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.
7 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
Me too, also considering some electronic components are volatile, and also corrosive, making a crew less effective or killing them. But, only time will tell.
Can I consider this one meta? As a premium meta means more buyers, and more buyers means money moving.
Now I’m taking from a ethic perspective than a logic,
Same as there’s a lot of people requesting for increasing its BR same there’s a lot of people that own it. Making a premium not that good anymore means no buyers for that specific vehicle. But it’s a specific aspect that we could discuss but I don’t see that it would be worth it, so I say: “I agree.”.
Honestly, about this I simply have to disagree, I don’t have a strong argument to stand against some possible increase of BR with a lot of extra modules just because even with the new modules it keeps as the same as before it got the new modules.
As I mentioned: “Significant decompression”.
Mad is a hard word to use, in most arguments I agree, but to explain: I got two sides: I care that it’s getting all those changes without a notice that others vehicles will get the same treatment and that moving it BR above over +0.7 just make it worse fighting against vehicles with spall lines in a situation that except by few vehicles, auto cannons doesn’t face, in another I really don’t care because it’s the 2S38 and it’s OP as most people says.
But it’s ok for everyone vehicles like AFT09 that fires HJ-9 with 1,200mm pen Tandem warhead missile at 9.3. Or the ZBD04A that have chances to fight vehicles with early APFSDS rounds that its engine can easily hold at 9.7. Or the T-80UD with the same T-80s build, good cannon and a powerful protection at 10.0 is fine? Or the 2S25M with 3BM60 at 10.0. Or the Khrizantema-S with 9M123 with 1,200mm pen Tandem warhead missile. Or the VIDAR at 8.0 is completely fine? Or for the last one, it’s fine keeping the Merkava 1B at 9.3 is even better with that thing begin impenetrable by early APFSDS rounds.
But the 2S38 it’s the issue. “I’ve shoot it but doesn’t deal any damage”, “It’s a prototype, never entered service!”.
I’ve seen so much posts about Turm III getting moved up BR or the same with VIDAR and you know the excuses? “Get good.” or “Pay attention”. For you specifically I’m taking this personal: Get good, learn to aim then.
And surely I’ll spend my time replying to most messages here in a troll post.
2 Likes
Read.
Ammo stored in hull → taken by loader (or whoever) → loaded directly into the loader or put in the auxillary rack (just like how ready racks work in game already).
Ready racks don’t work that way in War Thunder currently.
Whoever told you that lied to you.
That’s an IFV with a search radar.
No, moving it up would.
2S38 is not labeled SPAA in game, neither does it have a seperate feed mechanism like the OTO does. Even if it was labeled SPAA there is no basis for that limitation to be applied.
Lvkv 9040C has no APFSDS limitation and is also a “large caliber spaa” (40mm, small but still sizable enough for a VT-fuze). Thats because there is no seperate feed mechanism for that type of ammunition.
Its arbitrary, but it has some general rules as to when it applies. Like a seperate feed mechanism.
Its a game at the end of the day, how it is modeled when a lack of propper tools is arbitrary. This is the choice Gaijin made to include the seperate feed mechanism in the game.
Heck if they had the propper tools they could also arbitrarily choose how to model it and how they apply restrictions.
The OTO is a spaa in game, and spaa in game get limitations to APDS/APFSDS if there is a seperate feed mechanism for that kind of ammo. OTO has a seperate feed.
2S38 fulfill neither of those observed guidelines for when the restriction is applied.
2 Likes
the reason to raise its BR is because it’s OP as shit and belongs at 11.7
just like the object 292 and the bmp 2m lmao
The only argument of you is following what the majority says and because you died for it again and again?
If same as you I had the courage to say that I would say a list of vehicles that is “OP as shit” and belong getting moved to 11.7.
As the Object 292 is possible to fight against vehicles with spall liners or BMP-2M’s 9M133 begin useful against top MBTs like VT4A1, Leopard 2A7V or something else.
Actually you don’t have any good argument to this, just coping about your situation and your wish.
1 Like
I wonder that kind of rule makes the Wiesel 1A4 a SPAA and 2S38 not?
Both are useable against low flying air targets, but only 1 is labeled as SPAA.
The 2S38 currently gets the mechanic of double-feed. With the new modules you can see that there are 2 shells pre-loaded. But in game you can switch the very next shell that should not be possible. So i am curious if they gonna change that.