I sincerely hope KNDS notices something is off after receiving a flood of emails from people who aren’t even their actual customers, and realizes their mistake. This isn’t just about some online game—it directly affects KNDS’s own interests and the defense industry as a whole.
4 Likes
I mean, I’m sure potential customers would receive far better information than that anyone could find in War Thunder; but I still believe it’s sad that their best product is maliciously butchered and misrepresented on such a popular piece of media.
Same goes for SEPv3, etc.
In 2A8s’ and 2A7s’ case, not only is their armor underperforming, but now traverse angles too… and the shell as well; not only is it an outdated one, but it does not even have its anti-ERA tip.
1 Like
Its crystal clear now Gaijin only wants to nerf german tanks, no matter how much we complain. they just want everyone to play russia
3 Likes
It appears that the decision to weaken it had already been made. Following a single notification possibly even from one of their own employees, though we cannot be certain the tool was promptly weakened, less than a day later. Yet, countless complaints submitted with the hope of seeing improvements were either closed immediately or took an excessively long time to even be reviewed.
1 Like
so what is the problem there? with -9 grade gun have enought space from hull but no need the -7.4 grade same with leopard side depression from 100 grasde the gun look up but have loot os space from hull…
8 Likes
They just wanna nerf Leopard
8 Likes
Well modelling a Leopard accurately, even to the specs that are at least partially known would make it an absolute nemesis to pretty much everything else on the battlefield, especially in terms of armor.
But denying it minor details like even the roof MG is just mocking the players imo.
9 Likes
Clearly a marketing lie, actual powerpack is a 50HP Golf Diesel engine.
1 Like
The sources were two newspapers…
3 Likes
It’s impressive how many people dont know what a primary/secondary/tertiary source even is
1 Like
Funny that you say that, considering you abused a mistake in one within your original report
6 Likes
It’s quite laughable that they’re still clinging to their marketing brochures, even though the military of the country that actually operates the vehicle states that it’s -9 degrees. Of course, it’s also Gaijin’s fault for failing to verify the information themselves.
7 Likes
The 2A7, 2A7NO and 2A8 brochures all agree on the gun depression.
A separate 2A8NO brochure also agrees that it is not -9 degrees.
All primary sources. Theres a reason why my report was accepted and surprise surprise, none of the counter reports have been.
Maybe you guys could try AI generating another email from KNDS?
1 Like
They’re all based on the pre-production 2A7’s specifications in which the SPECTUS placement was different, hindering gun depression since it was placed on the hull rather than built into the front.
Logically if the mechanical depression of the L/55 was -7.4, then surely if the SPECTUS remains in it’s original location that depression would decrease further???
Pre production 2a7V
Production 2a7V
5 Likes
The funny thing is that Gaijin isn’t doing anything to put an end to this debate.
Can you explain to me why the gun elevation is limited to 17.4 degrees by the SPECTUS placement there?
Doesn’t strike me as 17°
10 Likes
How can they even use the Leopard 2A8 brochure as a source?
-
Page 8, Trophy is listed as optional and not integrated
Leopard 2A8 has Trophy as standard -
Page 8 Inaccurate Weight
This doesn’t even need an explanation, its just wrong (No, the trophy argument doesn’t work). -
page 3 Wrongly using trials of older Leopard models as being trials for the 2A8
Switzerland (vs. M1 Abrams): Late 1980s evaluation of the basic Leopard 2 / 2A4
Sweden (vs. M1A2 & Leclerc): Early 1990s trials of the Leopard 2 Improved.
Greece & Turkey (1998–2000): Leopard 2A6 HEL.
Qatar (2010), UAE (2011), Saudi Arabia (2012), Oman (2016): Desert trials with the Leopard 2A7+.
Norway (Feb–Mar 2022): Winter trial with the Leopard 2A7NO demonstrator -
No pictures of the Leopard 2A8 on the whole pdf!!! Like what?
-
False Customer & Production Claims
Hungary: Page 2 states: “It is currently being manufactured new for Hungary…” Hungary never bought the Leopard 2A8, Hungary ordered 44 new-build Leopard 2A7HU tanks that we know from the game.
Germany: Page 2 Describes 2A8 work for Germany as an “upgrade program”. Germany’s initial 2A8 contract (18 tanks to replace 2A6s donated to Ukraine, plus options) was explicitly for newly manufactured hulls and turrets, not an upgrade of existing stock.
Sweden and Denmark: Page 2 Mentions ongoing upgrade programs alongside Germany. This is a copy-paste from 2A7 era marketing describing the Swedish Strv 122 and Danish 2A7DK programs. -
Obsolete & Misleading Equipment listed
Commander Sight: page 8 states “CDR sight periscope RTWL”, a sight specific to the older 2A7+ demonstrator. Production 2A8s use newer Hensoldt PERI systems
Standard Armor Kits Listed as “Optional Modules”: on page 8 stuff like mine protection and roof protection are listed as unintegrated options rather than standardized 2A8 baseline features. -
Typos and errors
Page 7 text says “superior reverse speed of approx. 30 km/h”, but then the graphic directly below on Page 7 and the table on Page 8 both say 28 km/h
Page 8 lists road range as “<400 km”. Using the “less than” mathematical sign, that would mean that the tank cannot reach 400 km, whereas real sources always specifies “up to” or “~450 km”.
17 Likes