Obviously addressing those issues is the preferable method of solving the issue, my issues with auto cannons are entirely based on the buggy implementation of them, SPAAGs are just the worst exploiters of the bugs due to them effectively teleporting hand grenades into your tank at a rate of 13 per second. I suspect that removing the SAP-I would actually have more of an effect on it’s tank killing abilities, but at the end of the day this change is based of a bug report on the historical accuracy of the ammunition (yes I know that is an inconsistent standard with Gaijin) so the arguments around it being OP or not are ultimately pointless as it’s not a balance decision:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/Brd6OnOoMlmS
See, the thing is here, if it were as OP as people here claim, it wouldn’t matter that you were bad at the game. A truly overpowered vehicle is one like the Terminator, where even someone with their head cut off like a chicken can drop nukes in it.
It’s really not. SPAA camping at the back of the map for the entire game is exceptionally lame and I prefer to play aggressively in them. When I play vehicles like the LAV-AD, I sit up front in the middle of the map catching both tanks and aircraft off guard.
SPAA doesn’t need nerfs; most of them need buffed. Sure, Cupola Overpressure is a problem, but APDS isn’t causing it. What harm is there in a Falcon tearing apart reckless rushers?
1 Like
Land that shot in a real game, wtf is that angle?
I can pen a BMPT with a SAV 20.12.42, then move BMPT to 3.7?
RARDEN never used SAP-I that is in game, fyi.
Ok, remove Kh-38MT, still bias without any NATO equivalent. It’s not going to solve it, will just leave bias back to USSR only. What the ragebait is that argument.
i uptier the falcon to 9.3 so sure
Compare them to SIDAM 25, if that’s what you want falcon to be, go play USSR and bite it.
No stabilisation? Falcon irl could go 80 km/h and had an IRST tracker. Older version had 52 km/h top speed, since FV430 hull, the SPG variant specifically.
Finally someone with no “soviet main” brain eating disease.
1 Like
What you can’t shoot the side of the tank? That’s 1500m specifically to show how FAR it can still pen from, it’s quiet capable of penning even when it’s a fairly angled shot at closer ranges.
Go play with it in test drive- 1 tap 400m:
Remove the SAP-I too then, but the document that the removal is base on lists APHE-I and not APDS as available ammunition.
Not the point, Su-34 carries Kh-38s, Su-30 doesn’t, this is about using the weapon, not the balance of said weapon.
Balance is a separate issue and not relevant to this topic as this is not a balance based change
It will still asbolutely be able to do this without issue. The standard ammunition still absolutely shreds MBTs up to 9.3 from the side.
Statistically it’ll have to perform worse stats wise or it’ll end up sat at the same BR forever.
Legacy BRs and what not
Oh btw I generally can see it either moving up further, as it’ll now be played less by folks who are worse for AT.
And used as a major rat / ambush tank which it’s rounds even without ADPS still absolutely annhilate.
Would love to see some proof of this.
Tank Encyclopedia indicates 29 mph / 47 kph.
You realize the Falcon is based on the Abbot spg (FV433), right?
And how does this help it “fill the air-gap” between Skink and Marksman as Stockholm mentioned in the post you responded to?
Cause he’s mentioning without APDS itll likely move down, which it wont at all.
It’ll likely remain stuck at it’s current BR forever however nerfed
2 Likes
There were more than one falcon, read the whole article you’re referring to, look up some more docs.
Most likely soviet crying won’t stop regardless, they’re trying to draw attention from the BMPT files.
What are you going on about mate, the BMPT just got launched up nearly 2 BRs since it released which is the fastest I’ve seen a vehicle move up.
Soviet crying about what? xD no soviets are crying about falcon rn
I know what I read.
And there’s only one Falcon - a prototype - the thing never went to production.
The lightest version it’s based on - the FV432 APC - can only reach 52 kph
I’ll wait to see the proof from the poster to verify the claim.
What I’m asking (since you seem to be rather experienced in the game playing multiple nations at various BRs) is which in your observation seems to be a larger problem. I’ve told you my answer - that light tank spam is leagues more of an issue than any TD-SPAA.
Considering how much CAS gets spammed in the 4.7-7.0ish range, much of it from people spamming light tanks, I’d daresay the light tank dominance over everyone starts way earlier than MBT tier.
My point is that every single possible opponent of your rolling pillbox heavy is able to frontally cripple your ability to shoot him regardless of what gun or ammo he has. Which effectively means your armor can never truly matter in any frontal encounter.
Wouldn’t actual balance instead be requiring most opponents to have to pen the sides of the slow rolling pillboxes, with only a handful being able to frontally harm/kill them? Otherwise why did they throw away all their mobility if the armor they gain still cannot protect them at least frontally? Many nations have examples of this sort - Maus, T95, IS-4M, Tortoise, Foch to name a few.
It’s the only test we had, and it was to my recollection over the then-top-BR range of the game. At the time Ka-50s were still first-spawning in midair with overperforming Vkhir missiles, so anti-CAS rage was at a particularly high point then.
Yet even then we have not seen so much as a single repeat of this event, even though CAS has gotten much more potent since. Does that not suggest that the first test clearly told the devs it’s not popular enough to bother with?
Yes it will. Give people counters to CAS which actually work, and most of them will eventually shut up about the CAS they claim to hate and go use said counters (or at least try to). If everyone at every tier were given default SPAAG based on the 9.3+ BR feature, and that was paired with Naval’s default Fighters and Default CAS options, then everyone would have multiple effective counters to CAS right out of the box. And they’d also be able to bring more counters of their own if they grinded them out.
Then, it is entirely each user’s choice how much of a “problem” CAS is from then onward. If they now have the tools to help themselves, but choose not to, it’s no longer a game problem, but a player one. Goodbye and good riddance to the whiny tanker victim mentality which drives much of the CAS debate. Either get with the program and use the tools to help yourself, or let your “preferences” render yourself irrelevant.
I’ve personally seen how the Coelian buff caused a bunch of those to flood the MM, and in the process of being used to annihilate tank sides, many players also swatted lots of planes, and the whining at those BR ranges almost totally stopped. Similarly, with the proliferation of radar AA, people don’t complain about CAS all that much there either. And while I haven’t played at those BRs, I have read plenty of forum threads about how the current top tier SAMs were on release creating no-fly zones, upon which CAS rage vanished. All that tells me that giving people effective counters will indeed solve the problem.
When I am calling for flipping the script on SPAAG, I have clearly stated that actual buggy features such as this still need addressing.
Restoratively buffing the rounds that are supposed to kill tanks and fixing the rounds that aren’t supposed to do so very well are not mutually exclusive.
Well if you do that you cripple a bunch of lineups and unleash a flood of anti-CAS whining again. The APHE itself isn’t the problem - the size of the damage area and it being a sphere of death IS.
Yet the same people complaining about the Falcon, DCA, and 35s voted against nerfing APHE to correct levels.
Ever since I saw that, I knew that such folk must be not just passively ignored, but aggressively moved against so they cannot damage the game any further.
Indeed. The Falcon, for all its strengths, is made of glass and can be .50cal’ed to death.
Not only is it lame, but with how the effective range on SPAAG guns vs planes is (ideally 500-800m even in high velocity guns like the Falcon), camping at the back of the map renders you powerless to stop CAS pummeling your team near the front lines.
This is why the very people who keep crying for SPAAG nerfs are, funny enough, making their own gameplay experience worse via making CAS less counterable.
And cupola overpressure is not unique to SPAAG APHE either - regular tank shells do it just as well.
It does seem that much of the complaining about the Falcon’s sabot comes from Korea-era Soviet users, because without sabot, the Falcon cannot reliably pen a T-54 anywhere, and it already couldn’t so much as scratch a T-10, IS-3, IS-6, IS-7, or IS-4M. The APHE will still pen M60s, M103s, T58s, Leopards, various light tanks, and much of what it sees, though at less forgiving ranges.
Good to see - I recall at one point hearing how the Falcon and Warrior/Fox’s 30mm guns are supposed to use different cartridge sizes, with the Falcon’s being significantly larger and thus underperforming in both muzzle velocity and therefore penetration. I forget if it was an old forum thread or a Reddit one, but one of the two stated with documentation that the Falcon’s APDS should pen as much as 145mm.
Correct, it will only stop shredding Russians and their 80mm side plates, as the 20mm underside plates are rather unreliable to hit in my experience. I do remember laughing out loud when I hit that area on an IS-4M in a Pakwagen once by complete accident, thinking it was an IS-3 and aiming for the flatter part of the 90mm side.
Yeah, many awful legacy BRs still have yet to be addressed due to people ceasing to play the now-neutered thing.
Regarding the BMP-T, would that thing even be an issue if it had APFSDS and was uptiered where that round would place it, alongside its single internal-external ammo belt detonating it if struck? As its a single belt, shouldn’t it be ammo-racked rather easily?
IMO, It should carry APDS at a limited amount, roughly 40 rounds would be good, still some APDS, but not enough to go gung-ho