2S38 is similar to HSTV-L for America, but it is in a lower b.r. and it has better thermical visor, is amphibious, spams more…it MUST be brought to a highter b.r. in my opinion.
1 Like
Gen 2 and gen 3 are literally the exact same in game its just that gen 3 has slightly higher contrast.
Why does it being amphibious even matter it might help once every thousand games and what do you mean it spams more? The cv90 fires even faster and sits at the same br as the 2s38.
2 Likes
Weird since the 2S38’s breach is rather large in-game.
The engine is a flat engine to allow soldier access, and only produces 500HP because of that.
@TheMightyAltroll
Weird since, not even half of the 2S38 is empty.
And the Lvkv9040C (at 10.0) has:
- far better survivability, with 5 crew members, a frontally mounted engine and transmission, and good spall liner coverage
- a radar to actively spot aircraft from far away (unlike the 2S38)
- far better gun handling with a better gun depression, while not being as tall (the 2S38s unmanned turret is useless because it only has -5 deg of depression while being a tall bus)
- a higher RPM (FIRES ALMOST THREE TIMES FASTER)
- double the reverse speed
What the 2S38 has over the Lvkv9040C:
- slightly higher hp/t
- slightly better APFSDS
- APHE (which can prove detrimental if you’re caught in a frontal engagement and struggle to pen)
- slightly higher turret rotation speeds
And the HSTV-L has:
- the best shell out of both of them
- insane gun handling with -17 (SEVENTEEN DEGREES) of gun depression (GOES UP TO -30 FROM THE SIDE)
- insanely high survivability due to an insane damage model and ricochet angles (impossible to kill if its hull down, essentially, and considering it’s extremely small with an extreme gun depression…)
- has over 10hp/t more than both of them, is far faster
1 Like
The Lvkv9040C has this shell
The 2s38 has this shell
You are fooling yourself if you are going to call that ‘slightly better’
It also has APHE, which isn’t detrimental because you simply swap at will.
The 2S38 also has this shell
Which has a 6m trigger radius, as opposed to the Lvkv9040C’s
Which also does far less damage, and anyone who has ever used the Lvkv9040C will tell you that the proxy fuze is not very good at actually killing aircraft, most times you will only get a ‘hit’ or very minor damage.
The Lvkv9040C does not have an unmanned turret, and can easily be destroyed/ammoracked through the turret. It does not have a tiny Gaijin male sized breech, unlike the 2S38, which makes it easy to breech. The Lvkv9040C, due to the massive radar on the back, is extremely easy to kill with HE, something Russians have in spades.
The 2S38 has OBSCENELY good gun handling, STOCK it is 38 degrees, which will only get better, likely upwards of 60 degrees, and it is 22 degrees vertical. (I’m not pathetic enough to buy the 2S38 so I don’t know for certain, this is a guesstimate). The Lvkv is literally half as good as the 2s38 in gun handling.
The 2S38 has gen 3 commander and gunner thermals, the LvKv9040c has gen 2 thermals and NO commander sight.
While the Lvkv 9040c has double the reverse, it takes much longer to reach the same speed as the 2s38. The 2s38 is much more maneuverable, much faster forward, much more responsive. So no, the Lvkv9040C is not more mobile.
The radar is actually not super helpful. It can occasionally find targets, but the angle is fairly low facing, and the lock on is IRST, which the 2S38 appears to have far better functionality with, as I struggle to lock on to many things with the 9040C.
While the 9040C may have double the fire rate, it also runs through its ready rack (24 shots) in seconds, while outputting far less firepower than the 2S38. It then takes forever to rearm said ready rack. It takes 5.5 seconds of sustained fire to completely empty the Lvkv9040C’s ready rack, whereas it takes twice as long, over 10 seconds, to empty the 2S38’s ready rack of 21.
The 2S38 can also kill pretty much any tank in the entire game frontally, if you know your weakspots.
The HSTV-L is also 11.3, does not have an unmanned turret, does not have IRST, does not have proxy fuze, and does not have APHE. The shell of the HSTV-L is also only marginally better than the 2S38’s APFSDS, and you have to aim for the same weakspots.
A better comparison would be the Otomatic, which sits at 11.3 as well, and is worse in every single way to the 2S38, besides slightly better shells (though the APFSDS is limited to 12 shots, and is artificially inaccurate) and a mediocre radar (the lock on function is wobbly and also very inaccurate, unlike IRST which is steady.)
So frankly I just think you are a purchaser of the 2S38 (Gross) and are attempting to defend it with all of your might. It is severely, hilariously, and obnoxiously undertiered.
5 Likes
Ah, I see - a text wall so full of skewed information that you intend to triumph by making it a literal chore to debunk your spewings.
I’ll just focus on the few specifics.
Gun handling is primarily gun depression, then horizontal and vertical traverse speeds.
The 33deg/s experted of the Lvkv9040C is more than enough and plenty fast. The 2S38s experted 56 deg/s is faster by a noticeable amount - but is far less of an advantage compared to the Lvkv’s 8 degrees of gun depression coupled on a lower turret.
I’ve personally never used a commander sight once in my life. And yet I seem to have performed noticeably better than you in any vehicle we’ve both played, so clearly - it’s not a very necessary feature.
Gen 2 vs gen 3 thermals is quite literally unnoticeable.
19.3hp/t vs 23hp/t is nowhere near the difference that you are making it out to be.
So can the Lvkv9040C.
Not an advantage for the 2S38 because of its horrible depression + huge vertical profile exacerbating the issue.
(You don’t seem to understand that an unmanned turret without gun depression isn’t a very large advantage - while the HSTV-L is a tank with, I believe, the best gun depression in the game on a tiny turret. Its turret can be nigh invisible, and I even think it might not even require turret crew to function - essentially becoming unmanned after being shot.)
…But is a 100 times better platform in every feasible way. With an actually considerable hp/t advantage (literally 10hp/t more), and the most insane gun handling in the game, packed into a tiny chassis with a far higher survivability. It’s quite obvious that most people don’t understand how much of a detriment size is.
“Worse in every single way” until you realize the advantages it has, and you start half-heartedly listing them, as if the APFSDS on it isn’t a much higher caliber, and much higher pen. And as if its full-size radar combined with a superior proxy doesn’t make it far better at killing aircraft. Although I do believe it is overtiered, and should go lower.
And you finish off your post with something utterly wrong (clearly a bit of a trend).
I don’t think you understand that trying to apply some sort of “peer pressure” - since you’ve just made a post without any substance, essentially “coping” - doesn’t actually affect me? Right?
You do realize that you telling me to “see myself out” after writing a very poorly written reply (“he just read you to filth” ???) (“real with us and admit you just don’t see why it should be put up in tiers” ???) isn’t really doing anything? You’re not someone worthy of respect in the least.
Also, it’s quite clear with that “Edit” that your reading comprehension is non-existent, so I think text-based forums such as this one really aren’t your speed.
It is not. It is primarily traverse speeds, and gun depression is only a part of it.
2 Likes
You’re right, you don’t think.
I don’t care about your peer pressure. You’ve repeatedly been a stonewaller with no coping skills and no ability to acknowledge others’ points without turning it into a some stupid Powerpoint presentation reply.
Ultimately, you’re worthless to debate with because you are scummy. So your opinion and vote is nullified by the wider consensus, and someone finally putting the stats in your face makes you rage out. I’m not sorry for calling out an a-hole.
1 Like
Great - then the T-90M has some of the best gun handling at top tier!
It’s incredible what kinds of replies you’ll get from “people” that are both dumb and adamant at the same time…
I did not say that depression does not matter. It still matters alot, but not as much as you make it out to be.
Depression doesn’t help you turn the turret faster.
2 Likes
No? You do realize I made a whole wall of text comparing direct numbers and stats to his cherrypicked ones? You literally replied to that post. I find myself consistently dumbfounded by how low you can get.
Apparently -3 degrees more depression negates over twice the gun handling.
I find myself consistently dumbfounded with how you characterize someone as “dumb and adamant at the same time” and then are surprised how you don’t see how arrogant you make yourself out to be.
1 Like
Comparing the two APFSDS shells on them makes no sense, both shells pen the exact same weakspots regardless the cv90 has a higher rpm and the 2s38 has better spalling
As for the HE-VT they’re practically identical id rather use the cv90 and i will once i get it becuase from seeing it being used its incredibly consistent and better since the higher cyclic rate helps massively the trigger radius being slightly higher on the 2s38 can just be considered a sidegrade for having a lower RPM
As for the unmanned turret cope, this would’ve been a good point a few updates ago but now the 2s38 can be ammoracked by shooting the ammo in the turret and can also be overpressured by HEAT-FS to the turret and UFP
Onto gun handling im 90% sure the cv90 all get above 38°s turret trav and 25°s vertical trav which is sufficient for any encounter they come against stop whining.
Would you please like to demonstrate the ingame practical difference between gen 2 and gen 3 thermals because they’re almost completely identical ingame
Heres the chally 2 with gen 2 thermals
Heres the 2s38 with gen 3 as for commander thermals who cares theyre a useless gimmick 90% if the time anyway
Onto mobility
The stridsfordens 9040c has a p/w of 19.3
The 2s38 has a p/w of 23.2 sure the 2s38 is faster acceleration wise by a little bit but it has weaker armour making it vulnerable to enemy autocannons unlike the cv90 which are mostly immune to 30mm and lower
Stop complaining about the lvkv radar it also has access to UTAAS which can lock up to 8km
Your next point is just dumb what you’re saying is an advantage on the cv90 for the most part just aim better and you wont be running out of the ready rack so quickly
And yes the 2s38 can kill pretty much any tank frontally so long as you know the weakspots but so can a T-34/85
Just learn how to aim and stop expecting every shell to magically teleport itself inside of the crew compartment
3 Likes
“Apparently”, being the clause.
3 degrees of gun extra gun depression on a considerably shorter chassis does indeed negate good vs great horizontal traverse speeds in terms of gun handling.
Especially considering the topic of an unmanned turret is constantly brought up surrounding the 2S38 - when that very same unmanned turret is turned far less effective due to those missing 3 extra degrees coupled with a very tall hull…
You said horizontal traverse is the primary facet of gun handling. Which is obviously wrong.
…You do realize that engagement is meant to be an active process and not a reactive process?
You think the Type 59 with its abysmal horizontal traverse was unplayable for me?
Of course - this is all under the assumption that horizontal traverse speed isn’t inverse, and that the jump from 33 to 56 is less noticeable than the jump from 5 to 10.
An active process in close quarters means HORIZONTAL TURRET TRAVERSE matters more than depression in most cases.
In short, evidence supports that the 2S38 will hold in an uptier and can go up to 10.3 or 10.7.
You’re the only one out of the bunch who consistently argues about it and against it. You consistently try stat shaming, until called out for what you are, and then you whine that you’re actually being ‘intellectually sound’ and the rest are just ‘dumb’.
1 Like
You’re too dumb to realize what active and reactive means when it comes to engagement.
I don’t know if it’s even worth spelling it out, but - it is what it is.
In CQC - you will HEAR the enemy. You will obtain information about where the enemy IS. (And also know positions on the map).
You will turn your turret TOWARD the enemy before you SEE the enemy. That is ACTIVE engagement.
Of course, both the 2S38 and the 90s have more than adequate horizontal traverse speeds for anything, so this doesn’t mean much. The Lvkv90 does have the advantage when it comes to killing air targets, because the 2S38 has to waste its time scanning the skies - while the Lvkv90C will have a radar ping and turn exactly towards the target in advance.
REACTIVE means that you will hold W into the enemies and REACT to them without thinking. This is probably your preference.
CQC when hearing and turning to address is reactive.
Active engagement is anticipating where the enemy’s routes of travel are, or predicting where they will go, and intercepting them ahead of time. This is done typically in long range.
Whichever your preference, it’s quite clear that the 2S38 is worth an uptier.
Also, in regards to ‘you’re too dumb’, you see of course now why I say you are what you are. You’re toxic, and I personally don’t like you.
1 Like