Profile of Hannibal

Why not just make it 60 range like other TDs? Simple and finally giving a 60 range tank destroyer to ost. If you really insist it could be temporary (sth between su85 and US at gun).

I honestly think this is a bad solution. Please correct me if I'm wrong (I don't have the exact numbers at hand right now), but the StuG always or at least very reliably penetrates Allied armor except for the very heavies, which is its intended role. Increasing the range to 60 would make it very similar to the JP4 and only be possible with increasing the fuel price accordingly.
In my eyes, the reason why we don't see much of the JP4 is that it has no real role on the battlefield. It is quite fiddly due to being a casematte, too expensive to buy for just countering mediums and has too less pen to fight against heavies. The Panther is more often a better choice because while being more expensive, it's an overall less micro intensive and allround better unit. The only thing that a JP4 can do better is countering Allied TDs, but that's it.
StuG would suffer the same fate. Right now it has a very good niche. A Casematte to counter mediums. A bit fiddly but being cheaper than the unit it counters. And it also performs well in that role. If TWP really is a big issue, than it should be buffed or exchanged for another ability. But keep in mind that the overall performance of the StuG should remain the same (assuming here that the StuG is decently prices for its performance)

Guys, look twice. Stormjäger suggested making the HT an AT unit an the Stuart an AI unit.
I just don't get what issue this should solve, since each tier basically has a similar unit setup than before. But now both suppression platforms are in the same tier?

I don't think this is a good suggestion. It solves practically nothing unless the now newly introduced combos turn out to be OP. Basically it either solves nothing, or is likely to create issues.
If Cpzt is OP, then nerf the OP unit. If Lt is UP, then buff the UP units. The role setup atm is very well done.

Tanks deal 160 damage, arty up to 640.
What kind of dmg reduction you talk about here? 99%?

That could not miss the point any more than it already does

Reported in shoutbox supposidly

I just checked. It's not in the automatch pool

sorry to pop ur bubble but the zis gun does 160dmg like every other at gun. the lack of penetration is made up for by its 6 man squad to improve its durability.

anddddddd the soviet does not have weaker units. non doc only
t1- penals can slug it out with any non doc axis infantry during mid early game
t2- zis gun barrage op
t3- t70 is the BEST light tank in the game with its raw wiping power
t4- if u think t34s are bad its a l2p issue. su85's low mobility is made up for by its self spotting ailibty+strong vet0 penetration. if u think Katyusha is trash, u obvs havent tried panzerwerfer.

please, just stop this blatant ally fanboyism. the mods are in heavy favour of buffing allys and nerfing axis units.
more obvs in the previous patch prior to IS nerf where brits dominated 1v1 tournaments while ally fanboys still screaming BUT AXIS OP!!!!

The ZiS has the lowest rate of fire, that's why it is the worst at AT duty. It's not a bad AT gun either, but what it lacks in the AT department when compared to e.g. the PaK40, it needs to make up for in versatility, like most of the SOV units.