I wish there would be a few days free testing of premium vehicles so people can try it and come back to earth.
1 Like
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.
so frontal area:
strf: 3.38x2.3=7.8 sqr meters.
2S38 3.23x2=6.46 sqr meters.
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.
but i will concede as this is anecdotal from me.
(
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.
1 Like
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.
True
i don’t know the in game heights and i don’t know how to see them. the screenshots you provided i cant interpret.
i thought i did:
started, not gotten far, like at all. but still started.
i’m focusing on the higher ranks as that is where the discussed vehicles are at, playing lower ranks wont make you face them or experience them (and i still don’t think this matters for the discussion, but still a point to make as your statement was that you played against both and know how they feel to face).
Going by pure player stats from thunderskill (apparently questionable source) and exclusively realistic mode, i think its K/D comparable to most other light autocannon tanks at 10.0 (IIRC). but if you take into account arcade as well then no. and i don’t think we are able to see the stats from all players in total.
unnecessary and demeaning, please stop.
does ESL matter? do you think i write in any sort of way insufficiently well in English?
sure, but that is not what we are talking about. i fully agree. but it makes little point for this comparison in my opinion.
Getting them when they were top does not explain this without further explanation.
i have now looked it up and as i understand it the entirety of rank 6 got added after the M1 Abrams and IPM?
in that case then i also assume that most of the games you played with those two vehicles were before the addition of the 2s38 in 2022?
2 Likes
Yes, and 99% of my recent hundreds of games were at 10.0 in the Chinese lineup? Against the 2S38??
No, it just means you played passively just like an ATGM TD should be played and got remarkedly lucky, but now try that with an MBT - on a city map. You btw don’t have a K/D of 2.0 either in the M113 TOW, you’re sitting at 1.72, which is the average for this vehicle… considering the fact it has a total registered match count of 33 for the past month.
Aside, it’s an outlier when checking out your stats, seeing as CM25 has a K/D of 0.58, lol.
But hey, it’s not like M113 is actual garbage in any other situation, right? You’re grasping at straws honestly, actually pathetic.
Your entire post is dogwater, but the fact that you got 6 likes is downright incredible. Goes to show how uneducated people seem to be about basic game mechanics and gameplay.
Mate, all you do is attack people for their posts regardless of the substance, aren’t you a bit tired of this childish tirade by now?
Well, not that it matters to me. Enjoy writing your next worthless post & make sure to include as many insults as you can, since that’s pretty much the only thing you’re good at :p
5 Likes
Wow! You’re finally beginning to grasp the concept that people have been trying to explain to you, amazing! Took you only about ~3 days I think? A garbage vehicle can still perform well in its “natural habitat”, but put it into any other and what are you gonna get, a waste of SP.
I’ve played more than enough Russian vehicles to know that they’re bad at hilly maps due to their limited gun depression ability, but put them into a town and they become S-tier brawlers, especially the BVM - same thing here, just that instead of cities, it’s the hilly maps where the M113 excels because it can make use of its advantages over other AFVs.
You write this drivel and expect anything less. You should be thankful I’m even taking into account what you’re writing.
Do you want a pat on the head too? To me it looks like you’re starved for attention.
1 Like
Honestly, this debate of the 2S38 needing to be moved up in br has ended multiple times by now.
Nano, Sneed, and others have debunked every bs argument the whiners brought up.
1188 comments and not once it was proven that the darn thing needs to get moved up.
2 Likes
One of the best light vehicle in SRB for 10.0+, that’s for sure xD
SRB? Like the country?
I’m just gonna assume that you’re talking about GRB.
And I think the Begleit, Radkampfwagen 90, Type 16, Dardo, VCC, Freccia, the Strf9040C, Lvkv9040C and Strf 9040 BILL and CV90105 are all “one of the best vehicles” around the BR range of 10.0.
I would personally take any of the Italian ~10.0 IFVs and any of the Swedish 10.0 IFVs over the 2S38. I bought the Italian premium OF-40 almost entirely because of their 10.0 IFVs. Especially with the spike buffs, which have gone unnoticed by most. (I noticed them because my friend plays the Vilkas and I play the QN506.)
No, SRB as in- Squadron Realistic Battles.
Those are just called Squadron Battles because they’re Realistic by default.
And if we’re talking about actually overpowered vehicles from squadron battles (I used to play them quite a bit with an old squadron) - the IS-7/Object 279 take the cake.
People who spam the IS-7 or Object 279 in SB deserve only the worst.
There used to be SAB (Squadron Arcade Battles), but they decommissioned it couple years ago. We still call it SRB to this day.
‘SB’ can also be confused with Simulator Battles.
You could say that, yes, but the Object 279’s BR was increased to 9.0, and it is no longer that invincible. The F4D makes short work of it now, as well as a good few MBTs at 9.0.
The IS-7 is definitely gnarly, but again, 400mm HEATFS is quite common at 8.3, so it isn’t that much of an issue too (although it is definitely lethal in the weapons department).
The 2S38 is a particularly useful light tank all the way even up to 12.7 (although its usefulness against actual MBTs and aircraft gets worse).
Yep… Just like the Freccia, BILL, Lvkv, QN506, Begleit, Dardo…
The QN506 is my personal favorite IFV and tank in the game so far, albeit I would say it’s worse than all of those.
I still use it at 11.7 anyway. And I find it more fun than the 11.7 tanks, honestly.
1 Like
If a team is using 2S38 in SRB they’re worse off than bringing an MBT.
Everyone’s in call, everyone has squad ping.
Light tanks in general aren’t needed.
At 10.0, there are 20 superior vehicles to bring for SRB.
1 Like
You clearly haven’t played SRB before at top tier then.
BILL and Lvkv are pretty decent (especially the BILL). They both have proxy for drones, but only the Lvkv has IRST target tracking.
2S38 is better in this situation (other than maybe against drones), since the Lvkv has much worse APFDS, and the proxy has less range and damage / proximity radius.
Dardo is also pretty good, but it doesn’t do what the 2S38 is suppose to do.
QN506s and Freccias are relatively common in SRB, but the spikes are inferior to any missile at close ranges. People mostly use these two to deal with helicopters while still having the capacity to deal with ground, although you can deal with aircraft somewhat effectively with them too (especially since the QN has IRST). In the video you sent, the 2S38 or Lvkv would’ve done a better job, maybe even the BMP-2M too!
Did you not read the thread? Or the many paragraphs I and others have written? Because that’s wrong.
The Lvkv9040C has TRIPLE the RPM and a radar. Three times more proxy shells down range along with a radar to spot and pre-aim enemies coming from all angles.
And you imply the 2S38 is better? Certainly not against aircraft.
And against tanks - I think it’s down to priority, I would EASILY take the Lvkv9040’s far, far superior survivability, gun handling and RPM over the 2S38s better shell, slightly higher hp/t and better horizontal traverse when it comes to ground combat.
Second - the QN506’s ace in the hole is the F&F missile. Which is not a Spike, and is in fact an NLOS missile IRL, even. But regardless - it has double the range, double the flight time, and better tracking, it’s also immune to flares and smokeless.
Therefore - the QN506 can destroy helicopters that are up to 8 whole kilometers away.
The QN506 can also fire its tandem 1200mm at any range, including point blank. They do perfectly fine at point blank. Only F&F missiles that are stuck in a vertical position like on the Vilkas are inferior at close ranges.
The missile you saw in the clip was the small 200mm penning missile. It was a showcase of how it can be tied to IRST and how it has good enough tracking and max G to hit a plane.