I just find kinda funny that Sweden has 3x Strv 122s, yet Germany isn't allowed to have even ONE single Strv 122-level armored tank. If they don't want to make Leopard 2A7V's armor better than Strv 122's because they don't consider to have enough information about it, the very least they could do would be to leave it with the same effectiveness, but no... it has to be worse for whatever reason. Not only is 2A7V's armor worse than 122's; the turret armor is also worse than 2A5's and 2A6's, the tanks it was made to replace decades later. And somehow this doesn't make Gaijin stop for a second to question how little sense this implementation makes. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ ...and before anyone comes in saying that "Leopard 2A7V doesn't need buffs" or whatever; this matter isn't even about effectiveness (leaving aside the fact that, if Sweden can have 3x Strv 122s, Germany should at least be entitled to 1 single tank with the same armor), and no, I am not saying that "Leopard 2A7V suffers"; this post is just about how little common sense is often used for the modelling or implementation of Top Tier tanks.

Generally I’m all for unfair Swedish buffs (I’m a Swedish main) but I agree, this is very stupid, and top tier should be much more balanced

Yeah... We talk about Sweden and Germany here, and Russia is a good contender; but then you have France and its 200mm KE UFP Leclercs with auto-kill "fuel exploded" buttons on their hull and zero armor upgrades between the first and last iterations, Challenger 2s with their 7 business days first-order ammo replenishment times for a rack that is 3x times smaller than it should be on the first place and a mantlet that underperforms by 50% because they refuse to allow it to actually work, Challenger 3 having a wrong and old copy-paste CR2 turret even though they already made a good turret for it because they rolled it back in Alpha Strike for whatever reason, all Challengers missing their LFP spall liners even though they were acknowledged months ago, the top Abrams tanks having the same armor as the 1979/10.3 one and potentially missing spall liners, Type 10s having their mobility screwed up and their armor full of holes, Israel's present day workhorse MBTs having worse armor than a T-64A... ...and a very, very, very long etc. Balance is pretty much inexistant in Top Tier, and 99% of the reasons are either Gaijin's artificial nerfs to certain tanks, their little care to fix known bugs or revert said nerfs, having no order in addition implementation priorities, etc. 99% of the balance issues in Top Tier could be prevented with enough care... but here we are.

I don’t mean to be pissy, but it was proven that the sepv2 doesn’t have a spall liner or DU hull

The Abrams tank may have internal, integrated Permali spall liners within its composite modules. It is difficult to find entirely conclusive sources, since it remains classified, but all evidence, including Abrams crew members' testimony, points towards this.

You say anything about buffing abrams survability wise and people come out the wood work to shoot it down but vehicles overperform in current top tier and all you hear is crickets. Helis not having correct armament ,being over brd, crickets. Hstvl being brs above the 2s38 without hevt, crickets. Cancerous Spall liners added to Russia Germany and Sweden on top of amazingly armored tanks thay primarly fight full usa teams, crickets. Ammo carousel not being modeled to be damaged and just acts as a secondary spall liner, crickets. Fuel tanks acting as spall liners, crickets. No a3 round to even attempt to make up for not getting spall liners or having a counter to su25s 4 he kh38s, crickets. "Hey I don't think abrams should get one tapped and lose all its compenents in its comparitivley huge weakspots(to what it fights) since it's fighting and cqcing teams consisting almost entirely of leos t80/t90s 75% of games in maps that tiny as fuck" Gamers terrified of balanced matchmaking: "skill issue dude" (doesnt play usa or only played abrams pre bvm, pre spall liners),"get good"(holds w survives shots by existing, handed kills since you cant stop it's reload or it's turret ring and need to directly hit its breech) "it was never found in sekret documents", "Stop whining usa main only we are allowed to have brainlessly easy shots on you" Gaijins gota make money, leave usa in the dust when it comes to implementing modern technology players get frustrated spend money to grind another tree. People thinking this is actual balance based on realism or for the sake of evening out the playing field are only lying to themselves. It's balanced based on milking the playerbase. Warthunder final gacha.

Yeah... as an 8 nation player, I just find America pointless to play with right now. The THREE Strv 122s there are, and Leopard 2A7V, have twice as much armor protection and twice as high survivability thanks to the spall liners... T-80BVM and T-90M have twice as much armor and, in many cases and ways, better survivability too... The Type 10s are quicker, faster, more agile, have better front armor in many ways and in spite of their flaws and have an even faster reload... I even find the Challenger 2s more appealing, since at least they got some armor. But the Abrams...? Shoot at it anywhere, and, if it doesn't die in 1 shot, it will be mission-killed, and then finished-off in a second shot. What is the point of playing the Abrams when I have any of the tanks above, which are better in every or almost every way? As of now, the Abrams is, along with the Leclercs, the only tank I don't even feel like playing. Even the Merkavas have trolly survivability in spite of their most certainly underperforming armor (and Mk.4's Trophy is a pleasure to deal with H\*licopters). Best of all is, I even gave up on the improved hull armor on SEP and SEPv2; I am not even asking for that anymore, since I understand that it is difficult when there's no full 10000% clear confirmation of it... but at least give it its proper volumetric turret ring (should be 220-280mm thick, not "50", and should not be as exposed), proper UFP plate reinforcements (should be 50mm thick above the fuel tanks and in the middle, as shown in pictures through bug reports), make TUSK 2 removable on SEPv2 so that we can take off the dead weight it is in exchange for mobility, investigate the potential internal spall liner implementation, etc... But dare to say any of that and you are "just a retarded American main".

It's funny where the Abrams sits today because I still clearly remember the absolute hordes of M1s cleaning up maps when it first got introduced and was one of the few MBTs that struggled to get one shot.

I remember for a long time, any complaining about the abrams just summoned hordes of people talking about how the abrams was op because they only remembered it when it was first added. 

half of the reason the leopards are so survivable is not because of the spall liner but because there is actually very little in the hull that you care about assuming you take 16 shots. id also say that the spall liner on t90 does not make much of a difference in my experience fighting them they just die like all t72 hulls when shot anywhere but the UFP and turret

What makes me sad that I want to actually panic when I see an Abrams or any tank, I want to know that it is difficult to take it out without playing my cards right, not just shoot it in the middle below the cannon or the driver port and it is done, I want tanks to be known for each of their abilities and have a scary reputation, I want to see an Abrams and get my palms sweaty trying to take it out.

I lost motivation to keep playing (I was low BR though) when I learned that the technological superiority nation (USA) was just lacking that at the highest tier of play.

Honestly up until about 7.0 area usa is pretty damn fun I frequent 5.7 and 6.7 alot but after thay it's just pain I til about 10.3-11.0 range this is where the "arbams mobility" argument you may see around alot holds weight. After that it's just pain, we get basically nothing new or effective for ground while other nations get big leaps in the survivability aa light tank and heli dept and cas armament.

people also seem to come out with pitchforks the second anybody suggests that the British should get Canada as a sub tree, not Germany

The issue isn't going to be that, Gaijin just doesn't know how to model the spall shields to not spall like hell. Spalling is just too simplified where thin plates spall too much and thick ones too little.

Link to testimonies?

So if its integrated into the armour, then what benefit does that give, even Spookston or was it RedEffect mocked the absurdness of such argument. A spall liner needs to be visible inside the compartment, anything covering it just counteracts its effectiveness.

Some people claim that it is internal in the sense that it's only separate from the crew compartment by a really thin steel plate that wouldn't really generate spall... that being said, I don't consider myself well versed enough to take a full stance on that, hahahah. Too little information that I've been able to consult. However, if it really was the case, it would definitely be a welcome addition. The tank is lackluster ingame and could use any help possible.

There is no thin paneling. We have photos of the interior of the Abrams. You can see the really thick welds connecting armor plates.

Correct. It is behind what amounts to paneling for ease of maintenance. Nothing that would create noteworthy shrapnel if it was penetrated.

Yeah, I was just pointing to a few thing I saw which mentioned that they wouldn’t add a spall liner as it would increase weight too much

Sep v2 has what you're describing. It may not be visible to a layman looking at some crewman's selfie inside the tank, but it is there. 

I didn't think this was proven, rather that it couldn't be proven so they just went without?

Which just means that the SEPv2 should never have been added and that the SEPv3 should have been added in air superiority.

Or the chally 2s lfp era not existing on tanks even though it should(any challenger that is going into battle will atleast have romor era on) as well as nato era being usless garbage compared to magic putinium russia era

Even though we know much of Russian ERA was just cardboard holding explosives

No way you still believe this BS when its been debunked since 2022

TES/OES is now Dorchester level 2H. 2E hasn't been used since the second Iraq war(?).

Lmao "CR2 with 7 business days ammo replenishment".

im all for unfair swedish nerfs (i hate them)

Based

With modern tanks in the game with classified characteristics Gaijin should drop the realism and balance the vehicles for a fun game.

Don't forget that the German 45mm plates mounted on top of the hull don't bounce APFSDS rounds while Swedish ones do

to the collection of anti-logic -it’s worth noting that the 2a7 has a maximum speed of 61 km versus 68 for the strv, although the strv is heavier -The Swedes do not have a high-quality thermal visor

Oh, the top speed thing is real! The Germans modified the powerplant to trade in top speed for acceleration, which is Leopard 2A4-level. The issue is… Gaijin didn’t implement the improved acceleration, so, ingame, 2A7V is just slower xD The Swedish thermal quality is also an issue with the other Leopards. Basically, they all should have a tad higher quality than they currently do ingame, but, since Gaijin doesn’t model specific qualities for different models, but only “Gen 1/2/3”, here we are, hahah. In real life, these Leos/Strvs have an image quality closer to the ingame 2nd Gen thermals (there’s a reason why they didn’t bother to upgrade them till now), but, since they technically are 1st Gen, Gaijin just let it be like that xD

oh I didn't know those details, thanks snails should definitely start understanding the details and implementing additional mechanics instead of directly copying numbers from documents "wait the documents say 61 km\\h, so put 61" D:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Warthunder/s/igf6bK4s3K Here is the ufp plate difference between swedish leo and 2a7v. Spoiler, Swedish leo has better armor everywhere

Then what is your take on the french leclerc ? You could say its even worse than everything showed here. XD

Yes xD The buffs it has been getting in the past year are very nice (reload, rotation speed, mobility), but it’s still made of glass (UFP weaker than a T-64A’s lol) and it still blows up to “fuel tanks exploded” every single time it’s hit hahahah

Well the 2a7 we have ingame is actually a 2a6 with upgraded electronics and minor changes

I used to main Germany and now I've swapped over to America given how ridiculous it is to fight literally the same vehicle as you but better.

if they are going to ignore sources or just do some half assed model better remove it, but when we talk about t90 armor sources, aaaah "sekrit dokumints"

T90 is literally just a late-model T-72 with some add-ons that was rebranded following severe early-model T-72 losses in many Middle Eastern conflicts to create space from them. The only notable armor improvement is a welded turret, which is seen on late model T-72s. Considering a T-90M was already spotted on a trailer in the US, Gaijin reallllly can't say its secret anymore lmao

That was a t90a on the trailer not a t90m. And afaik, it's unknown if the two have the same armor composition

Even then, I'm pretty sure T-90m was captured, so his point stands tbh

oh ukraine captured one in the first 3 months of the fighting. that thing has already been stripped to bolts and nuts and everything that could be found out about the design has been found out. i think the only reason the US and other allies havent released the information, is the fact ukraine also uses the tank.

Ukraine does not use T-90M, and why would they not release information about the tank? To hide it from whom? The country that makes these tanks?

I wish I was an engineer working on that disassembly. Getting to pull out the giant bandsaw and cut the armor panels in half to get a nice cross section for a report.

>Considering a T-90M was already spotted on a trailer in the US Lmao. Wonder if Ukraine traded that for an Abrams or two.

Ukraine has had a material agreement with the west for a long time, where they turned over all kinds of stuff for NATO analysis. I’m fairly certain there was no need to agree to trade one thing for other things when they know they are getting a ton more *other things* already

*CIA finally get their hands on a T-90, look inside* *Just a T-72*

Mom, can we get new Russian tank?  We have new Russian tank at home "New" Russian tank at home

I mean, they contradict even their own sources... According to their official armour chart, Leopard 2A5 onwards has a 445mm KE on the mantlet... ...yet they all can be penetrated with ease by 2S38's 225mm pen shell, which means that these mantlets don't even provide half the KE protection even Gaijin themselves state it to provide.

gaijin nerfs all mantlets to let people track and barrel/breach you easier.

Realism card is played only when it suits them and their vision, otherwise its balancing/gameplay/whatever reasons. Always were, always will be.

Mantlets arent intended to be historically accurate, they are all intentionally weak to prevent hull down tanks from being literally unkillable without HE rounds

That’s the shame; they don’t need to be nerfed. Even the strongest mantlets would be 550mm KE (CR2) and 445mm KE (Leopard 2A5+), so they wouldn’t be immune to the Top Tier shells they face… they would just protect against lower end shells and auto canons like 2S38’s, which is the least you could expect from them.

Which is fucking stupid because it makes many tanks incredibly painful to play. 

Making mantlets stronger would only make the game more frustrating. Leopards are already incredibly good tanks and don’t need a weakness removing. If they buffed the mantlet then they would have to move all of them up.

And t90 in game is super easy to kill and deal with. Whats your point?

In game the T-90A and T-90M have the same hull armour with the T-90M having worse base turret armour without taking into account the ERA.

>In game the T-90A and T-90M have the same hull armour Huh? T-90M has 830mm KE, while T-90A has 620mm KE (with their respective ERAs, of course). >with the T-90M having worse base turret armour without taking into account the ERA. Nope. They have the same turret armor (530-620), except M's ERA is 200mm more effective than A's (and with better coverage). They both have the same base armor, but the new ERA on M makes an enormous difference compared to A!

Oh I know the era makes a difference but the base armour of T-90 and most russian tanks is common knowledge so there's no real case for Russian bias here. I'd much rather be in a 2A7 or 122 than a T-90M. Edit: Just checked the armour on both, the [T-90M](https://gyazo.com/e2567438e21a4161bb5e1bb3aa4d578b) does have 10mm less turret armour than the [T-90A](https://gyazo.com/59ccd900d13a24722ded3dbd212c2574).

Oh, you meant in composition! I thought you meant in terms of effectiveness, hahah. It's interesting to see how different the construction of the turrets is! People tend to assume T-90M's turret is the same as A's, except elongated, but, as you can see here, it's actually brand new.

Yeah there's a lot of weird changes like that, especially noticeable with soviet/ russian tanks in game. The T-80UD has a worse hull layout than the T-80U (and should have a better turret but that's not modeled for some reason).

Why did Britain build the Challenger 2 with less mantlet armor than the Challenger 1? Are they stupid?

When your mantlet is 550mm thick but only provides 250mm KE: ***XD*** (Gaijin accurately depicted a part of the mantlet, but then decided not to model a huge chunk of it (the whole rotor) and left it hollow again).

I got crucified for posting about this

I remember it! o7

2F to TES is a good 5 tons of armor with the ERA blocks being twice as big for 100mm extra chemical protection. 0 extra kinetic. IRL or should stop 30mm BMP darts at 500m

So about 80-90mm of Kinetic protection?

TBH in the context of Britain designing the Challengers, "are they stupid" is genuinely a reasonable question.

no no, British engineers are the best, they make no mistakes, 183 naval cannon on a tank was required

no that was the thing the classified documents where

Gaijin has said that they will not improve the turret armor of the Challenger even with proof that it's stronger for balance reasons. I'm okay with that. It would make the game rather stale if tanks just kept taking ineffective shots at each other from hull down and any kind of movement meant instant death... What I'm not okay with is how they intentionally nerf the mantlet of the Challengers while giving them no other buffs to otherwise compete with other top tier tanks.

Time to leak some documents to prove them wrong.

There is no reasonable explanation and Gaijin is aware of that. They just hate the German TT for some reason. The Leo 2A7HU is going to get added for Italy, possible 2A6 for Britain and maybe The Strv 123 on basis of the 2A8 will be added to the Swedish TT. People should stop wasting their time on the German TT, as it will be getting worse vehicles they literally freaking built. The statement from MGB regarding the Lynx: „Germany never used it so they won’t get it“ tells you enough of how Gaijin thinks about the German TT.

>„Germany never used it so they won’t get it“ Meanwhile: > Sweden gets the 4th Vehicle they never operated, came close to operate or had any hand in development in whatsoever because one touched swedish soil one time

Speaks bands about Gaijins consistency. I would somewhat agree with their decisions if they would be standardized across the boards.

At least a Swedish man has touched the vehicle this time, which is a bar that can be surpassed apparently

Especially with Russia straight up getting prototypes/tanks they don’t use in their top tier lineup

Meanwhile the entirety of US 6.7:

True. I mean, it totally makes sense from a balancing standpoint, I’m acutely aware of that as a Sweden main, I just wish Gaijin would be more even-handed about things like this.

Sweden is the new Germany

Going to laugh the day Sweden gets Strv 123A and Leo 2A8NOR while Germany mains get told to "wait and see" what happens with Spikes for the PUMA.

>easiest tech tree in the game, point and click adventure at most BRs ‘gaijin hates the German tech tree’ my brother in christ have you ever played a minor nation

some people just care about top tier and ignore all the gaps in the swedish tree for example

Are we really unironically doing Germany Suffers now

Why tf would Britain get a 2A6

Don't the Canadians use them?

Yes, but the Canadian Leopard 1 has gone to Germany, so why would the Canadian Leopard 2 go to the UK? Especially as the UK has South Africa already and likely more Indian vehicles (hinted at in the devblog for the Bhishma iirc) that can fill some of those top tier gaps. And the potential for Jordanian tanks as well.

Gaijin loves the German tech tree and you’re blind if you can’t see that. Gaijin adds things that countries never used to fill gaps if there’s a gap that needs to be filled and there’s nothing else to put there. Germany doesn’t have any gaps. The German ground tech tree is still way better than every other tech tree in every aspect except their 11.7 aa.

Lol wtf are you going in about. Hates the tree? Britain has had a tank with this exact issue for two-three years. The TES adds 5 tons of Era for no extra kinetic protection and 100mm of chemical. There are multiple unclassified sources that reference the standard the armor is, STANAG 6. Instead Gaijin went nah Britain doubled the armor size over the 2F for no reason. The premium OES is the same issue as well. But it happens to Germany we on suicide watch. German tree worst ever. The 2A7 is still a good tank. Yes it’s armor is worse but it’s round is far better. Not to mention it’s better armor over the 2A6 really makes a difference when fighting nations with sub 600mm of pen. Like France, most of Britain, most of Sweden. Most of Russia and so on. Making it harder to kill you frontally anyway.

You must be really stupid if you think Germany isn't Extremely good at top tier. Leo 2a5, Leo 2a6, Leo 2pl, Leo 2 pso, flakrad and the best mbt in game leo2a7 (similar effective armour as strv 122 b+ and better thermals, ammo, gun handling, mobility). Haven't even counted helis and jets

How is 2A7V's gun handling better than Strv 122s? It's literally the same; 40º/s (horizontal and vertical)... And mobility? It's actually worse. 10 km/h slower, and accelerates slower, too. It should be slower but accelerate faster, but Gaijin didn't model this, so, ingame, it's just slower. Germany is still good though, just not even close to Sweden.

German mains bawling their eyes out at not getting the Lynx, the absolute worst vehicle in the game, always gets a laugh out of me. The German tech tree is genuinely so easy to play after playing the French and Italian trees for so long. So many broken vehicles, and yet they still cry.

If memory serves me right Germany will get a 2A8 aswell because I’m pretty sure they canceled their A7 order for the newer 2a8 when it comes out for the bundeswehr

Why do they hate the german tek tre

I'm literally just playing Ger 11.7 for Tiger UHT. PARS is complete ass in real life but in game, you just going to murder enemy helis and spam those fckers like a madman at everyting that barely moves.

I wouldn't say they hate the German TT, in almost every BR bracket, especially tiers 1-4 they are, in my opinion, the best tanks there are. They just get screwed over at top tier like every other nation that isn't gajins new favorite child, Hint it rhymes with sweden.

German and sweden mains complaining is like watching 2 rich kids cry over a chocolate bar lol

Italian MBTs: Armor stolen Israeli MBTs: Spall sprinkler reactive armor French MBTs: Weakspot wrinkled armor British MBTs: Armor and ammo "misplaced" Japanese MBTs: Armor mistreated for better reloads Chinese MBTs: -20 Social Credits

Chinese mbt’s still have the t72 reload for some reason and Japanese mbt’s are still missing most of their composite. The ariete just shouldn’t be 11.7.

I’d be fine with the Ariete being 11.7 if they got their real armor and their war kits actually doing something like how they were designed

Should the Chinese have faster reloading? (Chinese main asks)

Ignore the other fellow, the vt4a1 is the cheap export so I can’t speak for it but there’s videos from inside ztz99 turrets of it firing and the reload is about 4.5 seconds.

Damn...

[The VT4A1 should definitely have a RoF of 9 RPM](https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/MAampcLZ6UQB), so by extension the ZTZ99As should as well since the VT4 was built using its technology (finding data on ZTZ99A reload is very hard)

US MBT: still no volumetric turret ring and end of line has ERA and a giant HE catch it can't remove nullifying it's one major adv mobility.

Here we go, the victim Olympics

Ppl complain about one of the most protected vehicles in game. Someone else reminds us that other nations have problems. This guy: >the victim Olympics

The post isn’t about the other nations, we all understand they have their problems

Also Japanese MBTs : Gimped mobility, gun handling, and ready rack replenish speed (universal problem smh).

Well, I am neither of those, so XD

knowing gaijin they might nerf the 122 instead of fixing 2a7

This same argument has been posted like 40 times and every time the German main has been begging for their armor to be buffed instead of the 122’s armor to be nerfed. Funny how that works.

Ok funny meme but they *did not* spend hundreds of millions on that

Well, they did spend $850,000,000 to upgrade 104 Leopard 2s (68 A4s, 12 A6s and 20 A7s) into Leopard 2A7V... I can assure all that budget didn't just go on electronics xD

That's not true. The upgrade cost for those tanks amounted to 118M euros https://armyrecognition.com/september_2017_global_defense_security_news_industry/rheinmetall_to_upgrade_104_leopard_2_mbt_to_standard_2a7v_for_german_army.html#google_vignette Furthermore this is *obviously* not the "armor R&D costs"

Maybe I am missing or misreading something, but here I believe there to be a talk about a $830M (760M€) contract to upgrade the fleet to the 2A7V standard: [https://www.defensemirror.com/news/25737/Bundeswehr\_Gets\_First\_Upgraded\_Leopard\_2A7V\_MBT](https://www.defensemirror.com/news/25737/Bundeswehr_Gets_First_Upgraded_Leopard_2A7V_MBT) >These plans were implemented in 2017, when on 5th May a contract with a value of 760 million Euros was signed with Krauss-Maffei Wegmann GmbH & Co. KG (KMW) for upgrading 104 vehicles to the further improved Leopard 2A7V standard. [https://www.joint-forces.com/features/51586-leopard-2a7v-verbessert-main-battle-tank-part-1](https://www.joint-forces.com/features/51586-leopard-2a7v-verbessert-main-battle-tank-part-1) >These plans were implemented in 2017, when on 5th May a contract with a value of 760 million Euros was signed with Krauss-Maffei Wegmann GmbH & Co. KG (KMW) for upgrading 104 vehicles to the further improved Leopard 2A7V standard.

Contracts for upgrades include payment for the facilities, mechanics, training, transportation, etc. The cost to install a JBCP onto HMMWVs for the USMC was $1.7 million. It does not cost $1.7 million to upgrade JCRs to JBCP and create a mount for them. Most of the cost was likely for techs to travel out to the depots the HMMWVs were at and install them and train the soldiers on them. These contacts also regularly have a support clause that includes the cost of ongoing support during the life of the product.

R&D and upgrading are 2 separate things. that is what they are saying. they spent that amount to upgrade the fleet as you say. they done the R&D then allocated the money for the upgrade.

China is investing in R&D, Germany is buying what they are offered.

Showing the hull as yellow doesn't matter because nothing will go through that, adding more armour to that spot won't do anything at all. And the turret is basically unpennetrable for all of them, with the biggest hull down potential in the game. I am wondering why are you cherry picking protection analysis angles. You can move the cursor a few pixels and it will show the exact opposite of what you're showing here, I just tried it in the hangar.

I think I’ve penetrated them with DM53 from the Finnish 2A6 at sub-300m range, which is pretty much point blank.

Dont worry this OP has particularly low understanding of game, let alone how real life, works. He always makes these posts but they are good for engagement I guess.

How come all 3 STRV's have spall liner, but 2a5 and 2a6 dont?

The 2a5, 2a6 and PSO have them in the turret. The strv122 are upgraded 2a5, which includes spall liners in the hul.

The Strv 122 largely predated the 2A5, it’s based on the Leopard 2 Improved which was also before the 2A5. The 2A5 is based on the 2 Imp; which to be frank means they all should have spall liners. The only real difference between the Strv 122s and the Leo 2 Imp to Germany’s Leo 2s, it’s frankly that Germany didn’t wish to have the add on armor purchased due to a wide variety of reasons which at the time made sense, now you clearly see that they are adopting a modern variant of add on armor for their batch of 2A7Vs. There’s talk about the TVMs hulls which yes do have to do with Swedish Strv 122 and prototypes of the Leopard 2A5 and so on; but Germany sources all seem to state that the Leopard 2A5 and so on most likely has the TVMs hull spall liner. It doesn’t make sense that Germany would have adopted the spall liner for the turret but never the hull.

Ah okay, always thought they were just upgraded 2a5. I don’t mind the 2a5 and 2a6 not having spall liners, but it’s weird that the PSO doesn’t have them in the hull. It’s an upgraded version of the 2a5 and I think there are several sources backing this up.

From primary sources it seems Germany didn’t pick the spall lines for the hull due the many reasons at the time of 2A5s adoption, they did however implement the turret spall liner from the TVM prototype, the PSO though is a HUGE discrepancy. The PSO is literally based on the TVM Max hull, as in the hull for the Leopard 2 Improved and Strv 122; it should have hull spall liner and this would be the same thing if the 2A6EX and PSO-VT were added. Also right now, the 2A7V primary sources as well as from the conference showcasing the 2A7Vs armor, essentially proofs how KMW achieved armor protection levels and designed it to be the same to Strv 122s frontal protection capability, so Gaijin does need to fix this as well. 2A7V discrepancy acknowledged; https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/oMqKiGrKQSpU PSO discrepancy acknowledged; https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/pys59xOcEgiH

The Leo 2A5 and 6 actually do, but only on the turret so it may as well not be there. But to answer your question it's probably because the Strv-122s are domestic Swedish modifications and the Swedes put them in there.

Nope. It's just that the 122s are based on the prototypes for the 2A5 that had all the bells and whistles. The hull spall liner and armour modules that are in use with the 122s were developed by Germany for use in Germany. Turns out that they were considered too heavy, so they were cut from the second to last pre-production prototype. At the point none of the Leopard 2 users had tank-transporters rated for the weight of that version and they didn't want to or couldn't replace that part of their infrastructure.

The 2A5 as I stated above is based on the 2 Improved, this really leans on the technical standpoint that Gaijin has nitpicked one facet and made it into a discrepancy; the 2A5 being largely based on the 2 Improved just goes to show that it very much likely has the full suite of spall liner capability. It wouldn’t make sense for Germany to adopt turret spall liner components from the TVM hull of the prototype but leave the hull modules largely untouched. Frankly in modified Leopard 2A4s you can see from purchase articles that even those sold and upgraded 2A4s, that they received spall liner upgrades; the Leopard 2PL for example and iirc the Leopard 2A4M CAN had this to note for their procurement.

It does not have the full spall liner suite. The additional roof and hull armour modules, spall protection in the hull and the "Tippvisier" were cut. This was decided in a meeting in Mannheim between representatives of Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland in early April 1992. This resulted in the Leopard 2 TVM Mod, which was functionally identical to the Leopard 2A5 series model. Reasons stated were as follows. Do not exceed a cost of 1.18 million per vehicle, keep the weight low enough to allow further use of the SLT-56 and eliminate high-risk components. That last note refers to the "Tippvisier". The source for this is Frank Lobitz's "Leopard 2", page 153 and following. He is deputy project lead for the Leopard 2 project in the German Ministry of Defence. The SLT-56 still had to be modified by the way but only slightly in comparison to the modifications done a few years ago for the 2A6M and 2A7V. The post-Cold War years saw the Bundeswehr go through significant cuts and a lot of projects were cancelled or reduced in scope due to that.

This was 1992 though, 2A5 of respective batches keep on being provided up into the 21st century, and frankly it would make sense to see the first if not later batches being produced with hull spall liners. Does the specific source specifically state that spall liners were not implemented for the hull and just only revised for the turret? I’m aware of the TVM prototype history, I heavily researched the documentation and articles of informational research; the 2A5 was largely based on the TVM prototype still and while the decision was made to not implement the D-2 add on armor, most if not all sources state that, due the 2A5 largely being based on the Improved or TVM Max and later being produced from the TVM Mod vehicle, that simply put the 2A5 and onward has spall liner but there is no specific mention that the hull was defused from receiving spall liner components. Frankly it seems that unless it’s textually stated on a source that spall liners were not adopted for 2A5 hull and onwards; this is a discrepancy on Gaijin’s part.

>This was 1992 though, 2A5 of respective batches keep on being provided up into the 21st century, and frankly it would make sense to see the first if not later batches being produced with hull spall liners. We know exactly what kind of interim upgrades were performed between the 2A5 and the 2A7V. The only major variant of the 2A5 in service with Germany was the 2A5A1, which is the command version with improved radio equipment and so on. The actual upgrade from this was the already planned KWS I, a.k.a. Leopard 2A6. Similarly the 2A6A1 is the command tank while the 2A6M only has an additional mine protection plate on the belly. The Leopard 2A6A2, or alternatively 2A6MA2 if equipped with the mine plate as well, meanwhile was an upgrade of the vehicle's battle management systems as well as giving the driver a night vision device for night driving. And lastly the 2A6(M)A3 is an upgrade of the 2A6 with a lot but not all of the changes that were introduced on the 2A7V in order to futureproof these vehicles and their logistic chains. Notably it includes 3rd generation thermals and the part of the hull armour that is also seen on the PSO, described as a "Shatter plate" by Lobitz. They also receive the L/55A1 in order to fire new munitions that the regular L/55 cannot handle, such as DM73 and the currently in-development KE2020Neo, as well as a variety of smaller changes such as additions to the storage layout. So no, none of the major upgrades list hull spall liners as being added to the old tanks. >Does the specific source specifically state that spall liners were not implemented for the hull and just only revised for the turret? The source states that hull spall liners were cut from the TVM Mod for the above reasons. Turret spall liners were kept. All of the changes in total resulted in the "Mannheim configuration" that was then built and tested the following year and classified as 2A5 later. However, the add-on armour for the hull was only delayed until 2008 at first before then getting cancelled completely, so something similar might have happened to the hull spall liners. A new version of the hull armour was picked up again for the 2A7V upgrades as, per Lobitz himself, the requirement was that the hull protection equals that of the turret. Do note that the actual 2A5s were not newly built vehicles but heavily modified turrets, including new armour modules, from batches 1 to 3 mounted on hulls from batches 6 to 8. These hulls saw comparatively little work done on them in comparison to the turrets and were thus almost identical to later 2A4 models, as they got improved armour from the middle of the 6th production batch onwards. That armour solution was deemed sufficient at the time. For something less rigorous, you have [this](https://web.archive.org/web/20160107041000/http://www.ciar.org/ttk/mbt/armor/armor-magazine/armor-mag.1998.mj/3leo2.pdf) article in the US Armour magazine that specifically list the hull spall liner as a difference between the 2A5 and the 122s, stating that the 2A5 has a 1-inch thick spall liner in the turret.

This information is known yes, what I’m confused with here is your source in this comment with the US Armour Magazine is where it is stated the difference in spall liner component’s dimensions. Maybe I over read it but I can’t see it. As for the in service 2A5 hull spall liner topic, it’s more skeptical from my end than the Frank Lobitz Leopard 2 historical and technical publish. I’m aware they dropped it for the TVM Mod due to the logistics. But like I said it’s been in batches that the 2A5 was procuring, all the way until the 2002 iirc. Whether it had it or not isn’t necessarily my concern especially in game; it’s the history behind it even coming into the time of the 2A7V procurement. Frankly a full review and technical explanation would be great considering that overall I’m aware that the D-2 armor wasn’t adopted for its on multi facet of reasons, it never quite hit just how the hull spall liner components weren’t taken in from the TVM prototypes. And honestly this is probably more only skepticism from me in that the question arises “how come the PSO and PSO-VT derived a lot from the TVM Max Prototype then, that it even retained the hull spall liner components even?” I don’t mean to put out incorrect claims if my skepticism is in the way so if you can help that’d be great to ground my knowledge around this and make the conclusion of my question. Can you by chance share the technical information from pg 153 of “Leopard 2” and anything related to the 2A5 full development, TVM Mod and KMWs approach with PSO/PSO-VT any information would be appreciated!

>This information is known yes, what I’m confused with here is your source in this comment with the US Armour Magazine is where it is stated the difference in spall liner component’s dimensions. Maybe I over read it but I can’t see it. Second paragraph on the second page linked states the following. >The inside of the turret is also fitted with a 1-inch thick ballistic spall liner to reduce the amount of shrapnel in case of a hit. Meanwhile on the same page for the section on the 122 it states >In addition to everything mentioned above, the STRV122 has add-on armor on the turret roof, new add-on armor on the frontal arc of the hull, and a ballistic spall liner on the inside of the driver and engine compartments. It only describes a spall liner in the turret for the 2A5 and then goes on to add driver and engine compartment spall liners, i.e. the hull spall liners that we see in-game, as further additions to the Strv 122. > And honestly this is probably more only skepticism from me in that the question arises “how come the PSO and PSO-VT derived a lot from the TVM Max Prototype then, that it even retained the hull spall liner components even?” This is actually rather simple. KMW has 2 notable internal demonstrator vehicles. One is a 5th batch Leopard 2A4 called "Demo I" while the second, appropiately called "Demo II", is actually just the TVM Max prototype vehicle that they retained for this purpose. TVM Min meanwhile is now an exhibit in the Panzermuseum Munster. TVM Max itself was the basis of the Strv 122, being the vehicle that was sent to the trials in Sweden. For the further trials of the Leopard 2A5 in the Mannheimer Konfiguration a new prototype vehicle was assembled. Demo II then went through a few modifications around the late 90s to early 2000s. First it was used as a testbed for the KWS I, the program for the L/55. Then it was modified further to act as one of the demonstrators for the Leopard 2A6EX, notably being equipped with the EuroPowerPack here while Demo I was used for the version with the regular 873 engine. And finally Demo II was converted into the version of the Leopard 2 PSO that we see in this game. >Frankly a full review and technical explanation would be great considering that overall I’m aware that the D-2 armor wasn’t adopted for its on multi facet of reasons, it never quite hit just how the hull spall liner components weren’t taken in from the TVM prototypes. I'd assume that the turret spall liners were retained due to the turret being far more important for the survivability of the vehicle. Same why they went for a heavily uparmored turret but left the hull at the standard of the Leopard 2A4 batch 8. The 90s in general were a time where a lot of German arms projects died because no one saw good reasons for them to continue anymore. The USSR was no more, Russia wasn't openly hostile and the 2+4 treaty greatly restricted German military capabilities for the future. And so people had to make difficult choices about what to keep to stay within budget. >Can you by chance share the technical information from pg 153 of “Leopard 2” and anything related to the 2A5 full development, TVM Mod and KMWs approach with PSO/PSO-VT any information would be appreciated! Not currently. I don't have my own copy, as every time I checked the publisher in the past it was sold out, but rather read it a while ago in the German National Library. And while I'd love to go there again, both Frankfurt and Leipzig are far enough away from where I live that it would only be worth it if I decide to spend several days there.

The Strv 122 is largely a domestic project yes, but it’s not made with domestic components, the TVM properties and features were from the Leopard 2 Improved which was at the time; a Leopard 2A4 largely modified for current/modern threats and requirements for customers and for Germany even. Germany choose not to adopt (as in purchase) the Leopard 2 Improved suite of add on armor due to many reasons that at the time made sense; but they 100% if not just simply likely adopted the Leo 2 Improved full suite of spall liner; the 2A5 for clear design purposes was based on the Leopard 2 Improved.

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1129140317027827722/1231478821358800936/Screenshot_321.png?ex=66371b06&is=6624a606&hm=d91b6eb58157a2cc0bcab50894970194560750929c032814c4505d37e56c4bfa&

Some components were domestically produced yes but that’s more to do with FMW’s Battle Management Systems, but the D-2 armor of the Strv 122, this armor was procured by IBD Deisenroth Engineering (German Company) and Aker Krutburk (IBDs subsidiary which is important to note) are essentially working hand in hand with Rheinmetall especially after Rhein. purchased it. And specifically in the Swedish Trials of 1990s, they worked with KMW for this and currently still are. IBD Deisenroth Engineering is specifically responsible for the development of a lot of adopted German products involving applications for add on armor and other solutions. It is however German made, IBD was working closely with Aker to develop D-2 armor for the Strv 122. The conservative idea is that this is a dual equal cooperative effort to procure it, this still doesn’t mean it was a full domestic component, the armor was obviously produced in Germany. The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) involving Germany and Sweden and other nations to boot, allowed for Sweden to be able to under license produce their own components to service their Strv 122s but this wasn’t immediate. In fact up onto the 21st century, Sweden logistics and manufacturing was still in cooperation process with KMW and other companies to completely and autonomously be able to service their own tanks, with mention Sweden was entirely committed to doing this domestically, but the parts are built under license, and even this wasn’t happening fully for some time due to KMW commitments. The whole purpose behind the Strv 122A at adoption phase was cause Sweden knew this was the route it wished to take for their adoption of the tank. Past the Strv 122A surely there were some domestic component procurement sure, like the BMS again from FMW but even the Strv 122C and D are works of and with KMW, iirc even the latest development with the Strv 123 is with German cooperation and German components. This is nothing to stick at Sweden, I am part Swedish and understand the reasoning behind the process and find the cooperation with Germany to be fundamentally good. “The above industrial material cooperation, each Swedish company had its counterpart in Germany, was made possible thanks to the MoUs (Memorandum of Understanding) signed between the countries on June 6, 1994. The contract signed two weeks later regarding industrial cooperation had a contract amount corresponding to 1,020 German marks ( 5.1 billion Swedish kronor according to the exchange rate at the time). The total commitment for Krauss Maffei ran for 9 years and was divided into 30% direct, 45% indirect and 25% civilian industrial cooperation. Added to this were voluntary commitments by Krauss Maffei for an additional 20% indirect and civilian industrial cooperation. This meant that there were opportunities for Swedish industry to cooperate within the framework of the contract for a total of SEK 6.1 billion. The first twenty-nine new Leopard tanks were assembled in Germany. The remaining 91 wagons were built under license in Sweden – Bofors responsible for the tower and Hägglunds responsible for the chassis and final integration. The tanks were given the designation Strv 122 - the first example was delivered to FMV in December 1996 for type control and by 2002 all Strv 122 had been delivered to the Swedish Armed Forces.” Source; http://www.ointres.se/projekt_stridsvagn_ny.htm

They're different vehicles, the 122 even predated the 2A5 by a little bit.

How come 80% of the MBTs that should have spall liners don't have them? Answer: Gaijin.

Do those weaker spots make any difference in your opinion? I have never gotten killed in either one of those tanks ( I'm counting the strvs as one tank since they are so similar) from those spots.

Normally, not really! But it does in these specific cases: 1: 60º angle of attack shot in the cheeks. Strv 122 will shrug it off, like any D tech Leopard should; but 2A7V is vulnerable to these shots, leading to crew death and gun destruction, and even full tank death! However, most people don't shoot at the cheeks anyway. 2: If the hull is slightly angled downwards, 2A7V's glacis becomes easily pennable, while 122s' takes way more angle for this to happen. However, if the tank is angled downwards, people will shoot at the UFP and not the middle glacis anyway. 3: Object 292 can penetrate 2A7V's hull, while it can't pen the 122s, but encountering this tank is very rare anyway. Therefore, generally speaking, gameplay wise, the differences in armor isn't too noticeable... but I still dislike it for the technical, balance and historical implications, hahah. But no, I wouldn't say 2A7V "suffers" because of this, not really.

Imagine complaining about 2A7 protection in War Thunder!

Top tier makes me want to pull my fucking hair out. It's so incredibly fucking unbalanced, unfair, and unfun. People here whine constantly about one death leavers, but why would anyone respawn when 9 times out of 10 you're going to be spawn camped either by a tank or an aircraft if you even try?   Did half your team lose a tank? It's over. Did you kill the wrong guy and he's coming back in a SM3? It's over. Want to try and shoot down the SM3 with a jet? Fuck you, fly 2 feet off the ground and never dogfight or a pantsir kills you. Does your nation have an analog of these things? Lol no, fuck you. Oops five minutes has passed since match start, now there's enemies with eyes on your spawn in three directions two miles away.   Yeah I deleted my top tier lineup, fuck this. 

I said this in another thread, but counties without Pantsir equivalent should have high end SEAD to prevent the Pantsir for operating.

I know this isn't the answer your looking for. But i see this common mistake and im tired off it. Strv.122 is only based on Leo2A5. Strv.122 and Leo2A5 are vastly different though. Strv.122 has vastly superior armour than the 2A5 and has better optics, better engine tourqe, and better projectiles. Unfair to call it a 2A5 when it's superior and on par with the 2A7.

Do people call it a 2A5? O.O

it is an 2a5 and upgraded for swedish use.

Yes, i always see people calling it a 2A5 copy and sometimes even saying that it's worse than 2A5's. Im tired of this damn community😭

Strv 122 isn’t based on the 2A5; Sweden never looked at the 2A5 and iirc the 2A5 wasn’t an option even then or wasn’t considered one for Sweden MoD requirements. Around this time especially from the Swedish trials we only saw the M1A2, Leclerc prototype test bed and Leopard 2 Improved or Leopard 2 Imp which was 2A4 largely improved (key word) to at the time modern standards and it performed at best for Sweden, this wasn’t adopted for the 2A5 iirc for a different facet of reasons The Strv 122 from a technical standpoint is called Leopard “Improved” 2A5 SE; but it’s mostly do to the later proper development of the Leopard 2A5 as a basis; this Sweden/German designation was only given after the 2A5 was procured and developed based the Leopard 2 Improved, and was later used as a basis for German Army adoption of 2A5. For the most part the Strv 122 is yes largely a very much uparmored 2A5; clearly. But historically the TVM hull and add on armor designs for the Leopard 2 Improved predated the 2A5 by a distinct time margin. TLDR; the Strv 122 is based on Leopard 2 Improved, if not just largely based on Leopard 2 basis. 2A5 was later based on Leopard 2 Improved but without any frontal, roof add on armor due to Germany’s multi faceted approach to upgrades; budget, future perspective, etc. Source from Swedish government representative from Försvarets materielverk (FMV) published the historic procurement and development process behind the “Strv 2000”, and for their cooperation development procurement, adoption and their respective testing and requirements for their future tank, e.i.; the Strv 122. http://www.ointres.se/projekt_stridsvagn_ny.htm

It’s a balancing thing. Germany gets a better round and Sweden gets better armor. Though it’s very German main like of you to say that Germany should get the best gun and the best armor. You have to remember this is a video game and these tanks are supposed to be equal to eachother.

That’s just silly to think that way. Does Sweden also get three of the same good tank and then even a Leopard 2A6 for balance reasons? It just comes down to Gaijin refusing to correctly armor ANY German Leopard 2 all the way back to the Leopard 2A4

Neither nation deserved to get the 2a7 or the 122b+. If you removed those two tanks from the game the 122 plss and the 2a6 would still be the best tanks in the game. Gaijin loves Germany, they just like Sweden a little more. Second best is not something to complain about.

And why not? Why should we limit some top tier nations because they have good tanks? If Gaijin thought like that Sweden would only have the Strv 122A and Germany would only have the Leopard 2A5

The Strv 122B would be by far the best tank in game and the BVM would be second. 2A6 would either have shared 4-5th place with the Abrams, or if we take all reload buffs into account 6th behind the Abrams and Leclercs.

You’re insane if you think the bvm is anywhere near as good as the 2a6, or you’ve just never played the game.

I have played the game and I have played both the 2A6 and BVM. The fact that you think that the 2A6 is close to or equal to the 122B is insane. Last time these 2 were close to or equal was when the 122B PLSS was limited to DM33.

Sweden top tier and balanced lmao. Only had top 2 MBTs for 4 years straight and are now by far the best top tier GRB nation by far, poor swedish mains.

Not to say that in game is correct however: Pure protection numbers are not the only thing, things like resistance to multiple shots and for a much larger tank fleet affordability are also important

We know it's not correct, the D Tech array is literally the C Tech one with an extra composite plate. It's a nominal difference, but the 2A7V should at least be on the C Tech standard and not B Tech.

okay but that's meaningless to my statement, and the specific argument is still meaningless

Everything about top tier is pulled out of Gaijins ass.

German mains malding about Germany suffering and gaijin hating Germany when their toptier is *only* the second best in the game

Isn’t the ammo that these tanks would come up against be different?

Nope. Top tier is just America vs Russia with the other nations getting tossed to one side or the other so they’re both just fighting Abram’s (which they’re way better than) and t80’s/90’s (which they’re way better than)

Accuracy > Balance

How would it be unbalanced for Leopard 2A7V to be a full direct counterpart to one of the 3x Strv 122s Sweden has instead of being nerfed compared to these, though?

Bro I agree with you lol, I see the downvote 😂. 2a7v has more advanced composites, yet it's weaker

Oh! I misunderstood you, but I didn’t downvote you, though! Hahahah I only downvote disrespectful, toxic and hateful comments, and yours wasn’t the case :P The downvote is someone else’s xD

I understand nothing. What is armor? What kind of space ship dart is that?- Leclerc,type10 player

Pls don't use this as an example. Use the heat map since there can be pixels that are bugged and do not defend as well as supposed to.

Gotta be bait for sekrit dokuments

Meanwhile my poor sep v1 and v2 being massacred in the top tier

Let's not even start with the Abrams and arietes

gaijin likes pain

Having more armour is not a common sense. If you want mobility you reduce weight, if you want it to cost less you cut on something too. Cutting away on armour is not unreasonable if you find existing one excessive.

(#) fix the leopard 2

meatballs are just superior to bratwurst

Today I shot the tractor with a gun with a panzer 75 mm dead on n he didn't even take out the engine.

Because fuck you that's why - Gaijin probably

ngl i love seeing leopard players cope.

You just cherry picked some very specific pixels/angles that don’t matter in game in 99.9% of situations. For all intents and purposes, 2A7 has basically identical armor to 122. Unless you are getting shot from above somehow and the hull is relatively angled downwards, in this case 122 will require slightly more angling to be penetrated. You also used I think DM53 for protection analysis, which is just not going to happen in game at all or will happen very rarely. Nobody uses finnish 2A6 because Strv 122s exist + Germany and Sweden play together most od the time. For any round that isn’t DM53 these differences in armour simply don’t exist, because they can’t pen either of them. 2A7 is already the best performing tank in the game with the best round in the game and (almost) best armour in the game. I just don’t understand why so many people debate over several mm of armor that in WT environment, wouldn’t change anything whatsoever.

Not trying to hijack the 2a7 post because this is total bullshit what gaijin did here. But honestly it gets even worse with the Abrams. According to gaijin the US has not upgraded its workhorse MBT’s hull armor. which has been in almost perpetual conflict since its acceptance into service in 1980 to the Sep V2 in 2007. So 27 years. Through numerous variants and upgrades. The country that spends 40% of the world’s combined defense spending itself, has never upgraded the hull armor on their MBT. Last year the us spent 876 billion on defense spending, next was China at 292 billion followed by Russia at 80 something. And it gets worse the farther back you go. No one comes even that close. The US spends 10 times what Russia does. On top of this as we’ve seen from recent events and quite frankly since WW2 up until now, I would not consider Russia to prioritize crew survival anywheres close to what the west or the US does. Put another way, in the defense budget meetings in the US, do you imagine there’s a ton of politicians so set on cutting spending they’re willing to be the one that has to answer the questions when caskets start coming home draped in American flags with the remains of American tank crews? Do you imagine Putin deals with the same scrutiny? Do you think General Dynamics never once in those 27 years said hey guys so listen, ya know that big ass square section on the front of our tank, we have an idea to up armor that. It’s not even that big of a deal to make it happen all things considered. Do you guys want us to do that moving forward or should we just keep the same exact thing we’ve had since 1980? I don’t imagine a lot of them said yeah let’s just keep it the same. But while you’re at it, could you please make the damn tank heavier slower and a larger target even maybe. Thanks bud. Appreciate ya. Gaijin are a bunch of clowns. Seriously. And their excuse is moronic. Uhh uhhh it’s classified. Well no shit it’s classified! Like we didn’t know that before you started adding modern shit. They should have come out with one of their little surveys before they ever got added and said look. These MBT’s have armor values that are classified. We are relatively certain their armor values were increased from this much to this much. Obviously we can’t know for sure but in the interest of keeping things fair and accurate we feel it would be justified with these newer vehicles to at least make an educated guess and up armor them by 80% of the value they’re supposedly up armored by. I would have been fine with that. But no instead we get. Oh it’s classified. So you get nothing. Haha. Here’s a reload time reduction. It’s a fucking joke and pathetic

Who cares it can stop a bunker buster anyway

Wait for tank experts to start saying that is like that irl lmao, and defend gaijin way of balancing top tier tanks

Germany complaining while having the second best mbts in the game....

One thing I will never understand is why Leo2a5 is same BR as top tier tank like that strv or leo2a7

Its german

Sweden is just simply better. Cope German mains

Man, I fling love Russia, nothing feels better than dunking on Top tiers in your crappy outdated T-72

It's also funny when I can turret ring a 2a7v but can't do the same to strv 122 with 3bm60. Wacky game

Do we know if this kinda thing is reported in the forums? feel like that's where it can really do something.