DickerMax
Raketenautomat
Couldn’t really find an image of this one, but well;
DF105
VT1/2
Couldn’t find images for Class 3… well, maybe cus it’s not even German to begin with.
1 Like
I’m not?
I have done nothing but show proof of information disputed in this thread. I have stated nothing on my stance on the vehicles BR or type.
I think generally they give AA radars. No radar makes it light tank in game, has radar makes it AA I game. (At least at higher BR ranges)
If that is the correct thing to do or not is a diskussion I’m not really that interested in having if I’m honest.
2S38 should be upped to top ground BR. Everything else would be too short.
What a sophistry?
If a person is being bullied, shouldnt what you want to do is stop it? rather than “If you want to prevent someone from being bullied, you have to accept someone else being bullied.”
might not a very good metaphor, but what Im trying to say is that this set of logic they just simply doesnt hold up
as you said, the BR of a vehicle is determined by many factors, rather than “because others do it, so you do it too”
Its not a good idea to go off topic when discussing whether the 2S38 is op or not, but I cant hold any longer
Top BR is not at all realistic…
i personally after looking over all the stats might agree to the sentiment of increasing it to 10.3.
Comparing to strf 9040C:
APFSDS: 30% better pen.
AA: IR tracking and the round has 50% better trigger radius and about 65% better pen on fragments.
Armor: worse, 9040C can survive almost all autocannons below 35mm. (2S38 below 25mm). both get yeeted by MBT canons.
Speed: the same forward, 2S38 half the speed backwards.
rotation: about 80% faster deg/sec.
so yeah, i can see the 2S38 at 10.3, perhaps even 10.7 but i’m unsure.
thats not really true though.
the 2S38 proxy has 50% larger trigger radius than all three of those and about 50% better fragmentpenetration. add to that the WAY better pen APFSDS.
that’s not really true either:
it is in fact closer to the HSTV-L than the Strv 9040C in terms of general type, performance and capabilities.
try comparing the stats between the three at aced crew.
1 Like
It’s SPAA capabilities aren’t 9.3 worthy, it’s actually much better than that. It’s possibly 10.7, considering it’s slightly worse than the Otomatic.
OTOMATIC isn’t 11.3 because of its anti-air.
It’s 11.3 because of its APFSDS.
it’s pointless to argue with him, you are better off talking to a brick wall…
1 Like
Bro, obviously they existed, but they are all just prototypes, which the discussion was about.
'kay. The discussion was about “prototypes with weaponary that the ‘designers’ fantasized about”, with you saying how this extends to “half of the German TT”.
Neither did you provide enough examples to account for “half” of the TT (which would still be dozens of vehicles, maybe even over a hundred), or why their loadouts/weaponary is ‘fantasy’.
All you did was throw up words, and never backed them up with anything.
1 Like
You think i load up the game and check every single plane and tank and list them here for you ? Do it yourself man, i got better things to do.
And the the fantasy weapon was a response to the “begleit uses a real VT”.
I also can draw something, build it out of wood and say it will carry a laser cannon in battle.
Burden of proof lil’ bud. Can’t prove it? Then don’t talk.
And the the fantasy weapon was a response to the “begleit uses a real VT”.
That’s what it is? It’s an HE-VT round that was originally developed for marine use.
I also can draw something, build it out of wood and say it will carry a laser cannon in battle.
Well, that’s exactly what BMP-2Ms APFSDS is, but suit yourself.
1 Like
I literally told you why i wont do it. Takes too much time. Do it yourself.
So? I can also say it will carry iglas, still didn’t happen.
I don’t know, remove it then idc, but i am also not the guy crying.
So do like I said, and just don’t talk about stuff if you’re unwilling to back your argument up - much easier to do imo.
So? I can also say it will carry iglas, still didn’t happen.
Sure, lets see if you have any proof of that.
2 Likes
You know what is even easier ? Stop crying about a tank and just acknowledge that it is a skill issue.
The proof is, that the tank never made it to a series production. What tf else you want.
ah so you want to say the gun that the bagel uses is fake ?XD
?
???
its a NAVAL GUN so ofc it would have acces to that round, if they would have purchased it or not is a different case
ye you are the guy saying bla bla half tech tree
And then you won’t list them
Weird
Wait, you’re the guy who came over to the 2A7V thread and started crying about people complaining in regards to the tank’s model, aren’t you?
Pot calling kettle black lmao.
The proof is, that the tank never made it to a series production. What tf else you want.
In other words “trust me bro”. To be fair, you’re putting a stain on the actual Karpov’s name, so just get out of here young man.
1 Like
I’d rather Gaijin re label this vehicle as a SPAAG like its supposed to be and give it guided projectile (3UO7) then give it a BR raise.
Also, this vehicle is supposed to have a radar of sorts, maybe get that modeled too.
Very interesting what you identify as crying.
Funny, everytime i come in here, i immediatly feel smarter after reading some of your guys diarrhea.