The MSC is still a fantastic 10.7. Its a light tank labelled as a medium. Play it like that.
This is a horrible take. The new T-72B3A is the worst top tier MBT. Ask ANY good player.
1 Like
I still don’t see what’s the big deal with MSC, it looks to be a 2A4 side-grade which is perfectly fine for 10.7.
I think the fact no one speaks about it on this forum speaks volumes.
This forum jumps on everything even remotely good if it’s added to RU, so seeing little to no fuss about it makes me think it’s poopoo.
2 Likes
Pretty much. Its now the second best 10.7, which isn’t surprising considering being better than the 2A4 is a really high bar.
1 Like
The reason the armor on the Leclercs ingame is bad is because, and you won’t believe this, the Leclercs have bad armor irl
1 Like
how is 68° better angle than 74° ? Better angle means more armor effectively no ?
If you want i can give you Leclerc S211 with the same angle of the MSC :
You get 185mm vs 366mm for the MSC with the same shell. It’s clearly because they didn’t model the armor of the UFP
Ah, here come the people that don’t know shit about a vehicle and still comments very confidently.
10 Likes
At this point you’d think Gaijin would see this thread and decide to take action. They could make good money on a good top tier for france, they just added a new top tier premium to grind the tree with. After years I’m starting to really think they have an anti french tree bias.
1 Like
The layout is different with the MSC having more angled internal plates and an extra one for the top of the ufp its not just the angle of the top layer of RHA. Why would they go with an inferior armor layout on the production model? Is this even accurate? I’m sure I don’t know.
5 Likes
Can anyone give me a logical answer?
Because how can you go from 562 mm to 427 mm on the same portion of armor, which is normally homogeneous?
I made a bug report because the speed of the MSC is not good as it has the same transmission and engine power as the production Leclercs Community Bug Reporting System
1 Like
hum akshualy the transmission is not the exact same. The gear number is different from the available sources.
While the do share the same name, looks like the MSC got a pre standard variant, which is the same as the AMX40
Please refrain from commenting on a topic on which you know nothing about. 😀
You’re right, I wasn’t clear. Higher angle always means more armor. As @OriginalCrispy said, the MSC’s case is however the exception because this different angle changes the geometry so to add an additional armor plate!
IIRC, this thread was created because we were told by Smin that, to get the Leclerc buffed, we would basically need to do the same as the Sweden players did to get a new shell on STRV-122s about 2 years ago (even though it was already the best performing MBT at the time), by whining about the issue on the forums, or should I say create a thread with a high amount of views and regular comment about these issues. This thread is now one of the most visited in the Ground section but we were lied to as usual when it come to France Ground so yeah …
Unless the Leclercs performances sink, we’re not getting any buff anytime soon.
Sorry but your screenshots are too small to see what you’re talking about …
But the answer is : don’t overthink it, Gaijin half-assed the Leclerc armor so it doesn’t really makes sense.
5 Likes
So, would it be useful to submit new bug reports on the Leclerc’s armor?
Because the MSC is proving to us that it could solve some of the problems related to the Leclerc’s UFP armor bug.
I had already reported several bugs, but they were ignored despite the evidence.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/3OYYIJZ3sync
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/f0Z2qMBo2GwX
3 Likes
I feel like all these bug reports are only an excuse for gaijin to make a vehicle that they want. Like at the end of the day, it comes to dev’s decision whether it should be implemented or not. Even if u gonna use all the sources in the world to prove a point, they can just accept it and move on, maybe fix it 2 years from now if they want. Not to mention the incredibly inconsistent standards in the use of sources.
For a lot of Chinese jets’ armaments, they ask for photos or evidence that the missile is actually mounted on them, despite all the sources stating they were capable of doing so. On the other hand, Su30 gets KH38 without any proves needed (and never seen irl, only mentioned in brochure and its not a primary resource per gaijin standards)
The only truth is that all the small nations are less popular, thus not a cash cow for gaijin, so they don’t care. The big3 will almost always gets something better