its the exact same for france and uk, they both have the exact possible choices as germany.
And benelux brings a lot german stuff to france, so they cant realy complain about germany getting french stuff
nothing personal, but that is a realy shitty distribution.
You are giving france benelux, spain, portugal and germany switzerland and austria only?
The quality and quantitiy of vehicles here is worlds apart not mentioning how france gonna swim in german leopards and getting diversity while germany is getting no diversity at all realy
and the gian east region for ital
1 Like
What the playerbase wants or not is once again, irrelevant. Gaijin saw that France has been underperforming compared to others, and that there are large gaps in their TT, and since developing new vehicles to fill in those gaps takes a long time - subtree it is.
Swiss Hunter was literally needed more in UK tree than German, too. Guess who has zero F&F CAS on a platform with flares at 9.7?
Guess how many jets did Germany have at 9.7 with F&F A-to-G & flares before the Hunter had been added? Zero.
Incorrect. Swiss Mirage variants and F/A-18 variants are not needed in German tree.
And how do you know the F/A-18C is not needed when you, to remind you once again, haven’t played Germany at top BRs? Your paragraph is void of any logic and reason.
Boy ain’t it great how that’s no longer the top German MBT anymore? Just sweep that under the rug, clearly not relevant.
It sure it painful to be the only person in this discussion to have played the tanks the argument’s about, and to have played top tier back when the 2A6 was added, and when it stopped being the “top dog” (its “stomping” period lasted for ± 4 months), and that its dominance lasted thanks due to FOTM effect (gee, guess what’ll happen when you give the best players in the game the best shell), then, of course, WRs stabilised for a while as they nearly always do in such situations. Not like experience is an important factor when it comes to making a correct statements after all.
Unless you’re trying to tell me 2A6 has remained the “best” tank ever since its addition, despite M1A2 SEP being added (which is honestly better), the BVM of course too. Oh wait, I think we’ve forgotten about something here… Strv 122s? Yeah.
M1A2 turret is the weakest of the strong nato turrets and can be penetrated by DM53 with only a slight angle.
Oh noooo
Oh nooo
Not like that’s a common weakpoint shared by most NATO designs…
Plus, ignoring the fact that out of literally every single MBT in terms of armor aside from the improved versions of the Leopard 2A5, that turret is the outright best in the entire game.
NATO tank has a strong turret that gets weaker the more off-centre you’re looking at it, more news at 11 PM.
Please do tell me how the Type 10, Ariete, and Leclerc turrets are even in the same ballpark as the Leopard 2A5 turret.
I’ll refrain seeing as you have to resort to changing the goalpost in order to paint the 2A6 as an “oppressor”.
But hey, it’s fine if we just ignore the fact some of the vehicles you’ve talked about also have better hulls than the 2A6… or how they have better reloads, are faster, have better sights, no no. It’s important to focus on just one thing and complain about it until the opposite party gives out :p
Oh, just like the Swiss F/A-18 variants you demand?
Hard to “demand” something when you know it’s literally coming, try that with the Gripen C that the Swiss might have leased instead, maybe then will your allegations towards me be more correct…
and before I forget, you should learn what a logical fallacy is before accusing someone of it. Especially when you falsely give someone guff about a strawman when you start with Ad Hominem.
Am I meant to laugh at how uninformed this paragraph is? Because this is the first time that I’m hearing of logical fallacies all being grouped up like this even though they differ a lot. Even your use of the Ad Hominem fallacy is incorrect. Your denial of having committed a strawman fallacy is quite telling in all honesty.
Ad Hominem: arguments directed against a person rather than their argument.
Your argument: you don’t have firsthand experience with germany at high BR therefore shouldn’t comment (despite the fact that the experience of facing Germany at high BR/squadding with germany players at high BR/having friends who play german high BR is more than sufficient experience)
This is literally 6th grade literature class stuff, man.
Strawmanning is also something different to what you think it is. Had I suggested “oh so that means all discussion on German vehicles must be locked behind 11.7 BR leopard tanks” that’s strawmanning.
Are you the type to tell a prosecutor in court they can’t argue on the behalf of the plaintiff because they weren’t present at the crime scene? Serious question. I’m curious.
Oh boy, a real question!
You’re crying for more top BR CAS and A2A fighters!
Guess what your favorite tree is guaranteed to get soon? A top BR fighter specializing in A2A!
How about that top CAS? Guess you’ll have to wait a little while, because the Swiss F/A-18 is A2A only until very late modifications re-enabled ground attack! Guess you’ll have to wait an update or two for them to add early F/A-18 variants before they move on to the later ones!
Later updates that likely will include later variants of… you guessed it, the EF2000 with ground attack options! Hooray!
Bloody hell, do you actually believe the Leclerc, Ariete, Merkava, CR2, Type 99, Type 10 and M1A2 have better hulls than the Leopard 2A5? That’s a laugh! Half of them have literally no armor below the top of their tracks!
2S38 loading APHE can punch through a third of those above. With APFSDS it gets the ability to punch through everyone’s lower plate aside from the M1A2, which has its own problem in the form of a gargantuan turret ring with some of the worst armor at top BR.
But hey, sure. Leopard 2A6 hull is also vulnerable to the 2S38’s dart. If you shoot the weakpoint right at the bottom of the tank, or gamble with the absolutely miniscule turret ring.
Have you ever heard of a little thing called Symmetry?
Crazy how the Leopard 2A5 turret is equally armored to a 60 degree angle along the front, while the M1A2 front turret is significantly weaker on the Gunner side of the turret.
Addressed previously with “Literal swede bias”.
Goalposts flying at 500 km/h. You gotta stop being a hypocrite.
1 Like
Ngl it’s sort of the only option if we aren’t going to get a good CAS let us at least get a good air to air fighter, the ICE is barely holding its place against F-16,15, Su-27 and Grepins; i believe everyone can wait for the EF2000 to get good CAS plus with the Swiss F/A-18 we will have a good option to grind the EF2000 when it come to game
Congratulations, and it’s an argument directed at your lack of experience with the things that are being discussed (so basically, I’m questioning your creditability), that is not an Ad Hominem fallacy, that’s an actual observation that logically leads to a conclusion that if A doesn’t have B, its opinion is less relevant (I never said you shouldn’t be talking about this either, so you fell victim to the false cause fallacy as well…)
This is literally 6th grade literature class stuff, man.
Why have you failed to properly use it then?
Strawmanning is also something different to what you think it is. Had I suggested “oh so that means all discussion on German vehicles must be locked behind 11.7 BR leopard tanks” that’s strawmanning.
No, a strawman fallacy means that you’ve distorted what I had actually said, which you have.
Guess what your favorite tree is guaranteed to get soon? A top BR fighter specializing in A2A!
And how do you know it will get it “soon”?
Bloody hell, do you actually believe the Leclerc, Ariete, Merkava, CR2, Type 99, Type 10 and M1A2 have better hulls than the Leopard 2A5? That’s a laugh! Half of them have literally no armor below the top of their tracks!
Generally, some of them do (as I have already said). M1A2 & Type 99 to name a few, Chally 2 could also be added to this list based on the fact its protected parts are about a large as 2A5s but offer a higher KE number. Relatively speaking however, none of them have any sort of hull protection due to the existence of more powerful shells, but objectively, if we were to pit them against shells from the past, then yes, a number of tanks do in fact have better protected hulls than the 2A5.
M1A2s have an actually better upper plate, and their lower plate has a lower surface area than Leopard 2s mid and low plates. So while yea, the middle section on the Leopard 2A5+ hulls is indeed better protected than M1A2s lower, it also packs a halfly unarmoured lower plate which btw, can also be penetrated by 2S38s APHE :)
But hey, sure. Leopard 2A6 hull is also vulnerable to the 2S38’s dart. If you shoot the weakpoint right at the bottom of the tank, or gamble with the absolutely miniscule turret ring.
Or the driver hatch, or the gigiantic lower mantlet, or the LFP, or as you yourself said, the turret ring.
Have you ever heard of a little thing called Symmetry ?
Have you? Because based on what you said right below, i’m not really sure…
Crazy how the Leopard 2A5 turret is equally armored to a 60 degree angle along the front, while the M1A2 front turret is significantly weaker on the Gunner side of the turret.
Which it isn’t, the gunner side is weaker than the loader’s.
As a side-note, “massively” lmao:
If anything, Leo 2s turret have more variable protection levels rather than the M1s which have that relatively uniform, but they’re not symmetric, and from off-centre angles they’re just as easy to perforate as M1s turret is.
Goalposts flying at 500 km/h. You gotta stop being a hypocrite.
You’ve clearly no idea what goalpost stands for and that’s hillarious to me.
Yes, let’s add a plane which has 0 relations to Germany from a country that has very little military relations to Germany.
Makes sense if you realy think about it.
Andddd where did I say I supported that addition, huh? It’s also pretty idiotic to claim that Switzerland hasn’t “military relations” with Germany when they’re both each other’s major suppliers, lol.
:)
Thats not even true, but im sure you will show proof.
“Nu uh” lmao. You’re so not worth the effort. Bye bye~
“i don’t know what im talking about and can’t show proof”. Bye bye
I really don’t feel like going through everything here again with you because you think arguing like RazerVon is in good faith, so I’ll spell it out to you here, mate. Germany’s been dominant on the ground with all of their top vehicles, the most recent of which is the 2A7 to now match the literal swede bias. You, for some inane reason, demand proof that it is solely the Leopard 2A5 and 2A6 making them dominant. I said the Leopard 2 platform is oppressive. Lemme repeat that a couple times.
The Leopard 2 platform is oppressive.
The Leopard 2 platform is oppressive.
The Leopard 2 platform is oppressive.
Got it through your skull?
Note platform in the statement. Referring to the top variant of each update. Not exclusively the 2A6 after competition is added. Not saying it is exclusively the 2A5 and 2A6 that are oppressive.
Type 99, un-armored LFP made of RHA and optional dozer blade. CR2 with 70mm at 30 degrees with impossible to miss charge rack behind.
These two are better than the Leopard 2 hull? Really?
M1A2 is only stronger along the heavy armor section, and the “better” hull roof extension bounces darts into the turret ring weakspot.
Dude, learn to use the protection tool properly. You’re intentionally misrepresenting the Leopard 2 to look weaker. Shoot the same spot on the tanks, not cut through the mantlet weakpoint on the Leopard 2A5 from an angle. And use proper ammo, instead of putting the US against their own ammo, when that never happens.
“Your honor, the forensic expert on the stand wasn’t present at the crime when it happened, their testimony isn’t credible”
Yeah man, see how that holds up in court.
I wonder if you’re some kind of accountant or statstics taker, because your fixation with numbers is surely put to better use there and not here. You might even learn to infer that stats don’t always hold the world’s truths, or that people can gain experience from talking to others.
Ah, so just like your perversion of “The leopard 2 platform is oppressive” earlier.
By the way, still waiting for the generous donation of GE and GJN so I can gain credibility for you. After all, you’re the one so hyperfixated on “only people who experienced german suffering firsthand can argue on it”. Let me share your pain.
1 Like
And where have I ever denied that Germany has been one of, if not the best, ground nation in the game? You seem to have this preconceived notion that I don’t think Leopard 2s are good or even the best MBTs in the game, which I don’t and it’s only in your head. Sorry not sorry.
I said the Leopard 2 platform is oppressive. Lemme repeat that a couple times.
And I had provided a specific example of Leopard 2s that aren’t nearly as oppressive as you make them out to be (because quite frankly, you’re a clown if you think 2A5 or 2A6 are even half as good as 122s or the 2A7s, so grouping these different variants into one creates a bad image for versions that don’t stand out), which you argued against in bad faith, because y’know, it’d be extremely dumb of me to argue that 2A7V, 2A7HU or Strv 122s aren’t damn oppressive when they are, seeing as they’re the best single MBTs in this entire hecking game.
Got it through your skull?
Wow. Maybe I overestimated your ability to converse.
Type 99, un-armored LFP made of RHA and optional dozer blade. CR2 with 70mm at 30 degrees with impossible to miss charge rack behind.
How’s that any different to Leopard 2s LFP or the 35mm or so thick upper plate that relies on enemies not properly aiming…?
M1A2 is only stronger along the heavy armor section, and the “better” hull roof extension bounces darts into the turret ring weakspot.
To make this easier for you to understand, here:
Leopard 2s penetrable hull area is in fact, far larger than M1A2s.
Dude, learn to use the protection tool properly. You’re intentionally misrepresenting the Leopard 2 to look weaker.
Okay, so why is the PA tool also saying that M1s cannon will also be taken out? FYI, the mantlet has been a part of the rigid cheek structure of Leopard 2s ever since the A5 variant, so I’m not “intentionally misrepresenting” anything here, and I even clearly stated that Leopard 2s protection is variable (indicating that in some spots its stronger and in some its weaker… gee).
“Your honor, the forensic expert on the stand wasn’t present at the crime when it happened, their testimony isn’t credible”
Cool equivalence, nothing more than that though.
I wonder if you’re some kind of accountant or statstics taker, because your fixation with numbers is surely put to better use there and not here. You might even learn to infer that stats don’t always hold the world’s truths, or that people can gain experience from talking to others.
So you believe that simply playing against the tank gives you better insight than actually playing it? Oh man (and I apologize, but I don’t think I’ve ever brought “stats” up in any way, so…). Yea, I’ve nothing else to talk with you about honestly, seeing your dishonesty presented like this in direct sun light. I’ll leave you to continue rambling or whatever it is that you wanna do and just sign off.
Have a nice day.
Don’t project your social inadequacy on me.