Is this better turret armour in the room with us? Every shot I took to my Challenger’s turret took out the breach and a crew member or two.
My own experience with them; Challenger 1s (and the 2s as well) die from a shot to the front. I’ve survived shots to my turret and my upper hull plate and even the lower hull plate in the Bhishma that would’ve killed a CR1/2.
My experience with 10.7 Britain instantly went up when I added the Bhishma and Vickers Mark 7 to my lineup. This is how my 10.7 lineup looks. I actually prefer the Stormer AD to the STRELA because the AD Gets a gun and radar for awareness.
I only count domestic vehicles as vehicles produced in that country from the chassis up. The Vickers Mark 7 is a domestic modification of a Leopard 2 by adding a Vickers turret and gun onto its hull. The Firefly is a domestic modification of the M4, britain never produced M4 chassis. The Tornado is a multinational venture between England, Germany and Italy.
The MTTD has the better ammo layout. Here are both tanks with 21 rounds. The MTTD has 20 rounds in the autoloading carousel in the rear of the turret +1 in the gun, and the VFM 5 stores 7 rounds on the side of the turret and 13 rounds upfront by the driver.
Its not strictly “faster”. Its more mobile as it accelerates faster but doesn’t come close to the top speed and has a much slower reverse speed. The VFM5 has the same oversteer issues as the Scimitar so it speed bleeds heavily on turns because it turns too much. VFM5 and MTTD both have identical gun handling in terms of elevation and rotation. The VFM5’s edge comes in the fact that its smaller, has a .50 cal and is quieter. Like I said, I prefer to take the VFM5 in cities and the MTTD anywhere else. I won’t hold the lack of thermals against the VFM5 because the MTTD’s are trash Gen-1 thermals.
Not much I can say here. You’re pretty much correct.
Can someone tell me if this is true? I say this because, as far as I know, the Challenger 2 OES is somewhat more modern than the TES, but they both seem to have the same ERA model, except the TES’s ERA is superior. https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/pT7qbqt5RWA9
Vickers Mk7 is one of the best tanks Britain have and that’s because it is fast and can also take a hit having the Leopard 2 spacious hull.
CR1 are fine but are being power crept by the M1 5 second reloads and Type 90s
T-90 is also fine but the gun handling is a hate crime
Didn’t bother with the Stormer AD seems a lot of lions for a Stinger and a Mini gun
OSA equally no interest in it.
If they fixed the ready rack, gave them the engine buff and hopefully also gave them their missing gen 2 thermals. Theyd be the best tanks at that BR I think.
Though would be nice if the 10.7s ones didnt face 11.7s every other match. but thats just compression for you 10.3 though is a rather fun BR for us
I think compared to their contemporaries they are balanced I don’t feel massively disadvantaged in a CR1 like I do when I take out the CR2 in top tier.
I still think the Leopard 2 and DM-33 seem to perform better than L23 and L26
Yes compression is and remains a massive headache for everyone.
The moderator is absolutely incorrect. Both TES and QES we currently have in game use the same add-on armour kit.
We have all disgusted in great details but the developers just completely ignore all our information and we honestly got the feeling that they didn’t understand what we were meaning when we are discussing that TES and QES add-on armour kit on the side of the hull is multi layered and not just 1 big block.
Both TES and QES side hull add-on armour is made up of 3 layers technically 4 layers.
Layer 1 - From the drivers side of the hull to the start if the engine bay is a 80mm composite armor backplate with 40mm RHA covering the engine bay hull side.
Layer 2 - 200mm VAMAR composite block.
Layer 3 - ASPRO HMT NERA/ERA tiles attached to the front of the VAMAR block’s.
Layer 4 - technically there is a 4th layer a thin rha cover.
With what we currently know on ASPRO-HMT and the VAMAR composite block. The side hull should be essentially immuned to all tandem warheads currently in game and at least 40mm APFSDS rounds because the VAMAR block from what we currently know is able to stop 30mm apds by itself and ASPRO HMT can stop 25mm apfsds on its own. So going of that at absolute minimum it can stop the best 40mm apfsds in game. From current information and calculations and numerous bug reports.
awww the Streetfighter II… it can also carry a dog ;-)
hope the chally´s are getting somewhen a little bit love…
but would be awesome seeing the Streetfighter II ingame…
Tricky bit is getting undeniable evidence that it actually fired a single Brimstone. Not that I would expect them to add it even with 100% undeniable evidence.
Would be very cool to have, but not something im anticipating anytime soon. Would also be worried the Dozer blade getting locked behind the SF2 for no good reason. Meaning we’d have basically a base CR2 with just a dozer blade and a different skin and nothing else. Would fix basically nothing. They like band-aid bodge jobs and they usually dont work (look at the CR3TD)
Not saying it isnt possible. Britian I think is buying ATGM slinger with them called the Ajax Overwatch but rather were they explicitly ever live fire or even live fitted to a Challenger 2. From the videos on the SF2 I’ve seen, it does say mockup. Which is enough for the soviets, but not enough for anyone else unfortunately
Really depends. Can’t think of too many examples of mock ups making it into their tree aside Derivatsiya’s AP round and the Kh38MT which is claimed to exist in brochures. Which have facilitated changes (positive and negative) to other trees as well. There are/were (can’t research, still can use if you have them) also the mock ups in the Kraut tree at low levels. If the aim is to point to inconsistencies, there are better ways than claiming
And whilst I don’t like the 141 being added it is not an example of a mock up, technically it was all there, the platform was airworthy and the weapons were made compatible with un-flightworthy versions. This one is a double standard for other reasons. The mock ups problem does present itself in the boats though, but that’s really an issue with how they manage that side of things. Would still be nice if they’d apply such favourable modeling of boats to others tho.
Short and long of it:
It is far more productive for all involved to complain about actual faults instead of perceived inconsistencies. Far easier to argue to oppose inaccurate assessments and derail stuff instead of discussing proper issues.
To be honest i’d use SF2 if it were added… like a lot
It’d be the offense to the BN’s defense, since brimstones hit like an absolute freight train and come from an absurd angle. Catch is knowing WT’s missile guidance and gaijin’s weird insistence on ignoring FCS mechanics, keeping the laser nicely on target would be pretty damn hard.
(And obviously we’d never get fire and forget ordinance)
