Extending the WOT German tech tree – Sturmpanzers


This is a purely speculative article that takes into account WOT German tech tree and uses historical tanks to speculate possible new tank additions. While trying to keep the articles faithful to history some room for inaccuracy is allowed within these rules:

1) No tank or tank part will be 100% made up, at least a mention about tank role and vague specs are needed

2) Components not planned for the tank are allowed, provided it wouldn’t create grotesque inaccuracies like putting a gun that would obviously cripple a tank under its weight

3) This will be limited to WWII plans, anything post war risks to be too arbitrary to properly balance

No serious expectation of anything listed to appear in WOT as described is applied, but as we’re discussing about implementing history into an arcade game some items will be controversial.

This is unavoidable as WOT tech tree rules need a tank to be better than the previous one and ergonomics are not exactly cared about, meaning that most designs are over-performing their real counterparts.

With the approaching Waffentrager tree, today we will see my personal take on the possible sturmpanzer tree.
SilentStalker recently had his own take on it, but I disagree on some choices and also prefer a shorter, more intense grind.

Historically sturmpanzers were basically direct fire artillery platforms, serving as mobile infantry howitzers or as assault guns depending on tank and situation.
Tactically conceived as a blend of artillery and tank destroyer later on specializing in urban fighting, they were very well described by Von Manstein:

The perfect root to start this tree in my opinion is the good old Hetzer. The first derp TD is a perfect platform to introduce the play style that will give character to most of the tanks in the tree, and is going to be followed by a derivative platform:

Tier V:  Selbstfahrlafette s.I.G.33 auf Bergepanzer 38 (t)

A close Hetzer cousin, the tank was born out of the idea of coupling a 15cm S.I.G. to a bergepanzer 38(t) chassis.

Open top and with very thin superstructure armor ( sources vary between 20-30mm front and 12-20mm side), but likely sharing excellent camo with Hetzer coupled with  a good view range, this tank was planned to be around 16.5 tons and powered by a 150HP engine, for a decent 13HP/ton ratio, it’s likely it would share the same engines with its lower tier cousin, making the tank pretty agile as well.

All this awesomeness is in turn balanced by pretty poor ergonomics, as gun traverse was limited to 7° per side and gun depression to 2°. Ammo capacity was also limited to 15 rounds, meaning every shot must count.

All in all, we can expect a stock experience with the Hetzer 105mm howitzer and a similar stock engine, ending with the mighty 15 SIG, giving similar but likely even less accurate firepower due to a much shorter barrel.

Tier VI: Sturm-Infanteriegeschütz 33B


The fierce battles around Stalingrad created the necessity to have an heavily armored assault gun.
In the urban context high muzzle velocity and long range accuracy were of little value, but armor was of the utmost importance. The resulting tank was a box-like superstructure on a Panzer III chassis.

Unlike its predecessor, the StuIG 33b was pretty well armored, with 80mm front, 50mm side and 15mm in the rear, which brought a total weight of 21 tons.
Ergonomics are again pretty restricted, with a traverse of a mere 3° per side as well as a gun depression of 3°.

Maximum speed is listed at 20kmh, although given weight and engine power it seems unlikely, so my personal suspect is that either the listed weight is wrong (likely and by at least 5 tons), or the speed is at least 10kmh higher than listed.

On the firepower side, we can expect stock the SIG 33, an intermediate upgrade to the SIG 33 model 1939 (slightly better aim time) and end it with the 15cm STUH 43, with improved accuracy.
Engine-wise we can expect the same selection as the STUG III, so no surprises there.

A decent armor upgrade overall, with some loss of agility.
Tier VII: Sturmpanzer IV Brumbarr


 As the Panzer III chassis proved to be inadequate for the fierce fighting around Stalingrad, the Sturmpanzer IV was originally born as a replacement for the Ferdinand Sturmpanzer variant (another awesome design, which planned to use a captured 22cm french howitzer).

A vast improvement over the StuIG 33b, the Stupa (as it was nicknamed by troops) was very appreciated especially by infantry, which often called upon them and also fought in a TD role at Kursk in support of the Ferdinands.

A decent 100mm sloped at 38° gives slightly better frontal protection than the mighty Tiger, while sides were 50mm at  15° and rear 20 at 10° so getting flanked is a pretty bad idea.
Top speed is listed at 40kmh, although 265HP for 28 tons gives a mere 9HP/ton, although we can safely estimate Panzer IV top engine will bring the ratio to a decent 15 HP/ton.

On the firepower side, stock we can safely expect the 15cm STUH 43 while upgrades here gets a bit tricky, as historically a very short 21cm howitzer was planned but would be impossible to balance at tier VII, so instead we could play with the 15cm SFH 13 L/13 (a short variant of the Grille top gun), which would improve accuracy.
Ergonomics are vastly improved though, so we can expect 7° traverse on each side and a decent 5° depression.

Nothing revolutionary from the previous tier, it’s still a decent answer to SU-152 and sports decent armor versus lower tiers.

Tier VIII: Sturmpanther

 Following Stalingrad, a new Sturmpanzer design was requested, this time on a Panther chassis.
Krupp quickly created a draft of a 15cm STUH 43 in a Panther turret, using Tiger’s commander cupola and Maus’ gun sight.

Panther’s chassis and turret were otherwise left untouched, so we can expect a fairly agile TD, with a turret nonetheless.
Upgrade-wise the same shortened 21cm howitzer as for the Brumbarr was planned, but of course it’s unlikely it would fit in a turret.

Here we have two possibilities: either we abandon the turreted chassis and we use the Jagdpanther-based proposal of which no drawings are available or we find a turret able to fit a bigger gun, not a schmaulturm for sure.

Luckily for us, a larger turret is available from the Waffentrager designs:

In this picture you can see the tank with the 15cm SFH L/29.5 howitzer which will be featured in the Waffentrager line (why wasn’t this design picked instead of overburdening the Panzer IV waffentrager or the fantasy WT E-100 is a mistery to me), something big enough to hold a long-ish 15cm or the mentioned short 21cm howitzer.

As there is no actual design mentioned, one could think it was basically a sawn off version of this baby, the 21cm Morser 16 (which would have been retired from main line use so in surplus):

Such awesome firepower would be balanced by horrid soft stats, however in skilled hands this TD would be a truly deadly tank, although still an appetizer in firepower compared to what will follow.

 Tier IX: Sturmpanzer Bar

 Awesome firepower comes with awesomely horrid sacrifices in every other area.

The Sturmpanzer Bar comes from a March 1943 requirement for a Sturmgeschutz able to mount a 305mm L/16 howitzer, two months later a conceptual design simply called Bar (Bear) was completed.
Planning to use a mix of Panther and Tiger components, this behemoth of steel would have weighted 120 tons, 8.2m long, 4.1m wide and 3.5m high.

Historically, the tank project was discarded on the same day as its completion, as Alkett/Henschel’s Sturmtiger plan proved to be much more effective and economical just at first glance.

Poorly armored at 100-130mm sloped front and 80mm side, the planned Maybach HL 230 engine would have given in an anemic 5.8 HP/ton, for a maximum speed of 20kmh.
Ergonomics were also rather poor, with 0 gun depression and a traverse of mere 2° on each side.

All of this would be compensated by the gun. A 305mm HE shell is more than enough to ruin even a super-heavy tank day, supplemented by an HEAT beton-grenate which would penetrate at least 300mm armor, for nearly guaranteed one-shot capability regardless of the target.

Still, this tank would represent a true test of willpower, a tank requiring the patience of an artillerist, greatly depending on proper positioning and good team-work.
After all, how good could be something discarded so quickly?

 Tier X: Sturmtiger

This classic steel beast needs very little introduction.
Coming from the very same requirement that resulted in the Bar draft, Speer himself contracted Alkett to develop a project to mount a 38cm marine rocket launcher on a Tiger chassis, after the earlier proposal of mounting a 21cm Morser 18 proved too heavy for the chassis.
Alkett initially proposed a rear casemate/frontal engine design which was quickly rejected, followed by a design of a frontal casemate with the 38cm launcher in a ball mount.

Frontal armor was 150mm at 47° with 80mm sides, lower front plate was 100mm often reinforced by an additional 50mm plate, not exactly stellar as top tier.
The MB HL 230 P45 engine gave it 700HP for 68 tons, which gave a power to weight ratio of  around 10 HP/ton, for a top speed of 40kmh.
Ergonomics are decent but nothing stellar: 0/ +70 gun depression and a traverse of 10 degrees on each side.

380mm with both HE and HEAT shells gives it the most devastating punch one could imagine, accuracy will be pretty abysmal though, worse than most howitzers (10m dispersal at 1000m, so in game something close to 0.8-1.0).

In conclusion…

Awesome firepower requires extreme patience and skill to be properly used, imho the mid tiers will be the places where most fun is to be had.
Still, any of these babies in Himmelsdorf will be a sight to be feared!


About Zarax

Wot: Zarax999 (EU Server)

130 thoughts on “Extending the WOT German tech tree – Sturmpanzers

  1. Not sure if this should be a short range arty branch that has more HP and mobility than ordinary arties , or a TD branch…

  2. Names are incorrect it should be:
    Tier VII: Sturmpanzer IV Brummbär
    Tier IX: Sturmpanzer Bär

    • English keyboard layouts mostly miss the “äöü” letters, but then you should write it properly as “Brummbaer” and “Baer”.

    • Even though, many keyboards don’t have the ‘ä’, my fingernails turn upward, when I read ‘barr’ with 2 r.
      I mean: ‘Arrr, they’re Nazi tanks and not pirats!’
      So please use only 1 r or make it consistently wrong and not Brummbarr (2 r) and Bar (1 r).

  3. Hm, if 210mm gun on Brumbarr is such a problem for tier VII (I don’t know why, btw, if we have tanks such as KV-2 on tier VI, or all those USSR artys with tier IX gun), maybe Bear should be swapped with Sturmpanther?

      • Panther was planned to have the same howitzer, so a swap would be pointless.
        Also, 21cm at tier VII would be ludicrously OP, no matter the platform.

        • “historically a very short 21cm howitzer was planned but would be impossible to balance at tier VII”

          Stop posting this dumb shit and using words like “impossible” who do you think u are, WG?

          The word “balance” says it u can balance all in some way, but you mean impossible like 122mm/130mm/152mm on Tier6 or 152mm on Tier7?!

          Even the Sturmtigers rocketshell speed is only 42-45m/sec most guns have 600-1000m/sec so u will have to shoot very foresighted or have to shoot stational camping targets, so the Sturmtiger comes automatically with hugh disadvanted to such a powerfull gun.

          • Please go on and try to propose something bigger than an artillery gun of the same tier on a TD, I’m sure SS will gladly translate Serb’s reply :)

  4. High caliber weapons on Bar and Sturmtiger will be extremely hard to balance (Bar was never conformed, but Sturmtiger is believed to appear in the game eventually). If both will follow the current dmg per caliber rule*, then it should be around 3500 for Bar and around 4500 for Sturmtiger. With no requirement to aim at weakspots at all, those weapons would be capable of dealing around 1500 and around 2000 dmg respetively to most targets. Knowing WG it will be balanced by having all other important stats hampered (RoF, accuracy, aim time, armor mobility). In the end we will have a one shot weapon (since after shot it will die hopelessly).

    *We can estimate what damage should its HE round do – looking at artillery guns among various tiers (caliber/dmg): wespe (105/410), GW Panther (150/1200), GW Tiger (170/1400), GWE (210/2000). The dmg(caliber) equation can be estimated as dmg = 15*caliber – 1126. Of course it is only a rough estimate.

    • But then again its balanced by the fact that its fairly inacurate, has no armor, has no camo factor, has ages of reloading, has no mobility.

      • That’s exactly my point. I can’t see Sturmtiger appearing in this game as anything else as extremely high risk – high reward tank. The problem is such tanks aren’t really playable, at least not as top tiers.

        • Why not? Think of all the trolling, especially with havoc.

          380mm shell flies past IS-7
          IS-7: haha! you missed!
          *A building falls ontop of IS-7*

          • since when it is known that havoc will bring us destructable environment?
            I think only tanks physics will be altered

            • If the range of guns is scaled to the WoT map size the the high caliber low volcity guns will have very short ranges – like low tier arty. Hitting anything fast, even with the massive splash will be difficuly and forget targeting any tanks in close proximity to team mates. Shooting anything close would damage or kill you as well.

            • Like that stops arty players… Sometimes I feel I get killed more by “friendly” arty, than by enemy

  5. The Bar and Sturmtiger simply have too much alpha. If they are to be introduced into the game HE mechanics need a rework. One shotting an equal tier tank with non penetrating HE would be stupid.

    The 380mm HEAT shells are a possible problem too. Does anyone know the armour penetration? I’ve only ever seen the concrete penetration value listed.

      • WIKI INFO: The main armament was the 380 mm Raketen-Werfer 61 L/5.4, a breech-loading rocket launcher, which fired short-range, rocket-propelled projectiles roughly 1.5 m (4 ft 11 in) long. There were a variety of rounds with a weight of up to 376 kg (830 lb), and a maximum range of up to 6,000 m (20,000 ft), which either contained a high explosive charge of 125 kg (280 lb) or a shaped charge for use against fortifications, WICH COULD PENETRATE UP TO 2.5 M (8 ft 2 in) OF REINFORCED CONCRETE. The stated range of the former was 5,650 m (6,180 yd). A normal charge first accelerated the projectile to 45 m/s (150 ft/s), the 40 kg (88 lb) rocket charge then boosted this to about 250 m/s (820 ft/s).

        Look this example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PG-7VR
        It can penetrate 1,5 metres of reinforced concrete and 750mm of pure armoured steal.
        So i think the HEAT ammo of sturmtiger can penetrate, the same with HEAT. Luck for example HEAT ammo of obj 268, it´s penn 450. So i spect 550, 600 or something like that but with a very high cost of gold ammo and a really bad accuracy and aiming time in the gun

      • Which is kinda the problem. 380mm would be a good low range for WW2 HEAT. If its fin stabilised it’s probably more like 570mm. With ~2k alpha as a lowball estimate it’s point and click for an insta gib of most T10 tanks.

        Very bad for the game. What sets WoT apart from shooters is the slower pacing and armour. As much as I love the thing the ST really has no place here.

    • Speaking from experience where I’ve have my tier 9 heavy M103 one-shotted by tier 9 arty. As much as I find that ridiculous, that sets a precedent that won’t change, so giving a line of high damage slow reload assault guns to the Germans won’t “break the game”.

      • It depends on SerB´s trolling mood. If he want to troll a little 450mm, if he have a good day 800mm. Mor than 800mm i dont think (this number is a lot anyway)

    • In my Kv-2 i once even one shotted an IS (pen + fire)
      If kv-2 with the possibility of one shooting tanks on tier higher is balanced, than they can also balance this. and compared to kv-2, they dotn even have a turret.

  6. Nice research, but I dont really agree in having it a Hetzer-spin-off, although it does make sense in its own way, but having a different starting point in my opinion may be better. Still excellent work.

    • I was thinking the same thing. Having a full line that started at tier 2 would be neat the only problem is the only German made vehicle that’d fit would be the early variants of the StuG III mounting the 7.5cm howitzer which would only be good at tier 3 at most. WG could do something crazy and add a half-track at tier 2 but I doubt that.

      • Stfu calling it Bar is just plain stupid what are u some kind of dyslexics, even in the schematic its called “Bear”.
        There is no Bar or Brummbarr its called Brummbär or Brummbaer and without double-r (rr) wtf it is doing there and where does is came from.

        You just cant change stated names.

        Fucking stupid dyslexics…

          • I guess that would be the… German Inquisition? ‘Cause I’m fairly positive Scandinavia (the other major umlaut-using region) never had one…

            Goose-stepping and overwrought accents optional. :P

        • If you rage like a kidish person here about 2 missing dots on an “a” letter I wonder what you do in-game in tier 8 fights where the players call the Lion “Lowe” instead of “Löwe” or “Lœve”…


  7. SS, may I am allowed to give you a little correction?
    The german word “Panzer” is both without change, Singular and Plural, to put an “s” at the end for Plural like in the titel-sentence is wrong… ;-)
    Regards from Germany

    • Or you google Alt Commands for Umlaut and find very fast the commands to make the umlauts:

      Alt+0196 = Ä Alt+0228 = ä
      Alt+0214 = Ö Alt+0246 = ö
      Alt+0220 = Ü Alt+0252 = ü

      (works only with numlock)

      • It’s “interesting” that more people bothered to post about syntax errors rather than the tank themselves…

          • It is important!

            How should one take an article and the provided information seriously if not even the names of the tanks are correct. How should i believe you know anything about a tank if you dont even know its name?

            • It took me 3 days and consulting a plethora of books including a couple german texts to put together the info for this, typos happens you know…

            • Just wondering are you unable to edit your post to correct it or are you just unwilling to invest 2 minutes of your time to improve it after spending 3 days to write it?

  8. In that picture of the Sturmtiger it looks like it has more than 0 degrees of gun depression, looks like maybe -2 degrees. What’s up with that?

  9. Sturmtiger will also have nice bonus, best overmatch. It gets overmatch bonus up to vs 127mm armor (380:3=126,6666…). Which means no roof isnt safe if it hits. Most tanks sides will be always penetrated despite the angle.

    • Overmatch increases normalisation by a factor of the shell caliber/armor thickness.

      Since HE shells have 0 degrees normalisation, theres no reason to apply the overmatch rule.

        • IIRC the overmatch effect comes from peculiarities of the relationship of the shell impact area to the plate thickness; the rather narrow HEAT hypervelocity jet ought not have much truck with it.

  10. Another two paper tanks, thanks, but no thanks. I would rather see incomplete tree with followning vehicles – T IV – Hetz, T V – StuH, T VI – Selbstfahrlafette s.I.G.33 auf Bergepanzer 38 (t), T VII – Sturm-Infanteriegeschütz 33B, TVIII – Sturmpanzer IV, T IX – Sturmtiger.

    • I have to disagree. WoT is more interesting because of many prototype and blueprint vehicles that are available.

      • Bar is ugly as hell, if they have to put paper tanks into game at least it should be a good-looking vehicles.

        • It may be ugly, but I doubt you’ll care much about its looks after you’ve suddenly had one of them blast away half of your health, if not more, in a single shot, before you even know it’s there (true, German TDs have bad camo at high tiers, but that can be mitigated to a good degree with a paint job suitable for the map you’re on, full camo perk on every crew member and a camo net).

          It’s like the JP E-100 in a sense; point out its flaws all you like, but if you get HIT by it, you’re gonna feel it, and it’s gonna HURT.

  11. With many of these vehicles it is difficult to say what should count as artillery and what should count as a td.

    I mean even SPGs we currently have are debatable. While it may seem obvious that the Sturmpanzer I is an artillery it was used for close fire support for the German infantry on several occasions.

    And many of the soviet TDs were used as self-propelled artillery vehicles IRL.

    So the choice is up to personal interpretation of WoT developers.

    • There were cases of US troops using their SPGs as ersatz assault guns to quickly demolish annoying roadblocks and suchlike, but I daresay the distinction between a dragooned “support” artillery piece and a dedicated assault gun kind of design tends to be fairly self-evident.

      Of and you know that open-topped turret with the short 75mm gun the ‘Murricans slapped onto both Stuart hulls to create the M8 Scott light assault gun, and onto their late-model amtrack amphibious assault vehicles for much the same purpose? The crews of the latters went and got themselves cross-trained as artillerists so they could use the little howitzers’ excellent elevation to function as de facto SPG batteries to support the advance past the beach…

      • Indeed, all of that is true. The M7 Priest in particular is well-known for its use as an assault gun for a good portion of the US’ involvement in the war, particularly in North Africa.

        • Sturmpanzers I and II were definitely used the same way you would with a TD.
          The best tactic they found in north africa was to make shells richochet on the sand before exploding, something that needs a VERY low angle of fire to be pulled off.

          After all, the 15cm SIG had lower range than most mortars and IIRC even the lowly 75mm L/24.

      • TDs destroyed tanks, Assault Guns destroyed fortifications (although they were more than capable of engaging enemy armor as well – point and case, the StuG III, which I would argue was probably the most successful armored vehicle used by Germany in World War II, and CERTAINLY a candidate for the most practical one)

        • “Meaningful” as in “insofar the game is concerned”. And let it be noted that son, I am dissapoint.

  12. Krupp quickly created a draft of a 15cm StuH 43 gun in a Panther turret, using Tiger’s commander cupola and Maus’ gun sight.

    Add the engines of E-75 from pre-8.8 nerf and let this failed monster become one big example of mechanic chimerism. :D

  13. Interesting, there is the point, should it be an arty or TD, why not both? When in “sniper” mode it aims like an arty piece and when it is in normal mode it aims like a normal tank.

  14. All come down. Yes there are many misspellings… as from other already mention “Panzer” (Sg. Der Panzer/ Pl. Die Panzer)….etc…..

    Even the great Mr. Hilary L. Doyle and moreover Thomas L. Jentz have a load of misspellings (and they had even a editor and publisher). So it isnt a big deal , as long we understand what trys to tell. Also people shouldnt forgot that those people, like Zarax arent native german-speaker and that german is one of the HARDEST language to learn. Even I – as german – had learned to do a proper konjunktiv, as I learned Latin.

    So as long as we understand what Zarax means. it isnt any problem. :) It would be just a problem if a typo would lead to a total different meaning: Like Bergepanzer – Bergpanzer…. but this isnt the case.

    As for the Assault gun line, I think it will make first sense if wargaming change some mechanic in the game; for example: Range. If we but it in a “if, then” hypothesis:
    If WG changes the map size + rendering range + encounter range of players + accuracy + shell range+ etc…. then I can see a real ROLE for assault guns. Because all those designs are in “tank-videogameplay-terms” more or less brawlers when it comes Tank vs. Assault gun; but currently ingame all Tanks are more or less brawlers. Which means that Assault guns wouldnt have a huge drawback to actual TDs. If Wg change this… I totally can see… a “brawlish-TD line aka Assault guns and a snipingish-Td line aka TDs.


    P.S. SS: Can you delete your “garbage comment” on the E-75 (W) topic?

    • What we need is destructible buildings on all maps… And the ability for shells to go through walls and houses (with a degradation in Penn ofc for AP and more or less instant explosion for HE). Then assault guns could be interesting. I use my grille often in game to just remove cover from some maps so people cant cap the flag. 1 shot is usually enough to take out most of the building.

  15. Noticed it yesterday, forgot to mention…

    Tier V
    “around 16.5 tons and powered by a 150HP engine, for a decent 13HP/ton ratio, ”
    Isn’t that just a sliver short of 9hp/t? Pretty much it is. Unless you meant a different engine.

  16. Sweet. If they actually do release a line like this I hope we don’t have to wait another 2 years for it.