Yes.
“my opinion”
No it has 100% relevance. Whatever gaijin classifies a vehicle will determine if it gets special abilities. Light tanks get scouting (rank II+) and drones (rank VI+). Tank destroyers and heavy tanks lack artillery. SPAA that can’t deal with enemy tanks get scouting. Not all SPAA are guaranteed (or deserve) scouting.
Its quite simple really.
On top of this easy to understand system the LAV-AD doesn’t need scouting so complaining about it is absolutely confusing as is complaining about the 2S38. Complaining about why a vehicle is miss classified is fine but stating that its miss classification should allow another vehicle to get something has literally zero connection. Its like me complaining that heavy tanks don’t have scouting because light tanks do. Its pretty stupid.
1 Like
We’ve already listed multiple other vehicles of both classifications which lack the ability so no, it’s not the classification which determines the ability.
Dude read. I get that you are in not such a happy place rn, but at least take the time to read.
Again, repeating is pointless, just don’t respond if you don’t have something new to say.
From the manufacturer:
Combat vehicle, designed to destroy both airborne and ground targets. Not an SPAA.
I admire the tenacity but this is a bizarre hill to die on.
“The 2S38 Combat Vehicle is designed to destroy air targets such as unmanned aerial vehicles (remote-piloted air vehicles), cruise missiles, precision weapons, tactical aircrafts, fire support helicopters, ground and surface lightly armored targets. The CV can fire both from a halt and on the move.”
So a self propelled anti air gun.
Wicked.
^^
Yes “combat” vehicle. Most vehicles used in combat could be considered combat vehicles. It’s kind of the thing they’re designed to do, combat.
1 Like
Like really read. Read what I say instead if screaming the same thing over and over when I told you that is not how it works. Your inability to understand others and be incredibly entitled really hampers this discussion.
To add to my previous comment, it doesn’t matter what YOU think it should be. What matters is what IS for the conversation about the LAV-AD and why it lacks scouting.
The 2S38 is not special as a light tank in its ability to engage aircraft with relative efficiency while not being an SPAA (examples include the begleight and cv9040). This doesn’t mean that other vehicles that have no difficulty dealing with aircraft (at their respective brs) should get scouting either (examples of vehicles that have good efficiency against aircraft include the ISU-152 and the lower M4 series of tanks w/ .50 cals).
Its established by gaijin ALL tanks classified as light tanks get scouting. IRL it could be classified something different but it doesn’t matter whether another class of vehicle should get something.
1 Like
Why does the LAV-AD lack scouting? That’s the question I’m asking yes.
FFS.
This is the main argument. I don’t care if you think the 2S38 is misclassified because it doesn’t affect the LAV-AD. It only affects the 2S38. You are not dragging me into a wild goose chase because you are mad.
1 Like
Your main argument is illogical as there are vehicles ingame that go against your argument.
If you’re saying the decision is arbitrary then we are in agreement. I would like to know Gaijin’s decision making process that lead to this arbitrary decision.
1 Like
No they aren’t. All light tanks rank II and above have scouting. Stop being salty you can’t drag me into another argument.
The above explanation is consistent to what we see in game.
We’re not talking about light tanks we’re talking about SPAAs.
The vehicle in contention is the LAV-AD, an SPAA.
2S38 isn’t classified as a SPAA in game, its a light tank in game. I DO. NOT. CARE. what you think it SHOULD be classified by gaijin. It has NO bearing on the thread topic.
Edit: That’s actually pretty funny that you edited the post I responded to to say LAV-AD to make it seem like I am complaining about nothing. You really that mad?
That’s great, no one is asking you to care about my opinion on classification.
As an SPAA that has scouting capabilities I believe it’s a direct counter part to the LAV-AD and can be compared, yes.
1 Like
No, I think you misunderstand. It’s a multirole light combat vehicle. Compare it to the manufacturer descriptions of the BMPT and Pantsir.
https://roe.ru/eng/catalog/land-forces/armored-combat-vehicles/BMPT/
https://roe.ru/eng/catalog/air-defence-systems/air-defense-systems-and-mounts/“Pantsir-S1”/
The BMPT is described as a “combat vehicle”, the same words as the 2S38, while the Pantsir is an “air defense system”.
Your source mate.
Great. Than let it be known for this current discussion the 2S38 has no bearing on the discussion. Because we are talking about vehicles classed as SPAA by gaijin, in a game called warthunder. Not real life.