Wait DM83?? Is that the NATO/ geman designation for KE2020NEO?
I will say, after playing the Merkava Mk 3B, 3C, and Ra’am. I think I’d prefer the Challenger 3TD in theory. The TD has armor, gun depression, similar mobility (maybe worse neutral steering speed), and a better reverse speed. However, I’m not sure if the Chally 3TD has a worse turret traverse & gun elevation speed or not. But that might change my stance a bit.
I’m convinced the Merk Mk 3 series are probably the worst set of 11.0+ below 12.0 BR tanks. Can’t stop DM33, or even DM13 reliably. Whereas the Type-90 has some kind of armor, better mobility, vastly better reload speed, better reverse, etc. The TD has the advantage in Pen, Versatility on Terrain, & Armor at least.
1 Like
All of what they’d need to do for the Chally 3 TD is simple.
Chally 3TD Revamp (from easiest to most time consuming imo):
• Easiest is an aced reload buff to 5 - 5.3 secs.
• Give the engine 1217hp, or just up it to the proposed 1500hp as they don’t have an issue with adding vehicles/prototypes with fictional attributes lol (E-100, Yak 141, etc).
• DM63/DM73 (so that you don’t need blowout panels). DM73 might have improved ballistics, so being that it’s a weak tank that can be justification for it. Not sure how easy it would be to model an ammunition propellant that won’t explode without them messing things up…
Now for the Optional stuff they might not go the extra mile on but might help:
• Turret rotation speed increase (it’s been supposedly bug reported to be too slow).
• Maybe throw in the improved Mantlet scheme that people have bug reported for a while now.
Overall, it’s simple changes that can make the tank worth playing over other Challengers. And even changes that can be made to other Challenger 2s. It’s just a matter of preoccupations with other tasks, and sheer laziness. But most of everything mentioned that didn’t have to do with armor or ammunition should be easy.
2 Likes
CR3 is fine. Has the best KD of all the Challengers i played and i played all of them. Like i said everything in this game plays the same way anyway except if it has some kind of quirk.
1 Like
Merkava turrets are like ~3 degrees faster and elevation is ~4 degrees faster. But yeah you’re basically correct here I suppose
1 Like
I’d rather have blowout panels than different shell combustibility cause the former has way better odds.
Some other things: Trophy APS, LWS, spall liners, ride height (IRL CR3 is a lot lower to the ground)
smaller things are armor modifiers (RN its a tiny bit less than CR2 composite.) and turret roof composite- i think i read somewhere that that might be a thing coming to it.
Best KD for you yes but in general its worse. And again, for you maybe everything plays the same. But we’re not talking about specific cases here. +confirmation bias on you’re end.
I’m sure most of us would rather have blowouts (most of us who are sane). But the current tank in game “doesn’t have them”. So I’d rather have a 1-4% ignition rate rather than no changes to its survivability at all. It would mean you’d need an insanely massive HEAT round that is very hot to blow up the CR3(TD). Which would be AMAZING imo. Problem is idk if they can properly code that, or have the bandwidth for that rn.
But the other fixes would be nice I suppose.
As far as ride height, that might hurt it as shots that come in low, would start to do more damage. And some hills you cannot be hull down anymore. To my knowledge the TD didn’t get its spall liners? Maybe only the production eventually got em but I’m not sure.
1 Like
I have to disagree on the ride height. I find many many times I think im hull down only to get utterly blasted below my mantlet/ in the driver port. I find that if it was like any shorter it would be so much better. It wouldn’t change depression at all it’d just… be shorter.
Yeah technically counting track base in full front view the LFP would take up more surface area (I mean like draw a box around the tank including the tracks/ space beneath floor) but it wouldn’t matter at that point. (fully exposed is death anyway in any tank especially CRs with their lack of UFP)
Confirmed IRL to have spall liners
The entire hull of the Challenger 2 (UFP, LFP and Side) should have spall liners ingame
We’ve sent proof, they just don’t seem to care
3 Likes
Ride height doesn’t change the distance from the hull to the turret neck. That’s not congruent with world physics. Secondly, a lower ride height limits the amount of places you can go hull down not always is it the opposite. This is because the shorter you are the closer you need to be to the incline, meaning you need more gun depression. Lower ride height will affect the ability to peak the turret out from certain spots on maps. Hence why Soviet vehicles struggle on plenty of maps. It’s not all gun depression.
1 Like
I stand corrected.
(Also soviets do struggle also because of low breech depression)
1 Like