StugIIIs and Stu42s

[HarryInk]

This knowledge I have of assault guns in general, gained from a quick search of the Dbase here: Keep 'em well back and hidden until your infantry has (a) reconed the target and surroundings and ( come up against something it can't crack for itself. Then roar in with the assault gun (preferably 2 or 3 AGs) to overwhelm the target. Once committed, keep em in cover, well supported by inf, and on the move (ie. keep the initiative and don't let your enemy regain balance 'til you've got what you want and are ready for counterattacks).

That much is theory. Anyone out there got practical CM advice about these bits of hardware that I've neglected until now?

[flamingknives]

What you've covered there holds true for all AFVs, not just assault guns.

With assault guns, I find that it's better to treat them as mobile AT guns, and keep them well back.

If you throw them forward into the fray, you'll quickly find out why turreted tanks are more expensive, as they'll get horribly out flanked, and they don't carry much MG ammo.

[gredeker]

Just substitute your "roar in" with "move into LOS" and you've got it. Keep in mind that there's no need to close with the enemy when firing HE at enemy infantry. Keep your armor pounding away on enemy infantry from 500m out, and the infantry's only choice is die or run away. Whenever possible, keep your armor at least 150m away from infantry hiding places so you don't lose tanks to infantry AT weapons.

[Silvio Manuel]

One note about movement orders: StuG/StuH, like all turretless AGs- if you give them a "rotate" order, they will wait for their command delay to expire before rotating, if enemy targets (like tanks) show up *outside of their current firing arc*- the result could be that your StuG dies while waiting to rotate, rather than reacting by turning and returning fire if you had not give the rotate order.

If you're buying your own units, note the following slight variations:

StuG IIIG - 73mm front armor, 54 total rounds (h, a, s) for the main gun, has a smoke discharger for when it sees superior tanks like Fireflies, Pershings, etc. Also has awful 14.6 PSI ground pressure rating, so they bog down a lot. has 1 ("forward") MG

StuG IIIG late- 80mm front armor, 54 total rounds (h, a, s) for the main gun, and trades the smoke discharger for the Naverteidigungswaffe, which is a Close Defense Weapon 90mm mortar used vs. threatening infantry. Also has a Remote Control MG in addition to the 1st MG, but only 24 ammo total for both

StuG IV- 80mm front armor, much better ground pressure, and higher ammo loadout (63 total rounds). Rear armor is just thin enough to be susceptible to close range .50cal fire, same as anything w/ the Panzer IV hull (Wirblewind, Ostwind, etc.) Only 1 MG (remote controlled)

StuH 42 - 73mm front armor, has smoke discharger

StuH 42 late- 80mm front armor, has N.G.W. close defense weapon instead of smoke discharger, and has remote MG only (just like StuG IIIG late instead of StuG IIIG/early

S.M.

[ May 18, 2002, 02:41 AM: Message edited by: Silvio Manuel ]

[HarryInk]

Ah, cheers for both the all the replies, particularly Silvio's ace stats.

Yes the 'roar in' was a little figurative. Though, if one can afford to buy and jockey SMG PzGren's then closing to 250m would be reasonable (I'm still assuming that would keep the AG behind my infantry line).

Other discussions have rejected the Stu/g as AT weapons in favour of the Hertzers, which seem sensible given the H's superior frontal armor.

[BaD JoKe]

I usally deploy Stugs, if possible, into a hulldown ambush position. Then I just wait that those pesky Shermans wade into LOF. Reverse and using cover, into next ambush position.

This is sometimes possible even in attack missions. Sharp thrust with artillery supported infantry into enemy controlled territory and when tanks counterattack: *smack* This requires wooded terrain and atleast, modest elevations.

I agree that they should not spearhead any attacks, they just arent fast enough to rotate. They should be used as they were ment for: defensive weapons for ambushing.

[Cogust]

Well if you want an AT-weapon, then buy a Jagdpanzer (including Hetzers) or a Panzerjäger (Marders). The Jagdpanzers have good frontal armour and often a better gun than the 55/L4X gun on the StuGs, Marders and Hetzer. Marders have a very high ROF and a low silhouette which makes them very effective against tanks. StuGs has the same gun as the Marders, lower ROF, higher slihouette (but not that high) and they both can be killed by a vanilla Sherman.

The StuG is your choice when you're looking for an all-around support weapon for your infantry, it is armoured, has good AT-capability, good AP-capability and a decent ammo loadout. The Jagds and Jägers often has less ammo and will only be able to support your infantry for a short while when the StuG usually have enough for the entire scenario.

[Switch_Back]

STUGs have proved very useful with me, especially when advancing down a hill, first I send out the infantry in an inverse wedge advancing forwards, and set up an artillery barrage to arrive in possible localized enemy positions, whilst keeping the STUGs back, then as soon as the infantry has, made contact with enemy forces and the situation seems acceptable, the STUGs are then rolled over the hill and put in such a position to provide accurate and fairly unrestricted DF support.

If I have some PZIV tanks available I will let them drive slightly behind the infantry so that they have plenty of close AT support as well as the DF from the hill.

Im a newbie to this forum so dont be too harsh lol

[Redwolf]

I think the StuGs in CMBO fundamentally suck, with the possible exception of the StuG IV.

The III and StuH has very slow going in bad ground, including a slow turn rate. That doesn't only make them vulnerable to flank attack, it also has a great negative effect on fighting anything that traverses horizontally in front of their noses. In addition, the TacAI emphasizes on the not-attackign -infantry problems mentioned in the other thread running right now.

I have an analysis with tests at http://thforums.com/CMBO/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=54

The StuG IV is much better. Still, the Hetzer is vastly superiour, and not only because of its armor, but because of its swiftness.

The StuH is usually needed in all-open laddergames to get rid of all the infantry that can overrun tanks due to MG ineffectivity in CMBO, but that isn't really my play style.

[ May 20, 2002, 10:35 AM: Message edited by: redwolf ]

[Silvio Manuel]

I agree that StuGs are best used in defense, and at range. Being turretless & having little MG ammo means that they are susceptible to infantry & their AT weapons if you bring them in too close.

StuGs excel in Short-75 games, where Sherman (Green ones at least) will actually sh%t and run from the StuG cannon, and the StuG (at range) hopefully won't have to turn to engage the Zippos. At range (maybe 500m+) the StuG will really outshine Shermans/Cromwells. If they get close, their fast turrets will turn the tables. In CM:BO, muzzle velocity=accuracy, so the StuG @ 770m/s is better than the Sherman's 619m/s- by 25% methinks.

The StuG IIIG (early/late) don't actually have much HE ammo, maybe 22-27 on avg. Figure 7 rounds/turn for a full turn of firing by a Regular crew, and that's only ~4 turns of pop and then you r left w/ AP rounds (your MG ammo is prolly gone by then) which are only good vs. buildings really.

After that, you can only deceive your opponent using their "threatening presence" if he hasn't already figured out that their outta ammo; otherwise you retreat and make sure you don't get them killed. Heh, I lost a out of ammo StuG once on a 196m bazooka frontal shot while trying to reverse away from any zooks.

StuG IV is defintely better w/ ammo load for main gun. StuG IV's were less common; historically there were ~1500 StuG IIIG, ~7800 StuG IIIG (late), and ~1500 StuG IV (those figures from memory, so go e-z on me). 1500 is a lot though, there were only ~900 Cromwells (all types) by comparison (if my info is correct).

Marder actually has better gun (792m/s) than both Panzer IV (750m/s) and StuGs (770m/s). I like to get my opponent to shoot his .50cals at my infantry, then use that sound on my own to "ID" the .50cal, even if the game says "machine gun?"- then I can use terrain or HE to protect vulnerable halftracks, self-propelled guns, etc. The .50cals love to chomp on the crunchy Marder (excuse for) armor.

The one time I bought three Reg. Marder III's, the bastard gunners only hit a combined 1 out of 13 shots vs. 2 buttoned-up Shermans. You've got to love the "luck" factor in this game.

[ May 20, 2002, 03:07 PM: Message edited by: Silvio Manuel ]

[Switch_Back]

STUGs are very useful if you can use them skilfully, I swear by STUGs and use them quite often, you are all gonna do some flaming over this, but all I gotta say is they work for me.

If they are used in a village assault, the STUG can be advanced down the road whilst being flanked by infantry ( preferrably engineers ) and supported from behind by mortars and basic infantry, they can provide fire support down the road and at buildings where the enemy might be hiding. Usually use two STUGs in tandem rolling down the road in this case.

Please dont be nasty im new lol

[flamingknives]

I like using Stugs on defence, where you can use them as mobile AT guns - they're a darn sight better at surviving Arty. Keep them behind a ridge and pop them up in a defilade position every so often. Nice.

The Jagdpanzers are OK, but tend to be a bit more pricey, and the Hetzers carry almost no ammo and don't shoot very fast.

In addition, a Jagdpanzer carries much more AP than HE, whereas the Stugs a re more dual-purpose.

[Switch_Back]

STUGs are very good defenders, especially when squeezed between two buildings or in a grouping of trees, they are the best in trees because they have such a low sillouette it can be difficult for attackers to spot them, thus making sure that the STUG gets off the first shot, one well placed Veteran STUG can be very menacing to any attacker that you face. :cool:

[Redwolf]

Defen... what?

[Silvio Manuel]

Originally posted by Switch_Back:

STUGs are very useful if you can use them skilfully, I swear by STUGs and use them quite often, you are all gonna do some flaming over this, but all I gotta say is they work for me.

If they are used in a village assault, the STUG can be advanced down the road whilst being flanked by infantry ( preferrably engineers ) and supported from behind by mortars and basic infantry, they can provide fire support down the road and at buildings where the enemy might be hiding. Usually use two STUGs in tandem rolling down the road in this case.

Please dont be nasty im new lol

First off, welcome to the forum Herr Major Switch_Back, this is the best darned game ever, and you are participating in a great, helpful community.

One note about supporting StuGs (or any AFV) w/ Engineers- I assume you mean to clear AT mines away. Note that only Daisy-Chain AT mines (the kind out in the open on the surface) can be spotted BEFORE a vehicle detonates one (knocking out, or at least immobilizing it). Regular "AT Mines" CANNOT be spotted in advance, no matter what the quality of the spotting unit/s, nor how long they are standing ON the same map tile that has the AT mines.

[Switch_Back]

Your right about the engineers, but I also use them because of their high level of firepower, I like to have the STUGs supported by a high level of infantry firepower, to match that of their destructive capabilities. The way I see it there is little point using wimpy units to protect and support vehicles with high firepower and low defensability because this just does not work, unless things are desperate.

Oh and thanks for the welcome, much appreciated!

[Silvio Manuel]

For their inflated value relative to normal infantry, Engineers are only really good for clearing mines, or for close-combat, 40m and in (maybe 20m) where they will use their Demo Charges vs. enemy targets. The demo charges are quite good at damaging buildings, esp. small ones.

Aside from the demo charges (and short-range Rifle Grenades), Engineers are never stronger in firepower than normal infantry (except for the 11 man squad Panzergrenadier Pioneer (armored w/ halftracks), in fact they are often weaker. Example: German 9-man Heer squad has 161 FP @ 40m, while 9-man Pioneer squad has 131 FP @ 40m...due to trading an SMG for a Kar98 Rifle.

On the other hand, Engineers are great fun...I've had enemy demo charges turn my Brit squad from OK to ROUTED! without even causing a casualty. Its just that you have to get VERY close to use either the demos or the rifle grenades, maybe 40m to 20m. If you are good and a bit lucky, you can even get some use out of the Flamethrowers before every unit in sight targets and destroys them (they have a HIGH value on the TacAI's targeting list). Happy hunting.

[ May 21, 2002, 08:37 PM: Message edited by: Silvio Manuel ]

[Switch_Back]

Then I have had a mis-lead belief about the engineers, thanks for pointing that out, maybe my STUG advances in a village situation will be more effective, I had not thought to check the firepower, I merely assumed that they would be more powerful.

[xerxes]

It's a reasonable assumption, I'd thought the same too. Engineers are too expensive to purchase and if you have them in a scenario you want to save them for mine clearing (and supporting that critical attack/counterattack).

[Switch_Back]

That is true, I am playing a PBEM game at the moment and I am keeping the engineers back whilst the flanks crumble, and then forcing forwards with engineers and firefly tanks, supported by 81mm mortar units.

Engineers perhaps shouldnt be so expensive, if they arnt greatly effective??

[Silvio Manuel]

With Engineer squads, you pay for the Mine Clearing Ability/Demo charges really, I don't know if they are more likely than Rifle troops to have more Rifle Grenades.

Buying Engineer Platoons is expensive b/c you have both the squads w/ DC's and the Flamethrowers...and you practically need transport for the Flamethrowers if you don't want them to get spotted and killed, since they're slow and can't sneak ever. If you're the Brits, the Wasp (uses Univ. Carrier hull) is a sweet alternative. The Canadian armored Badger FT vehicle is also great fun...it uses a Stuart hull.

[flamingknives]

The PzGr Pioneers are good. I ended up with an especially good pioneer squad in a recent operation.

The cheeky scallys had swiped an extra LMG from somewhere. 150 firepower at close range from just three men - not bad

[Agua]

Originally posted by Silvio Manuel:

you practically need transport for the Flamethrowers if you don't want them to get spotted and killed, since they're slow and can't sneak ever.

Yup. If I'm using them on offense, they get a fast ride in an HT all the way to the rear of the pillbox.

[Silvio Manuel]

Originally posted by Agua:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Silvio Manuel:

you practically need transport for the Flamethrowers if you don't want them to get spotted and killed, since they're slow and can't sneak ever.

Yup. If I'm using them on offense, they get a fast ride in an HT all the way to the rear of the pillbox.</font>

[Lt. Rags]

I haven't used the Stug's much. I hate not having a turret! But from my limited experience, the Hetzers seem to have a higher survival rate when under fire. Especially in hull down positions. I think it's the slope on the front armor. I seem to get a lot more shells bouncing off than with the Stug's