Then I don’t understand why he’s slandering myself & others when he’s obviously on our side.
As i have stated before, and written directly to you; those “misunderstandings” happen 90% of the time because you don’t actually write what you mean and/or think. either because of stressing through it or a lack of proper grammar, which of these i don’t know. many times you miss a word or add a word that completely change the meaning of what you actually ment to say, and then you get mad when people don’t understand you and claim “that’s not what i said” when more often than not it was exactly what you said, but not what you ment.
Edit: you can avoid SO MUCH irritation/“hate”/diskussion on the forum by just double checking your messages before you hit send and also slow down your typing and messaging frequency.
6 Likes
Which is fair. People need to go into conversations thinking everyone’s on their side IMO.
that’s not how that works though. Everyone will go into a diskussion thinking that people mean what they type. and that is more than fair.
1 Like
I type a lot of dry facts, and people think facts are the opinions of people for some reason as well.
But yeah, I’m sick of people making things personal when they end up literally agreeing with everything I said about the topic.
Me from my first post to this one: Challenger 2 needs to be as accurate as possible.
If people are mad at me for any other reason than that, bring it to DMs.
And to all the people that attacked me: You either hate the Challenger, or you 100% agree with me that Challenger 2 needs to be as accurate as possible.
Likely the latter where you agree with me that Challengers should be as accurate as possible.
I think you’ve also come into this thread without the full picture.
To try and keep it on topic
for example you came in and said:
But quite a few in this thread probably have been reading whats been going on in
Over the last 500 or so comments. those that wrote the bug reports mentioned above have literally torn apart Gaijins arguments and disproved much of what has been said above. Gaijin is for the most part. Not improving the CR2. At least not in a fair manner based upon information provided.
Like they did with MANPADs just before. They are changing data or being selective of data to keep the CHallenger 2 in mostly the same state. We’ll have to see what the changes they have planned will do, but many are unconvinced at this time. Myself included. They’ve also pulled out things like the backplate is made of aluminium (its not sources confirm steel) and wont share the source they used for that.
So people are angry. They have a right to be. and you just tend to defend Gaijin a bit and enter into conversations with people who really just want to vent and of course will argue with you when you respond to them.
15 Likes
Obviously because disliking you personally doesn’t mean one hates all NATO players like you constantly try to say.
Well when I say identical takes as my fellow bug reporters & researchers, it’s hard not to come to that conclusion.
@Morvran
I am bug reporting and making critiques, sir.
If you think that’s defense more power to you.
Yeah… about that
Some of your comments are easily misconstrued.
My head goes back to an earlier one where you suggested Gaijin did research on the Abrams before that Devblog, were buffing Chally 2, etc etc
Now, most of your comment is outside my remit.
I’ll dispute NATO getting the best aircraft last patch. If you’d qualified that by saying “for close combat” then I would’ve been completely onboard, because (I assume you mean) the Gripen is a monster in WVR combat. in BVR however, it is near enough useless for the time being.
Challenger 2, somewhere else I’d feel qualified/knowledgeable enough to talk about, has not been buffed. We finally got a buff in terms of turning performance, however that is more a bandaid to a bigger problem (namely no Regen Steering)
Challenger 2 has a far too large weakspot in the mantlet (or at least it has more armour than it does now)
The data they use on the TES is questionable, as the NERA elements (not the backing, just the NERA Blocks) should stop 25mm APFSDS. They do not in game, they rely on the backing that attaches the NERA to the tank and then any side armour actually on the Challenger.
That’s just cutting the surface.
So coming out and saying stuff like the Challenger is being buffed/improved, whilst technically true, isn’t really a good idea at best (at least without some qualifying remarks) and is outright antagonistic at worst. Hopefully you can see where I might be coming from
11 Likes
and herein lies your second problem.
as i have understood your messages, you are saying:
“Challenger should be as accurate as possible”
and
“Gaijin is improving the Challenger based on new information” (implying “so what are you angry about”? or?)
correct?
thing is, many people are arguing that Gaijin AREN’T improving according to the provided reports, they are improving(arguably just changing) it based on their liking. there has been evidence put forth about several things that Gaijin has basically said “not enough information, we will make it the way we assume it is”.
and here is where people get irritated with you:
your two statements of:
“Challenger should be as accurate as possible”
and
“Gaijin is improving the Challenger based on new information”
are then contradicting each other. do you think it should be accurate, or do you think Gaijin has done a correct job with the information provided?
(keep in mind this post when you answer: [Development] Discussing reports related to the Challenger 2 MBT - #5 by DevilO6
and also not that i personally don’t know enough to make a statement about the facts about the challenger)
4 Likes
The only time I posted about Gaijin & Abrams was after the Abrams devblog where they indicated they did more research on the topic. Not before.
If BVR was meta I’d state something about F-15 being the best instead of Mirage 4000 and Gripen.
As air RB is WVR boom & zooms, and dogfights.
I also said that Challenger 2 is improving as indicated by this devblog and acknowledged reports within the blog as well as acknowledged by other staff outside the blog.
I did not say it was improved prior, which it was to minor extent, but not as much as what’s coming.
@Necronomica
I don’t make implications 99.99% of the time. What I say stops at the period, and starts at the capital letter.
Improving is present & future tense, not past tense. There is no contradictions in any of my statements.
My own stresses about inaccuracies should be well known, but I do not let those stresses about software inaccuracy cause me to vent.
Issue is. If you read between the lines, Gaijin isnt changing much, if anything. They might infact be nerfing the Challenger 2.
The reports have basically been dismissed and brushed under the closest rug. We’ll have to see if the new high-fidelity armour, especially around the mantlet does anything, but most at the moment dont think its going to change anything at all and the Challenger 2 will still have one of the largest weakspots in the game.
But new reports have already been submitted
Like this one for the TES and OES
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/hUjNza9bvJyP
and
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/LIQZc0VjpdM4
6 Likes
I’m not going to argue against any of what you said.
Just as I won’t argue against what anyone else here stated about Challenger 2.
As you can see, all my posts are either Challenger 2 agreement, or part of the off-topic drivel that I shouldn’t have participated in.
1 Like
Started*
1 Like
Thanks for logging my reports, Morv o7
2 Likes
So far i’ve got:
ASPRO-HMT should have 84mm of KE at 67 degrees AoA and higher (likely 104mm) at 0 degrees:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/LIQZc0VjpdM4
ASPRO-HMT should have between 600mm and 1200mm of CE resistance, and be able to defeat tandem warheads:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/hUjNza9bvJyPhttps://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/hUjNza9bvJyP
Applique Armor Backing plate is steel:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/POJj1VwLKZRk
Applique armor baseplate configuration is backwards:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/oKubwOE7QWHV
ASPRO-HMT should not be destroyed by KE rounds:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/vsI2V1sJ9nto
TES/OES generic “ERA” bricks to be changed to ASPRO-HMT and not be giant, single stage ERA, but rather plates of NERA and ERA inserts:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/N1SummpRXQHa
More may come, but this is the focus of my research.
15 Likes
There’s a reason we see orbital striking Gripens out there now, you forget they buffed chaff and made it possible to notch pd radars while they’re tracking since the notch filters turn off. When you have over 300 units of chaff, you make it work. Keep up with your news before spouting bs and trying to act like everyone doesn’t know what they’re talking about.
Minor problem.
Thunderskill has 0 of the rank 8 tanks in it (except the ones which were moved up)
It’s missing a lot of the data.
2 Likes
That is not due to every Gripen notching and using chaff well thats due to people hardly looking up in a furball
Anyway this is a CR2 thread not a chaff thread take it some where else
Then why respond to me? And as someone that owns and plays the Gripen, you can defeat ERs. Considering you’re negative in the Gripen somehow, I don’t trust your opinion