You know what I want to say. this is bs. over
FFS why is it difficult to see that this thing is completely broken at 5.0? I want my BTR-80A at 5.0 as well. Move leopard AA to 6.0 or 7.0 plz， you may give it better AP rounds, just like ZSU-57-2
6 Likes
Because Italy is a little silly with it
1 Like
what else do you need? everything is already in the vehicle’s name! you have 40mm bofors, you have leopard 1 chassis, and you have 5.0. that’s all you need.
It has no armor though.
Neither does the WMA, I guess it can go to 1.0?
Armour is not the only thing deciding BR/rank, and the Leo AA has everything else in spades.
2 Likes
Not a problem when you’re fast and don’t have to aim
1 Like
You don’t even state whether you think it sits too high or too low… if you have nothing to say then just remain silent…
For my part I hope it raises even further.
1 Like
Another desperate AA filler for nations that never had enough vehicles or a sensible line up in the first place.So everybody in 4.0 CAS has to endure the Leopard as does everybody who likes WW2 at 4.0.
Pushing players like me closer to the door for good.
Yes the point could have been made better but I sense the OP’s disgust as mine is the same.
There must have been better alternatives.How about the M42 Contraereo with more ammo?
Or this if you must go cold war.
Cold War Italian Prototypes Archives - Tank Encyclopedia
2 Likes
Just give it HE-VT and move it to fill another gap.
4 Likes
Italy should never have been an independent tech tree. This is just one more piece of evidence.
The exposed crew is a real weakness against strafing aircraft, no doubt about that - it’s probably the singular reason, other than gap filling, that this thing sits two whole BRs lower than the Kugelblitz - but this is an incredibly effective tank destroyer and I mostly see people play it as such rather than as an AA, which is completely predictable. Not just because of the pen, but because of that in combination with the fact that first-spawn is where its mobility makes the most difference.
3 Likes
Italy has plenty of potential to be a good tree and the addition of the Hungarian sub-tree eases said process, but your points on the Leopard 40/70 are fair.
According to some people it never received HE-VT, which is a real pain as it could raise the BR beyond this current unreasonable one.
Gaijin, however, is not beyond adding ahistorical ammo and I hope that this will be one such case where ahistorical ammo is used for balancing.
3 Likes
Yes, ammo is not an issue. Rather, I think the issue is that they will try not to move it up unless they have literally no other alternatives.
Which makes me circle back to my wider point about tech trees…
Already in general terms, I am “biased”: I think we should have as many nations as possible in WT, but not too many tech trees, for many reasons that I won’t list here. So I already support condensing trees into multinational iterations as much as possible (ironically Gaijin is already doing this with subtrees, I would just take it further).
But in a specific case like this one, the problem is not potential. Yes, with all the bells and whistles, you could make a good Italian tree. Even more so if you were open to include the occasional blueprint tank. The problem is Gaijin’s intentions, not inherent potential.
For example, the Hungarian sub tree: to you, it fleshes out the Italian tech tree a lot more. To me, while yes it does that in the short term, it also removes all sense of urgency about finding good domestic Italian alternatives to stuff like BTR and ZSU 57.
1 Like
I watched a TEC video where he clowned people who wish this vehicle to kove up in BR.
His excuse for this is because it is a gap filler, but Italy had other vehicles that could suit this BR and fill that previous gap without having to be so overpowered!
The M113 with RH202 for example could work much better at this 4.x/5.x range.
It really makes the Leopard 40/70’s BR inexcusable
3 Likes
It’s not at all uncommon for people to want broken vehicles to stay broken, for obvious reasons, and this is the sort of game that offers plenty of rationalisations.
Yeah, in all honesty I’m not expecting much to change in the near future regarding this vehicle.
SPAA really seems to be a class of vehicle that Gaijin very much has trouble balancing when compared to the alternatives.
Things such as the ItPsV and Anti-II are easy examples.
Leopard 40/70 is just continuing the tradition of unbalanced SPAA I suppose.
4 Likes
It’s the unloved child for sure (which has all sorts of implications we probably don’t even need to spell out). It’s doing even worse than heavies in this regard and that’s saying something.
3 Likes
The bigger question is:
Why does the Italian AA with 40mm Bofors get full AP and HE belts while the French AMX-13 DCA 40 gets on of the other rounds stuck in each clip?
And the next one:
How does the same caliber gun on a medium tank chassis only have 228 rounds stored while the light tank has 404? o_O
The Leopard stores 40 105mm rounds at the front. Replace one with 8 rounds of 40mm Bofors and you get 320 40mm rounds instead.
1 Like
I don’t want to rile the masses but I think the Soviet SPAA tree is rather well balanced in this regard, most aren’t better TD’s than SPAA (they arent that good as SPAA either but hey), apart from the ZSU-57-2, which is pretty historical. It was very poor as an AA vs the emerging jet era.
1 Like
I find the Praga insanely annoying to deal with, not gonna lie.
1 Like
More like they don’t really care that much about SPAAs in general.
Imagine being in a worse situation than heavies lol.
1 Like