Matrix Games Forums

As far as I know, the firing range of a real strumtiger is extreme long, (at least farther than those 60mm mortars), so why is that a strumtiger can't be treated as offboard artilleries so that the firing range can cover a large area? (those mortars...) What's then, the use of a strumtiger? With the range of several hexes, and a relatively low hitting probability...

Hey Saviola,

The Sturmtiger is quite useful, just not against moving targets. If you are unsure exactly where those enemy infantry are, just 'Z' any hex near them and BOOM it'll get them. Shoot a building and watch the fun begin. It handles fortifications nicely also. Just remember, it has a huge blast radius. Use this to decimate enemy formations by shooting into the center of them, even into a hex that has no enemy in it, if that hex is adjacent to many units. Even if no casualties are inflicted, a great amount of suppression is!:eek: The Sturmtiger is probably not accurately portrayed in the game, but we benefit from that through increased firing rate. An actual round took 10 minutes and a crane to load!:eek: Hope this helps. I have a weak spot for the Sturmtiger ever since I broke a MASSIVE infantry charge with ONE!

Goblin

Thx Goblin,

actually not only the firing range of strumtiger I think is mis-portrayed in the game, and the survivability too. I think it was extremely robust....'cos it has thick frontal armor, but I got one knocked out in the front by simply a shot from an M4... And fires 38cm cannons! (that's comparable with naval guns...) The damage inflicted maybe too small. (I don't think even a T-34 can survive when the cannon lands in a 10m diameter neighbourhood...) No damage...that's seems odd...

Saviola/Goblin: I got on the subject of the misportrayal of the unit recently. One of the problems I see with it is that it's penetration is way too small. In comparison, the common flamethrower has a 200 rating while the Sturmtiger gun has only 108. In other words, we have a fort-busting unit which could demolish any building, which could penetrate up to 8ft. of reinforced concrete, and yet flamthrowers can do better in the game, a unit which the Germans have. Flamethrowers can probably destroy forts from any plate of the fort, while the Sturm has to shoot them most likely at the weak armor at the front, thereby likely exposing itself to fire from the fort, when it need not be.

On some other notes though, as tempting as it might be to try to make it offboard, I would consider that a waste. I won't speak about ROF here, but I know if they had the range to out-range things that normally out-range German offboard artillery you might want to use them to counter those guns, but I don't think they were used that way.

I think you're better off using them in direct fire on forts, as direct fire barrages. One thing above all other things cries out that the Sturm is not a typical offboard unit though and indeed was very likely used more for onboard roles: the armor.

The problem with this unit, appears that it cannot be given anything resembling it's realistic penetration rating (that would be off the charts, since 255 is the limit here), simply for matters of it being an easy unit to abuse and destroy IS3s with. I did point out that flamethrower abuse has been rampant in games, and that didn't stop it's great rating. Hopefully this unit will be given it's full advantage in CL, while at the same time it's ROF is seriously curtailed.

BTW, I thought I heard somewhere that the reload rate was 5 minutes, not 10.

(edited)-

Two types of ammunition were available-high-explosive Raketen Sprenggranate 4581 (with a 125kg, or 275 pound, explosive charge) and shaped-charge Raketen Hohladungsgranate 4582 for use against fortifications. The shaped-charge round could penetrate up 2.5m (8 feet) of reinforced concrete.

If you'll notice the layout of the unit in the game, there is no rating for AP penetration, only HE, nor is there the possiblity of any AP rounds carried. That quote was from http://www.achtungpanzer.com/sttig.htm . Perhaps this thing could've been used as offboard when it had the HE rounds, but again the armor of the vehicle would suggest otherwise.

There wer only 18 of these made, and were designed specifically to take out specified, point blank targets, such as bunkers, etc., never designed, or equipped to handle radio controlled fire!! The 38cm was intended for anti-submarine use originally..

Warhorse: Thanks, I suspected something like that, which makes my point that the fact that gamewise they cannot pierce bunkers from all angles even more piteous.

Originally posted by Saviola
Thx Goblin,

I think it was extremely robust....'cos it has thick frontal armor, but I got one knocked out in the front by simply a shot from an M4...

Have you considered how big the bore on this monster is, what a lovely target for a 75mm round. Adds a whole new meaning to 'down the throat'. This could really 'eat lead'.

I was out looking at the web and found that The Tank Museum-Bovington has aquired the gun tube of a Sturmtiger.

You can look at it at:
Its too bad they didn't have someone stand next to the mockup round so people could get hand on just how big that shell was.
http://www.tankmuseum.co.uk/collatest.html
thanks, John.

Torpedoes away!

A couple of things about the Sturmtiger #1 It fires a 300mm or a 380mm Rocket (WHERES JANES! when you need it) #2 It took an incredible amount of time to reload and around 10 men. And I am not sure but I think it was actually on a Mark IV chassis (don't quote me) Thats my 2 pfennings worth

Thomas D Curry: From the source I posted the link to and a few other things I've seen, there are a number of vague things about it. You stated 10 men reloaded it. That may be, but it would appear that was the exception rather than the rule, because the rule seems to be they used the crew (5 men) and a crane attached to the AFV. Someone claimed it took 10 minutes, I'm thinking I read 5 minutes somewhere, though I haven't found anything to suggest one or the other once this discrepancy came up. It was on a Tiger chassis, hence the name.

Here's one of the pictures provided at the achtungpanzer website I linked to earlier. I might be incredibaly dense in this instance, but I read that whole article, and not until now had I noticed that in that b/w picture that you not only see the men starting on using the crane, but you also see the shell being carried.

I must say though, the shell must be empty on the picture, afterall, one shell weighed 275lbs., while the other was in the 750lb. range. See how the men are carrying it, without strain?



OTOH, maybe they have it sitting on top of something and I can't make it out. I thought at first it might be the hull, but the men are to the side of the hull. Maybe there's a metal sheet they pull out of the hull for a table? Sure looks like an empty shell used for dramatic effect though.

Very nice picture, Charles.

I think you're wrong about the shell though. That may very well be a live round. The men beside the tank are holding it, not carrying it.

The shell is hoisted by the crane, which looks rigid enough for a 275 lb weight, and they are just guiding it, so it doesn't start to swing around during its ascent. You don't want that one to slam into the hull, I'm sure

So 4 men were probably enough to load it?

Originally posted by Thomas D Curry
And I am not sure but I think it was actually on a Mark IV chassis (don't quote me) Thats my 2 pfennings worth

The SturmTiger was built on a Pz6 Tiger chasis...you are thinking of hte SturmPanzer 4 mounting a short 150mm howitzer...a light-weight companion to the STurmTiger.

Belisarius: Ohhhhhh, now I see it. I never saw the cable extending from the crane, nor the strap in the middle of the shell. Yeah that would seem to indicate it took 'no more' than the crew of 5 to load it.