Because that’s what the BMVg stated it must achieve. It is likely they lowballed it for the British, as the person who actually acquired those documents, has confirmed that the vehicle achieved British requirements.
We do however know that Britain was offered a Leopard 2 with some sort of external armour on it, that had 650 mm KE turret protection.
It was this:
The post I shared doesn’t even have everything that I do.
So that to me would imply that the document saying 650 mm KE includes some sort of external armour rather than referring to purely internal D Tech.
It doesn’t. I have other parts of it and can confirm it was a purely internal armor.
Yes I’ve seen that picture before and it quite clearly has external armour giving it the triangle shape on the front of the turret. So if the 650 mm KE protection figure applies to that then it would be reasonable to conclude that purely internal D-Tech without the triangle shape on the front offers less than 650 mm KE.
The other option is that the 650 mm KE protection figure Britain was given is incorrect and the tank in that configuration provides more than 650 mm KE. However someone else has informed me that the tank in that image is indeed the configuration that achieved 650 mm KE.
I hadn’t played with the Challenger 3 thinking it would be bad, but I started grinding its stock modules and the tank is simply concentrated garbage juice. It’s heavy and moves slowly as if it had good armor, but it doesn’t stop any shots. The good ammunition is all the way at the last line, and I couldn’t even reach it because it requires so much RP. I have the Italian Ariete, which is way better since it actually has decent mobility. Basically, playing with the stock Challenger 3 means having the worst gun/penetration, the worst mobility, and the worst armor among high-tier tanks.
Yeah, I gave up on it as it’s just modelled in a way which makes it utter crap sadly.
It should never have been added but seeing how they can’t even be bothered to fix it having the wrong damage model, it’s clearly not a priority to fix.
It doesn’t make sense at all. Or do you want to say that they “nerf” cr3 to please the russians and support ‘‘russian tank not junk’’ agenda, but at the same time introduce 2a7 with similiar firepower, which is much better than cr3 will ever be?
Us Brit mains don’t whinge and complain like the Germans, Americans, Russians (but they never get properly nerfed) and the Chinese, we have more sense but that is also our prime reason for failure, we just aren’t loud and annoying enough
Not in the same way but most Brit mains are also Teeaboos that are more worried about their feelings than getting the few things us Brit-mains have, fixed but the slug
Talking about an indigenous design. I was also unhappy with the location of the AIM, C2 and 2A4M but those aren’t indigenously designed tanks, mostly heavy modifications on the Leo end and American done mods for the AIM
You missed the whole point. It’s now been censored as we knew it would be.
We have top tier tanks. M1, T-80 and Leopard 2A7 variants.
In the real world the T-90, T-80BVM would be some of the worst tanks in game. In real world performance the list would look like this
This is because NATO tanks if modelled correctly have higher fire rates, superior armour packages, superior ammunition and greater accuracy.
In game though instead of that Leopard 2A7 just absorbing rounds shot by a T-90M it is easilly penetrated.
The M1A2 has it’s hilariously modelled turret ring weakness.
Russian tanks have ERA and that ERA K5 and above is massively overperforming compared to the real world. However that is not how it’s modelled in game.
This is why and seeing whom Gaijin choose to sponsor outwith the playing community it leads to 2 potential outcomes.
Gaijin realises Russian tanks must be competitive for game balance and throttles back NATO tanks to make the game fun and “balanced”
Or Gaijin knowingly inflate the abilities performance of Russian modern weapon systems using flimsy sources and double standards guaranteeing the Russian thing is at least as good as the NATO thing.
Doing this as they are financially incentivised to do so.
