Jump to content

Challenger mk2/3 as of 1.89?


How will they fare with new tanks that can lolpen the turret? The only decent trait of the challenger was its turret since its probably worse than all the other mbts in pretty much every way. (Does have better depression than soviets)

I haven't been having much fun with my mk2, doesn't seem like it will be worth playing much now, was already bad/mediocre at best. Probably just skip to chally 2, which isnt that great either, worse ammo, worse mobility, worse turret armor than leo 2a5.

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have summed it up pretty accurately unfortunately. they partially fixed Challenger mk.3 side skirts but partially is the key word as they still are easily blown off as one solid piece.

 

Why the slowest tank does not get the best ammo makes no sense to me ..

Edited by DrPhibes1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, DrPhibes1 said:

You have summed it up pretty accurately unfortunately. they partially fixed Challenger mk.3 side skirts but partially is the key word as they still are easily blown off as one solid piece.

 

Why the slowest tank does not get the best ammo makes no sense to me ..

Well it is not a 10.0 so I would think it would get the same ammo as the best 10.0, I don't think it should be any better.

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CookieMonster_24 said:

Well it is not a 10.0 so I would think it would get the same ammo as the best 10.0, I don't think it should be any better.

 

The Challenger mk1 has stock APDS...

 

the Challenger 2 is also the slowest and has good ammo but not the best. 

Edited by DrPhibes1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Louise_So_schoen said:

Once GAijin fix the UFP of Challenger 1 9.7 is ok for them .

I agree. The wet stowage too, I also saw a post saying the chally 2 did not store ammo near driver, if this is also true with the chally 1 it would greatly improve survivability.

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's just frustrating not having any advantageous play style with the challengers anymore, there's no point in playing them anymore because they are so outclassed, but I only have British top tier so I don't have any other choice, I might quit war thunder all together if this bs continues for the british tree.

Chieftain sucks

Challenger sucks

Conqueror sucks

6.7 is ok

^thats not exactly an enjoyable experience, wouldn't recommend war thunder to a friend anymore, the dev's negligence of Britain doesn't leave me very optimistic Britain will ever be competitive again, the last couple times they were competitive and balanced they were nerfed into the ground. Britain simply does not have an OP or strong vehicle, competitive like 6.7 is the best it gets.

what I am really concerned about is the health of the game, I quit for 6 months in the fall because I was tired of the bs, I started playing again because I wanted the chieftain, Ive now unlocked all the vehicles I want, whats to bring me back when I get tired of the bs again?

 

Edited by CookieMonster_24
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hear this problem very often. The Chally mk2/3 are bad and the Chally 2 is not the best tank at 10.0. In my opopinion, they should put the Leo 2A5 at 10.7 and pretty much every other modern mbt. However, I don't think the Chally mk2/3 have no chance of doing something back to the 2A5, t-80U, Leclerc, Type90 etc. It´s just that they require more specific personal skill. I mean they play very different from the other NATO tanks and most people think because of this that they are bad. I totally agree that the Challenger and Chieftain series are not the greatest tank you will ever play. But I think they are not bad. They require good situation awareness. You need to predict where the enemy will flank and where the weak spots of the map are. You need to fight unfair fights (ofcourse, in your favour). So this means that a lot of people don´t give it a chance or don´t see the full potential of the tanks. Again, they are not the greatest, but they are definitely not bad! I can agree to people who say they won´t go for the British because it´s a waste of their time. There are better tank lines to play. The British are the first top tier tanks for me, but I love them. Challenger 2 has really good armor. Not when knife fighting, but when hiding your LFP and using the the terrain as best as you can. I bounce a lot of shell´s (yes, I also get penned through the mantlet but when the enemy need's to fire fast, they often forget or ignore the weak spot) and can make a lot of kills. For the Chieftain, it's a slow tank with not to much armor. But my god, I love the chieftain mk3 (yea the mk5 and mk10 are really bad tho) with it's great gun.

 

I have the feeling that the allied teams have some more power then they used to have. I don't know what it is, but it seems like I am winning more games. Because of the power advantage, I feel like the British have a lot more going for them because you won't lose every game and get flanked within the first 10 minutes.

But yes, the British high tier tanks lack mobility and that's not a good thing because everyone knows it's all about mobility in this game. They are not the best tanks out there but certainly aren't bad! They are different and get forced in a game style they are not designed for. If you don't wanna get used to something different that's quite hard to master, then maybe the British are not the tank line for you, at least high tier.

  • Upvote 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ___DEXCON___ said:

I hear this problem very often. The Chally mk2/3 are bad and the Chally 2 is not the best tank at 10.0. In my opopinion, they should put the Leo 2A5 at 10.7 and pretty much every other modern mbt. However, I don't think the Chally mk2/3 have no chance of doing something back to the 2A5, t-80U, Leclerc, Type90 etc. It´s just that they require more specific personal skill. I mean they play very different from the other NATO tanks and most people think because of this that they are bad. I totally agree that the Challenger and Chieftain series are not the greatest tank you will ever play. But I think they are not bad. They require good situation awareness. You need to predict where the enemy will flank and where the weak spots of the map are. You need to fight unfair fights (ofcourse, in your favour). So this means that a lot of people don´t give it a chance or don´t see the full potential of the tanks. Again, they are not the greatest, but they are definitely not bad! I can agree to people who say they won´t go for the British because it´s a waste of their time. There are better tank lines to play. The British are the first top tier tanks for me, but I love them. Challenger 2 has really good armor. Not when knife fighting, but when hiding your LFP and using the the terrain as best as you can. I bounce a lot of shell´s (yes, I also get penned through the mantlet but when the enemy need's to fire fast, they often forget or ignore the weak spot) and can make a lot of kills. For the Chieftain, it's a slow tank with not to much armor. But my god, I love the chieftain mk3 (yea the mk5 and mk10 are really bad tho) with it's great gun.

 

I have the feeling that the allied teams have some more power then they used to have. I don't know what it is, but it seems like I am winning more games. Because of the power advantage, I feel like the British have a lot more going for them because you won't lose every game and get flanked within the first 10 minutes.

But yes, the British high tier tanks lack mobility and that's not a good thing because everyone knows it's all about mobility in this game. They are not the best tanks out there but certainly aren't bad! They are different and get forced in a game style they are not designed for. If you don't wanna get used to something different that's quite hard to master, then maybe the British are not the tank line for you, at least high tier.

Well, yeah. I have a 2.0+ kd in the chally mk2 thats just because I just hide until someone passes facing the wrong direction. The problem I have with the chally 2 is the mantlet is easier to pen than the 2a5 and t80. Because it is a hull down tank if they filled in that hollow space between the metal plating on the outside of the mantlet and the composite inside it would uave good protection, i think hull down it has to be better than 2a5 to be viable.

  • Upvote 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎01‎/‎06‎/‎2019 at 17:40, CookieMonster_24 said:

Well, yeah. I have a 2.0+ kd in the chally mk2 thats just because I just hide until someone passes facing the wrong direction. The problem I have with the chally 2 is the mantlet is easier to pen than the 2a5 and t80. Because it is a hull down tank if they filled in that hollow space between the metal plating on the outside of the mantlet and the composite inside it would uave good protection, i think hull down it has to be better than 2a5 to be viable.

Yea well I don't really like to "hide and wait for someone to be unlucky". I really try to push (that's not possible for every map but still) and try to play for the objective. I totaly agree with the fact that the mantlet is very easy to penatrate and it's certainly a big weakness of the Chally 2. But to be honest. If I give the enemy's the time to aim for my mantlet, I'm doing something wrong. I try to shoot people who aren't looking or don't have the time to take a proper shot. In my experience, the mantlet doesn't get penned often when I do this. Still, people have some Lucky aim or are they are just really good. But I think it's hard to compare the 2A5 to the Chally 2, since they are designed for different purposes. The meta of War Thunder favours those of the 2A5 and not those of the Chally 2. But the Chally 2 still has some armor to bring to the battleflied. 2A5's often think they are god mode and overextend. When they do that, taking them out is not to hard if you know how to deal with them. But I do understand your problem with the mantlet and it's certainly a big weakspot of the Challenger 2.

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Louise_So_schoen said:

It's good for you that you have a 2.0 kd for Chally but what about your winning rate ?

 

The lower your winning rate is the lower your grinding efficiency is !

Win rate is 38%

Would appreciate it if Britain got at least a decent tank and America a strong tank, Americas needs to be good too in order to carry winrate

Doesnt help the axis controls the skies in every br I play, usual germans, think their vehicles are trash and because they are the loudest group the allies get nerfed into the ground...

Edited by CookieMonster_24
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing other than a buffed turret will  make the challenger mk2/3 usable.

I dont even know why I play this game anymore, every other nation clubs britain....

The maps are so bad this patch too, last patch I would leave a match maybe ever 4th game, this patch I leave about 2/3rds of the time without spawning, I can't be asked to play these maps in the challenger.

Edit: Ive left 11 of my last 14 matches without spawning.

Edited by CookieMonster_24
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My current problem:

How come the fv4005 is more effective than the challenger mk2 and mk3 at top tier on some maps?

Im lmao, the other match some guy was trying to convince me the leclerc is worse than the chally mk2.....

 

Edited by CookieMonster_24
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...