Just How Bad is the US SPAA Line?

I mean, its like, 70-80% copy paste, but if it is/was needed, I’m sure it would be fine, but its just an L60 Anti-II

1 Like

A lot of my proposed BRs are intentionally low.

This is so that anytime anyone dares complain how some piece of CAS equipment supposedly is, a dozen+ people will basically scream at said complainer “go use X that just got tons of buffs and SHUT UP ABOUT YOUR TANK-ONLY MODE ALREADY!”

It’s to rip a major source of that loathsome argument out by the roots - the complaints about how “useless” or “not worth learning” SPAAG are. The point is to make them so piss-easy to use that anyone who dares to complain now has really no excuse to complain.

And I would frankly lower the BRs of much of the AAs you used as comparisons, too. I like my CAS, but I also like SPAAG, and most importantly I want to see the ceaseless gutting of CAS weaponry stop.

2 Likes

Guys we are talking about US TT SPAA.

1 Like

Need to get the M163A2 PIVADS w/ MK149 APDS rounds for 8.3. The APDS rounds increase range a bit but I think the penetration would be around ~60mm, still, every bit counts.

1 Like
  1. You are not a moderator

  2. That was a single reply, no more over that

  3. There’s not many mid-range SPAA’s for USA

Want some vehicles that could be added, here’s two?

T249 Vigalante 35mm rotary gun system, a prototype only, and not enclosed
MIM-46 Mauler, a cancelled prototype vehicle, not fielded, in preference for the VADS
those are the only possible additions, as the rest are either multi-peice, or non-self-propelled

2 Likes

Don’t forget the XM701 GLAADS

2 Likes

Woah chillax dude, you have been talking about more than once. Thats why i said that. But thanks for the extra vehicle suggestions. I would love to see the t249 ingame

What would you suggest to fill the gaps? The T77 (AA Chaffee) might be useful
6 50 cals.
image

Gets difficult when the jets come in though for all shell firing SPAA.

4 Likes

These vietnam era US SPAAs are quite good vs ground units, since they got 70+ mm pen. Enough to kill alot of common enemy tanks from the side or even frontally. Vs air not so bright, but nothing is perfect. Others might throw more lead into the sky, but are stuck with 49mm pen, which is not enough to reliably pen tank sides.

The question is what is better for a nation’s tech tree? It might be very advantegeous to have SPAAs which might serve as tank hunters. You need these magical 70mm+ pen to be effective vs. most ground units. US has it at rather conviniant BRs. Rus has it. France has it.

Ger for instance has just 49mm / 50mm pen for almost all SPAAs up to 6.0 BR. You fail to pen most tank sides with just 50mm pen. On the other hand Ger SPAAs are more effective vs. air than M-42 derivatives. Guess you can’t have both. Would be unblanced to have both features.

Not in Vietnam , North Vietnam won on 30 April 1975. 40mm VT shells started production some time in that same year.
But the M-42 was in service with the US National guard until 1988, Austria until 1992 and Japan until 1994 (along with several other nations that used them until between 1985 to 89). There are also Thailand, Tunisia, Greece and Taiwan that are listed as using it, but do not have a date of decommission so its possible that they are still in service, or at least maintained as reserve or training equipment .
So I would be surprised if non-of them at least tried using VT rounds in it during that time.

What if they give US more opportunities to leverage air superiority, as it was meant to be

I’m sure they will but I think the spawn cost for achieving the air superiority 600+ points vs. spawning a ground SPAA wouldn’t be as efficient. Not to mention, not everyone plays both ground and air so it’s leaves some without an option.

Maybe if they made it cost no SP to rearm with different weapons a fighter could clear skies then rearm to support ground, any aircraft gameplay is going to feel more fun and active than spaa, they should really lean into it for US. But for everyone who didn’t research US air tree (which is kinda surprising as to why someone would do that bc where US dominates is the skies and it’s what our military is most famous for) there are all the spaa suggestions on this thread

1 Like

About all they are good for .

Yeah, that too, but uh, issue is how it would be in game, essentially making the C-RAM a better choice (I.e. its a fully-automatic system)

Interesting to note. So there is some plausible basis to give them that shell.

Gaijin is too inconsistent on the whole Could use/ did use thing, given that we have the M-19-A1 and M-42 at the same BR and are, for all practical purposes, identical I would suggest that the M-19 stays as it is and the M-42 gets VT rounds and goes up to somewhere between 5.3 and 6.7 to fill the gap and remove a redundant extra SPAA

1 Like

I think too many SPAAGs are badly overreacted to when they are able to kill common tanks through the sides.

To me, a long-term player, an SPAAG able to reliably melt tanks’ sides is actually balanced. It means the average player will actually move outside their own spawn with the thing more often due to being able to defend themselves if needed.

This does not mean to repeatedly uptier an SPAAG until it becomes unable to harm common tanks it meets. Such as is becoming the case with the PG87 for China, which only pens 65mm point blank.

For the Duster, I would give it HE-VT, APDS, and globally give all SPAAGs a short-range lead marker out to no more than 1.0km-1.5km for a stock/aced crew. I would then intentionally place it “too low” to make it impossible to overlook and worth using even for the average pleb, probably 6.3 tops.

The “Raduster” suggested elsewhere, which has a radar unit but would be otherwise identical, would be 7.0, tops.

I would downtier many SPAAGs to be more in line with the likes of the Duster, give them any missing shell types they have to increase antitank potency, and generally make SPAAGs into effectively pseudo-IFVs in the lower ranks.

In order to make SPAAG “too good not to use,” they need to be able to murder tanks who do things no more stupid than would get them killed by most other tanks at the same BR, with an added bonus of melting planes that get close.

Then SPAAG have no excuse to not be used by anyone, helping kill one of the arguments keeping the embers of tank-only mode alive (that SPAAG are useless and totally outmatched). I want that argument dead, and the threat of more boneheaded global CAS nerfs dead with it. Such folk go and say “but snail did that, we didn’t.” Well whose whining provoked the snail?

Sorry if I started rambling too much. I see the entire CAS argument as the biggest poisonous self-inflicted wound to the game after BR overcompression, because changes meant for one mode all too often ruin something or occasionally many things in other modes that weren’t even part of the problem.

1 Like

This.

This works SO much better for the US than the Skink would.
The US never used or ordered the Skink, so it’s why Britain got it as they ordered the Skink.

Yes I know the German Airforce ceased to exist by that point, but my point still stands.

The T77 would be around the same BR as the Skink if we go off of the closed top aspect.
Skink went from 4.7 to 5.3 because it’s armoured (also because Britain moment)

2 Likes

The skink has 20mms and the T77 only has .50 cals. Depending on the targetting speed, i think it would be 5.0 max.