Is The Leopard 2AV Fake?

Decal affiliate link: tinyurl.com/42...
War Thunder players are finally starting to get their hands on the top rewards for this year's summer event. The ground reward is a German main battle tank, the Leopard 2AV PT19. The only issue is that by calling it PT19, Gaijin have unnecessarily painted themselves into a corner. The PT19 in the game hardly resembles the actual PT19 in terms of how it performs, so I'll be going through the tank's history, what's different about it, and what should be done.
Check the channel "About" section for the link to the creator of my profile picture.
Songs used (in order from first to last):
Command and Conquer: Generals - Various USA Themes
Halo 3: ODST - Rain (Deference for Darkness)
Sound mods:
Epic Thunder (Pre-release)
Gunner HEAT PC Crew Voices Mod (Personal, go play the game: gunnerheatpc.com/ )
Sponsor: apexpartner.ap...
Second channel: / @spookstoon
Patreon: / spookston
Twitter: / spookston
Reddit: /u/spookston
Discord: See my Patreon page.
Twitch: / spookstonwt
Steam: goo.gl/BYQjC9
#warthunder​​​​​​​​​​​​ #tanks​​​​​​​​​​​​ #tankhistory

[@Spookston]

In my opinion the 2AV should have PT19 removed from the name and have its composite corrected to actual 2AV levels. It can keep DM33 and stay at 9.7 then, I think. It doesn't get downtiers often but it does feel too strong when it does. Also sorry the overlays got their positioning messed up, literally no idea how that happened. I only changed the tracking once and that was on a separate layer. :)

[@Ben_Kunz]

luv your vids. thanks for the great content!

[@ghostlyinstincts]

What about the fact that it doesn’t get thermals?

[@Spookston]

@@ghostlyinstincts I personally don't use thermals much, so they're not a big deal to me. Thermals are only super useful to me once they get to Gen 2. Gen 1 thermals can be so bad that I have to switch back to the regular sight before I know where to aim on a target, since in Gen 1 thermals they're just a pixelated blob.

[@azravalencia4577]

i think this should be 9.3 tho but using the correct armor model as should. Yes, DM33/105 is strong, but good luck using that for uptiered 10.7.

[@emortalelitegaming2667]

I kinda feel like the gap between ww2 and Cold War needs to be different like anything with heatfs or apds, Atgms. Should not be able to be with ww2 Vehciles . Not only are vehicles slow with a lot of armor still can be penned by apbc, Cold War tanks like Is-6 and even up to some 7.3 American tanks or further just to name a few, when you have light vehicles with 8 sec reloads that can pen anything even the most amount of steel while driving at over 50kph and just fast overall shooting at vehicles moving like 30-40 max and slow turret travers and just slower in all mobility areas is just kinda dumb, . Obviously the heatfs rounds and apds don’t do as much damage as modern ones but if it means it can go through anything and then reload 2-3 times in the time a heavy or medium vehicles can is obviously kinda unbalanced.

[@vonmillardmanalastas7524]

Honestly disappointed that it wasn’t the 2SG, especially considering that this SUMMER Event started on *August 9th*

[@demonicwolfi4995]

Kinda lol if it was the 2SG it be my no 1 spot amongst the leopards since my country operates it but in WT its in another eyes a 2PL with add on armor and being it a event vehicle gonna trample top tier so badly even tho top tier is pretty much bad already but hey i might wan to see expansion of minor countries into the major trees to have more variety

[@azravalencia4577]

i mean we still have 2PL, 2SG and 2PL isnt that much of different because both are Revo series. (The compo not so much different, but there's modification in FCS and Tropical Modification for Engine and Transmission) Fun Fact: 2SG and 2RI (Revo for Indonesian Armed Forces) is same.

[@lukegrant9526]

@@demonicwolfi4995 eyy Singaporean. Greeting from Malaysia, I wish they made Leopard 2SG as well

[@solowingborders3239]

It'd be cool to have Singaporean roundels too.

[@soto1649]

Waiting leopard2id(same like sg one)

[@elanvital9720]

PT 19 didn't have the composites but it was ballasted to the weight it would have had with the armor. So contrary to what some americans said it met the weight requirements and wasn't faster than usual. They also sent a mobility testbed with no turret but with ballasts, and a ballistic testbed that is basically a static tank with the armor. So the Americans had all they needed to do proper trials. The Germans even brought both the 105 and 120mm smoothbore but the Americans ordered them to put the rifled 105 barrel on the 105 smoothbore breech.

[@freddarau]

And if you don't send an actual model the tank you're trying to produce why should you produce it? If you're going to lie in the competition you deserve to lose.

[@elanvital9720]

@@freddarau At this point of the trials no complete tank was needed. Think of it like when the US tested M1E1 with ballast plates to simulate the weight instead of having the intended armor. The Americans have from the Germans one tank that can test mobility (mobility testbed), one that can test armor, and one that has the complete tank to test all the systems except the armor being replaced by ballast. This is cheaper and more importantly faster (when the 2AV/XM1 competition was set up very quickly). As far as trials are concerned the Americans can get all the info they needed to make their conclusions. The Germans DID NOT lie. The story about American testers knocking on the tank is more than suspicious (especially when composite armor sounds hollow regardless).

[@freddarau]

@@elanvital9720 fair point.

[@Talishar]

@@elanvital9720 The Germans never supplied a tank with the composite armor matrix as Germany had yet to design/invent one for their tanks yet. They were still using spaced armor and the U.S. had partnered with Britain for Chobam which Germany never got. They can't properly ballast the tank for an armor package that didn't exist nor even had a spec for it yet for that specific hull. There's also no mating difference between the 105mm barrel types. The breech doesn't contain any rifling as that's all in the barrel. The U.S. wanted a rifled gun at the time to stabilized HEP which when the specs first came out was still an important round type for engaging fortifications and used the ammo that was in high supply across NATO at the time. They also didn't ballast the hull properly as that weight would be distributed vertically much differently than just loading ballast in the bottom of the hull like the Germans did. This gave it a much lower center of gravity which added stability to the suspension and allowed it to traverse obstacles much better than it should with the proper distribution of weight. This makes the given prototypes disingenuous as they don't technically meet the full design requirements set out. It's like the recent M17/18 trials where everyone is pissed that Glock didn't win even though the primary specification put forth, modularity, was almost entirely ignored by Glock which Sig fully embraced. Also, composite armor does NOT sound hollow when you tap it with a metal hammer. Spaced armor sounds hollow as there's no mass between the forward and rear plates. Composite armors actually have material between the front armor plates and the backer so it won't sound hollow when tapped with a hammer.

[@jonesso11]

@@freddarau even the XM1 wasn't fully complete? you do realise durring trials the point isn't to go "ok give us 5 fully finished production models" it's give us what you plan on making and we will test if this fits our requirements and then we will award you with the money required to finish and produce the vehicles

[@werttrichen]

While not being all too nice to everyone grinding this specific tank, I would love a 90km/h armorless leopard 2

[@gatogordo4961]

Leopard 2K?

[@TheNicestPig]

Would have been way more unique and fit as an event vehicle lol

[@lukav3509]

if it was armorless the rounds would probably go inside the tank then exit lmao

[@ravenouself4181]

@@lukav3509 no armor best armor

[@ironic8340]

@@ravenouself4181 over pen is my religion

[@OddBawZ]

Hybrid Videos where you play the vehicle and talk about history is a big thumbs up from me! :)

[@beaverbob1129]

Trying to be nice to Spookston after your latest video huh 😉

[@kane-111]

@@beaverbob1129 lmao

[@gunther482]

The funny thing is that Gaijin even has the normal 2A4 wrong as it's modeled as a 2A4 with C-Tech armor but performance wise it's only B-Tech level. This has been bug reported for like four years now to Gaijin lol.

[@theScottishKoala]

That's incorrect. It's modelled accurately as a B-tech armored vehicle from 1994, when muzzle reference sensors were installed

[@Arthur_Neves]

Spook: gaijin looks for tanks to specific lineup branches, not in an individual ta k perspective Swedish 5.7: am I a joke for u?

[@vikingsoftomorrow4038]

*French at almost any BR*: Why are we still here? Just to suffer?

[@jackburton9035]

If you’re going to do more on historical inaccuracies I would put forward the idea of looking at the whole of the British top tier tech tree from chieftain onwards.

[@adenmitchell7633]

Leaking classified documents of those tanks then

[@seemslegit6203]

​@@adenmitchell7633 no no, he has a point. i personally spoke with a chally 2 tanker and it is severely under armored in the game

[@ragingassassin6659]

I mean, you could say that about almost every single mbt in the game. None of the important information regarding modern mbts is declassified so gaijin is genuinely just pulling numbers out of oblivion and using it to attempt to create some sort of balance. I think the difference is that someone actually leaked the challengers details and as such the community is certain that it should be better.

[@alphaplayzz1381]

@@ragingassassin6659 the challenger platform actually has extensive combat experience though, so even just looking at the anecdotes should show you they're far better armoured than in game. along with the fact that a challenger 2 has never been lost in combat, neither to friendly or hostile fire.

[@firestarteronyoutube5542]

@@seemslegit6203 additionally, the Chieftain "Mark" system is completely wrong in game. The Mark 5 should have Laser Rangefinder, and I think should have early models of Thermals. Someone I know is a lot better versed on it, but the Chieftain has documents, and its Wiki page is fairly detailed so....

[@domco07akagrassknuckless89]

I do some research on my own when trying to base an argument however without you i would think the tigers were gifts from god, Jagdtiger an unstopable Force of nature, and confused why so many world of tanks fictional tanks arent in war thunder and so much more. Love your videos and realy enjoy them. Keep up this style. You deserve more subs you have.

[@i8yourDog]

"I dont want that level of realism" * *later Tiger crews couldnt operate the tanks because they were childrens* *

[@charlescourtwright2229]

most people who want realism refer more towards facing tanks that tank would've seen with realistic mechanics, NO ONE want sot deal with a tank that randonly breaks down at the start of the match, or cant even move due to not having any fuel after getting to the battlefield

[@vitiate5093]

@@adamg7984 to poke fun at historical matchmaking just ask should Swedish tanks be face t-64s, Tigers, etc when their tanks at those ranks are literal 1930s-1940s designs.

[@vitiate5093]

@@adamg7984 people will whine always just ignore their shit.

[@dumpsterfire42]

Day 1 of asking to play with the 2.7 t50

[@jollybee8984]

waiting for day 100!

[@derrickstorm6976]

The Russian T-50?

[@devilishwolfie6975]

@@derrickstorm6976 No the American one

[@Visigothicc]

@@devilishwolfie6975 Clearly it's swedish

[@leogunt]

​@@derrickstorm6976 it's clearly Italian smh

[@Serkay64]

The Leopard 2A4 ingame uses B-Tech composite, not C-Tech

[@BatteredWalrus]

Even though they modeled a version of the 2A4 that should have C-tech 🤣

[@tigertank1819]

I remember someone doing a video on this and apparently there was I think one bach of Leopard 2A4s that look like the one we have that were built with B tech armour, but this is more a convenient solution for Gaijins poor implementation not an excuse for it.

[@theScottishKoala]

@@BatteredWalrus nah, you’re thinking the muzzle reference sensor right? Batch of B-tech Leo 2A4’s got those in 1994

[@Chris-xu7sy]

Funny enough he complains in his video about people who do not do enough research and has most facts in his video wrong

[@theScottishKoala]

@@Chris-xu7sy not most, a few sure but that’s just unavoidable. Offer up corrections and move on whit yo’ life 😂

[@nukedispenser349]

Just so you know and to complete the list, IJN Haruna has a massive hole in the armor that is not historically accurate and makes the vehicle pretty much useless, one big ammo rack. Around 1/5 of the deck in the middle of the ship is unarmored, IRL it had HTS armor which Gaijin doesn't model on most ships, only some few that they selected arbitrarily.

[@kasugaryuichi9767]

Mostly r*ssian ships have that kind of armour modelled I bet.

[@nukedispenser349]

@@kasugaryuichi9767 nope, don't assume things without any basis, this game makes no sense when it comes to balance and features. This armor is modelled mostly on British and german ships in game as far as I know.

[@MeowMeowMeowMeowMeowMeowMeowww]

And its pretty useless ingame, guesing on how russian bias battlehips are just oneshotting everyone with ease.

[@mrprism5382]

The 2A4 in war thunder does not currently use C tech, it has B tech modeled

[@Viktor-fl5mv]

2:42 At least as far as I know, this RARDE document shows tech B armor data (Leopard 2A0-Leo2A4 not built new), 350mm RHA vs KE and 700mm RHA vs HEAT. The Leopard 2AV had A-technology armor and offered better protection, but was too heavy with it.

[@luki97z]

That'd be correct AFAIK. Just going off by the blueprints of the 2AV's armor and adding up the LoS armor, the steel layers by themselves come up to over 420mm, which is before we add any effects of NERA. Also I'm not convinced the 2A4 in-game represents the C-type armor. The turret protection of ~420mm only matches at 0°, where normally it'd be given at +/-20-30° or so. If measured at those angles it comes out to well below 400mm KE, and roughly equivalent to the hull directly front-on, which in itself roughly matches the 350mm stated for the B-tech armor (which would explain why the protection figures were not given for the hull and turret separately, as the hull front-on has nearly identical LoS protection to the turret at the edges of its safe maneuvering angles, and would thus have identical on-paper protection even if the turret came out stronger head-on because of it).

[@tigertank1819]

The Hull armour of the Leopard 2A4 in game doesn't even meet B tech standards as it provides less than 300mm vs KE head on while B tech should be 350ish.

[@eyyze]

@@luki97z That's incorrect. Both tanks according to their specifications would offer ~350mm RHAe in a 60° ARC with production's hull also falling in this category whilst 2AV's not (lack of composite side-skirts). When looked at frontally both armour will exceed 400mm (430 - 440mm) and in terms of C-technology armour, it will exceed 500mm (530 - 550mm).

[@Remon_A.]

Hey Spookston, i would love to see you make a video about the Swedish tree, i know you are a tank RB player but the swedish jets have been getting nerfed for "historical accuracy" which made them increasingly useless. I am talking about the Akan 30mm cannons having their tracers removed because the swedish didn't use them, historically they used a radar aim lead indicator (which gajin won't acknowledge). There are 100s of people complaining about this issue, but on the war thunder forums our posts keep getting removed by the swedish forum mods, i've also seen people saying that the swedish forum mod was the one to push this change (removal of tracers) through and has been blocking people from complaining about it. Like i said before, i know you are a tank RB player but you have the platform to bring light to this issue, i would love to see you make a video about this so we can get more people talking about it.

[@burneracc2567]

Yes! Yes please! SK60B handles so well, it's really a joy to fly but Gaijin beat it into the ground. It also sucks a lot when you get a German team against full USA and then Germans just die and you are left against 5 or more F-84s that outperform you in almost every aspect. Not to mention Vampire facing early AAMs in uptiers and insane repair costs beating Sweden into unplayable mess. Gotta love losing 15K SL every match because you are literally unable to fight shit you face, unless you bait someone in a turn fight but that's rare. Only reason for Sweden being nerfed? Idiots taking head ons against 20 and 30mm cannons.

[@Remon_A.]

@@burneracc2567 yeah i'm almost at the Viggen but grinding Sweden is a fucking pain with the amount of SL you lose every match, most planes, even props, cost an insane amount to repair. currently grinding the Viggen with the J35D but it is a pain to fly since it g-locks instantly, loses all of its speed in a turn because it's a delta wing, it's overtiered meaning i'm just endlessly fighting against F14's without flares/chaff and RWR and if i don't get 1 or 2 kills i'm in the negative with SL. My trick is i bought the american moffet boat, it was like 7 euros and i make about 50-100K SL per match (match lasts around 15 minutes), recently had a match where i made 350K with it. everytime i'm low on SL i just do a few boat matches, since with sweden gaining SL is impossible.

[@casematecardinal]

@@burneracc2567 do you mean f86s? Because the f84 is ass.

[@firestarteronyoutube5542]

Ah yes, the Chinese forum mod reincarnated

[@Remon_A.]

@@firestarteronyoutube5542 guessing this means that this has happened before? not suprised tbh.

[@Appelschmappel]

Nice high quality video as always! Suggestion: the whole AMX-30 family and it's history. Sure, there are already some videos but most people dont really know much about them and their history and I personally love that tank (at least what it looks like, gotta grind still a bit)

[@jeffneinenstein5923]

I’d love to see videos like this on the Shermans, Panther F, TCM AGS, Panther II, Zrínyi I, and the Cromwells. Edit: A video like this on the M18, T-34s, A.C.I, and A.C.IV would be nice too!

[@theScottishKoala]

Our Leopard 2A4 has the B-tech array, shared by the older Leo 2 variants. C-tech entered service in 1988, would give about 100mm more kinetic energy and I can’t recall how much CE. That’s apparently why our Leopard 2A4 lacks DM33, even though our model has the muzzle reference sensor it only received in 1994. Best fix IMO for the 2AV is to remove DM33 and lower it to 9.3 to fit into a different lineup. Right now it feels a bit redundant being alongside the autoloading PT14 and tech tree Leopard 2K. Also, the German 9.7 lineup is stupidly strong, I feel like if anything Gaijin added the 2AV as a 9.7 rather than a 9.3 vehicle specifically to NERF it (same way they introduced the 2PL to “nerf” the 2A6)

[@convolutedconcepts]

i really feel that these models were rushed out and in the new major patch they will address the issues. plus this was way too many leos. Gajin needs to add prototypes as event vehicles for more fun and uniqueness even if they just end up being a trophy on a shelf

[@victenslaw7064]

More Leos needed, must fill out two full teams of leos to play Germany.

[@Gary_The_Metro]

Honestly wish they'd add some more experimental WW2/early Cold war stuff rather than just more top tier shit. More importantly, wish they'd stop with the endless additions to the 3 main trees and at least add some stuff to japan, sweden, italy, france

[@sway_hybird4984]

Love the videos spook!!! Also did you see oddBawz video? He put you in his video lol

[@23thenicu]

Are you sure 2A4 uses Composition C armor? As far as I know it used Composition B and some people proposed Leo 2A4 Late as a top tier tank some time back.

[@Adlumairsoft]

my solution would be giving the 2A4 C batch armour give it DM33 and up it to 10.3 like the M1A1 and then just Copy paste the current 2A4 and call it 2A2 or A3 and leave it at 10.0

[@yoboyroy262]

ngl i really like these form of like hybrid videos with the historic sides and the game play its pretty nice

[@j.k6943]

The Warthunder 2A4 uses full B tech actually. C tech is the 2A5 hull!

[@datankz2498]

I'd love to see a video of you playing and talking about the Challenger 2 Black Knight

[@victory7999]

6:34 You're right, the Zrinyi is not working properly at all. I don't know how/why Gaijin failed so bad at making the Zrinyi in WT. There is a long list of things that aren't working right with it: -Rockets are old and can't overpressure -Rocket launcher tubes can't shoot straight forwards at 0 degrees (and it should in reality) -It's missing 25mm of frontal armour; it should be 100mm not 75mm -The TNT equivalent of the APCBC shot in game is lower than it was in reality. I think it's supposed to be 2x more if not higher! (around 80g I think) -The ammo rack is bugged and is permanently full, you get ammo racked even if the ammo stowage is empty, it's like always going into battle with full ammo. -It has smoke grenade launchers modelled (like the Turan II) but you can't use them in game (-) I think the gun might be a bit bugged too, sometimes it can't penetrate shots it really should be able to. (-)Rocket launchers should be a modification that you can dismount if you want and should probably have some sights to aim with or something But I think Gaijin just has a tendency to make tanks weirdly, like the E-100 which was given a Maus tank turret even though it wasn't supposed to, it should have the square turret like in WoT.

[@CarburetorThompson]

I heard the reason E-100 has the maus turret is because it was a purposed design for the tank, and since the unique turret was never completed it would be a ‘paper tank’ if added to the game

[@victory7999]

@@CarburetorThompson I mean the E-100 is a pretty paper tank anyways.

[@CarburetorThompson]

@@victory7999 that’s true, that’s just the reasoning I was given as to why it has the maus turret instead of it’s dedicated turret. Not that it matters since I’ll never be able to play it

[@renameduser6668]

@@CarburetorThompson thats the point, the maus turret was proposed, but it was too heavy. thats why they would've needed to cut it a little bit thus getting the E 100 like in wot. in reality the e 100 will always be a "paper" tank as there wasnt ever any turret mounted on it.

[@rotoface5469]

the left side of the turret has about 360mm of Kinetic protection in war thunder

[@superbattledroid1862]

This is my biggest pet peeve with War thunder.. The inconsistencies of the Vehicles in game, people claim it’s for balance reasons but I call BS on all that, you either add the vehicles with everything they have and used or don’t add them at all. Seriously it took 5 years for them to get the M60 close to right and it’s still wrong and that’s just one example, I don’t need to go into specific’s because we have plenty of Forum posts and this channel as well to prove it.. But Alas Gaijin will never do it, and at this point it’s just laziness and they just tell us players to shut up and buy more premium, and I haven’t payed a single cent to them in years, for that reason.

[@Gary_The_Metro]

Or that shermans don't have smoke launchers, I recently saw a post on the forums about it and the thing is.. usually anything that gets posted on the forums, gaijin's staff make some kind of comment, be it to say it's not a bug pretty quickly, or that it's being looked at. this post about sherman smoke launchers? they didn't even reply. they just ignored it completely until it was burried under all the other posts.

[@sndrc9]

"Why do you care so much about historical accuracy?" "Because we are not Wargaming"

[@tigertank1819]

Sorry Spook but yah messed up when it comes to the armour model of Leopard 2A4, as you state the War Thunder one to used C tech, however, it judging by the protection levels in game it doesn't even meet the standards of B tech armour as the hull should be roughly 350ish mm resist to long rods (which seems to be the level of the AVs lower plate) but doesn't even meet 300mm, if the armour was C tech the hull would be on par with the 2A5 and 2A6 and the turret would be stronger also.

[@shaggings]

Isn't D-tech also a thing? I heard from somewhere that the newer leo 2s use a different more modern composite array that weighs the same but is stronger.

[@Viktor-fl5mv]

@@shaggings Some people say that D-tech armour is just wedges another one's say that D-tech is main armour package. ,,Thorough execution enabled the optimization of the tank fleet to the best possible level of protection: For the rebuild to Leopard 2A5 standard, the oldest turrets of batches 1 through 4 were taken and modified to KWS (combat value improvement) turrets equipped with D-technology armor packages. The KWS turrets were combined with the hulls with C-technology armor packages (batches 6 through 8). The remaining vehicles created mixed batch tanks, meaning that the turrets with C- technologie armor packages were combined with the hulls of batch 1 through 4 vehicles (B- technologie armor packages)." - Leopard 2 - sein Werden und seine Leistung (P.W. Krapke) + "Die Weiterentwicklung des Leopard 2 vom Serienbeginn bis heute" + "Aspekte zur Zukunft des Leopard 2" (Rolf Hilmes).

[@susixi7250]

hey spookston, where do you get the documents from? if you can link the documents in the description that'd be nice, thanks

[@IanAwfuls]

No spook. You're wrong. 2AV had 450mm vs KE. Germans decided not to go with it because at that time it made the tank weighting too much i.e. around 60 metric tons, because the technology of special armor wasn’t as advanced as it is today. Also it was pricey and complicated to produce. So Germans went with standard NERA plating (more similar to original Burlington) design which offered around 350mm vs KE which was less than 2AV but still enough for that time and they could cut the weight of the tank down to around 55 metric tons.

[@andrewmacias-brown1818]

I really like the Zyrni it’s fun. Not the best tank but it’s solid and now I want to play Italy.

[@kimjanek646]

I kind of want it but I'm too lazy to grind for it and don't want to spent 4k Gold on it. It's probably just a better StuG III G.

[@mab2187]

Its prob just another one of those cases that even tho this thing was irl was like THAT, here in the game it can have its full potential to what it could've/should've been irl F104S from Italy is technically not the Itaian one even since they buffed it to have 6x9J's. The 6x9J version was actually iirc the Greek F104S, so Gaijoob just updated to the historically accurate Italian ver of the 104S to the Greek ver of the F104S. I doubt Gaijoob is gonna update its armor model to the literall irl ver of the model that was sent to the US, instead they gave us the full proper potential ver that was to be sent to the US.

[@TheEnricoMicheli]

There are unclassified 2AV armor drawings, not sure which exact model got those but, ignoring composite effects and just going by steel LoS, the protection is over usual 2A4 claims. What I heard was that for the production Leopard 2 they changed the array to be lighter. One possibility is that production was B-tech, 2AV was A-tech, which was just too heavy.

[@vinncent_hater9521]

Oh god... you’ve awoken cone of arc...

[@puffletuffle]

You know that a youtuber is good at WT when they have a preset named simply "bitch"

[@jammygamer8961]

If i remember right with the M6A2 the additional armor was intended to be added but never was. which if the case i see the problem as its not historically accurate however again it was something they planned to do

[@Gary_The_Metro]

But if that's the case then, why does the panther A not have a governor to set it's hp from 700 to 600? This was something that was not only planned to be added but also actually added. It's the selectiveness that's the problem.

[@basedjorts]

@@Gary_The_Metro the Panther A already gets to use its max turret traverse speed without having to select the hihh speed traverse gear or rev the engine. At the low speed setting and with the engine at idle, the traverse should be 6 degrees per second. Panther A gets 20 degrees per second permanently in game. It doesn’t need any more artificial buffs.

[@jfv2312]

Thanks for pointing out the comparison with the 2A4 armor. Ever since the devblog came out saying it would have similar protection I knew something was off, and they went and release the vehicle just like nothing. Same with it getting DM33. Obviously being an event vehicle it will never be corrected. Another topic would be the C tech composite on the A4 not being strong enough, but Gaijin correcting western/japanese MBT armor values is a lost cause at this point.

[@tfk_001]

The puma in the hangar behind you at the start was struggling while you just explained

[@Ropetor]

The 2a4 in Game is modelled as a c-tech leo but it's armor is that of a b-tech leopard. Not only that, the armor is underperforming, there is a report on tve forums about it but it hasnt been updated in months and hasnt been passed somehow

[@GUIZAR-kr2cj]

The information you gave about the 2A4 having c tech package is incorrect. You can visually see that the 2A5 and 2A6 can tank M774 but the 2A4 cannot. I don't know about the turret but it seems that even without turret wedges it can tank very well. Also 2A4 in real life fire DM33 so its missing a lot of accuracy as well.

[@ServusIchBins]

The 2A4 in War Thunder uses both B-Technologie armor for hull and turret.

[@colinwu4910]

Hey spook, do you think we can make any sorta change on repair cost? It's forcing balance by making playing certain vehicles painful 😢

[@UnknownArt_K]

No, unless you can make atleast 10% of players do the same thing you wont make a dent, even 10% would probably make a small dent

[@yianniskouros1060]

Repair costs is a major part of getting people to buy premium time, so as long as players keep buying it the repair costs will never go away.

[@DefinitelyNotEmma]

I don't know why but your narration seems a bit off this time? A lot of pauses and sometimes it seems like you're not sure about what you were reading, like you were unsure when giving an answer in school o.O Nothing that's too bad, just very different from your usually very well structured and presented narration

[@Spookston]

Because it was recorded as I was playing

[@DefinitelyNotEmma]

@@Spookston Oh, I wasn't aware that it was one of those videos, but I should have guessed based on the length. My bad ^^'

[@Ben_Kunz]

"lets just take a moment to app-" no im not gonna be that cringe but rly thanks for the great content spookston!

[@theteadrinkingowl.2295]

I have a Question: If Gijian is more focused on "balancing" and filling out line ups. Please would you explain the Line up gaps, such as the British 4.7 - 7.7 gap. (others exsist)

[@bornonthebattlefront4883]

Both to add to the question, and to answer it It’s the same reason for why the massive gaps for Italy and Japan and France exists Because they arnt America, Germany or Russia Italy and Britain both have massive gaps in their SPAA from 5.0-8.0 Yet the UK gets 3 SPAA at 8.3 It’s so stupid And Italy doesn’t have anything really from 4.0-6.3 It has a small lineup at 5.7 with the m36a1, m18 and the 5.0 m4 firefly But otherwise Not really The air is even worse for Italy Only having 1 plane between 5.7-7.7 Absolutely stupid So once you get out of the hell hole that is Italian 4.3-6.0 And you reach 6.3 with a good lineup, you get screwed as you have only 1 option for cas Yeah you can bring in lower tier stuff, but usually it’s all outclassed by literally anything else in the air And Italy has options, it’s not like it doesn’t Gaijin just doesn’t care

[@ShadowsOfTheSky]

Sweden is truly awful for awhile 5.7-6.7 is the worst. A mediocre light tank at 5.7, then a 5.0 that’s basically just the 4.0 with a fast reload. Nothing at 6.0-6.3. Then the BKAN 1C, which is a very very VERY situational and difficult vehicle to use. Tho once you hit 7.0 with the IKV 91, Sweden is pretty much a monster for the rest of the tree. Lower BR is also fine (laughs in 1.0 APDS at a 4 second reload)

[@qFamop]

@@bornonthebattlefront4883 honestly Britain getting Skink is a huge boost (at least morale) I love the Ystervark and the previous aa are amazing but having my milktruck face Me262 and other early jets is just sad Hopefully other nations get these SPAA gaps filled

[@theteadrinkingowl.2295]

@@ShadowsOfTheSky A.P.H.E. is O.P.

[@goliver9991]

yea bro, going from cromwells straight to centurions does that

[@_ob200]

Really like this style of video 👌🏼

[@nicholasleon7819]

theres a very reasonable and obvious middle ground between realism and gameplay and spookston hits that sweet spot really well

[@duckmartin9853]

The leopard 2A4 currently in game uses B tech armour not C tech. And If am correct there was 2A4s upgraded with C tech armour just before the 2A5 was made !!

[@mrprism5382]

And the model 2A4 we have in game is a very late block one that got the C tech, but Gajoob is gajoob

[@handlesarecringe957]

You forgot about the battleship with a massive hole in its deck because apparently the metal decks don't even count as structural steel

[@PzOwNeD]

i'd genuinely love a longer form discussion on the adats, i think it'd be good for a lighter edited video like this.

[@120-e5h]

Spookston: "Unless it is not a real-visual-touchable tank it is fake".

[@BobbyB1928]

A British 1978 evaluation confirmed the 2AV was 300mm vs ke, the XM1 was 320-340 (probably 320 on glacis), and the MBT-80 was 430.

[@mr.jancok4413]

I still amazed how spookton can casually speaking about the tank that he's playing while still clapping people left and right in top tier match

[@dengar3095]

Great vids as always spook, keep it up! :D

[@bontempsthomas]

5:02 I will even argue that they aren't looking at thing from a BR perspective. Take France at 8.0 & 8.3 : good lineup overall. Then you go higher : you've got the AMX-32 at 9.3, the AMX-40 at 9.7 and then straight up the Leclercs at 11.0. Alright, then maybe there is some interesting CAS at those BRs ? Helicopter wise, apart from the overBRed Gazelles, you've got the Tiger HAP at .... 10.0 ? It doesn't suit the BR of either the AMX-32 AMX/40, and it's way too low for the Leclercs. How about aviation ? You've got the Etendard IVM and Super Mystere at 9.0 (too weak), and then you have the Mirages & Jaguar A at 10.3 or higher. It doesn't make any sense. If it's a premium, it's always going to be under BRed, or it will receive some unhistorical changes to give it a edge over its opponents. Time shown us that Gaijin doesn't care about "balancing" in any shape or form. The USSR has had 70%+ winrate in top tier for almost 2 years now, and nothing changes. You've got Smin on the forums saying that giving 30G missiles to the Type 93 or the Leclerc their 5 seconds reload would "according to their staistics, break the balance". Maybe there was a time when War Thunder could pretend being "historically accurate". But that is long past now.

[@1999Almaz]

But it's French tree - gaijin hates it and would never care filling the gaps there. We have how many unstabilized tanks at 8.0-8.3? I think it's about 10 already - why? Did we really needed Mephisto (i mean right now, all holes in tree considered)? No, especially since gaijin fucked up and didn't given HOT-3 missiles (so you can't use it on higher BRs). FFS we still see FRENCH turret with FRENCH cannon on swedish premium for 2 years i think, like wtf? Where's AMX-10RC 105 TML? MARS 105 TML? It's really that hard to copypaste turret to another hulls? Of course not - they are just milking money from ONE stabilized AMX-30 in the game hidden behind paywall (i don't even wanna start talking about AMX-30C2, AMX-32-105 etc)

[@lukitomanek601]

Looks like you are playing Generals ZeroHour. Do you have shockwave version?

[@rowiek7668]

Spookston, page 622 at time stamp 2:10 . Is there a possibility that i can get that file? Since the file contains information about the netherlands; which i need... :)

[@Spookston]

"Department of Defense Appropriations for 1981: Research, development, and acquisition" You can find it on google books

[@rowiek7668]

@@Spookston thanks

[@stalinyourleader3846]

a video talking about the event as a whole would be nice, the skyray is a pretty depressing case (man)

[@otavio8566]

CV33 gameplay video! Lets go!!!

[@RuneOverW]

Because of the repair costs; people usually only take one or two tanks in high tier battles so there is not really a ‘line up’

[@okonkwojones]

Showing up without armor is a bold play

[@SzaboBenedek]

Please make a video on the Zrínyi 1, I am a Hungarian and I would love to see you talk about it

[@nathanouellette5654]

A terminalmontage clip I love it dude

[@bobman36]

It would be really cool to just have a leopard with no composite at all and treat it as like the xm8

[@ukasztokarski3715]

Actually, German prototype 2AV had better armour than first 4 batches of 2a4. Only batches 5-9 had better armour. Composition A vs B in turret. Then in 2A5 they swapped A to B in hull and B to C in turret with turret redesign. Than 2A7 C in hull and new type of special armour in turret.

[@EasyAL_YT]

2AV with inconsistent armour, ok gun and no thermals is too strong for 9.7... but t72 turmst with really good armour, really good gun and clear thermals is fine. Why are you so biased against Germany? You constantly make videos of german vehicles you deem to be too strong but rarely about USSR tanks.

[@kod47]

About T25: stabilizer was added and then removed based on the forum historical reports of one person, it's not Gaijin being picky but reporter questioning accuracy of his first report. Gaijin will follow correctly formed reports 95% of the time, that's how historical inaccuracies get fixed in WT, if not for the people's hard work most of the historical stuff would be the same as 2013 WT.

[@arczer2519]

ye, now T25 rather than being amalgam of Pilot 1 and Pilot 2 (both were different) it's now fully pilot 2.

[@krimm1450]

More Hybrid videos! This was really entertaining.

[@Peter-je1sr]

I like that one of your lineups is named "bitch"

[@SilentSniper58]

Adding onto that list at 6:27, the Haruna is nice since it's essentially a second Kongo class but it gets a horrible SL modifier as far as battleships go so you're almost always going negative in a match unless you bring something else economic and do well in that.

[@MzRayTimo3x]

What do you think about Japan Tech Tree? I mean the Ground vehicles always get something to suffer but almost unheard of.

[@T26e4sp]

Hey Spookston, I used your link to get your decal but I never received. I don't know If this is an issue but I was just letting you know.

[@CaptainCiph3r]

This happens all the time in arms procurement, the army rejects something, and years later internet weirdos complain about it and ignore the trial results. FAL guys forget regularly that the springfield m14 trial offering beat the FAL fair and square because the Belgians didn't meet the trial specifications or even finish the trials, and the Armalite offering literally exploded.

[@iain-duncan]

9 7 germany is incredibly strong. I definitely would like another tank with thermals for long range forest maps, but it's still really a good vehicle range

[@KecahirEdits]

Hi spookston what components do you use. I wonder how you get that fps and graphics.

[@ГеоргийМурзич]

Didn't XM-1 have no armor package either during the evaluations?

[@spacecaesar7619]

Good format.

[@johnnymnemonic8487]

If the game wasn't so broken with armor so janky and rounds not penetrating when they should I might care about historical accuracies in this game but until they fix the graphics, sounds, and servers I could care less. Still I love learning the technical aspects of war vehicles which is why this channel is awesome so keep correcting Gaijin Spookston.

[@crimsin0263]

Can you do a review or your opinion on the YMT-05 hildolfr form gundam?

[@nascome9084]

Can you make a video on the AMX-50 series ? Or just the AMX-50B. I suck in it, so i kinda want to see what it will do in better hand

[@thethinkingfox8862]

Man, I’m still burned by them removing the T25 stabilizer.

[@Gary_The_Metro]

If they wanna remove the stabilizer, fine.. but then make it a 6.0 or a 5.7, there is literally NO REASON for it to stay at 6.3. They claim it's because "it's stats aren't dropping considerably" because no one is playing the damn tank. I pretty regularly play 6.0/6.3 and I don't think I see more than 1 T25 in a match if I even see one at all.

[@Liverpool2102MHB]

Poorly researched video. The protection levels of the 2AV and 2A4 are NOT similar. In fact, the 2A4 has about 100mm more kinetic protection on the turret and better overall hull armour.

[@hywang1949]

@Spookston what do you think of the idea that just giving Leopard 2AV the same round like the XM1(M456, M393 and M735) and then put it at 9.3?

[@Dog5ight]

Yo spookston, did you hear the news? They’re finally adding the skink in the next update!

[@lucasdelacierva9226]

So.... no armor? *slams phone to the ground*

[@csabakatona1461]

Can you make a video on the CV90105 TML? I just recently got it as I decided to speed up the grind with the Swedish tree, however the machine just appears to me as an untameable monster.

[@Freeman-mm6cx]

Can somebody plz help me? When i fly planes, i don’t fly after my gun cursor, but i instead have a white circle around my plane. And basically, it makes flying planes god awful. Plz help.

[@Hayde1222]

Man day of upload and gijen anoucess they are adding the skink

[@khoanguyenngoc9094]

Spookston could you please do a guide for US low to mid tier ? Ive been struggling with 5.3-6.7

[@socialus5689]

Only historically accurate when there is no money to be made.

[@shuhratkessikbayev8886]

Watch someone get the classified documents again. I'm calling it now.

[@ussdaedalus5058]

gaijin watches these videos and says "this is cool! lets do nothing of that"

[@jPlanerv2]

Hard question is it worth to sell its coupon to buy this new battlepass 100mm is1 from market?

[@MonoMugi]

Yes, if you already have any Leo2

[@jPlanerv2]

@@MonoMugi i have

[@MonoMugi]

@@jPlanerv2 so sell it, IS with 100mm is the best IS in game now

[@warbird1e1]

I really wish people liek you work quality control in Gaijin.

[@orangelemon9786]

Love the intro

[@murmenaattori6]

Just a heads up: Mild steel isn't pronounced as 'milled', but 'myeld'

[@gabegames7365]

I like the "Hybrid video" style, i would like to see more of it

[@basedjorts]

The M6A2 got a front plate it didn’t have because it would be a 5.3 tank without it. I don’t agree with adding the front plate but I doubt most non US mains would be happy with the M6A2 being at a lower BR. The PT19 getting composite it never had and ammo made years later is a whole different issue. That’s just typical German handholding.

[@ravenouself4181]

How to add unique vehicles that are fun: Yugoslavia, Poland and Romania. Call it a "Międzymorze/Intermarium" Tech Tree. No backlash about the tree being too small, an influx of players from said countries, and more opportunities for premium vehicles Everyone wins.