:)
I had so much fun.
I love it when the comments get closed so you can’t also state that you’re doing this because of the other report the quoted that you believe is wrong :)
5 Likes
They just nerfed the horse power 1500 hp - 1200 hp.
Gajin after the (rework) on the challengers having the excuse to start nerfing them:
3 Likes
I mentioned 1500hp in that report because previously the CV12-9A that completed HAAIP was assumed to have 1500hp. That’s why previously implemented with 1500hp.
Now both have 1200hp, so I mentioned this to emphasize the difference.
Of course, James Kittredge stated that the CV12-9A engine was 1200hp, so this was changed.
I wonder- the Challenger 2s have 1,217hp, while Challenger 3 has 1,200hp. I know it’s not a big difference, but it’s still a discrepancy.
Shouldn’t all of them have either 1,217 or 1,200?
I also want to ask, although maybe it’s not in your power to reply- Challenger 3 (TD)'s primary advantage was its mobility. Since this advantage is not existent anymore, would the developers consider giving it the same 5 second reload all other Challengers have, as well as many other MBTs like the Abrams family?
As it stands right now, Challenger 3 (TD) is worse than many other Challenger 2s because it lost the advantage of mobility while retaining the disadvantage of the rate of fire.
Regarding Challengers and firepower, there’s this bug report that’s been acknowledged for nearly one year by now. Are there any updates you could share in regards to it?
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/ojFgCJ6Jnos4
I believe the Challenger tanks really deserve as many improvements as they could possibly get within realistic boundaries, and, in order to achieve this, we must all do our part- but specially the developers. Without their cooperation, anyone else’s work is vain.
There are many bug reports regarding these tanks that have been “acknowledged” for 6-8 months and there’s still no indication that any of them are going to be fixed anytime soon, and this is really frustrating to those of us who just want it not to be undermined and neglected as they have always been ingame.
6 Likes
Yeah, I understand the 1500 horsepower thing, but none of my reports were to do with the horsepower but more to do with the name of the engine, as I believe the reasoning for it being changed was incorrect.
Difference between horsepower and metric horsepower (PS). Converting 1200hp to PS is 1217ps.
Developer answers for similar issues are that it is not considered a bug unless the error exceeds a certain percentage.
In Challenger 3 (TD)'s case, those 17hp of a difference imply going from a 19.47 hp/t ratio, to a 19.2 one.
That’s a 0.27 hp/t difference! Would the developers not consider this to be significant enough for a tank that is now one of the slowest MBTs in Top Tier?
Those 17hp may seem insignificant, but when we are talking about a tank in such circumstances and with such drawbacks and weaknesses… I don’t think it can afford the luxury of missing 17hp.
I mean, Leclercs had their engines corrected from 1,475 hp to 1,500 hp. All Challenger 2s have 1,217 hp (1,200 bhp) except for 3 (TD) now, which has 17 less hp (because, as we established, 1,200bhp = 1,217 hp).
All Challenger 2s have the correct measure on hp, and then there’s 3 (TD) with the bhp value in an hp metric, reducing its power by 17 hp and its power/weight-ratio by 0.27 hp/t.
Wouldn’t this be one of the numerous little things that should be adjusted? Even if just for consistency. It blows my mind that it can just be left ignored and not considered a bug because the acknowledged and known error isn’t “large enough”.
1 Like
This thread is so much full of pain and tears that we are now begging for 17hp increase
10 Likes
The Challenger tanks are just so underwhelming and underperforming ingame… that each and every single hp, each and every single mm, or each and every single second just… counts. xD.
It’s sad, but… here we are, hahah.
1 Like
I think I’ve been switching between the last 4 for a few years now
I think most people have been, but this 3TD nerf hurts just a little more than usual.
I vibrate between the two states at about 18Khz
I myself have already reached the acceptance stage and switched to Germany/Sweden. After all this is just a game and the devs clearly don’t deserve the dedication the playerbase of war thunder has.
To be fair, this is their game, if they want to make it with the circus level of realism that they are clearly accomplishing it’s ok, but it will backfire one beautiful day when the playerbase just decides to leave. They simply won’t get away with so many shady moves.
Also, I think in general Russian games tend to have such problems. For example, games like warface, Tanki online and others all suffer with the due diligence problems with their playerbase and because of this they all lost their popularity and barely function today. The same might happen with this project as well but again I don’t care, this is their source of income, not mine
Just…
-Add the missing LFP spall liners for all CR2/3s.
-Fill up the volumetric trunnion of the CR2s to match up the more accurate X-ray module that is not as hollow as the damage model is.
-Extend the CR2s’ first-order ammorack to include the shells at the back as it should be.
-Give CR3 (TD) its 5 second reload.
-Give CR3 (TD) the correct turret damage model that already exists as an asset and was accidentally removed by the developers.
-Give CR3 (TD) its missing 17hp.
Etc.
1 Like
Pish posh and inconsistent applications of “realism” is the worst part.
I dont find much enjoyment out of Germany and Sweden given they are currently meta.
I want to play France, Israel and Japan but they are suffering in their own aspects that pushes me to not want to play them.
We will be playing GTA 6 on PC before anything from that list gets implemened
8 Likes
The french top tier might see a revival if the most modern prototypes that we see now turn out to be effective