Unit Errata

Place bug reports / questions here.

Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 288
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

Post by milivoje02 »

Question regarding the German Leopard 2A tank family. Why there is no Leopard 2A4 version and Leopard 2A7+(2A7+ shown at armaments fairs 2018,2019 in Munich,Paris,Budapeat,Belgrade,Doxa and probably somewhere else). 2 A4 is the version that is most produced from this tank family.
Leopard 2A4(NATO main tank) - A new digital fire control system is installed, and a new dome with additional armor. This version is the most widespread and all tanks belonging to the older versions have been upgraded to this one. Production lasted between 1985 and 1992.
Version of Leopard 2A: Leopard 2A2,Leopard 2A3,Leopard 2A4,Leopard 2 IMP,Leopard 2A5,Stridsvang 122,Leopard 2-140,Leopard 2A6,Leopard 2 E,Leopard 2 PSO,Leopard 2A7,Leopard 2 A7+. It is a large family :-)
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20578
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: Unit Errata

Post by Balthagor »

Decisions on which Leopard tanks to include where made in 2003 for SR2010, then reviewed in 2013 for SR Ultimate. I don't remember why we decided what we did. It hasn't been reviewed since then.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 288
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

Post by milivoje02 »

Thanks for the quick response regarding the problem around the forum.
May I suggest the following remarks regarding the production of units. To insert into a Spanish Region group a tank Leopard 2AE(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopard_2E )
it is the result of cooperation between Spain and Germany.
For T group to insert a Poland stealth tank PL 01 (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PL-01)
And Leopard 2A7+(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Gr ... bat_System) for German and Frensh regional group(and maybe other European countries)becouse he is the cooperation between German and French and set up as the future main tank of armies of European countries.
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20578
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: Unit Errata

Post by Balthagor »

milivoje02 wrote:
May 06 2020
...To insert into a Spanish Region group a tank Leopard 2AE(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopard_2E )
I disagree. It is a licence agreement between Germany and Spain. We should not add it to region E, we just need to add the design as a known unit design for Spain at the start of the game. I will make notes about this for SR Next Gen. If we add it to E, then Portugal and other E regions would be able to research it and I disagree with that.

Thanks for those links, the Polish tank is an interesting find.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 288
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

Post by milivoje02 »

Balthagor wrote:
May 06 2020
milivoje02 wrote:
May 06 2020
...To insert into a Spanish Region group a tank Leopard 2AE(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopard_2E )
I disagree. It is a licence agreement between Germany and Spain. We should not add it to region E, we just need to add the design as a known unit design for Spain at the start of the game. I will make notes about this for SR Next Gen. If we add it to E, then Portugal and other E regions would be able to research it and I disagree with that.

Thanks for those links, the Polish tank is an interesting find.
Manufacturer for Leopard 2E is Santa Barbara sistemy from Madrid(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_B ... a_Sistemas),they were made on the soil of Spain.The Germans reworked the designs for Spanish.
I see again what you want to say about the E group. But there were also solutions that were done, for example, for Turkey.
For the Polish tank PL 01 there is a several clips on yutube.
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20578
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: Unit Errata

Post by Balthagor »

milivoje02 wrote:
May 06 2020
Manufacturer for Leopard 2E is Santa Barbara sistemy from Madrid(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_B ... a_Sistemas),they were made on the soil of Spain.The Germans reworked the designs for Spanish.
Exactly, it's a design by region G (Germany) that is know by region 1789 (Spain). The only reason to add it to region E is if some country in that region should be able to gain the design by researching it. Spain didn't research it, they bought it from the Germans.

If you start as Spain in 1949, you should have to buy the design from Germany in 2003 if you want to start building them. If the Germans never research it. the Spanish should never have it.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
Nerei
General
Posts: 1139
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

Post by Nerei »

milivoje02 wrote:
May 06 2020
And Leopard 2A7+(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Gr ... bat_System) for German and Frensh regional group(and maybe other European countries)becouse he is the cooperation between German and French and set up as the future main tank of armies of European countries.
MGCS is not the 2A7+. The 2A7+ is an upgrade on the Leopard 2 chassis trialled in mid 2010. Germany took delivery of the first A7+ in 2014. Both events predate the KMW Nexter merger that is planned to produce the MGCS. MGCS is a completely new vehicle that is not expected expected to enter service until the 2030's. The typically used name for the MGCS is Leopard 3.

Also going by Jane's the latest variant of the Leopard 2 is now the 2A7V the first of which Germany took delivery of in October.
https://www.janes.com/article/92288/ger ... opard-2a7v
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 288
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

Post by milivoje02 »

Balthagor wrote:
May 06 2020
If you start as Spain in 1949, you should have to buy the design from Germany in 2003 if you want to start building them. If the Germans never research it. the Spanish should never have it.
I completely agree with you. That development model would change a lot in the units of all regions. For example, when we would play with the Russian Empire in 1914 and we survive with him until 1955 we could never devolop a Capital Ship BC-82 Stalingarod BC( we would probably call it Volvograd).
Then we can say the era of 1949 had a great influence on the military development of europe when it came to the eastern part(X and T group). Example: Start to play as Poland or Yugoslavia,both countries first bought the tank T 72 and developed their tanks based on it. So without t 72 there would be no tanks when it comes to these two countries.
Another example: If we strat with Japan in 1936 camping and survive without capitulation to 1979 uless USA won't sell to us a F 15C Eagle we could produce it as Japan.
This all raises the question of alternative history (reason I love the WORLD 2020 scenario more of these from the past ) wath if....
Because of this theory what would have happened if it had been different in the past it may be useful to separate the era in terms of technologies and units. And to classify the development of technology by the country in terms of what they have in their era. Technologically weaker countries usually develop military technology heavily influenced by their current stronger ally. And that has changed a lot in Eastern Europe form 1949 until the 2020. This is one really big topic.
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 288
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

Post by milivoje02 »

Nerei wrote:
May 06 2020
[

MGCS is not the 2A7+. The 2A7+ is an upgrade on the Leopard 2 chassis trialled in mid 2010. Germany took delivery of the first A7+ in 2014. Both events predate the KMW Nexter merger that is planned to produce the MGCS. MGCS is a completely new vehicle that is not expected expected to enter service until the 2030's. The typically used name for the MGCS is Leopard 3.

https://www.janes.com/article/92288/ger ... opard-2a7v
It says in description Leopard 3(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Gr ... bat_System ). Is described as a hybrid of Leopard and Leclerc tank. Yes was announced for the period between 2030 and 2035.
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20578
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: Unit Errata

Post by Balthagor »

So I would expect this to be regions FG.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 288
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

Post by milivoje02 »

Yes,but again it seys The European Main Battle Tank or Enhanced Main Battle Tank (EMBT). I would exclude him the fate that the Eurofighter Typhoon had.
Nerei
General
Posts: 1139
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

Post by Nerei »

milivoje02 wrote:
May 06 2020
Nerei wrote:
May 06 2020
[

MGCS is not the 2A7+. The 2A7+ is an upgrade on the Leopard 2 chassis trialled in mid 2010. Germany took delivery of the first A7+ in 2014. Both events predate the KMW Nexter merger that is planned to produce the MGCS. MGCS is a completely new vehicle that is not expected expected to enter service until the 2030's. The typically used name for the MGCS is Leopard 3.

https://www.janes.com/article/92288/ger ... opard-2a7v
It says in description Leopard 3(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Gr ... bat_System ). Is described as a hybrid of Leopard and Leclerc tank. Yes was announced for the period between 2030 and 2035.
You are mixing up the EMBT and MGCS/leopard 3. They are two completely different vehicles.


EMBT is an attempt by KDNS to create a MBT that takes the advantages of the Batch 10 Leclerc Turret and combines them with the Leopard 2A7 chassis to create a lighter (relatively speaking that is) vehicle with as few compromises as possible.
The logic is that the lighter turret allows for additional equipment to be mounted on the vehicle.
This is an off the shelf product. That is why KNDS could show it off in 2018 despite only being formed in 2015.
It has also undergone trials in Portugal already. Really there is no reason why it could not technically enter service in the next few years.

Italy have apparently showed interest in the EMBT as a replacement for the C1 Ariette so that could in theory happen.

All this said the main purpose of the EMBT really is as a proof of concept. If it sells then that is great but that is not the main purpose of this vehicle.

Its goal mainly is demonstrating that the constituent companies of KNDS (KMW and NDS) can cooperate on complex projects like the MGCS and CIFS.


Where EMBT is basically a frankenstein vehicle MGCS is a brand new built from the ground up vehicle.
It is expected to remain in the technology demonstration phase for another 4 years after which KDNS plans to spend another 4 years turning those technologies into tank components that from 2028 will be assembled into the MGCS/Leopard 3.

Basically there will not be a MGCS for maybe 10 years as most of the technology does not even exist yet.

This is the vehicle that will ultimately replace the Leclerc and Leopard 2. EMBT just exist to demonstrate that the KMW and NDS can cooperate to make it.
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 288
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

Post by milivoje02 »

Nerei wrote:
May 06 2020
milivoje02 wrote:
May 06 2020
Nerei wrote:
May 06 2020
[

MGCS is not the 2A7+. The 2A7+ is an upgrade on the Leopard 2 chassis trialled in mid 2010. Germany took delivery of the first A7+ in 2014. Both events predate the KMW Nexter merger that is planned to produce the MGCS. MGCS is a completely new vehicle that is not expected expected to enter service until the 2030's. The typically used name for the MGCS is Leopard 3.

https://www.janes.com/article/92288/ger ... opard-2a7v
It says in description Leopard 3(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Gr ... bat_System ). Is described as a hybrid of Leopard and Leclerc tank. Yes was announced for the period between 2030 and 2035.
You are mixing up the EMBT and MGCS/leopard 3. They are two completely different vehicles.


EMBT is an attempt by KDNS to create a MBT that takes the advantages of the Batch 10 Leclerc Turret and combines them with the Leopard 2A7 chassis to create a lighter (relatively speaking that is) vehicle with as few compromises as possible.
The logic is that the lighter turret allows for additional equipment to be mounted on the vehicle.
This is an off the shelf product. That is why KNDS could show it off in 2018 despite only being formed in 2015.
It has also undergone trials in Portugal already. Really there is no reason why it could not technically enter service in the next few years.

Italy have apparently showed interest in the EMBT as a replacement for the C1 Ariette so that could in theory happen.

All this said the main purpose of the EMBT really is as a proof of concept. If it sells then that is great but that is not the main purpose of this vehicle.

Its goal mainly is demonstrating that the constituent companies of KNDS (KMW and NDS) can cooperate on complex projects like the MGCS and CIFS.


Where EMBT is basically a frankenstein vehicle MGCS is a brand new built from the ground up vehicle.
It is expected to remain in the technology demonstration phase for another 4 years after which KDNS plans to spend another 4 years turning those technologies into tank components that from 2028 will be assembled into the MGCS/Leopard 3.

Basically there will not be a MGCS for maybe 10 years as most of the technology does not even exist yet.

This is the vehicle that will ultimately replace the Leclerc and Leopard 2. EMBT just exist to demonstrate that the KMW and NDS can cooperate to make it.
Paris fair(https://youtu.be/Wx006Tk9kds).
I can't find a better video in english. But I'm glad that something is happening on this issue, because the Leopard family 2A deserves more models in the game.
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 288
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

Post by milivoje02 »

May i ask one question? Why all models of the M 84 tank (especially the first model M 84) do not have Regional texture which is made by Nerei? It looks nice, and it seems to me that this model is in question.
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20578
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: Unit Errata

Post by Balthagor »

Are you asking me or are asking Nerei? He makes all the models and textures, we just implement what he delivers.

Are you saying there is a region texture that isn't showing?
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
Post Reply

Return to “Issues and Support”