were able to be put out of action by almost everything the Germans had. . The Churshill was totally useless. It was super slow and had a gun that was good for nothing but infantry artillery support. Also shoot and move really wasn't acheived until a computer was used to stabilize the gun. You were still at the mercy of the terrain while driving and shooting in WW2 tanks so shooting on the move isn't really something a M-10 or M-18 can do any better than the current line of tanks we already have. It just will be able to shoot while going faster than the rest. Not a big deal if you ask me.



So not just killing tanks but all around usefullness between the 3 of those choices mine still would be the stug. I can assure that more Stugs killed more Shermans and Churchill's than the two of them killed Stugs combined .The Stugwouldn't be my first TD choice but it would provide a little more dynamics to the game than another tank that can be killed one shot all the time. Also take into consideration about bombing survivability. M-10 and the M-18 might as well be filled with candy like pinatas. Also as stated .... in LW TT there are so many engines running do you think starting you engine means suicide? Starting your engine even firing you gun doesn't give you position away all the time. It just informs the opposition that your there.

[BigPlay]

it only looks like the gun aims up and down only, is it like artillery, or does it turn 360 degrees?

not sure about the Stug but most German TD's have a side to side traverse as well as up and down.

[Greebo]

Most Jagdpanzer style tank destroyers had around 15 degrees traverse each way for their gun.

[glock89]

I still want the Stug along with the Su-85 or the Su-100 and the M-10 would be great to have.

[Babalonian]

The Stug only aims up and down same with the Su-85 and Su-100 the M-10 doesn't it turn 360 degrees. But allowing the TD's such as the Stug and the Su-85 without the turret save weight and time to build them and make them harder to see at long range.

The StuGs and Su's had ~10-20 degrees of traverse, depending on the various makes and models combinations of the chasis and gun.  I'd slap 15 degrees as the average.  Same with the Su's too, they had a slight taversing angle, otherwise they'd never get to destroy a moving tank at anything but the closest ranges.  You still had to slightly turn the tank to regularly adjust in a battle, unless you found some nice nook to hole up in, 15 degrees is only 15 degrees.

And in anything but raw flat open country, I'd choose a StuG III G or Stug IV to defend a position anyday (pending I had time (or familiartiy with the location i'm defending) to setup and take advantage of the StuG's strengths, but any tanker in any tank would want to familiarize themselves with the conditions and layout of a battlefield before going to battle in their tank).

[glock89]

The StuGs and Su's had ~10-20 degrees of traverse, depending on the various makes and models combinations of the chasis and gun.  I'd slap 15 degrees as the average.  Same with the Su's too, they had a slight taversing angle, otherwise they'd never get to destroy a moving tank at anything but the closest ranges.  You still had to slightly turn the tank to regularly adjust in a battle, unless you found some nice nook to hole up in, 15 degrees is only 15 degrees.

And so what?

[BigPlay]

15 deg traverse covers quite a bit of terrain if your shooting from standoff range.