I would agree on past conflicts yes, but in the current one (which it’s really not suited for imo) not so much.
according to the crews using it there loving it, sure its got a few issues on the soft terrain but there using it as a artillery mbt. sitting back using drones to locate convoys then taking them out in quick succession
1 Like
That’s not how it works. They aren’t going to write germ_destroyer_lutjens_class_molders instead of germ_destroyer_lutjens_class_lutjens just for the fun of it.
1 Like
I do hope we see the Molders in the update since we saw a bunch of camos tied to it in the files of the last dev server, probably the most interesting thing for me personally
I defiantly wont say no to more missile armed ships in the game, personally hoping to finally see the County Class or even the Type 42 class.
ive already got the Bravy, im about maybe 50k RP from the Lutjens and then im still a decent way from the Charles F Adams making it my goal to acquire all the missile ships (not including costal as the costal grind is awful)
In this case it is no doubt an useful asset, but for general indirect fire rather than fortification or vehicle busting you’d probably want a tank with more potent HE, just comes down to the situation
True, I’d imagine it’s because it is also a lot more comfortable compared to their standard options
i meant more there using it as a big sniper rifle against T80s and stuff, but the HESH is suprisingly good irl (warthunder gets it wrong)
its much better than old T72 or oplot or whatever so yeah
I mean tbf the Ukrainians also said the same to all NATO MBTs they received, they thoroughly enjoyed using the Leopard 2s, Abrams and Challenger 2s they received.
Even the Russian forces that captured a perfectly operational 2A4 stated that it was much better to drive and more comfortable than their T-80s.
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