The Veak 40 is just bad after its HEVT rounds got removed (at least from my point of view). Any player that is not stupid enough to charge head on into its 0.8 km range can easily dodge the low velocity rounds. The lack of proxy fuse and the swaying of the radar lock makes hitting targets extremely difficult.
However the major problem I’m having is not with this. Sweden now have no methods of effectively countering aircrafts/choppers that are directly above the battlefield. Meaning the 10.3 and 11.7 line ups would suffer greatly against Heli/jets that are spawn camping right above. (one could use the ItPsV, but that thing has a Marksman turret ffs)
I understand it is not balanced to put two AA at 8.7. So I suggest giving back the HEVT and move the vehicle to 9.3. Or give it the APDS that it suppose to have and move it 10.0. What do you guys think?
Which do you think is the most reasonable option?
- HEVT (8.7)
- HEVT (9.3+)
- HEVT, APDS (10.0-10.3)
- APDS (7.7)
- duplicate one that has HEVT to higher BR
- It’s fine as it is now
5 Likes
HE-VT was removed for historical reasons, not balance.
7 Likes
Ho-ri production was added to help the JP TT have a better transition in BR, F-16 AJ was given to JP to improve player experience before the F-15 was added. All Gripens are allowed Aim-9Ms for “game balance” and they are added to UK and Hungarian tree for similar reasons. Tanks produced by Russians operating in India can join the UK TT as squadron vehicle and Swiss Hunter produced by UK can end up in the German TT. Same thing for that stupid Mi-28a in the Swed heli TT. And where is the APDS round that VEAK 40 is supposed to have?
I get historical accuracy is important but that should not be the reason for the game to ruin players’ experience without offering alternative solutions.
3 Likes
But in Gaijin’s mind they have. The ItPsV 90 fills the 8.7 SPAA role, whereas the VEAK now fills the SPAA gap at 7.7. Whether you agree with this or not is another question but in Gaijin’s reasoning they both now can allow for game balance and historical accuracy. Now yes I think the VEAK with HE-VT would definitely be the better SPAA of the two previous 8.7, but I guess Gaijin also wanted to nerf the VEAK probably so they came up with this historical solution instead. Quite a shame, it was a nice SPAA.
However, I think at 7.7 it can be pretty good still, especially in anti tank role, 95mm of AP pen is not bad at all, and it gets the fast firing 40mms as well.
2 Likes
Balance should trump everything, always. At the end of the day, this is a competitive video game, not a painstaking simulation of real life. There are countless vehicles using weapons they never had in service (Or missing weapons they did have in service) in the name of balance.
And the VEAK at 8.7 with HEVT was a lynchpin of balance. It, along with the Sgt York, were the only vehicles able to counter a well played ATGM helicopter at the tier. Additionally, it was the only vehicle that had even the slimmest chance of taking on an A-4E.
Now that it’s been rendered a worse ZSU-37-2 (For a lineup that didn’t need it), there is nothing left to stop those vehicles if they end up on the American team.
2 Likes
But it is. Life sucks and WT as well!
yeah you’re right but problem is you need to be russian player, write in forum in russian language to be seen, like i want too LWS on leclerc AZUR, or lots of things leclerc don’t have but we’re not going to get it fast, i think they will buff 2s38 faster than repair any vechicle
How are historical reasons an argument in a game that is anything but historical?
1 Like
Bro that isnt talked about by anyone, im pretty sure all Leclercs from the Azure and up have a LWS right?
In real life yes, in game AZUR have modelled lws but not functional
No Leclercs have LWS in War Thunder
i see this purely as someone from Gaijin is tired of having a counter for their helis.
that’s it, pure bias.
there are PLENTY of dublicate vehiclea with different ammo in this game, so there could easily have been 2 Veaks, one with and one without HEVT.
But nooooo.
Someone had a decent defence against choppers, and that’s a no go.
1 Like
No Leclerc has LWS in game as of yet (despite the modelling team modelling the LWS on the AZUR). IRL, the AZUR has it by default, and all Leclercs are said to have it optionally (altough pictures are hard to find…). Next Leclerc, the XLR, will have a LWS as well.
Going back to the original topic, I would actually say move up the VEAK 40 to 8.0 without its VT Fuzes. It does have a great APDS round to deal against ground targets (and in fact it will face more armoured vehicles under 8.0 than above). Despite what the OP says, I don’t thing the ITPSV is a bad AA. The marksman turret is amongst the best (no VT) gun AA platform in game, along side the Gerard and the Chinese one at 8.3, on a leopard 2 chassis
And the VEAK was moved down partly to give one of the strongest 7.7-8.0 lineups a great SPAA.
And the F-16AJ is effectively as historical as the VEAK.
Gripens had RB-74Ms, which are ficticious and effectively just smokeless Lis.
The T-90S is Indian-built.
Post-war switzerland had almost no relation to the German military industry whatsoever, instead only taking British and French export vehicles.
Why shouldn’t it be in the British tree?
Released with the T-80U as a gimmick heli, though I feel like you simply refused to look as this isn’t a TT heli…
2 Likes
I was struggling to play the veak against jets more than 2km out soni dcided to just run ap and sap and well who would’ve thought a swedish spaa does better at being a TD over spaa. Also the marksman turret is decent but not on par with the gepard. Having the gun colser together helps to more accurately shoot down aircraft. Besides most swedish players are playing as a TD cause suprise suprise it does better at hunting tanks than it does with air. Also since the veak plays almost the same natches as before it doesnt really bolster the lineup imo since you run into 84e players in a partial uptier and now the veak can’t do anything about it if the a4e players knows what hes doing.
HEVT is both unauthentic and there’s already an 8.7 available.
F-16AJ is still a real YF-16 under a different name with camos it didn’t use and one camo it did use; It will also likely be delisted when F-16 OCU from Thailand is added.
Ho-Ri production if never built is on a time limit to be removed when a TD replacement is added.
Gripens use 9Ms IRL, it’s in their manuals and advertisement literature.
Mi-28A is a real helicopter that Sweden trialed.
T-90S is a real tank from India using equipment it uses IRL.
Swiss Hunter is a real aircraft.
40mm APDS never existed [at least in Sweden], and definitely wouldn’t for VEAK 40.
You’ve shown exactly 1 [Ho-Ri Production] example. The rest were real vehicles, and only one of them was renamed and given to Japan on a likely temporary basis.
@Aegis270
VEAK 40 is balanced at 7.7.
@Gruminator
Swedish bias cause 7.7 has an amazing SPAA now? lol
Oh, have an image of a Gripen using an AIM-9M:
1 Like
Very balanced being an objectively inferior version of an already mid 7.7. Compared with the ZSU-37-2, you have almost half the rate of fire and slower shells. This makes hitting targets, especially manuevering targets, more down to luck than skill as they can literally fly between the shells that are being fired.
It’s only better at tank hunting, which is not something Sweden needed for this lineup, since between the USH and ZSU-57-2 they had no shortage of squishy flanking tanks.
And even if it was balanced at 7.7, that’s still irrelevant to the core of my argument, which is that it’s position at 8.7 was critically important to the overall CAS versus SPAA balance. Removing one of two vehicles that can even hope to counter guided weapon CAS at the tier and not replacing it with anything was a terrible move for game balance.
And don’t give me the historical accuracy argument either. This isn’t some fantasy round that never existed or worked (Looking at you 128mm APHEDS rounds that just IRL shattered due to the high velocity). These are rounds that would obviously have been given to the VEAK later in life had it entered service. The same justification as dozens of other historically inaccurate vehicles. A small price to pay for game balance.
4 Likes
ZSU-37-2 has an inferior radar by far.
8.7 already has a capable SPAA platform for the CAS available.
People are still engaging too far away which forces aircraft to keep their distance.
If aircraft see no tracers they get closer due to confidence.
People forget to check kill feeds when on the ground and don’t remember if SPAA is up.
It’s why I yelled at people in 2020 that were firing on aircraft from more than 2.5km away when using my Japanese Gepard.
All historically inaccurate vehicles AKA paper vehicles AKA blueprint only vehicles will be delisted at some point so your last paragraph doesn’t matter.
The game is already balanced in the VEAK regard.
Whew, one whole point for the VEAK. A great RADAR that’s rendered largely pointless by the weakness in actually hitting the targets it can spot. What a great combo, spawn a VEAK as a dedicated spotter SPAA alongside an actually effective one.
Nope. ATGM helicopters at 8.3/8.7 can render themselves completely immune to Gepard and Gepard equivalents (Including the ItPsv 90) by simply staying at least 2.5km out and jinking slightly. A-4Es are even stronger, being able to Walleye or Bullpup you from outside your effective range.
Proxy was the only round capable of consistently countering ATGM helicopters, and the only thing that had a hope in hell of countering an A-4E (Even if it was a losing battle most of the time). There is now a single vehicle left with proxy at this tier, and it’s always on the American A-4E’s team.
In other words, hope to hell the CAS you’re facing are idiots with a three second attention span. Got it. As if the first thing an A-4E or ATGM helicopter looks for isn’t SPAAs for them to preemptively counter.
And guess what distance ATGM helicopters and A-4Es can kill you from?
Laughs in missing APDS for the Lvkv 42 and VEAK
Laughs in F-5C flares.
Laughs in Maus APHEDS.
Laughs in F-4F missiles
Laughs in T-2/F-1 missiles.
Laughs in Finnish MiG-21 Bis missiles.
Laughs in T-34-100 rounds.
Laughs in the 9040C being the only 9040 to get m/01 rounds.
Bofors L/60 guns using L/70 ammo, which they aren’t compatible with.
Type 16s (2016 vintage) using rounds rendered obsolete in the early 80s.
ZA-35 not getting any APDS.
Several missing rounds for the HSTVL.
Need I go on?
I want it made clear, most if not all of these historical inaccuracies are good for the game. Balance is (and always should be) the priority over slavish historical accuracy. Making every vehicle perfectly accurate leads to trying to balance flareless F-5Cs, or ZA-35s with APDS belts. Sometimes bending history is preferable.
1 Like
Gepard range against helicopters is 3.5km, it’s what I learned using my Type 8X and helicopters alike.
The only times I didn’t die in my 7.7 2km helicopter is no one was in SPAA, legit zero people. Once they were even in a Model 42 I was gone cause the range is too short.
Helicopter engagement range for SPAA is always further than jet range, and jet range for Gepard like vehicles is <2.5km. Add a km for helicopters.
It’s like Pantsir, it can hit helicopters out to 18km, can’t hit a fast moving jet beyond 13 nearly all the time.
A-4E’s maximum range is usually 3km, and that’s at bomb drop, by the time they pulled up they’re within 2.5km. It’s worse on some maps, slightly better on others.
As for your final paragraph:
1- That is a request for info not confirmation.
2- Accurate. This is well known that F-5As can have flares.
3- Was a real round tested in Jagdtiger and Maus came after Jagdtiger.
4- F-4Fs can indeed use missiles.
5- Mig-21Bis can indeed use missiles.
6- The 100mm gun of T-34-100 did indeed fire those rounds.
7- Those auto-lights did indeed use those rounds.
8- Bug report with evidence.
9- They are indeed capable of firing those rounds.
10- ZA-35 guns do not have the APDS compartment, thus it not having APDS is accurate.
11- HSTVL’s current round is accurate and advanced rounds would make its BR higher than the top MBTs in War Thunder.
Everything you stated are historically accurate to those vehicles with 2 suspect issues: 8 and 1.
The suspect issues are however non-confirmed.
