Jump to content

You can't win against German top tier


1 hour ago, senzawa said:

I assume this means Challanger 2 vs Leopard 2A5/6

 

Bruh?

 

You must be completely inept at math.

The Chally 2 can easily get penned by Leo 2a6 and the L26 it pretty weak is what he is trying to say.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kocant12 said:

The Chally 2 can easily get penned by Leo 2a6 and the L26 it pretty weak is what he is trying to say.

 

Leo 2's can be easily penned by Chally 2's, except for the turret cheeks. So it looks perfectly balanced. Both can pen each other. Even at the same spots.

Edited by Thodin
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Thodin said:

 

Leo 2's can be easily penned by Chally 2's, except for the turret cheeks. So it looks perfectly balanced. Both can pen each other. Even at the same spots.

 

if you gloss over the mobility, survivability, comparing the size of turret weakspots, turret drives then yeah

 

perfectly balanced

  • Upvote 3
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Calc[email protected] said:

Last i check, leo 2 are well known for their turret arnor not their hull armor.

The Leo 2 irl is well know for being one of the most armored, fastest and deadliest tanks ins the world.

  • Haha 2
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Thodin said:

 

Leo 2's can be easily penned by Chally 2's, except for the turret cheeks. So it looks perfectly balanced. Both can pen each other. Even at the same spots.

Actually the 2A5/2A6 hulls have a pretty decent chance of blocking worse top tier APFSDS like 125-I, Mango and L26 at 400-800m+ range. 

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, Kocant12 said:

The Leo 2 irl is well know for being one of the most armored, fastest and deadliest tanks ins the world.

Only after the A5 upgrade in the 1990s.

For us who remember it, Leo 2 was always known for being the least protected one out of all 3rd gen MBT.

 

 

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 11/01/2021 at 23:29, Kocant12 said:

So where to begin. Well the Leopard 2a6 was added and its essentially a Leo 2a5 with a better gun. The problem is that its gun is way to good and it ignores Russian armor which makes Russia almost pointless to have on your team. The Leo 2a6 when hull down is basically un-killable because it has a impenetrable turret and tiny little mantlet. If you manage to kill a Leo 2a6 he either comes in a Leopard 2a5 | G91 R/3 or 4 | EC-665 tiger | The Leopard 2a5 is a good backup especially when compared to tanks like M1A1 and T80B but the Leo 2a5 isn't that big of a problem. The G91 has been talked about enough and I think everyone knows that it will wipe out half a team in a few minutes. The EC-665 had F&F missiles so it can come out of cover, shoot, go back into cover which no other Heli can do. If you spawn in a plane or heli there is the FlakRadPaz which will shoot you out of the sky if you are within 10km range. Germany also gets one of the best armored cars Radwagon 90 which is really fast and survives way more than it should and it gets a good gun. All Gaijin has done is raise repair cost which is going to make it where only elite players want to play.

 

So, I have came to the conclusion that you can't win against german top tier.

Gaijin: Yeah we noticed, we planning let other nations can’t against German in any br, in that case you won’t say “top tier German bias”

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, croatiankiller said:

Other nations can win but you will rarely see one deah leavers in german team contrary to allied one.

Which is also again caused by how strong germany currently is. Germany is strong -> which causes 1 death leavers -> Germany get's even stronger because of this -> even more leavers. 

 

Just picture your average US 10.7 player with a lineup that contains: M1A2, M1A1, ADATS, AH-64 and F-4.

 

They start with their M1A2, which is already outclassed by the 2A6. They do some stuff and get killed by said 2A6 and now they have to spawn the M1A1 which is even worse than that same 2A6. So they will probably think something along the lines of: "why would I even respawn when my tanks get even less capable against a 2A6."

 

Meanwhile if you reverse the situation a german player can still spawn in his/her 2A5 which is still a bit worse than the M1A2 but not nearly as much as M1A1 vs 2A6.

 

I picked US but it only get worse as you look at minor nations. So I think I understand why these 1 death leavers are doing it and I won't blame them even if they ruin my games.

Edited by __Renzo__
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, __Renzo__ said:

Which is also again caused by how strong germany currently is. Germany is strong -> which causes 1 death leavers -> Germany get's even stronger because of this -> even more leavers. 

 

Just picture your average US 10.7 player with a lineup that contains: M1A2, M1A1, ADATS, AH-64 and F-4.

 

They start with their M1A2, which is already outclassed by the 2A6. They do some stuff and get killed by said 2A6 and now they have to spawn the M1A1 which is even worse than that same 2A6. So they will probably think something along the lines of: "why would I even respawn when my tanks get even less capable against a 2A6."

 

Meanwhile if you reverse the situation a german player can still spawn in his/her 2A5 which is still a bit worse than the M1A2 but not nearly as much as M1A1 vs 2A6.

 

I picked US but it only get worse as you look at minor nations. So I think I understand why these 1 death leavers are doing it and I won't blame them even if they ruin my games.

I'm USA main so I know that.They should also get a new tank something like M1A2 SEP but I'm talking more about mentality.When there is no 2A6 it was the same case and you could see germany wih 65% win ratio while others had something around 50% or even less.2A6 just increased the advantage germany has but this is not something that happens 2 months ago.At this rate I highly doubt something will change if they get a new tank and I believe it will remain the same.

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, croatiankiller said:

I'm USA main so I know that.They should also get a new tank something like M1A2 SEP but I'm talking more about mentality.When there is no 2A6 it was the same case and you could see germany wih 65% win ratio while others had something around 50% or even less.2A6 just increased the advantage germany has but this is not something that happens 2 months ago.At this rate I highly doubt something will change if they get a new tank and I believe it will remain the same.

Yeah I think most of the damage is already done in the mentality aspect for a lot of players. And even if it isn't yet then it might be done by the time gaijin finally adds new vehicles for US, UK, Japan, China etc. 

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, __Renzo__ said:

Which is also again caused by how strong germany currently is. Germany is strong -> which causes 1 death leavers -> Germany get's even stronger because of this -> even more leavers. 

 

Just picture your average US 10.7 player with a lineup that contains: M1A2, M1A1, ADATS, AH-64 and F-4.

 

They start with their M1A2, which is already outclassed by the 2A6. They do some stuff and get killed by said 2A6 and now they have to spawn the M1A1 which is even worse than that same 2A6. So they will probably think something along the lines of: "why would I even respawn when my tanks get even less capable against a 2A6."

 

Meanwhile if you reverse the situation a german player can still spawn in his/her 2A5 which is still a bit worse than the M1A2 but not nearly as much as M1A1 vs 2A6.

 

I picked US but it only get worse as you look at minor nations. So I think I understand why these 1 death leavers are doing it and I won't blame them even if they ruin my games.

 

 

Now imagine the Brits

 

By the time you manage to make a 90 degree turn at the spawn point in your Challenger 2 and crawl out the spawn half your team is already dead and the battle is decided basically...thats is how you try to grind your way up to your best APFSDS to have even a chance to defeat the Leo 2A5 and 2A6...which again is only just a chance because even your top round is trash compared to theirs. your armor is crap compared to theirs and you are as mobile as a snail.

 

I don't know why but british APFSDS shots always feel like i shoot wet noodles...even if i pen or sideshot a Leo nothing freakin happens. Once is was waiting for a Leo he drove in front of me i shot him and the fuel tank caught my shot completely. which is like 50mm or armor

VKEHwEb.gif

 

Edited by MTom
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MTom said:

 

 

Now imagine the Brits

 

By the time you manage to make a 90 degree turn at the spawn point in your Challenger 2 and crawl out the spawn half your team is already dead and the battle is decided basically...thats is how you try to grind your way up to your best APFSDS to have even a chance to defeat the Leo 2A5 and 2A6...which again is only just a chance because even your top round is trash compared to theirs. your armor is crap compared to theirs and you are as mobile as a snail.

 

I don't know why but british APFSDS shots always feel like i shoot wet noodles...even if i pen or sideshot a Leo nothing freakin happens. Once is was waiting for a Leo he drove in front of me i shot him and the fuel tank caught my shot completely. which is like 50mm or armor

VKEHwEb.gif

 

Well brit tanks are in reality **** because they didn't upgrade them for a long time and they didn't care about it.

Even if they get a better round the result will be the same because they have no mobility.

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, croatiankiller said:

Well brit tanks are in reality **** because they didn't upgrade them for a long time and they didn't care about it.

Even if they get a better round the result will be the same because they have no mobility.

The Challenger 2 received multiple upgrades (extra ERA, extra NERA/chobham, remote weapons station, sights, communications...) since 2001 when Germany had its Leopard 2A6 entered service. Though most of the British upgrades do not make a difference in this game.

 

Most German Leopard 2A6 didn't even get ANY kind of upgrade until last year. They did not need to fight in urban environment so a single MG3 with no remote was all they had for rooftop. Leo2A6 was expecting to face Russian tanks, while CR2 was expecting to fight T-72 and people in mud hut. Different mission different gear.

Edited by Loongsheep
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, [email protected] said:

 

 

Really selling the Challenger 2 rn.

Weren't some folks within the British military pushing at one point earlier to just adopt the Leopard 2 to maintain commonality with most of NATO? Especially in the ammunition department. But national pride in building and maintaining their own domestic tank won out in the end? 

 

Not sure is this was actually the case...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Loongsheep said:

The Challenger 2 received multiple upgrades (extra ERA, extra NERA/chobham, remote weapons station, sights, communications...) since 2001 when Germany had its Leopard 2A6 entered service.

They didn't upgrade the gun and engine and they put even more armor and you have worse p/w ratio and at the end a bad tank.

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, croatiankiller said:

They didn't upgrade the gun and engine and they put even more armor and you have worse p/w ratio and at the end a bad tank.

They didn't upgrade the gun because upgrading the gun (which I presume you mean adopting either the L44/L55 of M256) because that in turn would require them to re-design the turret in order to facilitate proper ammo stowage. At that point you might as well just buy Leopard 2s'/M1's or develop a new tank entirely. Can't speak to the mobility thing though. My understanding is the CR2's is still considered satisfactory. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, AssaultPlazma said:

Weren't some folks within the British military pushing at one point earlier to just adopt the Leopard 2 to maintain commonality with most of NATO? Especially in the ammunition department. But national pride in building and maintaining their own domestic tank won out in the end?

The opposite. Because lack of national pride so people just say what they saw. You do not hear about that with many others - for example the US, M60A1 used by IDF has hydraulic fluid that burned crew to death. No huge uproar among the troops. Generals was concerned and made the fix/change. Also, no action = no complain in the case of Leo 2.

 

Leopard 2 was at one point (early 90s) cheaper than Challenger 2 so they were considered, manufacturing in UK was expensive due to labor union and stuff. That era saw huge surplus of relatively new NATO gear and many countries like Poland got a great deal. When they looked at building Leo 2 domestically in UK, it wasn't cheaper anymore.

 

27 minutes ago, croatiankiller said:

They didn't upgrade the gun and engine and they put even more armor and you have worse p/w ratio and at the end a bad tank.

 

24 minutes ago, AssaultPlazma said:

They didn't upgrade the gun because upgrading the gun (which I presume you mean adopting either the L44/L55 of M256) because that in turn would require them to re-design the turret in order to facilitate proper ammo stowage. At that point you might as well just buy Leopard 2s'/M1's or develop a new tank entirely. Can't speak to the mobility thing though. My understanding is the CR2's is still considered satisfactory. 

UK has withdrawn tanks from Germany. No longer are they facing a threat of direct armored assault. No need for huge penetration and high mobility.

 

Considering that their missions were about cruising around Iraqi towns at 20km/h, and that most targets could be deal with by a single HESH, that was not necessary.

They upgraded side and belly armor, added weapon station, IED jammer and stuff, same as the M1A2 with TUSK. Without these, a Leopard 2A6 in Germany service would have been quickly destroyed by IED, enhanced anti-tank mine, RPG-29 or Kornet.

 

Talking about reliability, the Leopard 2 is a garage queen in hot and humid Singapore/Thailand. My friend was responsible for fixing them during his national service and it was anything but reliable.

Edited by Loongsheep
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Loongsheep said:

Considering that their missions were about cruising around Iraqi towns at 20km/h, and that most targets could be deal with by a single HESH, that was not necessary.

They upgraded side and belly armor, added weapon station, IED jammer and stuff, same as the M1A2 with TUSK. Without these, a Leopard 2A6 in Germany service would have been quickly destroyed by IED, enhanced anti-tank mine, RPG-29 or Kornet.

Canadian ones who were upgraded 2A6 did suffer an IED and no casualties. quote:"My crew stumbled upon an IED (improvised explosive device) and made history as the first (crew) to test the (Leopard 2A6) M-packet. It worked as it should." 

They just repaired him and he was put back in service.

Edited by croatiankiller
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, croatiankiller said:

Canadian ones who were upgraded 2A6 did suffer an IED and no casualties. quote:"My crew stumbled upon an IED (improvised explosive device) and made history as the first (crew) to test the (Leopard 2A6) M-packet. It worked as it should." 

They just repaired him and he was put back in service.

It was installed as "M" package because a Danish one hit a IED earlier and got the driver killed!:016:

That is exactly the case I included, also driver lacked a suspended seat that absorbs shock. None of Germany's own Leopard 2 got the belly armor installed, they are still vulnerable.

Edited by Loongsheep
  • Confused 1
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Loongsheep said:

It was installed as "M" package because a Danish one hit a IED earlier and got the driver killed!:016:

That is exactly the case I included, also driver lacked a suspended seat that absorbs shock. None of Germany's own Leopard 2 got the belly armor installed, they are still vulnerable.

But the same thing would apply to any tank if he got hit by IED.

Germany can install it but there is no need for that.They do not engage in low-intensity conflicts so current upgrade is sufficient.

Danish soldier got killed year after canadian leo got hit not another way around.

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, croatiankiller said:

But the same thing would apply to any tank if he got hit by IED.

HAHAHA no:lol2:

 

Leopard 2 is literally the only common NATO 3rd gen without a suspended "lie-down" driver seat.

Abrams and Challengers have them from the start, UK invented that with the Chieftain.

 

This is the difference between combat-proven and unproven tanks.

  • Confused 1
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Loongsheep said:

HAHAHA no:lol2:

 

Leopard 2 is literally the only common NATO 3rd gen without a suspended "lie-down" driver seat.

Abrams and Challengers have them from the start, UK invented that with the Chieftain.

 

This is the difference between combat-proven and unproven tanks.

but its combat proven

Spoiler

 

 

but for real the tank is combat proven not exactly by germany but other nations that use it

also tanks get upgrades mostly for Theaters where they propalby get used so its understandable that the danish did not use the extra protection for mines etc 

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...