Not in an urban labyrinth = wide open apparently
Says who? MOST maps you can still figthing at longer ranges, even after the changes, in those you still have the advantage of the better round with the rangefinder
Huertgen, Middle East, Seversk-13, 38th Parallel, Alaska, Iberian Castle, Campania, Japan, Vietnam, Test Site, and North Holland are all short range maps. Finland, Tunisia, Golden Quarry, Normandy, and Spaceport have places where you can snipe, but very heavily encourage or focus on CQC fighting, and often times you won’t even have the option of fighting at long range. Just because something isn’t an outright city map (which several of those are) doesn’t mean it’s long range. That makes 34 out of 43 maps short ranged, with less than a fourth of the maps in the game being anywhere near what you’d call a sniping map that favours something like the Leopard 1, or, for that matter, favours any tank that’s designed explicitly for the type of long-range combat that’s expected of tanks in real life.
If two tanks crest a hill to shoot each other at the same time, who do you think gets the shot off first? The guy with the rangefinder who has to wait for his gun to stop bucking up and down, or the guy with the stabiliser who can just shoot and reverse, and whether he hits or not gets out before the first guy even gets the shot off?
It id much faster and have a larger explosive mass, which btw the being faster also helps you at targetting those fast lights tanks that youre constantly complaining as you will need to lead way less.
I don’t know what game you’re playing, but leading a light tank is almost never the problem with killing one.
youre acting like a mx 800 can melt you down you from the front, you can kill him way more easily than he does, and if he gets in to your flank then thats on you, again you are acting like there is no counterplay to fast ifv unless you have armor and thats no the case, youre just being hyperbolic for the sake of argument.
It very demonstrably can melt you from the front, if you’re in a Leopard. So can essentially every autocannon at that BR against the Leopard 1. It is not that there is not counter play, it is that you are so heavily outmatched and have such a smaller margin of error than the light tank (who can typically afford to miss much more than you can, and doesn’t need to worry about accuracy, even if it isn’t stabilised). Further, I did not argue that mobility was not an advantage; in several places I mention it as helping. My point is that, with the factors in place and without a stabiliser, the mobility is not enough to “make” the tank, despite what a lot of people seem to think.
literally all of the other have 11.3 km/h or less
Any reverse gear over 7-8 km/h is enough for most situations; more is better and can make a big difference, but meeting that baseline level of reverse speed is the important thing. 11 km/h reverse is plenty.
Simply dont play the leopard as a light tank, first you dont need to as you do have the penetration to engage targets from the front and second the leopard works better at longer ranges.
You might have the firepower to engage targets from the front, but so do literally all other medium tanks at this BR, and they have enough armour to give them a margin of error. In the Leo 1, if you miss an important component, you are dead. Other tanks still have a chance to bounce or dampen some of the damage, but literally everything can kill you from the front in the Leo 1, even the XM800T. It’s like saying a Stuart is perfectly balanced at 8.0 because it can kill other light vehicles, is fast, and dies just as quickly to them as they do to it. Just because there’s counterplay doesn’t mean it’s balanced enough to stay in the same BR.
1 Like
Again, almost all of those maps can be played at longer ranges, if you dont what to play closer go to the caps that allows you yo do that.
First you can use the rangefinder when youre still in cover and preset it, which would give you a massive advatage in that situation, second there are plenty of 8.0 without stinilizer, most vehicles at 8.0 doesnt have them either.
So youre telling me that there is no difference between shooting at a target moving at 60 kmh 600m away with a round that goes at 1100m/s than using one that goes at 800m/s, there is quite a difference in the lead and drop, faster round are inheritly easier to hit.
Almost all of your front is protected agaisnt it, the leopard doesnt have the protection lf an ikv 91, they have to either spam enough, or carefully aim to the two spots at the corners on the gun mantlets everything else is protected agaisnt an xm 800t
It isnt, there is a huge difference between having 7km/h than 25, one allows you have doest allows you much margin of error while the other does not.
Against the round of a leopard those tank with the same fire power havd the exact same margin of error as the extra armor does not matter when youre getting shot at by heat or apds, they have areguably less as they cant go go back into cover nearly as fast if they they miss an important component.
If the bt7, HO-I or M14/41 also were 8.0, then it would be, but they are not, and a leopard is not an stuart, again most of 8.0 are in fact comparable to the loepard and just because they have a slightly better armor doesnt make them better, specially when that armor does not protects you against your peers.
And as a reminder many of those tanks with “better” armor can still die by autocanons they are not inmune to them either
1 Like
Why are you assuming that you will only face 8.0s?
1 Like
Is the thing that youre going to face the most…
No, you’ll most likely face 9.0s and 8.7s most of the time
No, you face 8.0s most of the time even when you face 9.0 and 8.7 you will still face other 8.0
1 Like
In this case, you are entirely mistaken. The War Thunder matchmaker, last I checked, is widely known to be uneven in its distribution, and at 8.0 uptiers are far more common than at-tier or downtier gameplay.
This is bad enough on its own, but the problem is inflated in that there is a large technology gap between 8.0 and 9.0. Putting aside the matter of stabilisers and laser rangefinders at 8.0 itself, they become exponentially more common at 8.3 and 8.7, which is almost entirely what you see when playing the Leopard 1.
Thus far we have mostly only discussed 8.0 vs 8.0 gameplay, but if we’re going to start talking about the Leopard 1 facing uptiers, all previous points made about superior technology being an exception to the rule go out the window. The Leopard 1, without debate, fares much worse in uptiers than its opponents do against it when it is downtiered, because the technology gap from 7.0 to 8.0 is just better gun, better mobilty, better armour, as usual (with the Leopard 1 lacking the armour aspect, which is the most impactful when discussing downtiers). The technology gap from 8.0-9.0 is laser rangefinders, APFSDS, thermals, stabilisers, and better gun, better mobility, and somewhat better armour, with many tanks getting this jump in technology just one BR step above the Leopard 1.
1 Like
Buddy even under an uneven distibution you will keep seeing more vehicles of your br on average as even when you face higher or lower br you keeps seeing those vehicles as enemies on the enemy team keeps having 8.0 players.
And it is pretty irrelevant to compare an 9.0 with a 8.0 to begin with as you will always be worse, this is why you compare them with the other 8.0 as it is a far more accurate comaparation as they are afterall the same BR and for the 10th time, whitout a debate, the leopard isnt any worse compared to most 8.0s so unless all the others that are equal or worse than the leopard goes down aswell, there is no reason for the latter to go down by itself.
Aside form the of 40 the leopard does not do any worse than any 8.0… you actually do much better than a m60 or a t54 since their “armor advantage” is even more meaningless while their worse mobility makes them fare way worse against the more mobile 9.0, in this case the leopard while the leopard having a better mobility, can still keep up with them.
The technology gap is just as bad with pretty much all vehicles in or is some instances even worse than the leopard at 8.0, again how is something like a t54 or an m60 less impacted on this technology gap than a leopard, if anything those are even more impacted that the leopard due to the worse mobility.
Also 9.0 isnt nearly as popular as you pretend to be, as only china as a decent 9.0 line up and many of those get drawn in the much more popular 9.3.
1 Like
Actual skill issue
1 Like
It looks like all of his arguments regarding Leopard I being weak at 8.0 can be transferred to most other 8.0s, which at the end means we need decompression. Only moving Leopard I down would be a hilariously dumb move.
7 Likes
which at the end means we need decompression
This is the core of it. I will note that I made a fair few more points than just the technology gap, that was just my last post; before that I was comparing the Leo to other 8.0s rather than to the full 8.0-9.0 bracket. I do think the Leo is in a bit of a rougher spot than a lot of the other 8.0s, especially considering there aren’t many alternatives to it at that BR, but frankly most balancing problems in this game would be best solved with decompression, whether by stretching out the BRs or making the matchmaker ±7 instead of ±1.0
1 Like
I’ll list some common 8.0s with their pros/cons when compared to Leopard 1.
M60’s cons: mobility, optics
M60’s pros: armor
T-54’s cons: mobility, gun handling, gun depression, reload speed, optics, only two “butt smokes”, no rangefinder
T-54’s pros: armor and APHE
Vickers’ cons: mobility, no HEAT, no rangefinder
Vickers’ pros: reload speed, stabilizer
Type 59’s cons: same as T-54 + no smokes
Type 59’s pros: vertical stabilizer
Type 69’s cons: same as Type 59
Type 69’s pros: stabilizer and LRF
OF-40’s cons: none
OF-40’s pros: LRF
AMX-30’s cons: no APDS, worse HEAT
AMX-30’s pros: 20mm autocannon, slightly better mobility
Strv 101’s cons: mobility, no HEAT
Strv 101’s pros: stabilizer, armor
It’s clear that Leopard 1 can hold it’s own against many 8.0s and is far from being the worst off there.
(+) Reverse Speed and turret traverse
1 Like
Thanks for pointing that out.
Thanks.
With all that said, Leopard 1 surely isn’t the worst 8.0 out there and deserves to stay at that BR. Decompression is needed though.
3 Likes
M60’s cons: mobility, optics
M60’s pros: armor
x8.0 is more than enough for most scenarios. I only ever use the extra magnification on the Leopard 1 when shooting on the other side of a large map, like Maginot. If they’re even just halfway across the map I use the x8.0 zoom. The M60 also has an 8.3 variant with a stabiliser; I’ll speak more on that at the end of this message.
T-54’s cons: mobility, gun handling, gun depression, reload speed, optics, only two “butt smokes”, no rangefinder
T-54’s pros: armor and APHE
This is probably an example of something that, if the Leopard 1 was lowered to 7.7, would be lowered with it. That said, you have the option of skipping it entirely and moving straight to the T-55 at 8.3, which has a stabiliser, APFSDS, and engine smoke.
Vickers’ cons: mobility, no HEAT, no rangefinder
Vickers’ pros: reload speed, stabilizer
My only note on this is that it has, at a glance, weaker armour than a lot of these examples, though the turret is a bit stronger than the Leo’s. As to the HEAT, with the damage of HEAT being what it is, it’s not really a disadvantage to lack it if you have decent APDS as an option; I’d say it’s mostly a matter of preference at this point (I prefer the APDS, but it’s honestly more picking your poison than anything).
Type 59’s cons: same as T-54 + no smokes
Type 59’s pros: vertical stabilizer
Type 69’s cons: same as Type 59
Type 69’s pros: stabilizer and LRF
The Type 59, again, can be easily skipped, in this case either for the Type 69 (which also optionally has a low-pen APFSDS round) or for an 8.3 tank with APFSDS, ERA, and LRF (though no stabiliser). I will also mention the M41D (which is either 7.7 or 8.0, it’s showing me different things between the preview and the tech tree screens), which has comparable speed and armour to the Leopard 1, but with optional low-pen APFSDS, Thermals, and LRF.
OF-40’s cons: none
OF-40’s pros: LRF
As far as I can tell this is pretty comparable to the Leopard 1, aside from the LRF and a bit of extra spaced armour on the side of the turret; otherwise the armour is probably similar to the Leo’s in practice.
AMX-30’s cons: no APDS, worse HEAT
AMX-30’s pros: 20mm autocannon, slightly better mobility
This also has better armour than the Leo. In practice, probably similar, with a bit less ability against other tanks but notably less vulnerable to autocannons and light tanks. In this case the next tank up is an 8.7 with LRF, Thermals, and APFSDS. If you want to you can also try and get the MARS-15 with APFSDS, LRF, and a fast reload.
Strv 101’s cons: mobility, no HEAT
Strv 101’s pros: stabilizer, armor
To repeat from earlier, lacking HEAT when you still have decent APDS is mostly just lacking an option that you may or may not prefer.
To explain why I mention 8.3s, one of the big problems for Germany at this BR is that most other countries have options they can relatively quickly jump to at 8.3 or 8.7 that have very large jumps in capability; the next jump up from the Leopard 1 is the Leopard A1A1 at 9.0, which has has APFSDS and a stabiliser, but no Thermals or LRF, which makes it good, but comparable to some 8.7s, and is otherwise the same as the Leopard 1, to my knowledge.
As it is, the best option for Germany (and the one I have taken) is to struggle through using the Leopard 1 and Marder to get to the TAMs, which are just better in every way than the Leopards until you reach the Leopard 2A4. This involves several more researches to get to the point of having a stabiliser than most other countries need to suffer through.
It isn’t a matter of the Leopard 1 being able to fight 8.0s, it’s a matter of it being balanced against them. Most tanks can fight something .3 or .7 above them; the argument in this discussion has been moving the Leopard 1 down to 7.7, where it would still face many 8.0s, but would be a bit more balanced without causing too much grief in downtiers (as it does still lack armour, so it doesn’t have the same problem with lowering the BR of a heavy tank).
I should also note that in a few points in this post I mention low-pen APFSDS as a potential advantage. This is under the assumption that it does more damage than HEATFS or APDS; if this is not the case, then consider that point null.
Buddy just because you can skip a tank or the next tank is better, doesnt mean that the leopard is worse than the other 8.0
Did you forget that there are more tanks in the german tt than the leopard 1 and leopard 1a1? You have the m48 at 8.3 and the JagPz a2 at 8.7 so all of your argument that you can skip x or y vehice also applies to the leopard.
Buddy just because you can skip a tank or the next tank is better, doesnt mean that the leopard is worse than the other 8.0
I maintain that the Leopard 1 is worse enough than other 8.0s to be downtiered, and that any tank as bad or worse than the Leopard 1 should also be taken down to 7.7. I mention that other countries can skip those tanks to show that the Leopard 1 being in a bad spot is a bigger problem for Germany than it is for them.
Did you forget that there are more tanks in the german tt than the leopard 1 and leopard 1a1? You have the m48 at 8.3 and the JagPz a2 at 8.7 so all of your argument that you can skip x or y vehice also applies to the leopard.
M48 at 8.3 is worse than the Leopard, its only advantage in comparison is APFSDS and enough armour to protect against autocannons, and the JagPz A2 is unstabilised (admittedly its one point of weakness, but not a small one at 8.7) and, crucially, you unlock it after the TAM. There is no quick jump from 8.0 to an 8.3 or 8.7 tank that fills the gaps in the Leopard’s capabilities, because everything that could is either locked behind a new rank (necessitating multiple researches and greater rp investment, all using the Leopard 1 or its lacking alternatives) or occurs after the problem is already solved in the German tree, and well after it’s forgotten in another tree.
If you want to see an example of a .3 BR step, the RU 251 is at 7.3 and plays like an early Leopard 1, the Leopard 1 at 7.7 would have a bit more pen and a rangefinder in comparison to it.
I have exams to do, so my replies, if I feel they are necessary, will be slower than average, as warning.