Not with the Strv 74’s mobility, if we compare with the AMX thats similar the 74 should probably be 6.0 to 6.3 the vehicle is huge, slow, and the main round for pen is basically as reliable as German supplies to Stalingrad. It could be the vehicle just cant be balanced into warrant adding as gaijin cant see people buying it.
405 405 405 405 405…
I do have 3 theories for where the Strv-74 (RBS-52) can be added based on previous editions of similar vehicles
i would imagine that the Ikv 90(40) (BWR) would be much better event/BP vehicle instead of the Strv 74 (RBS-52), and that the Strv would instead be a basic premium vehicle.
For reference, the BWR is functionally similar to the PT-76-57 BP we had a while back, exept it’s the hull of an Ikv 91 with an open(?) turret holding the same 40mm that’s now found on the CV90.
They already have the Strv 81 with the missiles being a premium, would prefer at least 1 to be TT or event
Very small error, microscopic even
If i punch in the Total weight of the Slpprj M/40 projectile for the akan m/40 together with the Velocity of 845 m/s we get
Id say that is pretty darn close to the in-game value? Taking into consideration the formula doesnt 100% match accurately
Even if we take the Slpprj M/42 B We get
So- I don’t know where you got the calculations from? Id assume you only took the weight of the fuse? I don’t know?
EDIT:
So yea you definitely didnt calculate the penetration correctly- And i have posted comments explaining this in the comments-
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/qMa0lt5K9aew
I am using the official Caluclator of gaijin.
And stop with your nonsense THERE IS NO FUZE. And even if that wouldnt matter. AND you CANT use the full weight of the complete round, ONLY the projectile leaves the barrel. That you dont even know that, why are you even arguing.
And there isnt anything wrong with the round, only that it in game incorrectly uses the APC/APCBC modifier. WHICH IT ISNT. Meaning its penetration is too HIGH.
Im pretty sure that table states some of the rounds have caps
Edit:
They are capped shells
Yes, 1 shell is capped, but only APBC, not APC or APCBC as such it cant get the Penetration boost. And its not even used in game. The rest isnt. If you got more shells, feel free to post them. Tho the 2 in game are not capped shells. Its the M/40 of 145g 815m/s and M/42 of 136g 845m/s.
BC does add some pen, the russians found that out.
Shells with BC had a far greater time penetrating FHA armour
No it doesnt, BC is just the ballistic cap, which shatters on impact to not interfer with penetration. Its just a thin steel (or light alloy) cap, it does not offer ANY penetration effect.
You are mixing it up with the C, Cap/Protective cap/Penetrative cap. Which either are a soft metal protector using the Rehbinder effect, or a Hardened steel tip going soft downwards to the actual tip, which shatters the FHA first layer and protects the tip by Rehbinder effect.
For anyone interested in talking about suggestions for the Elde or anyone that wants to comment on my suggestions please read through this as i want to give the devs some form of idea as to what temporary solutions they can do to fix the Elde for the time being bow that my bug report on its mobility has been marked as accepted.
Eh, i think youre over exaggerating the mobility issues, the only real issue with the 74 as far as ive felt has been the flimsy dispersion of the apds shell at long ranges. At 6.7 its just like you’re playing it in an up tier but you get three almost guaranteed kills with the missiles. An issue i could see is an uptier from there to 7.7 but we’ll cross that bridge if we get there. Id buy it at 6.7, i’d do me better than the 501.
For me i just cant stand the 74, its just far too slow and flimsy for me, id be a waste of a premium when something potentially more valuable could be addwd imo. It’d be a good BP vehicle since its nothing special. Now if it was the silly car sweden had with the the RB 52 thats a different story. Unique chassis with a useless gimmick. Instant TT vehicle like the Type 60 ATM.
the elde 98 drives like a wheeled vehicle that weighs 32 tonnes… WHY
Because someone at gaijin thought it would be a great idea to add a vehicle they couldn’t program into the game and let chat gpt do the coding for movement lol
need this fixed
Add it to the ever growing list…im currently working on the bug report list for the MLU 2 and it gets longer every time i look away.
Clearly a market lie russian missiles cannot be intercepted.
2 bug reports for the MLU 2
Edit: for the BRU-55 report Smin stated hes not sure if its deliberate so it may actually just be an oversight so the MLU may actually be somewhat worth adding to your lineup for ground RB if we can get more people to mark it.
F/A-18C MLU 2 Missing BRU-55 for all wing pylons // Issues Community Bug Reporting System
F/A-18C MLU 2 BOL pods not working with cuatom loadouts
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/KdCQgKat0WgF
Ill be doing more but if anyone else has stuff let me know
So as we know, the Swedish tree is a bit lacking when it comes to “heavy” vehicles, as the Swedish forces never really focused on heavy armor for combat during WW2.
For an example, the Strv m/42, which was Sweden’s medium tank during the war, is 2.7, while tanks from the same year (Like the Tiger 1 and M36 Jackson) is 5.7.
To compensate, Gaijin added the “Kungstiger” and Pz.271-1 (1942), and has considered adding the Krv Emil to the Swedish tree in one of the “passed to the developers” blogs.
What could also possibly be added is the Churchill Mk.III of which Sweden tested during the same time as the Tiger (aswell as a StuG III) to a lower BR like 3.7. This will in this case also strengthen Sweden’s (already pretty powerful) 3.7 - 4.0 lineup.
In general, Lend-Lease/Captured/Tested vehicles are usually frowned upon since it wouldn’t be fun if every Tech Tree had every vehicle. However, I am going to play into the controversial territory either way. If heavy tanks aren’t really your thing, and you are still interested in well-known tanks from the period, then i may suggest two tanks that could possibly strengthen the Swedish 4.7 and 6.0 lineup.
First off, the Panther A.
While not really a heavy tank, it could fill in some spaces in the Swedish tree that lacks armor, since the only tanks at that battle rating with some actually decent armor are, in fact, not Swedish.
On the other side, the second tank might not have the same amount of armor, but still a decent gun compared to the Pz.271-1’s BR-350B or the Strv m/42 DT’s Slpgr 43.
That being the Sherman Firefly.
Excellent mobility, good gun, still lacks the rooftop .50cal. The armor might not be that great, but it makes up for it in firepower.
Now, why am i bringing up medium tanks in a message about heavy vehicles? It’s the armor, and the gun. While they’re not heavy tanks, they got enough armor to take a few hits and stay alive, while some Swedish tanks may crumble right after being hit.
On the more “lighter” side of the spectrum, aircraft. What does Sweden not have? dedicated heavy strike aircraft. In fact, the first “strike aircraft” makes an appearance at 7.0, so you have to either use the A 21A-3 (4.3), Bf 109G-3/6 (4.3/4.7) or the B 18/T 18s.
While these aircraft are doing an excellent job within CAS, there are still some BRs that lack CAS-dedicated aircraft. One of these examples is 3.7. Sweden did “develop” such a vehicle for said task, but was never completed. The BJ 24.
In theory, it would have been very similar to the Bf 110s we have ingame, being driven by DB605s and being able to have bombs sizing from eight 50kgs to a single 1000kg bomb. For offensive weaponry, four 8mm ksp m/22s in the nose and two 20mm akan m/41s in the fuselage.
If ground battles isn’t really your thing and you want to be one-tapped by a Bf 109, then this next one might be interesting for you.
In 1944, a few B-17G Fortresses diverted to Sweden after a bombing mission over Germany. A deal would go on to be made inbetween the Swedish and U.S. governments to permit ~300ish American crewmen to be repatriated in exchange for a promise not to use these crewmen in combat service and to formally turn over to Sweden the B-17s that had landed intact.
(source: worldairphotography.com)
Some of these B-17s would go on to be purchased by Sweden after the end of the war and were converted into airliners, but that’s not the important part.
In theory, since these B-17Gs had now been formally turned over (and later purchased), they were still combat ready up until they were converted into airliners. Sweden was still a neutral country, so a heavy bomber would make no sense to have either way.
If they weren’t converted to airliners though, there is a high chance that they could have been adopted by the Swedish Air Force, and fill in roles that both the domestically produced B 17 and B 18 currently had (bombing and reconnaissance.)
Once again, this topic is still pretty controversial since, again, this game would not be fun if everyone had the same vehicles. But it’s still fun to think of what Sweden could get for “heavier” roles than what we already have.
