Talking about “many cases” where certain weapon is practically never used. Discussing “superiority” when certain weapon is never CHOSEN.
A lot of children and man-childs dream this power fantasy of defeating guns in melee. You know, space marines and stuff. If you are like 40 years old, then it’s just super sad. Play some computer games and stop mistaking them for reality.
Banana peels and banana allergy have killed plenty of people. So I guess they have “many” cases where they are superior to firearms. Also silent and 100% biodegradable.
Wirbel and Ost both have virtually no armorinf vs planes. Vs tank MGs they will protect you at long range cause at short range your crewmen will die through the gaps in armor.
There’s no gamble, they are an easy kill.
Kugel at 6.7 was OK, at 7.0 it’s useless. It’s higher ROF, waaaay less range alternative to Coelian. 58mm pen is not a lot and HVAP is of very limited use and you have 1 in like 4? Used to have 93 pen, but that was too much and Gaijin nerfed it just enough so it xan’t hurt soviet mediums and heavies at that BR.
If you don’t understand the potency of a weapon because you’re blinded by this “superiority” take…that’s unfortunate, especially given that you imply I have hyped knives when I have not.
What I have said on these matters has been realistic and serious…moderate really. I haven’t tried to say anything was always or never the case, I just acknowledged the possibilities involved.
Believing that a ‘superior’ weapon is always preferable or that an 'inferior" weapon is never sufficient is mistaken, as reality has proven many times.
As a side note: absolute terms like ‘always’ and ‘never’ are very poor words to select in discussions because even one single counterexample destroys the claim–as I showcased earlier. Broader, more open terminology is almost always more realistic.
All in all, the whole knife analogy has proven to be a bizarre yet fascinating tangent. It’s a far cry from where things started.
SPAAs shouldn’t be counted out…that’s really all there is to say in sum-up.
You are still doing this. It all started with “many situations”, and “,close quarters superiority” while one is false in the “many” part while the other is an absolute made up power fantasy.
Just talk to some soldiers maybe.
Moderate approach is: knife is no longer truely a weapon and should be considered a tool and indeed in many armies it’s designed accordingly.
Comparing SPAA to a knife is simply openly stating that SPAA is a last ditch effort that will result in an almost guaranteed failure unless facing another SPAA. I don’t agree but I respect such view, as the game clearly shows that overwhelming majority of SPAA are just free kills.
Show me those cases of someone choosing a knife in a modern conflict over f.e. a pistol.
Oh, yes, for spreading butter on a bread.
Pistol is not good. Also for cutting sausage I definitely choose a knife.
It’s all about probability. What will work. A banana? Or a knife? What is more useful in close quarter combat Nutrition provided by banana. Or added movement speed provided by knife, because life is like counter strike, oh wait, it isn’t. Banana provides nutrition and deadly banana peel (and also can work vs enemies allergic to bananas) and knife-wielding power-fantasy kiddo will provide target practice for properly armed opponents.
So overal - banana seems to be superior. Potassium is very important.
Of course soldiers carry a knife because they need a cutting tool. If they did not, they would carry a banana.
SPAA is slightly superior in this regard. With masterful performance it can beat avg plane user. But that’s it. If our SPAA master faced equally skilled plane user, he would eat RP-3 from 1300m away.
I’ve acknowledged the possibilities…but I have no interest in bothering with the knife bit further.
In a rather fitting twist, I can tell you I debuted the T77E1 hours ago on Finland and I thoroughly enjoyed what it offered.
I believe I took out 2 or 3 aircraft plus a stray Wirbelwind…despite the utterly stock vehicle and new status, I felt pretty comfy with the T77. The only glaring flaw I personally found in it was (is) its Tier II rank.
To close things up for the time being, I thing it’s fair to say you and I have very divergent views on these matters.
T77 barely gets better with upgrades.
Meanwhile after scoring 1 assist I can take out 3 heavy tanks using a Wyvern and gun down some light vehicles like basically every single German tank around that BR :P
T77 is good as long as nobody is willing to waste a bomb on him. I sometimes do, when I have no better targets and also from long range it looks like Sherman so there’s that. I always feel sad I wasted a bomb on a useless vehicle :P
The “roof armor” of T77E1 and the side shields of whirbelwinds/Ostwinds will NOT stop CAS strafing down on them. The planes have the mgs and cannons to wreck all of the above easily.
And your earlier comment about killing Tiger IIs with an M42… a wee bit exaggerated maybe?
Considering the weakest armor the m42 can target is 80mm (often sloped) and the m42 max pen at point blank range is 72mm, I don’t see how you are “killing them”. At best you are tracking them or maybe disabling their gun.
For anybody else reading this ESPECIALLY those that think the recoil of Yak9’s centreline cannon DOES NOT affect the accuracy let me explain. Correct, the airspeed is slowed down and also with every succesive shot. Reduced airspeed mean reduced AIRFLOW over CONTROL SURFACES. Putting the engine torque aside, reduced airflow over control surfaces will result in yaw, roll and nose attitude, so unless the pilot is a CAT…I rest my case. The Yak9 was originally a bomber interceptor where accuracy was of little importance against mass bomber formations where one shell/one plane had a good chance. The bombers in question being B17, B29 and B24. Gaijin got this correct in Birds of Prey/Steel so why not with this game. Dumbing down perhaps.
The T77 is enclosed, minus its bubbles. The other two are open but would have to be hit by steep firing strafing runs which turn the incoming enemy into a stationary target, which makes him easier to hit.
I just began using the T77, so the jury is out–but on the latter two, it’s not uncommon to trick enemy players into trying an attack by pretending to not seeing them…then blasting them.
Not exaggerated in the slightest: my best result was two Tiger II Hs killed side by side along with a Jpz 4-5 and another vehicle (a Panther or Jagdpanther if I recall) around the same time.
The Tiger IIs were killed by sneaking behind them and firing through their turret rings (40mm thick or something); the JPz 4/5 is generally soft and the Panther/Jagdpanther would have been killed by side shots.
It wasn’t unusual to get 1 or 2 guys like that (the M42 was 6.7 at the time, so this was its standard MM)–but I was fortunate enough to find a gang of rather dim Germans on Hurtgen Forest that day (circa 2018 I’d say). I got onto the flank, circled around them and then struck.
Swing role use by the M19/M42 is still common for me.
12mm AP from above will pen anything on the TE77 but the glacis. Would not last if targeted by CAS. And that’s just mgs. Ground attack planes with anything stronger would not sweat taking it out.
The side armor will only help the other two if a plane comes in at a ridiculously low angle - and any auto-cannons would still punch through. They are open topped and totally vulnerable to any and all CAS attacks.
As for the Tiger 2 kill one-offs you claim, well I can’t prove you didn’t do it.
But good luck for anyone relying on that. And apparently you have not replicated it in 7 years.
Using examples of one-in-a-million lightning strikes doesn’t really support your narrative.
Having survived many strafing attacks, I cannot say any and all will kill them. Wound? Certainly possible. Kill? Not necessarily, given the two hull crew.
In the meantime, the attacking aircraft is effectively a stationary target for the SPAA to fire upon and it doesn’t have crew replacement or crew changing seats to fall back upon. If someone is looking for an ‘easy’ setup for SPAAs, letting the aircraft come right at you is one way to do it. (Sometimes I intentionally fire at aircraft to entice this.)
It happened and people at the time were freely able to watch the server replay. If you want to look at the damage viewers in game now, you can see that the ammunition of the Dusters will go through the turret rings from behind (as was the case then).
As for replicating it…the M42 isn’t at 6.7 now, is spaded and I haven’t really bothered trying to do it as of late (some time ago (read: months), I did goof around with the 75mm M3 GMC at 6.X though…that generated some laughs). I could probably go on a rampage with the M42 at that range if I wanted to, as nothing has really changed mechanically since then…I just don’t have any real need to do so.
I’m not sure how you read what I said as that–both because the odds are higher than that and because I said they occurred because I intended the encounters to happen. I didn’t just accidentally kill those Tigers, I went out to go after them because I was bored waiting on aircraft.
Looking at the X ray viewer in game, it seems they’ve changed the modeling in the years since (possibly due to volumetric). It’s still possible to wound the Tiger IIs with the 40mm now via the turret ring–but it’s clearly trickier than it used to be.
Question if your tank died by op CAS or verhicle are you suppose to stay in your spaa or losing any sp because sound very easy to get free verhicle without spending any sp at all.
As of 06/04/2025 destruction of aircraft (heli) in GRB is worth about 60 mission score (event grinding number.) Destruction of scouted ground vehicle by an ally is around 120. You personally destroying a ground vehicle is around 200 points per vehicle. Why is it that fighting something on equal footing gives such a massive amount of points compared to fighting a vehicle with distinctly unfair advantages? Inb4 “spaa is sooo strong” it was with a tank
