Can we finally uptier the 2S38 to a BR where it sits with it's contemporaries or will it always be an underteired meme?

Machinery of War Discussion Ground Vehicle
,
21

Congrats on having a similar KDR with both tanks proving how balanced both are.
You have more matches in HSTV-L which likely means you’ve had it longer in a less skilled state than you’ve had 2S38.

Proximity rounds doesn’t impact BR.
Generation of thermals doesn’t impact BR.
IRT doesn’t impact BR.
Laser warning doesn’t impact BR.

2S38 is a 9.3 SPAA with a 10.X APFSDS round that causes it to be its BR.
Just as OTOMATIC is a 9.7 - 10.0 SPAA whose APFSDS round causes it to be a higher BR.

Fuel tank cannot absorb shrapnel that happens from the armor behind it, and doesn’t. Spalls just as much.

Your fanning of 2S38 isn’t healthy when your own stats disprove your claim, as well as the comparative analysis.

This means nothing about the tanks. This is purely a team-skill difference.

2 Likes
22

Proximity rounds doesn’t impact BR.
Generation of thermals doesn’t impact BR.
IRT doesn’t impact BR.
Laser warning doesn’t impact BR.

Excuse me what? That has to be the most out of touch statement I have red in a while. So what you are saying is that all these things don’t impact br, whilst impacting gameplay and competetiveness and instead only speed/armor/pen do?

Your fanning of 2S38 isn’t healthy when your own stats disprove your claim, as well as the comparative analysis.

You are completly missing the point of what this discussion is about. What do I claim, and what do I “disprove”?

The point is that the 2S38 is a carbon copy of the HSTVL with less mobility and all these:

The 2S38 has 80% of the entire HSTVL ammo just as ready rack.
The 2S38 has prox. fuse rounds that devistate helicopters and jets.
The 2S38 has 3rd gen thermals.
The 2S38 has autotracking of airborne targets.
The 2S38 has a laser warning system

points you just disregard because you feel like it, or what exactly is the reason?

Fuel tank cannot absorb shrapnel that happens from the armor behind it, and doesn’t. Spalls just as much.

We are playing the same game, are we?

Completly disregard my own stats with these vehicles if thats what youre hung on now.
Give me some structured reasons why the 2S38 sits at a lower BR then the HSTVL, which don’t just disregard literally all the differences of these vehicles.

Thanks.

6 Likes
23

2S38 isn’t a carbon copy of HSTV-L, it’s worse than HSTV-L.
2S38 doesn’t even mach my Type 89 KDR and I was bad in the Type 89 when it was OP, and I’m okay with IFVs today.
If I started playing HSTV-L I bet my KDR would at worst match my 2S38 because both are rather balanced.

I also addressed all those bolded points, you even quoted my statement addressing those points.

2S38 has a worse penning round, is larger, slower, less survivable, and slightly worse optics [zoom] with better thermals.
“But its turret is unmanned.” with 5 degrees of gun depression, and the most common maps are CQC maps where IFVs are less effective which includes 2S38.

1 Like
24

Skill issue. Very little spalling, front fuel tank eats all the spall so you have to snipe one crew at a time, and most of the 2S38 is empty space. It’s absurdly survivable, and has absurd offensive capabilities for its role in its BR.

3 Likes
25

2S38 doesn’t even mach my Type 89 KDR

I thought we’d not base arguments on KDR now.

2S38 has a worse penning round

That the 2S38 fires twice as fast with 5x the total ammo count. Not to speak of the prox HE ammo against helicopters and aircraft.

less survivable

Highly doubt that’s the case. The HSTVL can get penned by 12.7mm from the side and some spots from the front where the 2S38 has 40mm of combined armor consiting of steel blocks added to the hull armor.

and slightly worse optics [zoom]

Actually it’s the other way around, the 2S38 has an optic with higher max zoom (9.4x), 3rd gen instead of 1st gen thermals and IRST

“But its turret is unmanned.” with 5 degrees of gun depression, and the most common maps are CQC maps

You got it. CQC maps, where gun depression plays none to a marginal role in performance.

…and the most common maps are CQC maps where IFVs are less effective which includes 2S38.

What do you base that assumption on? What makes the 2S38 worse then the HSTVL in these conditions?

Both have next to no armor, a fast (or even faster) firing gun, an autoloader and ammo in the center of the vehicle. The difference being that the 2S38 has these components much more spaced out with more air in between.

In these CQC maps, height of the vehicle isn’t as important as well since you can’t hide behind some distant vegitation, hill etc. If youre spotted, youre spotted within a distance that makes the siluette of the tank less of a factor. Nobody will “take a HSTVL as a bush” from 50m away because it has a smaller siluette.

I also addressed all those bolded points, you even quoted my statement addressing those points.

You didn’t “adress” these points, you literally just declared them to be irrelevant for some reason only you know. That’s not how this works. Who are you to invalidate factors on which vehicles are balanced off.

Don’t you think a vehicle that has autotracking, 3rd gen thermals, LWR and prox fuse rounds would be placed on a higher br then the same vehicle without those features?

If not, why don’t we just remove the proxy rounds from the 2S38, change the 3rd gen thermals for 2nd gen and then just leave it at the same br, because it doesn’t matter for the br placement, does it?

7 Likes
26

KDR average based on one person is a decent method of determining differences in vehicles.
Granted, it’s not useful if the vehicle is substantially older due to skill differences of the player.

Win rate of course gives us no indication of vehicle performance.

Proximity round doesn’t impact its BR. 2S38 would be 9.3 without its APFSDS round.
2S38 does not have 1x minimum zoom optics. Thermals aren’t the optics themselves, and IRST doesn’t help against tanks.

2S38 is always worse than HSTV-L in the anti-tank role, the role that both tanks are BR’d on.

You defend 2S38 more than anyone else I’ve witnessed on the forums.

27

KDR average based on one person is a decent method of determining differences in vehicles.

It’s not. That’s why me using that metric was not helpfull. You are presenting a statistic with a volume of ONE participant and vastly different amounts of games played. That is pretty much useless. It’s an indicator nothing more.

On top of that, the comparison is flawed initself because the 2 vehicles are not at the same br, and thus have different factors playing into winrates and KD.

2S38 does not have 1x minimum zoom optics. Thermals aren’t the optics themselves, and IRST doesn’t help against tanks.

2S38 is always worse than HSTV-L in the anti-tank role, the role that both tanks are BR’d on.

That is the key point. They are NOT only BR`d on their anti-tank role.

My man. We are playing RB. Ground vs ground combat isn’t the only metric there is when balancing ground forces.

The same way aircraft are also balanced on their CAS loadout, and not only based on what they get to hit air targets.

A 2S38, if played with more then 2 braincells, can literally deny enemy helicopters the airspace and severely hinder jets until it gets destroyed.

It is as or even more effective in that role then most SPAA vehicles at this br.

On top of that it has munitions for ground combat that are only 50mm less effective then HSTVL rounds, 1.3 BR lower. With twice the fire rate.

Do you honestly think that all + the miscellaneous improvements in terms of thermals, LWR and IRST don’t play into how this vehicle is placed in terms of BR?

If so, idk how I can help you anymore.

You defend 2S38 more than anyone else I’ve witnessed on the forums.

Clown Emoji for that one.

4 Likes
28

If you go beyond one participant, you’re measuring skill not vehicles.
You cannot measure vehicles outside of two methods:
1- Comparative analysis.
2- Stats using one person to avoid measuring skill.

Winrates don’t matter, everyone knows this if they took stats. Winrates are a measurement of skill, not vehicle power.

2S38 is 10.0 purely because of its anti-tank capability otherwise it would be 9.3 just above M279.
2S38 is a 9.3 anti-air with 10.0 anti-ground capabilities, thus its BR’d based on its anti-ground capabilities.

1 Like
29

Not to mention it can pen the Leo 2 of any kind in the hull, pen the front of the turret of the leo 2A4 , when you shoot the 2s38 , alot of ghost shell happens , if not, well you brake a mirror?! This tank is broken in all aspects and should not even be in the game as they dont even have any real numbers for this new vehicle that is not even used by the russian army yet!

2 Likes
30

The 2s38 is NOT and ifv, its an SPAAG

31

Holy hell this is one stupid reply,

2 Likes
32

It shoots like an IFV, it’s as effective as IFVs, it’s better as an IFV than a SPAAG, so it’s an IFV.
It’s a 9.3 SPAAG at 10.0 cause it’s better as an IFV.

33

You think GJN uses sample sizes of one when doing their “statistics” for balancing? Do you need me to explain why small sample sizes, nevermind a sample of one, is a bad idea?

Alvis is a known forum troll. It’s why they had to change their name from razorvon lol.

5 Likes
34

Balancing vehicles on winrates would be foolish; which is why Gaijin doesn’t do it.
Gaijin balances on comparative analysis.

35

ok so lets entertain your logic, if it had only the spaag capability and no ability to engage tanks it would be a 9.3 vehicle, by your own logic if it had no ability to engage aircraft it would be a 10.0 IFV, now can you please tell me how an AFV which incorporates both of these features is supposed to be 10.0? and this is using your own flawed logic.

36

oh so thats why hes damn everywhere

1 Like
37

what?

38

I think that all of these SHOULD impact BR rating. It is generally ridiculous that a light tank with proximity rounds instead of ranged rounds wouldn’t change the BR of it. It drastically changed the effectiveness of it. also, you really can’t just say that the OTOMATIC and the 2S38 are similar in the condition of having APFSDS. They also have very different properties. The OTOMATIC has worse thermals, not allowing it to spot aircraft as well, no laser rangefinder, making it less aware of helis and/or planes. This proves that these should impact BR and make them less or more effective. On the subject of the HSTV-L, It has bad penetration for the BR. Saying that the HSTV-L is not in a worse position and citing the penetration for this is just wrong. It is 4 BR brackets above. Also, the armor really doesn’t do anything to help in the position it is in. The HSTV-L faces better armor and better guns than the 2S38 does by far.

2 Likes
39

Why is it not at a higher battle rating? Why do you think that the HSTV-L is better? I think it should be at 10.7 for the place it is at right now and how it performs.

40

Because 10.0 is higher than 9.3. Nothing flawed about that.

@MistaFin
They do only if the capabilities are higher than that of its anti-tank capabilities.
HSTV-L isn’t 4 brackets above anything.
HSTV-L’s closest analogue is OTOMATIC and the Italian at 9.0/9.3 but that is larger, slower, and has worse armor & optics.

HSTV-L is superior cause it’s faster, more armor, more pen, better optics, and smaller.
If you think HSTV-L should be 10.7 then 2S38 should be 9.7 according to your rules.