Yes they did, Im currently expecting a Belgian Scimitar to be added before a British one is
I will find a cricket bat and employ it in situations other than playing the well known game if that occurs.
2 Likes
From what I can find its 2.44m and 3m with the muzzle device
Velocity is a part of the kinetic energy equation KE= 1/2mv^2. They’re directly proportional but mass is important in the equation.
From what I can find its 353 MPa for almost all 30x165mm and 420 MPa for 30x170mm KCB, considering the difference between KCB and Rarden is the KCB is a steel case and Rarden is brass, we can assume the Rarden averages around the same chamber pressure for most rounds if not higher considering brass has higher pressure tolerances than steel. Albeit this is all I could find for any chamber pressure info for 30x170mm. Ammocan 30 mm Rarden Autocannon? - #8 by Tony.Williams - General Ammunition Discussion - International Ammunition Association Web Forum
Tbh thats probably a balancing factor. (Which ones are you referring to specifically, if I may ask?)
Any of them that have AP rounds that can pen more than like 50mm. Especially the ZSU 57, the Gepard and the Gepard clones like the one in the Swedish tree, the VEAK too.
The Gepard and its clones have a pure AP belt with 127mm of pen. Thats fucking stupid and completely counter-intuitive to its role as an anti air vehicle.
The cheiftain marksman also has the same belt since it uses the same twin oerlikon 35mm cannons. A 40-round apds belt for self defence is hardly game breaking. The platforms they are mounted on play a role because the cheiftain is worse than both the silly leopard 2 hull on the itpsv, and the gepard
The Chieftan’s belts are limited, and I would be fine with it not having them at all. Same with the Falcon.
No more ridiculous AP belts for SPAAs.
Literally all the Zsu can do, without AP ammo it would be literally useless. Hell- it wasnt even that good of an SPAA irl.
Gepard is fine- it has limited APDS ammo, still fufills its AA role, and can defend itself.
VEAK is similar, except they ripped proxy off of it and its now far less effective at AA work- do you want it to be useless?
These vehicles need AP rounds to be actually able to defend themselves and do at least some work on the ground, especially since planes do not always exist. There will always be tanks to shoot, but there will not always be planes. If you want SPAA balance, make them actually able to do their job as AA- not by ripping away what antitank capacity they have, but by giving them the tools (i.e. short-range lead marker, proxy on vehicles that could use it like the Veak/Lvkv 42), and giving them the means to defend themselves (i.e. APDS for Lvkv and Veak)
True, their spawn cost may need to be increased- but I am fine with that. I am tired of SPAA being the discarded ones, not up to the purpose they have to serve and so nerfed because of that.
1 Like
They are hardly ridiculous, and this statement…
…is completely false, as they did use those rounds.
1 Like
I would be glad because at least the falcon would go down in br so you dont have the use the damn bosvark which has the turning circle of a fully laden 80 ton lorry carrying special cargo…
And I’m tired of people spawning an SPAA first spawn and using it exclusively for anti-tank. It’s not just self defense if its being used for highly effective offense.
Genuinely. Maybe I’d be less upset about these overpowered nonsense SPAAs if they didn’t seem to only go to Russia and Germany (or countries with clones)
The Bosvark is so utterly hopeless that I still run the Ystervark at 7.7 and the G6 with proxy fuses is arguably a more effective anti air.
the solution then is to trade their AP belts for proxy belts.
Vehicles can perform multiple roles, and I think SPAA having that capability is perfectly fine. I use the Bkan for very effective SPAA work- do you want it’s HE-VT rounds removed because it cant be allowed to do that?
Then they become literally useless against ground targets (The Zsu only has HE ammunition beyond its AP, it would be completely unable to defend itself), would still remain at a high BR because of that HE-VT, and in many cases would be ahistorical.
I think this is mainly a tech tree gap issue to be honest, and could be just as easily fixed by introducing something to fill that gap and not ahistorically gutting the performance of SPAA.
1 Like
If gaijin will give us a nice, proper SPAA i will take it but they keep giving us fugly abominations so I wouldnt bet on it
I would be fine with sacrificing HE-VT if it meant no more AP crazy SPAAs.
And its not ahistorical the fact is SPAAs like that were not terribly effective IRL and the effectiveness of portable ground mounted anti-air didnt get better until the advent of SAMs.
SPAA’s should know their fucking place, which is sitting at the back in their spawn where it’s relatively safe unless their team is already overrun. They can fight it out with aircraft as they were intended to do and their cheap spawn cost means that spawning one to clear the skies and disposing of it after is no big deal. Heck I’d even be okay with allowing them to be refunded if they were locked to spawn.
1 Like
Literally matters nothing to the game. The Maus was completely ineffective, as were in many ways the panthers- but that doesnt matter ingame, does it?
Also, CAS ingame is significantly better then IRL, especially with mouse aim and the like.
Or how about you actually let them do something, and incentivise people to actually play the damn things and provide you cover.
If they are completely useless versus tanks no one will play them, especially since they arent even that good against aircraft.
This thread has some if I am correct.
5 Likes
So does historical accuracy only matter when it supports your vision for the game?
The problem is they are TOO effective against tanks to the point where people use them more as anti tank than anti air. This is especially true for the ZSU-57 which gets rapid fire dual 150mm pen APHE at 7.0!
At the absolute minimum all SPAAs should be limited to a single reload’s worth of AP, that’s sufficient for self defense without encouraging anti-tank use.
There is a major difference between historical accuracy in modeling (What rounds tanks can use, their armor/speed, etc), and effectiveness/matchmaking.
The Zsu is a special case, and one that actually mimmicks its IRL role.
1 Like
They are only effective in the hands of a decent player, against the right tanks, facing worse players. The ZSU would be an awful SPAA at any BR, and it’s only good because of its TD capabilities.
That provides 0 self defence for so many SPAA. That is as low as 8 rounds on some of them.
2 Likes
Now the WZ305/ZSU-57M…
Those are peak.
Howabout this, bring the Falcon down to 7.7 or even 7.0. As it stands 8.3 is way too high for the Falcon, its the same BR as the Chieftain with no radar, and it doesnt even have a pure AP belt.