Inconsistent BR placements for high tier SPAAs

Game Discussion Realistic Battle
,
1

Greetings,

God I hate this forum interface. Oops, that’s not what I meant to say. This is supposed to be about SPAAs.
Some months ago I made a post asking about why the G.91 YS was still 9.7 despite being completely outclassed by newer planes at the same BR. There was no unanimous agreement on the exact BR the G.91 YS should be, but there was a unanimous agreement on the fact that 9.7 was too high.

This last month, the G.91 YS (and the G.91 Y) were finally lowered after multiple years of being quite literally ignored by Gaijin, so maybe Gaijin reads this forum from time to time? (I am slightly on copium, yes.)

So with that hope (delusion) in mind, I’d like to bring attention to a few of the high-tier SPAAs.

The SIDAM 25

Ironically, the SIDAM 25 is very similar to the G.91 YS, its BR has not budged in several years (at least not that I know of), despite many things changing since then (including it being nerfed). Years ago, it used to be a threat, but today you really don’t see them around anymore.

Compared to other 8.3 (or even 8.0!) SPAAs that other countries have access to, the SIDAM 25 is quite… sad

The SIDAM 25’s features (and lack of features):

  • No search radar, the only other SPAA at the same BR that currently doesn’t have a search radar is the Falcon, but the Falcon, as we all know, is a tank destroyer first and an SPAA second
  • An ammo count of 600, average for the BR’s many 2-guns SPAAs, but which depletes faster due to having 4 guns instead of 2
  • Average speed, mostly on par with other SPAAs of the same BR, and of course much slower than the ZA-35
  • Only two belts, a full HEI-T belt with only 7mm of pen, and a full APDS belt with only 80mm of pen and restricted to 60 rounds
    • The 60 rounds for the APDS belt is 20 more rounds than the Gepard, but with significantly lower penetration which completely negates the advantage gained by having 20 additional rounds
    • The 60 APDS rounds are the ONLY tool for the SIDAM 25 to destroy ground vehicles, the HEI-T belt being unable to damage even the lightest vehicles.
    • Comparatively, at the same BR, all other SPAAs get API-T rounds in their default belt, with penetration nearing the SIDAM 25’s APDS

For the SIDAM 25, I am strictly baffled, I do not see any reason for it to still be 8.3, it is a worse SPAA and a worse tank destroyer than any other 8.3 SPAA, and I would even say it is also worse on all fronts than the Hungarian ZSU-23-4 also in the Italian tree, which sits at 8.0.

(The ZSU-23-4 has worse ballistics, but I feel that the fact that it has a search radar makes up for it)

The Type 81 (C)

This one was recently moved up, in fact, it was moved up a whole 1.0 higher than it was, and while I can believe that it was good where it was, I must say that moving it up all the way to 11.3 was a massive overreaction.

The Type 81 (C) can be easily compared to the Strela-10M2, besides the slightly better missiles the Type 81 (C) gets, they have almost the exact same features:

  • No search radar
  • 8 IR missiles
  • No offensive armament (the Strela-10M2 at least gets a machine gun but that’s hardly effective even as defensive armament)

The Type 81 (C) gets thermal sight, which does help in spotting aircraft, but it is absolutely no replacement for a search radar. At 11.3, aircraft have so many tools at their disposal to perform their CAS duties that they could be absolutely anywhere, and the sky is a big place to search with your own eyes.

The missiles aren’t particularly impressive either, I did say earlier that they were slightly better than the Strella-10M2’s missiles, but so far, out of all the missiles I ever fired with my Strella-10M2, not. a. single. one. missed. You get 1km more range with the Type 81 (C)'s missiles at least, but that makes it only 6km, which is an incredibly limited range at 11.3 considering ALL aircraft at the BR have armament with more range.

I believe the Type 81 (C) should be no higher than 10.7, the 2S6 currently sits at 10.7, and while I would argue that the 2S6 is a significantly better vehicle in almost all aspects, one could make the argument that the Type 81 (C) has fire-and-forget abilities that the 2S6 lacks and that this aspect is not negligible.

Endword

Last time I was told to include polls to gather other people’s sentiments on the vehicles, the reason I don’t is that polls are not constructive at all, it is a lot more constructive for people to word their sentiments in replies rather than clicking options on a poll.

Thus, if I have missed something and you have found ways to make the two SPAAs I mentioned as effective as other SPAAs of the same BR, do tell!
Similarly, if you feel like there are other SPAAs with a BR that completely mismatches its performance compared to other SPAAs of the same BR, feel free to add them to the list! For this post, I only talked about high tier SPAAs because high tier is currently what I’m playing, so I have a fresh experience with them.

11 Likes
2

Yeah the SIDAM is just sad. I’m happy to see it brought up.

3

Sidam was a useless tin can with 20k repaircost or something, so no one uses it and snail cannot figure out or rather doesn’t care to balance it.

4

Honestly, the Sidam 25 could get a full APDS belt and it would still not be anything crazy when you have the 35mm Oerlikon KDA wielders like the Gepard with full auto APHE at the same br

5

Not gonna lie, I agree, but that might be too radical of an idea for the snail

1 Like
6

Agreed although the otomatic should be nowhere near top tier

7

The OTOMATIC is similar to the SIDAM 25 in that manner, I remember it used to be highly capable. Newer vehicles and the nerf to the OTOMATIC have changed quite many things, but I didn’t include it in the list because I do not own it so I can’t tell how well it compares with other SPAAs

8

OTOMATIC was added in 2018 before all the nonsense helicopters and long range missiles.

9

You forgot about Sidam 25’s IRT lock.
The primary reason it’s 8.3 instead of 8.0 is its APDS though.

10

2 seconds of 80mm APDS is worth a BR increase?

11

I like your sense of humor, funny man. +1, good post.

Though I have to point out something - statcard range for Type 81 is completely wrong. 6km is no trouble for those missiles, and you can easily stretch it to 8km (and sometimes more, if your target is slow enough).
Plus they’ll basically never miss unless they overlead themselves into the ground or you launch from too close, which is a big upgrade over the 2S6 and most other SACLOS SAMs like all the Rolands.

Its only real fault is lacking a search function.

12

Yeah I have no idea what the “range” actually means in the statcard, maybe it’s the range the missile would have going 90° up? Like many of the other statistics on the statcard, “who knows”.

Are you talking about planes exclusively or all aircraft though? I haven’t been able to lock-on helicopters that were more than 6km away :(

13

Planes in particular. I think even 6km is below what the Type 81 will do when pointed straight up, I don’t seem to recall issues slapping stratosphere laser bombers at 8km (according to the Air Alert callout).

As for helis, if they’re high enough I never had issues. The main limiting factor is either 1) I can’t fuckin’ SEE them, or 2) they’re flying too low and the contrast locking doesn’t work.

1 Like
14

After double-checking while playing it again, the range is actually specified to be 10km, the 6km is the all-aspect lock-on range (which is still wrong, but I assume gaijin just made up that number as a rough estimate)

15

as of today, SIDAM is similar to the M163 (M133 plus Vulcan) and should be placed at 7.7. It used to have a value, but then they nerfed its HE rounds, severely limiting its effectiveness against aircraft.

Today, it’s still paradoxically at 8.3, a mockery considering it has the same BR as the Gepard.

We’ve been waiting for years for the OF-40 SPAA (Cheetah PRTL).

@Smin1080p It’s never possible that Italian players always have to struggle to get something. The hull is in the game, as is the turret. It wouldn’t take much to give a bit of decency to your customers adding the OF-40 SPAA. Furthermore taliking about italian SPAA, the Leopard/Bofors was introduced to fill the gap between the M42 Contraereo and the R3. The result now is that the Leo Bofors is at 5.7, and the R3 is at 6. Might as well give it APDS and put it at 7. What are you going to come up with now to cover the gap 3.7 - 5.7?

16

Double the range and nearly double the G overload, 35% higher deltaV, 5x explosive mass

17

As I was saying, in practice there’s little difference. It might just be me, but none of my Strella’s missiles ever missed, and they’ve always killed, so in my experience, the Strella’s missiles are already perfect; with that in mind, besides the increased range, the missiles are not noticeably “better”