Hello there, been meaning to ask, which batch, between batches 5-8, is the current in-game german leopard 2a4, netherland 2a4, hungarian 2a4, finnish 2a4, swedish strv121, supposed to represent ?
Shouldn’t there be a distinction between leopard 2a4(b), and leopard 2a4(c), as in they are supposed to be 2 separate vehicles(the c tech version being batcher 6-8), with 2 different armour configs and perhaps dm33 for the later version, with 2 of them sitting at 2 different brs ?
There is also the question of the even earlier batches, of leopard 2a1 and leopard 2a3, they aren’t present in the game beacuse of certain reasons that have been mentioned and i’ve simply not heard of or ?
I feel like the jump from leo1 to straight up 2a4 is a bit too quick, and that realistically speaking, it should go somewhere like Leopard 2a1-leopard 2a3 - leopard 2a4(b) - leopard 2a4(c), no ?
It’s some more vehicles to play for different line ups at different brs, with a progression of dm13-dm23-dm33, between the variants, and sometimes armour and/or sights changes
There’s not all that much different regarding the initial versions up to the Leopard 2A4, that’s why they’re not in-game if I had to hazard a guess.
Leopard 2A4 (C technologie) /w DM33 is something that should’ve been added 8 years ago.
No idea why it still isn’t here, despite the US having the IPM1 and M1A1 as counterparts, Japan having the Type 90, Russia having the T-80U, Britain having the Challenger 2, etc. etc.
Yet Germany still can’t get a tech tree MBT at around 11.3 - 11.7 for some strange reason.
For some reason, it also feels like the Leopard variants operated by countries other than Germany are often represented in a better state than the Leopards in the German tech tree itself.
This is especially strange when Germany is the country that originally developed the Leopard 2. Instead of accurately representing the different production batches, armor packages and historical configurations, we often end up with foreign Leopard variants receiving better equipment or protection, while the German versions remain artificially limited.
For some reason, it feels like almost every Leopard in the game is being modernized or modified in ways that don’t accurately reflect reality, while at the same time being artificially weakened. Whenever these issues are brought up, the answer often seems to be “balance” or some other gameplay-related reason.
Sometimes I honestly wonder whether War Thunder is really trying to represent realistic vehicles, or whether the “realistic” aspect is simply being used as a selling point while historical and technical accuracy is sacrificed whenever it is inconvenient for balance.
This is also one of the things that has gradually reduced my motivation to play the game and support it financially. If vehicles are intentionally made weaker or less accurate than their real-life counterparts for balance reasons, it becomes difficult to see War Thunder as a truly realistic combat simulator.
Totally agree. Earlier Leopard 2 variants would still be welcomed though. I genuinely would even welcome a copy and paste Leo 2A4 (Pz 87 for example, don’t know if it’s C- or D-Tech though) by now, as I can only field a singular true 10.7 in my German lineup (two if I decide to use a backup.) as I don’t own the premium version, whereas I can field up to three for my Swedish lineup.
I’m not sure at what BR I’d place the earlier Leo 2 modifications, though if I had the choice I’d add a copy and paste at 10.7 (B-Tech), B-Tech with DM-33 at 11.0 (or 11.3) , C-Tech with DM-33 at 11.3 (or 11.7).
Maybe even add some more as event vehicles, or through the aforementioned Swiss sub tree, (Pz 87 WE with Pfeil Pat 98 LSP comes to mind), either at 11.7 (C1 Ariete equivalent) or 12.0 due to its better speed and armor - this would also finally allow a lineup for the Canadian Leo2A4M at its own BR.
I agree with this. I think adding the earlier Leopard 2 variants and separating the different 2A4 production batches would be a much better approach for the German tech tree.
Instead of having one Leopard 2A4 represent completely different production standards, we could have the B-Tech and C-Tech versions as separate vehicles, with their respective armor configurations and ammunition at appropriate BRs.
It would also make the progression of the German Leopard line feel much more natural: Leopard 2A1 → 2A3 → 2A4 B-Tech → 2A4 C-Tech → later modernized variants.
I think this would be better for both historical accuracy and game balance. Rather than artificially limiting a vehicle because of its BR, different historical configurations could simply occupy different BRs.
I would definitely rather have more historically accurate Leopard variants with different BRs than have one vehicle trying to represent several different configurations.
^ This means our ingame vehicle is depicted in a >1994 configuration.
As such all upgrades made to every Leoapard 2 (regardless of production-batch) made until then should be represented.
Well, i am happy to hear that, i think a more natural progression of early Leo 2 variants, would be very nice indeed, maybe i’ll do a more proper suggestion, somewhere down the line)
