Login

russian armor

Commander Update Beta 2021 - Ostheer Feedback

PAGES (49)down
16 Apr 2021, 08:55 AM
#361
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17583 | Subs: 8


75% less damage and slightly less do not sound like a big deal, except Stug-G has enough pen to deal with stock mediums and pen TDs, SU-76 is clearly lacks in this regard, especially vs OKW. Also Su-76 kills p4 with 5 penetrating shot, Stug needs only 4 to kill 640 HP tank. If you add armor values of P4j, then SU-76 needs to fire 7 to 8 shots to kill it. On top of it SU-76 dies with 3 AT shots, Stug with 4.

Not sure if all that 10 range worth it.

SU-76 can handle medium armor alright, except OKW P4 and vet2 onward ost P4.
16 Apr 2021, 08:57 AM
#362
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 2879 | Subs: 2


The SU-76 is cheaper, has more range better fire rate and slightly less pen and about 75% damage. I'd say they are on par with each other.

Range and cost is all it has. ROF is equal to worse, penetration is also worse considering its targets and the reduced damage is a huge issue since the unit needs at least 5 shots plus snare or 6 shots on its own to kill a medium tank. Considering also a slightly worse accuracy a Su76 will probably need about 7 shots or 33,1 secs to kill an OST P4.
Stug will likely need about 5 shots or 21,5 secs to kill a medium.
16 Apr 2021, 08:59 AM
#363
avatar of ZeroZeroNi

Posts: 1563


75% less damage and slightly less do not sound like a big deal, except Stug-G has enough pen to deal with stock mediums and pen TDs, SU-76 is clearly lacks in this regard, especially vs OKW. Also Su-76 kills p4 with 5 penetrating shot, Stug needs only 4 to kill 640 HP tank. If you add armor values of P4j, then SU-76 needs to fire 7 to 8 shots to kill it. On top of it SU-76 dies with 3 AT shots, Stug with 4.

Not sure if all that 10 range worth it.

su76 has a max range pen 170 and ost p4 has frontal of 180 that's 94.4% pen dude from a range of 60. The su76 also has a faster reload of 4.15(avg) compared to stugs 5(avg). considering the su76 is only 75 fuel. I'd say it's on par with the stug in terms bang for your buck AT power. Considering Allied Mediums are barely cost more than the stug while su76 is far cheaper than ost p4 and evn more so then okw p4.
16 Apr 2021, 09:01 AM
#364
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 2879 | Subs: 2


su76 has a max range pen 170 and ost p4 has frontal of 180 that's 94.4% pen dude from a range of 60. The su76 also has a faster reload of 4.15(avg) compared to stugs 5(avg). considering the su76 is only 75 fuel. I'd say it's on par with the stug in terms bang for your buck AT power. Considering Allied Mediums are barely cost more than the stug while su76 is far cheaper than ost p4 and evn more so then okw p4.

The SU has an additional second wind down...
16 Apr 2021, 09:08 AM
#365
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13290 | Subs: 1

If one want to compare SU-76vsPzIV with the Stug vs T-34/76 one also has to keep in mind of the cost difference between the TD and the Tank it is facing.

SU-76 is cost efficient TD that can also barrage.
16 Apr 2021, 09:12 AM
#366
avatar of ZeroZeroNi

Posts: 1563


Range and cost is all it has. ROF is equal to worse, penetration is also worse considering its targets and the reduced damage is a huge issue since the unit needs at last 5 shots plus snare or 6 shots on its own to kill a medium tank. Considering also a slightly worse accuracy a Su76 will probably need about 7 shots or 33,1 secs to kill an OST P4.
Stug will likely need about 5 shots or 21,5 secs to kill a medium.

OK, i say'd it was on par in terms of price to performance with the stug. It costs less so it also performs less.

Like what more do you want form a 75f vehicle
60 max range(stug has 50)
170 max range pen(stug has 180)
3.875-4.375 s Reload(stug has 4.5-5.5 s reload)
fuel difference with mediums p4 45 and p4j 65 (stug has t34 0, sherman and cromwell 20)
fuel difference with special mediums Panther 110 (stug has t34/85 40, easy8 55, sherman-76 35, comet 95)

I don't know for me they look on par in terms of bang for buck.
16 Apr 2021, 09:16 AM
#367
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 2879 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Apr 2021, 09:08 AMVipper
If one want to compare SU-76vsPzIV with the Stug vs T-34/76 one also has to keep in mind of the cost difference between the TD and the Tank it is facing.

SU-76 is cost efficient TD that can also barrage.

Barrage ability aside (Stug has a stun shot), the StuG is more efficient.
Only and really only in OST vs SOV matchups they are roughly equal at vet0, while the StuG improves at vet3.

The only advantage of the SU is the additional 10 range. If you don't manage to regularly get a potshot in, the SU has no real advantage.
16 Apr 2021, 09:16 AM
#368
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13290 | Subs: 1


OK, i say'd it was on par in terms of price to performance with the stug. It costs less so it also performs less.

Like what more do you want form a 75f vehicle
60 max range(stug has 50)
170 max range pen(stug has 180)
3.875-4.375 s Reload(stug has 4.5-5.5 s reload)
fuel difference with mediums p4 45 and p4j 65 (stug has t34 0, sherman and cromwell 20)
fuel difference with special mediums Panther 110 (stug has t34/85 40, easy8 55, sherman-76 35, comet 95)

I don't know for me they look on par in terms of bang for buck.

I suggest you use ROF instead of reload:
SU-76 5.275
STug 5.25

Penetration values are:
SU-76 Penetration near 180 Penetration mid 170 Penetration far 160 (165 at range 50)

Penetration near 200 Penetration mid 185 Penetration far 170
16 Apr 2021, 09:17 AM
#369
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13290 | Subs: 1


Barrage ability aside (Stug has a stun shot), the StuG is more efficient.
Only and really only in OST vs SOB matchups they are roughly equal at vet0, while the StuG improves at vet3.

Stug is probably more efficient but that does not make it more cost efficient nor does it make SU-76 a bad TD.
16 Apr 2021, 09:33 AM
#370
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 2879 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Apr 2021, 09:17 AMVipper

Stug is probably more efficient but that does not make it more cost efficient nor does it make SU-76 a bad TD.



OK, i say'd it was on par in terms of price to performance with the stug. It costs less so it also performs less.

Like what more do you want form a 75f vehicle
60 max range(stug has 50)
170 max range pen(stug has 180)
3.875-4.375 s Reload(stug has 4.5-5.5 s reload)
fuel difference with mediums p4 45 and p4j 65 (stug has t34 0, sherman and cromwell 20)
fuel difference with special mediums Panther 110 (stug has t34/85 40, easy8 55, sherman-76 35, comet 95)

I don't know for me they look on par in terms of bang for buck.


Stug is more cost efficient AT.
Assuming the TTK times as written above (7 and 5 shots vs medium for SU and Stug):

Stug needs 21,5 s to kill an average Allied medium (326 MP, 103 FU), yielding 15,16 MP and 4,79 FU per second.
SU needs 33,1 s to kill OST P4 -> 10,57 MP / 3,62 FU

This gives StuG higher damage potential of +43% MP and +32% FU, while costing the same MP, +20% FU and +25% POP. This advantage still remains if you subtract 2 seconds of the SU TTK because of higher range. It equals out in the matchip against a T34 and improves vs Sherman and Cromwell.
So unless you can regularly take a long range shot, the StuG is better. Not to mention that a close range StuG is still a threat. A close range SU is probably dead because the StuG comes with way better defensive stats.

I'll say that this is a quite theoretical calculation since vehicle combat is all or nothing. But still, the StuG counters Allied resources more efficiently than the SU76.
16 Apr 2021, 09:33 AM
#371
avatar of Klement Pikhtura

Posts: 765

I'm still baffled that Stug is being compared to SU-76 and stating that it is on par with it. To unit that is nothing but a stopgap with even more awkward timing after Mechanized Armor Kampenya fuel price increase to delay t-70. I guess it is alright in terms of T3 all-ins.
16 Apr 2021, 09:36 AM
#372
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 2879 | Subs: 2

I'm still baffled that Stug is being compared to SU-76 and stating that it is on par with it. To unit that is nothing but a stopgap with even more awkward timing after Mechanized Armor Kampenya fuel price increase to delay t-70. I guess it is alright in terms of T3 all-ins.

Why more awkward? It comes 10 fuel earlier now.
16 Apr 2021, 09:41 AM
#373
avatar of ZeroZeroNi

Posts: 1563

I'm still baffled that Stug is being compared to SU-76 and stating that it is on par with it. To unit that is nothing but a stopgap with even more awkward timing after Mechanized Armor Kampenya fuel price increase to delay t-70. I guess it is alright in terms of T3 all-ins.

I'm saying it on par in terms of cost-to-performance not raw-performance, why can't people see that.
16 Apr 2021, 09:49 AM
#374
avatar of ZeroZeroNi

Posts: 1563





Stug is more cost efficient AT.
Assuming the TTK times as written above (7 and 5 shots vs medium for SU and Stug):

Stug needs 21,5 s to kill an average Allied medium (326 MP, 103 FU), yielding 15,16 MP and 4,79 FU per second.
SU needs 33,1 s to kill OST P4 -> 10,57 MP / 3,62 FU

That is a very terrible way to calculate efficiency. Cause what does that even mean??
16 Apr 2021, 10:05 AM
#375
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 2879 | Subs: 2


That is a very terrible way to calculate efficiency. Cause what does that even mean??

If you think it is terrible, make a point why it is bad.

It calculates how quickly they can shut down their targets based on target cost, their own coat und their own performance
16 Apr 2021, 10:06 AM
#376
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13290 | Subs: 1





Stug is more cost efficient AT.
Assuming the TTK times as written above (7 and 5 shots vs medium for SU and Stug):

Stug needs 21,5 s to kill an average Allied medium (326 MP, 103 FU), yielding 15,16 MP and 4,79 FU per second.
SU needs 33,1 s to kill OST P4 -> 10,57 MP / 3,62 FU

This gives StuG higher damage potential of +43% MP and +32% FU, while costing the same MP, +20% FU and +25% POP. This advantage still remains if you subtract 2 seconds of the SU TTK because of higher range. It equals out in the matchip against a T34 and improves vs Sherman and Cromwell.
So unless you can regularly take a long range shot, the StuG is better. Not to mention that a close range StuG is still a threat. A close range SU is probably dead because the StuG comes with way better defensive stats.

I'll say that this is a quite theoretical calculation since vehicle combat is all or nothing. But still, the StuG counters Allied resources more efficiently than the SU76.

There are so many theoretical simplifications here to draw any safe conclusion (7 shots vs 5, slug fest, not having to rotate to fire,...).
(The math you are using are also unclear)

Cost efficient is simply difficult to quantify but if you want simpler approach the PzIV/SU-76 cost ratio is much batter than T-34/76/Stug and SU-76 can zone out the PzIV from longer range.

If one want to attempt to dive a tank to kill the the one still risks more in the case of the PzIV to cause less bleed to the enemy.
16 Apr 2021, 10:11 AM
#377
avatar of JohnSmith

Posts: 1273

Either way, it is very easy to conclude without doubt that the Stug is overall the better AT unit in every category and that SU76s are simply in a lower-tier AT with the bonus of barrage. Both theory and practicalities denote that the StuG is better. You'd even easily find players relying heavily going on Stugs in the late game, whereas Soviets going straight to T34s or SU85s instead. Stugs are definitely better than SU76s. I main OST 2on2s, and if i had a choice between building Stugs or (let's assume OST had access) Su76s, i'd go for Stugs without hesitation. Other OST players would agree. If Soviets had access to Stugs, they'd easily forego SU76s.

I like Hannibal's thinking and maths, they are valid approaches to partially quantifying the unit's better value over the soviet's "counterpart".
16 Apr 2021, 10:17 AM
#378
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 2879 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Apr 2021, 10:06 AMVipper

There are so many theoretical simplifications here to draw any safe conclusion.
(The math you are using are also unclear)

Cost efficient is simply difficult to quantify but if you want simpler approach the PzIV/SU-76 cost ratio is much batter than T-34/76/Stug and SU-76 can zone out the PzIV from longer range.

If one want to attempt to dive a tank to kill the the one still risks more in the case of the PzIV to cause less bleed to the enemy.

Obviously there are quite some other factors. The Stug has to stand in ATG and TD range for the first shot, the SU only in ATG range. The math is simply dividing cost by TTK and comparing it to the costs of the respective TD

The resource ratio you use is a very bad indicator, because it assumes similar TTK.
16 Apr 2021, 10:18 AM
#379
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13290 | Subs: 1


Obviously there are quite some other factors. The Stug has to stand in ATG and TD range for the first shot, the SU only in ATG range.

The resource ratio is a very bad indicator, because it assumes similar TTK.

TTK is also a bad indicator on it own because it assumes that TD will kill the tank...
If a PzIV get shot twice from SU-76 from range 60 it will probably back off (or risk a dive).
16 Apr 2021, 10:22 AM
#380
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17583 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Apr 2021, 10:18 AMVipper

TTK is also a bad indicator on it own because it assumes that TD will kill the tank...

By that logic, firs unit to pen won the engagement, because other unit will back out and there is no real way to tell what unit is efficient or effective, because engagements never conclude and by extension, all CQC units are always fine, because opponent will just retreat with no loses.

TTK is, was and always will be a valid indicator.
PAGES (49)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag shadics ARG.
  • U.S. Forces flag TüMe
  • Ostheer flag The101stAirBorne
  • Ostheer flag Clororaa
uploaded by TüMe

Board Info

257 users are online: 1 member and 256 guests
jamesjamozo
17 posts in the last 24h
107 posts in the last week
491 posts in the last month
Registered members: 36501
Welcome our newest member, meliodas7
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM