How did you end up with that 895k number ?
You still don’t understand how bad it is to compare minor and major nations’ vehicles.
No it really isn’t.
1 Like
Oh, I accidentally added the Leopard 2 (OTCo) as it has 319,928 matches. Good catch. Well, for February,
German 2A4 - 924,397
Finnish 2A4 - 147,636
Leopard 2A4NL - 118,717
Hungarian 2A4 - 76,844
Strv 121 - 232,555
total - 1,520,149, which comes out to 575,752 (38.4%) of matches involving TT 2A4s from minor nations. That’s still a good chunk of the statistics for the tank.
If you want to include the premiums,
Leopard 2 (OTCo) - 319,928
Leopard 2 (PzBtl 123) - 743,563
Christian II - 395,337
new total - 2,978,977, which comes out to 1,291,017 (43.4%) of matches involving 2A4s from minor nations. I didn’t include the 2A4M as it has a redesigned armor layout.
It’s literally the same tank xD So you’re saying the Lepard 2A4 should go down in BR because the German variant is the worse performing MBT at 10.7 and would drag every other Leopard 2A4 with it to the new BR, which would just improve the minor nations statistics? Why would it not be treated the same? Should the M1A2T be moved around because the US M1A2 SEP v2 struggles in comparison?
It literally is. You want to ignore what is almost 40% of the matches played in RB of the same frame from the TT version.
It’s true that it has become quite a lot better thanks to the added horsepower, but I’d still pick a M1 Abrams over it.
The M1 Abrams is significantly more mobile than it and the Challengers reload drops down to a pretty appalling 7.1 seconds after the first four rounds.
It’s hull armour is also much weaker than that of the Abrams, it’s got exposed hull ammunition stowage everywhere, it’s turret roof is weaker (M1’s turret roof is overperforming) and the turret traverse is slower too.
I’m playing the Challenger Mk2 lately and that feels decent because it actually gets some downtiers every now.I don’t even notice the difference in penetration because in practicality you’re aiming for the same weakspots regardless of whether you’re using L26, L23A1 or M774.
1 Like
your not aiming for the same weakspots l26 can go clean through the ufp and turret face of a t80b. m774 can not
the abrams has slightly better hull armour sure but the challengers got better turret armour and no big turret neck (and nera on the ufp and lfp and hull side)
the challengers ready rack isnt to much of an issue if u play it right neither is the turret traverse considering its quite average but its all personal preference
Just because it can doesn’t mean I will.
74% of my shots against Soviet MBT’s will be overmatching side armour, M774 does that just fine and that’s how I achieved a 6 - 1 K/D ratio with the thing.
If I’m using L26 I’m still going to overmatch their side armour rather than UFP a T-80B. That’s what I meant when I stated you’re generally aiming for the same areas regardless of what shell you’re using.
1 Like
i mean side on it doesnt really matter so yeah sure but again i said its personal preference i will die on the hill that the cr1 is the best 10.7 tank
Even considering doing that is hilarious on it’s own.
So you still don’t understand the difference between major and minor nations and how that translates into stats ?
40% of which are played by players from minor nations which are factually better than players from major ones. You’re artificially inflating stats for 2A4 and you know it very well.
2A4 in the hands of a major nation player simply isn’t better than M1, which is pretty simple to see.
1 Like
It’s literally a Leopard 2A4 that got a modified armor package. Don’t be upset just because I bring up facts about a tank.
You do realize ignoring minor nations data, that makes up 40% of the data, makes 0 sense right? If that’s the case, the Leopard 2A4 needs to go down in BR since it’s the worst performing MBT and has a sub 1.0KD for Germany… yet it has the highest KD as well for the BR with the minor nation…
Dude, it’s still a Leopard 2A4 in the TT. You’re just salty because you don’t actually have an argument when statistics are shown to you.
I’m not talking completely side-on.
That is only a 18° side angle and it’s already a one-hit-kill for M774.
If you actually go through your replay history and check the various shots you take, you’d notice that very, very few were against vehicles that were facing you directly head-on.
2 Likes
It also gets a much better round and thermals.
It’s more than a full BR higher for a reason.
Nah.
Mixing minor nation stats with major nation stats makes no sense unless you do it for all parties equally.
Anything that hovers around 1 K/D shouldn’t move at all.
Still doesn’t understand the difference between minor and major nations when it comes to stats.
2A4s in minor nations have better stats than German 2A4 because they have better players which is, I hope, easy to understand. Same thing would happen to M1 when operated by players of a minor nation.
To be fair, the regular Leopard 2A4 can run that round irl
So go ahead and name another M1 105mm, T-80B, T-80UD, etc as another standard tech tree vehicle that isn’t a premium/event vehicle…
The German 2A4 is typically below 1.0 (it was 0.91 in July). Since July, the KD has been 0.98. So, why does the T-90A need 3BM60 to fight that? Sounds like the T-80B is performing far better than the Leopard 2A4 so why are y’all saying Russian tanks struggle?
tbf, that’s if the autoloader and/or track doesn’t eat it. I’ve put rounds directly into it and it would eat all the spall, protecting the ammo. Realistically, that round would have to punch through the turret control accumulator and battery pack but Gaijin won’t model that for some reason (it’s in the BMPT). As for the angles, welcome to APFSDS and how it’s modeled in game. They removed dart shatter a few years back and said they would return it when it’s “how they want it”.
Doesn’t change anything I’ve said.
T-90A needs 3BM60 to stay at 11.0.
Bhishma is at 10.7 for a reason.
From May (first full month with turret baskets) to November, 80B and 2A4 were trading blows when it comes to stats. After that BMPT came and made a mess out of that whole BR range.
You brought up why would I even think it when in reality, it’s a Leopard 2A4 with an upgraded composite armor. Realistically, the Leopard 2A4 can use the same round but Gaijin just didn’t give it in game.
Not really. 3BM42 does just fine. Why does it need 3BM60?
And? Does that negate the fact it’s struggling far more atm where its at? The T-80B KD going up isn’t because the BMPT.
If those had comparable performance they wouldn’t be more than a full BR apart.
So it can stay at 11.0 ?
I thought this was obvious by now.
80B in November had 44.7% WR and 1.01 K/D.
80B in January had 62.9% WR and 1.30 K/D.
80B in February had 55.2% WR and 1.20 K/D.
This spike in WR and K/D isn’t just observed on the 80B, as pretty much all 10.3 / 10.7 USSR MBTs suddenly got “much better”, conveniently at the same exact time BMPT was introduced.
They also don’t have the same ammunition in game… clearly you are struggling to hold the point.
But why? 3BM42 does just fine right? Just like how M774 does just fine right?
It had been trending upward before the BMPT and the 2A4 KD also spiked up and matches trends so clearly it isn’t because the BMPT.
And ?
Does just fine on a T-90A, but on 10.7.
Oh yeah, several MBTs found at 10.3 / 10.7 all got substantial K/D and WR boost the moment BMPT entered the game. Mega coincidence.