It is really the Swedish Armour trials all over again
Missing Lws for Germany wasn’t enough so they nerfed the depression even more than it already was. Gotta love The Selective realism and general hypocrisy
7 Likes
I think the brochure itself is like a weird mix of 2a7+ and 2a7NO, despite being labeled 2a8
oh btw, they nerfed the 7v and 7hu too, and that’s despite 7v clearly not having the very visible spectus on the hull front:
meanwhile 7no, with a very clearly visible Spectus:
Needless to say, neither german nor norwegian 2a8 have the spectus there, “fun”
7 Likes
I think, the brochure was written in the first days of the upgrade, so the customers knew whats going on. Later on specs and placement of Spectus changed and the search light was removed, how ever no one at KNDS bothered enough to change the brochure, as contracts most likely were already signed a that point
3 Likes
Your coping surely isn’t helping the situation lol.
1 Like
The reliance on a marketing brochure as “primary documentation” directly contradicts Gaijin’s own official historical source validation guidelines regarding military equipment updates.
-
The Marketing Brochure Policy Violation:
According to Gaijin’s established technical reporting rules, commercial brochures, product catalogs, and public website marketing materials published by defense contractors are explicitly classified as unreliable for vehicle parameter changes. Historically, when players submitted KNDS brochures to prove upgrades to the Leopard 2’s armor layout, the moderation team rejected them, stating that “brochures are marketing material meant for export attraction and lack accurate blueprint fidelity.” Utilizing the exact same KNDS marketing PDF strictly to enforce a mechanical nerf is a textbook double standard. -
Proof of Brochure Inaccuracy (The Weight Anomaly):
The specific KNDS 2A8 brochure used for this report is demonstrably outdated and contains copy-paste legacy placeholders. For example, it lists baseline system weights that completely fail to reflect the actual, finalized 69.5-ton combat weight of the active Bundeswehr and Norwegian production contracts equipped with EuroTrophy APS. If the brochure’s weight matrix is completely inaccurate for a production-ready 2A8, the vertical elevation entry (-7.4°) is undeniably a legacy placeholder carried over from older documentation formats. -
The Physical Geometry Eradicates the Directive:
As visually proven by the community layout tracking, the historical -7.4° / -7.67° restriction existed solely because prototype builds featured a blocky, protruding Spectus driver sight box bolted on top of the hull deck, which physically blocked the gun carriage. On the production model of the Leopard 2A8, KNDS engineers physically embedded the Spectus sight flush into the sloped glacis armor plate, leaving the forward hull deck entirely clear.
Applying a flat 360-degree software clamp based on an outdated, copy-pasted marketing PDF—while ignoring the finalized physical hull engineering and the fact that the game engine already models dynamic variable elevation over the rear deck is fundamentally incorrect. The frontal arc must be restored to its authentic mechanical layout capacity of -9°.
To further illustrate the logical and procedural contradiction here, we must look directly at Rule 2.2.2 (Marketing and Manufacturer Documentation) of the War Thunder Military Restrictions policy:
- The Selection Bias of Rule 2.2.2 (Request for Armor and Equipment):
If the moderation team insists on treating this specific KNDS marketing brochure as a definitive source to enforce a mechanical nerf under Rule 2.2.2, then by your own regulations, the entire document must be accepted as authentic, not just the parts that nerf the vehicle. The exact same brochure explicitly states that the production Leopard 2A8 features the advanced D-Tech composite armor package and the FLW 200 RCWS. Selecting a single legacy placeholder value (-7.4 elevation) while completely ignoring the protective and electronics upgrades listed in the exact same document is a direct violation of objective sourcing. If the brochure is valid under Rule 2.2.2 for a nerf, it is universally valid for a buff. - Precedent for Other Nations (To set a precedent for other countries):
By establishing the precedent that a manufacturer’s commercial brochure overrides physical layout tracking and finalized hull geometry, Gaijin is opening a massive door for all nations. If commercial marketing material is now considered a primary definitive source for vehicle parameters, then players should be fully allowed to utilize official brochures from General Dynamics (USA), Nexter/KNDS (France), and BAE Systems (UK) to universally adjust or upgrade Abrams, Leclerc, and Challenger variants based on marketing claims.
If Rule 2.2.2 is to be enforced, it must be applied consistently across all fields of the vehicle and universally across all nations’ tech trees, rather than being used as a tool for selective nerfing.
16 Likes
Pointing out facts is cope now?
What a age to live in.
You haven’t pointed out anything close to facts. All you have done is rage about your nation suffering and how mains of other nations are evil bla bla bla.
Typical behavior from low skill nation mains though. It’s a shame for the German mains trying to actually fix the issue, because it seriously muddies their cause.
1 Like
I responded to the guy saying “haha, your tank is broken, should have supported the abrams!”
Then I pointed out the fact that no one was opposed to the abrams getting fixed and US mains made such a stink they made a entire devblog to explain why the community was wrong and they STILL GAVE A BUFF TO IT.
So ya know, facts.
I don’t want to further derail this thread, but if that is all you got from the SEPv3 hull armor blog you might want to read it again lol.
Yeah yeah, and I think your not getting the point.
The earlier guy tried to already derail the thread and pretend like the devs don’t care about US players.
AI however I see that the point stands and this nerf is completely unjustified as the document is completely inaccurate for the current configuration of the 2a8 today and in game. I hope Gaijen will read this bug issue and actually revert the change ESPECIALLY as its affecting 2 tanks (2a7v and 2a8) because of the SPECTUS that isnt even in the correct spot to justify the lower depression. It is really sad to see Gaijen use that brochure.
1 Like
well what can be done? is there any old documentation, perhaps on the 2a7 that can be used as counter evidence?
Its listed as stabilized as in on the move. (-7.4D +17.4E)
there i no way that it’s the camera since its also reduced upwards also helping my argument
of being stabilzer limitations.
Also another thing that helps my case is that the challenger has the same exact stabilizer limitation.
This would probably also go for all the leopards with the same firecontrol system
The physical gun itself is described as being able to depress to -9
So the bullshit idea that even if spectus got moved, it’s an internal change for the breech is just wrong
12 Likes
Amazing find
Pretty sure the brochure only talks about the stabilizer itself and not the mechanical depression.
No way people really think this is a new change on the 2a7 and 2a8.
It has to be protective measurement to just be safe on the move.
What would they even change its the same gun.
1 Like
@Smin1080p_WT Are these ahistorical nerfs going to be reversed? The new values make sense for stabilized shots, but physically the gun can still move past that.
3 Likes
It is a waste of time to rewrite this, and the delusional community manager that took it down immediately without reading it linked a facebook video instead, but check out this bug report
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/U1TIoRawG4um
my post was taken down as “secondary source” but this brochure was what caused the nerf in the first place.
3 Likes