The Leclerc is far from sad, it is still a pretty solid top tier MBT, though in its current and previous state it is more of a 12.0.
1 Like
I’m aware that the T-series’ vertical guidance drive has its own “pump,” while the horizontal guidance drive has its own motor.
This isn’t a single module that can be considered “power electronics in the game,” as it doesn’t control both systems simultaneously.
1 Like
As far as I am aware, that is exactly how the Abrams are modeled tho. But more as independent « hydraulic systems » than anything else
As for the Leclerc, they seem to model some random modules here and there that potentially do power distribution from the engine alternator, which should exist on any other tank
They are willing to shove several fully independent and unrelated parts into the fcs module on leopard 2’s (gunner and commander each have their own independent stabilization, ballistics and fire control computers + equipment plus manual backup cranks on 2A4 and another fully separated independant backup system on 2A5/6/7).
They can also be modelled as part of the vertical drive or horizontal-drive respectively.
This is not a issue for implementation whatsoever.
6 Likes
I’m not ready to give you a definitive answer, but if the Abrams didn’t have a single hydraulic system, it would need two hydraulic fluid tanks. Does it have them? I think it has one.
Take the T-72A for example. I’ve circled everything that controls turret rotation. There’s no hydraulic pump or single power amplifier.
1 Like
This phrase doesn’t apply to the fire control system. In fact, it’s independent not only in the Leopard, but in most MBTs as well. The game apparently decided that this was unnecessary detail (it’s simply impossible to determine exactly which part of the fire control system is responsible for what in most cases).
Don’t make an invalid argument.
The Leopard’s vertical drive rotation handle is already designed as a horizontal one, which is a plus, as it reduces the vertical drive’s damage zone.
I was mistaking the Abrams and the leopard 2(A4) huge hydraulic pump in the back
It’s in this case more similar to the T72 picture you shared. I still stand on the fact that the addition of all those modules for the Leclerc power system seems more strict than the implementation of other vehicles (including the Abrams and Leopard), since they seem to model random modules in the turret basket that affect the entire horizontal and vertical drive, that I’m sure other vehicles should also possess in some capacity.
The leopard has a single module that powers both the horizontal and vertical drives.
Nothing in common. I showed you the part of the horizontal guidance drive that is not connected to the vertical one.
What is this assumption based on?
Likely because it is newer. Abrams basket hitbox actually looks like this:
Spoiler
Yet Type 10 looks like this:
Spoiler
I believe Leclerc shares a large hitbox like Type 10, but i’m not sure.
Leo and Abrams basket sometimes allow a round to “slip” through the hitbox, leaving your weapon drives intact.
1 Like
Spoiler
2 Likes
is not. only round plain shape on bottom
All other vehicles that I can see only have their motors/pumps modelled destroying them only disable the one module they care for. Instead of doing the same for the Leclerc, they are implementing "power systems"by picking random modules around the turret baskets that all link to the full vertical and horizontal drive, so that if one is destroyed, aiming is completely prevented
The rule that was given with the initial backlash of the implementation of turret baskets is that only by shooting the lower or upper ring of the turret basket would it be destroyed. I think it’s still the case for the leopard and Abrams, but it might not be the case for the type 10 then ?
Edit : just looks like spall is hitting the bottom part of the basket on the type 10 video, which would be why its damaged
We’re still waiting for russian MBTs to get their basket so the game starts the balance process
Spoiler
(bug there. its power electronic)
Please go into the game and see for yourself before jumping to conclusions.
My bad then.
So, not just the Leclerc. This implementation of power electronics still seems very strict to me. And in those other vehicles, at least those modules are situated in a compact area. The leclerc has those modules all around the turret basket, meaning that if the crew doesn’t get one shot, and shot center of mass is still going to cripple him (from any aspect)
Because in other vehicles the designers made them like that, unlike the Leclerc.
12.0 - 12.3
Definitely just as good or worse than the 12.0 Abramses.
1 Like
A considerable amount worse yes.
I think they should give 2 Leclercs a better round like F2 or Shard and put them at 12.3, and put 2 at 12.0.
The 12.0 Abrams could be 12.7 easily.
3 Likes
The modules chosen by Gaijin look very random. I’ve never seen any documents showing a layout that they have chosen for such systems.
And you are missing my point. I still think that whatever the vehicle, having these power systems modelled on a case by case basis tends to artificially buff/nerf certain vehicles compared to others.
All tanks have power systems at some point or another. Energy isn’t juste magically transmitted from the engine to the pumps/motors