You know you can just shoot the gun, gun mantlet, and when looking from the side space around turret ring. Then the heat pens and your crew has to take a permanent tea break
didn’t say it was full proof
Well true, but if you are using heat in top tier, you are either a good player stock, someone who forgot to change heat to apfsds, or a Aim/2PL. 2 out of 3 will 90% of the time know how to kill you
i use it in the xm1
Ok, i forgot that it got hit hard. Still, you wont be seeing TES in it, unless you uptier it
it not main tank i use so its not that bad
I wonder how long gaijin will take to revert that mistake change
Never i guess
Well, at least one of the tech mods followed it asap and went to correct it.
Challenger 2’s cheek armor should be practically impenetrable, much like Abrams
It already is lmao.
I’m not playing Brits and I can confidently say they need some buffs, tho I don’t think they would help much.
Challenger 2 should keep its momentum in turns (regen steering)
We are waiting for it over 4 years
You forgot the biggest bonus: glorious CV-12 engine audio instead of germanic grumbling noises
Otherwise mobility is meta and I think Challenger 2E has Gen 3 Gunner/Commander thermal sets as well
2E has gen 2 thermals and i can bet my hands on it. The difference can be seen easly on over 1km distance.
Yep
2E
BN
It is on ulq (im forced to use it, dont judge me) so difference is not as visible but it is there
1 Like
Hey guys. Since this post is about chally 2, I want to say few things from my perspective (as a player that tried to play them). First of all I want to point out that the in game stats say that Im slightly above avarage player when It comes to realistic, and for me chally 2’s are literally unplayable. I actually loved chally 1, I got descent stats in it, the armor worked most of the time. Then I got my first chally 2 and…It feels like a bad dream. They weight 70 tons, but the armor offer no real protection, any hull shot will 1 tap you, you can get knocked out by small caliber guns shooting at your optics at the top of the turret (I feel like this really should not be the case), the gun breech section of turret armor is also massive, so from my perspective, the protection is worse than t80s that weight almost half of challis weight. Also the mobility is limited (stuff like t80s, leos etc. just zoom around me at the start of the battle). I see that a lot of people say that the tank offers unique gameplay (aka. hull down) but it really doesnt because the stars must allign for you to have a good game aka.:
- You actually have to get a map where this kind of gameplay works,
- You are slow so most of the time you wont be even able to get to position where you can have any impact on the match,
- As i said earlier, you can be easly knocked down by ppl shooting at our optics and mantlet, and since your turret is tall, enemy will most of the time get the first shot,
-This hull down gameplay makes you vulnerable to CAS and flankers (a lot of the time you will get shot from behind by leos or bvm, that seem to teleport around the map and I could give you replay just from today where i spawned, drove like 200 meters, got shot from behind by bvm, then I respawned, I drove like 10 meters and I got shot by leo2a6 spawn camping. The entire battle lasted like 2 minutes for me, counting loading loading screen and thats about 30% matches for me), - Hull down just doesnt work in war thunder, because there is only 1 game mode, where you have to capture objectives to win),
Ofc, it might be skill issue, but i have a lot of battles behind me, and playing those tanks really feel like my only purpose in matches is to get farmed by leo2a6 and bvms (btw im comparing 11.3 challis to 11.7 because this is literally only tanks that you will see, I played around 50 matches in last few days, and I was top tier once). Overall, either the tank is horribly missrepresented in this game, or brits should just scrap them and buy themselves leos or T90s.
2 Likes
Yep, typical Cr2 experience. That is why we are gathereing around. To make it at least viablea.
4 Likes
The challenger 2 in game is the direct result of a lack of care, lack of attention to detail and lack of quality control from gaijin.
Can you imagine a t-80 being left for so long with so many issues? It just wouldn’t happen.
Hell, it’s gearing alone would have been fixed years ago.
4 Likes
Well if it’s the 1992 one, Britain at that point had aquired multiple T-80Us probably included the ammunition. I’m assuming 3BM42 at that point? Possibly there was 3BM48 shown off, considering it was meant as a sneak peak of Russian capabilities they’d want to garner all they could.
As for the other revelations I think it’s very plausible armour was changed, there is a small amount of indication inserts were changed in 2004~? But it’s quite likely the hull armour is overperforming in game then if the requirements were that low.
Yeah especially now with all the CQB maps Challys are in a really tough spot.
When I first played the Challenger 2 (that was now idk 2-3 years ago), you could actually work with it. Sure youre slow, which is very noticeable when youre stock, but the 5 sec aced reload (aced) really works wonders and the optics are top class.
What we assume why the Challenger feels so much more sluggish is because of the inertia values.
Like I said just an assumption, so no definitive proof.
Btw if you think the first Challenger 2s have horrible mobility wait until the TES, that thing is even more heavy with huge ERA blocks on the side, which offer the same protection as the much lighter composite side skirts of the previous Chally 2s. XD #logic
Very unlikely. BM-46/Svinets had only entered service within the Union/Russia a year prior (tbh, the DOI isn’t even well known, most sites just cite 1991, but some also cite 1992/1993) and in very low quantities, to such a point it was never seen on service vehicles within Russia itself, don’t think it was ever even shown at an EXPO, mostly just pictures here and there.
That’s btw, not an assumption. Vehicles with lower inertia values (such as T-80BVM & Abroomz) are much quicker at turning, and they conserve their speed better. Best comparison would be between a Leopard 2A6 & M1A2, despite 2A6 being two tons lighter, it has worse manouverability than the M1A2 across all terrains due to higher inertia values.
@NoodleCup31 had in fact reported that before.
2 Likes
If you’re purchasing T-80Us it’s possible they’d have shown off growth potential ammo is all, even if it’s just in paper form or in writing.