ostheer medium tanks

[Cozmin95]

@MaxiKing6
I like your idea with the Panzer III and Stug III thing!The L42 50mm buildable, than the L24 and L60 are upgrades per unit like the PE Panzer IV has the skirts and MG and the Stug III should be a research at the factory like the soviet have and once you make that upgrade you can either build Stug III or if a Panzer III is near the factory you may change that one!Also the Wespe should have the same concept like the Stug III, global upgrade, than from Panzer II near factory or build them directly from the factory!And if you don't have a regular Panzer II and only the Luchs, that the reason why you should have a regular one for the Wespe!

PS: If you really want the Bergepanzer III to be in game than you should make it doctrine specific and serve not only to recover and repair vehicles but also turn Panzer III to Stug III and Panzer II to Wespe on field!

@TheReaper
Yeah i think those will be some cool Stug III variants and i think it would be even better if you build one stock and get to chose a gun between those too, like MaxiKing6 said for the Panzer III!But in my opinion it's better if the standard Stug III has the long barrel so you can tackle stronger tanks faster and the short barrel anti infantry one should be per unit upgrade!

[TheReaper]

I think just these two variants needs to be in the OH for StugIII:
http://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints/tanks/tanks-sd/33162/view/sd_kfz_142_sturmgeschutz_iii_ausf_a__stug_iii_/
and
http://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints/tanks/tanks-sd/14656/view/sd_kfz_142_1_stug_iii_ausf_f_1943/
maybe with armoured skirts. The F variant would be a little slower, that it's weigt increased wit additional armour and the bigger gun.

[Max 'DonXavi' von B.]

@Cozmin95
Thank you! But like Lord Rommel said, its a little unrealistic to do such a big change at the tank on the field, so i think one to be buildable is better, maybe also the idea with salvaging pzIII to stug III. Am I disagreeing to my own argument?

@TheReaper
I like your idea of early StugIII, but when do you think can the player use it? When StugIII enters battlefield, it is up to deal with medium and heavy tanks, the anti infantry duty (which is already done by panzer 3 L24 or even L42) comes to late. But i think it could be included as doctrinal unit. maybe in a tree with elefant/ferdinand as armoured doctrine or something like this. yes, i think, i would like to see it as a middle doctrinal unit (maybe 5 points )

[Gerrit 'Lord Rommel' G.]

Well...there is an alternative of the Pz III/StuG III "problem".
The magic word: REWARD UNIT.
Perhaps Ostheer could work with this idea

Think would be the best when the player could decide;
Pz III or StuG III or other systems...
Decision are always the best 

[Paciat]

@TheReaper
I like your idea of early StugIII, but when do you think can the player use it? When StugIII enters battlefield, it is up to deal with medium and heavy tanks, the anti infantry duty (which is already done by panzer 3 L24 or even L42) comes to late. But i think it could be included as doctrinal unit.

The most produced Wehrmacht "Tank" a doctrinal unit?
Its like saing that Sherman or T-34 should only be doctrinal.

[Max 'DonXavi' von B.]

@Paciat
Maybe you misunderstood me. I said that the EARLY stugIII which wasnt produced as much as later versions ( stugIII ausfg G) because, like lord rommel said, von manstein wanted the stugs to be tank killers. and that the anti infantery Role is already taken by pnz3. So we could make an Arrangement and take Lord Rommels Magic word "reward unit". For example for any earlier light Tank because stugIII saw First Action in the war against the French in 1940. I totally agree with you that stugIII has to be included in both ways, because both were Important.

[Aouch]

Actually LordRommel's idea with the Reward-system is the easiest way how to implement Pz3 and Stug3.

Pz3 starts with 5cm KwK38 L/42 cannon (Ausf. J), with ability to either upgrade to 5cm KwK39 L/60 (Ausf. J¹ or 7.5cm KwK37 L/24 (Ausf. N). Therefore first it's a multi-role-tank, later AT or AI.
Stug3 starts with 7.5cm StuK37 L/24 (Ausf. A-E) and later upgrade to 7.cm StuK40 L/48 (Ausf. F8 or G). So first AI later AT.

As we can see, such a reward-system will have two different types of vehicles and therefore wouldn't be boring either.
However, I doubt it's a that "new" concept.

But Lord Rommel has of course a point in his statement, that Pz3 shouldn't be magically turned into Stug3 in the field.
(That's because Loup and I suggested the Bergepanzer3)
However, conversations weren't really that common.
Only 173 out of about 9000 Stugs were converted Pz3s. 

[Blackbishop]

Yeah, Lord Rommel's is the wisest decision. I wonder what Loup will say when read that...

[Loupblanc]

With the appearance of the T-34 and KV tanks, rearming the Panzer III with a longer, more powerful 50-millimetre (1.97 in) cannon was prioritised. The T-34 was generally invulnerable in frontal engagements with the Panzer III until the 50 mm KwK 39 L/60 gun was introduced on the Panzer III Ausf. J¹ in the spring of 1942. This could penetrate the T-34 frontally at ranges under 500 metres (1,600 ft).[3] Against the KV tanks it was a threat if armed with special high velocity tungsten rounds. In addition, to counter antitank rifles, in 1943 the Ausf. L version began the use of spaced armour skirts (schürzen) around the turret and on the hull sides. However, due to the introduction of the upgunned and uparmoured Panzer IV, the Panzer III was, after the Battle of Kursk, relegated to secondary roles, and it was replaced as the main German medium tank by the Panzer IV and the Panther.
By the end of the war the Pz.III had almost no frontline use and many exemplars had been returned to the factories for conversion into turretless assault guns StuG, which were in high demand due to the defensive warfare style adopted by the German Army by then.
The Panzer III was well designed in that it had a three-man offensive crew (gunner, loader and commander), leaving the commander free to concentrate on commanding the tank and maintaining situational awareness. Although other medium tanks of the time also had this feature, most tanks of the late 1930s had fewer than three men in the turret crew, potentially providing the Panzer III with a "fightability" advantage over otherwise similar tanks, such as the French Somua S-35, which only had a one man turret crew.
The Panzer III chassis was the basis for the Sturmgeschütz III assault gun, one of the most successful self-propelled guns of the war, and the single most-produced German armored fighting vehicle design of World War II.

 -========-
 
 As Paciat pointed out, this will make the most numerous
 German fighting vehicle - Not be present in Wehr, not
 be present in PE, and - maybe - be added as a Reward
 unit in OstHeer.
 
 - This means the PzIII is the only OstHeer MBT
 Therefore it has to be given PanzerIV stats/equivalency.
 - Sherman 75 to Sherman 76 were not conversions. There
 we factory built that way. I'll point to you that American
 is a hell of a lot further away from Normandy than Germany
 is from Normandy/East Front. Rail is easier than boat,
 besides, and I can guarantee you they didn't send
 Shermans back to America and then back to Normandy
 (After they had been fighting awhile).
 The whole thing was a Rush from the beaches of
 Normandy to Berlin.

 ** Fine, Lord Rommel. No conversions, no StuG3,
 PzIII that are PzIV that will fight T34/Sherman on a
 1-on-1 basis and be as/more numerous as American
 /Russian tanks (5774 versus 75000)

 Production history
Designer   Daimler-Benz
Designed   1935-1937
Manufacturer   Daimler-Benz
Produced   1939–1943
Number built   5,774 (excluding StuG III)

 ---
 
Production history
Unit cost   82,500 RM
Number built   9,408 StuG III
1,211 StuH 42
 ThatS 9408+1211.

 as the Germans faced the formidable T-34, stronger anti-tank guns were needed. Since the Panzer IV had a bigger turret ring, the role was reversed. The Panzer IV mounted the long barreled 7.5 cm KwK 40 gun and engaged in tank-to-tank battles. The Panzer III became obsolete in this role and for most purposes was supplanted by the Panzer IV. From 1942, the last version of Panzer III mounted the 7.5 cm KwK 37 L/24, better suited for infantry support. Production of the Panzer III ended in 1943. However, the Panzer III's capable chassis provided hulls for the Sturmgeschütz III until the end of the war.

 ---
 
 In terms of the resources expended in their construction, the StuG assault guns were extremely cost-effective compared to the heavier German tanks, though in the anti-tank role, it was best used defensively, as the lack of a turret would be a severe disadvantage out in the open. As the German military situation deteriorated later in the war, more and more StuG guns were constructed in comparison to tanks, in an effort to replace losses and bolster defences against the encroaching Allied forces.
 --

In 1944, the Finnish Army received 59 StuG III Ausf. Gs from Germany (30 Stu 40 Ausf.G and 29 StuG III Ausf. G) and used them against the Soviet Union. These destroyed at least 87 enemy tanks for a loss of only 8 StuGs[2] (some of these were destroyed by their crews to avoid capture).

 --
 
 The vehicles of the Sturmgeschütz series were cheaper and faster to build than contemporary German tanks; at 82,500 RM, a StuG III Ausf G was cheaper than a Panzer III Ausf. M, which cost 103,163 RM. This was due to the omission of the turret, which greatly simplified manufacture and allowed the chassis to carry a larger gun than it could otherwise. By the end of the war, 10,619 StuG IIIs and StuH 42s had been built.[1]
 
 -----
   
 Grats.

 I demand you buff T70 and Greyhound to be
 same strenght as Sherman/T34, and that you make
 those two tanks 'Reward' units, too.

 Without StuGIII , you'll have to make PzIII equivalent
 to the PzIV. Welcome Wehr 1.5.
 
 You're removed the MORE probably German conversions,
 for the LESS probably American conversions. Your OstHeer
 looks less and less historical, and interesting, every moment.
 
 I remember when you said you didn't want to bring in
 Finnish units, etc, because there were still plenty of
 German units to bring in.

 ... What's the point?
 When you craft it so UTTERLY wrong from historical canon?

 You might as well put Klingon battlecruisers.
 There's no difference.

 Put in some Leopard II tanks while you're at it :p

 Guest Eastern Front stopped being about representing
 the Eastern Front

Post Merge: September 15, 2010, 07:51:08 AM
 - Boring?
 Seriously. Sherman75-Sherman76 upgrade makes
 even LESS sense.

 After the heavy tank losses of the Battle of the Bulge, in January 1945, General Eisenhower asked that no more 75 mm M4s be sent to Europe: only 76 mm M4s were wanted.[42]
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_tank
 
 The Sherman 75 wasn't a conversion to the 76. It was
 a completely different tank.

 So, grats, guys.

 I'm serious. Make a boosted Greyhound/T70 replace
 the Sherman/T-34 and make those REWARD units.

[Blackbishop]

I don't know how would fit in the ostheer the StugIII(stubby and AT) and the PzIII(vanila, stubby and AT) they have the same role .

[Loupblanc]

@Paciat
Maybe you misunderstood me. I said that the EARLY stugIII which wasnt produced as much as later versions ( stugIII ausfg G) because, like lord rommel said, von manstein wanted the stugs to be tank killers. and that the anti infantery Role is already taken by pnz3. So we could make an Arrangement and take Lord Rommels Magic word "reward unit". For example for any earlier light Tank because stugIII saw First Action in the war against the French in 1940. I totally agree with you that stugIII has to be included in both ways, because both were Important.

-
 Yea, StuGIII saw action against the French in 1940.
 It was a short barrel, then. And the PzIII in those days
 had a 37mm cannon.
 
 That's why I said StuGIII should be available sooner,
 although I wouldn't want it to be god-awesome 'so soon'.
 Suggested a series of Nerfs culminating in something
 a little deadlier.
 
 ...
 But who cares anyways?
 It won't be included. PzIII will be the main MBT,
 and it'll be z PanzerIV-V that can be spammed MORE
 than the Sherman/T34.

  Who cares with history, right?
 Your ostHeer won't be a historical representation.
 - No other countries.
 - No StuGIII
 - No conversions.
 - More German tanks than Russians/Americans.

Post Merge: September 15, 2010, 08:08:36 AM

I don't know how would fit in the ostheer the StugIII(stubby and AT) and the PzIII(vanila, stubby and AT) they have the same role .

---
 Why did Germany make both, then?
 Why have StuGIV and PzIV in Wehr, if they have same role?
 They have different flavors, but they're not drastically
 different even in Wehr.

 The PzIII-N came *AFTER* the StuGIII. The StuGIII
 was made way-earlier. Reason for PzIII-N is because
 the 2 other tanks which had the infantry role (PzIV and
 StuGIII were both turned into tank destroyers (long barrel).
 Didn't know what to do with the remaining PzIII, so they
 made short 75/AI role.
 
 Now, this only makes sense *IF* PzIII is made inferior to
 the PzIV (Which it won't apparently). So PzIII-J and pzIII-
 N are basically PzIVH and PzIV-AI (PE). No need for StuGIII
 short or long barrel, thus the idea of using it as a REWARD
 UNIT.

  ... Which makes no sense from a historical point of view.

 StuGIII only becomes a reward unit if the PzIII is buffed
 accordingly. Out of historical proportions.

 It's a Greyhound that kills Tigers, gentlemen.

Post Merge: September 15, 2010, 08:49:01 AM
 http://ruse.wikia.com/wiki/Panzer_III
 
 This from RUSE!

 However, as the Germans faced the formidable T-34, stronger anti-tank guns were needed. Since the Panzer IV had a bigger turret ring, the role was reversed. The Panzer IV mounted the long barreled 7.5 cm KwK 40 gun and engaged in tank-to-tank battles.
In 1939 battles, these tanks will be the highest level of tank available for Germany, and so should be mass produced to make up for it's less powerful 37mm gun. In other eras, Panzer IIIs will become less effective as the game progresses, and should be replaced by more advanced tanks, such as Panzer IVs, Tigers, or Panthers.
 
 ---
 
 Thank you for going against history, Lord Rommel

Post Merge: September 15, 2010, 08:55:03 AM
 5700 PzIII produced (Excluding StuGIII conversions)
 And 11,500 StuGIII were produced.
 
 Take out the StuGIII from the equation, since they're
 Reward Units and you've got
 
 5700 PzIII against 75,000 T34/Shermans but fighting
 1 vs 1 on the battlefield
 instead of 5700+11500 (17,000)

 Although, to be sure, PzIII have to be cheaper than
 T34/Sherman, more numerous, and still be equivalent
 (or Stronger!)(Quality, remember?)

 Aouch has a swarm concept for the PzIII which assumes
 large groups of PzIII.

 ...

 With Germans who can't convert (but did!) against
 Americans who can convert (but never did).

 When the Klingon Battlecruisers?

Post Merge: September 15, 2010, 09:00:28 AM
 The Sherman Jumbo/Sherman 105, although I like the units,
 are poorly balanced/thought out, as I discussed with
 Black Bishop.

 Conversions should be a choice, not a no-brainer.
 Sherman Jumbo also has a poor place.

 Sherman Jumbo should replace Crocodile (But with a cap?).
 Thus giving other doctrines a heavy tank/Hv Crusher.
 Sherman 105 should lose it's heavy Crush/Shovel and
 replace the Callioppe as it's an artillery tank.
 (I also think Sexton should replace Priest)
 (And Priest also be potential for Callioppe)(It's american)

 Right now, Sherman 105 is same cost as Crocodile,
 but it can do everything the Crocodile does... and do it
 better. a LOT better. I love the tank. I really, really do.
 I even love the ghastly slow turret traverse (Realistic).
 I just don't think it replaces the right unit, though.

Post Merge: September 15, 2010, 09:30:16 AM
 Pawel Pawlikowski:[1]
“   Both Natalie and Emily were extremely different and very original, which is a rare thing nowadays. They avoid the obvious, and are capable of playing complex and conflicting attitudes. Above all, they had energy, which is key for a movie. When I brought them together for a workshop, I could see them feeding off of each other well, and I knew that this was going to work.

 Completely unrelated, but... it explains rather well that
 which I was striving for. Something different, that can
 bring something new. Not same old in a different skin.
 For once.
 
 Magic.

[Ghost]

I don't know how would fit in the ostheer the StugIII(stubby and AT) and the PzIII(vanila, stubby and AT) they have the same role .

they could, either like lordrommel suggested as one being the reward for the other or like in his old concept when choosing different unit pools. but i wouldn't make much sense including both of them into the same army unless one of them offers something different.

[Aouch]

they could, either like lordrommel suggested as one being the reward for the other or like in his old concept when choosing different unit pools. but i wouldn't make much sense including both of them into the same army unless one of them offers something different.

Exactly. The way I see it, the DEVs have three possibilities how to add in Pz3 and Stug3:

Easiest way is for sure the Reward-system.
Both "tanks" are similar yet different enough to add one of them as reward-unit. (Pz3 "J" as gap-filler between light and medium tanks, either AT or AI upgrade. Stug3 "A-E" as AI-"tank" later upgrade to "Ausf. G" = AT)
Next way is again from Lord Rommel, his unit-pool-suggestion. You can have both, however only one of them is buildable at the same time.
Third but the most difficult way, because it needs perfect balancing, is Loupblanc's idea of having first Pz3 and then Stug3. However the way he wants it now, with Pz3 weak as shit and Stug3 beginning as "Ausf. A" which is the same as Pz3 "Ausf. N" doesn't make any sense at all. Plus he desperately tries to enforce "realism", something about neither CoH or EF really bothered.

Therefore I think the DEVs will decide between one of Lord Rommel's suggestions, I tend to say it'll be the first option.

Or they'll surprise us with a fourth option, something nobody took yet into account. 

[Gerrit 'Lord Rommel' G.]

All of u can be sure that i want to see Pz III and Stug III as part of the Ostheer.
Last i can tell u that it was MrScruff's wish to see the StuG III in eastern front.
BUT the hole team had to decided - Ostheer is a team project.

All in all i hope that we - the ef team - will find a way to implement both tanks and i'm sure that there is a way to add both.

Hope we will be able to present u this way as fast as possible.

and @Loupblanc:
U can be sure that history is my love and so i try to find the best way to get the balance between a pc game ( here CoH EF ) and history.

[Loupblanc]

I don't know how would fit in the ostheer the StugIII(stubby and AT) and the PzIII(vanila, stubby and AT) they have the same role .

they could, either like lordrommel suggested as one being the reward for the other or like in his old concept when choosing different unit pools. but i wouldn't make much sense including both of them into the same army unless one of them offers something different.

 ---
 The StuGIV and the PanzerIV have the same role.
 Do you suggest we take the PanzerIV out of Wehr, and
 make it a reward unit for the StuGIV?

 They DO have the same role.

 - - And my PzIIIL42 - PzIIIL60 - StuGIIIF culmination
 did offer something different. Especially with conversions.
 Something new and unique. Which would have fit nicely
 with PzII - Wespe - Marder2 conversions.

 Take StuGIIIF away, and you have to buff the PzIII to
 PzIV or better than PzIII status for balance's sake.

  That's why StuGIIIF replaced PzIII you know. Because
 PzIV had replaced it. And they needed something to do
 with all those pesky PzIII still lying around.

Post Merge: September 15, 2010, 05:09:07 PM
 @Aouch :
 Third but the most difficult way, because it needs perfect balancing, is Loupblanc's idea of having first Pz3 and then Stug3. However the way he wants it now, with Pz3 weak as shit and Stug3 beginning as "Ausf. A" which is the same as Pz3 "Ausf. N" doesn't make any sense at all. Plus he desperately tries to enforce "realism", something about neither CoH or EF really bothered
 
  - There is a reason why Germany switched from PzIII
 to PzIV. Take the PzIV away from OH, and you have to
 fall back on the StuGIIIF. Take the StuGIIIF away, you
 have to buff PzIII to PzIV levels, as Ouch wants.
 (More numerous, earlier, cheaper, and 1-on-1 wins vs
 T34/Sherman)

 I also want American 75 to 76 conversions (Mass and
 in the field, too!) taken away, as if Germany can't have
 them, America certainly shouldn't have it.
 - If OstHeer is to have any sense.
 - It's easier to have PzIII into a real MBT if you take
 away T34/Sherman/Pershing/IL2/ISU152, then PzIII can
 truly be 'DA' tank.

 Movies - Haven't you ever heard of continuity and
 suspension of disbelief? It's like saying only the good
 guys can hit things (on first shot, too)(from a moving
 vehicle) while bad guys forever and eternally miss with
 everything? In Hitchhiker's guide to the Galaxy, there
 is just a scene in the end, where 80 some troopers
 fire at close range with assault weapons and succeed
 in missing with pretty much every shot (except one)
 (which is non-fatal).

 Works in movies, comedies, even.
 Not so much in a strategy game.

Post Merge: September 15, 2010, 05:19:30 PM

I don't know how would fit in the ostheer the StugIII(stubby and AT) and the PzIII(vanila, stubby and AT) they have the same role .

they could, either like lordrommel suggested as one being the reward for the other or like in his old concept when choosing different unit pools. but i wouldn't make much sense including both of them into the same army unless one of them offers something different.

 - You can't have them that way.
 ** 1) Reward Unit. Reward units can't have upgrades.
 So it would either have to be Stubby StuGIII or AT StuGIII.
 Either way, it doesn't work.
 ** 2) As a pool unit one being exclusive to the other.
 Might work. As long as they both have upgrades. But
 there is one detail. One is much better at AT, and the
 other is better at AI (Those machine guns).
 
 I still prefer the PzIIIL42-PzIIIL60-StuGIIIF linear.
 Because that's when the StuG became significantly
 better than the PzIII.
 
 Small detail. Earlier on, the PzIII was AT.
 The StuG and the PanzerIV were the anti infantry tanks.
 Then roles were switched around.