Yep, no external changes
Here is to another 10,000 posts of nothing.
9 Likes
Which I’ll happily admit is what I’m doing.
Then again, I have an extremely low opinion of anyone that is part of the “government” and has the words “Minister” or “Secretary of State” in their job title.
Except Ben Wallace, of course.
Not that it justifies it, but my understanding is that Gaijin’s “justification” for fitting the 1200hp engine in WT was that it was the one going on the Production tank (as stated by the SoS in a Question in Parliament) - if that was the case, then the CR3 needs to, well, for starters be renamed from the Tech Demonstrator, and iirc it also needs Spall Liners.
that’s the same logic they had for initially giving it 1500hp also, LEP was a different project to HAAIP so BAE and Rhm had no reason to look at engine upgrades, or include any engine upgrades in their respective demonstrators. The CR3 demonstrator is, as far as I’m aware, still the same as it was prior to May of 2021 (though i believe now the turret has been removed from the hull)
1 Like
Go for it
@DevilO6 You seem to have forgotten to put this report in the CR3 section ^^
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/cFGEAyRPu5Rj
Challenger 3 TD at 11.3 would make it more viable.
2 Likes
I forgot nothing, i just posted the raw from Morv as of now, i will work on it later.
1 Like
Yeah… I’ve been procrastinating updating that list for months… Tag your it :P
Thank god for German mains trying to keep the CR tanks down…
2 Likes
I’m not trying to do anything of the sort, I just noticed a historical inaccuracy after I saw a model of the Rheinmetall Challenger 2 upgrade, so I reported it.
1 Like
Thank you for your service
1 Like
Would be better to give it DM53A1 or DM63 which would prevent a catastrophic ammo detonation. The Ariete and Leopards can have it too. For the Leopards it won’t make much of a difference because they have blow-out panels anyway, but it would still be nice.
Is this the first thread on the new forums to roll over?
You still would have no armour, limited mobility and if they remove TWS, you’d be very vulnerable to most attacks. Remember, we dont have spall liners. Crew would still all die from one hit basically anywhere. Different ammo is going to change nothing
1 Like
I think so (Excluding threads like the R&R)
1 Like
challenger 3 in the game is better is some ways and worse in others than the challenger 2. getting shot in the breach with cr2 will destroy the breach and potentially knock out some crew and destroy some rounds in the back. shooting the breach with cr3 can overpen into the ammo stowage in the back of the turret, and because it lacks spawl liner and blowout pannel (not that a blowout pannel would matter from that pen angle), a round coming from the crew compartment usually means an insta kill; the weakspot is still the breach meaning as survivability goes, its hugely worse in hull down, the only thing its ‘okay’ at.
top that with the engine nerf gaijin put it with, it doesnt deserve the BR it has.
The turret cheek armour is actually better than the 2A4M. It can stop DM53 while the 2A4M can’t.
So aim between the turret cheeks then, guaranteed 1 shot there. Meanwhile I’ve nailed a 2A7V in the gun breach before with a DM53 and not even disabled the gun breach.
2 Likes