This is a constructive suggestion aimed at one of the most long-standing issues in Enlisted: the balance state of legacy premium squads — vehicles that were designed for pre-Merge campaigns and have been left in an awkward spot ever since. Among these, the StuG III Ausf. A (Sd.Kfz. 142) stands out because, unlike most other legacy squads that were quietly shelved, it remains permanently available in the store — yet it carries a long list of unresolved problems.
I’ve chosen this vehicle specifically because its historical documentation is unusually complete, which makes it the perfect test case for how the developers could approach legacy squad rebalancing in a measured, evidence-based way. If this approach works here, the same framework could be applied to legacy squads across every faction — German, Soviet, American, and Japanese alike. That’s the real goal of this post: to establish a fair, sustainable method for fixing legacy content, not to beg for a one-sided buff.
With that in mind, please read the following with an open mind — this isn’t about making one vehicle overpowered, it’s about giving a permanently-available premium vehicle the functional loadout its own history and its current Battle Rating actually justify.
————————
1. Current Problems
The StuG III Ausf. A currently suffers from a combination of issues:
- Casemate (turretless) design severely limits its combat effectiveness and situational awareness.
- Weak armor — 50 mm frontal / 30 mm side and rear, which is a historical fact, but leaves it highly vulnerable at its BR.
- No machine gun — the vehicle has no secondary armament whatsoever, unlike its successors.
- Inadequate and mis-allocated ammunition — the current loadout is dominated by AP rounds, with no HE at all, which contradicts the vehicle’s very design purpose.
Some of these are historical givens — the 50 mm armor and the 44-round total stowage are both documented. But Enlisted has always balanced within the constraints of history using asymmetric adjustments, and that’s exactly what’s needed here.
2. Battle Rating — Why BR I Is Not the Answer
There have been proposals to lower the StuG III Ausf. A to BR I (see: “StuG III A to BR 1”). I understand the frustration behind that idea — people paid for a premium squad and feel short-changed by its awkward state. But lowering the BR is a blunt, irresponsible fix, and I voted against it, for a simple reason:
The 7.5 cm StuK 37 L/24 is a devastating weapon at BR I. Its 75 mm HE shell would be near-absolute against BR I infantry and light vehicles, and combined with the Gr.38 Hl/B HEAT round (87 mm penetration) it would shred virtually everything it meets. Dropping this gun into BR I would demand rebalancing everything around it, not just the vehicle itself — something neither the developers nor other players want.
The StuG III Ausf. A belongs in BR II. The solution to its problems is not to change where it sits, but to fix what it carries.
3. Ammunition Rework — The Core Proposal
Here’s the historical context that matters. Per T.L. Jentz & H.L. Doyle, Panzer Tracts No.3-2:
“While it was primarily designed to engage fortified positions using a 7.5 cm Gr.Patr high-explosive round weighing 5.7 kg (at a 420 m/s velocity), it was also fairly good for engaging enemy armor.”
And per Tank Encyclopedia: “Its purpose was to provide close fire support to infantry units.”
In other words, the 7.5 cm StuK 37 L/24 was designed as an infantry-support howitzer, firing HE at hardened positions first and armor second. Yet in-game, the StuG III Ausf. A receives no HE at all — instead, most of its stowage is packed with AP, which is the exact opposite of its historical role. Meanwhile, the vehicle doesn’t even get the proper late-war HEAT round it should have access to.
I understand the developers may have modeled the Ausf. A strictly on its 1940 French Campaign service window, when the Gr.38 Hl/B (87 mm) was the standard HEAT round. But restricting a vehicle to one brief service window, while ignoring the full wartime history of its gun, is inconsistent — especially since the same 7.5 cm StuK 37 family eventually received the final, far more capable Gr.38 Hl/C (115 mm penetration) HEAT round.
The proposed ammunition loadout:
| Ammunition | Rounds | Justification |
|---|---|---|
| Gr.38 Hl/C (HEAT) | 20 | 115 mm penetration — the historical final HEAT round for the 7.5 cm StuK 37 L/24, already in-game on the Panzer III Ausf. N |
| 7.5 cm Sprgr.34 (HE) | 20 | The weapon’s historical primary role — infantry support. Currently missing entirely |
| Nbgr. Kw. K. (Smoke) | 4 | Smoke shells exist historically, but 7 of them is excessive for a casemate infantry-support vehicle; the space is better spent on HEAT/HE |
| Total | 44 | Matches the documented historical stowage of 44 rounds |
This gives the StuG III Ausf. A the proper 115 mm HEAT round (identical to the Panzer III Ausf. N, as repeatedly requested — see “When will the StuG III Ausf. A get the 115mm HEAT round?”), restores the HE that its design purpose demands, and trims the over-generous smoke allocation back to a sensible level.
Sources
- T.L. Jentz & H.L. Doyle, Panzer Tracts No.3-2 — historical role of the 7.5 cm Gr.Patr HE round
- Tank Encyclopedia — StuG III Ausf. A —
https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/stug-iii-ausf-a(30 built; infantry-support role) - Wikipedia — 7.5 cm KwK 37 —
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.5_cm_KwK_37(full ammunition list, Gr.38 Hl/C 115 mm penetration) - Osprey, StuG III Assault Gun 1940-42 — 44 rounds main gun stowage
- Doyle/Hilary, Sturmgeschutz III and IV 1942-45 — 44 rounds + MG 34
- Forum references: “StuG III A to BR 1”, “When will the StuG III Ausf. A get the 115mm HEAT round?”
————————
Add the Loader’s Roof-Mounted machinegun (and SU-76 DT Self-Defense MG)
The roof-mounted machine gun on the StuG III, operated from the loader’s position. It’s a topic that has come up repeatedly (see the existing “StuG III G w/ MG 34” thread), and I want to lay out both the historical case and the likely reasons it hasn’t been implemented yet — so we can have an honest, constructive discussion rather than just repeating the same demand.
1. The Historical Record
The StuG III’s roof MG is not a “nice to have” — it’s a documented part of the vehicle’s evolution. Per the standard references:
“From December 1942, a square machine gun shield for the loader was installed, allowing an MG 34 to be factory installed on a StuG for the first time.”
And the secondary armament specification lists:
1 × 7.92 mm MG 34 or MG 42 (600 rounds), plus a coaxial MG 34 from 1944 onward.
The key detail here is the phrase “for the loader.” The roof-mounted MG 34 was operated by the loader, who would partially expose himself through his hatch to fire it — with the square shield (fitted to later G models) providing protection. This is precisely the crew position that currently has no functionality in Enlisted.
2. Why It’s Likely Missing — And Why That’s Understandable
I’m not here to accuse the developers of neglect. I suspect the reason the StuG III’s roof MG has never been added comes down to two genuine technical challenges:
- Crew-mechanic limitations — In Enlisted, we cannot switch to the loader’s perspective, nor can a crewman expose himself through a hatch to operate a weapon. The game simply doesn’t have a mechanism for “hatch-exposed loader with a machine gun” yet.
- Modeling cost — Adding a functioning weapon station means new crew animations, a new weapon model, and integration with the existing damage/interaction systems. It’s a non-trivial amount of work for a single vehicle class.
3. The Proposal
If and when the loader/hatch mechanics can be implemented, I propose the following:
- All StuG III variants receive a roof-mounted MG at the loader’s position, operable when the loader exposes himself through the hatch.
- StuG III Ausf. G receives its distinctive square machine gun shield for the loader, as historically fitted from December 1942 — giving the G a unique visual and gameplay feature that sets it apart from earlier variants.
- StuG III Ausf. A should at minimum receive the loose MG (600 rounds) that historical references confirm was carried by its crew, even if the shielded roof mount remains exclusive to the G.
Bonus — the same mechanism would benefit the Soviet SU-76, whose specifications list a 7.62 mm DT machine gun as secondary armament. The SU-76’s open-topped fighting compartment means its loader/commander also performed self-defense duty with the DT, and giving it this weapon would be a fair counterpart improvement on the Soviet side.
In short: a genuinely symmetric quality-of-life improvement.
Sources
- Wikipedia — Sturmgeschütz III —
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturmgeschütz_III（“square machine gun shield for the loader” + secondary armament spec） - Wikipedia — SU-76 —
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SU-76（“7.62 mm DT tank machine gun” secondary armament） - Doyle/Hilary, Sturmgeschutz III and IV 1942-45 — loose MG 34 + 600 rounds carried by early StuG III crews
- Forum reference: “StuG III G w/ MG 34” (141189), “Why doesn’t the StuG III have a MG?” (130078)
————————
- Yes
- Objection(please provide your opinion for discussion)
- NO
- Yes
- No
————————
Put a lot of work into this. Please keep it civil and constructive in the comments.
