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.
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
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
You are a complete moron that will attempt to dispute even the most undisputed of knowledge just as a way to dunk on others.
I could easily rebuke your stupidity with a clip that shows me clicking literally everywhere on the hull of the Leopard 2/Abrams with rounds that penetrate and EVERY SINGLE TIME it would take out the horizontal drive, but you’d say how that “doesn’t count as evidence”.
I hope you no longer participate in this thread given you only seem to be here just to stir up drama and confrontation (not that you continuing to be here matters much to me as I’ve blocked you).
I’m gonna go back to playing the MSC now.
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
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
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 shit
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
We are indeed missing the ranges at which the armor was stated, although it was visibly tested in an indoor firing range, so estimations are in the hundreds of meters
That would be considering x rays are correct, which is unlikely. For example I believe the Leopard 2A7 was also said to have terrible hull armor because the devs managed to give it lower LOS armor thicknesses compared to the 2A6 (or was it the str 122 ?)
do you have the image source or anything, i could do an aproximate calculations based off size and distance
the thickness and shape are correct issue is the value not the size itself
There are no public images of the Leclerc that was used as the test target sadly. We know it was fired at using as the Leclerc ammunition, OFL 120 F1 and the HEAT one. There’s only one picture that is available of an armor module with 3 impacts : 1 APFSDS and 2 HEAT, which show no penetration at the back
However there isn’t specific information on the conditions of the firing range, which the the entire issue at hand, hence why last reports were refused
not very helpful tbh also i see u mean the central part of the ufp i tought you mean like the really angled part
We know the Leclerc was tested basically everywhere and was scrapped after the firing tests. There’s just no public information for the aforementioned test.
We’ll have to wait 40 more years to get them, since France has a 70 years classified time frame lmao
The backplate bulged so we can conclude the APFSDS was in fact REALLYYY CLOSE to perforating it, depending on the simulated engagement distance this would mean ~520mm to at best 540mm KE, which ironically puts it near what the flat part of the hull is currently capable of in WT…
