Extremely common mistake, hence why I made a handy chart:
Those documents aren’t very clear regarding C tech armour values, even the B technologie is relatively open to interpretation.
Thus not too useful for our current discussion.
Regardless, the source I provided given concrete values, and those match the in-game ones.
It’s for both.
Spoiler
Also have further sources, but I’m not certain if I’m allowed to link those.
They do however specify protection requirements for B technologie to resist 105mm KE with 38mm core and MILAN anti-tank guided missile.
Those requirements are exceeded by C technologie values.
then it might be so that it actually uses C tech that’s my bad there sorry, B tech seems to be wrong in terms of protection, i know what document you are referring to, it even stated to withstand M735, issue rn is that ingame M735 its incorrect and in the tests they talk about it like XM735 wich goes along with the tests the US did with germany of the XM735 and then the XM774
I’ve aways been careful with my shot placement on the Leopards unlike the T-90M, one has a nuke for ammunition and spall lining only makes it tiny bit harder whilst the previous iterations of the Leopard and their spall liners before this was horrific to fight.
It might be, and has been bug reported a long while back.
Still no info from Gaijin whether it’ll be changed, or if they believe the current implementation is correct.
Personally I’m not entirely sure, the in-game Leopard 2A4 seems to roughly match the protection requirements against these specific threats (DM23 105mm, MILAN) established in source material, though I suspect the KE resistence for the UFP is slightly low (perhaps underperforming by ≈20mm)
They were not “horrific” to fight at all. Also the T90M by no means gets ammo racked anywhere near as easy as you say, it has the same problem as the T80BVM with ammo not blowing up or getting absolutely no spalling even when you don’t hit the spall liners. But “ohhh nooooo I have to actually aim on the 2A7V ahhhhhh it’s the end of the world it’s OP ahhh”.
If you honestly think the Leopard 2A7V and Swedish counterpart when introduced with spall liners wasn’t a nightmare to fight then you must be on another planet. Please don’t joke around with me, a lower plate shot always kills the T-90M but this isn’t the case for the Leopard 2A7V.
If this was to be a cap competition you’d be their top guy, most nations in-game and including Russia have little vehicles comparable to the Leopard 2A7V performance wise, sure the T-90M is a good vehicle but its god horrible reverse speed is a fat no for me.
2A7V ahhhhhh it’s the end of the world
Nice joke
T90M by no means gets ammo racked anywhere near as easy as you say, it has the same problem as the T80BVM
I’ve had this happen back in 2023 with the BVM, I haven’t encountered this with my hundreds of games since Air superiority.
I believe both vehicles are now balanced with the Leopard 2A7V being overall better and especially when compared to the Challengers, Arietes and Merkavas
they were annoying but not a nightmare since its introduction. I’ve happened to have pen’d the 2A7V upper hull accidentally when trying to aim for the lower hull, six times already since yesterday. Honestly, it’s not that hard to kill; it’s what I’ve always been doing: shooting at the lower part of the breach to kill them since that nukes their crew. On the other hand, T90M survivability is pretty artificial; it eats side shots at times where it shouldn’t, i shoot at the lower hull and the fuel tank eats all the spall, i’ve even shot the driver port and it has completely eaten my shell in 12 occasions, all this against T90M’s.
In my opinion 2A7V armor is unconsistant but covers a good chunk of it together with DM53 and 3rd gen thermals it makes it pretty darn good just fix the armor holes and incorrect armor thickness.
T90M its just artificial survivability quite frankly but its understandable to a certain degree, some times it feels a bit exagerated, specially with the volumetrics and the side shots or the ammount of spall fuel tanks eat
this is my experience while using the Type 10 against both of them.
comparing MBT’s, which arent even up to par in real life, less in game, specially since gaijin has the merkavas incorrectly modeled together with the challenger’s recent DM rework being horrible, basically you are comparing oranges to apples specially with the ariete, lol.
Nah I fought spall-less BVM for years when i fighting 2A7 and 122 with spall liner I don’t see much difference sure harder to kill but it more balance when it wasn’t Russia only that not spall
Harder? Yes but not nightmares
When I refer to nightmare I don’t mean the actual performance of the vehicle but the knowledge people had to combat this vehicle whilst introduced. It was both overperforming and unknown at the time hence why it was a nightmare.
Go fight the Ariete and tell me if you have to aim as carefully as on the Leopards
it’s not that hard to kill; it’s what I’ve always been doing
When introduced it was near impossible to one shot it side one buddy but this wasn’t the case for the T-90M as you could aim for ammo instead of individuals.
T90M survivability is pretty artificial; it eats side shots at times where it shouldn’t
Aim for tracks when angled and not the actual side armour, the ERA sometimes do gobble penetrators but this is on rare occasions.
i’ve even shot the driver port and it has completely eaten my shell in 12 occasions
NEVER shoot drivers port on the T-90M and I don’t know why people still do it, breach sometimes one shot both Gunner and Commander and sight shots can chip the crew away if in cover.
comparing MBT’s, which arent even up to par in real life, less in game, specially since gaijin has the merkavas incorrectly modeled together with the challenger’s recent DM rework being horrible, basically you are comparing oranges to apples specially with the ariete, lol
This is about in-game mate not real life, the T-90M is a upgrade of a already obsolete T-72 and this is something I’ve said many and I mean MANY times before. The Leopard 2A7V wouldn’t perform any better in a modern symmetrical war as well but this isn’t for debate as we are talking about War Thunder.
We can’t also ignore the fact the T-90M has a god awful reverse speed, look at this example:
i always ended up disabling them and if not i would just go back and hidde normally this gave me more than enough time.
when angled, that’s pretty situational specially if the objective has a side angle of 80+ degrees, my argument still is up the fuel tank does eat too much spall in my opinion, even the abrams fuel tank dosent eat this ammount of spall
so if i tell somebody to never shoot the lower hull plate of a T90M cuz it sometimes dosent do anything that means that weakspot dosent exist anymore? no its just an issue with the modeling and volumetrics
yeah i was comparing them ingame too not only in real life and yet they still underperform but is not like they will overperform the 2A7V reallistically speaking, is not like UK’s 570 mm in lenght apfsds could pen over 600 mm of armor
idk why people acted like it was impossible to kill when fighting STRV122 was the norm to be honest, yeah the spall liner did add survivability to it, like it did with the T90M too, in fact the T90M had armor values a bit too op when it first came out and it was noticeable when 2 T90M’s kept fighting each other and doing nothing except turning on fire some fuel tanks and the engine compartment, i kept fighting them in my type 10 and still as the type 10 shell has only 4.2 kg of mass i could still one shot leopards its not impossible just harder that’s it
Well then you’re one lucky person. I’ve gotten no spall and hit ammo numerous times since Air superiority. It’s still a problem and most likely always will be.
That’s just outright wrong. I one shot it many times when the update came out. The reason Russian mains thought it was so OP was due to the fact that they actually had to aim no instead of just pointing and clicking like they used to always be able to do.
