Challenger 2 needs to be brought to developers attention

America with some Dart from outerspace vehicle, when we get real British light tanks finally haha

NVM im stoopid :(

Well we did just get the vicker mk11 at 8.7. So that means we aren’t due for another light tank till at least 2025.

Desert Warrior in 2030?
image

Depends. For modern vehicles absolutely, but for vehicles in which your target isnt a dot on your TI screen, it does seem a bit excessive to get 5km ranges

I guess i will change it, Now

1 Like

You mean you aren’t using your reserve tanks for 5km sniping?

1 Like

NVM im stoopid :(

its not a nerf they literally only changed the ranges on the statcard, pen is the same if you look at 2km

1 Like

M829A2

heres the old M829A2, same pen at 2km

1 Like

Ok that would make sense, im stupid :(

2 Likes

I am using my Swedish ones 😂

I also wanted to ask: is there any lore reason why Challenger 2E’s hull armor is even worse than the rest of Challenger 2s?

520mm is already too low on Challenger 2s, but… 490 on 2E? Why? Just why? Is this a bug or did this tank somehow have downgraded armor?

2 Likes

I do not know about anything that would cause this.(maybe once i translate that one russian document i will be able to find anything, but i cant do it rn) Unfortunately, due to it being armor problem, we can either have a shot with comparing it to the normal challys, and it gets passed as a suggestion to be fixed soon tm, it causes armor in the normal challys to get worse, so they match 2E value or it goes nowhere as we need source to prove it. Also fun fact with the CR2 ufp there is a giant dark blue armor part that is not counted in the protection value, just sits here taking space


image
(Light blue 50mm, yellow 200mm (ignore the fact it is at least 3x thiccer than what 200mm would be when comparing it to the 80mm plate thiccness, nothing we can do there) , dark blue nothing, light blue 80mm)

Ok i digged some files and i found the reason, or so i think???
Cr2 BN Hull armor
image
image
image
image
2E
image
image
image
image

So change from the turret_05_back to superstructure_bottom causes this. It seems like missing of EffectiveThicknessMax is causing it to provide flat 80mm istead of variable one, or so i suspect.

Still if is fun how giant composite with nera is so big, yet it states 200mm(i can find the actual thing that is this block, so i take the 200 not only as showed but also as given value (WHY IT IS SO HARD TO FIND THINGS IN THOSE FILES??!??)), and even then these 200mm gets 0.01 modifier.

2 Likes

We need to report this, it is clear 2E’s underperforming…

I mean, all of them are underperforming, but 2E is underperforming even more lmao

This is just sad. I try to find reasons to convince myself to bring myself down to play with the Challenger 2s, yet I can’t find a single reason.

Back in 2019, Challenger 2 wasn’t the fastest or most meta, but at least it had rate of fire and armor as redeeming qualities. Now it has got NOTHING. Nerfed first-stage reload and nerfed armor…

8 Likes

I made another diagram, this time with ingame pictures.

Here, you can clearly see how even on the ingame model the internal shield/trunion/rotor is missing half of its thickness. The front part of the mountings are empty when they should not be.

It should be 400mm thick, not 200mm thick.

Between the internal 200mm missing and the 90mm missing angled shield cover, Gaijin is basically robbing Challenger 2’s mantlet 310mm KE. It would go from its currently miserable 270mm KE to 580mm KE.

If Gaijin fixed the mantlet and the first-order replenishment speed (or, alternatively, made the back racks a part of the first order rack, as it should be), Challenger 2 would already be worth playing: and if they fixed the hull sides and the glacis front, it would be even better! Would still not be meta, but could become competitive at least.

13 Likes

After looking at the mantlet(ignoring its incorrect shape)
image
image
and looking at the model


It is missing ist back half (red) and the plate at the front (yellow)

(Dont judge me, im busy, i did in 2 min in paint, ok?)

7 Likes

Oh, I see now in more detail, true!

Around 100mm on each side. Basically, yeah, missing around 200mm.

8 Likes

Given what @Fireball_2020 has mentioned about the mantlet in the past, this additional 200mm they should have, plus the other changes should make the mantlet pretty hard to pen, no?

3 Likes