yeah i guess saying the crews love it over the T-80s doesnt say much but the challenger 2 atleast in my opinion the tanks purpose is completely over looked and misunderstood
I call it - Slow and steady wins the race, rush in to quickly and lose your face.
1 Like
I agree with that sentiment.
Also, regardless of how one thinks the tank should peform, the fact that Gaijin has repeatedly denied proven documentation of equipment it is, well, proven to have, is just inexcusable.
It saw what are in the ground scheme of things minor improvements.
The requirements for the hull were lower than what was achieved through challenger 1 mk3.
Off the requirements alone.
CR2 350KE - 650 CE
CR2 2E/2F - 400 KE - 770CE
Weeeelllll….
ive still seen nothing on it
the Chally 2E finished behind from all other western MBT in the Greek trials of1998
the 2E which used a different powerpack and outdated munition.
Admittedly, it was let down two fold, it uses faulty charges, L14A2’s which were rapidly developed for use in the gulf but the longevity of which were unknown.
And the integration of the power pack was suboptimal, leading to some failures.
Well, the different power pack of all things was an additional strength compared to the production variants xD
But yeah, I believe to recall it was only trialed with L26.
the power pack integration was rushed so no it wasnt and as fireball said the charges were faulty
Cough yet T-90M and T-80BVM are sooo good IRL.
And Ukrainian T-84 Oplot finished last when put on a test with NATO tanks.
T-84 has a more advanced FCS system and is seen as at least an equal to the 80BVM
the T-80UE finished last
1 Like
Wow T-50-2 was real? I thought it was made up from World of Tanks.
They really should add the M339 HE-MP-T shells for nordic Leopards.
That has been a bug report for many years yet nada.
Oh joy, my ww2 ships will be getting hit with missiles they can do nothing against, just like my ww2 tanks.
im gonna be honest missiles in current naval are kinda gimmicks, sure they can do a ton of damage but they need to hit ammo which they cant hit below the water line so it only really works against ships with ammo racks right at the water line or above it, not to mention anything past a destroyer is pretty much immune
the ammo racks for the missiles are also massive powder kegs and are almost always above the water line so tbh I think DDGs are fine in game, and later ships are going to be even more exposed to the larger calibre guns they will be fighting, not to mention most ASMs arent designed to punch through traditional armour found on ww2 ships
In game it is, the hull is basically the same with a slight armour increase on the upper front plate, the driver port/gap is a huge weakness and the turret on CR2 actually has a larger weak spot, with TOGS near enough guaranteed to take out a breach or a crew member.
Mobility is a similar with the CR1 being more mobile, a lower profile target harder to hit.
1 Like
Personally, I’m not much of a completionist. I generally only research and play the vehicles that interest me, so the growing number of squadron vehicles doesn’t bother me too much. That said, I can understand why it would be frustrating for players who want to collect them all, especially if they are trying to obtain them without spending money.
For context, these are the squadron vehicles I currently own (having played long before the system was implemented, and I was never part of a grinding squadron, just a casual one):
Spoiler
That said, I think the continued addition of squadron vehicles is ultimately a positive thing. They provide more options for nations that previously lacked them, help fill out line-ups without requiring players to grind an entire research line, and give premium players an additional vehicle to complement their line-up. This is particularly useful for players who purchase a top-tier premium and would otherwise have very limited spawn options.
On this point, I largely agree. The current squadron RP system feels outdated and is in need of modernization. The game has changed significantly since the system was introduced, and a much larger portion of the playerbase now participates in squadrons. The existing progression rate no longer reflects that reality and could certainly be revisited.
For anyone interested in the numbers behind this, Bruce_R1 covered the state of the squadron system at the start of 2026 here:
3 Likes