I agree. Moreover, in my case, Black Night is my favorite tank of the whole game)
Even after so many battles, I didn’t get bored playing it.
2 Likes
I just wish the Ch2 would have a larger readyrack, the BN would be almost perfect (given its more defensive niche) with more than 4 rounds of its high rate of fire.
The APS is very fun when you get some heli player trying to kill you and they cant do anything.
1 Like
Yeah…
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/ojFgCJ6Jnos4
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/nzUoCC2yxJx5
Or even just a ready rack replenishment time of more like 5-8 seconds rather than 20+
2 Likes
While you prefer the BN these two are objectively better in almost every regard.
The BN has:
- Best APS in the game, neither of those even have APS.
- Better reload (5 vs 6s)
- Better optics (Afaik both leos have gen 1 gunner thermals, compared to the gen 3 of the BN)
- LWS
its mostly the APS which is extremely strong, it can intercept most APFSDS in the game at medium-long range. Gen 1 thermals at 12.0 is also pretty awful.
The Leos are faster and have a better shell, thats about all they do better. I would take a faster reload and an amazing APS over that any day.
1 Like
APS is range restricted and dependant on the projectile.
1800m± for a top tier round on many maps the engagement lanes are shorter.
Optics are great
LWS is nice to have.
ROF 5 seconds and then 7ish
Leopard 2A7/6 etc have:
Better mobility by a large margin
A superior round in DM-53 and a consitent 6 second reload rate
Better hull design, greater survivability
More chance of glancing a round off the armour.
1 Like
In range battles, BN is superior of any leo. + This is the most protected tank from CAS in game.
Yes, her niche of superiority is local, but that makes this tank very distinctive.
In the current reality, there is still such a factor as the Kh-38. Whether you’re on any leo, you’re least likely to be able to survive a raid by a weak soviet CAS. And the Iron Fist is capable of intercepting X-38 doublets into the side and quad launches into the forehead and stern.
1 Like
Yes you can intercept a KH-38 with the system and that is relevant and yes on large maps the APS system is good.
But, we know the next evolution of tanks Gaijin add are all going to have APS.
Leopard, T-90M and M1 will all have their respective APS, this change will make the BK nothing more than a CR2 with good thermals.
The peculiarity is that, as for the Trophy, what will be on the Abrams, Leo and all the other NATO tanks, and the arena from soviets is not a competitor to the Iron Fist at all.
The trophy is opened in duplet-lunches and has a colossally worse performance characteristics relative to the active protection of the Black Night. And the Arena is a tool only against ground ATGM and CAS missiles in still very limited angles.
At a distance of 1km+, there will be no difference for the BN player whether he sees Leo 2A7 or Leo with the trophy in his sights in terms of the ability to shoot him.
IF now and for perspective is top APS for NATO-units in game. The closest competitor in terms of in-game potential is Afghanite from the Soviets. But it will be heavily limited in anty-CAS protection zones.
But it will be just as good at working against kinetics at a distance.
As a result, we have only a few potential MBTs with IF for the game.:
Merkava with IF, Sabra Mk.2 with IF and KF-51U
Multiple armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles with IF, if my memory serves me correctly., use the IFLD - version without the kinetic interception option with a smaller mortar size, while the IFLK was supposed to be installed on MBT since it still requires heavy enough armor to contain a deflected projectile.
For four rounds. then its either 6 seconds aced or just over it.
With expert my CR2 past the ready racks over 7 seconds.
Gen one on the thermals, commander has 2nd gen I believe, but optics isnt just thermals its also magnification believe theyre similar in that regard, the 2E is far better than the 2a5 and 2a6 for magnification.
Id rather lose the LWS for DM53 especially the 2a6 as its the highest penning shell at top tier.
A quite niche feature that has saved me a handful of times.
id rather lose all of those for the over all better performance of the Leopard 2a5/6
Only on the gunners sight, commander has gen 2 or 3, both are about the same in game.
Hardly, they have more effective turret armour, they also don’t have as stupidely big a breach shot (all tanks have one)
The Reload is hardly anything to shout about, half the comments are about how its incredibly insufficient for the tanks to only have a 4 round ready rack, meaning you get only four rounds faster than a 2a5/6 then are on par or arguably worse.
As well as this, the ammo layout on the CR2s is pretty damn brutal for if a tank flanks or gets a hull shot.
The CR2’s are some of my favourite tanks in the world, behind colddwar gear like chieftains etc. In game they just aren’t it man .
I prefer my 2a5/6 at range than the CR2 BN, the L27A1 is far too anemic for the BR compared to the Dm53.
It’s one of, there are other tanks with APS which works fine against cas.
The APS on the BN is so highly regarded as it works against ground rounds etc.
Im sorry but any cas plane is a threat to all tanks, not just KH38 carriers.
I’ve died more to the damn rafale in my BN than su30 or SU34.
Depends if you’re in a position to get dunked on by cas like that regardless of the tank the CAS will win.
the leopards are better overall for GRB, whether you like the CR2 or not.
It’s 7-8 seconds for the CR2. The ready rack is too small and you will average 2 shots per target so the Leo takes the cake as it also has higher damage rounds
Not sure about CR2E optics but the Leo 2A6 and A7 have some of the best optics (zoom wise) at top tier, 3.0x - 12.0x zoom is very good
Only on the L/55 guns as they have better pen and velocity
It helps but with only 4 charges it is not very long lasting
You can live with Gen 1 thermals but I prefer the higher zoom
The Russians have a second launcher on the top of the T14 turret that they make out to intercept Air to Surface weapons, I don’t know if this is true but it does look similar to Trophy so it could be possible
Could we get L28 on the BN? If so, how much better is it than L27A1, if not, :(
Not much better. Maybe. We don’t know. It’s tungsten anyway instead of Uranium so it’s going to be worse.
1 Like
I’m just looking for ways to make the CR2s more competitive
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
1 Like
I want to note that I’m not saying that Leo is worse than Cr.2. The moment I mentioned is a complex of factors. which allow me not to suffer when meeting Leo at a distance, of course in my case. The opportunity to fire 4 unpunished shots at it, and starting from the second, due to reloading, the initiative will be on our side, this is something that no tank in the game can afford.
Naturally, this does not negate all the well-known advantages of Leo. But it seems that many Cr.2 players tend to ignore the strong positive aspects of their units, focusing on the negative ones.
This naturally has an impact on a comprehensive objective assessment of british top MBTs.
P.s. I would like the APS to recharge faster then 1.30 min for 4 charges.
1 Like
Exactly my point man it’s a joke that hes saying the Fire rate of the CR2 is better when overall for a sustained fire rate the leopard trumps it.
The CR2E has 2x -12x I believe or 2x- 10x.
the 2a5 and 2a6 have great optics (ive yet to get the 2a7)
Even the L/44 caliber guns the DM53 is substantially better than the L27A1 , which I still do prefer to lose the APS for.
Especially if :
A- CAS is firing at you
B- Any form of ATGM carrier.
C- MBTs
the four charges disappears fast in that case.
Id definitely prefer gen 1 thermals, Dm53, more mobility, and 2nd gen commanders optics over the BN
Because naturally the strong positives are on one tank, that is its APS
the CR2 platforms are substantially worse than the leopards. the APS is handy to have sure, but its circumstantial as hell for it to be effective reliably.
The Leos for example fix multiple problems at a time with each upgrade but only one for the Challengers (I mean all of them, even the A30) which Gaijin do intentionally. I would love to have a Type 90 or Type 10 sort of tank in the British tree for that reason, they have all they things I love and find work the best; good quality optics with high zoom, fast reload, good shells, .50 cal, very high top speed and acceleration and all of these it feels like Britain is not going to have them, at least not in one package
Been wondering the past few days; why did British tank designers go the way they did with Cold War MBTs? And why didn’t they make the tank that became the CR2 fast, nimble, fast firing and with a better pair of main sights? For example, the Type 90 is the complete opposite of the CR2, it has less armour; fast autoloader; high zoom sights; low weight; better engine for its size and a reduced crew but the CR1 and 2 both have large amounts of strong armour; lower zoom optics; 4 man crew; very high weight; weak engine for its size and a fastish reload but the loader can tire over time
The design philosophy was “sit tight, shoot first, shoot accurately and take the hit if you have to”
It explains the strong turret armour, excellent fire control and excellent guns. Bunker up and blunt the hoards of soviet tanks pouring towards you while buying time for the counter attack or tactical nuclear weapons to be deployed to shut down the fulda gap.
1 Like