You are welcome to dissagee and as I mentioned reports are welcome. The naming convention is however not planned to currently change by the Devs as things stand.
It was an intended naming decision by the developers.
2 Likes
I don’t really know how you’re deciding what to put on the vehicle.
Surely the 2019 prototype would only have an upgraded turret on a Challenger 2 hull for demonstration purposes? But it doesn’t have the additional turret armour which makes the turret bulkier?
But you’ve also added the improved engine which I’ve only seen mentioned in the specifications released in 2021, but again there’s no sign of the upgraded hull armour?
The APS was also mentioned in the 2021 specifications but there wasn’t anyone selected to manufacture it so it makes sense why that wasn’t added. Although I will add that it has been decided that it will be using the RAFAEL TROPHY system shown here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1PX-pdyiTw&ab_channel=RAFAELAdvancedDefenseSystemsLtd.
On a side note; does this mean we will be getting the other proposed CR2 LEP from Rheinmetall with the 130mm Autoloader? Or the CR2 with the Hensoldt MUSS APS?
It was intended to name the vehicle incorrectly? Then what is the point in claiming the game is based on real tanks? We may as well throw all naming convention out of the window then, and give tanks whatever names we want.
1 Like
The only explanation I can think of is marketing. They want “challenger 3!” In their game, reality and facts be dammed.
Although, air superiority is turning out to be basically made up anyway, the mis-naming of the tank is the least egregious part of gaijins denial of reality.
I will never, ever stop being salty about them claiming the ch1 doesn’t have a spall liner.
Intentionally wrong, like how the Challie 2 is modeled in game?
1 Like
As I previously said, dissagrements are welcome as were source backed reports. I or anyone else cannot do anything simply by responding to my posts over and over that something is wrong.
As it happens someone did report it with sufficient evidence and it will be changed in a future version.
2 Likes
Whilst I appreciate that bug reports with sufficient evidence is required. even when that is provided changes don’t always happen. Just look at the mass of reported bugs for the CR2. Several are more than a year old (and have been acknowledged for quite a while)
3 Likes
By making a properly sourced bug report, there is a chance something can be properly resolved. By pinging me or any other staff member to simply argue something is wrong without soruces and a report, leads to little to no chance it a resolution.
1 Like
There’s your bug reports Smin.
I’ve even organised them into nice neat sections for you and anyone else’s convenience
1 Like
Already left a response in the other Challenger topic.
1 Like
Yep, though actions speak louder than words. It’s one thing to say it’s being looked at. Its another for bug reports to actually start getting fixed. In the meantime. I think more bug reports have been submitted for me to add to the list
3 Likes
Absolutely
2 Likes
Thanks to your reports, the Challenger 3’s name will be changed to Technology Demonstrator (TD) instead of Prototype, with the weight decreasing from 66 to 62.5 tons.
14 Likes
Nice! Very Nice!
Now I have to update the bug list from P to TD. God dammit 😜
1 Like
Hey, dont be like that, there are not as much of them for you to complain about it ;P (i have no emotes 😕)
Not yet at least 😜. So I am fortunate in that regard
1 Like
You are, and i hope it stays that way. The less the better 😅
I watch that video to this day. I enjoyed the bit where he was going in circles around the bush to stop the HESH, little did he know the Challenger 2 could also use CHARM 3 APFSDS rods
2 Likes