It’s 10.0 on the dev server IIRC. So no quite but not much different
it is quite true if you play it right you could potentially be the KV-1B of 9.7 but Gaijin gives a lot of uptiers I see 2S38s and T80UDs every few maches tho
Congratulations on your first post.
Amen brother. Not to be one of the war thunder conspiracy theorists but
It’s Gaijins anti-britian bias infecting/ affecting the community too.
1 Like
This and all other responses aged like fine wine, with the FV4030/3 being moved to 10.0 and countless of YouTubers agreeing how busted this thing was and currently is at 9.7 it’s good knowing I was on the right side of Gaijin history.
This thing was genuinely criminally good at 9.7 and if I recall correctly I got a KDR of like 5 to 6 in this beast, it only took me couple battles to realise how dumb it was.
With it moving to 10.0 I have no issue with it anymore, it’s a perfectly balanced vehicle but those 11.0 uptiers will be a pain
1 Like
Just wish it could get L23A1. L23 is barely good enough to deal with 10.3s half the time.
1 Like
I do think that it should’ve remained at 9.7 and gotten its APFSDS removed and especially since the Rapier is also moving down to 9.7 but apparently that would be too much effort, which it moving up to 10.0 however it should indeed receive the L23A1.
I guess so
your complaint was the Shir facing T-55AMs
and it still can because the AM/AMD are going to 9.0
and it still can because the AM/AMD are going to 9.0
And that is the fault of decompression, vehicles like the FV4030/3 shouldn’t be facing the T-55AM and that’s common sense, using one wrong to argue why its okay isn’t a good argument. The Chieftain shouldn’t face the BV and the T-55AM shouldn’t face the FV4030/3.
The performance of the FV4030/3 however is on par with other 10.0 vehicles, give it L23A1 and its going to be perfectly fine at that BR.
1 Like
you dont bring it at 10.0 though, theyve now moved the rapier down to 9.7 which means nobody will use it cause itd pointlessly uptier a otherwise good lineup, and put the fv4030 into a place in which it has no lineup, you either bring to to 10.3 where its vastly outclassed, or you uptier 9.3 to 10.0 where it makes the lineup pointless.
that was my critique, just inversed
A very small list of vehicles which includes the Leopard 2K and 2AV
1 Like
which both are vastly better
Other than ammunition, both don’t have turret protection to trade shots
both the 2av and the leo 2k have better firepower and mobility
that was my critique, just inversed
What were you criticizing, the fact I said that the FV4030/3 shouldn’t face against vehicles like the T-55AM? It’s crazy if you believe that the 4030/3 should face against it, you also probably believe that the Fox isn’t a little gremlin as well lmao.
A very small list of vehicles which includes the Leopard 2K and 2AV
That isn’t relevant to balance, the FV4030/3 both statistically and in real scenarios was overperforming and therefor went up, it was doing exceedingly well and I spotted this early.
The FV4030/3 has significantly better turret armour (2K and 2AV) and hull armour when compared to the (2K), significantly better reload, better overall magnification (gunner/commander), better survivability when compared to the 2K and is more uptier proof than both.
The 2K and 2AV undoubtedly have their pros over the FV4030/3 but all those three vehicles at good at their respective BR, the 2K however is slowly getting powercrept.
1 Like
pointless in 99% of cases.
really? lmao, it has barely any armor to stop the weakest apfsds shells in the game this is a TERRIBLE take
absolutely not wtf are you smoking speed and mobility is always preferable over armor, especially if said armor is crap
Using one wrong to say why something is bad isn’t a good arguement
Instead of taking a holistic view over BRs, you looked at the worst example comparing it to 8.7s instead of other 9.7s
1 Like
pointless in 99% of cases
The pointless in question, didn’t know 450mm to 460mm of RHA was pointless and especially at its current BR of 9.7 lmao. Next will you tell me that the turret protection on the 2A7HU isn’t adequate enough for 12.0?
really? lmao, it has barely any armor to stop the weakest apfsds shells in the game this is a TERRIBLE take
Having 600mm of chemical protection when compared to the 2Ks 180mm of chemical protection is terrible? Yeah so true, armour is a thing of the past apparently.
Jokes aside, just because it may have poor RHA equivalency (280mm) doesn’t mean its chemical protection is bad, it’ll stop all HEAT projectiles around its BR (obviously not tandem missiles and such) - still significantly better than the chemical protection the 2K offers lmao.
absolutely not wtf are you smoking speed and mobility is always preferable over armor, especially if said armor is crap
Next to no vehicles can effectively penetrate the FV4030/3 at 9.7 and the same can be said for 10.0 other than few exceptions, its RHA equivalency on the turret cheeks is excellent and even the side chemical protection on the turret is fantastic - stop underplaying this beast.
The mobility of the FV4030/3 isn’t even bad anyways, it’s not like the Chally 2 TES or anything lol
The FV4030/3 is so bad that it should actually move down to 9.0 and anyone who disagrees is Britishphobic and clearly bias!
Because its not like the other 9.7s aren’t significantly worse than the FV4030/3, and exceptions like the T-64BV are bad examples as they themselves should also move up to 10.0…
Jesus, you guys honestly believe the 4030/3 is bad? Go play it for yourself
1 Like
good thing i was talking about 10.0 then.
ah yes as if 99% of threats werent kinetic but go on more disengenuos arguments.
this is patently untrue, it has at best 360mm of kinetical protection in the front hull, the massive hull is one big weakspot.
no i dont, besides strawmen and bad faith arguments do you have anything? my point was always that at 9.7 it was fine, quite strong sure, but not out of line with other 9.7, next update 9.7 is basically not going to exist. at 10.0 it has no place. at 9.7 it was a competitive tank.
1 Like
ah yes as if 99% of threats werent kinetic but go on more disengenuos arguments
God forbid anyone is stock grinding a vehicle, you’ll still encounter HEAT projectiles and the UFP is angled in a way that if you hit the higher parts of it then you’ll automatically bounce mostly anything INCLUDING kinetic projectiles like APFSDS.
this is patently untrue, it has at best 360mm of kinetical protection in the front hull, the massive hull is one big weakspot
You play the FV4030/3 as a sniper as you play the Centauro RGO as a flanker, I was obviously talking about its turret protection but you’re so fixated on hull protection that this fact flew over your head lmao.
Additionally, the entire hull or the entire vehicle in fact is a weak spot and I’m talking about the Leopard 2K, if you’re going to wine about the LFP then don’t forget about the protection the 2K has or the lack there is.
no i dont, besides strawmen and bad faith arguments do you have anything? my point was always that at 9.7 it was fine, quite strong sure, but not out of line with other 9.7, next update 9.7 is basically not going to exist. at 10.0 it has no place. at 9.7 it was a competitive tank
Have you played the FV4030/3? If you’ve struggled with it then its a gameplay issue, if you haven’t then where is this conclusion coming from? The FV4030/3 is borderline busted at 9.7, not “quite strong” as you claim.
It was comparable to the Obj. 279 at 8.7, it simply shouldn’t be at 9.7, it furthermore has superior protection than both the 10.3 and 10.7 Challengers but I’m yet to see you mention this, the only difference between the 10.3 and 9.7 Chally is the lack of L23A1 and thermals (which are generation 1).
I guess the Challenger Mk.2 is unusable according to you XD
1 Like
for the first 4 rounds*
It has the same micro ready rack and stupidly long replenishment time the CR1 and CR2s have
2 Likes