yes
1 Like
+1
+1 more options for lineups
As much as I’d like to see more unique additions, I find an issue with stating a country can’t have more MBTs because you find it “tiring” any nothing else. No logic at all. It’s a bit messed up.
1 Like
The TVM MAX would effectively be a Strv 122, so it wouldn’t really fit a BR any lower than BR 12.3 to 12.7
Germany has many Leopard 2A4 modifications that could squeeze into the 11.0 to 12.0 bracket, but there’s no meaningful lineup to begin with, so it’s a bit unnecessary unless they add a bunch back-to-back.
A 122 with DM33, DM43 at best. I don’t think that’s a problem for 12.0
Note that the comment you replied to was from 2024 when 12.0 was the top BR
It’s the exact same tank to 122. 🤷♀️It would be 12.7 lmao I don’t think it would be given worse ammos
The TVM program ended in 1992. At the time DM33 was the most modern round in service, and was the round used during those Swedish trials. In fact firepower was the one area where the Leo was found to be outmatched by the other competitors. DM43 was developed alongside the TVM but of course not in service. DM53 wouldn’t exist until the late 90s, and it was developed in response to the failings of DM33 during that same Swedish trial.
1 Like
The Leopard 2A7 and Strv122 don’t use DM53 IRL either. Shells are picked for balance at top tier.
“It needs DM53 because it’s going to be 12.7 and it needs to be 12.7 because it’s going to have DM53” is that about right?
It has to be top tier because the normal Leopard 2A5 is 12.3, and the TVM MAX is a heavily upgraded and modified 2A4 model that surpasses the base Leopard 2A5.
Even if you gave it DM43, it would still be a 12.7 because it’s better than all German 12.3 tanks and most other nations’ 12.7 MBTs.
Only the case if your sole criterion for an MBT’s effectiveness is its armour. Which if that’s the case get the Maus to 9.7 immediately! It’s slower and considerably less powerfully-armed than the 2A5. It’s worse in every regard to the 122A.
Tell me deadass, with a straight face, that the TVM MAX should be lower in BR than the Ariete AMV, while the 122A, based on the TVM MAX, is 12.7.
You dead ass just said the TVM, with DM43 mind you, should be the same BR as the 2A7V
Should you want to talk about the Ariete’s BR go for it, but trying to strawman me isn’t a particularly effective argument.
Tell me, with a straight face, that the TVM on which the 122A is based, should be the same BR as the 122B+ and PLSS.
The TVM MAX will not be using DM43 unless serious BR decompressions are made, which I speak about regularly needing to be done. I have several posts about it, in fact.
Please explain where I distorted your argument about BR placement by using the Ariete to show why it shouldn’t be a lower BR. You have no idea what a straw man means if you claim that to be one. It’s a rational comparison as to why it shouldn’t be a lower BR.
In War Thunder, they are identical in protection and firepower. The TVM MAX is functionally a 12.7 Strv122A.
Even if you gave it DM43, it would still be better at 12.3 in the current meta than numerous other vehicles such as the two Oplots, Ariete, Challenger 2E, and the Merkava Siman 4s.
The only physically possible way to balance this tank with the current BR cap of 12.7 is to give it DM53 and make it the same BR as the 122A it’s identical to. That’s the state War Thunder is in right now, so even though it shouldn’t be the same BR as a Leopard 2A7V, it has to be for Balance.
You’re right. It should be DM33.
You’re right, false equivalency is the more appropriate term. You’re taking an outlier of an overtiered vehicle and trying to make it seem like I’m saying the TVM is worse than it. Which it is, to be clear, unless you were to give the TVM fictional ammunition.
No, you could quite easily make it 12.0 with DM33 as I’ve been saying. If you think it’s impossible to add the vehicle without fictionalizing it’s armament, you can always just say no and leave it at that.
Mind linking one of these? In the last year it seems your posts have been dominated by “Britain suffers” and “Gaijin hates Israel” which are pretty telling. You can’t just pull out “I like decompression :)” to try to establish some sort of moral high ground. For that matter, as we’ve established, the adjustment of BRs of other vehicles is outside the scope of discussing this one.
You are not getting a Strv122’s durability at 12.0, nor do you even have a lineup to use it at 12.0.
Aside from this being obvious Ad Hominem, I have one post on the Challenger. I barely play Britain. Furthermore, one of my first statements EVER on the forum was asking for decompression in a post. I regularly reiterate that I would like ground to be decompressed somewhere between 13.0, in the short term, and 15.0, in the long term, during discussions outside my own topics.
Mostly from 2024 and several of these are not decompression posts but rather “Russian bias” and “Israel suffers”. Take a look at your say 20 most recent topics and consider.
But this isn’t going anywhere. I’m clearly not convincing you and you certainly aren’t convincing me, and third parties aren’t getting anything new out of the discussion at this point. So I’ll just head to a summary and closing remarks and leave it there.
I believe the TVM min/max would be excellent additions for 11.7/12.0 with DM33 or 12.0/12.3 with DM43. No, I don’t believe they would be overpowered by armour alone. Yes, I am aware of the presence of the similar but superior Strv 122s at 12.7. No, I don’t think the TVM should be 12.7 with DM43. And I don’t believe they should be added at any BR with DM53, a shell which didn’t exist at the same time as the vehicle.
“How dare you care about tanks you like and the overall health of the game”
Great response with Ad Hominem and showing that you don’t actually understand you aren’t allowed to make duplicate topics.
Not that you read anything other than a glance in those topics anyway. If you did, you’d notice I mention the Leopards as my primary example for BR compression in my posts, which you’re complaining about here and saying I don’t care about. Great attempt at a goal shift, by the way.
Furthermore, while the Merkava is my favorite MBT, I have advocated for better treatment of the Challengers, Ariete, Leclerc, and Type 10 for years now as well, which you also attacked me for.
Simply put, attacking me for liking to play my favorite MBT and hoping it’s bug-fixed is doing nothing for your case.
Also, adding another edit to reinforce the “your recent topics” isn’t going to help you. You cannot make duplicate posts as yourself or other people. When I make a balanced topic, it has to be exceptionally different than one that already exists. That’s why most of them are from years ago, when this forum was still new. I have had several topics shut down because of this issue.
Of course you aren’t convincing me. You’re attacking what I like to play, accusing me of not caring about balance, and stating you want a Strv122 at 12.0. That’s a hilariously awful idea, even if you give it DM33.
I absolutely want the TVM MAX in War Thunder as well, but you can’t just expect to give a top-tier tank a terrible round and put it nearly a whole BR lower. There are other factors to consider besides just penetration. Armor is the biggest contributing factor in War Thunder at high tier, and both DM33 and DM43 will kill every single MBT in War Thunder if you aim properly.
But I seriously have to ask what you expect to happen if a TVM MAX goes hulldown with 2A7V/122s armor at 11.7 and 12.0? I have a 68% win rate and a 2KD in the 2A7V at 12.7 because of that ridiculous armor protection prior to the new SPAA handling the KH38s better, and I was using DM33 for that back before it got DM43 stock. What you’re requesting is more absurd than you realize.
1 Like
Holy snail that is some crazy stuff how much beer did the designers have before they designed the panzerkampfwagen 200 and EGS???
+1 for the Leo 2 TVM
2 Likes