only ever used KEW-A2 not KEW-A1
never used KEW-A2 and has only used KEW-A1
still didnt use it
what with the worse armour worse gun worse reload and just as average mobility
fair
10.3 and also not better at all, you get an m1a1 turret sure but your on an m60 chassis so your slow nd cant take any hits
Wasn’t it limited to the A1 initially or some bogus malarky or am I getting the two mixed up due to australia wnating to retain the penetration values of the US round.
That I didn’t know and yeah it should completely lose it then no questions asked.
Historically in the game if the tank is tested with it, it can use it.
Though if it never was trailed with it or what not it should by all means lose it, not as if DM13 for the 2K is not absolutely banging anyways.
better cannon? It’s got an L/55 cannon with higher penetration, substantially better mobility than the Shir 2, thermals, 20mm auto cannon and better overall performance.
it’s got access to a 600 pen round with a 5 second reload mate, the hulls not that big an issue
It’s still better than a shir2 though.
My bad i was thinking of the amx 32 not the 40 but i still prefer the shir 2
its also terribly slow and it is definitely not better than the shir 2 for its br
Ahistorically Slow.
Also, that didn’t stop them needlessly moving up the MK10 chieftain.
That literaly means it used it . The heck u talking
yeah i know and i never mentioned the cheiftain mk10 but i hate what they did to that
doesnt count
in all seriousness i just dont want them to change the shir 2 because as it stands it is an amazing tank and if you think otherwise then i will just say its a you issue
Thats dangerous ground, because there are Reports of the Turm III being used as a test bed for DM23…
At the same time, if that means the thing gets moved up again, So be it!
How doesnt that count?
The Leo 2K literaly was a prototype/developmenr in the first place. It was never in service.
All it did was test stuff including ammunition.
You have no idea what you are talking about and are just taking it to your benefit.
Tested always meaned it used it.
U cant test it without using it.
What they do in your mind? Lie the round next to the Leopard 2K and look at it? And call it good enough?
That’s what I thought, was the DM23 not tested with the 2K when it was in development.
Which is exactly my point as to why the SHir2 or FV4030 should lose the L23 (which shouldn’t be in game as it’s not real) and get correct L15A5.
The Shir 2 was never tested with the L23 and was by all means “scrapped” near a decade before the round was in service, and a few years before it was even in testing.
Only when CR1 was finally planned did the new dart come into testing and then service.
Same as CR1
This dude above is just chatting nonsense, same with the M1A1 AIM i’m sure originally used the KEW then upgraded to KEW 2.
For taiwan I’ve no idea.
But I know the 2K had a lot going on with it as it was used as a test bed for other stuff
i love how oblivious you are when someones not being serious
Prefer what you want, it’s not better.
I’d say it is, may be slow but it’s not that slow and it’ll hold a flank better than most anything at it’s BR with ease.
I am not saying it’s bad I am saying it is A historical which is BS it has ammunitions it shouldn’t have, which also means the munitions it should have will never be fixed like L15A5 should be better than it is and accessible on the Chief Mk5
you definitely were not joking where’s the joke ?
What’s funny about what you said, or where’s the incling of sarcasm?
You got upset as you are biased towards the Shir 2 and are saying other stuff have rounds they didn’t which for the 2K is untrue.
Thats the same ground theyve been using for a long time now but just because an ammo for example was used/tested doesnt mean that the vehicle gets it. Loadouts are still subject to balance after all.
For ground its less relevant unless a tank Physically cannot fit it inside its storage (Hello FV4030/3, you’re the exception)
And if we’re honest Turm III at 9.0 and DM23 probably would be more balanced than it currently is, or was
For aircraft it is certainly “Technical Compatibility” And i do hate that rule because it destroys uniqueness between otherwise copy paste
Unlike ground where a tank will always be copy paste no matter the round it uses really so im less inclined against it
For example AFAIK the Olifant Mk.2 doesnt use a Single round in game that it uses IRL
Oh and the XM800T couldnt have gotten DM63 because the US never used DM63, its best round should be M601 HVAP. but technical compatability…
A testbed testing something. What horror!
There are worse things to look at, Like the JAS39C(ZA) getting R-Darters despite not having them IRL nor any other Operator or the Gripen
Or Spice 250 / Dual Rack AMRAAMs on Typhoon, which have not been seen fitted to the aircraft (only brochure or simulator evidence that they could get them, but still need to be integrated)
It can only do so if the round is going slow enough but is historically accurate. Only really works on long ranged maps though because all top tier shells need to slow down quite a bit before it will work
Yeha but the FV4030 never tested the L23, 1 because it’s not real and 2 becuase it was a scrapped project before the development for L23A1 started-
it’s stupid as hell having L23 it makes zero sense at all
It would be funnier and funer tbh
it doesn’t ? i know absolutely nothing of the Olifant other than I like it.
Statistically the other vehicle is better lol. it has more pros in it’s favour than the Shir 2 for the BR.
mk5 speed last I checked. Not far off the heavier M60s.
(!) generally shows it.
You literally said otherwise xD
Am I tripping or did a comment disappear.
no you are not tripping, my message just dissapeared.
Mods removed it then.
I think the forum-flagger-muppet-in-chief is at it again.
I’ve no idea who that is but I am folded at this mate hahahahaha
¨