Because it is.
Trying to spot enemy tanks with thermal sight is much better than doing with naked eyes.
Compare to having commander thermal it’s not.
Gen1 is enough to deal with enemy tanks while with Commander thermals you can spot them easily, unless you’re playing on very small screen which in this case commander thermals benefits you more than gunner thermal only.
Fair enough, we just weren’t talking about the same thing.
As I don’t know how to look at the graph of KD, KS, I usually don’t watch them too closely
As I said, your opinion on the huge part.
Gen2 is a night and day difference.
You’re free to disagree.
Like yours.
Hence why having gen2 commander thermals with gunner thermal> gen 2 gunner thermal only.
Got anything else?
That’s why I’m using stats to compare two tanks, not personal opinions to gauge tanks as I seem fit.
Not really as you can lose that gen2 sight, unlike for the gunner.
If you get shot that’s your problem, this doesn’t change the fact that commander thermal+gunner thermal>gunner thermal only.
Not really smart to use personal opinions as facts.
Nothing indicates Leclercs perform worse than 2A6, so you have literally no ground to ask for buffs.
Like how you ignoring commander thermals benefits?
I agree.
Let’s call agree to disagree since this conversation going nowhere.
Have I ever mentioned any buffs? Try harder please.
Also fixing inaccurate things about vehicles is not asking for buffs, learn the difference.
So it’s the best to close this thread off then, as that’s the whole point of it.
You also talked about 2A6 being superior in almost every way which isn’t something stats agree with.
Yes it is if those fixes make the vehicles in question better. Same thing applies to nerfs as well.
Have you ever heard player skill differences? I guess not.
So you’re admitting that you only care about stats rather than having accurate vehicles.
Good to know.
Not at the expense of Gen 2 gunner thermals.
It becomes solely a benefit when coupled with the Gen 2 thermals.
In the opinion of the majority of folks who have spent the last 3 years talking about 2a6 (if not longer)
Clearly proving you chose to ignore my statement of the lower half of the breach entirely can be penetrated with the M18 round APHE round.
You choosing to ignore something doesn’t change it.
Again I’m aware that it is.
however the angle to the tanks is the same 90 degree angle.
Would you like me to turn it off and show the exact same thing¿
I didn’t ignore them, it’s plainly stated above the 2A6 turret front is better, the rest of the turret side / rear is pretty much the same, unless you get Gaijined with a shot.
whilst ignoring the gen 1 gunner sights as if Leclerc isn’t running gen 2
Using the gunner thermals at gen 2 is objectively better in game than commander thermals.
EDIT : just to prove a point
the HSTVL can actively pen through the entire UFP bar the very frontal section on the 2a6
EHAHAHAHHAHA
EDIT 2 - **furhter proves how littel he knows, with said camera angle turned off the leclercs frontal armour VS the HSTVL round is actually higher.
Both are operated by the same group of people, aka French TT players.
Stats paint a better picture for the vehicle’s performance than random opinions in a thread about said vehicle’s sufferings.
You do not understand basic English.
He is stating objectively. That your argument of :
Leopard 2a6 > Leclerc in every possible way, is false.
He has proven this, as others have, with the statistical capabilities of the vehicle in game.
Asking for a fix, which improves the vehicle, regardless of reason for said fix, is in fact still buffing the vehicle.
Exhibit A :
Average stats obsessor vs average historical accurate vehicle enjoyer.
We’re not the same.
At this point claiming otherwise is just arguing in bad faith.
None of these vehicles are historically accurate mate, haven’t been for a very, very long time.
Again trying to fire that across to him as if it’s an insult to want the game balanced xD
He has resorted to just blatantly trying to insult / claim you are more insignificant with his last statement.
His argument of my vertical camera angle was on, actively worked against him, Leopard 2A6 hull is shown to be arguably weaker VS the HSTVL round at 500 meters.
Gonna keep yapping?
Going to actively produce something that makes your point ?
Any factual evidence or stats from vehicles provided or just ancedotal evidence?
By all manner of the statement, tis you sir who is “yapping”
