Thats my point,
The MSC as well as leclercs are miles from what they should actually be
2 Likes
No stats but from my experience if there’s any spall* in the hull of an Abram’s it’s bound to get its turret drive. It’s not as remiable when there’s no spall* (so a third of the Leclerc round or smaller caliber auto cannons)
MSC is not worst than it should be I believe, just got the stats in the wrong places lol - armor instead of firing rate
Leclerc is just such an annoying issue I simply gave up personally
In my experience with the abrams it survives more now than it ever used to.
racked up a few hundred games since the turret rings were introduced
its thermals are wrong,
reload
armour
and last I cehcked its mobility is wrong as well.
Personally id rather see it get what it should have, then a BR to reflect that (as how the game should be balanced, not nerfed arbtirarily to be forced into a bracket)
they cant even use the excure it would sit on its own, the fking TKX (P) now is the only 11.7 japanese tank, (an anti air only SPAA doesn’t count as a lineup)
1 Like
Got a stat for that?
-
Go into protection analysis and select ANY shell that is able to frontally penetrate the Leopard 2 or M1 Abram’s hull, and then just click around the hull. Literally every single penetrating hit will take out the horizontal drive.
-
Simply play the game and experience for yourself that any penetrating hit to the Leopard 2’s/Abram’s hull immediately takes out your horizontal.
Replying with the “GoT a StAt FoR tHaT?” does nothing except make you look like both an idiot and a snarky prick who will contest even the most commonly known game knowledge that is proven by just playing the game…
It’s not that its a bad tank, its the fact its absolutely nothing like it should be.
I never said it was accurate, I just said it is a good tank in it’s current implementation.
I spent literal days searching for documents on the AMX-40’s missing turret composites, but the AMX-40 is STILL a very good tank right now.
3 Likes
Again, thermal there’s just not enough info yet.
As for mobility, it’s probably good. It doesn’t use the same transmission as the Leclerc, despite sharing its name. It’s actually the same as the AMX40, and prototype of the Leclerc transmission with one less gear. It also means it has less issue with the automatic transmission as the Leclercs, so it’s more mobile in game. Does it still miss some extra maneuverability completely depends on a top tier mobility rework from gaijin tho, since there’s not enough datapoints on the MSC to actually say if its mobility is good or not
No way in hell that would stay at 11.0 or 11.3.
Ive had hundreds of games between me leopard 2’s and Abram’s since the update.
well you are stating shit without any actual factual evidence of it.
Doesn’t make me look stupid to ask someone to provide some evidence for a claim xD
Okay? and?
People spent hundreds of pounds, weeks of effort and time in searching for and proving many things about challanger 2.
Chieftain as well has had reports sitting for years
Abrams,
leopards
etc what is your point here?
Type 90 sits at 11.3 mate, with better armour, mobility, reload and same thermals. and a better round.
Maybe and just maybe, ground RB needs a full fking overhaul? cause this shit is just stupid now
1 Like
Top tier mobility rework?
See the thermals though I was under the impression from the reports were between gen 1 and gen 2 , the game doesn’t seem to show that though as its just clear distinction of gen 1 and 2.
Also BTW your report? whats your attitude all about at the bottom of it? xD
Theres no need to call me a snarky prick here then be a total child on a bug report.
1 Like
Mobility across all tanks at high tier is very badly modeled. It’s a combination of bad traction (granted, this happens at all BR), but mostly as to how modern automatic transmissions are modeled.
In game gaijin just decides to double the number of gears to improve gear switching speeds or whatever, but in the case of the Leclerc (and VEXTRA), it just makes it accelerate slower because of the wasted time switching gears instead of accelerating.
Currently at top tier, almost no tanks move as they should IRL. Some are massively underperforming (such as the Leclerc and also Type 10 with its very special CVT), while others are massively over performing like seen in the t80/t72 series.
We are missing key informations. The thermal used is visibly a prototype of the ATHOS camera. Thing is, I haven’t seen reports mentioning the pixel density, sensor tech… as far as I can tell, it seems that devs, seeing the lack of info, decided to assume it was similar to the AMX 40 since the MSC already shares many systems with the MSC (Transmission, beefed up gun…)
I personally would also say it’s gen 2, but there’s just not enough info as of now. Maybe is the MSC was underperforming the devs might be inclined to make it closer to the Leclerc in that aspect but seeing the stats we are definitely not heading this way
1 Like
Love the msc best vehicle of the patch, just finished spading it rounds occasionally still feel like i’m shooting wet spaghetti though
Yeah, cus it shouldn’t have any. MSC having the armor it has is Gaijin giving a handout to France. Bleh, sure, lets have it, but at least make it as weak as it’s supposed to be i.e 2A4 level of armor (actually worse) cus it was only supposed to have 350mm KE over a 50 degree arc…
Seen people here claim the UFP should have 600mm+ KE which is just hilarious to me.
Leclerc armor, not MSC. Here pretty much everyone agrees that MSC should in fact not have any armor
1 Like
0.95 to 1.03 thickness to efficiency coefficient yeah, my favorite fantasy
even armors from 2010s can’t hit that but the French 1990s NERA was simply that advanced huh?
The Leclerc is stated to have protection across a 60 degree arc to its own ammunition, that is OFL 120 F1. so yeah, around 600mm KE for the UFP, aside from the driver port which probably is less than half of that
That’s sooo cool, ignoring the fact OFL F1s performance at combat ranges would be in the low 500s for flatter parts.
And at the UFPs angle it would be in the high 700s, which again is pure fantasy as Leclerc’s armor doesn’t have the density nor space to stop that.
Also, source.
i dont remember OFL 120 F1 having around 600 mm of pen and considering the armor in the leclerc hull ufp that seems rather impossible
for example take a look at Merkava’s wich its optimized for an angled design, it dosent even surpass the 400-500 reallistically
and even russia requires this, and a very specially designed ERA that works much better on angles to do that
1 Like
In game every penetrator use the LO formula, and shockers, for most modern APFSDS, the formula tends to under estimate the penetration. LO is just less realistic as MV of APFSDS increases.
As for the penetration of the OFL 120 F1, it is stated to penetrate the modern t72 (of the 90s) at 2000m frontally according to some documentation.
To me, the x-ray just isn’t realistic, but there’s just no available pictures with better information on that. That’s there main reason as to why there aren’t any reports on the actual armor, devs want some diagrams and stuff
1 Like
Lmao? Official BW tests of DM43A1 from the higher pressure L/55 of the 2A6 give only 30% chance of it defeating a T-72B 1989 at 1200m so I call big cope.
There’s a reason why they adopted the DM53 instead of staying with an inferior product like France did.
Oh actually you are right that I am wrong. It’s OFL 120 F2 that was supposed to achieve that.
well yeah if LO formula wasnt used wt would be impossible to play, and reallistically speaking 600 mm of pen would be too much even for that UFP to handle, it really would depend on angle armor performance, and as for statements you really need a source for that man, that’s why i normally accompain something i saw with its source whenever i can and if i cant i just say i saw once but that it should be taken with a grain of salt, and also im using X ray so thickness can be seen