The point they are making regardless is like many vehicles before them gaijin has refused to change a vehicle because the proof wasn’t the exact version being asked to fix. This is exactly what they have done.
For chally 3 they have denied Spall liner though it will be on production version but wasn’t on the display. They refused APS because it wasn’t on the display version. No armour packages because they aren’t on the display version.
All this potential buffs rejected. But one report on the production version gets this pre production one changed.
It’s constant hypocracy.
2 Likes
What they should have done, is added another tank, the production tank, different from the Technical Demonstrator. The point is balance over realism, while not sacrificing realism over balance. The point is that the TD is no longer 11.7 worthy, and the challanger series in general are not worth of their respective BRs like the Ariete.
Its just funny how quick they are to respond to said bug report when so many things within this game remain broken for months. God forbid Britain comes close to being competitive at top tier in these moronic cqc maps. Its hard enough with the giant lower plate you can never hide, or the gun breech half the size of the turret.
But this is what happens when lots of effort goes into accurately modeling combat vehicles only to then place them in call of duty map enviroments they were never designed to fight in. But its fine, the one time in 1000 matches I actually get to play on Red Desert, the Chally 2 can perform quite well.
2 Likes
it was player report, but even at British army site it saying that Challenger 3 has “improved and more powerfull engine”, also it weight 66 tons and has improved armor. In game - challenger 3 has weaker armor, weaker engine.
1 Like
Agreed.
I suspect it was only added to move Britain top tier up so they could sell the OES.
I just pretend it doesn’t exist.
OES is still missing 100mm of chemical protection on its ERA which is funny because they claimed they fixed this but only did it for the TES
1 Like
It is missing much more than that, but it does miss 100 to be in line with TES
1 Like
The part i find hilarious is the original forum post the guy posts a photo at a expo of a later challenger 3 with an improved ufp and active protection system next to a sign and says… “I don’t see any mention of an improved engine on the sign” Funny enough i don’t see an active protection system on the one in game or an improved ufp? so yet again it’s another example of a vehicle THAT ISN’T FINISHED yet is being nerf’d based on the most vague answer I’ve ever seen provided as evidence despite basically every other outlet stating that it’s receiving a new engine and cooling system. They should have left the TD as it is until there’s concrete evidence of it specifications ans if the production challenger 3 has a 1200hp engine fine. But this whole bug report change within a month is even more insulting when things like the mantlet protection has just been left Community Bug Reporting System or what about the chieftains laser range finder Community Bug Reporting System or even it’s woeful reload Community Bug Reporting System i even wished the rolands bug report an happy 1st birthday Community Bug Reporting System this isn’t just an issue with the engine I think what people are so annoyed by is with how the system works, we have an unfinished vehicle changed within a month based on minimal evidence meanwhile people have put stacks of work into other reports on vehicles the need help and are waiting nearly year or more and they’re yet to be changed in a positive way.
3 Likes