Questions about the new 2S38's changes and possible balance

[Константинович7]

@AlvisWisla

HSTVL is the best autocannon light in the game, 2nd to none. It’s fine where it is.

Not only the best automatic cannon even with the wrong ammunition but also a small and agile vehicle,

Given its current situation, I envy those who can play with the HSTV-L.

Along with this change to the 2S38, I hope that in the near future the same will be done with the HSTV-L, receiving ammunition that was actually used, making it truly rewarding for completing the entire line of light tanks in the American tree.

@AlvisWisla

2S38 if its first stage is finally fixed should go to 10.3 where I’ve been wanting it to go.

In the same way, the major drawback of the 2S38 is its limit of 20 shots, which makes the vehicle complicated to use in intense close-combat situations, which in some cases is not very good even with its quick response capability.

---

@Kingtiez

Hopefully similar changes come to other vehicles and for other nations.

Also me, I was planning to do a list of vehicles that could receive additional modules, but I don’t think this is the right time, too early, when even 2S38 hasn’t got its new modules.

---

@uuzsodana

bro，To my knowledge, this is not the case. The two lines provide different ammunition, such as APFSDS on one side and HEVT on the other.

I also agree with this, the thing of changing from a different type of ammo is kinda hard to understand, and probably some even curious mechanic in real life, I mean, how they can change between 3UBM22 to BR-281U with 3UO8 between both rounds.

Something that I really wanted to know.

[AlvisWisla]

It has the best ammo of all the auto-lights.
Why do you envy those that play the easiest light tank in the game?
HSTVL could be made 12.0 with better ammo, sure, but it’s already the best 11.3 light tank in the game and I like using it at 11.3 for now.

2S38 is WAY slower, larger, worse ammo, and so forth.
Don’t claim the ammo difference doesn’t matter or Strf 9040C is as good as HSTVL by your own argument.

[eqS729gYidXuT2BN]

@Константинович7

In the case of the OTOMATIC and the 2S38, it’s completely different and should be treated as such; they are opposites:

Descriptions of the 2S38:

• “Self-Propelled Anti-Aircraft Gun”
• “This new mobile air defense system…”
• “It is also effective against ground targets, vehicles, and infantry holed-up in buildings and field fortifications.”
• “This 57 mm cannon will easily defeat most modern armored personnel carriers, infantry fighting vehicles, self-propelled artillery systems and other armored vehicles.”

Descriptions of the OTOMATIC:

Tanks Encyclopedia - https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/otomatic/

• “It was developed as a heavy self-propelled anti-aircraft gun for use in Armored Divisions.”
• “The OTOMATIC could also be used in other roles in addition to its anti-aircraft main purpose.”
• “Its cannon, being designed for naval use, could be used for coastal defense against lighter targets.”
• “The wide range of ammunition that could be fired from the cannon also allowed it to be used for infantry support and even to engage enemy AFVs (Armored Fighting Vehicle). In fact, the availability of armor-piercing rounds made it possible to destroy armored vehicles and Armored Personnel Carriers (APC), and even deal with IFVs and MBTs in certain situations.”
• “the 76 mm OTO-Breda gun can fire many types of ammunition, from… to APFSDS (Armor-Piercing Fin-Stabilized Discarding-Sabot) and MPAT (Multi-Purpose Anti-Tank) for the anti-tank role.”

Journal of Italian Army 1990 N.4 “Rivista Militare” - JOURNAL OF ITALIAN ARMY 1990 N.4 "RIVISTA MILITARE" by Biblioteca Militare - Issuu

• “Powerful APFSDS ammunition enables the OTOMATIC 76/62 AA tank to engage armoured fighting vehicles in attack or self-defence actions.”
• “The OTOMATIC is intended for: defence of armoured vehicles and troops against air attacks on the battle field; defence of forces and vital objectives in rear areas; armour engagement in support of own forces and self-defence.”

The Navy’s Antitank System - (PDF) OTO Melara 76mm OTOmatic - DOKUMEN.TIPS

• “Unlike small calibers (30-, 35-, 40-mm), this system would provide the Army with stand-off capability against armored vehicles on the ground, or aircraft and helicopters coming in for a strike.”
• “The OTOmatic (OTO Main Automatic Tank for Interception and Combat) is a mobile armored weapon system designed for: defense of troops in the main battle area against air attack; defense of targets in rear areas against aircraft and air-launched missiles; engagement of light armored vehicles.”
• “For optimum ammunition allocation, 26 antiaircraft and three antitank rounds are ready to fire in the automatic feeding system, with 26 more accessible, stowed in the turret, backed up by a reserve of 26 rounds in the hull and nine rounds in the turret.”

Now with all that being said, please explain to me how the OTOMATIC and 2S38 are opposites of each other.

[Константинович7]

Amazing, I think I should retract my statement,

I wasn’t aware of these documents, and honestly, it never crossed my mind to search for them.

Tell me, is there any topic/post confirming that the OTOMATIC was loaded with more rounds for better-armored vehicles? More than the 12 that the game limits?

It’s something that comes to mind whether it’s a fact or just another nerf by Gaijin.

[Константинович7]

@AlvisWisla

Why do you envy those that play the easiest light tank in the game?

Because I don’t own it lol,

@AlvisWisla

Don’t claim the ammo difference doesn’t matter or Strf 9040C is as good as HSTVL by your own argument.

I won’t, but it’s something I’ve seen in most topics about most auto cannons at this BR (10.0 - 11.3).

[SpardaSon21]

@Константинович7

Tell me, is there any topic/post confirming that the OTOMATIC was loaded with more rounds for better-armored vehicles? More than the 12 that the game limits?

Gaijin based their 12 round limit on a secondary feed that contains a rapid rotary loading system and a dedicated magazine for said rotary feed, but AFAIK nobody’s presented any evidence that feed system can’t be replenished by the crew from the vehicle’s own storage racks.

[eqS729gYidXuT2BN]

There’s nothing to suggest there were limits on the APFSDS rounds. Gaijin just guessed since the APFSDS rounds are a few millimeters longer (visual inspection) than the AA rounds, they must not fit anywhere in the tank besides the three in the steploader and the nine in the AT turret rack. In the Italian Army Journal above, there’s a diagram that shows the AT and AA turret storage are separate, but it never specifies what the hull storage is (it’s just labeled “ammunition storage,” not “AA ammunition” or “AT ammunition”).

[Sail1ng]

It’s ridiculous to give so many new models and not add autoloader models to certain tanks.

[Константинович7]

I was wondering how the currently auto loader model worked in 2S38 lol.

Nice to see something more accurate in this next change.

[AlvisWisla]

If you struggle fragging Leclercs and Type 10s… lol
Adding autoloader models will do nothing to the survivability of tanks.

@SpeclistMain
Your entire post is incorrect.
The reason OTOMATIC is limited to 12 is because the ammo pool is one giant pool of ammo, and dual-feed isn’t modeled in War Thunder.
It’s that simple.

[eqS729gYidXuT2BN]

@AlvisWisla

The reason OTOMATIC is limited to 12 is because the ammo pool is one giant pool of ammo, and dual-feed isn’t modeled in War Thunder.

And the dual-feed needs to be modeled why? And why the arbitrary limit to 12 APFSDS if it’s just a feed issue? The 2S38 can shoot more than one ammo type, yet it isn’t limited to 12 APFSDS, so why is only the OTOMATIC limited?

[DiamondLag]

@SpeclistMain

And the dual-feed needs to be modeled why?

Because thats how this and other vehicles handle loading ammo.

CV9040 is technically 3 8-round strips and not 24-rounds as shown in game. So thats another vehicle that has a different feeding mechanism that should be modeled, even if its just that ammunition should be loaded 8 rounds at a time.

@SpeclistMain

why the arbitrary limit to 12 APFSDS if it’s just a feed issue?

That is the 3 round drum + 9 round “ready rack” For the drum. Its both a buff and nerf in anti-tank performance (IRL it would be 3 shots before having to reload the drum)

So its an arbitrary decision, but its also not a terrible one to choose imo. One could argue they should have chosen differently but im not gonna go down that rabbithole.

@SpeclistMain

The 2S38 can shoot more than one ammo type, yet it isn’t limited to 12 APFSDS, so why is only the OTOMATIC limited?

When there is a seperate feed for anti-tank munitions for SPAA in game they get the ammo limit imposed by that feed mechanism. You see the same limit on the 35mm on the Gepard and vehicles using the same mechanism.

Even if the 2S38 was SPAA in game, idk of a seperate feed mechanism that would warrant this restriction

[PercussionCap]

@Константинович7

Flying in a single direction is completely irresponsible unless at a safe distance

It gets 57mm proxy fuse ammo which no 10.0 SPAA gets. Closest you get is 40mm on the M247 at 9.3.

@Константинович7

but moving it up in BR with future BR decompression because 10.0 is a nightmare for both vehicles of its own BR and neighboring lower BRs doesn’t really favor the situation

It does favor the situation. BR changes aren’t set in stone, the situation can be improved NOW for literally everyone else, and when BR decompression comes along it’ll have no problems coming back down due to the traditionally below average premium players.

@Константинович7

the fuel tank is literally positioned and built in such a size that it provides greater protection for the vehicle

Irrelevant, in that case its survivability should put it at a higher BR, not a measly 0.7 above the Begleit which is worse in every way including survivability.
Which by the way is lacking darts and IRST.

@Константинович7

In the case of the OTOMATIC and the 2S38, it’s completely different and should be treated as such; they are opposites:

In-game they can do both roles and the 2S38’s main role IRL is as an SPAA.

@Константинович7

but I doubt the naval cannon was actually made to fire these types of projectiles when it was mounted on an OF-40 chassis

Gepard also isn’t “intended” to engage ground targets, however it still carried a small supply of APDS for that very purpose. The same happens with the SIDAM 25.
On that very site you quoted they also provide range against ground targets, up to 2km.

Range against aircraft is 4 km and over 2 km against light armored vehicles and other ground targets. This artillery system could also be used in coastal defense role.

So the OTOMATIC was also intended to be able to engage ground targets if needed.

Another example if this double standard is the Gepard 1A2 - one of the biggest changes was the introduction of FAPDS-T , frangible ammo. The penetrator core was surrounded in a layer of plastic, which would fragment heavily when hitting aircraft while retaining all the AT capability of the earlier backup APDS. The introduction of this ammo implies that attacking ground targets became more relevant for the Gepard.
This ammo is not present in game, despite numerous bug reports/suggestions made.

post-pen effect illustration

@Константинович7

whereas the OTOMATIC doesn’t show much adaptation

Clearly a very different turret and mount. The feed system is also different, on warships it has an 80rd ready rack while on the OTOMATIC it is just 29.
Not to mention the addition of search and tracking radars, optronic tracking, and being redesigned from completely remote controlled to having 3 crew in the turret directly. This likely necessitated an entirely new fire control system as well.

[AlvisWisla]

So that you cannot incorrectly load more APFSDS than it’s modeled for.
2S38 has no limitation IRL, stop citing that. Cite the Gepard instead.

[eqS729gYidXuT2BN]

@DiamondLag

So its an arbitrary decision, but its also not a terrible one to choose imo.

Artificially limiting the number of APFSDS it has access to (for an already underpowered vehicle) is a terrible decision, though.

@DiamondLag

Even if the 2S38 was SPAA in game, idk of a seperate feed mechanism that would warrant this restriction

So the feed shouldn’t matter anyways?

@AlvisWisla

So that you cannot incorrectly load more APFSDS than it’s modeled for.
2S38 has no limitation IRL, stop citing that. Cite the Gepard instead.

The OTOMATIC has no APFSDS limit irl either.

[AlvisWisla]

The OTOMATIC does have an APFSDS limit IRL… in the feed mechanism.
It’s dual feed IRL, and has a special ramp that can fit longer munition.
As everyone’s been telling you, the only way to increase it from 12 is for dual feed to be modeled in War Thunder, and hull ammo to be separate from loaded ammo.
And currently ammo is one big pool, so you’re limited to 12 shots, which is at least 3 frags.

[dotSHINI]

your whole argument is under the premise that gajin doesnt balance repair times under the new modules.
U cant make any argument for this case until you dont know how it specialy will be handed.
EIther way the vehicle definitly doesnt need a decrease in BR or a reclassification to spaa.
Its spawn point amount is good as it is

[Константинович7]

@PercussionCap

It gets 57mm proxy fuse ammo which no 10.0 SPAA gets. Closest you get is 40mm on the M247 at 9.3.

Also Lvkv 9040C.

@PercussionCap

It does favor the situation.

Keeping it 10.0 and leave lower BR vehicles fight it?

---

@PercussionCap

Irrelevant, in that case its survivability should put it at a higher BR,

Since when some vehicle characteristics is irrelevant? It’s something that makes it survive in some first encounter.

---

@Константинович7

Counter argument

Mentioned ^

@PercussionCap

In-game they can do both roles and the 2S38’s main role IRL is as an SPAA.

@PercussionCap

So the OTOMATIC was also intended to be able to engage ground targets if needed.

@PercussionCap

Clearly a very different turret and mount. The feed system is also different, on warships it has an 80rd ready rack while on the OTOMATIC it is just 29.

---

@x_Shini_

your whole argument is under the premise that gajin doesnt balance repair times under the new modules.

Yes.

@x_Shini_

U cant make any argument for this case until you dont know how it specialy will be handed.

I also need to agree,

@x_Shini_

EIther way the vehicle definitly doesnt need a decrease in BR or a reclassification to spaa.
Its spawn point amount is good as it is

Same, I doubt that you know how it specially will be handed.

[DiamondLag]

@SpeclistMain

Artificially limiting the number of APFSDS it has access to (for an already underpowered vehicle) is a terrible decision, though.

Its in line with other spaa. Lets just be happy they didn’t limit it to 3 rounds. Which would be more in line with the Gepard.

@SpeclistMain

So the feed shouldn’t matter anyways?

It would matter if such a restriction were to be put in place.

@AlvisWisla

has a special ramp that can fit longer munition.

It has a special feed ramp for a seperate munition. It doesn’t have to be APFSDS in that feed ramp and idk if there was any limitation that would stop the more roomy main feedarm to deliver APFSDS via the main feed.

It just seems like a restriction in line with other spaa.

You can’t pick ammo in the main loading mechanism, so you have a seperate feed for emergencies. Its a feature on many autoloaders. Including 100mm autoloaders like the AMX-50 (TOA100)

[eqS729gYidXuT2BN]

@AlvisWisla

The OTOMATIC does have an APFSDS limit IRL… in the feed mechanism.

I didn’t say APFSDS feed limit, I said APFSDS limit. More could be stored in the hull (or at least there’s no reason to think they couldn’t going off of the sources I’ve seen).

@DiamondLag

Its in line with other spaa. Lets just be happy they didn’t limit it to 3 rounds. Which would be more in line with the Gepard.

It’s not, at least when it comes to large-caliber SPAA (like the 2S38).

@DiamondLag

It would matter if such a restriction were to be put in place.

But the restriction is arbitrary, so it shouldn’t matter.