What do you think? The StuG IV is the "anti-hard" version of the StuH42, but has range 2. It's quite effective in the "Narva" scenario so far.
This is not the first time the "artillery" mode gets discussed. First we didn't like that the StuH42 only had 2 range, then we accepted and loved it with range 1.
It is a really effective anti-infantry unit and a great support. A real "Sturmhaubitze", it lives up to the name.
The StuG IV is basically a StuG III - same role, just Panzer IV basis. They have a history, you can read it up on Wikipedia.
Now is this really a 2 range artillery? Does it perform in its historical role? How does it fit in in terms of game balance / mechanics?
Many Russian SU-guns have artillery modes as well. What do you think?
Then there are also the Jagpanzer IV/48 and the later IV/70. They are quite shitty with their low armor, especially the IV/48 who doesn't pack a punch.
These units are relatively new; I don't play multiplayer and in the campaign and scenarios they barely if ever show up. So some input by users who used them and how is appreciated.
TL;DR version: What do you think of the Sturmgeschütz IV in Panzer Corps and its 2 range "hard" target artillery mode?
StuG IV is extremely good in MP. I was using it even before it was buffed, now I consider it a must have along with the StuG IIIG. In fact, I think it is too good for MP, as its direct fire stats are only marginally worse than the StuG IIIG, but it more than makes up for that fact with an artillery mode, and the two are almost identical in cost.
I am fielding 3 of them currently in my pre-build core which basically shows that I consider them to be very usefull. And this is mainly due to the range.
I was never a big fan of the range 1 StuG/StuH. If the StuG IV had a range of 1 I doubt that I would use more than 1 of them for special occasions and would mainly stick to the Hummel/Wurfrahmen combo.
And concerning their usage I use them mainly to suppress the enemy heavies and either destroy those outright with my own heavies after a Ju 87G attack without any losses tor force them to surrender if short on time.
Ammo supply is also slightly lower, 6 vs... what was it for the StuG III again.
My main beef with it is more that it shoots 2 hexes while the StuG III doesn't even have an artillery mode. I would settle for range 1 and slightly worse ammo and hard attack in AT-mode. I mean the StuH42 and earlier StuGIIIB have shown that 1 range artillery of this type is useful and powerful.
Also, historically indirect rather long range artillery type fire by a tank destroyer like the StuG IV just doesn't compute with me.
(The Soviet SU's are also something to think about. Not that urgent but to consider for the future. I obviously don't play as Soviet player in the campaign, so I leave that to multiplayer players to argue about that.)
Technically the StuGs are not tank destroyers, they are all by defintion and name infantry support artillery. They just had such good guns and low profile that they were often used as AT and later equiped with special longer guns for that purpose, but they always kept a large supply of HE ammunition for close support.
Heck the Americans did it the other way around. Their dedicated tank destroyer units were often used for close support like StuGs because they had great HE ammunition, which had the advantage of having the same blast radius as a howitzer but not creating a crater, leaving the roads mostly unharmed.
Also tanks themselves are pretty much StuGs when firing HEs, they just usually don't have the optimal caliber for that job, even though the original Panzer IV short 4cm later 7.5 was made exactly for this job. Only later it got the proper anti tank gun.
So looking at their primary use later in the war doesn't change their initial role, which was short range artillery, not tank destroyer.
All original design classifications and intended roles aside I agree with Longasc, there's no sense in giving the lone stug IV range of 2. Personally I'd prefer to see the 105 model get range of 2 if any. it seems it was thrown in there just to compete with the plethora of soviet SPG's in the game that can convert to artillery and fire 3 hexes, like the ISU 122. Theres a pretty strong case against this vehicle raining down indirect artillery fire on infantry that are miles away just as with the Stug IV. Actually the soviets didn't really design any proper self propelled artillery pieces designed to fire indirectly at long ranges but in Panzer Corps they have the strongest SPG/ arty force out of anyone. The ranges of the the sturmpanzer (or sig) and the stug IV have been discussed many times in the forums but the developers seem happy with their equipment file even if it does border on fantasy sometimes and don't make any changes.
We are all expected to mod the equipment file ourselves till were happy, which is fine but doesn't excuse a poor standard file which never gets worked on.
This issue doesn't seem to have priority at the moment but I hope it gets some love.
It's not only StuG vs StuH - as soldier just pointed out, it's more about so many tank destroyers, particularly the Soviet SU models, being artillery as well. Some models run under Anti-Tank, others under Artillery. It's a bit a mess, both from a historical point of view and from game balance as well.
I rarely if ever play multiplayer , but almost every SU being basically artillery as well - isn't that a big problem?
Whatever - range 2 for the StuG IV really strikes me as sooo wrong.
Hello, I did not participate in earlier discussions about range and/or switchability modes. But recently I have begun some modding/testing of convertible AA units, and tried to help deducter in adjusting the SU series, as he was not satisfied with how they were represented in the game. And now there seems to be a renewed interest in the performance of switchable units, maybe because the improved AI can actually use switching? Since I have recently been trying to collect 'real-life' data about units which are switchable in the game, I'll try to add something to the discussion, since the issue seems to get more complicated everytime I look at it. Since I'm going to mod them I have been thinking about the artillery modes, so I would like to share some info/thoughts about them.
For now, I'll post some info aboute the Sturmgeschütze, I'll mention some tactical doctrines, but as they changed during the war, they are not really that important. Although StuG's started as pure assault guns, the later versions were more and more focused on anti-tank work.
First some definitions which I will be using:
Bascically, for the purposes of gameplay, there are two versions of 75mm Sturmgeschütz, the StuG 'Short' and the StuG 'Long' barreled. 'Short' used the same gun as the early Panzer IV, the Long the same as the Panzer IV F2-G and later. The 'Long' started from the StuG III Ausf. F, so versions A to E were the 'Short' versions. The StuG IV was always a long version. The designation of the guns were different, so instead of KwK (KampfwagenKanone: tank gun) they were called StuK (SturmKanone: assault gun). Doesn't matter for gameplay, same ammo and performance, only the mountings were different, but it might cause confusion otherwise.
Then there was the StuH, with the 105mm howitzer. Same basic vehicle as the StuG III, but with a version of the 10,5 cm leFH 18 mounted.
Okay. The StuG Short had a maximum range of indirect fire (ARTY mode) of 6000 metres. Simple, as that was the design demand and the range to where to sights were calibrated. It had no doctrinal anti-tank role unless in self-defence or when nothing else was available. It was to be used as an attached unit to deal with enemy strongpoints, preferably attached to infantry units, secondarily tanks. Tertiary use was as divisional artillery (indirect firing) but this was advised against as it was a waste of their abilities.
Direct fire range (against enemy bunkers or tanks) was max. 1500 metres, design specs called for 500m direct firing range and at this range all existing tanks should be penetrated (which ment 40mm armour penetretation at the time). So these 1500m/6000m ranges were the maximum ranges allowed by the sighting equipment. The gunner had to physically switch the sight unit to be able to change between direct and indirect fire. So this is actually pretty consistent with the switching modes in the game! Note that a lot of people think this was just a Panzer III chassis with the gun of the Panzer IV (D) mounted, but the frontal armor was far heavier than those tanks (early Panzer III=30mm, similar StuG III=50mm), it was specifically designed to attack well-defended hard targets. They were very succesful during the Battle for France, especially when supporting infantry.
All the doctrine went out of the window during Barbarossa, and they started to operate more and more as offensive mobile anti-tank units, out of pure necessity.
Next thing, the StuG 'Long' versions were introduced in February 1942. And now for a funny bit of history, the 'Short' versions were designed according to a 1936 specification, and most people assume the upgunning followed the Panzer IV, as a reaction towards the Soviet tanks encountered during Barbarossa. But, the first talks about equipping StuG's with a 'Long' 75mm were started in August 1938! Development was slow, but the first tests of the proposed gun were in May 1940, and in December 1941 the first production orders were written. So the development of this vehicle was not a reaction at meeting T-34's. And this means its doctrinal role remained unchanged for the time. Because of problems with ammunition design and the emphasis on production of tanks, the Long versions weren't in production until April 1942, and still the problems weren't completely ironed out by then.
And now I have to confess something: I have re-read three books on StuG's (two by Osprey and one by Spielberger), and searched the internet, but there is no definite answer as to how far the 'Long' version could fire indirectly. But I managed to correlate some data: the maximum barrel elevation for all StuG's was 20degrees, far below the optimum to achieve the theoretical maximum range of the gun. A comparable German gun using the same projectiles reached a little over 7500m with that elevation. Since the sights and elevation remained unchanged I assume that the maximum indirect firing range (ARTY mode) was max. 7500m.
Even before the Long versions became available all StuG's were used more and more as mobile anti-tank guns, and doctrine changed to reflect the changing practices. So although their official primary purpose still remained the same they were now 'allowed' to combat enemy light and medium armored units. This was a case of a unit assuming a role and doctrine slowly acknowledging by changing the theory to match the practice. Indirect fire was still possible, but was used even less.
But the StuG shifted so far away from the true 'assault gun' role that a new vehicle was introduced to cover the gap: the SturmHaubitze (Assault Howitzer) or StuH. Again the emphasis was on close infantry support, and since the major topic here is range, let's skip to that, because,
Another confession: the oft-quoted range for the StuH is identical to the 10,5 cm leFh 18. I don't think that's correct, because a howitzer needs a fair amount of elevation to reach maximum range, and the StuH's elevation was very limited (20 degrees). This is complicated by the fact that the howitzer used separate propellent charges to vary the range, 6 or 7 different ones. The oft-quoted ranges are 10600m for the nr. 6 charge and 12325m for the largest charge, and these are correct for the towed artillery piece. For the StuH, I believe max. range to be somewhere between 7800-8300m, as these were the ranges reported by US trials of captured vehicles, so lets say 8000m as a nice round figure.
Everybody still awake? Good, now for the StuG IV: this is an emergency production vehicle. Although there were proposals of turning Panzer IV's into StuG's, this was considered unnecessary. That is, until a couple of things happened: First of all, in mid-1943 it was expected that production of Panzer IV would be phased out, as the new Panther was its replacement. Secondly, a certain mr. Hitler had the opinion that due to glowing reports about long-barreled StuG's, the final production series of soon-to-be-obsolete Panzer IV were to be equipped as StuG's until Panther production was in full swing (never happened, but a defensible proposition at the time), and, the major production facility of StuG III's (Alkett in Berlin) got bombed for the first time, and production of StuG III's there dropped from 255 to 23 a month, and took a while to recover.
So the StuG IV was ordered into production as a substitute for the StuG III. The superstructure was identical, and the gun performance as well. As it was based on the Panzer IV it had a bigger engine and more room to store ammo, but gun range and sighting equipment was identical.
So, here we have the following max. range stats as a guidance for ARTY modes:
StuG III Short: 6000m
StuG III Long/StuG IV : est. 7500m
StuH : est. 8000m
Now, for balancing reasons some figures can be deviated from, and indirect-firing StuG's (ARTY) would only use high-explosive (HE) ammunition, not armour-piercing (AP) ammunition, so ARTY attack values would be substantially different from direct-firing with AP ammo. Also note that StuG's were lousy artillery, with low sustained rate of fire, and firing at maximum ranges would not be as effective as a barrage from a similar towed battery. I have not seriously looked into that kind of SA/HA figures, as I'm still busy adjusting switchable AA units, but this is all I could find about these units so far.
My opinion, for now: range 2 is too high for the StuG IV, in fact it would be more fitting to have StuH with range 2 and StuG's with range 1, and I still have doubts, maybe the StuH should remain range 1 as well, but I only advocate range 2 for now to emphasize the difference in roles.
If anyone has any additional info/sources about the StuG/StuH, I would welcome those, any remarks/criticism/questions are welcomed as well. I have already added some info about the SU-series to deducters thread, so I won't repeat that here.
And as a final remark, yes, I think some AT (tank destroyer) units have weird statistics, trying to correct those will result in a lot of basically similar units with big overlapping capabilities, so any modding will need to be done carefully if you want to preserve some flavour.
My opinion, for now: range 2 is too high for the StuG IV, in fact it would be more fitting to have StuH with range 2 and StuG's with range 1, and I still have doubts, maybe the StuH should remain range 1 as well, but I only advocate range 2 for now to emphasize the difference in roles.
I agree with this assessment too. Although it may have, theres no real evidence to suggest the StuH would have had any longer range or higher gun elevation than the IV but its clearly a large calibre short barreled artillery piece with an emphasis on suppressing (or destroying) enemy strongholds and is more suited in role at least to having some ranged capability. I think the ass end of the IV gun would be digging into the floor of the vehicle before it achieved any sort of elevation and this goes for the ISU 122 as well (which gets a range of three ) ... come on guys, these are tank killers not artillery pieces
soldier wrote:Although it may have, theres no real evidence to suggest the StuH would have had any longer range or higher gun elevation than the IV but its clearly a large calibre short barreled artillery piece with an emphasis on suppressing (or destroying) enemy strongholds and is more suited in role at least to having some ranged capability. I think the ass end of the IV gun would be digging into the floor of the vehicle before it achieved any sort of elevation and this goes for the ISU 122 as well (which gets a range of three ) ... come on guys, these are tank killers not artillery pieces
Yep, the StuH was a direct replacement for the close support role where the early 'Short' StuG series was designed for, which had started to be used more and more as mobile anti-tank guns, especially when the 'Long' version were introduced. So the StuG III 'Long' and the StuG IV were primarily used as mobile anti-tank guns (they were not real tankdestroyers or 'hunters', though). Oh, and you're right about the elevation limits, all StuG and StuH apparently had 20 degrees of max elevation, depression and traverse was less for the Long barreled StuG and the StuH, because of the longer breech of the gun. See some photos of the interior:
I think the recoiling breech would put a nice dent in the floor if the gun had the same elevation as an artillery piece. This low height was because the original design demanded that the vehicle was to be no higher than a standing man. Together with the limited range requirements (6000m is low), it was clearly primarily designed as a direct-fire weapon.
I'm not well informed about ballistics, but you could drive them onto an incline to gain extra elevation to extend the range, but that is beyond the scope of gameplay of course. And yes, the ISU-122 with range three is a real joke. The whole StuG family is a bit confusing, but I'm guessing the StuG IV was made this way as a ranged weapon with worse direct damage stats than the StuG III because otherwise there would be a whole range of nearly identical units. Maybe that is why those Panzerjagers IV have such low defenses, otherwise they would be too similar to the StuG's, now they occupy a niche (performance and price-wise) between the Marder/Hetzer and the StuG's.
I think most of these original game values were achieved due to balancing reasons, otherwise the Soviets would have virtually no mobile artillery, making defensive scenarios against attacking Soviets much easier, and frustrate multiplayer too much maybe?
I guess that is also the same reason the T-90 SPAAG is included, so that the Soviets would have a 'hard' mobile AA unit. My regular multiplayer opponent who mostly plays as zee Germans now thinks half the Soviets' AAA consisted of these things , since I refuse to buy fighters that die faster than they fly, and the towed units are only good as static defense. So I don't mind a bit of creative balancing, as long as it is consistent, and I think that is the reason why so many people complain about the switchable assault guns, because the balancing of capabilities between various armies have produced some strange and inconsistent results, which annoys people.
I always knew something were funny.
As far as I remembered the 7.5cm always had the same range as the 10.5cm in games.
The 15cm and 17cm should have range 4.
I can understand not having range 4 for the big artillery for game balance but 7.5cm should be range 3.
Range 1 seems correct for the STUH and STUG.
It would be interesting to play a few game with the Soviet SU's range 2. Your tactics would have to be different and you would need allot of 122mm and 152mm howitzers. Since the AI still does not use it's artillery properly. I can understand them having switchable mobile art range 3.
) ... come on guys, these are tank killers not artillery pieces 
, since I refuse to buy fighters that die faster than they fly, and the towed units are only good as static defense. So I don't mind a bit of creative balancing, as long as it is consistent, and I think that is the reason why so many people complain about the switchable assault guns, because the balancing of capabilities between various armies have produced some strange and inconsistent results, which annoys people.