C’est ce que je fait tk mais quand je regarde ce que ma traduction donne en anglais elle n’a plus aucun sens alors ducoup de doit la ré modifier pour que nos amis les anglais puissent comprendre 😂😂
If someone has access to [« La Protection Balistiques des Chars Modernes », Trucks & Tanks Magazine, mars-avril 2018] it could be really usefull for the armor issues (if Gaijin dare to do something)
Not at all. I was explaining that your report is passed as a suggestion and not a bug. You do not need to submit them as a suggestion. They will simply be classified as such. There was no implication that anyone submitted a report wrong.
Im not sure what this case has to do with this topic or the Leclerc. This was an issue of conflicting source material over a series of bug reports which are currently under review.
Sadly crew from all kinds of vehicles make statements all the time. If we took them all at face value, vehicles in game would be a whole mash of combinations that conflict with actual written and known materials. So therefor as a set rule, we cannot simply take the word of crew members alone.
As made clear and explained in detail here, the devs are very much aware of the complexities of modern vehicle armour and all materials are possible to be submitted for consideration as a suggestion. But it does not guarantee that the information specified in it will be implemented in the game.
Nobody has claimed anyone here is an issue. Simply that the current submitted information is insufficient for the developers to consider a change.
Once again, we appear to be going further and further from the topic. Which I can no longer assist with after laying out what’s required for a report to be considered.
Please feel free to submit any reports you wish and we can review and pass any valid ones that meet the minimum criteria.
2 Likes
Make a bug report about it maybe they can change it
For which bug ahah, there are too much
Ouai résultats du compte il va falloir attendre l’an 2045 pour que le Leclerc est sont armure. Car si je ne me trompe pas c’est 2035 l’arrivée du successeur du Leclerc et c’est 10 ans pour la déclassification de documents (à confirmer)
I made a bug report about Leclercs missing LWS, i know its a small thing but its still something, lets fix the small things then go for the others
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/1lM5qQsDJv56
5 Likes
Je ne savais pas que le Leclerc avais une alerte Lasers tu m’apprend quelque chose, merci. 👍
Use Deepl. Their translations are very accurate, they’re either close to or match human translation.
Alright.
I’m trying to point out that even when someone provides undisputable proof, gaijin might still chose to ignore them.
If this is how gaijin behaves with vehicles whose information are declassified, what chances do we have to provide any sort of proof to get gaijin to change their position on a vehicle whose information is still classified? It’s impossible.
My point with this is that gaijin needs to change their attitude when it comes to report from user about implementation of certain vehicles being wrong. No one expects gaijin to get the implementation of every vehicle correct 100% of the time, but when we provide either undisputable proof that something is wrong (for declassified vehicles) or reasonable doubt (with classified vehicles), then gaijin needs to move on the issue.
This is understandable for situations where the crew make claims about performance of the vehicle. Like, if he had said “It can hit a moving target at 10km while on the move” or “even the weakest part of the tank can’t be penetrated”, obviously these aren’t acceptable.
But he didn’t comment on the performance of the tank at all, simply on the presence of armor in a given area of the tank. There’s absolutely no reason to believe he’d lie on this, it makes no sense.
I’d like to point out one more time that the Leclerc has had 6 proposed armor upgrade package, including from third parties, and that none of them included an upgrade to the UFP or LFP.
If the frontal armor of the Leclerc was as bad as it is in game, there’s no way some of these packages wouldn’t have included some sort of LFP/UFP uparmoring.
Hell, the Swedes, which decided to add armor to the UFP of the Leo 2A5 didn’t feel like this was a necessity for the Leclerc.
Yes, all of this is circumstantial evidence, but it’s circumstantial evidence that falls under “common sense”. It goes without saying that the different MIC involved have a better understanding of the Leclerc’s protection than gaijin, and the fact that they didn’t see a need for an upgrade to the LFP or UFP support the idea that it’s at least considered as strong enough to handle most threats, which the Leclerc in game most certainly cannot.
As I pointed above, when we the community provide enough elements to put the current implementation of classified vehicle in question, gaijin should accept to look at it.
It’s absolutely not normal that a modern MBT can be killed from spall from a round that didn’t penetrate the hull or that it can’t bounce a shell coming at a near 90 degree angle.
6 Likes
I wonder how many documents could prove that Leclerc reload time could be buffed to 5s or less?
Video was used to prove Type 10’s 3.5 seconds, which got rounded up to 4 for the average, since 3.5 was at gun near zero elevation/depression.
I think the only autoloader that is EXACT to its IRL stats are the osculating turrets since no travel to zero needed for gun & no delay from finding correct ammo type.
1 Like
Leclerc can also reload in similiar time.
İf Commander activates override mode it can reach 3 or 4 seconds in exchange to have a chance of damagin autoloading system.
But since Gaijin doesnt model malfunctioning this shouldnt be a problem.
This was in the datamine
- Auto tracker (Leclerc), Auto tracker (Regular) :
- IRST :
- Added the ranges as IR Seekers on IR-AAM : All-aspect baseline lock range = 10 km
- Antenna Angle Half Sensitivity : 0.05 → 0.4
- LOS Lock :
- Width : 0.125 → 0.4
- Bar Height : 0.5 → 0.4
- Bar Count : 1 → 2
Not sure what the hell that means
im starting to fear it might be a fire control system i hope it is not
I don’t understand, why do do fear it ? Isn’t it a good thing?
I sent an email and they answered me today ! They said they sent my CV and proposition to the community lead.
7 Likes
According to a leak, the Leclerc SXXI AZUR is likely coming this update.
Nexter makes an HE timed fuse shell which isn’t in the game yet, this will probably be added alongside it.
Before anyone gets too excited about the AZUR: Remember that gaijin seems to believe that ERA not made by Russia is incapable of increasing KE protection (even when it’s explicitely stated, like in the case of the Brenus . And BTW @Smin1080p , here’s another example of a correct report being rejected from the devs for no reasons), so the AZUR kit will likely lead to increased weight and nothing more. In other words, probably a straight downgrade over the SXXI (unless they give it the OFL F2, but at this point I don’t have high confidence.)
5 Likes
Yes its good but it applies to other mbt’s aswell imagine some mbt’s like leo 2A6 with lead indicator
Way to go brother.
We’re trusting you on that.
2 Likes