funny part is that bmp2 is a better vehicle is 10 br and nobody cry about it. Seems that 2s38 causes some brain damage to all entitled gringos
No, it is not going to survive. It’s pretty much useless at 11.0
It can frontally penetrate most, if not, all MBTs at 10.7 ( even in a full uptier)
And I don’t think it should still be facing 9.3 NATO MBTs ( that typically have no armour at all), or 9.3 aircraft ( most of them don’t even get access to smart munitions either).
Coupled with the fact that it rarely has to go rearm at a capture point (unlike the HSTV-L, which I do remember you saying it had an issue with the lack of ammo, and maybe the RDF-LT too), it can remain at the flanks of maps pretty much indefinitely if you want to, and you do not have to worry about expending more ammo while killing tanks / aircraft than you should have to.
10.7 sounds fair enough, especially when the HSTV-L and RDF-LT are 1.3 BRs higher at the moment.
5 Likes
I think it’s time we stop using compression as an argument to move specific vehicles up. Only time this could be considered is if something is literally immune to vehicles a full BR lower.
Sorry but this is such a non argument considering better AAs like M247 are found much lower in BR.
Just because Shilka has more rounds than Gepard doesn’t mean it will get out with more kills, that’s just one example of how ammo count doesn’t tell you a whole story.
You’re still perfectly fine for 5 kills in those 26 rounds you have on average.
Light vehicle with such a mediocre mobility won’t even be able to contest the flanks in many occasions.
As I said it’s already pushing it considering it’s stats.
1 Like
But that’s the thing, 10.3 has effectively been decompressed (for the most part).
A lot of 10.3 MBTs (like the 2A4 / M1 Abrams, T-80B etc), 10.0 IFVs (BMP-2M, Strf 9040C, etc) all went up in BR so that 9.3s no longer have to face them or face them less often. I think the STRF9040C and BMP-2M are reasonable at 10.3, but the 2S38 should be moved further up.
So the Abrams or T-80B shouldn’t have went up to 10.7? After all, 9.3s were (and are) still able to kill them frontally with relative ease.
I don’t think you believe that to be reasonable, so ‘immunity full BR lower’ isn’t the only factor that should be taken into account. Mobility and Lethality matters too.
The T-80B is quite well armoured, but gets the much needed -12km/h reverse speed, all while having ESS, Thermals, and 3BM42.
The Abrams is less armoured (but still fairly good), but gets great mobility and versatility (40 degrees per second turret rotation speed, -10 degrees gun depression, 5s reload etc). Its lethality against 9.3s is also exceedingly good.
The 2S38 is not really well armoured at all, but it gets a 0.5s reload autocannon that doesn’t have to reload (first stage ammo, unlike STRF 9040C), which can penetrate and kill any tank at 9.3 with great optics, versatility, and relative ease.
But that’s the thing.
The M247 is a dedicated SPAA, the 2S38 is not. The 2S38 can do both things (albeit not as well as the M247 in most cases, though it can outrange it to kill helicopters from further away).
The M247 cannot kill most MBTs frontally (or side-on even if you wanted to).
You’re comparing apples to oranges here.
The WZ305 is 8.0 whereas the ZSU-57-2 is 7.0.
The only reason why the WZ305 is much higher is because it’s so much more lethal against aircraft, despite its exact same capabilities against ground targets.
BRs aren’t and shouldn’t just be assigned based on one aspect alone (whether it be killing ground targets or air targets). It should be assigned based on the overall capability of the vehicle.
In the 2S38’s case, if it didn’t have proxy and lead indicator, its ability as a ‘decent’ SPAA would be non-existent. Hence if it didn’t have these attributes, its BR should be lower as its capabilities is not as good as the current 2S38’s.
That’s true – ammo count doesn’t tell you the whole story.
I think we can both agree that the Gepard is a much better SPAA than the Shilka (I think it should be a 0.7 BR difference, but unfortunately it’s only 0.3 at the moment).
2000 rounds compared to only 680 rounds.
That would be around 1.94x more with the Shilka than with the Gepard.
However, let’s take into account their effectiveness against tanks and planes respectively.
The 35mms of the Gepard does more damage and has better range than the Shilka.
So even though the Shilka has 1.94x more ammo, the better lethality and average number of possible kills probably goes to the Gepard (especially because of the range).
The Gepard shoots 68mm pen APHE worth ~29g and 127mm pen APDS.
This allows the Gepard to cupola shot most tanks, or outright kill them from the side with APHE or APDS (for well-armoured heavy tanks, for example).
The Shilka only gets 51mm of pen AP. This is only going to be useful against light tanks, which usually isn’t as common as MBTs or Heavy Tanks.
I’d say the Gepard wins in both aspects by a considerable margin (especially in the anti-tank role).
Now I’d want to look at the 2S38 and HSTV-L.
If we just talk about their raw kill potential (like we have with the Gepard and ZSU-23-4), you say that the HSTV-L can kill (on average) 5 MBTs in those 26 rounds – which I mostly agree with.
It may take 1 to 6 shot(s) to take out an MBT (though this largely depends on if it’s a NATO MBT with safe ammo stowage or not). Around 3.5 shots on average. And then I’d say the average person would use the shells inefficiently or to get a hold of a target ( There will be times where you may have to shoot engine, or track, or barrel, or maybe you miss). I’d say you’d need to spend around 3 - 8 shots in total for those purposes / skill issues (15% skill issue, 10% taking out other modules) or 6.5 rounds per 26 rounds.
So the average kill potential for the HSTV-L may be around 5.57 kills.
Now let’s look at the 2S38.
The 57mm APFSDS rounds have less penetration and less spalling (though I’m not sure by how much) than the 75mm APFSDS with the HSTV-L.
But the 2S38 has 148 rounds to its disposal, and gets access to APHE with 20g of TNT.
I’d say you’d probably need more shots to take out an MBT than the HSTV-L (I’d say around 2-7), but less if the MBT is side-on. I don’t want to get into the probabilities etc, so I’m going to say that the side-on case is relatively negligible, and so instead of an average of 4.5, it may be somewhere around 4.25 shots per kill.
And then you also have to take into account the tracks (it actually takes two shots for the 2S38 to track someone with APFSDS (the default round in any case)), barrel, engine, missing, etc…
So assuming same skill level (15% miss rate, maybe 12.5-17.5% for external module damage / engine & transmission damage), the total number of shells ‘wasted’ would be 7.8 shells per 26 rounds, or 44.4 shells per 148 rounds.
So I’d say the average kill potential for the 2S38 may be around 24.37 kills.
Nobody really needs that much killing potential, so they are more free to attempt what the HSTV-L would probably not (to conserve ammo). That means shooting at further away targets, and taking a good number of proxy rounds for any potential planes or helis. Their ‘skill issue’ percentage (misses) may be much higher as a result, but it doesn’t matter since they still have enough ammo to kill everything they need to anyway.
Of course, the 2S38 may not be capable of killing a tank for other reasons other than maximum kill potential (such as mobility, gun depression etc), and that’s why I’d say the HSTV-L is better in practically every regard other than firerate and gun elevation (funnily enough those two aid the 2S38 at being a better SPAA too). But the lack of killing potential really hinders the HSTV-L to the point where it cannot use its other benefits to its fullest potential (because it has to go back to the frontlines where it can be easily spotted and shot to refill on ammo).
For 5 kills 😅
Is that how bad you think one of the ‘best’ light tank is at its current BR?
I agree with you.
If MBTs (such as the Leopard 2A7V) could only bring 5 kills worth of ammo, then I wouldn’t say that they’re very good, even when they’re better suited to the frontlines than the HSTV-L.
I think you can agree.
Well here’s my thought process, feel free to point out BR changes that you may think is unwarranted:
Let’s say we start out with two 2S38s (The specific BRs of them isn’t important – just the difference), and I will progressively make 2S38 ‘B’ into HSTV-L.
They both start with 0.0 BR difference because they are the same vehicle.
-
Now let’s give 2S38 (B) 75mm APFSDS (that of the HSTV-L).
I would say it’s a pretty big buff, as it’s now able to penetrate side armour at higher angles, does a little bit more spalling, 1-shots tracks, and can penetrate front-plate armour (for example, the LFP of the 2A4 and 2PL more easily).
+0.7
Total BR difference: +0.7 -
But let’s reduce 2S38 (B) reload rate to 1s instead of 0.5s
That reduces how quickly (on average) you can kill a tank, reduces how many tanks (on average) you can kill in quick succession, and also reduces the number of shells you can shoot at an enemy’s barrel, or breech, or turret ring, etc… before they notice, react, and kill you. (The better the firerate, the more likely you can destroy the module – think of SPAAs and how quickly they can destroy your tracks and barrel before you notice them).
This also reduces the ability to kill aircraft.
-0.55
Total BR difference: +0.15 -
Let’s give the 2S38 (B) much better gun depression (-17) instead of -5 (pretty bad).
This is a huge deal, being able to be hull down on effectively any hill.
+0.45
Total BR difference: +0.6 -
Let’s remove the 2S38 (B)'s APHE shell
This would lower the kill potential with side-shots, as well as the ability to kill multiple targets in quick succession (albeit not by that much).
-0.15
Total BR difference: +0.45 -
Let’s give the 2S38 (B) a better proxy (that of the Otomatic’s)
This is a decent buff, as it allows the 2S38 (B) to kill aircraft in one-shot more frequently due to slightly better range, 2m increase in proxy radius, and a whole ~0.75kg more TNT.
+0.1
Total BR difference: +0.55 -
Let’s give 2S38 (B) crappier thermals (gen one) but better optics:
(This one is somewhat difficult to estimate)
The thermals only really affects the ability to search through vast landscapes, but the better optics help with situational awareness. I’d say it depends on the map, but I’d prefer the optics in general.
+0.1
Total BR difference: +0.65 -
Let’s only give 2S38 (B) 26 rounds instead of 148.
This is a huge nerf to 2S38 (B)'s killing potential.
It is now 5.57 (not enough) instead of 24.37 (more than enough).
I’d say a vehicle needs at least 9 to feel comfortable (Only taking 11 rounds with the Merkava Mk.4M since that’s its capacity in the safe ammo stowage turret bustle, for example, is just barely enough).
This makes it so that you can’t take any gambles with any potential shots. You have to stay near capture points to not get caught lacking without any ammo. Usage of Proxy rounds is heavily unfavourable since you barely have enough rounds to kill tanks to begin with.
-0.60
Total BR difference: +0.05 -
Let’s give the 2S38 (B) a smaller silhouette (no ammo in turret either):
This makes it so that it’s harder to spot and shoot this 2S38, as well as kill it if shot.
However, this reduces the benefit of the mostly crewless turret since the breech / gun is closer to the hull, meaning that you are more likely to accidently expose it.
+0.2
Total BR difference: +0.25 -
Let’s give the 2S38 (B) higher chance of ricochet and better frontal armour (now immune to most 20mms frontally):
This makes it so that it can sometimes bounce MBT rounds (which is pretty good), and not die to some autocannon fire (albeit not many).
+0.25
Total BR difference: +0.5 -
Let’s reduce the turret elevation of the 2S38 (B) from 75 degrees to 45 degrees.
Pretty big nerf for anti-air duty, but doesn’t really affect anti-tank duty all that much.
-0.1
Total BR difference: +0.4 -
Let’s slightly increase the reverse speed from 20km/h to 24.4km/h, and increase the top speed from 70km/h to 83km/h:
This is a pretty good change in terms of mobility. You are going to get to your position much quicker, which often means that you can hold corners / flank better.
+0.15
Total BR difference: +0.55 -
Let’s increase the hp/ton (acceleration) from 23.3 HP/TON to 32.5 HP/TON:
The transmission differences may not tell the whole story, but 39% increase in HP/TON generally means better acceleration. You will be able to react to situations considerably quicker and get to top speeds quicker.
+0.3
Total BR difference: +0.85
Lastly, some gimicky benefits:
-
Let’s remove the 2S38 (B)'s LWS:
This allows it to react to laser-guided weapons (like missiles from helicopters and laser-guided bombs from jets) and deploy smoke / hide if they need to. This also makes it so that they could react to enemy LRF’s, which slightly increases survivability and allows them to shoot back quicker.
This isn’t always that useful (especially if the enemy knows what they’re doing), but it’s a benefit nonetheless.
-0.05
Total BR difference: +0.8 -
Let’s remove the 2S38 (B)'s ESS:
Both have thermals, so they can use this to their advantage by smoking up with IR smoke grenades and then using ESS to see through the extra smoke when enemies are pushing it (they will most likely be oblivious).
This also can be used to trick people into pushing corners when third-person peaking (where they may have thought it was just regular IR smoke).
Removing this isn’t the end of the world, but it was a nice addition to the regular 2S38.
-0.1
Total BR difference: ~ +0.7 (maybe +0.6 or +0.8 if we talk about each detail and come to a relative agreement). I think I’m being quite generous here (if you are advocating for a higher BR difference) – especially rating better penetration and slightly better spalling higher than 2x the firerate, which I think may come in more useful in more cases.
I think this is a little bit different with MBTs since one-shotting almost every time is certainly better than having to shoot twice at a target but having twice the firerate. Although, firerate is still useful in other situations I’ve mentioned previously.
If the HSTV-L being 11.7 is reasonable (which I don’t think so), the 2S38 would be 11.0.
If the 2S38 being at 10.3 is reasonable (which I don’t think so), the HSTV-L should be 11.0 (I don’t think this is reasonable).
I think the 2S38 being 10.7 and the HSTV-L being 11.3 is fairly reasonable.
The 2S38 being 11.0 might be a stretch, especially considering I don’t think the HSTV-L is all that good at 11.7 when it constantly has to fight ultra-survivable MBTs like the 2A7V or 122B+.
I might compare the 2S38 and the RDF-LT too since I think they share more similarities than the HSTV-L, and yet they are also 1.3 BR different.
1 Like
You can’t effectively decompress a BR if you haven’t done the same for all of the BRs below.
Many of the 10.0s moved to 10.3 and many 10.3s moved to 10.7. This continued all the way up to the top.
Meanwhile you’re here trying to decompress whole tiers by just moving one vehicle.
The fact it can much easier engage tanks is already shown with it being 1.3 BR higher.
Acting like 9.3s planes are suffering so much because of 2S38 doesn’t make much sense to me as better AA systems are basically lower in BR.
They’ll capable of seeing M247 much more often than 2S38 as well.
At this point ZSU is practically useless against aircraft and is solely an AT platform. WZ is much more potent against aircraft, hence the higher BR. Same thing as in example above.
The higher you go, more useless this becomes and at 11.0 it basically becomes nothing to speak about.
Highly depends on what the other things are that they bring to the table.
A vehicle that makes it trivial to get 5 kills definitely looks like a better deal to use than something you need to try hard with just to get something like 7 with much less consistency.
You really made an effort by writing all that, great job at putting out your thoughts on paper, I agree with some as well.
This is under the premise all of what you said is factually correct, but it doesn’t need to be. Weighting parameters like that is extremely hard to do objectively as not everything is equally important to everyone.
This is why you’ll see people saying stuff like “better thermals don’t matter because I don’t find it useful” and similar ones.
That said, all of that theoretical stuff is really hard to agree on, community wise, so in my opinion looking at stats should be the best thing we have currently.
100%
There’s still a bunch of BR brackets that need decompression.
For me, the most notable example is 9.0 - 9.3
The T-55AM-1 being only 0.3 BRs lower than the T-72A (which has much better armour, round, and reload) is unreasonable.
Same with the 6.0 - 6.7 area.
However, until Gaijin does that (which I think both of us know they probably won’t), we’re stuck with small changes that can relieve an entire BR from one (or more) annoying vehicles.
That’s true, a lot of MBTs from those BR ranges moved up too.
But I don’t think you can’t agree that particular vehicles can be moved up or down individually too.
The M1 Abrams, 2A4, T-80B etc all went up together since they were relatively balanced compared to each other, but relatively unfair for 9.3s.
A lot of the 10.0 IFVs went up to 10.3, for the same reason as before.
But the 2S38 is not relatively balanced compared to other 10.0 IFVs. I think it needs to be moved up further.
I don’t think so.
It should be higher, along with the fact that it can partially do an SPAA’s job (albeit not as well).
They’re just an example, but it just goes to show that it can be lethal as an SPAA if it can deal with 9.3 CAS too.
I can’t really say the same for the STRF 9040C, or the BMP-2M.
So you agree with me that WZ305 isn’t at 8.0 only because of its anti-tank capabilities, but because of its anti-air capabilities too.
I would say a vehicle’s BR is dictated by their ability to kill air and ground targets, and that it doesn’t matter how little it is for one or the other.
If a tank has a roof-top 50. Cal but the other doesn’t, the one that does have the 50. Cal is objectively better, even if that 50.cal is worse at dealing with aircraft than a dedicated anti-air.
That’s true – and that’s why I’d say the roof-top 50.cal on the 2A7HU is effectively useless against aircraft, where it would have been useful if it was at 3.7, for example.
However, to say that ~3-5km range 0.5s reload, 75 degrees elevation, proximity fuze, and IRST lock is useless at 10.7 (and possibly even 11.0) is disingenous.
A lot of helicopters at that BR range only have 4-6km range (at best).
You are effectively preventing most helis at 10.3-11.0 from being able to kill, let alone see the battlefield.
A lot of 10.3 - 11.0 aircraft also have very simple mavericks / guided bombs.
AGM-65A, for example, can only really lock onto a moving target at ~<3 / 3.5km
The 2S38 is still an active threat at that range. To say that it isn’t is yet again disingenuous.
I mean sure.
I can give you an example:
The Churchill VII is a 4.7 heavy that is really slow and has an awful AP shell.
Its killing potential is very abysmal (poor shell ballistics, abysmal damage, abysmal penetration, resulting in having to shoot a billion shells to kill one tank, if even possible), but it has a lot of armour to somewhat compensate.
I still wouldn’t say it’s a good vehicle, and I believe most vehicles with such a problem can be said the same.
Thank you. I think it’s best to explain thoroughly so that agreements and disagreements can be more apparent.
Well yes, each attribute’s BR is just my opinion after all.
Though I would say that I think I personally have enough experience to make an informed estimation – especially when I’ve given my reasoning.
I agree, that is one of the issues with this.
I think so too, but vehicle statistics can often be hard to interpret.
2S38 is a premium, meaning quite a lot of players are able to access it, including very inexperienced players. This can negatively affect the 2S38’s overall statistics as the better players’ statistics (who know what they are doing) get drowned out from the sheer volume of shit gameplay.
That’s also why you can see a large difference between minor nations and the three main nations’ performance, even when playing the exact same vehicle. Those minor nation copy-pastes are played much less, and so good players’ statistics will have a greater effect on the overall statistics of the vehicles.
Spoiler
The 2S38 has been played almost 3x as much as the HSTV-L, which means there’s going to be a lot more shitty gameplay from inexperienced players than that with the HSTV-L.
There’s only so many good players, and so the number of games they can possibly play is vastly smaller than the number of games the boat load of bad players can.
The HSTV-L’s stats have a similar issue – America is quite a popular nation and so a lot of inexperienced players would still have it even though it’s tech tree, though considerably less than for the 2S38.
I’m also using my experience in Squadron Battles (8v8s) and I’ve seen time and time again that the 2S38 is even the better and more versatile vehicle (though may largely be because of the need to take down drones and potential aircraft, which is not nearly as much of the case in GRB).
Because of that, I used to think that the 2S38 is objectively better (and it still is in some cases), but as you can see from my individual evaluation of each difference in characteristic, I think the 2S38 is generally worse than HSTV-L in GRB. That being said, I think the 2S38 is in a much better spot at the moment (10.3) than the HSTV-L (which is at 11.7, having to face MBTs that have great frontal armour, spall liners, safe ammo stowage, etc).
1 Like
Ahahaha. This man really took the May stat because it was the best fit for his argument.
| 2s38 | HSTV-L | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| February | 2911994 | 1137859 | 2,559187035 |
| March | 2755157 | 1106825 | 2,489243557 |
| April | 2784396 | 1057957 | 2,631861219 |
| May | 3091866 | 1147220 | 2,695094228 |
| June | 2667767 | 1530842 | 1,742679519 |
| Jule | 1707273 | 1005908 | 1,697245673 |
1 Like
Doesn’t change the fact that 2S38 is still the most played.
1 Like
Sorry, I didn’t realise I had specifically chosen May before (I thought it was all-time, which I probably should’ve checked beforehand, and kinda naive of me to think that all-time would only be ~3 million games 😅).
Though even if you look at the most recent one (July), there are around still 700,000 more games with the 2S38 than the HSTV-L, but it definitely is less than in May. Or any month, 2S38 is played more often than HSTV-L.
2S38
May → July
Games Played:
3,091,866 → 1,707,273
~0.552 of original
Great reduction in games, so I believe KPS should increase as greater proportion of games may be from better players.
KPS:
0.73 → 0.71
~0.973 of original
Surprisingly, it didn’t.
HSTV-L
May → July
Games Played:
1,147,220 → 1,005,908
~0.877 of original
Decrease, so same thinking – KPS should go up.
KPS:
0.94 → 0.92
~0.978 of original
Same thing as with 2S38, it surprisingly went down.
Not sure what the exact reason for this decrease in performance for both.
I also thought that there would be a great increase of both being played since it’s summer for the northern hemisphere.
Perhaps the proportion of good players in those million(s) is still so little that they don’t really contribute much at all?
Moving singular vehicles like that might introduce other questions and concerns regarding it’s peers and their BR.
2S38 is now 10.7, why doesn’t Freccia move up ?
2S38 is now 10.7, why doesn’t Begleit move up ?
Just a few simple examples that might make people run in endless circles which can’t be solved without adding more BR steps into the mix.
I wouldn’t mind it going to 10.7 if it’s absolutely needed, but anything more is just impossible given it’s current stats.
The higher you push it, the more useless it’s AA performance will be. At 10.7 it can already see TV/IR missiles that can track vehicles from 5-6km away with ease. At this point 2S38 stops being an efficient AA.
2S38 is an AA in real life but for some reason it’s a light tank in the game.
Definitely, that’s why 2S38 is higher BR than M247.
See above.
Hitting planes from 5km away with it is pretty much their skill issue.
I don’t really play lower tiers religiously so don’t really know how to comment on that one.
I think that premise of premium vehicles having much worse stats in general simply can’t be applied with such ease. Copy paste premiums perfectly showcase that. I’ll use German premium 2A4, Click Bait (basically a premium HC), M1 KVT and M1128 as an example with July in mind.
Stats between premium and TT versions are extremely similar, so I don’t really buy into all of that “this tank is incredibly OP but is a premium vehicle thus has awful stats” arguments.
This is yet another benefit of having stats and actually one of the only benefits of copy paste vehicles used as fillers. With this you can decently gauge how much better players from minor nations really are and thus adjust your balancing accordingly for different vehicles that are unique to minor nations.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Gaijin has a list of this kind and say something like: “Oh look, France has, on average, 10% better players overall so we’ll reduce the stats by that value before looking at it from a balancing standpoint.”
Seeing the KPS difference for July between those two vehicles I’d say HSTV-L is better off at 11.7 than 2S38 is at 10.3. Even if I apply the “premium tax” that I don’t believe is affecting the stats that much for reasons mentioned above, it looks like both have similar performances relative to their BRs.
I’d say that HSTV-L is greatly hampered by the top tier compression where 12.0 MBTs can be vastly different in their effectiveness. I think it’s obvious HSTV-L would more easily deal with something like a CR2 than a 2A7V for example.
I hope we get 12.3 soon enough so top performing MBTs can finally move up a bit, thus letting HSTV-L at 11.7 breathe more easily.
1 Like
Here I go defending HSTVL again.
HSTVL is a minimum of 1.0 BR superior in capabilities, and potentially 1.3. So anything higher than 10.7 for 2S38 warrants an equivalent increase for HSTVL.
RDF-LT has an excuse in that it shouldn’t have thermals.
HSTVL never has to rearm unless you get over 10 frags in a single match. I’m not aiming for a KDR of 13:1 so I’m never going to have to worry about HSTVL’s ammo reserve.
Penetrating obscure weakspots does not make a good tank.
9.3 NATO MBTs are easy to use against 2S38.
2S38’s APHE shell doesn’t impact its BR.
Its reload rate doesn’t impact its BR because it’s higher than its SPAA capabilities already.
Gun depression is marginal.
Proxy doesn’t impact BR because 2S38 is not 9.3.
Ammo amount doesn’t impact BR in this case because it’s not balanced on its inferior SPAA capability.
Turret elevation doesn’t impact BR at all.
The only things that notably impact BR are round penetration, mobility, and one other thing I forgot about.
If 2S38 was 11.0, HSTVL would have to be 12.0 - 12.3.
1 Like
The 2S38 beats the absolute dog out of the Sarge York. 2S38 outranges it and beats it in both anti-air and anti-ground. Hell, the Sarge York hardly has any lethality at all against tanks while the 2S38 slaughters everything with impunity. It’s not even a contest and anyone saying otherwise is just crazy.
He claims he plays deliberately like dogwater to drag down russian winrates down, just ignore him.
5 Likes
Yes, if he played for real he’d have 30 K/D in such a busted vehicle like 2S38.
3 Likes
The York is 9.0, and the 2S38 is 10.3, 2S38 is already a higher BR than the York.
2S38 is 9.3 - 9.7 in SPAA capability, which is lower than its current BR.
If we do the same method as I done with the 2S38 and HSTV-L, I think you may be able to see that the a 1.0 difference between the Bagel, and a 0.3 BR difference with the Freccia may make sense.
I haven’t done it yet, but my general understanding of how they play gives me a good estimation.
I mean I get that.
Yes, we have discussed that previously, and I agree.
Only very few vehicles at 10.7 have that capabilities.
From what I know, there’s only one – that being the slow ass A-10, which gets access to 6x AGM-65Ds.
This can just be blocked via buildings on a lot of maps due to how low altitude they usually fire them from. Open maps like Tunisia may be more difficult, though.
Smoking up is also another way of avoiding them, but it may be difficult to tell when they have fired them.
Yes, but it’s also why it should be higher than if it didn’t have the SPAA capabilities.
That’s true. Though I was think more about 5km range for helicopters, not for planes.
It starts to become more of an issue for planes at <3km
Well I think there’s another reason as to why premiums can perform better than tech tree vehicles.
They don’t have to spade their vehicle, so they can play optimally if they know how.
Top Tier vehicles in general take ages to fully grind the modifications.
I can see that.
I wouldn’t say the 2S38 is extremely broken at 10.3, but I think it would be best for 9.3s to not have to face it. 9.7s and 10.0s generally start having more armour to use against 2S38s, so I don’t see them being that affected by it.
I would like that too.
You haven’t given me an analysis of each aspect and their effects on the total BR difference like I have.
There is no clear argument to have here other than me saying ‘no’.
Both @MotorolaCRO and I have came to the conclusion that at the HSTV-L’s current BR environment, it’s average kills per 26 rounds is around 5-6. That is well below the 10 frags in a single match that you are saying.
No, but it does help.
You’re also ignoring that extra penetration helps in other ways. Extra penetration = Extra Residual penetration, which generally increases spalling.
Extra penetration also allows you to shoot the side of tanks and penetrate more easily, which is what I had stated previously:
I don’t agree.
Most 9.3 NATO MBTs have relatively mediocre turret rotation speed (besides the OF-40 (MTCA)) and little to no armour (besides maybe the 9.3 Merkava and definitely the Magach 7C).
If the 2S38 sees them, it’s very easy for it to kill them first, or kill multiple of them in quick succession.
Everything impacts a vehicle’s BR.
Just because the APHE shell’s effect on the 2S38’s BR is small doesn’t mean it doesn’t have one.
There are uses to it.
I don’t understand what you mean.
Reload rate affects more than just anti-air duty. I have expressed this already:
Again, everything matters. Some more than others.
Even if the 2S38 is to be played at 12.0, proxy can destroy drones, which is a benefit to the team (however small that benefit may be).
But alas, I’m saying the 2S38 should be 10.7, maybe 11.0.
And at that BR, proximity fuze shells 100% still matter, and again, I have expressed why already:
Again, ammo count matters to an extent. Most vehicles have more than 9/10 kill potential, and so you are able to carry as much ammo as you want and still have enough to kill everything in the battlefield.
Only in some instances (like with the HSTV-L) is there a problem.
SPAAs and ATGM carriers also had this problem too, but they received ammo boxes to somewhat relieve that issue. They no longer (or are less likely to) have to drive to a (perhaps) contested point to rearm. The HSTV-L is not built for frontal engagements like those. It’s meant for flanking, but is underequiped for extended periods of time.
It should, as it allows you to shoot aircraft / helis more easily.
A benefit is a benefit, no matter how small.
If the max elevation of the 2S38 was 2 degrees, would it impact the BR at all?
No? Notably, sure, but you’re missing a lot more than those.
Smaller details, like gun depression, elevation, ESS, thermals, etc… they all contribute as well.
Maybe not as much as the ones you stated (and did not state), but they still contribute.
That’s assuming they have been compared to reasonably, which you haven’t.
@rainy2000
Here I go defending the HSTVL against Russian propaganda again; no, this is not an accusation against you as a person.
If you need more than 3 rounds to frag someone with APFSDS, that does not bode well for your argument.
HSTVL has 22% more pen and double the mass of 2S38’s round.
HSTVL has double the mobility of 2S38 and Begleitpanzer.
Armor only matters if you get seen first.
Even if you shoot at the same time, the 2S38 is flat out dead, and the 2S38’s round has a higher chance of bouncing.
No, everything does not impact vehicle BR. That has never been the case and never will be.
Proximity does not matter as the 2S38 is not 9.3. If 2S38 was balanced based on proximity rounds it would be 9.7, not 10.3; which is why I oppose balancing based on ammo selection otherwise most vehicles would reduce in BR from where they are now, including 2S38. Vehicles should be balanced based on their best ammo, just as they are now.
Please learn what diminishing returns are.
Reloads faster than 2 seconds are diminished returns against tanks.
Elevation better than 25 degrees is diminished returns against tanks.
Gun depression beyond 20 degrees is diminished returns.
Thermal generation is by definition diminished returns.
All your posts did was blatantly lie about the HSTVL and paint it as worse than it is.
By YOUR standards, the proxy round of 2S38 is -1.0 BR because it’s seen at 9.0 and 8.7, but is better than 40mm proxy.
However, your post did the math incorrectly.
Proximity rounds only add BR capability IF it’s below the average BR of proximity rounds of similar size and capability. Otherwise they remove BR capability.
2S38 would have to be 8.7 for proximity rounds to add capability to it.
2S38 would have to be 8.0 or below for APHE to add capability to it. PT-76-57 is 8.3 with the same round.
The edit added those smaller details about ammo and its relationship with BRs.