Your defense of 2S38 is noted and refuted with the following posts.
1- Fire rate of this caliber only matters against aircraft.
2- Amount of rounds of that caliber only matters against aircraft. Who’s using more than 30 rounds of APFSDS in any of these tanks? Besides players that don’t aim…
3- Thermal generation doesn’t dictate BR.
4- Year is irrelevant, also it’s from 2020 the same year as Leopard 2PL.
Type 16P is from 2016 firing M735.
If you’re getting 13 frags a match in HSTVL [running out of ammo], then you’re doing fine.
If you’re running out of ammo without even 8 frags, then your experience isn’t honed.
The round’s performance is correct in-game as proven via the Willi formula. It may or may not be misnamed, but misnaming something is common in War Thunder, especially for experimental systems.
In my HSTVL I’ve yet to see less than 13 rounds left in my tank, and I played a match where I fragged 5 tanks and 1 Mi-24.
Enough to have spent over 3 hours in it, and over 50 hours in the type of tank it is so I know how to use it.
If you’re about to claim people need to no-life the game to have an opinion, I’m just going to ignore that post.
Was just curious as to your amount of experience with it. I agree with most of what you have to say towards it I just don’t understand the blatant hostility towards anyone who dares disagree with you
@BRLQI-live
Thanks for warning us that you’re only here to bait players and claim you’re the only one with worthy opinion.
I have zero hostility toward anyone, and your hostility toward myself and other HSTVL players is sad.
But yeah, I have enough experience in it to currently have 2:1 KDR and good scouting for my teams while stock.
If it’s on-par with 2S38 BR for BR, I’ll likely end up around 1.04:1 KDR as I use it more.
I’m not great at the auto-light playstyle, HSTVL is just carrying me a bit.
I will keep defending NATO equipment from lies and slander, I’ll keep criticizing War Thunder where it’s inaccurate.
I’ll keep playing HSTVL because it’s fun.
What is amusing here is Gaijin actively ignores information they dont agree with.
NATO equipment has been tested in such away that it is usually verifiable through multiple sources, from multiple countries, where as Russian equipment we only have vague public info usually in the form of ads, which after recent conflicts has been shown to mostly be bluster.
But when support tickets were opened about the ammo for the HSTVL with documentation from direct testing, Gaijin came back with a “The ammo couldnt possibly do this” and shut the tickets down, like Gaijin somehow bought the gun and tested it themselves.
Okay. I get your feelings.
However, there are errors with your post’s assessment.
Soviet equipment we have in-game is exclusively based on declassified material, usually from NATO sources, especially in the case of ERA where K1, K5, and Relikt are based on NATO sources entirely. Which is partially why K1 is the worst ERA in the game.
NATO equipment along with classification status causes issues for Gaijin. Especially if we want for example, an accurate Abrams SEP2 turret protection. The numbers aren’t unclassified, the % increase over SEP1 and M1A2 are not unclassified… the two things needed to increase its armor over previous models.
T-90M in-game uses the same exact hull composite as T-72B. Partly cause that’s what it uses IRL, partly because even if we didn’t know that Gaijin would have to pick that hull composite if the information was classified.
All APFSDS rounds in War Thunder are modeled off of the Willi Odermatt formula, a Swiss man’s formula that’s very accurate for estimating things.
This way all APFSDS rounds are treated equally. The only way to change APFSDS metrics is to cite dimensions, and compare those dimensions to how they are in-game.
Gaijin will of course ignore information that isn’t 100% cut and dry.
Mig-29’s thrust curve is incorrect causing the Mig-29 to have lower thrust than it should from ~400kph to ~650kph. Sources are iffy on that and Gaijin shuts down most of thus bug reports.
Abrams turret ring is incorrect, and bar physically measuring it, there’s no source available we can use.
they could just outright say its for balance
but then they add stuff like 2s38 ingame
the fact that they deflect direct military government official documents mean that they can accept anything or reject anything base on their references
even if its accepted they can just “not doing it, accepted? nice, not adding it pal, go away” which is totally a bad thing to do
the vehicle itself is quite broken
its good overall on anti tank, air, good thermal, aphe, light tank actually gave it scout drone which is neat and it being quite low in BR compare to hstvl
light tank is justified, the gun doesnt even overheat so
IF the 2S38 had HSTVL mobility and its round, I would agree.
It has neither, which is why I can’t.
Double mobility is a HUGE buff over other light tanks on its own.
Let alone the 2x heavier round penning notably more.
Im not going to get into a massive drawn out source vs Gaijin battle since that is done daily here, but I will point out a few things things.
1
This video outline the issues with both the HSTVL, RDFLT and their ammo. Ture, Gaijin has changed the RDFLT a bit, but it is nowhere near what it should be.
2
KH38-MT. Only sources for this seem to be a picture of a possible mock up, and a brochure ad that the company removed years ago. Since the missile hasnt been used in combat, NATO cant have any information on it. So where did the info come from?
3
As far as the ERA information, and it may just be me, but I have yet to locate anything about testing done outside of the manufacturer. If NATO got ahold of the genuine article and tested it I cant find any info about it. Also, Gaijin doesn’t portray ERA correctly. Given how ERA works, a plain high explosive shell would set off most of the ERA panels on the front of a T series tank, but in game only the panel hit, if hit directly, or also the panel next to it if hit on the edge.
Also, given how most, including RELIKT, Russian ERA works, .50cal rounds while maybe not destroying the ERA panel outright with a single shot, would be able to damage it to a point the ERA wouldnt function correctly.
Let me also add that stat hasn’t changed since December (took a screenshot) and 5-6 months prior to December (wish I took a screenshot) it still stayed the same.
Make of that what you will.
Edit: shark stats is now taking snapshots of player stats. This means you can look at a vehicle’s specific stats at a certain time.
