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.
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.
I have.
And at top no one’s in 10.0s cause they’re in 11.7s exclusively.
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.
This entire blurb of text is entirely unfounded and is basically just “I think this is true”. I do agree on the 2S38 having a higher elevation. That is an advantage, although in most cases - enemies will either be low or impossibly up high.
On top of that - you are NOT hitting ANYTHING with proxy past 3km with these vehicles. Unless that player is essentially AFK.
You can easily penetrate half of the top tier tank roster frontally through their LFPs with even the 140mm weaker shell. And both tanks will need to flank against tougher vehicles, and both tanks will easily penetrate the flank of any tank.
To be more transparent - even the weaker shell of the Lvkv9040C can easily penetrate the:
Frontally, in a CQC situation. (Which is not how you’re supposed to play).
Similarly, the other vehicles that it can’t easily pen - the 2S38 can’t easily pen either.
And both vehicles can just shoot the breech and then easily dismantle any top tier tank from the side.
Russian tanks even have their infamous 20mm lower side - which you can penetrate if they’re showing their side even a little bit, and kill them. With any of these vehicles.
The only super relevant situation where the 2S38s penetration comes in handy over the Strf/Lvkv/anything with less pen is that it can reliably penetrate the LFPs of Russian tanks. The other tanks can’t reliably do so. The better Strf 9040C shell can penetrate the LFP, but it has to be quite close.
And that’s dandy… Until you realize the 2S38 doesn’t face Russian vehicles often. For obvious reasons.
Again - I’m sure you understand that the higher pen of the 2S38 won’t actually help it penetrate something like the cheek and LFP of an Abrams? Both something like an Lvkv9040 and a 2S38 will aim at the turret ring to kill.
And I’d personally take the higher ROF over the higher post-pen. (Implying that the post-pen of the 57mm APFSDS is much higher than 40mm APFSDS in the first place - it’s mainly the APHE - which has FAR WORSE penetration at an angle, I mean, it’s APHE.)
Autocannons are made for flanking. I get side aspect shots 90% of the time. If you’re meeting an MBT frontally in either vehicle - you’re probably gonna die. That’s not how you’re supposed to play a light tank.
…And? You also completely forget that the Lvkv/Strf C’s design makes them CONSIDERABLY more survivable against MBTs? You appear to completely ignore this post.
You seem like a normal person and upstanding person unlike some of them, so I’m sure that you can understand why, after all these arguments have been made - I felt quite peeved at some people saying the 2S38 is better than the HSTV-L, or how they think it’s somehow 11.0 worthy.
10.3 MAYBE. I mean - it already has horrible stats overall, and I have no issues with them.
I don’t understand why you think it should go up to 10.3 at all. If it goes up to 10.3 - the Swedish 10.0s should be going to 10.7 or 11.0.
The Italian 9.7-10.3 IFVs are also all superior to the 2S38 especially after the Spike buff, so I don’t see why the 2S38 somehow sticks out - OTHER THAN for this reason:
Realistically - ALL of the IFVs in the ~10.0 range are very good. Most of them superior to the 2S38.
The only one that performs poorly/out of line is the M3A3 Bradley, in my opinion. That should go down to 9.7, at least. And 90% of the reason why it sucks is because the launcher folds when moving, giving the ATGMs retarded amounts of downtime for no reason. If the launcher only folded when reloading - it’d at least be a fair bit better.
Also,
What?
The 2S38’s APFSDS only pens 209mm at 500m. That’s only 50mm more than the Strfs.
It obviously doesn’t go through even the Leopard 2A4s UFP.
I’m guessing you meant to say LFP. Which it can’t reliably pen. Only the lower parts of the LFP. And the Strf 9040C can also pen the LFP if you shoot a bit lower still (but it still can, and will do damage. The amount of area that the 2S38 can pen over the Strf is a tiny bit larger.
Any higher than this, and neither of them will pen:
And, of course - neither one will pen any more areas.
Also - if you meant the 81 degree angled upper UFP - not only is that a ricochet angle and not somewhere you will penetrate reliably regardless of what APFSDS you have. Since it will shatter all of them at 81 degrees - but both the Strf and 2S38 can pen there if it’s angled up a little bit.
You should never shoot there, though. Regardless.
that is how it is calculated in game:
https://wiki.warthunder.com/Damage_mechanics
i personally don’t have much issues hitting proxies past 4km if i have some sort of tracker with lead indicator like the 2S38 or lvkv.
without tracker/lead indicator i would agree with your point, just like with the strv.
This is based on what it should behave, which Gaijin probably had modelled, although you are right about being skeptical about it.
You are missing the fact that helicopters are usually not moving that much from their positions, other than strafing from side-to-side if they know they are being fired upon.
This is 100% true, but I am talking about competitive SRB, in which most teams do not run any of these vehicles other than the Abrams and Type 10 (possibly the Leclerc after its reload had been buffed).
Yes, you are not suppose to play these types of tanks in a CQC situation (other than those with particularly low penetration, like the Lvkv).
However, most cases in SRB, not going CQC is not an option, especially in city maps like Sweden.
This is true, and this is why I did not state the Abrams as an issue that the Lvkv would have.
Yes, like you said. But I am talking about it in an SRB aspect, where you cannot always guarantee a successful flank, especially with the enemy having good communication.
Yes, that too, and it’s why I don’t disagree with you when you said that the Lvkv is more survivable.
Except in SRB, it does face Russian vehicles often, like I stated at the start:
I agree that the M3A3 is indeed worse than vehicles like the dardo, and other IFVs at that BR.
Okay. Glad we agree.
Sad Puma noises
What? The PUMA is a fantastic platform, and it has an unmanned turret it can actually take advantage of.
It’s also faster than both the 2S38 or Bradley, and the CV90s, too. And very survivable. At least far more than a 2S38.
The Bradley is WAY worse than a PUMA. Maybe if the TOW-2Bs weren’t gimped (in the same way BILL isn’t) and the launchers weren’t stupid, it’d be a match.
What ? do we play the same game ?
have you actually played it in any form ?
“unmanned turret & advantage” ???
You kidding right ?
if this thing would not be the mess it could deserve 10.0
but right now its a straight up repair simulator and single shot 30mm after the first hit in the turret
or someone hitting your barrel for 2 sec with cal 50…
but sure everything is a fantastic platform if you never have used it
bmp2 is better then both the bradley and puma
And yes i mean the BMP2 not the bmp2m
Your K/D in the BMP-2 is 1 kill per death (combined with air kills, btw), your K/D in the PUMA is 1.3.
So - why has your in-game performance not matched your forum opinions?
I would looove to hear the explanation.
now do me the favour and check the amount of rounds i played in the puma
And in the bmp2
Always going for stats
but never amount of rounds played huh ? :D
Also let’s ignore the single feature the Puma has over the bmp2 :)
A little hint it has something to do with tracking ;)
Also Puma : 1141 Battles
and the Bmp2 : 413
But someone that owns neither should probably not even talk about them… :)
Nope Never
10.7 prob even 11.0 is where the 2s38 should be
Yall fr defending the 2S38?
I don’t think you can make that argument when you have several hundred games in both, regardless?
Defending the 2S38? I don’t particularly care about the 2S38. They’re free kills at 10.0.
I’m just defending reality.
