Despite having 481 mm of protection, the 2A7V can be easily penetrated—for instance, around the commander’s and loader’s stations. Furthermore, although the gun mantlet of the 2A7HU is protected by 250 mm of armor, the gun itself and the breech/cradle mechanism can still be disabled. Is the armor modeling of the 2A7V flawed? Could you explain why this is the case?
Yes it’s flawed, Germany suffers, all that kind of stuff. In actually no, it’s not flawed, is that composite armor analysis will always behave strangely in comparison to just steel, there’s a difference in that two types of armor, even if you had 100 mm of steel and 100 mm of composite armor (100 mm of composite armor ≠ 100 mm of effective composite armor) there will be always difference in armor effectiveness. On top of that you’re basing off your argument from the armor analysis, which can be accurate, but I don’t think so, also the armor indicator placement in the cannon barrel. Don’t you think that this will influenciate the final armor value that’s shown?
For example; the area between the gunner sight and the cannon barrel is clearly green:
But ends up recieving no damage at all, because composite armor ≠ steel armor, and I doubt that Gaijin has updated the armor map to properly show armor coverage for vehicles that has composite armor. So no, Leopard 2A7V armor is not flawed as it is now, it’s a very effective main battle tank, the problem is that the armour analysis can decieve anyone that doesn’t know of its flaws pretty easily.
2 Likes
imo the german 2a7v is actually better than the 2a7hu in terms of concealment, especially in a br where miliseconds matters, can’t reliably play hull down with the 2a7hu since the big ass machinegun pops up every time you peek, which result in enemies already anticipate and pre-aim at your direction lol
and the commanders sight on the 2a7HU can barely be used cause of the big canvas thingy in front of it
1 Like