It’s been sitting in the game files for past 5 years still not fully driveable. But it looks pretty finished to me. Minus the animations of the crew ofc.
2020:
10 Likes
Ah yeah let’s add more infantry atomizers so no one will play infantry
Realistically, addition of those heavy artys prerequisite bigger maps and bigger objectives
4 Likes
They have armament on par with KV-2.
Do you need bigger maps because of KV-2?
Armament calibre does not signify the same role.
The KV-2 was intended for direct fire at targets it could see - so at generally shorter ranges. It was armoured quite heavily as defence against expected return fire.
Sturmpanzer II is intended as mobile artillery with the main intention to be used as artillery in indirect fire role, so at generaly longer ranges, and lightly armoured (and open topped) because it wasn’t intended to be shot at much.
You are someone that hates when game gives you plenty of tools to defeat tanks. if only you would leave your ass from the objective and get free silver by destroy enemy tanks. I don’t see you complaining about KV-2 or Chi-Ha short or Sherman 105mm, as always Germany is only last country without equivalent of those tanks.
1 Like
Yeah. Germany really does suffer from having terrible tanks. Germany suffers. /s
Missing the point as always with your stupid memes.
You must be confusing me with someone else. I don’t meme nearly as often as everyone should.
It is open top, no mg, slow ass reload and thin armour. Literally anyone with decent aim can deal with it
2 Likes
as somone who mainly play infantry,
and unsure about ever using the sturmpanzer, i don’t see why not.
KV2 and sherman 105 ( albe it, not on par ) are already a thing.
germany doesn’t have one.
so either be this one, or the STUH 42.
beside, what’s the point of porting assets if you are not going to use them?
3 Likes
These heavy caliber tanks are completely useless, but why not? I’m sure some people like them.
Didn’t stop Germans to use these vehicles on very close range.
For example the only video we have of Bison I in action. Shows how it’s used to attack building with enemies from 10-20 metres.
No that is what the Hummel is for.
The Sturmpanzer 2 (litterly named “assault tank 2”) was just a Sig 33 infantry support gun on wheels. So the role would most likely remain as a direct fire support weapon.
The Bison was litterly just a carrier chassis with a ramp to roll the standard issue Sig 33 infantry support gun on top of it. Meaning you aways had the option to roll if of and contiune with it on foot just by removing the lock holding it inplace.
the chi-ha short gun and kv-2 already exist you know
1 Like
There is absolutely nothin wrong with adding artillery vehicles. At the end of the day they’re just a neat historical vehicle
It doesn’t matter whether you’re playing what’s supposed to be a light or heavy tank or tank destroyer or self propelled artillery, when your job is to just lob at infantry. Don’t matter if you’re a Panzer II or a Tiger or a KV 2 or a Stug
They’re neat for history and variety
1 Like
Of course not - and you can use rifles and pistols for indirect fire too if you want, and the Soviets could use ISU-152 for indirect fire (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-49d0Mf0VFc at 3.20) - ballistics is just ballistics.
And that is why I said “INTENDED USE” - but hey knew they were vulnerable and so would only use them at short range when desperate or very sure they were not under threat.
Which is why the Brumbar and Sturmtiger were made for direct fire engagements with heavy armour.
The bison would be pretty fun…
It might be squishy but…150mm with 11.1 second reload 
its an open top too, you would instantly die if a plane even decides to look at you
honestly I expect to get deleted if a plane is looking at me regardless of what im in lol…