As you all know, after the update, Germany finally got the long-barreled StuG III F at BR 2.
But this just makes the StuG III Ausf. A look even more ridiculous by comparison.
Back before the short-barreled Panzer IV got the 80 mm HEAT round, and while the golden Panzer IV E with 80 mm HEAT was still locked away, the meta sometimes forced players to pick this tank.
Now times have changed. The turreted StuG III N has moved up to BR 3.
Germany’s anti-tank firepower at BR 2 still needs buffing — especially against the two KV-series tanks, and the upcoming 90 mm frontal ISU-152.
Since the StuG III Ausf. A has no turret, it absolutely deserves to get the 115 mm HEAT round.
Should we give the turretless StuG III Ausf. A the 115mm HEAT round?
Alright, let’s be real. The 80mm and 115mm HEAT rounds perform basically the same against infantry.
And if this vehicle doesn’t get the 115mm HEAT, it’ll never keep up with the Panzer IV F1 and StuG III F.
On top of that, Germany’s BR 2 lineup really struggles against the KV tanks—it’s genuinely a tough matchup.
Plus, we owe some fairness to players who already bought the StuG III A.
Otherwise they’ll just feel like they wasted their credits entirely.
Sigh, just think back to the old days. Back when the StuG III N still didn’t have HEAT rounds, and the short-barrel 75mm Panzer IV also had no HEAT shells. What did Germany have at BR2 to deal with the KVs back then?
Here’s my point: At the very minimum, every armored vehicle in a BR bracket should at least have access to rounds that can reliably penetrate same-tier or higher-tier enemy armor as a baseline.
If it can’t even do that, its BR should just be lowered.
I’m using this exact same argument for the ISU-152 too.
The people arguing against it don’t think this through at all. If it goes to BR4, it won’t be able to pen BR5 tanks at all.
It’ll end up in the exact same spot as the KV-2, and on top of that, it doesn’t even have a turret.
I guess, if need the challenge level to be at “point, click, kill” . I’ll correct that statement for you: KV tanks are one of those rather rare cases in the game where killing enemy tanks is not completely trivial if you are uptiered. That would be fair - in general killing tanks in this game is remarkably easy.
Stug-3 A: 80mm Pen. KV-1/2 hull, 75mm. Shoot at the side hull at straight angle and you are guaranteed to pen.
What you basically want is to make all AT-vehicles and heavy tanks completely pointless and have everyone be in the best rapid fire HE-shell shooter? With that statement you need probably 3-5x the current BR categories just to account for all the gun-armor variations or go into a full HP system to have a chance to implement it.
So at the face value the desire sounds a bit retarded and actually the complete opposite of the direction the game should go towards. There should be a reason for the different vehicles to exist. They should be useful for different things. And the devs should actually make it easier for players to bring more choice of vehicles into the combat to allow them to use those tools to solve the different problems they face.
So the solution should be to allow players to bring a marder or stug 3 F in the line up, not to turn every tank into an AT vehicle. Because then the only things that matter are the HE shell power and loading speed combo.
Panzer IV F1 used to be the most OP vehicle for the first years of Enlisteds launch.
Eventually T50 and such got added and countered all German tanks with ease - just Panzer IV stayed a powerhouse because it would still one hit kill T50 always when hitting its cupola or gun shield. Later T50 was nerfed.
Then T34 got added with Tiger I like armor and Panzer IV F2 with Anti tank rifle post pen damage.
KV1 came much later and got introduced with the Stalingrad campaign. Funnily enough, KV1 was a joke of a tank when it first got introduced.
I remember very clearly how my Panzer III N with 80mm of HEAT always one hit killed every KV1 unless the KV was heavily angled.
It got overcorrected.
Thats the issue though, KV1 only had 75mm of minimally angled armor. Puma and Panzer III J1 should have zero issues dealing with that tank - for for what ever reason KV1 is much better armored than T34, or actually it has its recieved post pen damage altered. I swear I can directly shoot its ammo rack for it to only turn yellow. This has nothing to do with its real armor values, rather this has always been a post pen damage issue.
Historically T34 made KV1 obsolete because both had practically the same effective frontal armor, while T34 was much ligher and thus cheaper.
KV1 should be a sidegrade to T34, where it trades speed for better side and rear armor.
There is a reason why we ever only see KV1 tanks instead of T34 tanks.
The main issue is that almost all current T-34s have a two-man turret, so the commander has to double as the loader. Also, apart from the T-34E that was removed by the devs, no other T-34 has a commander’s periscope for short-range observation. This makes T-34s really vulnerable when infantry sneak up close—they can’t keep an eye on nearby threats at all.
The KV-1 has a three-man turret. The commander can just pop his head out and use binoculars to spot targets further away. That’s a huge advantage. As for armor performance, I bought the Panzer IV command variant recently. I fired five shots at areas marked as green penetration zones, yet still couldn’t punch through. Shooting a T-34 would’ve been way easier by comparison.
Back in the Moscow campaign era, German players could pay to unlock the Panzer IV F1 early. But T-34s were already around back then, and they completely outclassed the long-barrel 50mm guns. The map was advertised around the Panzer III J, which was supposed to match up against the T-34 (1940). That’s why German player numbers dropped off hard back then. Same thing for Soviet players in the Berlin map—hardly any real people left, mostly just AI bots.
I really miss those days when lobbies were full of pure AI. Everyone had an easy time farming kills and having fun.
Times have changed now. They added that ridiculous hull armor mechanic, identical to what Japanese tanks have. Now when only three crew members remain, the machine gunner won’t take over loading duties for the turret. Even losing just one crew member puts you at a massive disadvantage. On top of that, only the commander can remotely operate the machine gun—the machine gunner will never fire on his own initiative.
That’s why tanks without hull machine gun controls like the KV line are more viable now, same with the Panzer IV series.
And how many KVs will present that perfect 90 degree angle to you?
You are stupid if you thing that this makes the tank a none issue. Even if the KV players is 100% clueless of you chances are that he will still maintain some degree of angle to you even by accident.
As a result the KVs will almost always have above 80mm of side armor making it immune to the 80mm HEAT even if you catch it out of position.
Whats the point of running the Stug A compared to an F1 when
It has no turret
It carries only half the ammunition ( you are always short on ammo giving it terrible uptime once in position)
Is easiely is made combat ineffective by ATR once your tracks are gone
It cant brawl in CQC
It has the same armor thickness as the F1
It has the same gun as the F1
So in the end it is worse in every aspect compared to an F1and even as an infantry support tank it does kinda struggle due to a number of reasons.
With the 3 seconds reload and 20 HEAT you will run run out after just one minute on the frontline forcing you to resupply which will again take up another minute or so.
The constant supply runs will make you way less impactfull to the match than most other tanks.
If given the 115mm HEAT it would genuinely have a reason to be used over the F1 but it would still be balanced out by all the downsides it otherwise would have.
I guess you should have figured that out before you bought a stug III A? Otherwise you would indeed be kinda dumb to use it over F1 I guess?
But I’ll give you a couple of reasons:
As a premium vehicle, you earn more rewards with it when you earn score with it. Unlike the F1!
Similarly, you can fit it into one of your premium slots. Unlike the F1!
Also maybe you even like it and rock it for the fun of playing with it - like many other premium squads and vehicles. Not all of them are a clear utility upgrade over what you find in TT - which is fine.
I didn’t say it would be easy, but you have a way to do it. I understand that you guys want to just point and click with it one a 4-second reload.
I think a reasonable request would be to ask the ammo to be flipped 100% to 80mm HEAT to allow the stug III A to lean fully into the infantry support element. But why should a 4s reload infantry support vehicle also become a highly competitive AT-platform? Why not give 115mm to all the short barrel 75mm guns as well?
The person who started the poll really ought to push the post to go viral so more people can see it.
This suggestion would absolutely give the StuG III A a proper selling point.
It’s way better than just fixing bugs or small quality-of-life tweaks.
How come it’s getting no attention at all?
Looks like they made enough money off the Victory Day event.
They’ve got no incentive to give players good rewards anytime soon, and probably won’t have any long-term plans either.
I wish you and those like you, who destroy tanks from the sides at the training ground, to play at combat level 5, using PTRS and T70, they know if they can destroy the Tiger II tank.
.
Your suggestion is utterly absurd. No tank will wait for you to ram its side when the map is teeming with infantry. Also, your suggestion of firing at a straight angle at 75mm armor means the KV tank only needs to position itself in a diamond-shaped position to avoid any penetration. The damage from HEAT rounds is negligible, and the KV kills you with a one-shot, leaving you no room for error.
