I have been playing the M3A3 bradley for a brief amount of time, and one thing i’ve noticed is that it is very difficult to penetrate anything with it’s lackluster gun, and the ATGMs on it are inconsistent and a lot of times they are impossible to launch before being destroyed by a tank (skill issue on my behalf.) Regardless, im here to ask if there is anything that gaijin could add to this tank to justify its 10.0 BR rating (same as 2S38 and the BMP-2M.) The 2S38 has much better AA capabilites and also better ground capabilities (the ground part is my opinon), but in general i think its better than the bradley). The BMP-2M is better in almost every way. It has a faster gun, a APFSD-S gun that penetrates the same as the bradley (basically) and missiles that have better penetration and can fire at any speed. I think the M3A3 is terrible for its br and needs either some things to make it better or a BR change. thoughts?
Yeah Ive suffered trying to grind the M3A3 and its garbage.
For a start they need to throw away the dumb folding ATGM launcher, it needs to stay raised. And then I think it could easily go to 9.7.
The 2S38 needs to be like 10.7 though, its more that thing is absurdly undertiered than the bradly is overtiered.
you mean if it’s atgm thing didn’t fold? sorry. also, I think it could go to 9.7 or even 9.3 and still be pretty balanced. so yeah… 2S38 is very OP for its tier aswell
There’s already a topic open for the discussion of BRs and balance. No need to make a dedicated topic for a specific vehicle.
(But since yall are here, yeah wtf is up with the launcher folding thing, surely it didn’t do that irl…)
I’m not necessarily complaining… Im comparing it to the other vehicles around it and saying I think it deserves modifications to make it better or a BR change. (just a discussion)
It’s something that always kill those IFVs, both Strf 9040 BILL II, M3A3 and M3 Bradley, I wish this wasn’t a thing, it would cost less time of reaction.
The Urban combat package? I think it would be the same thing as the SepV2 we have useless add-on armor. I really agree on decompression but moving a specifically good vehicle, it’s middle term, I agree but not that much with most arguments presented.
Perhaps adding a new keybind to manually fold it would satisfy the people who like that and the devs. As it is, it’s more detrimental than anything…
yeah I mean you could definitely add the BUSK kit for it. From photos im looking at, it would be adding a stabilizer for the missiles launchers (or whatever you wanna call it), which would make it not fold. I think that would be a great change. Also, when someone compares to the BMP-2M, or the 2S38, that doesn’t make their argument invalid. It just proves the inequality of BR ratings in this game. I would personally love to see the game decompressed to 15.0 even, which wouldn’t even make waiting times that bad. edit: There is also photos of ERA on bradleys, so yes, definitely could be added.
Unfortunately, they do these things irl. EX:
The folding is realistic in that it can do it, but from what Ive been told its not realistic in when it folds in war thunder. Disclaimer: my source is “someone else told me” but it only gets folded down for long distance non combat travel and such, in any combat situation, which any war thunder battle would be considered, it would be permanently deployed.
They fold, but not automatically. The crew folded the launcher in because they arent using it and so that it doesnt take up space or get damaged by something while they are driving. Just because it folds does not mean it does so automatically.
yeah, that makes a lot of sense, thanks
Head to page 15 of this PDF, it says the Bradley has a switch to lift or fold the launcher.
(obviously declassified, this was page 1 google)
The launcher will get damaged (its very heavy) if driven with it raised and TOWs can’t be fired on the move at all IRL.
I’m of the opinion that ATGMs need to be able to be fired on the move, it’s currently way too limiting and there is no technical limitation I have been able to find that prevents them from doing so, so they’re artificially limited.
At the very least increased to 25km/h or so, the current situation invalidates ATGM vehicles, the Marders are completely useless currently for example, and NATO vehicles get dunked on by Russian vehicles that get beam riding missiles and shoot on the move, whilst the rest has to put it in park, unfold a launcher to shoot even worse missiles with wonky trajectories.
Worst thing is how the game considers rotation as speed, so if you are parked and rotate the vehicle it considers you as going too fast to fire ATGMs, it’s a mess.
Can you provide a source that suggests they outright cannot be fired on the move?
You mean… secrut dokumunts!!!
Ahh you got me comrade!
I mean I can find examples of the Bradley moving with the TOW launcher deployed at speeds way beyond what Warthunder allows us to do, and despite trying I have been unable to find any evidence that ATGMs cannot be fired on the move, but rather it’s just doctrine… but being on a training ground is a lot different than out in war, and I’m fairly certain no Bradley crew is going to be in CQC and take the time to deploy and retract the launcher when they can run into an enemy target around any corner.
If 2S38 was balanced for its SPAA capabilities it’d be 9.7, and I don’t want that.
M3A3 is balanced where it is, but there could be compression around 10.0 cause Namer 30 is only 10.3 despite being superior to BMP-2M itself.
Then so is HSTVL, Strf 9040C, VCC-80/60, and Begleit, cause they’re all powerful for their BRs.
Honestly people might get the idea you want a vehicle to be OP.