I didn’t say that or imply it.
2A5 is only better where it can play hull-down → This is most maps → 2A5 is better
Yes.
Yes.
Yes…?
Not meaning:
So you did imply it or am I misunderstanding you?
You are misunderstanding
So is the 2A5 / 2A6 equal to the Leclercs
They are better tanks from what I can tell. (The Leopards)
1 Like
Because of what
Penetration higher post pen effectiveness
Survivability
Ammunition
Armour
All favour leopard.
The leclercs not much worse but it does start to show
1 Like
Leclerc has better mobility, better thermals, much more usable 5s reload, and no NATO hump.
I’d say they’d both be fine at 12.3.
1 Like
The reload is an advantage firepower wise but its still slinging a subpar dart in comparison to the DM53.
Also if you play around the nato hump, aka not putting yourself in a position that it hinders you, the leopard will still win most situations.
Mobility the 2A5 isn’t far behind leclerc but its a fair point.
They could ve fine at 12.3 sure, or we could mobe other stuff up too
Leclercs armour is a huge issue but
1 Like
Well yes but actualy no, the leclerc lacks the armor to be considered equal to a leo or an abram.
5 Likes
All the 12.0 Abrams should be 12.7, so the Leclerc wouldn’t be equal to them.
The Leopard has the turret armour, survivability, and round but the Leclerc has the mobility, versatility and reload.
That’s fair imo.
Are you three suggesting the Leclecs should be 12.0?
Because their pros work more often than the Leclerc’s pros and they don’t have such glaring cons
The reload, mobility, and versatility do work quite well.
Name me a map where these features can’t be useful in most of or all of the time
I mean, that’s true, though that meaning the Leclercs should be 0.3 BR lower than the Leopard 2A5 / 2A6 is a little extreme imo.
Leclerc’s low speed mobility is mid because the gearing is terrible. Low speed mobility is important because it’s what allows you to reposition quickly and what actually allows you to get up to speed. The reload is only .3 seconds faster than pretty much any other nato tank’s expert crew. The tank isn’t versatile. It’s a “light” MBT that relies on flanking and not being seen. A versatile MBT is something like an Abrams or Leopard who have everything good or better regarding their overall characteristics.
City maps do not promote mobility usage. Corridor maps do not promote mobility usage.
4 Likes
That’s fair but from my experience facing them, it doesn’t seem that bad.
The only NATO / Western MBTs at 11.7 - 12.3 that have similar mobility and reload (assuming the 12.0 Abrams are moved up) are the M1A1s and Ariete, which both have worse armour, and possibly even worse survivability.
The Leopard 2A5 / 2A6 are worse than Leclerc in most cases other than hull-down because the hull armour is just as useless as the Leclerc’s
It’s why 2A7 / 122s are better despite having the same turret armour.
So if you need to play around corners (such as in most city maps), you need to work around your NATO Hump and 6s reload. The times where city maps would favour the 2A6 / 2A5 is when it can afford to post up behind debris and defend a position / chokehold.
The Abrams is the only one I agree with being more versatile than the Leclercs.
I definitely agree here.
Though I can’t tell you how many true corridor maps there are since it’s quite nuance.
It is awful. Tanks that have no business being faster than you at low speed are because the leclerc has an awful transmission. It reduces the mobility heavily at low speed.
The M1A1 has worse armor? I don’t really care to read the rest. You’re being disingenuous.
3 Likes
I’m not talking about the 12.0 M1A1s, but the 11.7 one.
Every single M1A1 has superior armor.