Basically 40mm then, you can see it more clearly in this photo.
Well, the tape says 40, and i bugs me we cant clearly see it is a cr2
So, we doing the 40 or no? Not a huge buff but still, and we have 2 photos
i mean would it theoretically be possible that the fighting compartment has extra side armor like we see with leos and abrams?
Of course it is possible. After all you can replace the engine, but you can’t replace the crew
1 Like
let do this guy vote about bug report implementation
I would say it’s 40mm, sheet steel wouldn’t come in 38mm it’s an odd number tbh, 40mm is much more freely available. I know this isn’t armour quality but i very much doubt they’d specifically want 38mm https://www.metalsupplies.com/products/mild-steel-plate/
We have 2 pics, one newer one with 40 and one worn out with 38. It is clear like day for ma that it is 40 in that spot. If it is 50 inside is a different story
1 Like
That’ll be harder to prove, unless you can get a set of digital calipers on a hull being built like in the photo i personally would say it’s 40mm.
Well, we have the cutouts for the transmission and inside of the hooks, maybe we can pixel it? Ah yea, we would need to know the width of the inside of the hook
1 Like
On another note do we have the spaced armour section around the turret ring like on the left of that photo?
I dont know anything bout it
Another photo
And it give us the info that the hooks at the front are the same thicness
tbh at this point 38mm - 40mm lets just accept 40 for now, focus are efforts in areas which make a bigger difference.
2 Likes
nothing we can do, most significant thing are either reported or denied.
Also logging out for a while
1 Like
Challenger 2 section of bug list updated.
Let me know if there are missing bug reports, I thinkl I might have missed a few over the last few days. Also it seems they consider all the mobility issues resolved. So if there is any outstanding issues, New bug reports need to be submitted
1 Like
So im just doing some testing in terms of the mobility changes with the gearing so far i’ve tested the Abrams, Leclerc, t80bvm, challenger 2 and leopard 2a6. what i’ve found is after the changes the challengers mobility has improved (alot) the noticeable outliers would be the Abrams and Leclerc which performed the best in my quick testing. so in test drive i tested the neutral steering on spawn the Challys was comparable to the Leo and Leclerc with the Abrams smashing it with ez, T80 doesn’t seem to have neutral steering. secondly i tested their acceleration on road, all hit over 35 mph in a similar distance, new Chally top’d out at 37 but in a short distance. And finally all performed a J turn at 37mph or over by holding W and D and letting the driver take over in gear selection. what i found is they all have some form of stutter whilst turning noticeably with the Chally 3 the stutter starts when the driver attempts to put it into 4th for some odd reason. Now i know its not the most scientific test but notably the cv90105 really struggled with the J turn test, the driver seems to refuse to leave 1st gear leading to and extremely slow turn. This is a worse case scenario and you wouldn’t play like that. But overall a positive change for the challenger 2s imo.
5 Likes
Ok, so what do i add as my improvement wish to the roadmap? Renenerative, nvd/tvd checkable in hangar, or deincrease of certain crew skill influence in higher tier tanks?
I would do a constructive list
- Regenerative steering
- Nvd/tvd checkable in hangar
- Decrease of certain crew skill influence in higher tier tanks
keep is short and to the point