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.
1 Like
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”).
5 Likes
It’s ridiculous to give so many new models and not add autoloader models to certain tanks.
1 Like
I was wondering how the currently auto loader model worked in 2S38 lol.
Nice to see something more accurate in this next change.
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.
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?
2 Likes
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.
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.
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
It gets 57mm proxy fuse ammo which no 10.0 SPAA gets. Closest you get is 40mm on the M247 at 9.3.
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.
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.
In-game they can do both roles and the 2S38’s main role IRL is as an SPAA.
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
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.
1 Like
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.
Artificially limiting the number of APFSDS it has access to (for an already underpowered vehicle) is a terrible decision, though.
So the feed shouldn’t matter anyways?
The OTOMATIC has no APFSDS limit irl either.
1 Like
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.
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
3 Likes
Also Lvkv 9040C.
Keeping it 10.0 and leave lower BR vehicles fight it?
Since when some vehicle characteristics is irrelevant? It’s something that makes it survive in some first encounter.
Mentioned ^
Yes.
I also need to agree,
Same, I doubt that you know how it specially will be handed.
1 Like
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 would matter if such a restriction were to be put in place.
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)
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).
It’s not, at least when it comes to large-caliber SPAA (like the 2S38).
But the restriction is arbitrary, so it shouldn’t matter.
Read.
2S38 isn’t the OTOMATIC SPAA system, not comparable.
There is no arbitrary restriction.
???
This vehicle has been the most requested vehicle currently by the community to increase the BR. Why would Gaijin go against one of the community’s biggest requests?
If this change means the 2S38 actually becomes killable reliably. Then it can stay at 10.0. If it continues to be hard to kill ,especially when in full hull down and can continue to one shot most top tier tanks fairly easily. Then it can go up to 10.7.
If it goes to 9.7 then a lot of other tanks need BR drops as well
2 Likes
So you’re mad that the premium bias 2S38 is finally getting not only nerfed, but actually balanced?
A BR drop is absurd btw, it is already massively overperforming, at 10.0. Let alone over performing at 11.0. The 2S38 is not only way overdue a nerf, but is by far the best premium vehicle in the game, maybe it will finally have some of the hype and OP-ness about it taken away.
I genuinely hope this is a troll post.
8 Likes
Like that is going to happen…
Im kinda dreading this is just gunna add spall sponges to the tank. Making it even harder to kill. Though Im hoping that is wrong and instead it does the opposite