Or force-feed AA Ersatz TDs to the whiny community until they choke on them and accept they aren’t going away any more than the autocannon light tank IFVs will. Copy-pasting the same machine without the better rounds only adds another worthless vehicle that cannot defend itself effectively and if it gets used at all, gets used very incorrectly, thereby being a waste of time to even model, let alone add.
Thank you for the corrections.
If the round exists, and its the same damn gun, and the round existed in the same time period, it should get the round.
While not an AA gun, I feel the exact same way regarding British 6-pounder cannons getting M86 APHE.
And those things have such horrifically bad pen and postpen that even at 8.0+ with all the light tanks running around they aren’t particularly threatening. Nevermind the Bosvark using the same guns.
The same argument could be made with the various ZSU-57s and its APCR, technically speaking. I care more about gameplay than historical accuracy in cases like this.
Yeah, it’s pretty dumb they screw over the Falcon because it has APDS. It’s an spaa with modest speed and armor compared to many opponents in the 8.3+ BR range.
Moving it from 8.0 to 8.3 really does nothing to impede it’s ability to kill tanks, and makes it more difficult to perform it’s core function - shooting down CAS.
It was never designed as an spg, it was supposed to have a modest ability to defend itself against ground targets. See excerpt below from details on the Falcon, along with link to source.
“With its high-velocity armor-piercing rounds, the Falcon would be more than capable of engaging light armored targets such as armored personnel carriers (APCs) or soft-skinned vehicles, as well as infantry. If nothing else, the high volume of ordnance spewing from these high-rate-of-fire guns would heavily suppress an enemy force.”
Most of these are not missing ammunition. Just because a gun theoretically could maybe fire a type of ammo doesn’t mean that it should be added when the user nation never owned nor operated it. On that matter, a number of vehicles have ammunition that they shouldn’t. The most egregious example in my opinion would be the XM800T which has APDS that was never used by the US and also didn’t exist at the time of the XM800T’s development.
And of course there’s the issue of the BR and gameplay impact of artificially buffing the anti-tank capabilities of anti-air vehicles.
I don’t think they should get high power AT ammo, we have enough mobile autocannons, we don’t need more that will make other proper tanks less relevant. They also shouldn’t gain added TD capability because it will result in BR increases that push them above their BR in the AA role, while also adding more gaps in TTs that won’t be fixed. Look at the Falcon, Kugelblitz, AMX-13 DCA, R3 or AMX-30DCA and you’ll see some examples of TD SPAA balancing negatively effecting the AA capability of a nation in a BR range.
Some AP ammo is always needed because you need to be able to defend yourself, but SPAA shouldn’t be better in an AT role than non autocannon tanks.
I did not say to copy paste the vehicle, but rather to provide an alternative with the same gun(s), meaning that there would at least be another option if the player wished to experience a weapon with specific anti-tank ammunition.
Also, I personally do not believe that an AA’s ability to defend itself against ground attackers should affect its placement in relation to anti-air duties. Of course there are many AA such as the M163 that could easily stay at its current BR even with new APDS shells, but this is not the case for every example you provided.
But the Falcon is undoubtedly fun to play in anti-tank roles at the same time, hence it’s notoriety. With one of the two changes I suggest, the Falcon would either:
A. Have two different battle ratings, dependent on whether or not one equips its APDS ammo.
B. Be complemented by a second Falcon (such as this version that presents notable differences and can be foldered underneath (or vice versa), or perhaps another vehicle fielding the HSS 831L (surely Britain or one of its subtrees can provide this).
Or just stop weighting TD ability of SPAAGs so heavily. It sure seems like it takes way less effectiveness to move an AA up in BR than it would any other type of vehicle.
As the game dispensed with timeline limits many years prior, it is better and fairer for everyone if "could the gun in question fire said shot, and did said round exist when said gun was made and/or used?
It is also HIGHLY hypocritical to allow light tanks with autocannons to do what they please but then punish SPAAGs when they so much as start to do even a fraction of what is normal for the light tanks with autocannons. As autocannon lights have only proliferated more and not been punished really at all, there is no right to punish SPAAGs for the same.
Something about the Snailgorithm weights SPAAG tankbusting too heavily. But as we do not have access to what its thresholds are, let alone the global stats its using to balance in the first place, we are unable to ever suggest it gets changed.
Part of me would want to see all these changes and intentionally not move the AAs much. To punish the whiners who got us in this mess until they cry themselves to sleep and grow a set.
It’s only been a few days since the Coelian’s change, and surprisingly there isn’t much in the way of complaining in actual matches about it. People are learning to shoot the damn turret. I firmly believe that while yes such stubborn [insert expletive of choice] will whine, it is essential for game health to intentionally ignore such people.
Incorrect Ammunition in Game
VEAK 40 and Lvkv m/42 currently use L/60 shells instead of the proper L/70 rounds.
In-game muzzle velocity is 850 m/s, far below the historical 1000–1025 m/s.
Ahistorical Ammunition
SAP-HEI rounds currently available on these vehicles are not historically accurate.
nr1. Its not even classified as an Light Tank despite it being an IFV, somebody just slapped a RB 56 launcher on it. Therefore it doesent get scouting despite its armament being. sub-optimal.
nr2. It should have access to: APCR-HEI-T 20 mm slbrhpgr 95
Tbh the M163 could’ve greatly benefited from the APDS before it got downtiered to 7.3 since it offers a very significant range improvement (4.4km compared to 2km of the full caliber shells)
It is very weird that the Machbet still doesn’t have access to it though despite its gun being so low range it’s basically useless against anything above early jets
This is you responding emotionally because you don’t like the idea that these SPAA can be used effectively as objective winning, fast moving, hard hitting vehicles that objectively can be some of the strongest vehicles at their BRs and only cost 80sp. I don’t see why else you would lash out at people who don’t like the current state of balance. Saying you think something isn’t balanced does not make you a “whiner”.
This sounds cringe not gonna lie, refer back to me saying you are responding emotionally.
Oh, so now it’s not whining if somebody points out that the SPAA are overperforming because of the problems with their small caliber aphe overperforming due to volumetric? (And while you didn’t mention it, overpressure?)
Better idea, give them their missing anti air functions such as lead calculators/ gyro sights etc. so they can actually do their job of killing planes properly.
The last thing large caliber SPAAGs need is more uptiers due to their tank killing abilities, when they already struggle with planes at their BRs.
this would require the APDS belt being a selectable/de-selectable mod. to prevent people queuing with HE belts for lower BR then swapping back, but there are quite a few vehicles that would benefit from such a system.
Well that’s interesting. How much armor penetration would the rounds get?
Could any L/60 Bofors fire the shell, though? Did any L/70 Bofors fire the same shell with modified cartridge to fit the bigger gun?
Sometimes concessions must be made for gameplay - having a gun with postpen so abysmally low that you struggle to kill a single light tank makes for a vehicle which only gets used for memes. Or if its used as an “AA,” it gets used incorrectly for what WT demands (sitting in their own spawn rather uselessly).
Very interesting - so would this “APCRHEIT” functionally be some sort of APHE at the end of the day? Or is it more an APCR round with an HEI immediately behind it that follows the APCR into the same hole?
I never said that the SP cost could not go up, man. I have just realized over too many years of experience in this game that for any SPAAG to be remotely effective below radar tier, it HAS to be GOOD at tankbusting so it can reach useful locations on the map to then intercept CAS from.
An AA which sits in its own spawn signs its own death warrant as all CAS knows exactly where to look for it.
An AA with no good TD potential bothering to move outside of its own spawn also signs its own death warrant.
Do you not see the problem here? The way current gameplay is set up is demanding AAs do two polar opposite jobs, yet punishes the ones actually effective at both.
I see a blatant hypocritical double standard towards SPAAGs going on, yet Light Tanks with the same autocannons in some instances get a free pass.
Other than the Kugelblitz, Coelian, and Skink, all SPAAGs below radar tier are open-top. And other than a couple which currently have nearly-nonfunctional postpen on their guns, most SPAAGs do not have insane mobility relative to regular tanks at their BR range.
I’m sick of the default reaction to anything new or different seemingly being “its OP, nerf it!” Even if whatever such people complain about gets obliterated, they don’t suddenly stop complaining - they just blame something else when they die and claim whatever that was is automatically “overpowered.”
Most people think SPAAG killing their tanks is automatically overpowered simply because its an SPAAG. This is “whining.” The moment it would be “fixed” by either butchering the “offending” SPAAG or uptiering it to uselessness, the same people would go complain about something else and never stop. Repeat that nonsense enough times, and soon nothing works consistently anymore.
Bugs enabling said SPAAGs to penetrate stuff they shouldn’t are separate and legitimate issues. This is not “whining.”
I have seen too many things utterly destroyed that in some cases still haven’t recovered since being destroyed in years prior, and want to see that “nerf cycle” broken at its whiny source. For example, the Kugelblitz. Belt composition still neutered long after nerf was not relevant anymore. Penetration neutered to the lowest possible estimate for no good reason. Postpen of the APCR still artificially shafted to be identical to the much smaller 15mm APCR since May 2016 where it was nerfed 16-fold in response to whining about the Horton 229. Even after we got proper counters to jets like that in the form of radar AA and proxy HE shells - those old “balancing” nerfs were never reverted.Examples like THAT is why I automatically bristle at the mere idea of “nerfs for balance” alone.
I have proposed in other threads to make lead calculation on SPAAGs, Heavy AAs currently classed as TDs (88mm Flak Truck for instance), and SPHs with HE-VT rounds a Crew Skill feature. Stock crew gets a 1km max range lead marker when looking at a plane. This can be increased up to 1.5km with an aced crew.
Is this an arcadey “solution”? Yes it is, but the equally arcadey reasons SPAAGs without radar struggle to swat planes are so basal to the mode that they will never change (mouse aim and 3rd person camera benefitting planes far more than SPAAGs). SPAAGs also usually acted in groups to defend things and thus often had multiple emplacements firing at a single plane - ingame we have either one AA vs one plane or multiple planes vs one AA. It’s the same story as why Bombers in Air RB are so weak.
The SAP-HEI Was designed for the L/60 (Lvakan m/36) And the L/70 (Lvakan m/48) Could fire L/60 ammunition although this required changing out alot of components to re-fit the L/70 (Lvakan 48) to take the Shorter rounds of the L/60 (Lvakan m/48) And couldn’t be done on a whim.
SPAA is a role within war thunder and shooting down aircraft rewards you and your team in the long-run. And its highly unlikely that the Dev’s will implement A-historical ammo (for these vehicles atleast.)
However there are records of the L/60 (Lvakan m/36) having APDS used on the Luftvärnskanonvagn fm/43 Although. That is not in-game yet.
If we keep going this route, the spawn cost of SPAA needs to be raised, or have the same system as planes and helicopters; higher SP cost for spawning with anti-armor ammo.
Interesting, thank you for the info. I was thinking that the rounds with modified longer cartridges and more propellant existed for L/70 Bofors guns.
We can’t selectively apply history when none of the actual gameplay is remotely according to historical doctrine, let alone usage.
Sounds like enough justification to give it to all 40mm L/60 Bofors in my mind. I don’t think we have that specific SPAAG - we have the Lvkv 42 with its single L/70 and the L-62 ANTI II.
A 42-round clip before reloading? Oh hell…
Yes it would be fun, because current WT gameplay forces SPAAGs to be TDs if they want to get to and survive being at the areas of the map where planes congregate, especially in non-radar tiers.
What’s 20mm DM43 and 20mm DM63? I’ve heard of FAPDS - lower pen but a lot more shrapnel upon impact.
SP costs of course should go up - but I think BRs should probably not for many of them and even go down for some. Partly to force-feed tankbusting SPAAG to the whiners who got them nerfed to their current state until they cry themselves to sleep, grow a set, and actually go kill them instead of complain. And partly because with current standards for setting their BRs, most would cease to be effective at swatting planes due to the whine-overreaction to them.
Why do you hate people who don’t want SPAAs to be more effective at destroying tanks than actual tanks? And why are you whining so much about effective tank destroyers being moved up in BR?
I’ll take an example of what this proposal feels like. Imagine an SPAA 2S38 but without APFSDS, at 9.0 because that’s where it would go. Under your proposal it would gain APFSDS, becoming equivalent to a 10.3/10.7 tank at 9.0 because it’s balanced off of it’s SPAA capability. Would that be balanced, fair, and fun?
Why should we not weight the ability of a vehicle to destroy tanks in a mode where you primarily destroy tanks?
It doesn’t.
God forbid people take issue with vehicles that are too effective at their BR.
Not true. People think they are OP because they have better reaction time, and they kill you instantly without any chance to fight back.
