The top tier Leopard 2 problem, attrition and time to kill

M8 he presented a well stated argument, not on a skill level difference, but on a gameplay feature imbalance. Simply saying “Git Gud” adds nothing to the discussion, and makes your later arguments if you choose to continue less convincing.

1 Like

It is skill level difference, just shoot weakspots.

1 Like

I’d be fine with them removing spall liners as long as there is some fairness involved
that being said, i still tend to die to 1-2 shots in my Strv122B+, different story if you aim for the most armored parts and expect it to actually do something

So with that in mind
2S38 is going up in BR
T80BVM’s side plate should not stop any shells with 600+ pen
Pantsir should be replaced with a Tor instead of having a 6-8km range advantage over every other nation
Fuel tanks should be fixed so they don’t stop any shells in mid-high tier, that way any light vehicles made out of paper such as the BMP-2 can’t survive simply because it ate of the shell somehow

We are finally gonna have a balanced game just by removing all spall liners and fixing the USSR

We also might want to a look at the strela missiles somehow still outperforming some 10.3-10.7 missiles compared to other nations IR missiles


spall liners create an issue of increased TTK on average (Which you would understand had you actually read the post) which leads to less average kills per minute to one team. and considering that sweden and germany are teamed together often, it leads to an attritional advantage for their team. not everyone knows weakspots, and in some cases those weakspots may be not visible (remember hull down cr2 bns? that level of armour on the 122b+ or 2a7v with spall liners is not exactly easy to fight in an M-1A2 SEPv2 or type 10, let alone merkavas, leclercs, or god forbid arietes

Idk… When i get hit in my leo, its always in the Mantlet, right under the gun. That produces so much spalling that it almost kills if not outright kills the entire crew in the turret…
I think more ppl need to learn how to deal with Leos correctly


still waiting that they fix it one day or “fix” ru breaches to the same level…

If not everyone knows them its their problem.

The “weak” Mantlet of western tanks


so youre saying that due to a superior design philosophy, these vehicles in game must be nerfed even more than they already are in order to achieve some facet of balance from a singular viewpoint?

well if we look at ru tanks they don’t have one so western tanks can’t have one :)))

its reload rate is with the best crew 6 seconds which outspeeds all soviet and chinese autoloaders and is comparable with every other manually loaded 120mm except for the Abrams which got a 5 second max reload

it actually has the best top tier round ingame penetration wise well atleast untill the masses get their hands on the Object 292

Its optics got improved from the other leos and has gen 3 gunner and comander thermals and some of the best zoom if i remember correctly atleastt way better than the arietes which are my go to

The breech is a good spot but it’s one that’s covered by the cheeks if the Leopard’s turret is facing away from you. I’m well aware that it’s a weakspot, I think I said that somewhere in my original post, it’s just a lot smaller than on most of the other top tier MBTs

That’s not the mantlet, that’s this piece

You can literally frontally kill any Sov tank with a 30mm lmao, here’s a vid of me doing so. The Soviet breeches are already substantially thinner than any NATO tank bar maybe the Challengers. And thank you for once again trying to hijack this thread into another “muh Russian Bias” thread, of which there are already plenty you can post in.

FYI, that’s still too little lmao. From an off-angle, those pieces along with the wedge were able to provide ~750mm+ of KE protection in Swedish Trials. Frontally they should be as strong as the rest of the turret, considering the projectile is going through the entire piece.


Do you think this is a realistic game? They have been doing this all along.

The Game it’s more reallistic than other Games with the same theme, if the leopard 2 was more reallistic it would be more survivable, and i know that people wouldnt like a more survivable leopard

1 Like

the claims of the game are of realistic implementation. modelling something unreal breaks the last line of that.
is it really that difficult to learn how to counter a vehicle?
i think not.
i havent complained about the T-80BVM spam.
not because i can deal with it but because i know i eventually can.
if you think you cant… nmp

In reality, they only choose what they want, and even add some non-existent things. Is it realistic to add MI28 and T80U to Sweden? Is the fictional Japanese TD very real?

I have engaged in thousands of battles in advanced competitions, and almost all vehicles are 2KD. Can learning how to confront solve the gap between vehicles? Look at the Ariete Main, Mekava, Leclerc, this is simply too much so that I hardly see anyone using these vehicles in combat

T80BVM is powerful, but 122 and A7 are even more powerful, and you can’t stop people from complaining about it. Germany, Sweden, Soviet Union. Any combination of two camps together is a 90% victory.

If gaijin insists on placing vehicles with huge differences in the same BR, then necessary balancing measures should be taken

1 Like

i dont agree with the T-80, mi-28 in sweden nor the T-90 in britain, but that is besides the point.

artificial nerfs are bad. period.
either implement them with counterparts or wait.
if you cant wait then just increase the BR ceiling.
unreal solutions are despised by the community afaik

Is this the time where I mention that 2A7V lacks majority of its real life capabilities?

  • none of the armour it should have (currently worse than a prototype Germany created in 1989, and significantly worse than the follow up; TVM max)
  • still no DM63/73 which do not explode
  • plagued with artificial weakpoints
  • doesn’t have its actual acceleration

Well, what balancing measures can be taken here? You’re losing to an MBT that is actually a lot worse than it could actually be.