Though I still do not understand how identical vehicles end up at different battle ratings. How can their “effeciency” be different when they perform identically
1 Like
It’s almost like they count a vehicle with 100 players, the same as one with 10.
Ignoring the fact a different in number of players I’m exist and in turn doesn’t factor it in.
The only time you can ever get into an engagement with a 2S38 in an MBT is if you ignore every single advantage you have and charge at it. So the 2S38 is a bit of a skill equalizer in that regard.
Anybody who makes rage posts about the vehicle are just flaunting their lack of skill. They’re such a non issue at top tier it’s kinda funny.
In fact I usually just rush them even in NATO MBTs (BTW, a very bad idea and why most noobs die to them), and I still kill them because the dart usually can’t kill in hit.
There is that as well. But even examples where that shouldnt be an issue, it just doesnt make sense.
For example in the Italian Tree, the Tornado A200 being 11.3 and Tornado A200A being 11.7.
100% identical airframes, 100% identical performance in ARB/ASB, no issue of bad pay-to-play players like you definetly get with the WTD61 and may get with the MFG and yet are somehow “different effeciency levels” if anything the A200 should be WAY higher “effeciency” than the A200A because its a lower BR.
And where you have 2 identical vehicles on 2 different trees like the B-26B and B-26C, I dont understand why individual nations are used and not an average of both/all nations with that vehicle, because whilst some nations have more bad players than others, a vehicles performance should be balanced based upon an average of the playerbase and avoids good players abusing the lower BR of a vehicle by playing it another tree
3 Likes
so what you are saying is that puma and co rather should go down in br then to raise the br of the 2s38
No one is debating whether 2S38 is an-issue at Top Tier ot not.
The criticised issue is, precisely, that the thing is currently facing 9.3s, not Top Tier, where it belongs.
2 Likes
I meant high tier, but my point still stands.
The Sheer degree that thing outperforms most other 10.0/10.3 IFVs is insane. If it does not need to go up in BR, then many others need to move down by just as much
1 Like
IFVs simply aren’t meta at top tier. Why take an autocannon that takes 5+ hits to kill (requiring you to be exposed while firing) when you can kill literally anything in one hit with an MBT.
Would be 11.0 then? MBT are there but not top tier
and yet the 2S38 can happily one shot a large number of top tier MBTs quite happily. Why would you take a tank that has a 5+ second reload when you can take something that has an auto-cannon.
1 Like
If we’re using your definition of top tier, then you’re suggesting it should be similarly balanced to the HSTV-L?
Leopard 1A5 vs 2S38.
2S38 is superior in each and every single way despite being a Light Vehicle vs an MBT.
Light Vehicles are suppossed to be sidegrades to MBTs and Support vehicles, not vehicles that entirely outclass the MBTs in every single way like 2S38 currently does because it’s facing vehicles 60 years older.
1 Like
So I guess the M41D should be 10.3 then because it can penetrate top tier MBTs an occasionally one tap them.
I think it’s worse than HSTVL so 11.0 would work imo
I once got 1 shotted through the ERA on the Challenger 2 OES.
Well, it’s also an entire BR higher. So yeah if it’s superior it makes sense. I mean what is a Valentine gonna do against a Sherman?
But it does not make sense that they are even in the same matchmaker at all on the first place.
2S38 should be 11.0, or, at the very least, 10.7.
1 Like
Quite a lot actually
1 Like
And so can the Leopard 1A5 against a 2S38