I don’t know much about K2’s technical capabilities, but it looks like an actually good Leclerc and I’m all for it, hahah.
From what I’ve read, it is heavier and stronger than Type 10, although not as strong as an uparmored Leopard: it has a 5 second reload, and it uses a L/55 gun with K279 APFSDS, of which I don’t know much but seems like a DM53 equivalent.
So it looks like a blend of the best of all worlds: Leclerc’s mobility, gun and turret dynamics, Leopard 2’s penetration, and protection good enough to probably defeat at least 3BM60 on the composite modules.
It’s also suppossed to have spall liners, but knowing how little Gaijin likes to implement these, I don’t know whether to even expect them at all.
Massive doubt. The premium will likely be either a 10.7 2A4, some version of the PT.91 or either a 2PL or M1A1 FEP with limited ammo to keep them at 12.0.
Not the most unique tank, but still relatively distinctive, and, in real life, it was a Gap Filler until SEPv3s could arrive, so, as a Premium, it would play a similar role lmao.
God, I REALLY hope they don’t go down the 2A4 way. If they do, I think I would skip.
2PLs will be more interesting if they ever get their damn missing spall liners, on the other hand. Since their armor is laughable, at least they could use some extra survivability.
The only downside for the FEP is that you would have to seriously nerf it’s ammo selection to keep it at the BR for premiums.
You would have to hard limit it to base KE-W to make it not straight up better than tanks than the M1A2/M1A1 HC/M1A1 AIM, which are already pretty overpowered at 12.0 to begin with.
I can’t see why. You have M1A2 and M1A1HC sitting at 12.0 with M829A2, I never understood why AIM and a hypothetical FEP need to be nerfed with M829A1 equivalents when other variants at their BR already have M829A2.
Is sharper gunner thermals (while lacking CITV) really worth 50mm in penetration…?
So you really can’t see how making the M1A1 AIM and M1A1 FEP straight up better versions of already overpowered tanks at 12.0 (M1A2 and M1A1 HC) is problematic?
I knew your sense of balance has always been off, but this is another level.
You really, REALLY think that M1A1AIM and FEP, ONLY because they have sharper gunner thermals while also lacking commander thermals, deserve to have 50mm less of penetration than M1A2 (which also has CITV, which many argue to be far more relevant than sharper gunner thermals) or M1A1HC?
Do you REALLY think better thermal resolution is equivalent to and a fair trade off to nearly 50mm of penetration?
Leopard 2A6 and Leopard 2A7HU, having WAY more differences than just thermals (which are 1st vs 3rd gen, by the way, and with also nearly twice as much hull armor and a hull coated in spall liners), sit at the exact same BR.
But now, it turns out that A2/HC having 1st vs AIM/FEP having 2nd gen thermals is a factor to determine that they should either have drastically worse shells or a higher BR?
Do you think M1A1 AIM is better than M1A2 to a larger extent than Leopard 2A7HU is than Leopard 2A6?
Since anything above 580mm generally performs similar in terms of who can pen what and where, besides some niche situations, yeah I think it’s an okay tradeoff.
The BR difference between the M1A2 SEP and M1A2 was 0.7 for only better gunner thermals for the longest time, so why should the M1A1 FEP with KE-W A2 not be 0.7 BR higher than the M1A1 HC?
(Although to be fair, all the 12.0 Abrams are heavily undertiered and should be 12.3-12.7)
2A6 is overtiered and should be 12.3, but it seems like Gaijin just loves the Abrams more than the not uparmored Leo 2s.
That was a nonsensical situation that was gladfully corrected by giving the SEPs their historical ammunition choices, increasing their capabilities against many of their primary rivals (K-5 protected tanks) and therefore truly justifying a BR difference.
M1A1 FEP shouldn’t be 0.7 BRs higher than M1A2 merely over better gunner thermals (again, no CITV) just for having a similar shell too based on an outdated, obsolete situation that was solved.
With some more decompression, I COULD find it more reasonable.
@Smin1080p_WT sorry for the ping on the weekend again. So the Sea Harrier FRS.1 (11.0 Squadron), is it a generic Sea Harrier FRS.1 after the Falklands or is it from a specific year?
Come on, let’s not go there… you know this statement to be highly hyperbolic.
It’s funny; 2nd gen thermals are enough for M1A1 AIM to be 0.7 BRs above M1A2, according to you… but M1A2 deserves to sit at the same BR as Leopard 2A7HU with 3rd gen thermals, twice as thick armor and spall liners for… no particular reason?
However if the T-90M, VT-4A1, Leclercs, Merkava Mk.4M, 2A6, T-80BVM, Type 10s etc can be 12.7 the M1A2 can also be 12.7. Especially when the M1A2 easily beats half of these tanks in capabilities.
When Gaijin will finally add separate battle ratings for coastal ships and a completely separate coastal matchmaker from bluewater.
SAM boats should be top tier in bluewater.
Why is it so hard for them to make the leclerc not useless, Like what reason do i have to pick the leclerc over the abrams… I love the leclercs looks and that its autoloaded but its just so horrible and boring to play, I just want a reason to play it since i spent so much time grinding for it yk
