Forgot about the shell, just got tired of back depression (since 2A4 is worse than everyone anyway)
3BM42 is way better than L26, better velocity and spall, DM23 is good enough most of the time.
I might be kinda biased with the T-80B though, since I always play it, and always at 12.0 with still a 2 kd.
-11 is good enough most of the time, gun handling and depression you’ll have to play around those
T-80B gets penetrated to hull with the 2a4 120mm. Its basically worse in all aspects except acceleration and turret armor
worse mobility, worse armor, no blowouts and munition in hull, but DM33
worse mobility, worse traverse, worse elevation, no survivability at all
less armor and no blowouts with munitions in hull
Wth arguably worse shell + less mobility, but comparable armor, also munition without blowouts in hull
Thats basically it. xD
Yeah no worries.
In terms of round and back depression sure 😅
L26 penetrates 471mm whereas 3BM42 penetrates 457mm.
The muzzle velocity may be better (though I don’t think it’s a huge difference), but the spalling with L26 is better since they’re both long_rod APFSDS and they have the same angle modifiers.
The amount of spalling long rod APFSDS is calculated based on the remaining (residual) penetration of the shell after it goes through the armour:
Yeah but definitely struggles in uptiers, especially against things like the BMPT.
L27 can also lol-pen the UFP of the T-80B.
Yeah no worries. I think I’d like it too if I were to spade it.
Yeah. It’s good enough for getting back behind cover after poking out from over a hill / building, but it starts to be a problem if you want to try and reverse away from a bad situation / area and if your breech is knocked out (you need to swing your whole hull around and expose your rear).
Yeah, and in those cases I’d rather play the Leo, Abrams, Chally, or Vickers Mk.7.
It’s iffy. If it uses its gun depression + K1 ERA, it’s not reliable:
Yeah. I’d rather take the Chally Mk.3s out any day.
Yup though with the introduction of turret baskets, the 2A4 can only really survive one shot and then it’s unable to run away / fight back.
Yup.
That’s the cost of having better mobility, gun depression, turret survivability (against better rounds), no NATO hump, and a better round.
L26 is better in all aspects over 120mm DM23 other than muzzle velocity.
True.
Hull armour is worse (but the 2A4’s lower UFP and LFP aren’t particularly good either) but the turret armour is much better (often being able to to stop 3BM42 with its right cheek and sometimes with its left cheek).
I’d say turret armour is more important than hull armour anyways.
That’s true but when hull-down, it cannot get detonated in any way.
ah but it happends all the time. As you picked a worse angle, and the T-80 is usually lower than Leopard 2.
Still it a sign that armor becomes non-existent. It is protected like T-72AV but no one calls Turms a good protection nowadays.
Well i like to use Ariette, but only because its uniqie. Otherwise it feels petty
Thats like that, yes, but it usually can run and hide. Play it safe you`ll be surviving at least twice
I may be mistaken, but Vickers 7 moves pretty alike with 2a4. Other than that, it has L26 which is cool thing. But i damned teh ammo storages in hull many times…
No doubt, but the challenger only gets teh L23A1 as i remember, innit?
Thus the 10.3 instead of 10.7.
I say that the turret armor is also comparable. It stops pretty much same things, but being slanted provides some better angles. But still can be penned with 3BM42 if unlucky. Just as 2a4s one.
Not that it hapened many times, but some angled sideshots to turret blew my munitions. Tho that rarely happends, so its probably can be labeled as “hull shot problem”.
Unless you are facing it from <200m or so, you are going to have your shell be parallel to plane at where you shoot the UFP:
And then if he uses his gun depression (what little gun depression he has with the T-80B) and K1 (an extra 5-10mm of KE protection), it will most definitely not going to penetrate.
Its UFP armour is only really usable against M1 Abrams’ M774, 2A4’s DM23, and possibly the CV90105’s / Boxer MGS’ 105mm DM33 / 105mm DM63.
After that, yeah its UFP is practically useless.
The TURMST’s UFP is so useless at 10.3, so I agree with you there 😅
It should be 10.0 in my opinion.
Indeed.
If it can smoke up in time and turn around and not get shot in the back, sure.
It’s slightly faster than the 2A4, but yeah it’s practically the same, if not, slightly worse in some situations:
I think it’s kinda annoying though with the introduction of the turret baskets, you aren’t going to survive a second shot with the Abrams / 2A4 anyways (unless your teammates manage to help you / shoot the dude before he reloads).
The Challenger Mk.2 gets only L23A1 (which is why it’s 10.3, like you said).
But the Mk.3 and DS gets L26, which is why they’re 10.7.
Well…
Yeah probably.
True! Changed it to 11.7
It would basically be a Type 90 sidegrade; trading reload for armor.
M1 should get M833 at 10.7, IMP, btw!
11.7 may be a bit much 😅
Type 90 would be a lot more mobile than heavier 2A4 due to the add-on weight, possibly now being as mobile as the M1A1s / IPM1s:
And a 4s reload is much better than a 6s reload.
The armour would be better than the Type 90 for sure (especially the turret ring and LFP), though the turret cheeks and lower UFP would be practically the same.
The gun handling would still be better than the Type 90, though I wouldn’t say 30 degrees per second is that bad at 11.7.
I think 11.3 would make more sense.
11.3 for the 2A4(C) if it only gets DM33
The M1IP is at 11.3, with M900, and a 5s reload, at 11.7 you’d have to give it DM53 to make it a match for the M1A1
For comparison what a 2A4(B) w/DM23 sees when it faces an M1IP, I painted that part of the LFP orange, because even though it can be perforated, it has very little energy left, and hits like that can often result in just minor damage.
I thought of that, until someone pointed out that it would basically be immune entirely to M1 without even being a full BR above.
Yep! That was my original idea.
The current 2A4 we have is an early capability one; I would like to have a mid-life capability one, with modern armor and DM33.
I am not suggesting a Late capability one with DM53 because it would be too awkward to balance as a 12.0-12.3 where its armor would be useless, hahah.
I was the one to point it out:
I’d just give M1 Abrams M883…
I mean… it’s then an M1A1 equivalent, DM53 L/44 has only like 25mm more pen than M829A1, and the armors are pretty comparable. I don’t think a 25mm different in pen should result in 0.3 to 0.7 BR upgrade over the M1A1 which gets a shorter reload.
11.7 Leo C with DM53 would be fine tbh.
Though I’d rather it just have DM33 and be 11.3…
Could split them into 11.3 2A4(C) 7th batch w/DM33 and C-tech side skirts, 11.7 and 2A4(C) 8th batch w/DM53 and D-tech side skirts.
Yeah that could work too.
Would finally fill the 10.7 - 12.3 MBT gap for Germany.
Mind you, do you know if the 2PL uses the B or C tech hull armour?
Currently it’s rather underwhelming…
The C tech hull armour of the later 2A4s would actually be pretty scary for HSTV-Ls and RDF-LTs (they can’t pen anywhere from the front – same against 2A5s, 2A6s, and 2A7s).
B-tech
In that case it would still be better than the current hull armour for it.
True! In hindsight, an M1A1 equivalent Leopard 2A4 could indeed be fun. Only issue, lack of lineup; but I supposse that could be fixed over time.
Leopard 2A4 (C) with DM53 would be to M1A1 what Leopard 2A4 (B) with DM23 would be to M1, basically; 1 second reload traded for slightly better penetration and armor.
I still think M883 may still be necessary
Especially if the hull armour gets buffed to 360mm KE.
