You’re about as low a bottomfeeder as they come, so I suppose I’m glad to sling mud on your bad actions and call you for what you are, a stonewall who ignores his own points.
You say depression helps you get better positioning, while ignoring that the CQC aspect is primarily done IN CITIES with FLAT surfaces that do not allow for defilade to be properly used, anyway. A very common map design in War Thunder, especially. In those instances, gun traverse speed and reload rate matters.
Which, as it turns out, the 2S38 does markedly more well than many.
I do, you just choose to think I don’t… get off of your moral high ground kiddo.
PRIMARILY does NOT mean that I’m “ignoring” other aspects. You clearly don’t understand what the word means, and you even bringing up “asking my teacher” and “growing up” is a joke.
Do you though? Seeing as you used that word to describe an important, albeit no more relevant than other aspects of gun-handling, characteristic - making it out to be the most important out of 4 of them, when it very much isn’t.
When I say that gun depression is the primary aspect of gun handling - it means that it is the most important and holds the most weight in the context. You can have a 200deg/s horizontal/vertical
traverse, but if you have -1 deg of gun depression - your gun handling sucks. If you would rather take that rather than ~20deg/s and -10 deg of gun depression, you’re just delusional.
Oh cool, and you can have -30 degrees of gun depression, but if your turret turns slower than Maus can drive, can you actually utilize that advantage?
You will prolly go out of your way, bend the laws of physics, resort to every single mental gymnastic ever thought of, and say yes.
I’ll just consider you more beast than man and no longer care about your points.
Ad hominem, an excellent example of why people don’t take you seriously. By the way, you’re Chinese right?
Regardless of you being in a CQC environment or a long range environment - you are expected to react ahead of time and pre-aim on your targets. If you’re in CQC or at long range, you should
Idealistic view that is unwarranted.
Hence, it is the most important aspect of gun handling. This is especially prominent in vehicles that ALREADY have good traverse speeds like the CV90s (and any 10.0 light tank), where the difference between 33 and 56 is barely noticeable.
It’s the most important aspect only on hilly maps that allow you to take advantage of it. In city maps, it is as useless of a characteristic as they come.
where the difference between 33 and 56 is barely noticeable.
You’re delulu, the difference between 33°/s and 56°/s is massive, it’s a 42% difference in the turret’s rotation speed.
Yea, think I’ll just call it quits while i’m ahead, you’re not interested in what other people have to say, you’re here just to prove that “you’re right, and they aren’t”. Your condescending tone really sells out who you are, and what your goal is.
okay, still not comparing to the lvkv as it has radar and no good AT round. the strf is a better comparison as it takes away the radar but adds the m/01 round instead but is otherwise identical to the lvkv as far as i know (except max positive gun elevation).
i do, but semantically there isn’t an order of priority within an umbrella term.
they are however differently important in different situations and saying one is flat out better than the others is objectively wrong. that is why i clearly stated that it is situational. gun depression wont help you att all in CQC and turret traverse wont help you much (but still a small bit) at long ranges from behind a hill.
what my main point is;
almost all of your points that are “flaws” are flaws only in specific situations. exactly in the same way that many of the advantages are positives in specific situations. BUT almost all of the advantages are advantages in most of the situations whilst the flaws are (almost exclusively) only flaws in one situation.
Many of the advantages will in my mind way heavier for BR placement as they are useful in more situations than one.
The only exception here being gun depression as it is a hard limiting factor, if you can’t fire att all the other stats won’t help you. but you solve that issue quite easily and that is such a small part of a vehicle when taking everything about it into account.
if you don’t feel like writing a wall of test as answer every time i completely understand, but could you then list of all the parts of the 2S38 that you think are worse than the strf9040C? no need for explanations as i will just use that list to add to my calculations made in the original posts that you commented to, to see if the BR range changes. (note that i will also then add all the positives for it that i didn’t use in the original).
But so far i have found that at least the raw stats of the 2S38 sits almost exactly in between the 9040C and the HSTV-L.
oh thunder skill, i don’t use that as i’ve seen many comments on it being unreliable as it relies solely on stats from players that use it and thus not being a representative selection of the player base.
but i don’t actually know so i won’t get into that. but thanks for the links :)
i also checked the strf and its stats are slightly lower than the lvkv for K/D but slightly higher for K/B
where the 2S38 shines is in arcade where it dominates in stats compared to both the strf and the lvkv.
K/D in arcade going lvkv-strf-2S38:
0.87 - 1.51 - 2.93
in realistic the difference is not that much:
1.75 - 1.48 - 1.13
if you look at K/B, starting with arcade:
0.75 - 1.12 - 2.86
and realistic:
1.36 - 1.42 - 1.2
so in arcade its ridiculously overperforming but in realistic they are equal enough for it to be within margin of error as the number of battles played for the strf is so low that i really can’t be used for any reasonable statistical accuracy (around 3000 is a number where you can start seeing and claiming statistical significance in most forms of studies/science). (K/D realistic is far enough apart that it will most likely show some sort of realistic difference in performance anyway).
So i think judging by this i think many players who say “its ridiculously OP and needs to be 11.0!!!” are probably coming from arcade and players saying “it’s fine where it is” are probably coming from realistic.
You do realise that is an anti air with not only the base APSFDS round but only difference is a search radar?
In my opinion that’s kinda poisoning the well, even if it’s in the favour of the CV90’s.
You’re implying that -5 gun depression is a flaw in only one situation… Or that it having far lower survivability with less crew members is also (mostly) a flaw in only one situation. I also recall you saying that it’s “mostly empty space” from the side, for the 2S38. As if someone who’s even a little bit experienced won’t just shoot towards the front where there’s 3 crew members lined up. Or the middle which will initiate an instant OHKO via ammo detonation.
The CV90s have full side hull spall liners and the Lvkv has 5 crew, of which only 2 are in the turret. If you don’t kill a 2S38 from the side in one shot - it is a skill issue. The Lvkv9040C being killed in one-shot from the side is miraculous.
Essentially - you think lower gun depression and lower survivability are “flaws only in one situation”, while lower pen accompanied with a 3X higher ROF and a lack of APHE - ALL THINGS which you can easily supplement by aiming better, are flaws in almost all situations.
you can’t do that, they are different vehicles with different uses and functions. it wont give a number worth any sort of weight to any of them individually by doing that.
Are you taking the piss?
You’re claiming the Lvkv9040C and the Strf9040C are different enough to not be bunched together?
You know - the two vehicles in the same tree, at the same BR, using the same platform, with the same internals, the same gun using similar ammunition.
With the only difference being that one gets a radar and 2 extra crew at the expense of a worse shell. The Lvkv9040C is certainly slightly better (and is easily better than the 2S38 and is the best 10.0 IFV in the game IMO), but they play almost identically. That’s a fact.
Whilst I don’t disagree with this at all I don’t fully agree either, the fact that with good placement a 2S38 can hide it’s crew while exposing the turret and back half of the vehicle alone is pretty much in it’s favour all things considered.
But of course that doesn’t always happen.
And yes of course you can just shoot back at the 2S38, there is absolutely nothing wrong about that statement.
But at least for me the main issue is the fact that to effectively disable the vehicle from the front you’d have to go for the crew (any good 2S38 player will try to safeguard the crew against getting shredded by another autocannon tank.) You’d have to go though the “Spall liner that’s pretending to be a fuel tank” and yes of course fuel tanks are basically liners anyway, one would think that once the tank was destroyed it’d stop behaving like a spall liner, you know, like the currently implemented spall liners do. Seemingly though it stays effective even after it’s been destroyed, (E.G completely red) at least in my experience.
If you have a way of getting around that I’d genuinely like to know cause I’ve obviously got it wrong on how to combat a 2S38 user.
Which is hardly ever possible due to the lack of gun depression. Which is something that’s been recursive and something I’ve personally mentioned perhaps half a dozen times.
If he finds a very specific area where he can somehow both shoot you and remain behind cover - you can always just take out his breech and reposition, you would need to be in a very bad spot for that to be possible, though.
I have experienced this maybe ~2-3 times, out of dozens of 2S38s that I’ve one-shot directly through said fuel tank. My most played BR is 10.0 so I see them all the time, and this has not been an issue. It HAS happened, but extremely rarely (about as often as any other tank from any other tree having a krok ))) moment). Autocannons seem to phase right through into the crew, even.
I’ve also been accused of being someone who uses the 2S38/has bought one, which is wrong. I’d personally never buy that piece of crap. But I’d also never grind Russia, either.
I don’t know how you’re having trouble with them, as they’re usually free kills in my experience.
The 2S38 fuel tank is far less effective than the BMP-3 fuel tank, as well. The BMP-3 fuel tank has actually eaten plenty of rounds in my experience - the 2S38, not really.
no need for this, i’m having a civil discussion and trying my best to understand your position in the matter and why you think i’m wrong. I’m 100% ready to be disproven and change my opinion if i see something that would in the grand scheme of things impact performance to such a degree that it would lower a vehicles BR compared to a collection of other things that would increase it (thus negating each other making it stay at the BR it already is).
yes, from behind hills, its the only place i can think of. feel free to correct me but i don’t then there is any other situation where gun depression matters.
it doesn’t have less crew, as i stated before, i’m comparing to the strf NOT the lvkv. the strf also has 3 crew. and again “far lower survivability” is situational.
From behind cover the 2S38 survives infinitely better as the strf has 2/3 of its crew visible in the turret when peaking and will at least loose one crew (and most likely die) if hit in the turret that has no liner. the 2S38 also has a way smaller area of the turret that will actually do any sort of damage at all to the tank after penetration, most of the shots that hit the turret will pass through doing nothing. those that hit gun or breech will damage it but with that repaired no permanent damage has been done, the only place to do damage to its turret is the tiny area of ammo that could explode and get you a kill.
in open fields and in CQC the strf will survive A LOT better as it has liner, better armor and a frontal engine/transition.
going by your earlier statement that the gun depression is the most important gun handling function i assume that you (as well as i) think that the main role of these two are shooting from behind cover then the survivability goes in favour for the 2S38 does it not?
oh absolutely, but that does not mean that you automatically hit that area if either you or it are moving.
the difference here is that the 2S38 has more places where the shot will effectively do nothing to it whilst the strf looses 1 or 2 modules almost wherever you hit.
hitting the 2S38 “in the middle” from the side is not a guarantied kill, there is several areas where the shot might yellow some modules or crew but not take anything out to the point of needing repairs. and if it does take out breech, gun, turret ring or gunsight you can still drive and try to hide (the strf cant since if you hit in those areas you also kill the crew and thus the entire tank).
spall liners help, but the area of instant kill in combination with second shot kill is still larger on the strf (NOT the lvkv, i dont know why you are still comparing to it, the 2S38 is much more related to the strf). still only 3 crew, not 5.
gun depression yes, (again feel free to correct me). but i said “almost exclusively”, not entirely, about survival (as described above).
higher RoF matter less than pen on these types of vehicles, it matters yes, but less (on MBT’s i would argue the other way around), if a tank shoots you and misses it matters little if you shoot 20 rounds or 10, it matters more if you in that time hit and destroy the breech or barrel (or with some luck the turret ring and kill it). if you surprise a tank it again RoF matters little, both of them will kill it from the side before it can do anything back.
the main area where RoF matter is AA as volume of fire increases chances to hit a fastmoving target, and there the 2S38 has the IR-tracking and a better proxy round to make up for that (and then some as that helps other areas too). lack of APHE i have not talked about and do agree that it matter extremely little, i don’t really know why you brough it up.
?
i’m just trying to have a normal discussion to increase my understanding on the vehicle and peoples position around it. i’m trying to be as factual as i can and with as little bias as i can (although it is to some degree unavoidable) to collect information that would help me BR-place it. i have no personal quarrel with the 2S38 as i don’t find it an issue when i face it, i’m just doing data collection and calculations to see where it would land in BR between the 2 most compared to vehicles.
statistically yes, for uses to compare to the 2S38 yes.
one is mainly used for anti air and the other is mainly anti tank.
i said nothing on specific stats, i said “uses and fuctions”.
they play differently and players will use them differently and such will garner different results.
they are almost identical in pure numbers, but their different roles makes them play differently enough that statistically you cant bunch them together.
looking back at the statistics you linked earlier they very much don’t play “almost identically”. the lvkv is MUCH more anti air oriented and is played as such to a way greater extent. saying “That’s a fact” feels disingenuous as it at least statistically is clearly shown not to be.
I also don’t understand your claim of the lvkv being “easily better than the 2S38” when as i showed earlier in my calculations (thus disregarding anecdotes and personal feelings/experiences) when comparing to the strf that almost all of the stats are better for the 2S38. it is much closer in playstyle to the strf because they both don’t have radar, the strf gets a better round making the main round closer to the 2S38 and lastly having the same amount of crew.
Well, you’re not really having a discussion. You keep bringing up extremely skewed scenarios and expect me to continue writing articles upon articles debunking them one by one.
Like - I have to go and focus on every single part piece by piece, such as this:
This is a stupid situation as you’re implying the 2S38 has perfectly found a spot where there’s a rock/other piece of cover where only his turret is visible. On top of that - the CV90 has two crew on two sides, and a turret shoot is going to only kill one crew in 99% of cases. AKA, it won’t die from a turret shot.
The best cover (and most reliable) in the game is based on gun depression.
Hills, any area with a height advantage (where you SHOULD be), and every map has it. Using your gun depression is the main way to hide your hull. On top of that, the 2S38’s hull is larger, more susceptible to autocannons - and is mainly ammo/crew inside.
You don’t seem to understand that this:
Applies more to the Strf9040C than it does for the 2S38.
Shooting the front of the Strf from the side will only kill the driver. All that space between the area in front of the gunner/commander and the front of the vehicle is a non-kill.
If the Strf 9040C’s hull is facing you from the side, while its turret is facing your tank - you’ll only realistically be able to take out one crew member, as well, because of the spall liner. You can’t test this in the garage as the turret is always facing forwards, but I’m willing to bet it’s what happens in a real match. You can tell how little spalling there is, due to the spall liner.
Shooting the turret crew will obviously always result in only ONE crew member dying, as well:
And shooting the middle doesn’t seem to result in both of them dying, ever. In fact, shooting the middle of the turret usually only takes out the breech and doesn’t kill anyone.
Dead. Ammo blowout. Instant kill. Also possibly kills two crew members (this one was 1 dead and another orange).
That entire area in the middle is an instant kill. Shooting slightly in the front is an instant kill. Shooting the turret slightly lower is an instant kill.
Both the 2S38 and Strf9040C don’t have any crew/ammo in the rear 50% of the tank, except the 2S38 has the engine there, and will get mobility killed. The Strf9040C has literally nothing there other than the radiator.
The 2S38 getting shot in the middle will OHKO the tank with an ammo explosion. Shooting the front from the side will kill the 3 crew lined up. The Strf will only lose the driver and the engine when shot in the front, and you need to hit a fairly small area in the side to OHKO the gunner/commander. IF IT ISN’T the Lvkv9040C, which has 5 crew :).
Here’s a shot in the front going through the gunner, into the ammo - and being an instant kill.
And you expect me to not say that you’re taking the piss.
The 2S38’s “stats” that are better are:
horizontal traverse
50mm more pen on the APFSDS and the option for APHE
3hp/t more
has an unmanned turret (with a platform that isn’t built to take advantage of it, as it’s just a BMP bodykit)
The Strf/Lvkv’s stats that are better are:
THREE TIMES HIGHER rate of fire
better reverse speed
great spall liner coverage
higher survivability (literally proven here, albeit anyone could have said that at a glance)
considerably better gun depression
far more resistant to autocannons (the 2S38 is not resistant to 25mm APDS or greater and will die momentarily, and can even be 50cal’d from the side at point blank)
the Lvkv9040C has 2 extra crew (incredible advantage)
the Lvkv9040C has a radar
So, what’s wrong with you?
Next, “the Lvkv is MUCH more anti air oriented”? Hello?
The Lvkv IS AN STRF 9040C. Except a slightly weaker APFSDS shell, but 2 extra crew and a radar. HELLO.
It’s the SAME TANK, except MORE SURVIVABLE, but with a weaker shell. Personally - I would rather take the Lvkv9040C for anti-tank duties just because of the 2 extra crew that make it less likely to get one shot and allow it to survive more. The slightly higher pen of the m/01 isn’t that much of an advantage over the 2 crew extra.
i genuinely don’t understand how they would be sewed. i’m trying to be as objective as i can.
and that is what a discussion is, a back en forth of arguments and counter arguments until a consensus is reached.
yes, that is the pint isn’t it? what would the alternative be?
this happens almost every game i play in any vehicle, that is my main playstyle. sure there are maps that does not have it (like cargo port) but a vast majority of maps do have many positions exactly like that.
saying “it wont die” full stop just isn’t factually true, the odds are lower because the crew are split, but any shot in the central area will spall and hit both (or hit the magazine under the breech killing it). sure, i exaugurated by using the words “most likely die”, and i do take that part back, but it still at the very least does lasting damage and kills one crew. make that shot at an angle and those odds of a one shot kill increase with the angle.
agreed to a large extent, but there are very few maps where the hills are made in such a way that you can’t reposition to find a place on it with less incline. it’s an issue yes, but one that more often than not can be solved.
larger? i don’t think so? lets check.
using numbers for 2S38 from military today and for CV90 from here i get:
strf:
length: 7m width 3.38m height 2.7m (with turret)
2S38:
length 7.2m width 3.23 height 2.4m (with turret)
i’m guessing the turrets of the two are about the same height (i even think the 2S38 turret is a small bit lower).
i’m just guessing here but lets say the turret is about 0.4m so subtract from both heights.
side area:
strf: 7x2.3=16.1 sqr meters.
2S38 7.2x2=14.4 sqr meters.
i might have done this wrong, feel free to correct me.
also worth noting is that by removing the height of the turret we also remove the area of weak spot that the turret is on the strf.
More susceptible to autocannons? yes absolutely.
mainly ammo/crew inside? i would say that the total area of crew from front is the same and from side is larger on strf. total area of ammo is a lot larger on 2S38.
i would not call that a center shot, but it makes a different good point, the strf’s weakpoints are way more condensed, hit center or front and you often hit more than one thing. the 2S38 gets hit and its often only one thing that gets damaged (unless crew/ammo kills the entire thing).
agreed.
non kill on first shot, will kill with sekond. but i do see your point.
side view:
shot at back does almost nothing to the strf but takes the engine of the 2S38 making it a sekond shot kill. advantage strf.
shot at center hull almost always kills both of them, 2S38 with ammo and strf with ammo or crew.
(hit turret the 2S38 survives but the strf survives) TINY advantage 2S38 with turret survivability.
shot at front crew kills 2S38. the strf gets second shot killed.
front view:
hull shot left half kills both strf and 2S38 (both majority crew and ammo for both), shot to the left half takes engine and gunner of strf and kills 2S38 (second shot kill strf as gunner is also out)
so that’s an advantage in survival for strf regarding the hull. but as you said
so hull wont be shown if you use the best and most reliable cover anyway. but yes, it is a point in the strf favour.
this i find very weird as this is how i die in it most of the time.
(
Sidenote:
i feel like you are cherry picking here. that shot is straight at the ammo, i specifically mentioned areas with nothing behind. i can find a lot of places where the shot only makes things yellow or orange.
)
BUT i will have to agree with you here and change my earlier statement as i had no idea the 2S38 spalled the way it did, that is horrendous (not even the strf B without liner spalls that much) x) thanks for showing me that. so the strf is vastly more survivable when it come to hull shots.
The last bit i agree to the points but your bad attitude makes me instinctively not want to answer, you are not helping your point here by doing this, no matter how factually correct you are. i will answer regardless but please, you are not helping either me or yourself by being angry, mean and saying things in affect. it will not help your cause.
higher fire rate does not make it worthy of higher BR. i think this is why people bring up the HSTV-L as an example (but i’m not sure), as it has conciderably lower fire rate but also conciderably higher penetration. i wont get into the HSTV-L more here as it digresses from the discussion we are having.
top speeds matter way less than acceleration, but yes, the top speed is higher.
as i own the strf C and can testdrive the 2S38 i have just now tested the reverse in realistic test drive of both.
the 2S38 tops at 20 after about 2 seconds going straight back, if you turn it falls to about 15 and then back up to 20 very fast.
the strf has way higher top reverse, it comes to ~23km/h after 3 seconds and then slows down in acceleration significantly, taking about 2 more seconds to hit 30km/h. 1 more second lands you at 33-34km/h and then it almost does not accelerate any longer.
after 6 seconds of backwards driving the difference was about 1.5-2m in distance.
i did not know the strf accelerated backwards that fast at the lower speeds.
so i would now after testing put them about equal in that departement as if you after 6 seconds aren’t in complete cover you are getting shot at again.
next three points are all the same thing and an advantage to the strf.
im not comparing to the lvkv.
i do not understand your point here at all, you are saying one thing but making it out to be something else. or am i missreading? i’m very confused.
in my mind giving a vehicle a worse round and instead a radar and higher gun elevation is exactly what makes it more AA oriented. if you look at the stats you linked the air kils are 6 times higher on the lvkv than either of the other two.
yes, that i agree to, i have not said anything about that.
changing only one or two things on a tank can make it play vastly differently and thus the K/D cant be melded to create a combination of the K/D stats as the playstyles are different.
this is a personal preference more than anything else. i personally would choose the other way around because that is how i play and like my tanks.
you are making this out to be like i’m claiming they are extremely different tanks (which i am not).
the only two things i have claimed is that the strf is closer to the 2S38 exactly because of those differences to the lvkv and that the strf and lvkv are used sufficiently differently in matches and cant be combined to get an average performance of K/D to use for either of them.
could you explain this more? the images confuse me as the turrets tops (excluding the periscope of the 2S38) are at the same height as the house in the background.
that and all the data i can find whilst searching about the irl vehicles show those numbers or something there around.
You were literally corrected.
Military-today and other such sites are not sources. They’re not even a secondary source.
The 2S38 is considerably taller - more specifically, its GUN is a lot taller, which is why the -5 gun depression being a problem is further exacerbated, and the unmanned turret advantage is gone. The Strf9040’s -8 gun depression is a lot better because the tank itself (and specifically its breech) is far lower.
How does it matter if you hit “more” things - if in the 2S38 - it’s either crew or ammo? That will kill you instantly? It’s like you’re implying that it’s worse to get hit in the breech, horizontal drive, radiator, etc - instead of in the ammo where you die instantly. Just because there’s more things. ???
And lastly, because I think this conversation can come to a close now.
I would recommend that you actually play multiple trees to better understand the weaknesses/strengths of these vehicles.
This is your rapport in Russian AND Chinese vehicles. AKA tech trees with “Eastern” design features.
That is to say - it’s quite obvious that you have no experience in them. I would recommend actually playing them and feeling their disadvantages for yourself.
I personally played the US up to the Abrams and IPM1 (back when they were the end of the tree), and the entirety of China (which is Eastern/Western vehicles combined, and now finally some domestics slowly dripping in). Along with a little bit of everything else.
And I’ve felt both of them. And I know what to look out for. I could easily tell that most of your downright loony takes are clearly from a viewpoint of someone who’s never really experienced these vehicles.
not really corrected. you just stated “you’re wrong” and showed an image from in game. (that i saw after my post as you posted a second time before i posted my respons to your first one, i hadn’t seen it yet and now that i have i don’t understand it).
what sources could i use that are considered valid to get the irl heights of both?
i don’t understand your response here as i further down in my post (just after the quote you made) acknowledged you point and gave it to you?
i have started to. but i would also argue that playing a vehicle and facing it in game shouldn’t really have any impact on BR-placement calculations as they are not supposed to be based on individual player experience.
see above.
and if you want to go down that route your stats aren’t really that diverse either at the ranks discussed
but as i said, individual player experience should not impact BR-placement calculations.
vast amounts of player statistics on the vehicles might though.
neither have you? in either of them? i don’t see the point in making this statement.
again, does not matter for calculations. but i very clearly have played the strf a lot so i have at least some experience in one of them. you have played neither of them. you have 15 games in the IPM 1 and 138 in the M1 Abrams. no games in any us tank rank 6 and only 265 games total in rank 5? how on earth did you manage that?
but again, this does not matter.
