Any data support?
If no data support Challenger 3 is -10 angle . then is should be nerf
The 2A8 and 2A7V have direct manufacturer data stating -7.4 to +17.4 gun angles are correct.
The Challenger 1 and 2 both state -10/+20, with there being no indication the Challenger 3 is different.
So That is no data support Challenger 3 have -10 angle.But have data show L55A1 is -7.4
A gun itself cannot have vertical limits, that makes no sense.
It has those limits when installed specifically into the Leopard 2A7/2A8, because of how the tank is designed.
Is it going to get lws
Design limitations? Multiple users have already pointed out that this constraint has already been resolved, and it is clearly reflected in the 3D model created by Gaijin.
Not available for now
where? The brochure? That’s nonsense because the weight and ammo capacity are also wrong there
2 Likes
It is primary documentation on the vehicle by KNDS, who made the 2A8, if you think it’s wrong bring it up with them
How?
All I wanted was the hull armour buff to be on par with 122 or better but these bs nerfs with the depression and missing Lws and roof armour/ mg just be making it worse man. Gaijin just having a laugh with the diabolical amount of rage bait they have been letting out lately
Isn’t it obvious at a glance just by looking at the hull? Where on earth is there anything restricting the gun’s depression?
It is likely an internal change to the vehicle.
If we take official KNDS product documentation and procurement contracts as the primary sources for the Leopard 2A8, we must consider the vehicle’s technical specifications in their entirety; we cannot simply cherry-pick a single performance metric—such as turret traverse speed—to justify “nerfing” the vehicle. Let us examine the requirements set forth by military specifications for the 2A8 hull:
- Evidence of Mass and Armor Efficiency: While KNDS’s commercial brochures cite a base delivery weight of 64.3 tons, official procurement and delivery contracts with the German Bundeswehr and the Norwegian NDMA specify a final combat weight of exactly 69.5 tons. This significant 5.2-ton difference is accounted for by the “D-Tech” next-generation modular composite armor systems, as well as enhanced hull and mine protection equipment integrated into the vehicle.
- Declassified Armor Performance (RHA Equivalency): According to armor tests conducted by the Swedish FMV for an upgraded Leopard 2 chassis—data which has been made public—this composite technology provides kinetic protection equivalent to 800 mm–950 mm of RHA (Rolled Homogeneous Armor) at the front, and protection exceeding 1300 mm of RHA equivalency against chemical energy (HEAT/ATGM) threats. Given that KNDS has integrated even heavier “D-Tech” modules into the 69.5-ton 2A8 configuration, it is mathematically and physically impossible for its in-game armor effectiveness to be lower than that of earlier models like the Strv 122 or 2A7V. Gaijin cannot legitimately disregard the physical mass and volume added to these armor profiles.
- L55A1 Gun and DM73/DM11 Ammunition Synergy: Weapon integration documentation from KNDS and Rheinmetall confirms that the L55A1 high-pressure smoothbore gun is designed to fire the DM73 APFSDS (armor-piercing) round—which utilizes high chamber pressure—as well as the programmable DM11 HE-FRAG (high-explosive fragmentation/air-burst) round. This synergy provides a genuine tactical penetration capability exceeding 800 mm at standard combat ranges. While KNDS data may be cited regarding mechanical upgrade limits, one cannot simply dismiss the performance of the high-pressure ammunition for which the gun module was explicitly designed.
- Integrated EuroTrophy and 20 kW APU Architecture: Official KNDS defense exhibition specifications indicate that the 2A8 features a fully networked EuroTrophy Active Protection System (APS) integrated with a digitized Battle Management System (BMS), enabling automatic target detection and counter-fire capabilities for target engagement. Furthermore, military specification manuals indicate the use of a 20 kW Steyr M12 Auxiliary Power Unit (APU), designed to operate fully electric turret drives and stabilization systems at maximum speed—even during silent watch (with the engine off).
While actively disregarding the precise armor mass, advanced ammunition specifications, and electronic architectures—as defined by KNDS itself—you are instead citing a generalized 360-degree clearance limit from a public marketing PDF, which is intended to account for forward-facing depression constraints.
8 Likes
Since the addition of 2a7v 3 year ago gaijin only ever acted on a “nerf” fix to leopard 2, fcs limitation while no other tank have, one of the first with turret basket, the only tank family(with chally 3TD as honorable mention) with nato 120mm that have 6s reload
While report on “buff” fix like 2a7v(and now 2a8) should have D-tech armor, 2a7v(and 2a8) underperforming ufp addon against KE, the many armor hole on 2a7v(and 2a8) onky get accepted and ignored for 3 year and still counting, not to mention also the promised leopard 2 dm rework that still haven’t happened
Its like gaijin really hate leopard 2 or something
2 Likes
The mass in the brochure excludes APS and mine protection, which are listed as optional, therefore this doesn’t reflect the mass of the vehicle we have ingame.
No it doesn’t, the Swedish trials armour was not that effective. The D-Tech armour provided 600-650mm of KE. If the armour of the 2A8 has been upgraded since those trials, there isn’t any public data on the exact armour values.
The armour values for the Leopard 2s ingame mostly accurately reflect the Swedish trials armour values.
I think it would be fair for Gaijin to add DM73 if they want, but they don’t seem to think it would provide much benefit.
The Leopard 2A8 already has DM11 programmable ammunition ingame.
Not entirely sure what you mean, the vehicle already has this ingame.
Because it wouldn’t. This is cope
Stop trying to deflect the attention to historical Swedish trials to avoid the actual German Bundeswehr specifications. We are discussing the German Leopard 2A7V and 2A8 variants here, and your own attached document completely backfires on you:
- The ‘GER - NO DATA POINTS’ Fact: Look closely at the very secret document you just posted. For the German armor solution (GER line), it explicitly states ‘NO DATA POINTS’. The columns for the German kinetic and chemical protection values are entirely empty because the German Ministry of Defence kept them classified. You cannot use a blank row with missing data to pretend you have proven the armor values of 2020s modern German 2A7V and 2A8 tanks.
- The Brochure Paradox Remains Unanswered: You admitted that the KNDS marketing brochure weight (64.3 tonnes) is incorrect because it ‘excludes essential operational sub-systems like the APS’. If that commercial pamphlet is factually incomplete and fails to accurately reflect the true mass and components of the production vehicles we have in-game (which weigh 69.5 tonnes in official Bundeswehr procurement contracts), it cannot be trusted as an absolute primary source for the forward firing arc gun depression either. You cannot cherry-pick a commercial leaflet’s numbers to enforce a nerf while admitting the document gets the vehicle’s baseline configuration wrong.
- German Hull Geometry and Firing Arc: The 2A7V and 2A8 share the identical baseline structural frame and L55A1 breech placement forward. The -7.4° in the public leaflet is a 360-degree system clearance safety limit to prevent clipping during high-speed turret rotation over the rear deck or remote weapon stations. Over the forward 180-degree firing arc, the physical hull geometry allows the full -9° depression.
needs to stop relying on incomplete commercial marketing brochures and empty ‘No Data’ rows, and instead model the German 2A7V and 2A8 according to their actual physical hull clearance and forward structural reality.
7 Likes
Nerfed reload, nerfed armor scheme, nerfed gun depression over the deck, now general nerfed gun depression. It’s slowly becoming absurd. At this rate the Leo 2s are basically quite bad in most regards.
6 Likes
And its still better than all other mbts it faces