Support vehicle is a valid category which lots of vehicles fall under.
I do emplore you to actually play the vehicle before speaking on it, as I can see you have a ONE game in the Badger as of the time of me checking. Presumably you haven’t even unlocked APFSDS yet.
No, support vehicle is what you call bad vehicles when you want to avoid calling them bad.
This isn’t a MOBA. You aren’t supplying ammo or repairing. The only way you support is by killing the enemy and if a tank does this worse than other tanks at or below the same rating then it is inferior.
Put it this way, if I had the choice between having a “support vehicle” helping me, and a normal vehicle that just does it but better. I want the latter.
We can argue about the definition forever. The vehicle is evidently not bad as I have proven through my statistics comparing it to other similar vehicles.
You have barely even touched the Badger, I dont see why you have such a strong opinion on it.
Your entire argument is the Fox is better, when the vehicles aren’t really comparable.
I’ve played vehicles very similar to the badger already, but they have advantages the badger don’t that actually makes them worthwhile such as unmanned turrets or ATGMs.
The badger is just an inferior fox, and they are plenty comparable as there is no situation wherein I can see ever wanting to use the badger when the fox provides far greater flexibility for lower spawn cost.
Keep playing your 28 ton IFV like a scout car if you wish… Idk what to tell you, you’re just ignoring everything I’ve said
You’re the one ignoring what I’m saying here.
The point is you can’t play the badger like you can play the fox, but you can definitely play the fox the way you’re forced to use the badger.
The fox is a better and more versatile vehicle than the badger whilst being lower.
Can the Fox use AFPSDS? No
Can it track air targets? No
Does it have thermals? No
Can it accurately fire on the move? No
Does the Fox have a laser range finder? No
You really can’t play the Fox like the Badger, which is my point, they aren’t that similar. The firepower of the Badger is miles better than the Fox, it does everything better in terms of firepower. Rate of fire, pen, damage, pen over distance, angled pen, velocity, target tracking etc… You would know that if you actually played the Badger, which you haven’t.
If you really think having a very small amount of extra angled pen, some limited SPAA capability in a BR where most things outrange conventional SPAA, a LRF on an autocannon and some piddly thermals makes up for a HUGE gap in mobility, significant size reduction and superior gun handling/depression then I don’t know what else to say to you.
The fox can hill hump better than a badger can and has the added bonus of not being the size of a truck and the mobility to reposition more rapidly than the enemy can keep up.
The badger can’t do that, it’s forced into one specific niche where even then I’d still rather just have the fox.
But you do you, enjoy your “support” vehicle.
The 60 degree pen at 0m:
Badger: 66mm
Fox: 42mm
That is 57% better than the Fox.
Pen at 0 degrees at 2000m:
Badger: 91mm
Fox: 41mm
That is over 2x higher than the Fox.
Sure, that is a “very small amount of extra pen”. Once again, you wouldn’t know as you haven’t even played the Badger with APFSDS. I’m not gonna continue trying to convince you as this is pointless.
Yeah because there are just so many 2000 meter engagements in war thunder. You’re still going to be needing to overwhelmingly sidepen anything more than a light tank at which point you’re still at a disadvantage to the fox given it is able to move to significantly better positions and outflank the enemy.
The fox is just the superior vehicle, sorry mate.
Guys is there a lf mk 9 spitifire that gets only 20 mms outside of the uk?
there isn’t a cannon only LF Mk.9
Only a normal Mk.9 with 4x Hispano
and yes that specific vehicle is unique to the british tree
So, decided to try out the Tracked Rapier and 3 hits on a Mig-27. 0 damage. So anyone know why the tracked rapier is any higher than about 7.0 at this point?
Is this related to the universal proxy missile bug or is the rapier just broken again?
It might be, but has the Rapier ever worked?
But its proxing, just doing no damage. Got a crit hit and 2x hits on that Mig-27 and he seemed undamaged
Rapier worked fine for a while, I was getting redic good ability from it, a couple aces, averaging redic k/d with it too.
A lot of missiles were/are proxing and detonating, just doing no damage, but IDK if it got fixed yet.
Then it might be that then. I’ll try again in… a few months?
Looking at the rapier, can anyone answer me this. Why has it only been added in recently? It seems like something that would have come instead of the stormer tbh. A WHOLE lot easier to introduce (or should be… no idea what gaijins doing) than the stormer.
Why would they add a direct hit missile when a prox one with similar range to the roland and other sam systems existed?
After 40 games of the rapier i can safely say it needs work. The radar is shockingly bad, it really needs its radar trailer if you want it to spot anything. Keep being killed by jets that have simply flown over it. The missiles feel exactly like the stormers where they lag far too far behind, you can see it in the autolead where it is always trailing behind the jet your tracking. Neither missile really feels like it has 35 or 50g of pull. Also, just like the stormer, its damage is woefull, no idea how your meant to do anything with 16 missiles total when it takes about 5 or 6 to even kill a heli. I had a game where an mi 28 took all 8 to the face and i managed to get a hit at most.
Its certinly fun being able to use the new radar screen but even that cant make this thing really viable as if you stay in it youll die to a jet eventually as it simply cant spot it. I have a 1.5kd in it against planes which really isnt great considering it should be ALOT higher as an spaa isnt meant to be trading with cas but eliminating it.
One of the most annoying things about it is the inability to shoot forwards, and not just forwards but a good portion of the frontal ark. It has gotten me killed multiple times when it shouldnt matter, they should make it so it has better off bore fire ability and guidance so even if you fire it forwards itll still guide the missile in like how it works on the striker with the swingfires.
I find the search radar to be perfectly adequate until you bring it into an uptier where attack drones start showing up, and if the Radar is insufficient, you can always to 1/2 full sweeps with the IRST, which usually picks up what the radar misses
if you mean at minimum altitude, theres a bug report for it to get 2x M2 .50’s attached to the launchers so you can aim it, (Community Bug Reporting System)
the Damage is a lot better than it used to, but its the classic Gaijin buggery i mean just compare these two
(on 2S38)
the damage comparison between these two isn’t even close, and the 2S38 has around 1/3rd the explosive mass, and 1.5x the radius, meaning it should do less damage, but it does more
I manage a 3.45/1 K/D against air in the rapier, (100 air kills, 29 total deaths) and i’d wager 80% of my deaths are to ground vehicles, so it’d be much higher against air alone,
It is annoying, and there is a bug report on it (Community Bug Reporting System), it can fire over the front, but you need to meet the guidance area of the missile in 3rd person before moving the mouse back down to aim at an aircraft,
aiming at a target over the front is possible, but your minimum range is much larger than any other aspect
Personally i find it to be a functional SPAA, and one thats quite good used properly, but it’s not ideal, and personally i’d take the SAD or HVM over it, any day, my main issue with it is the lack of damage, but the missiles are fast enough and pull hard enough to get multiple hits quickly with it, and can even be used to intercept munitions if you have the eye for it, once it gets its damage rectified further, and its firing arc and .50s added, it’d be a great SPAA, on par with the Osa, and ASRAD, or Rolands at a basic Minimum