Locust competition results

Hello everyone,

so, here are the Locust competition results. First: correct answers

Question 1 – “typically, medium to heavy guns were carried by four platforms: a Sturmgeschütz, a Sturmpanzer, a Selbstfahrlafette and a Waffenträger. Describe the differences between the four.”

This one was a bit more vague, I’d allow more than just one rigid answer, the important part is to actually know what’s going on.

Sturmgeschütz was armored artillery, capable of both direct and indirect fire. A Sturmpanzer was a heavily armored assault tank, intended primarily for direct fire destruction of fortified objects and fights within urban areas. Had more armor and typically bigger caliber guns than a Sturmgeschütz, often a mortar. Selbstfahrlafette is a generic designation for an artillery/TD chassis, often carrying a heavier gun than the vehicles of the same class. Typically, these vehicles were open-topped and most of them were self-propelled artillery pieces. A Waffenträger is much like the Selbstfahrlafette, but it is used primarily for direct fire and its main goal (unlike the Sfl) is to be as simple and cheap as possible to produce.

Question 2 – “What was the most penetrating gun ever considered for the Jagdpanzer 38(t), when was it and what was the main drawback of such a solution (there were several, but one is enough)?”

This one was a bit tricky. While most of the questions were answered correctly (75mm PaK 42 L/70). There were two possible answers. Only a few people knew that the one of the answers was the 1944/1945 Krupp Umbewaffnung program and that the vehicle had rear casemate:


The Jpz 38(t) itself was never originally designed or proposed with the L/70, that was the Jagdpanzer 38(d), but allegedly, a frontal L/70 variant was tested. By the way, Wikipedia is quoting Achtungpanzer on this. Achtungpanzer is one of the worst sites, when it comes to spreading unhistorical garbage and a source of several German tank myths. Be always be careful with it. For example “three prototypes built” is most likely crap.

The problems with this include overstressing the chassis (and subsequently, poor handling characteristics) and poor traverse/elevation, poor rate of fire due to cramped superstructure and long shells on both cases. In case of the frontal gun variant, it was too nose-heavy.

Question 3 – “When we talk about German vehicles, there are two very blatant cases, where people refer to vehicles with a name, that was never used by German troops. Both cases are very well known and widely used. Write both cases and write their historical real designations too (In other words: there are two very well known vehicles, that were referred to differently by Germans than they are today)”

This one was easy – there are even three candidates, so you could pick. The ones originally indended was the Hetzer (it was never called Hetzer, it was called Jagdpanzer 38(t)) and Brummbär (again, historically it was called either Sturmpanzer IV, or simply Stupa by troops). Third candidate would be the Tiger II, that was never called King Tiger (“Königstiger” translates as “Bengal Tiger”). Bison is also problematic, but not as much as those other three (conflicting sources).

Question 4 – “Which of these chassis was never fitted (or proposed to be fitted) with a flamethrower? Jagdpanzer 38t, Panzer II, Panzer III, Char B2, Maus?”

They all were. Yes, Maus originally had a flamethrower. Most of people got this wrong.

Question 5 – “Before the 380mm naval rocket mortar was selected for the Sturmmörser Tiger, it was supposed to be equipped with a different weapon to compete with another design by Krupp. What was this weapon (class and caliber suffices) and what was the name of the competing project (that came earlier than the Sturmtiger proposal)?”

The answer here was: 210mm mortar. The earlier Krupp project that was replaced by the Sturmtiger project was the Bär.

Altogether I recieved 68 answers altogether. Several people sent me more than one e-mail: I am sorry, but I clearly stated one answer per account in the rules, so I disregarded the later ones (rules are rules, I made one exception, where the guy simply sent me an empty e-mail, because he misclicked).

How many people were correct (with some very minor mistakes)? ONE

Congratulations Ashmodiel

Maybe it was a bit too difficult? I don’t think so. But some of the folks really did their research and I have 3 more codes burning a hole in my pocket. So, here’s what I’m going to do: I am going to randomly select 3 more people from those 67 remaining. You three will get a code as “thank you” for participating.

So, here goes…

Grats: CaptainNemo, Aligishere and Col_Beckett!

I think this way, it’s the most fair. Winners will be recieving their Locust codes shortly. Thank you for participating!

PS: as for the rest of you guys, there will be more competitions. Here, have some EU invite codes:


31 thoughts on “Locust competition results

  1. I messed up with the Flammpanzer Maus, but it seems I had most answers more or less correct, even the Bär :)
    Good competition!

  2. Gah, dat Maus. I was fairly sure I read about it to have a FT, but couldn’t find the source anywhere, so I took it away.

    And the last question totally threw me off by that “earlier” stuff, timeline pinpointing is tough.

    But whatevs, maybe the next time~ =w=

  3. Very good competition. The question 4 did me in. Everything else, I think, I did right, but the fourth question was indeed a trick question :D

    • Only if I’d watched The_Chieftain’s last video on the Maus, he specifically says there was to be a fmaethrower….on the back of the tank…

  4. SS is this quote from wiki incorrect?

    “However, there exists a memorandum from Heinz Guderian to Hitler claiming that an unofficial name, Hetzer, had spontaneously been coined by the troops.”

    Is there any proof that Jagdpanzer 38(t) was never unofficially called Hetzer by German troops?

  5. Got two wrong it seems.
    Intepreted question 2 as biggest gun on a derivative of the 38 t chassis, meaning I referred to the ridiculous waffentrager concepts, not the actual “Hetzer” as we know it.

    And then I didn’t know Maus once had a flamethrower. Deduced from the fact that I knew for sure that all the others had flamethrowers and used them in active service, so I got well and truly fooled there.

  6. Being the winner is really nice start of the weekend. Thanks a lot, I’ll call this Locust “Frank” ;)

    • about sturmtiger
      i answer Bar with 305mm etc, etc……after send i realize about your tech tree with sturmtiger on tier 10 and sturmtiger prototype on tier 9 with 210mm morser
      then i realize my bad answer:(

  7. i wanted to participate, but i didnt have enough time as i was very busy. turns out i found most answers but not all.

    still, i realy liked this competition. would be nice if more stuff like this comes.

  8. Messed up the last question by forgetting the name Bar. Got the rest more or less right. Can’t believe the Maus one threw people off as i thought that was the easiest one. As for the Hetzer Penetration one I hazarded a educated guess on it.
    Thanks for the tank.

  9. This competition was buggy like the game :-D
    Yes, german troops call Jpz 38(t) Hetzer and no, StuG (and StuH also) was not designed for indirect fire. BTW Stupa was sometimes called ‘Bär’.
    Have a nice day.

    • StuG (and StuH also) was not designed for indirect fire.

      It must be funny feeling to overlook quite big Sturmtiger which was part of the Sturmgeschütz family too.

      But if you insist, contact ASAP with Mr Doyle and explain him why he made awful errors writing about Sturminfanteriegeschütz 33, Sturmgeschütz IV für 15 cm Sturmhaubitze 43 or about Sturmtiger in Panzer Tracts 8 “Sturmgeschütz” book. I’m sure he will be happy with new discoveries and maybe he will ask you for being co-author on revised edition.

  10. You know, I knew the answers to all of them, but it wouldn’t have mattered because I only play on the NA server (I would get too much ping if I played on any of the other ones, because apparently ripping people off for a slow internet connection is an acceptable business practice in the US).