CR2 also faces tanks with stronger rounds.
CR1 doesnt 3BM42, wont go through CR1 turret cheek.
DM-53 and 3BM60 have a chance to go through CR2s front turret face and any part of the hull.
CR2 is fine, it’s fun if you want a slower style gameplay. A palate cleanser.
No War thunder player is taking a CR2 over a BVM any Leopard 2A5/6/7 or an M1A2.
Neither DM53 or 3MB60 can pen the Challenger 2’s turret cheeks
They can closer to the mantlet.
Thats not the turret cheeks though. The Challenger 2 has a huge, massive hole between the its cheeks, but the cheeks themselves wont be penned (though anyone that hits them really need to learn to aim better)
The Chally 2 used to have an armour hole in its turret cheeks, but luckily gaijin actually fixed it (for once)
The only place you can actually pen is the mantlet itself, and with volumetic it can sometimes be a bit funky.
Every top tier has a bad mantlet too, the leclerc/type 10 both have way worse mantlets than the Challenger. The Ariete might as well not have a mantlet weakspot as its whole turret is a weakspot.
My main point is at 11.0s main competition will be ZTZs Merkavas T90A, Fujis, M1A1s, T80B, Leo2a4s all of em can easily take out an CR2 also There isnt huge upgrade besides thermals and turret cheeks still turret is full of weakspots. Mobility wise both Cr1 and Cr2 are identical
ZTZ fires 577mm pen better mobility 7.1 reload
M1A1 588mm pen better protection better mobility gen 1 thermals same reload
T90A 580mm pen better protection better mobility 7.1 reload
Fuji 481mm pen (4 sec) troll
Merkava 588mm pen (6 kg shell) better protection, same mobility, same reload
Cr2 564mm pen
as if the turret is more than 50% cheak lol, the breach is at minimum a third of what theyll hit and most of the time people will aim for the centre. also ignoring that massive forehead gaijin has given us where its basically a one shot as well…
What are we even arguing about at this point? that the chally 2 is comparative to the leo 2a7? The TES should be 11.3 along with the 2f maybe (you can remove the add on armour from it so its iffy. The normal should be 11.7 along with the 3td (could be 11.3 but safer sat at 11.7). The 2e and BK can be 12.0 and are.
Every single top tier tank has a huge breach. It isn’t an issue which is exclusive to the Chally 2, so using it as a reason to downtier the tank isn’t really fair.
The Chally 2’s breech is about 30% of the turret face, which is comparable to most other NATO tanks. If anything the Leopard has a larger breach.
The forehead is quite often also an auto-richochet or it does very little damage because of the spall liner. The commanders sight however is a notable weakspot.
2A7V vs L27A1
CR2 vs L27A1
The Abrams has a huge turret ring weakspot, and do I even need to mention how bad the Ariete/Leclerc/Type10/Merkava turret armour is?
Chinese tanks also have a huge mantlet weakspot, only Russian tanks have a somewhat small mantlet but its still very easy to hit as well is their drivers port.
My argument is the moving the Challenger 2’s down to 11.0 would make them far too strong and that most of them are fine at their current BRs. I think instead, that stronger tanks such as the Leopard 2A7V should go to 12.3 or 12.7.
I know protection analysis gives similar looking results but in practice I don’t find it works out that way.
For example T80/90/Leopards, I think because of the construction and layout of the mantlet/breach area they are not guaranteed penetrations and when you do the spall tends to be more focused and eaten by the breach.
It’s not just about can you penetrate but what happens after and for the Challengers it tends to be far more damaging.
I do agree 11.0 is too low but if there is to be no decompression then 11.3 for the 2/2F/TES/OES should be okay. I would even drop the BK/2E to 11.7 but then that leaves the 3TD in a weird spot again, showing just how badly decompression is what’s actually needed.
Alternatively they could buff the ready rack size and/or make the initial reload 4/4.5 seconds and fix the mantlet position(yeah right).
They are the worst top tier, does not mean they are useless, however the effort required to do good in a CR2 compared to most the roster is just silly.
Ill keep that in mind next time I put a round through a CR2 LFP and take it out xD
Its armour is laughably worse for the BR compared ot the CR1 mk3’s man.
BR for BR the CR1’s are actually better than teh CR2’s are BR for BR.
The CR1’s have the L26 round, which is close to DM/JM 33 in penetration levels.
In comparisson the L27A1 round is actually worse than the 11.3 M829A1 round found on 11.3 abrams tanks.
Though no it should not be 11.0 that is just silly
Whats even funnier is the M1A2 abrams sitting at 11.7 which is actively lower than the 2A5 while having a better round, reload, similar optics, similar mobility and arguably better turret armour.
Too many folks act like the breach weak points arent there on every other tank.
Though I will say if you look at CR2 due to the way its modelled you can pretty much shoot through the top of its roof and consistently take out the crew, even with a round like DM23 on the 2a4.
TBH like has been stated if the CR2 got its armour fixed, and the ready rack sorted its lack of mobility and mediocre round wouldn’t matter that much at all.
However we sit here as you say with 2a7’s sittin at the same BR as 2a5’s and such ot makes no sense
Yes but protection maps do not tell whole story.
2A7/HU/122B will regularly bounce/deflect breach shots.
That upper front plate is an absolute trap and should never be shot at.
Then the spacing of the crew the 2A7 is far more surviveable.
CR2 regulary gets one tapped by a 2S38 from both the front and the side
What? they just don’t man, Its how I beat them with the VT4A1 and WZ1001
The spall liner helps too.
Or HSTVL its more of an issue, 2S38 isnt much of a problem since it got its modules, as usually youll disable it even if you dotn kill it one shot
I actually went into the test drive with the MBT-2000 before I made the post to test this, every shot I shot at the Leopard 2A6’ breach went straight through and did damage.
Most shots not only took out the breach but also killed one or two crew, one even ammoracked the tank. As long as you have over around 500mm of pen, all the leopards have a very easy breach weakspot which extends much furthur than the visual breach.
The CR2 is missing most of its hull spall liners, hence why its pretty weak from side shots, I’ve made a report for them hopefully it is passed.
The Challenger 1’s hull armour is literal cheese lol, its like 275mm KE. Its not stopping even early 105mm APFSDS. The Challenger 2’s hull can at least stop rounds at range and in a downtier. 275mm → 500mm is a pretty huge difference.
It will be interesting if and when we get the Challenger 3 Prototype with its significantly upgraded UFP armour.
I wouldn’t say the Chally 2’s are the weakest top tiers, the BN and 2E are both much better than the Ariete and Merkavas in my opinion.
However, something being the “best” or “weakest” is purely subjective
Ok I do have a question. I just done researching the Chally 1 , about to start the chally 2. Can someone tell me why are these thing so slow. God forbid, even the Chally 3 TD look extremely underwhelming
The only caviat I place there though, is that whilst the Arietes are much weaker defensively. they are hella strong glass canons with good mobility (relatively speaking) and 5 second reload DM53.
Ah yeah…
basically, they liked the engine so they kept just using the same engine from the Chieftain (iirc) but the CR2 also wieghts 70Ts. So… its a little down on power.
Someone else with more knowledge can probably do a better explanation than that though.
Your best bet, is to place the support role. cover the flanks and push more slowly. Though whilst Id be confident in giving you help for the Typhoon or HMS Hood, I shall refrain from giving too much for the CR2 as ground is not a gamemode i Play hugely often
Definitely not the same engine.
The establishment finally learned that you let leyland design an engine and the ch1 and 2 have Perkins/caterpillar engines.
