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.
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?
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
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.
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.
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.)
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.
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.
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.
0.5s reload on the 2S38 (120RPM), 0.2s reload on the Lvkv9040C (300RPM).
This is 2.5 times as fast, not triple (but close enough anyways).
I agree that radar is good to have, but it’s not necessary for pseudo SPAAs in SRB, like the 2S38, and can actually alert aircraft of your presence and possibly your position.
The purpose of these light tanks are to scout with drone for CAS, destroying enemy drones, deal with ground if needed, and air if needed.
I 100% agree that it all comes down to the situation you’re in; however, 57mm APFSDS will do a lot more damage than 40mm APFSDS, and 57mm APFSDS will be able to pen more (143mm flat, and 83mm at 60 degrees for Lvkv 9040C, while 225mm flat, and 130mm (!!!) at 60 degrees for the 2S38. This is equivalent to the T-55AM-1’s 3BM25 round, which is not particularly impressive at 10.0, but for the reload, it is (despite its relative lack of damage). The 57mm APFSDS the 2S38 has enough penetration (and angle pen) to penetrate the UFP of the Leopards, the LFP of T-80Us, and being able to ignore more of the angled side armour of MBTs (because of that angle pen).
The firerate increase of the Lvkv compared to the 2S38 may compensate for the lack of penetration and damage from the sides, but it does NOT compensate for the lack of penetration when considering front-aspect shots, where the extra penetration matters most. You could, instead, more reliably shoot the barrel and go for the sides of MBTs than the 2S38, but less damage from the 40mms, and the fact that actually killing MBTs are the far better option in this situation, makes it so that I believe the 2S38 is the better option.
The survivability of the 2S38 is rather strong hull-down, although it rarely is in hilly maps due to the lack of gun depression, as well as having the external fuel tank that may soak a few rounds. The Lvkv does not have the crewless turret design, but it is 50.cal proof, and is even immune to 30mm APFSDS rounds in most areas, as well as having slightly better gun depression. I won’t disagree with you on this.
Yes, this is true (besides the three times as much, as it would be 2.5 as many Proxy shells down range).
The better firerate is definitely helpful, but it comes at cost with running out of first-stage ammunition 2.5x as fast as the 2S38 does. 24pcs of ammo in the Lvkv9040C is not a lot compared to 20pcs of ammo in the 2S38… you see? Although, I must admit, the first-stage replenishment time for ammunition in the Lvkv9040C is probably shorter than the first-stage replenishment time for ammunition in the 2S38 (unfortunately I cannot check for sure), but from what I can see from both of their test drives (with basic crew and 0 crew skill level, they are quite similar.
Besides that, you are now required to shoot multiple more rounds to destroy an aircraft compared to the 2S38, due to the fact that it has ~17% less explosive mass (190.8g compared to 231g), and, more importantly, only a 4m proximity fuse radius instead of 6m (33.3% reduction), so the chances of them hitting is also less.
The projectile mass of the proxy for the Lvkv9040C is 0.88kg, with 1015m/s muzzle velocity, so we can say that its momentum is 893.2 kg m/s.
The projectile mass of the proxy for the 2S38 is 2.8kg, with 1000m/s muzzle velocity, so we can say that its momentum is 2800 kg m/s.
This means that the 2S38’s round has more inertia than the Lvkv’s round, and it means that it would be less affected by air resistance, as well as being less affected by spindrift (causes more inaccuracy). The effective range of the Lvkv is much worse and is probably around upto 4km, whereas the 2S38 would be around ~5 or ~6km.
What you are also missing is the fact that the 2S38’s gun elevation is 75 degrees, while the Lvkv9040C is only 50 degrees, which greatly hinders its capability of hitting aircraft that are directly above.
Overall, I would say the 2S38 is the better option at medium to far ranges (where helicopters would normally be, as well as jets who are trying to launch AGMs), whereas the Lvkv are better suited to dealing with drones and close-proximity aircraft.
The 2S38 would be reasonable at 10.3 or maybe 10.7, but I don’t agree that it should be at 11.0.
Yes, I admit that I was wrong about the QN506’s fire and forget missiles. They are better than the Spikes, so they are far more deadly.
The SACLOS missile, that you killed the Harrier with, is reasonable with most irst-locked ATGMs, since that harrier was flying straight and not maneuvering at all.
