If you don’t want to remove the British tech tree and boost the Challenger, then assign an appropriate weight to the Challenger.
As a dedicated player deeply invested in War Thunder’s British tech tree, I am writing to formally request a balance adjustment for the Challenger series main battle tanks—either through targeted performance enhancements or a recalibration of their battle rating (BR) to reflect their actual combat capabilities. For years, the Challenger line has stood as the cornerstone of Britain’s late-game armored forces, yet its current state in both Arcade and Realistic Battles has left many players frustrated, as it struggles to compete on equal footing with counterparts from other nations, undermining the game’s core principle of fair, skill-based combat.
The core issue lies in the mismatch between the Challenger’s inherent design tradeoffs and its assigned battle rating. Historically renowned for its exceptional armor protection—particularly the Chobham composite armor that defined modern British armor doctrine—the Challenger in War Thunder fails to translate this advantage into viable combat performance at its current BR. While its frontal armor theoretically offers resilience, the game’s armor modeling has long been a point of contention: community discussions spanning hundreds of forum pages have highlighted discrepancies between in-game vulnerability and real-world specifications, with even former military personnel noting inaccuracies in turret joint armor representation . Compounding this, the Challenger’s firepower suffers from critical limitations: its 120mm L11A5, while possessing decent penetration with APFSDS rounds, is hamstrung by a sluggish reload time and underwhelming damage output compared to Soviet or German counterparts . The cumbersome mobility—with a top speed of just 55 km/h and poor hull traverse—further restricts its ability to flank, reposition, or respond to threats, turning its armor advantage into a liability in fast-paced engagements.
What makes this imbalance particularly glaring is the discrepancy between the Challenger’s BR and that of its competitors. At its current rating, it frequently faces opponents with superior firepower, faster reloads, and more agile mobility—vehicles that can exploit the Challenger’s slow response time and neutralize its armor with high-penetration weaponry. War Thunder’s BR system is designed to group vehicles of comparable combat effectiveness, yet the Challenger’s placement forces players into asymmetric battles where skill alone cannot compensate for fundamental performance gaps . This is not a call for overpowered buffs, but for parity: either adjust the Challenger’s BR to a range where its armor and firepower tradeoffs are viable, or refine its core stats—such as reducing reload time, improving turret traverse, or correcting armor modeling—to align with its current rating.
The British tech tree has long been beloved for its unique playstyle and historical authenticity, and the Challenger deserves to be a competitive choice rather than a niche novelty. Players invest countless hours unlocking and upgrading these vehicles, only to face consistent underperformance that discourages engagement with the British line. Gaijin Entertainment’s commitment to balancing historical realism with gameplay fairness is what makes War Thunder stand out, and addressing the Challenger’s imbalance would not only restore faith in the British tech tree but also uphold the game’s integrity for all players.
We urge the development team to review the Challenger’s combat data, consult community feedback, and implement adjustments that recognize its strengths while mitigating its weaknesses. Whether through a BR recalibration or targeted performance tweaks, ensuring the Challenger can compete on equal terms will enrich the game experience for British tech tree enthusiasts and foster a more balanced battlefield for everyone.