I don’t think that an SPAA is necessarily overpowered when it is a capable tank destroyer, rather when it can easily engage both while also not being so hard to use.
R3 T20 is a good example of this.
I don’t think many would argue the ZSU-57-2 is overpowered.
Leopard 40/70 is very capable in both aspects while being among the most mobile SPAA, which makes it quite unbalanced.
As always, the incentive structure behind the game is what dooms it. There is a clear incentive to prioritise the collectable nature of the game, over trying to make every single vehicle balanced.
In a TD role? It slipped my mind, for me it’s a stand out SPAA, really competitive apart from the small amount of ammo.
Yes, I don’t fly yet (my rather obsessive behaviour is to try and get good at a smaller amount of things at a time), so I meant when encountering it as a ground unit.
They are overpowered when used as a TD or light tank when you compare it to other light tanks. For example I very frequently encounter ZSU 57 and 23 or whatever the name while i’m in a shitty EBR 1961.
I have to aim for a good 4 seconds while they just have to spray. Any engagement face to face is a clear loss for me.
Bascially, light tanks with big caliber canons are always at a disadvantage when compared to SPAAs and IFVs that can just spray all around.
All in all, I’m less mad about AA that I am about autocannons and the way they ruin the game.
Legit almost every WW2 to early cold war AA has an exposed crew.
I know. I was trying to figure out how you could rationalise this being lower than the Kugelblitz by two full BRs.
The Kugel has a fully enlcosed turret with 2 30mm guns, which fire pretty fast. The Leopard AA is an opened topped with a 40mm bofors, which shoots slow. Same reason the Ost and Wirbelwinds are at 3.7 and the Kugel is at 7.0, the former is open topped, and the latter has an enclosed turret.
Amazing mobility for it’s BR with hull that can bounce some shells and turret not armored enough to fuse APHE.
Pair that with a really solid autocannon with more than decent pen and rate of fire and you’ll get something similarly cancerous as that Swedish AA on Leo 2 hull.
Yes. That’s why my conclusion was exactly “the exposed crew”. 😁
“I want my speed machine with a 30mm autocannon with APDS at 5.0 so I can run wild.”
Perhaps if we get another variant of the BTR, like the BTR-60, then we will have a lower BR BTR. But right now, I don’t see the 80 going to 5.0 or below,.
Yeah. People rationalise this in many ways but it’s clear why they defend low BR placements of some vehicles.
THOUGH some vehicles could go to a lower or higher BR.
Does it have a stabilizer?
My experience with the Leopard 1 doesn’t make me too excited for it.
BTR-ZD on release
M53/59 sitting where it is with a full belt with 91pen 10 degree gun depression 60KM forward
lol
The Gun is a basic 40mm Bofors cannon, the same as the M1919 and M42 duster. Those 2 however have 2 40mm’s.
The Leopard with a single 40mm would not have a better AP round. Other all Bofors would get it. One more thing the turret is machine gunable and the crew is exposed so use a HE round.
The Leopard 40/70 has a different variant of Bofors 40mm that fires faster, so it is not the same armament.
Your arguments on exposed crew is just as applicable to the vehicles you mention in your comment too. Hell, the M19 (not M1919) and M42 are some of the worst offenders in that aspect, arguably worse than Leopard 40/70…
‘On release’ so now how it is now, where all it’s worth is in it’s AA capability.
The Praga can work, it doesn’t go toe to toe with anything outside of light vehicles unless it gets a flank. I think it’s a very well rounded example of a capable SPAA that doesn’t excel in a TD role like the ItPsv 90 or Gepard do.
My bad i’m tired as heck. Was about to head to sleep until I saw this forum post.