ADATS labled as SPAA when?

Both US and British ADATS are neither good SPAAs nor tank destroyers. At the same time, they cost more sp than other SPAAs. They do not have a radar lock, you have to find the enemy with your trash gunner sight. For the US ones, the elevation for sight is still bad if I remember correctly. They can not really head on with ka50s and ka52s, not to mention su-25 spams (easily got outnumbered and can not really pull the missle much). After two or three death, you need to really work hard to have enough rp to spawn an ADATS to do the anti-air job.

When will Gaijin change this?

6 Likes

Ya, the ADATS was probably the most nerfed vehicle in the US SPAA line up, designated as an "tank destroyer ". Lacks most of its modes like target lock on ground vehicles, can be avoided using flares (ADATS uses optic guidance not heat/IR). The guidance system for ADATS is laser guided but only so much as keeping the target in it’s optic lockup. It was never deployed and used in real life combat so really hard to say how it would perform. Testing showed it at 80+% in missile to kill. I used it in over 1000 battles and given first spawn to heli, had to be spawned in first or not enough SP for later as you said. GJ claims it isn’t a SPAA because it is ground target capable yet so many SPAA’s are better tank killers then SPAA? Quit playing 11+ BR due to short life expectancy and high repair costs on the ADATS. With the addition of “fire and forget” aircraft missiles it really became impossible to keep lock and survive an exchange with aircraft.

4 Likes

Given the current bad performance of ATGMs, I don’t think ADATS should be labelled as tank destroyer anymore, and plus it also lacks tandem warhead to effectively penetrate ERAs at br 11.7. Now helicopters can be easily researched by ground vehicles, which means anti-air job is becoming much more important in future ground battles. The US has every reason to get a good SPAA with low spawn point at top tier, same with the British ADATS.

1 Like

Not a feature in WT for anything at this time.

The ADATS missile isn’t a fire and forget . The optic lock just doesn’t require the operator to actually pin point impact location, the optic does that. The operator still must keep the kill box on target.
Have no idea what the rest of your post is addressing? I don’t use joy stick but certainly use sniper sights for long shots?

It appears I was typing something for a different post, my apologies for not catching it earlier.

Can not agree more, I do not even bother to take out ADATS anymore

AlvisWisla.
But can’t the khrizandoma-s lock on to ground targets?

2 Likes

That’s radar.

In general vehicle classificatiosn should be reviewed all over WT, as those classifications often do not make sense. Some vehicles DO have different roles, which are not represented by the “single role” identification WT uses - and the ADATS (Air Defense and Anti Tank System - it’s all in the name…) is a prime example for that.

2 Likes

Yep, though in this instance, its more than just a name. The result of the ADATS having an ATGM launcher designation is that it has the ATGM launcher SP cost, not the SPAA SP cost, which is quite a meaningful nerf.

2 Likes

Gaijin has yet to revert the ahistorical classification of the M18 Hellcats.

They are not light tanks. They are tank destroyers.

1 Like

Well, no and yes. What makes them tank destroyers? What makes them light tanks? Those classifications are quite arbitrary and also quite meaningless…

I think I remember reading in Zaloga’s book about M10 and StuG that those two vehicles are insofar similar as they started with one role, and in the course of the war ended up with a different role: The StuG started as infantry support vehicle, and later turned TD, the M10 started as TD and later was commonly used as infantry support vehicle.

Problem in WT is that some functionalities are (more or less consequently) bound to those classes: Scouting for LT’s, arty for LT, MT and AA, but not TD, and so on - but the vehicles themselves fit into various roles at the same time!

Literal. Historical. Doctrine.
Literal. Historical. Designations.

They were designated as SPGs and utilized under tank destroyer doctrine that the US designed. The M18 was quite literally designed for the doctrine.

Gaijin changing the designation was ahistorical and disrespectful.

2 Likes

Or: look at the JaPz.K A2: in WT a Light Tank, but already the name Jagd Panzer means Tank Destroyer…

And it shouldn’t be designated as such. Ahistorical designations are wrong and disrespectful.

Big question for me is: Why can’t they be both?!?

I don’t see why TD’s shouldn’t be able to scout and arty as well…

Indeed, but the higher you go in tiers, the trickier it gets, with everything getting more and more multi role…

naaa HSTVL is nerf’d wayy more, is missing better rounds, optical tracking, air burst ammo and even its cage on the back for aesthetics, the ADATS had its missile characteristics changed, and it still cant looks up, but defo not the worst spaa or most nerf’d vehicle in the US tech tree.

A light tank destroyer could be a good addition