Yes, so confusing when they are not named correctly😅
A dozer blade that offers no protection and more weight…
You are just asking Gaijin to placate the suffering CR2 community by adding/changing oh another CR2 with a dozer blade instead of fixing actual pressing issues.
Tank is unplayable at any BR with or without a dozer blade, unless that dozer comes with the spall liners and armour improvements it’s just a cosmetic.
Isnt it 700mm using the Lanz-Odermatt formula? L27A1 at 60 degrees at 2km against RHA is 700mm. If its the case, why dont we have this in game?
The tank is unplayable because its slow and cant be used in its desired role of hull down and ridging. You cant make hull down or sniping spots because the maps arent big enough, and everyone will and up sniping or being hull down since accuracy isnt dependent on your tank.
For the challenger 2 to be good, you need long distance sniping spots that are hull down a ridging.
The dozer blade does offer lower plate protection and does allow to dig in a tiny bit. Gaijin buffing the dozer blades digging speed/effectiveness would be useful.
Edit: if you want it to be more competitive, its should have its first stage ammo storage increased to its realistic size of (i think it was) 20, OR its ready rack replenishment speed buffed, how does it take like 30secs to move 1 round like 2 meters? They could also give us a more realistic reload of like 3.5-4.5secs.
Its traverse and turret traverse speed does seem a bit slow in game but not sure if it is correct or not.
1 Like
I’m sorry this tank just frustrates me it is pure pain every time I take it out. It struggles with 11.3s why it’s 12.0 is beyond me.
It has no redeeming qualities, the armour is just overmatched by everything 2S38 57mm through the front plate one shot killed the tank…No other tank in the game even the Ariete would die to a single 2S38 round.
L27A1 is so poor too.
CR2 shouldn’t need massive maps they should just improve the armour it could play like a fatter T-90M and not what we have in game.
I do hope they add your dozer blade, the last meaning full change the CR2 received was a more detailed camo net!
1 Like
It frustrates everyone because its incorrect in many ways and is cant be played to its designed doctrine. The tank doesn’t really fit the games/maps.
Additionally, the storage bins i dont think are armoured in game or not properly atleast, and the charge bags if they do catch fire should be able to burn for something like 8h and not just explode. There’s also the question if they still use the wet glycol mixture to stop the charge bags burning and instead just singe.
3 Likes
1 Like
This is from the last game a breach shot on a T-90M and it turned the breach yellow and the T-90M killed me with their first shot.
It’s not a one off either certain tanks, the Leopards 2A6 and above and T-90M have an artificially buffed resilient mantlet. Also note how no crew died either.
1 Like
The Challenger 3 programme was the CR2 LE programme, Rhinemetall made 2 bids, the basically just the CR3 TD we have in game, then an improved version with a new turret (amongst other things), the 2nd bid won, and due to the significant changes they decided to rename the programme. Both names are technically correct, though as of right now “CR3 TD” is more correct. Think of it kinda like the SMLE, during its introduction and pre No.4 service it was named SMLE, but when the No.4 was introduced it was retroactively renamed to rifle No.1, SMLE.
It’s mostly people being pedantic, both the Gov and Manufacturer call the CR3 TD the CR3 TD.
1 Like
Yh i noticed alot of “less damage” given to leopards and T90s especially.
We really need a top tier IFV already to balance us a bit. Ajax, VERDI-II, Warrior CSP, Ajax Overwatch. 4 right there that could change us.
1 Like
Yes and no light tanks are used to get your CAS option and now they are adding IRIS-T with Pantsir making trying to CAS in the Typhoon with none fnf Brimstones a real pain
Its ground launched, less range, less speed. Its not as big of a game breaker as everyone thinks it will be.
Its more the Typhoon needs to knife fight with Brimstones, you are close and putting you in the IRIS-T envelope.
Brimstones should be F&F. Takes more than 1 to kill most tanks, its usually 40sec guidance time to kill a pantsir out of its range, but within 40secs, that pansir is gonna move behind a building or just shoot your brimstones down or another SPAA is gonna get you. How are Kh-38MTs and Mavericks F&F allowed even though there existence is questioned?
Anyway, should probs stay in topic.
1 Like
Its less about raw increase in protection, but rather an alternative playstyle, the ability to dig in and defend a point. Its what the CR2 is designed for.
Giving most of the CR2s a dozer blade wont change much in terms of raw performance, but would be fun. At the very least, i’ve been rather enjoying the Chally Mk2 with the dozer blade recently
1 Like
I don’t think digging is ever a viable strategem. Aircraft and IFVs will be on you before you have broken ground. At least at higher BRs
Perhaps, but I would still like the choice to have it, and given the base CR2 has it in the files and is simply disabled, it shouldnt cost them much effort to re-enable it and add it to some of the others (2F, TES and OES)
A couple of points on this:
-
If a bag charge is burning inside the tank then anyone inside that tank will be dead (or incapacitated) in a matter of seconds, so it really doesn’t matter whether it burns or explodes in game. IRL the idea was that if the charge burned rather than exploded it would give the crew a limited chance to escape.
-
That was only true of APDS and HESH charges. It was found in trials that if the L8 charge (used for the L23A1 APFSDS) was unstable and if penetrated in any way it was liable to explode instantly leading to “the total disintegration of the vehicle”. Later APFSDS charges for CHARM 1 & 3 were designed to be less vulnerable than L8, but it was still acknowledged that if either of them suffered a direct hit from a penetrator they could be expected to violently detonate.
The glycol charge bins were discontinued long before Challenger 2 entered service, because they were found to be completely ineffective at protecting APFSDS charges (see above). They were replaced with Armoured Charge Bins (ACBs); the logic being that if the charge is penetrated it will explode glycol or not. Therefore, the best thing to do is replace the glycol with armour to try and reduce the risk of them being penetrated.
All Challenger 1 Mk.3s and Challenger 2s were built with ACBs. In addition some Challenger 1 Mk.2s were retrofitted with ACBs.
4 Likes
My understanding is the current traverse rate is the speed at which at even a tiny bit lower, the unit would be removed for servicing, i.e the absolute bare minimum acceptable speed.
Might be wrong though and for all I know the same absolute minimum value is used for all tanks in game.