Unfortunately, I don’t have any info on the optical zoom of the thermal imager. But, the COTAC system on the AMX 30 B2, AMX 32s and AMX 40 have a dedicated rangefinder sight with 4x - 8x optical zoom. Perhaps the devs would consider this. It was on my to-do list but I will get around to it in the coming days.
There’s also an upcoming bug report for how the CASTOR thermal imagers on the AMX 30 B2, AMX 32 (120) and AMX 40 are modelled in game. In reality these thermal imagers achieved the same performance as the 2nd generation FLIR on the Abrams; therefore, they should be modelled accordingly. The thermals on the Challenger 2 are already modelled as being of the 2nd generation despite in real life only being a 1st generation technology - the same policy should apply to France.
Performance of CASTOR according to French army documents:
Spoiler
Performance of the M1A2 SEP FLIR according to US army documents:
Spoiler
I will move both of these issues up the to-do list.
Yes, this is uses a German thermal imager and doesn’t apply to any other vehicles in France.
COTAC MBT optical zoom could be changed to 4x - 8x but it is ultimately at the devs’ discretion
These MBTs will be modelled as having 2nd generation FLIR in-game
As for the AMX 10 RC… I will have to look into it more.
Not that I recall. I would have to go digging through what little source material I have for them but to be honest not much source material even exists for these tanks in the first place.
Is this a joke? I’ve been on this forum page for almost a year, some people have been fighting with NEXTER documents for a year, like for the SHARD shells, and Gajin just turns a deaf ear… We can give them a Nexter document signed by the Ministry of the Army and President Mr. MACRON and you’ll always get the same response “unreliable source”!
Sadly, upon reviewing the source material as I was about to make a bug report it appears that I have misread the info. The 4x - 8x optical zoom is for the M427 sight for the commander.
I will go ahead with the thermals report in a few days along with some other reports such as armour for the AMX 30. In the meantime, I’ll look into having a dedicated thread for the AMX 30, 32 and 40.
On the question of whether the Leclerc has spall liners: I have recently acquired the English of Stephane Ferrard’s “Le Systeme Leclerc”. The original French text written by Ferrard is quite poorly written but the English translation paints a clearer picture:
Therefore, spall liners were only ever proposed for the Leclerc and they were most likely not included due to weight considerations (much like the Abrams).
I’m pretty certain I’ve seen most of the still-available literature for the Leclerc and only 1 secondary source has stated that the Leclerc contains spall liners. And if I had to hazard a guess, this source got its information from Ferrard’s original French text which can be at times quite incoherent. Consequently, there are no plans at this time to report any sort of missing spall liners for the Leclerc.
For what it’s worth, we could still get the Leclerc ARV which I’m almost certain has spall liners (but not really any armament lol):
But I can’t say I’m surprised. The Leclerc was put on a massive diet. Fun fact: the crew compartment is so limited that neither the commander nor gunner can be over 182cm tall. This is surely the reason why the Swedish didn’t choose the Leclerc since the average Swedish male is 180cm tall.
/j
You should see how the commander is supposed to use the escape hatch.
There are only 2 escape hatches. One under the gunner, the other below the drive. In order to leave, the commander needs to remove a panel between him and the driver, and go through that opening head-on (so upside down), to then leave through the driver’s exit.
These guys probably need special flexibility training just to be sure they can escape the tank
I was really happy to load in and see better French colours. I was promptly disappointed by the realisation that it was the only thing they bothered with.
I am glad the colours are better, but it was really the least pressing issue.
8mm more pen is not nearly enough of a difference to make it objectively “better”
difference between 2nd and 3rd gen thermals in WT is barely noticeable unless you’re playing on 720p or lower resolution (I play at 1440p and If I hadn’t access to WTs thermal datasheet, I wouldn’t be able to tell you that 3rd generation is actually “better” than 2nd generation in WT)
Leopard 2s survivability (apart from the 2A7V) is pretty much non-existent after they have fixed the “hull spall bug”, especially so in case of tanks with as bad of an armour as CANs
How are the “same mediocare armour” and “minimal difference in mobility” advantages, btw?
I’d also argue a 1s faster reload (lets be honest, in most situations it’s actually 1.4 seconds faster because I doubt anybody in their right mind will ace the CAN) is a much bigger advantage, qualitatively speaking, than a 3rd generation camera or 13mm more penetration, it’s not like KE-W spalls better either, since it weighs 4kg, same as OFL F1.
You could’ve made a much better case for yourself if you had simply stated that Leclerc S1/S1 are as good as 2A4M CAN is in most situations, but are at 11.7 and not 11.3… but I also kinda get why they aren’t 11.3, you can get some filthy downtiers there, and seeing as majority of Leclerc players aren’t lvl 5 to 15, they would stomp (been there, done that - Type 90).
A typical case of BR compression ngl, considering that 2A7V & 2A5 are at the same BR.
So, how long gaijin goin to avoid this conversations? Idk but its one of the biggest on the forum i guess
U cannot add armour just because no inf, ok, just give them SPALL LINERS!!!
