The "Leopard Problem" of Top Tier Ground

Game Discussion Realistic Battle
21

Sadly that was theorised years ago

By following the current course of real-life events,Gaijin made Top Tier basically “ops! It’s all Leopard 2s”
Realistically speaking the Leopard 2 is one of the most exported tanks in the world,so logically i get that many nations in the game would eventually have it.

But still,this further points out the reason why we better needed a Pan-Continental Tree,just like a known ship game: European TT with all minor nations (BeNeLux,Hungary,Romania,Poland,Greece,Spain, Switzerland,Austria,Denmark and so on), Pan-Asian TT (Thailand,Indonesia,Middle-Eastern countries,India,Bangladesh,Pakistan) and Commonwealth (Canada,New ZealandAustralia and South Africa)

Access to the European TT would be granted when you reached Tier V with a German,French,British, Italian,Swedish or Russian vehicle, Pan-Asian with a Tier V Chinese or Japanese vehicle and Commonwealth with British or American vehicle

So,as you can see,no nation is excluded (except Israel,but that’s because Israel already works like this) to gain individual access to another unique tree and Gaijin has the freedom of being creative with the vehicles and whatnot.

Without this remodel,i’ll only say these few words: just wait a few years until the F-35 will soon come,and you’ll see how extremely stale the Top Tier experience would be (7 Nations currently have access to it)

2 Likes
22

I mean their efficacy should be looked into, as in, why are thees vehicles performing badly?

23

Same as ariete and merkavas
They are bad and not optimal in the game Environment.

Maps to small challys are snipers hull down.
Not enough information leads to bad modelling etc etc

24

Reason no.1: Challenger 2s are bad
Reason no.2: Challenger 2s are objectively bad tanks no matter what

In case people in this thread still haven’t noticed, the nations that tend to perform the worst also tend to have some of the worst tanks, both IRL and in WT (or they’re simply too specialized) among many other reasons like bad modeling; a lot of bad premium players blah blah. Some nations “suffer” more from the first reason I’ve given, some “suffer” more from other reasons I mentioned.

Like, sorry British lads, but if you think CR 2/CR 3 have ever been on the level of their latest Leopard 2/Abroomz counterparts, you’re just actively lying to yourself. They’re literally just a bad design that doesn’t fit in the game’s meta, most notably because well, mouse aim exists!

25

Or you know… They could actually model the Chally 2 correctly. Instead of it hauling around 20 tons of armour that does nothing.

5 Likes
26

Covered in this

1 Like
27

Well… The 30 or so bug reports covering armour alone, should be enough to get them started at the very least.

Base Armour

Extneral Armour

Internal Armour

8 Likes
28

U know how it goes shrug

29

I mean gajin has the stupid swedish armor charts from the trials and aimt even able to model those right.

The promised DM rework fpr leos is an eternity away now

30

As I said earlier in this thread. CR2s are not competitve currently. Nor would they be a true equal to the Leopard 2A7s. But the gaping maw between them in performance is entirely and completely gaijins doing.

Heck. They could at least give us back the advantage we used to have to compensate for low mobility and poor armour. A reload rate buff.

CR2s with 4 second reload and a fixed ready rack (currently 4 should be more like 20+) would put us back in the fight

2 Likes
31

In all fairness, if both were to get fully fixed, that gap would arguably grow bigger than it currently is. I mean… a fully fixed 2A7Vs armor profile would be just “red - can’t penetrate” anywhere that isn’t the unarmored part of the LFP… a mantlet that’s virtually impenetrable unless you’re firing DM83-tier projectiles, basically unkillable to ATGMs that cannot straight up overpressure the crew from the front. As mobile as a Leopard 2A4, and on top of all that, fixed spall-liners.

1 Like
32

Oh dm63/dm73 my beloved

33

Perhaps and I dont necessarily have issue with Britian being less MBT focused (though the sheer number we have really flies in contrast to that)

But I think our tanks being good rear-guard, glass-canon, support tanks, combined with good IFVs (What we’ve got + other additions like other warrior and scimitar variants as well as the Ajax and Boxer) for IFV support and scouting. A decent SPAA in the form of the Sky Sabre or Supacat HVM would give us a solid ground line-up to make us a solid support nation.

Combine with our already fairly decent but underperforming line-up of CAS aircraft and future additions like the Harrier GR9A and Typhoon and we’d have a perfectly competitive top tier ground line-up.

I have seen the suggestion to just run Fox, Scimitar and Desert Warrior with a full line-up of CAS and CAP aircraft at top tier

Just Gaijin is interested in not adding top tier IFVs, SPAAs or fixing the core issues like fire rate or FCS on the CR2s leaves us woefully underpowered.

As for something competitive. Challenger 3 would probably do that. With all the bells and whilstles Gaijin wont add to the TD

2 Likes
34

Glass cannon denotes that your tank has a crushing advantage in terms of “firepower”, I dunno man but CR 2s ain’t that XD

The rest is good, tho.

35

Not to mention that with the autoloader model, practically all T tanks would have to lower the br.
Not only does it have a reload speed that is barely equal or lower, but you also have 1 less crew member, one more module to destroy that completely negates the reload, also less reverse speed to escape, and not even the T-80s only have better reverse speed than the other Russian tanks.

36

Eh he propably means the half decent round + the faster fire rate

37

image

38

Again. For the last 4-5 years? . We had the fastest fire rate on any tank (I think) at 5 seconds. But now that is the average.

If we were given a 4 second reload combined with a ready rack buff (we have one of, if not the smallest ready racks at top tier and one of the longest ready rack reloads because "reasons ") and maybe some buffs to our FCS (perhaps model the insane hunter-killer system the CR2s have in some way, maybe auto-LRF?) and finish up with the fact that L27A1 should probably have at the very least a little more pen than it does now (though most believe it is underperforming a lot more than that)

And we’d have a decent sniper.

Especially if the Mantlet armour ever gets fixed which leaves us really vulnerable in hull down positions

3 Likes
39

Well it was shared with Japan but fair nuff.

though most believe it is underperforming a lot more than that

Most also cherrypick what they wanna hear, going as far as ignoring actual UK docs and relevant snipets, like this one:

image
image1036×164 54.2 KB

This is where the “muh 700mm!!1” comes from, people’s inability to consider angle of attack.

40

This would also be a buff to almost all the top tiers vehicles…