May as well remove it now
1 Like
Whole tank?)
3TD has become a tank with a maximum sad story in the game.
1 Like
Its an unifinished mess, it was thrown together to help a struggling Britain. They then shorty afterwards nerfed the engine power.
They chose not to give it the same 5 second reload buff.
Making it worse in many regards as the BK and CR2 E
They are never going to fix it they acknowledge it’s not as good as the CR2 when they didnt increase its BR
1 Like
At the other hand they give a ultra strong buff to Black Night"s APS. As a result, it began to work better than IRL
Now (since autumn хD) IFLK fully desintegrate APFSDS n 100% of cases when it works.
IRL it works not so cool, but can give a large deflection angles on APFSDS
This is partly the reason why the kinetic interception version of IF (IFLK) was intended for heavily armored vehicles, since certain armor is still needed.
Just another reason for me to never play it, honestly it should just be removed, it’s 99% a guesswork vehicle that doesn’t fill the role it was put in the game for.
4 Likes
The fkin CR 3TD is such a mess in game, its a patch work mix and mash of a CR2 and the actual TD of the CR3 , its not even realistic at all, why would it have worse protection e.g removal of the spall liner, or a horrifically worse reload, no blow out panel at all.
also on the topic of the thing losing the LWS.
- isnt the whole point of the CR3 TD to demonstrate the technologies used. such as:
- LWS
- FCS
- New cannon
- and im sure new molbity.
the CR3 TD in game is actually that bad it couldn’t stay at 12.0
edit, just to clarify, the CR3 TD can be one shot by DM13 from the 120mm cannon, so a leopard 1a1 L/44 can take it out if it wished.
The whole problem is that on the presented sample LWS was not demonstrated.
If I’m not mistaken, the placement of the sensors of LWS should look +/- like this
1 Like
Genuinely that is fair enough, however, At this stage the “CR3 TD” is barely worth having in game, at all, the tank is neigh on useless. If you can whip up a model with it on it the LWS I mean, why tf cant gaijin implement it on it.
Why not just use the CR2 with the 120mm that was tested in 2006 that has far more information on it than the monstrosity of a broken CR3 TD that is just worse.
5 Likes
The difference between 80s therman vision and that of the late 90s is a massive improvement when on earth are you on?
Stop instigating.
youre one to talk bro
Stop fighting with each other and shout at gaijin for christ sakes xD
look at the plethora of bug reports for the majority of vehicles in game. Look how many vehicles we are missing.
Ill use britain for an example. up to mark 13 in centurions, from engines and FCS to straight up full overhauls of the tank, yet were sitting with the “best” british centurion being the MK10 being insidiously slow and pathetically armoured for how it should be.
Then the chieftains ? mk3 and 5 ? how does that work when there was a plehtora of them, no mk8s, 2s, 4s, 11s or the prototype 900s etc
challanger 2 , they could of actually went with the 2006 trialed 120mm rheimental gunned CR2 with DM53 opposed to this absolute travesty that is the CR3 TD.
the majority of trees are missing a plethora of their own tanks, or trialed tanks and are now rammed full of Copy and paste, there its said.
And we all sit bickering with one another over what tanks is slightly worse than the next, its bloody pointless man.
Also BTW he quite literally got disproven theres no need to bring it up now.
Interesting fact, IRL its called 2TD 🤣🤣🤣
But Gaijin does not believe. There is somewhere picture there this modified chelli stay behind Poster which says “Challenger 2 Technology Demonstrator”
🤣🤣🤣
2 Likes
Best centurion we have is Olifant mk.2)))))
4 Likes
I mean actual centurions that are british, out with south african and such.
But yeah the oli is infact the best one, though the MK2 isnt really a cent anymore.
the fact we have centurion 1 through 13 and only have 3 of those actual british ones in the tech tree is pretty poor.
Yeah I thought I had seen that somewhere actually.
Do you know whats even sillier, the “CR3 TD” being stripped out of its turret spall liners etc, which makes no sense to fire that 120mm rheimental gun inside it! they already trialed a CR2 with that exact gun in 2006 as part of the CLIP program! without stripping the tanks internals xd so why does the 3TD in game not even facilitate the base levels of protection a CR2 has to meet.
what exactly is the CR3 TD demonstrating ? xD
i imagine it’s mostly electronics and stuff that doesnt factor into war thunder, they might have had to remove the spall liner for fitting the new systems and as a non-combat demonstrator they weren’t refitted. As far as I’m aware there’s no photos of the inside of the BN so while it’s possible the same happened there, there’s no evidence for it.
I hear clip had very limited ammo stowage, and the photo I’ve seen looks like 6 rounds of stowage.
I
theres loads of tanks with incorrect ammo values right now as it sits, im sure they could find a way to make the 2006 clip CR2 work better than this damn abomination of a CR3.
im aware the clip project was panned and so on, however the “CR3 TD” in game is not even right at all, teh fact a T55A can one tap it through the front of the turret is wild af
No, then it was standard L55 with parts from L30A1 gun.
Challenger 2 TD uses improved L55A1, wich has much stronger gun breech. It allow chelli 2TD use DM73 with 670mm penetration.
But Gaijin did not add a shell, for wich gun was created.))))))
5 Likes
My apoligies however the 2006 clip program CR2 would be more fitting in the game RN than the abomonation that is the 3TD.
The fact its slower than a CR2 when it actively has less in it, e.g spall liner missing, and no roof MG etc yet is slower than the CR2 from the early 2000s… as if the CR2 platform it was based off of suddenly would have a worse engine etc.
it makes no sense how butchered it is man.
I wonder if they are going to nerf the turret drive like they’ve done with the Abrams and Leopard in the future.
1 Like