I always found this argument that an SPG and a Tank Destroyer are not the same. Many SPGs"s are in fact. Tank destroyers are intentionally classified as an SPG to bypass certain rules made at the time that restricted it.
In the case of SPGs that are incorrectly called Tank Destroyers, it would be only a rename rather than a class change, in the same way that ATGM carriers are called “Anti-tank missile carrier” but are still Tank Destroyers by class.
Example;
3 Likes
It’s just about accessibility to new players, basically. They’re classed the way they are so that someone can pick them up, knowing nothing about them historically, and at least have some idea of what they’re doing.
The M18 is the principle example of this. When newer players see a TD, and especially if they’re just playing the US line, they’re going to be used to the idea of TDs as large, unmaueverable snipers with solid guns. If they try to play the M18 in the exact same way, it’s going to suffer. But call it a light tank, something like the M24, and more people are going to have an easier time understanding how to use it.
This goes for double when we’re talking about the Flak Bus and QF 3.7 Ram. Imagine someone picking those up and honestly attempting to use them as an SPAA first and foremost.
While it would be good to have historically accurate labels, it’s not that important at the end of the day.
4 Likes
2S38’s current BR is already balanced, and it’s as much a light tank as it is SPAA IRL.
On top of that, vehicles are given a class in-game that they did IRL.
M18 WAS used as a light tank, and a SPG/tank destroyer [they meant the same thing in WW2 for Britain, USSR, and USA militaries].
The M901 is a recon vehicle IRL with anti-tank capability.
Your point about accessibility for new players is important, but I think it can only really be judged to apply to the 8.8 Flak and 3.7 Ram.
Basically a new player who is not familiar with the vehicle outside of War Thunder may need to be told what to shoot at eg. ground vehicles, or air vehicles. Using the M18 as an example it would be quite evident in either LT or TD class that the duty of the M18 is to engage ground vehicles, and assuming that new players will somehow be confused by a fast TD is a little far-reaching.
New players become intermediate players fairly quickly, and vehicles such as the M18 or below are quite quickly spaded. There is no point incorrectly classifying such a vehicle because the player may somehow be confused as to what it’s for or how best to use it, that is part of the familiarisation process.
5 Likes
I’ll argue with you about this one until the cows come home. M18 is a TD, the reclassification as LT is a non-historical Gaijin-ism.
Edit; are you confusing the M901 ITV with the M981 FISTV? Similarly to the FV102 Striker, it could easily be argued that the M901 is an ATGM carrier with reconnaissance duties, and should have Scouting applied while still a TD.
3 Likes
I am friends with an M901 operator, and there are many many instances of WW2’s “tank destroyer [SPG]” group doing recon for troops and other armored divisions.
Again, just cause the military gives it a public facing name doesn’t mean that is its sole use.
Wikipedia is also not a source.
To ensure that I am clearly understood, I’ll reduce this to a list;
- I don’t care who you’re friends with.
- I have worked as an operator on British Army, and mechanic, inspector, and QA on US Army tracked and wheeled vehicles (but argument from authority is a logical fallacy, so this doesn’t matter).
- Wikipedia is not a source, but can lead to viable sources.
- That was War Thunder Wiki, not Wikipedia.
- A vehicle can be used as required, but that doesn’t change its original design (eg. M18 is a Tank Destroyer, but is also useful for lots of other things).
6 Likes
Vehicle classification in game is not claimed to be or stated as the “historical” designation of that vehicle in real life. As a whole this subject in real life is open to interpretation, as what one nation calls a “heavy” tank is a “medium” to others, and much the same with several other classes.
In War Thunder Its simply an in-game classification defining how that vehicle is played or more importantly, its spawn point cost for gameplay purposes. Any player new or old to the game, inexperienced or not can simply understand a glance the general type of gameplay to expect from this vehicle. Its not a representation of real life vehicle classification and is not intended to be. As such, it is entirely correct that such matters are not accepted as bug reports.
5 Likes
You say that but I can name two opposite ends of this spectrum
- The T1E1 (90mm). You are given a heavy tank and so expect lots of armour, low mobility, and great firepower. In practice the T1E1 has less armour than a Sherman in some places and is very nicely mobile.
- Churchill VII. Again Heavy tank. Good armour, low mobility, great firepower. You get the first two but not the last mark.
Alternatively you have the German 6.0 duo.
Tiger I: Pretty reasonable armour for a heavy tank. Really Reasonably mobility. Really high firepower.
Panther F: Reasonably Armour comparable to a heavy. Good mobility. High Firepower.
And what about the Panther D and prototype? Panther D is played moreso as a heavy tank destroyer than a medium because of the turret traverse and the Prototype is just less armoured but more mobile.
This will always be open to personal interpretations. However both of those cases fit their in game classifications.
2 Likes
How do you go about requesting a vehicles designation changed?
FRS1 is the one that I want to see changes to a naval fighter and it would actually be a meaningful and important change given it’s our only fighter at that BR.
If you want to spawn into the FRS1e/FRS1 before or after Spawning in something like the Jaguar GR1A or Buc S2B, the cost more than doubles due to all 3 being considered Strike Aircraft. Despite the fact that the FRS1 primary role IRL was air interception and its most famous role was CAP
4 Likes
There’s one big problem:
Due to the doctrinal approaches of certain countries and arbitrary classification, vehicles people know far and wide to be a tank destroyer - and they may have even specifically picked that nation to play that tank destroyer - cannot be used to complete battlepass tasks and challenges requiring tank destroyers.
Due to this arbitrary classifcation, rank 3 Britain has no means to do battlepass tasks requiring TDs (at least until recently with the M44 being added). This is despite the fact that the avenger is known to be a Gun motor carriage AND is the direct follower of the Achilles in the tank destroyer line and plays exactly the same as the achilles.
If the Achilles can be a tank destroyer, why can’t the avenger? They’re effectively the same gameplay style and are each other’s direct heirs. Both are vulnerable to strafing and overpressure too due to open tops.
5 Likes
clearly not as the Wiesel 1a4 is never played as an SPAA yet it has that class. In game its played as a rat light tank, not an SPAA.
I’m not sure exactly what point the OP is making but flooding the WW2 levels with post war artillery killed 5-6BR for me so I retreated back to 3-4 only to have Gaijin spam that with the M44 and kill that off.I haven’t played the game since.
War Thunder has no immersion anymore and a game without immersion is a dead game.I’m just bored of random faceless and pointless teams facing off against each other.
The game feels more like FIFA than a War game of any kind.Just a point scoring exercise.
You can proudly lament that WT does not follow era’s but for those who joined and stuck with the game for years due to a passion for WW2 the game is dead.It feels like a silly child’s game now …hey maybe it always was but it was well disguised.
Anyway I’m just bored of it.Been playing Red Dead 2 where the immersion is immense and the game all the better for it.Easy to forget about Warthunder the moment something even slightly better comes into view.
Im sure a new game would easily kill this old chestnut off once and for all.
The recreation of the vehicles historically means nothing ,the authentic decals mean nothing or the detailed skins.All pointless.
4 Likes
This wasnt a discussion about the SPG spam we are seeing in the game. I agree that its ruined low-mid tier but this wasn’t about them. Only incorrect classifications similar to how the ADATS was called a tank destroyer for years
It should bloody well have HE-TF at the very least if not HE-VT as well, otherwise some AA it’d make hah
3 Likes
the 3.7 is a Heavy Anti Aircraft gun. if you wanted a 3.7in gun vehicle as a tank destroyer it would have to be the 28pdr or 32pdr so were limited to tortoise, TOG and the 32pdr centurion