WHY can't L2PSO have own D1 armor

Machinery of War Discussion Ground Vehicle
,
41

Looks like its much more vulnerable than a A4, A5 or A6. Just lost one to a artillery strike. Can’t remember when this happened last to me at top tier. The shell ofc hit this high 50cal weapon station (like a bullet magnet) and the tank was lost somehow. The UFP also seems to be a huge weak point, nothing shatters or bounces off, despite the massive angling.

Also wish Gajin would somehow reduce the huge amount of spalling, its almost not possible to survive a hit. The cones are always huge.

42

Some of my previous expressions had problems translating. Now I’ve solved it.
about the composition of D-tech in Swedish materials.
Some military enthusiasts in our country call
the three parts of D-tech D1, D2, and D3 when translating, which refers to drop-in-type, add-on armor, and top protection module.
So there were some misunderstandings.
What I would like to express is that
“the D-1 is the B-tech armor and add-on armor，
the D-2 is the C-tech armor and add-on armor，
the D-3 is the D-tech armor and add-on armor.”
War Thunder’s armor are wrong，
When we wreck the add-on armour, the 3BM42 can penetrate the Strv.122, but the DM23 cannot.
This is the performance of C-tech hull in game，
In fact, Strv.122 is equipped with D-tech drop-in-type armor of the Swedish modification.
However, WT assigned all the D-3 versus C enhancements to add-on armor.

43

the KWS-II includes“drop-in-type”,“ add-on armor”, and “top protection” , the TVM-1 carried these three types of D-tech to participate in the test, this is the only D-tech test vehicle on the data. Then KWM converted them to the Leo2A6 EX .The site of Demo II was used in the Leo2 PSO demonstration tank in 2006~2009.

44

NEW issues Gaijin.net // Issues
Some of my previous expressions had problems translating. Now I’ve solved it.
about the composition of D-tech in Swedish materials.
Some military enthusiasts in our country call
the three parts of D-tech D1, D2, and D3 when translating, which refers to drop-in-type, add-on armor, and top protection module.
So there were some misunderstandings.
What I would like to express is that
“the D-1 is the B-tech armor and add-on armor，
the D-2 is the C-tech armor and add-on armor，
the D-3 is the D-tech armor and add-on armor.”
War Thunder’s armor are wrong，
When we wreck the add-on armour, the 3BM42 can penetrate the Strv.122, but the DM23 cannot.
This is the performance of C-tech hull in game，
In fact, Strv.122 is equipped with D-tech drop-in-type armor of the Swedish modification.
However, WT assigned all the D-3 versus C enhancements to add-on armor.

45

I like to ask the same question as well that why they don’t have D-tech for PSO (even 2A7V still don’t have D tech in the game ironic isn’t it?)

2 Likes
46

Personally, I think there are some reasons for this:

  1. Part of the staff does not know much about the military.
  2. The Swedish sources, which are the main basis, are also not clearly stated.
  3. In recent years, no one has clearly described these contents, including some differences in titles.
  4. Because vehicles carrying D-tech hull armor but not having full add-on armor are only Leo2 PSO. There are no issues about these.
  5. The vast majority of people also do not have a careful understanding of the armor of the Leo2 family, and the erroneous statements occupy the majority, resulting in a few statements being ignored.