Yes, obviously it's best used in games where you DO NOT tech to T3. What's wrong with that? Nothing. For example, you should never tech T3 if I want to call in T34-85s either. It's just suboptimal play.
If you want to build T3, obvoiusly don't bother with the Stug E.
Teching costs ALWAYS factor into a unit's value.
yeah except those t34/85s obviously aren't stopgap units. they actually offer something worthwhile that the other t3 units don't (reliable ap, obviously). what does the stug e offer? a cheap, long ranged and armored anti infantry vehicle supposedly. except this thing doesn't do a good job at it, for its price or when massed. it has a long reload time and it misses too much to make up for that making it very unreliable. not to mention its fragile and clumsy.
the t34/85 on the other hand does a great job as a general purpose tank. whenever i get that thing i never wonder "hmm... would it have been a better idea to get a t34/76?" |
thats a completely subjective statement.
im not denying that the ostwind is better, but its more expensive. the stug does 80 damage per shot though, so the radius of its AOE that will 1 shot infantry is larger. it can miss, but if it hits it will be more effective than the ostwind. the ostwind cannot 1 shot full health infantry.
it could still be viable if you dont have enough fuel for a more expensive tank and really need some armor in a hurry. it could also be useful if youre skipping t3 to fast tech to t4. its not as clear cut as you try to make it seem.
you're basically saying that all this is is a shitty stopgap unit. appleseed made the point that the kv8 is also a call-in and it's ridiculously good for it's price. this just isn't the case for the stug e. on that twitch preview one of the developers said that the stug e isn't very good on it's own but if you have a lot of them they'll be very effective. that's just not true. i've tried this many times and they just don't cut it in large numbers. they're fragile and unreliable (slow reload with accuracy that doesn't make up for it). i wish this wasn't the case but i'd take 2 ostwinds over 4 stug e's anyday.
this is one of those situations where you should actually play the game and use the unit rather than theorycraft off stats.
i got an idea. give me a replay where this was used to good effect. doesn't even have to be one where you won or even yours, just a replay that shows thing pulling it's weight. |
your other post isnt really correct. the stug has a target size of 14 compared to the ostwind which has a size of 22. that makes it harder to hit with AT guns. the stug also has slightly better armor. ostwind does have more hp though, but it costs over twice as much and requires teching.
as for its weapon, the short barrel stug has about 1/3 of the distance scatter of the long barrel stug meaning its shots will hit much closer to infantry. on top of that, it has 2.5 AOE compared to the long barrels 1.5. the stug E also rotates 10% faster than the stug G. the stug actually has identical scatter and AOE as the ostwind, so if ostwinds snipe inf, so do short barrel stugs.
you should really know stats for the units youre comparing so you can avoid making false statements.
and the ostwind fires in multiple bursts. not all the shots hit, but it gets more chances to shoot. the small target size really doesn't do much for this guy.
"so it's only viable if you don't tech or construct any buildings all game.." isn't correct? did i miss something here? |
i say it suck because it have about same cost of T70 and not having nearly close to T70's effectiveness?
don't give "it don't need build a building and teching so this unit should suck reason"
KV8 is a unit don't need any buildings only cost 360MP 135FU and its german counter part brummbar which cost 680MP 140FU and require T4, follow that logic why the new Stug 3 should suck, brummbar should have better effectiveness than KV8 because it is more expansive and require teching and building. in the actually play, KV8 have way better performance than Brummbar, it instant wipe infantry like eating a snack, higher armor, higher HP, and less pop. yes Brummbar have more AT like 75 penetration vs KV8's 50 penetration....great for the price, tehcing and building requirement....
yeah the "it don't need build a building and teching so this unit should suck reason" seems to be the only thing this has going for it. |
Because the ostwind requires T3 and a building, which is expensive. It also costs 2x as much and doesn't build instantly.
The Stug 3E is fine, great even. I can see them being very useful in 1on1. Weak/cheap vehicles will always suck in team games though.
did you not read my other post
you know, the one where i responded directly to you |
Because you don't need to tech up to tier 3, which saves a lot of money.
And yeah, if you consider a infantry heavy strategy, where you go for Tier 2 with couple of PGs and your opponent tries to counter that with sniper + infantry of himself, these StuGs gonna hit your opponent really hard as he is only investing in anti-infantry.
And even if you get a P4 before you reach 3 cps, the StuG is still an awesome support unit, with quite a lot of potential to soak up dmg and snipe infantry.
except it doesn't snipe infantry... sometimes it'll get a clump but that doesn't happen very often. it has the same anti-inf capabilities as the stug g.
oh and this thing does not soak up damage. it only takes two hits from a 76mm to destroy it. even guards take out chunks of health with each shot.
everything 3 of these can do 1 ostwind can do better.
|
Ugh, it's a great unit for its cost. You do realize that you spend zero on teching and building infrastructure for this unit. And it's cheap as nuts.
It's adequate vs infantry and good vs light vehicles. It can even kill an engine damaged T70 far more reliably than a Pak40.
so it's only viable if you don't tech or construct any buildings all game.. |
It's really strong atm, no idea what you are expecting from such a cheap unit in first place, but it comes relatively early in the game and offers pretty good anti-infantry capabilites. On top of that it is able to soak up some damage (especially from infantry anti-tank weapons). You obviously don't build it when your opponent goes for a more vehicle-orianted strategy.
To use it to max effectiveness you go for a infantry-heavy strategy and get that StuG when your opponent is still investing in anti-infantry units.
so why would you ever get this over an ostwind?
and did you say early? by the time i get to my second or 3rd tank this thing becomes available. |
oh and it's vet 1 ability doesn't work on tanks. it just bounces off and wastes 30 munitions.
i think the unit should be retweaked to do some suppression to infantry (when there's enough of them shooting) and have like a 20% chance to stun enemy tank crews |
yeah i just don't get this thing... if you need an anti-infantry tank the ostwind does such a better job. maybe if it had more health/armor??
god i really like this thing and i'm trying a buncha unit combos to make this work but every time i make one (or 3) i sit here wishing i had an ostwind instead. it has the same anti-infantry effectiveness as a stug g.
*maybe let the gun do some suppression? |