RDF/LT vs. 2S38

Machinery of War Discussion Ground Vehicle
1

Let me preface this with a few statements. I do not have either of these tanks, and I do not intend to have either of these tanks. One for the reason that it is just a little (/s) busted, and the other for the reason that currently it is simply a downgrade of an existing tank for nearly 100 dollars, which I could be spending on some new thing to satiate my horrible WW2 reenacting addiction. Secondly, this is going off the stats stated in game, not by player experience. But thats enough of that so let’s get into this shitshow.

We will go through each topic as we go along, and stats will be considered at ace, so let’s start with mobility.

Mobility:
Unlike the 2s38 and HSTV-L debate the 2s38 actually wins against the RDF/LT. The 2s38 is 6km/h faster going forward and 10km/h faster in reverse. The 2s38 has more horsepower than the RDF/LT with 500 compared to 350. I have not yet tested stationary turn speed but I am assuming it is about the same. The 2s38 is 21 tons while the RDF/LT is 13 tons.

Armor/survivability:
The 2s38 has 57% more frontal armor than the RDF/LT, and while the RDF/LT does have a more angled front, the 2s38 is also immune to .50 cal while also having frontal fuel tanks to act as armor. The 2s38 has more armor on the side, and in fact the RDF/LT can even be 7.62’d on the sides in some places, where the 2s38 has trouble even being penetrated by .50 cal from the side. The 2s38 has smoke grenades, the RDF/LT does not, the 2s38 has ESS, the RDF/LT does not, the 2s38 has a LWS, again the RDF/LT does not. Another rarely brought up feature of the 2s38 is that it’s size actually may act as an advantage. It’s larger, and has more empty space than the RDF/LT. If a shot penetrates the 2s38 the damage is less in proportion to its size compared to the RDF/LT.

Armament:
This is going to be a long section so buckle up. The RDF/LT has a worse sight than the 2s38, with it only having gen 1 thermals and the 2s38 having gen 2 thermals (or is it gen 3 please inform me in the replies). The RDF/LT has a smaller zoom of 2x-8x compared to the 4x-9x of the 2s38. The 2s38 has a better IRST system than the RDF/LT, and its laser rangefinder strangely is the only one in the game that can range over 9999m, being able to range up to 14999m. Even after the buff the RDF/LT still fires 43% slower than the 2s38 at 1 round every 0.5 seconds compared to one round every 0.89 seconds. The 2s38 does not have a ready rack meaning it can fire indefinitely until it runs out of ammo. Again another strange aspect is the 2s38 does not fail even after fully overheating. Oh and not to mention it has 2.43 times the ammo of the RDF/LT at 144 compared to 60. The 2s38 has equal horizontal traverse to the RDF/LT but does have 40* per second elevation traverse compared to the RDF/LT’s 60, so that’s one thing it beats the 2s38 on. But the 2s38 has 75* of elevation compared to the 40 of the RDF/LT, and gun depression is certainly worse on the 2s38 at 5* compared to 15*.

Ammunition:
Yes it is true that 3ubm22 has 50 less mm of flat pen than XM855 at 0* and 30* and only 30mm difference at 60* this is made up for by the gun, an increase in velocity compared to XM885 as well as the fact that it has APHE, meaning most side shots against tanks without thick side armor such as the Abrams or Leopard will cause devastating damage due to the HE filler. The HE-VT on the 2s38 round is only slightly better than XM884, having less explosive mass in exchange for better velocity.

Economics:
The 2s38 has a smaller repair cost in all three game modes, with AB and RB only having a 200 SL difference while SB has a nearly 1000 SL difference. The aces GE cost on the 2s38 is 100 less than the RDF/LT, while this may seem like nitpicking it still matters, golden eagles are money, money someone has to spend on the game, so while it may be slight but it is still an advantage. The 2s38 has both a better premium SL and RP bonus, being about 15% extra in all three game modes for SL and 10% for RP. Not to mention the real life cost of both vehicles. The 2s38 is only $50 US, while the RDF/LT pack is $70 US.

All of this for a 1.3 decrease in BR for the 2s38 compared to the RDF/LT, which is just a worse 2s38 and a worse HSTV-L. Please keep it calm and civil, I know this is a very controversial topic so don’t freak out.

Thanks for spending your time reading.

5 Likes
2

You should also test acceleration, since it is more important than just top speed (especially when the difference is just 6kmh)

In my experience facing them, the 2S38 is a driving ammo rack, so that size isn’t helpful in the slightest.

Personally, I think that the 2S38 should be 10.7/11.0, since it’s too good for 10.3.

Comparisons to the Otomatic can be made, but keep in mind that it’s overtiered as well.

7 Likes
3

Just buff the RDF/LT / HSTV-L’s shell pen/velocity and post pen damage and I see no issue with them being 11.7
(ofc gaijin would never do that since it would make spookston happy, and why would they ever do that? Same reason we still have easy to spawn CAS, spookston gotta suffer…)

2 Likes
4

You forgot to mention that 2s38 can easily be one shotted by getting hit into the breach, and its the only tank with crewless turret in the game that can be killed this way.
Its funny how you mention the armor increase in % to make 2s38 look more armored, but both tanks are equally made of paper by top tier standards. And RDF LT sometimes bounces a shot by having insane angles both on turret and hull.
And bigger hull is never an advantage to 2s38 - it has giant ammo rack right in the middle, and it is exactly the place where noobs are shooting after buying their first top tier premium. Bigger hull makes 2s38 harder to hide, easier to spot and kill, and lack of depression is a critical disadvantage to a top tier tank. Especially for a light tank.

5 Likes
5

Although 2s38 is absolutely bonkers at it’s BR it has some huge drawback compared to HSTV-L and to some extend the RDF.

First of all, it’s acceleration is abysmal and every time you turn the vehicle it loses so much speed. This happens with almost every soviet/russian vehicle that uses similar chassis. 2S38 barely keeps up with MBTs at similar BR.

Second, the size. While the vehicle can soak up some hits occasionally due to it’s huge size it gets incapacitated or outright killed for the same reason. Smaller vehicles are easier to hide, harder to spot and also somewhat harder to hit (especially when moving at high speed) so american lights take the cake here no question. Even though I don’t have RDF I can comfortably say that I’d pick HSTV-L any day of the week over 2S38 in that regard.

Third and the worst one imo is the horrible gun depression. 2s38 is too tall and have very little gun depression. It will force you to expose your vehicle a lot more than you’d feel comfortable with. This also gets you killed. A lot.

On the flipside 2S38 enjoys more ammo, a wider range of useful ammo types (aphe just deletes things when flanking and/or facing light armor), faster fire rate and much better thermal quality which is helpful in long range sniping from bushes.

Long story short 2s38 has similar or better offensive capabilities while being worse in defensive positions and mobility. In my humble opinion cons outweight pros but 2s38 still deserves a higher BR.

6

2S38 is glass cannon, most of the times in uptires… I dont see the reason to put it at 10.7 or 11.0 since its already in those lobbies…Unless you want to make it useless in higest rank, then Im against changing 2S38 br.

1 Like
7

US mains try not to CRY = impossible

4 Likes
8

Another day another thread to be locked because there are tons of others with the same subject ongoing;

Then you could just stop by this statement instead of posting this wall of text based purely on other’s experiences, “math” and Test Driving those vehicles.

Based on what I’ve seen in War Thunder Forums, you or anyone else yapping about a vehicle without any prior experience means nothing and adds nothing to the subject.

Nice you mentioned the vehicle mass which can be used as counterargument to you mentioning the vehicle’s top speed, which in both cases are comparable.

2S38 can be pierced by 12.7 mm rounds on the side. The case with the RDF/LT is that Gaijin added it as the base model instead of the latest modification vehicle that features the better ammunition, I believe the add-on armor on the sides, the missing thermal sight on the cannon base and probably few other features. Which is common, it’s not exclusive to this vehicle, the T-80UD/478BE which also is missing a lot of features, currently only difference from the Ukrainian variant T-80UD is the thermal imager.

With the size you pointed is no advantage but a issue, it’s a SPAAG after all, the most ammo it can carry the better, not to count the numerous modules inside it to make it capable as a anti-air vehicle:

images (6)

And as you can see, barely no empty space, which, in my opinion is a good thing, I’m not against really, but as you can see, the advantage is non-existent, actually, the 2S38 is a moving ammunition box.

I believe it’s a third generation thermal sight; and as a coastal defence system, the 14 999 km laser rangefinder operational distance is reasonable, also, as I’ve mentioned earlier, it’s a SPAAG, and it’s accurate information, there’s no bias, you can easily search up for “Bajkal Fire Control System combat module” and you’ll find most information about the cannon and offensive modules in the 2S38.

The difference between the fire rate on the 2S38 and the RDF/LT is quite obvious why, the 2S38 is a dual fed auto loading system, where the ammunition comes from two sides instead of a single linear rail. Obviously how the system works is unknown at least for me but this is how I think it can reach 0,5s reload time between shots.

Again, 2S38 is a SPAAG, and I believe that 1/3 of the vehicle is pure ammo, and also, as I’ve mentioned, it’s combat module came from a ship for coastal defence, maybe it explains the overheating subject, it’s made to shoot consecutively for a long period compared to common autocannons.

The RDF/LT cannon is way superior, the problem is people that never tried 2S38 in live battle but test driving it, the difference of damage between the 57 mm autocannon and the 75 mm autocannon, the BR-281U AP HE ammunition is no advantage, you’ll need more shots to heavily armored vehicle to make it count, and same applies to the 3UBM22 APDS FS that, even in small caliber, doesn’t deal good damage to light or medium armored vehicles. And the HE VT is also no advantage, the argument of “It’s faster” is pointless when the RDF/LT shoots the second best or if not the best HE VT in terms of velocity, HE filler for a auto cannon.

Everything related to the economic subject of both vehicles in-game and outside it’s due to its BR placement and Rank, which I’ll not argue, it’s Gaijin.

Both vehicles are capable but I wouldn’t buy any of them despite owning 2S38, it’s a vehicle hard to adapt, specially for newer players and demand strategic changes, how you play it and everything else. Which same applies to the RDF/LT which I hope no new players are buying this, which, I wouldn’t, even considering the firepower superior compared to the HSTV-L with more ammunition to use, either I would buy the M1 Abrams KVT or the T-80U-E1, both vehicles mentioned in this thread are good to be played as secondary options, not primarily grinding vehicles.

2 Likes
9

Obviously they’ll both be killed by actual cannons but the reason I brought up armor is because the RDF/LT can be killed by 7.62 machine guns to the side, which literally every MBT, light tank, and TD have at top tier. But the 2s38 has appliqué armor that prevents it from even being .50 cal’ed like the regular Bmp-3.

10

you guys dont want to talk about Lvkv 9040c? almost similar caliber as 2S38. with more crew, better gun depression angle. spall liner, search radar antenna all at the same BR and lower spawn cost?

11

Can you please show me where i can get your version of 2S38, the one that had monsterous survivability, almost railgun like autocanon? mine can never pen Leopard 2A4 front hull. let alone Type 90 which 2S38 will meet 100% of the time, and also happens to always died to something as small as 12.7mm

12

+1 for asking about the survivability as it`s bad

13

Dont show your side to enemy. seriously you have all that gun depression and gun that was very far from your hull. if your cry was 2S38 “crewless” turret. sorry to ruin your grief. the crewless turret is actually quite useless aside from scouting. 2S38’s gun sits so low in the turret it is just a couple milimetre away from crew’s head that it is not only useless for hull down. Any hit that the turret take there is a chance that your crew will catch the shrapnel

14

this alone is enough to tell how shallow your comparison are. debating about horsepower and top speed while conveniently ignoring hp/t ratio

RDF/LT is:
13.4 tons
350 hp
26.119 hp/t

2S38 is:
21.5 tons
500 hp
23.25hp/t

1 Like
15

Okay I 100% agree with you that a person who doesn’t have a vehicle will not have the experience to talk about them, but I probably would want the RDF/LT if it was better, even though again it’s $70

No, the 2s38 cannot be .50 cal’ed from the side due to it having appliqué armor, appliqué armor that they did not give the RDF/LT even though right now it can be killed by things as small as a 7.62mm machine gun. Every MBT at top tier has one, and most also have either a .50 cal or a 14.5mm.

About the air gaps I did not realize it was that full after they added the new modules but it looks like most of the modules were added in the turret. Actually it seems like they increased the size of the ammo, which I think is a little too big for a 57mm unless they have multiple pieces of ammo as one piece in the model.

When I brought up the rangefinder going up to 14999 I just thought it was strange, and didn’t know it was because of the actual sight.

The ammo advantage in the RDF/LT is negligible as you have to face things like T-80BVM T-90M, up-armored leopards, up-armored challenger 2’s, etc. The round is so weak that even side ERA can stop it, and even when it does penetrate unless you “knock out” either both the gunner and commander or ammo it will most likely turn onto you like a CIWS and shoot you, and as it is a very small vehicle with tightly packed crew and ammo you’re dead, and you don’t even have the speed advantage of the HSTV-L to compensate for this or get out of bad situations. The 2s38 only has to face early leo 2a4’s, the 105mm Abrams, the early challengers, and overall MBT’s with less side armor. The reason I brought up the velocity for the HE-VT is because having faster ammunition when fighting aircraft and helis is an advantage, as your ammunition will reach the target faster and you will not need to lead as much, not exactly much better, but still better.

I also do agree that new players should not buy either of these tanks, but honestly if they fixed XM885 I would not oppose it staying at 11.7, but until then I do not believe it is good enough to warrant a 1.3 BR increase over a very similar tank that has several advantages over it.

It’s pretty obvious you fully read my topic and put some effort into your response, so thanks for reading and your time.

16

Icv(p) would like to have a word with you

17

where do i get this? mine side’s was just empty box that get caught in anything

you mean Kontakt-5, Relikt which happens to be made to stop KE projectile?

once again conveniently ignore that it can meet something like Type 90, Merkava Mk3, Puma, M1A1 120mm

The HE-VT has a limited range of 6 km for 2S38, and try take a guess what was 2S38 actually designed for?

it still missing its long rod APFSDS as spookstoon mentions before

18

Yes it can be pierced by 12.7 mm rounds, the additional “armor” which I believe are purely to assist the vehicle on water, in-game has only 5 mm of armor, and as structural part, the 12.7 mm round will destroy it, making penetration easier.

The fact that 2S38 doesn’t face up armored vehicles like the Challenger 2 OES or the M1A1 Abrams SepV2 or even the Leopard 2A7V or the Strv 122 series, but it doesn’t make 2S38 any better when auto cannon APDS FS rounds performs terrible, doesn’t matter which vehicle is, specially for 30 mm auto cannons vehicles.

And I appreciate you trying to keep it low and not touch much of this sensitive topic. Hopefully others try the same.

19

I never have experienced the sides coming off when shot on anything less than the 25mm bushmaster, and maybe I over-exaggerated a little when I said “side armor,” but it still is more than enough to stop .50 cal for at least enough time for the 2s38 to turn onto you like a CIWS and light you up. Obviously the 2s38 shouldn’t be up at 11.7 or 12.0 like i’ve seen others claim it should be, but I believe that until the RDF/LT is fixed it also shouldn’t be 11.7.

20

I don’t really care about the fact K-5 and Relikt can stop kinetic penetrators. But I do care about the fact that perfect side shots fail because XM885 is incorrect and missing a big chunk of penetration. The whole point about side armor is that while the 2s38 has less penetration it does not have to face the more heavily armored MBT’s that have improved side armor (see: STRV 122B+, Leo 2a7, T-90M, BVM, up armored challengers, even sometimes in my SEP) I am not opposed to the 2s38 going up 0.3, or even staying where it is, as I love dropping a GBU-27 on them from my nighthawk, but having a roughly equal tank be 1.3 BR above it while often being inferior in some ways is a little BS in my opinion. I do know the 2s38 was designed for SPAA, its a widely known fact. And as spookston said and sourced XM885 is missing penetration. If it gets this penetration I will be okay with it staying at 11.7.