Chally DS is identical to the Mk2 currently. THis would just make it identical to the Mk3. Almost all british premiums are just carbon copies of the TT. I think we have a big enoug gap between 10.3-11.3 that we shouldnt be making it bigger.
1 Like
I dont get the problem with increasing the BR to 10.3.
10.3 is a better lineup, for me personally, anyway because the moment you are 10.3 you get the Stormer, an SPAA which finally has missiles instead of guns, and you can take out the Jaguar Gr.1A aswell and bomb people with your GBUs (which I enjoy doing).
The biggest benefit imo is that you cant get uptiered to 11.7 and the tanks at 11.3 to 11.0 are not more problematic to not want to play 10.3. I prefer having the things I listed above instead.
It wouldnt change anything for me tho. I already have the Challenger 1 DS and I will continue to play it, if it has L26 or not, because if I want to use L26 I will just play the Challenger 1 Mk.3 or the Vickers (even tho im not a big fan of the Vickers) and I dont need the increased rewards, since theres nothing for me to research anymore anyway, and I can make money with other tanks. I would welcome the change regardless.
So in the end its up to gaijin again but I think it would benefit the tank more then it would hurt it and gaijin can market the Challenger DS with “having a round actually used in Operation Desert Storm”, or something like that, which would make the tank more attractive to buy. Because right now the Challenger DS is slower as the Leopard 2a4, doesnt offer that much more protection and also while having worse penetration. So why would you buy it over the Leopard? Because it has fancy sandbags on the front?
3 Likes
Well said. If britain had dozens of good options in and around 10.3 then it wouldnt matter so much, but we have only 6 vehicles between 9.7 → 11.3. One of which being the DS. Most of which are 10.3 anyway. Our highest BR premium vehicle sitting exactly at the top of that bracket would be great. and it lines up perfectly with many other options like you said
3 Likes
Completely agree, i would be happy with it going up in BR with a new shell to make for a better line up for top tier Britain. I do think the British top tier vehicles need a rework on BR’s and especially armour values. But having another 10.3 MBT would be a good enough change for now ( with the appropriate shell type/armour accuracy update )
2 Likes
indeed, but she has the best NATO round in 10.0-10.3MBT. it leds Ariete become more powerful tank in BR 10.0 than our Chally DS. And of course i think its really easy to play and threat T72AVs in BR 10.0. But lack of heavy armor is also the reason she stay in BR 10.0
L26 is worse than 120mm DM33, but Chally mk3 has more armor and in BR 10.3. so I think its sort of balance.
Actually Chally DS is Chally Mk3 without L26. And chally mk2 didnt equipped the L26. L26 is researched for gulf war.
And Chally Mk3 is in medium level in this battle rating (compared in NATO MBTs). it should not go to 10.0. or Leopard 2A4 should go to 10.0 as well.
Armor fixing is really hard for gaijin i think. especially some bad things happened in a Britian tank crew.
last, if you tried to play Chally mk3 you will find this viechel is more powerful than chally DS.
L26 could even make a huge threat to T80U.
I’ve been saying Challenger Mk.2 (DS) because they are functionally identical in-game, I’ve already known it was a Challenger Mk.3 for a while now but just been saying “Challenger Mk.2 (DS)” as a way to group both the DS and Mk.2 together.
got it. so you mean gaijin should make new vehicle named Chally Mk2 (DS) and then make it a copy from chally mk 2 right?
No, I’m saying “Challenger Mk.2 (DS)” as a way to group both the DS and Challenger Mk.2 together since saying Challenger Mk.3 Desert Storm and Challenger Mk.2 separately would take too long and unnecessarily lengthen my sentences.
1 Like
“Challenger Mk2/DS” would probably be the better way of grouping them
1 Like
True, that would probably help with the confusion.
1 Like
Does that mean something like the IAI Lavi could potentially be added to the game, not confirmation on if it is coming, just if it was developed enough as a project that it could come?
Britain Mk3 and Mk5 L11 gun is missing the following ammunition:
L15A5 APDS-T
L23A1 APFSDS
L23A2 APFSDS
L26A1 APFSDS
L28A1 APFSDS
At a minimum.
L15 APDS-T and L15 APFSDS should both be at 8.7 with the Mk3 and Mk5 because both those tanks could use them.
1 Like
It’s not missing those rounds. It’s 8.7.
need bug reports
done years ago. meaning gaijin doesnt want to fix them
4 months ago, meaning it’s in the works.
What? Stingers were bug reported the day they were brought into the game.
They lack 22g agility, optical tracking, and datalink.
The 20 - 22g bug report is 4 months old.
I doubt datalink is on the ones we have.
Optical tracking is a game-level feature not one that can be applied to just one missile.
The 20 - 22g bug report is 4 months old.
“the” bug report, they’ve closed plenty and said it wasn’t a bug.
I doubt datalink is on the ones we have.
Do any research at all before speaking. FIM-92K was made explicitly for datalink purposes.
Optical tracking is a game-level feature not one that can be applied to just one missile.
Literally all they’d have to do is artificially improve the stinger’s lock range out to about double where it is currently to mimic optical tracking. That’s the reason we need it.
2 Likes