yes they don’t have the useless ERA NERA
2 Likes
This is what happens when Gaijin take a tech demonstrator and put it in the game.
It’s like in software development where you make a prototype, and the boss wants the prototype in production straght away even though it absolutely isn’t ready for it.
I’ve had this out with smim regarding the hypocrisy and double standards with the yak-141 getting it’s IRST but it’s like talking to a brick wall so I gave up.
3 Likes
Just played 2 games in the TES.
Both games, first hit straight into the breech and gun disabled.
This is the most utterly ridiculous, stupid shit I’ve experienced in this game for a long time.
I am in a stinking bad mood now.
3 Likes
A good friend of mine served in the RTR on the CR2.
Made a passing comment one day (Nothing secret, just confirming what the public already knows), that no known Russian fin round is able to penetrate the mantlet. The cheeks are more likely to be penetrated than the mantlet.
Obviously couldnt back it up because you know, official secrets act.
1 Like
It’s like Gaijin think the British engineers were drooling idiots.
“Hey, lets make a super armoured turret, and then, lets give it a giant gaping hole in the middle!!”
Gaijin need to use common sense at some point, rather than “we dont’ know!1!”. It makes zero sense for the mantlet to be so horrifyingly vulnerable. I mean, come on lads, use your goddam brains.
3 Likes
I dont know at what ranges he was referring to when he made that comment, but I can only assume its at standard engagement ranges for the CR2, as opposed to within a few hundred meters.
I do get Gaijins side of the issue at times with NATO tanks, as theyre still heavily classified, whereas Russian MBTs have a not more information floating about that isnt classified.
However, Gaijin has been presented with enough info now to fix the issues we have in game.
2 Likes
From the foreword about British MBT design philosophy from the Haynes Chally 1 manual
Made me chuckle when I read it
6 Likes
I think the best thing about the spall liners in the challenger 2 is that they are all absent from any of the actual weakspots where people shoot and will pen so they’re pretty much redundant.
6 Likes
3 More breech loses on first hit. This is insufferable.
You don’t like having 1/3rd of your turret face be a huge weakspot with a gun position so low on the turret that you need to expose your massive 4head for the enemy to easily shoot and cripple you before you can even get LOS on them to fire?
Skill issue.
4 Likes
I know right.
Stupid me for trying to use the spawn and getting my breech taken out from across the map by some leopard within 20 seconds.
Just play hull down and ignore that the leopards, especially the spall lined ones are infinitely better hull down tanks whilst also being better than you in every single metric bar a slightly slower reload (for your first four shots).
1 Like
It’s weird you say that actually.
I am being teamed with the Russians far, far more than the swede’s and germans, and we almost always lose.
My experience as well since the spall liners were added.
I’m frequently seeing enemy teams that are nothing but germany/sweden and they absolutely steamroll games now because of all the spall lined leopards running around.
Fighting them in the challenger is absolutely soulsucking, I thought BVMs were annoying to fight but these are so much worse now.
I’m not against being shot in the breach and having the gun knocked out, it happens to every other mbt in the game, the issue i have it that it’s a garenteed 1 shot most of the time because the area is basically hollow. I also think the lack of spall liner in the 3P is ridiculous because the photo’s used to justify this the coax isn’t even installed. So clearly the vehicle isn’t using a combat loadout so the photo’s for this should be dismissed.
1 Like
This is exactly the argument I had with smim. I pointed out the raging hypocrisy of the yak-141 getting it’s IRST when it never flew with it but go nowhere as expected.
It’s a freakin tech demonstrator, of course it’s not combat ready and was never intended to be so. Their position is pretty indefensible but nothing we can do.
4 Likes
Yes, but you don’t know what else was removed for the presentation, who’s to say the spall liners weren’t removed also.
True, but we cant prove what we do not see
4 Likes
Lol, what’s their excuse for dismissing this source? Not in Russian?
1 Like