Umm… You weren’t supposed to use logic to debunk their arguments?
This is the “whining about the 2S38 because it hurts my feelings” thread?
So… You should fix your post. The 2S38 should be 12.7.
3 Likes
So real
2 Likes
Yea it is weird to see the Russian 10.0 line up, tbh I was just really weirded out about the Strela going up to 10.3, but maybe theres some other facts I need to learn about
Because, as said before, its APFSDS cartridges are of different dimensions than any other cartridge it carries.
Why can the BMP-3 and BMD-4 only carry a handful of missiles?
The same exact reason.
2 Likes
It could fit more APFSDS shells in the front hull storage, and the difference in the length of the APFSDS and HE shells isn’t enough for it to be impossible.
Gepard (edit: don’t forget Ikv) getting limited APDS isn’t a thing I guess, and there’s no reason why Gaijin wouldn’t nerf a better version of APDS rounds.
That’s great, please refer to:
You also talk about the Gepard - but regardless of the Gepard being realistic or not (I’m not sure whether it is limited in real life), your argument about them limiting SPAA has already broken down.
The shells can be manually loaded into the APFSDS feed.
in which its not alone at that br. Swedish 10.0 sports the same multirole ability
You are also correct about the LVKV, I played both the 2S38 and the LVKV, they both play really wierdly the same
3 Likes
However, in War Thunder the ammo pool is all 1 uniform entity.
In order to change that they’d need to overhaul how ammo is stored in the code, as well as model dual-feed systems.
Until that point, all they can do is limit it to the amount the feed ramp can hold.
OTOMATIC is not the only item that would see changes based on that.
Gepard has an entirely separate feed ramp for its APDS as the 35mm gun is dual feed, one is for APDS specifically.
2 Likes
Also as a quick footnote, I will not be changing the name of this thread or the title of it due to showing my mistake and horrible take on the 2S38, now Im really interested in others data
2 Likes
They do limit APDS (and since APFSDS are better, they would limit those too) for the Gepard, Marksman, ItPsV 90, SIDAM 25, etc.
How? What is so difficult about it? Just change the ammo storage from only HE-VT to general ammo storage, which is how most ammo racks work in game.
That’s not how any ammo rack works in War Thunder.
That’d also be an incorrect representation of OTOMATIC.
Even with the current representation, it is accurate for the current limits.
I gave you the solution: Overhauling how ammo is stored in code.
That is the sole solution.
And no, they don’t limit AP ammunition on vehicles. Real-life manufacturers do and Gaijin adopts those real-life manufacturer information.
Complaining that Gaijin makes vehicles accurate is silly.
Does it have to be so complicated?
If you want an idea for nerf, here it is:
Simply nerf the fire rate.
Now, before ya’ll start going “uhh that’d be unrealistic” let me remind you that reload times are one of Gaijin’s primary balancing factors and don’t have to be historical. In fact they rarely are.
Case in point HSTV-L’s current reload of 1.5s when in reality it was 1s. When users raise this issue, they are told “not a bug, it’s a balancing factor”.
So why not apply the same logic to the 2S38.
That and the magical autoloader which can swap between HE-VT and APFSDS instantaneously are what make this thing completely absurd.
The Lvkv also has numerous advantages and currently has better statistics than the 2S38.
The 2S38’s advantages over the Lvkv are:
- the slightly higher hp/t
- 56deg/s horizontal traverse vs 33deg/s horizontal traverse (Expert)
Then, the main problem with the 2S38’s other advantages are that they are antithetical. It has:
- the higher pen (the 9040C’s APFSDS still penetrates all the same spots as the 2S38’s APFSDS, but the 9040s have an advantage because their RPM is three times higher at 300 RPM while the 2S38 is at 120 RPM)
- APHE (honestly would barely consider this an advantage as I wouldn’t personally use it, and would rely on better aim instead, it’s a sidegrade in my eyes)
- the unmanned turret (which only has -5 gun depression on a very tall platform meaning it won’t be able to hide its hull and make use of it)
A lot of its advantages are heavily offset by its poor design, which is a common theme in Russian vehicles.
The Lvkv9040C/Strf 9040C, however, has:
- FAR better survivability (the 2S38’s front is all 3 crew, and if you don’t kill them by making a poor shot, the middle is a huge carousel that will kill it instantly when shot, and the rear will kill the engine, while the Lvkv is a fully spall lined, frontal engine, decentralized crew monster that is nearly impossible to one-shot.)
- Much better gun depression on a shorter chassis.
- 5 crew and a radar on the Lvkv9040C (the only IFV that gets extra crew which makes it more survivable than MBTs)
- TRIPLE the RPM (this already makes the Strf 9040C superior at anti-air, but the Lvkv9040C’s radar pushes this even further, not to mention the more consistent damage)
- Better reverse gear
The Swedish 10.0 IFVs have EXTREMELY strong aspects you can take advantage of, while the 2S38’s design somewhat fights against itself. (This is just Russians making cost-savings by creating bodykits of old vehicles again)
Especially the survivability on them. Not to mention the 9040 BILL with the best (and unnerfed) top-down missile in the game. After the Spike buff, the Italian ~10.0 IFVs are also all extremely mobile, extremely dangerous, and fairly trolly from my experience fighting them.
You can see all this just by looking at the stats of all these vehicles.
I personally don’t think any of these vehicles should be going up, either. I think they’re just fine at 10.0. I just hate that people seem to whine about the 2S38 due to sheer ignorance.
Like this post here:
Yeah? That’s literally EVERY AUTOCANNON IN THE GAME. My PGZ09 switches (35mm Gepard gun) switches between APDS and APHE instantly, too. Like, seriously?
1 Like
eh its the game i guess but its only feeded by 1 autoloading mechanism
How? I don’t see only HE, only AP, only APCR, etc. ammo racks in game, they are generalized for most vehicles.
It’s not, the difference in length of the APFSDS and HE shells is barely anything, and the ammo is put into the feeds by a manual loader - none of that requires only 12 APFSDS.
There is a difference, or should be a difference, between the real-life ammo allocation and the War Thunder ammo allocation. The Gepards weren’t meant to be meeting tanks face-to-face constantly, but in War Thunder they do. I don’t see a reason why Gepards couldn’t just have put APDS belts in the main ammo storage.
The APFSDS changes for the OTOMATIC are accurate, there’s no evidence that the tolerances on the front hull storage are so tight that the APFSDS rounds couldn’t fit.
Here’s the thing, nerfing the fire rate of 2S38 is increasing it, which coincidentally makes it more annoying but less effective.
Lowering the 2S38 reload speed would make it more effective due to its relatively low first stage supply.
@SpeclistMain
Secondary ammo storage is not modeled in War Thunder at this time.
The “first stage” is purely a classification that reduces the reload time and nothing else.