It just seems very ungaijin-like to admit it.
1 Like
The Challenger 2 model rework was already deployed last year. There is no other “overhaul”. What was promised has already been deployed.
FV101 76 confirmed?! icicic
1 Like
and would we be expecting anymore Indian stuff soon or is that for next year
1 Like
Hey, if I have to live with copy-paste, at least give me the copy-paste that has actually been requested first
cough Sabres for Britain cough
3 Likes
RIP the manlet
1 Like
You will have to see what lies in store for the next major. We haven’t even started blogs yet. So its too soon for confirmations and denials.
12 Likes
That ones fair I still dont get why Germany got the Canadian Sabres
i see well i will know in a few weeks
I wonder if we ever get a damage model for the CH3TD that actually fits the 3D model
Because they used them?
1 Like
haven’t started writing the blogs? What do you mean
Time for me to get the popcorn ready
Im just a little stupid sometimes okay? My brain has melted being on here the past hour
2 Likes
To be fair, the Challenger 2s are still plagued with issues that haven’t been addressed or corrected over the years;
1- Still missing lower front plate spall liners.
2- Still too small first-order ammo rack (back bin should be included).
3- Still too slow first-order ammo rack replenishment speed (twice as long as any other MBT).
4- Mantlet’s trunnion is still hollow (just because the shield has cavities it doesn’t mean it ought to be hollow; those cavities aren’t there to be left empty…)
5- Challenger 3 (TD)'s turret damage model is still a non-matching copy-paste of the pre-rework Challenger 2 turret even though a more appropiate model had already been ingame before being reverted the following update after having been corrected.
6- Challenger 3 (TD) is still missing 17 HP because the developers did not convert BHP to HP even though the engine power is correct on all other Challengers which have the same engine.
7- Challenger 3 (TD) is still the only Challenger family member to have a 6 second reload for no real reason at all, making it, all in all, barely a sidegrade if not a downgrade compared to other family members, even though it was suppossed to be the pinnacle of the British Ground tree.
8- The LFP add-on armor on TES and 2F still has different thicknesses and protection values across both tanks despite supposedly being the same armor; in both cases, WAY too low.
9 Likes
Yeah, Yugoslavia when?
1 Like
Germany used them and at the time, they were the only jets possible to add for German top tier to balance them out with other nations. Britain had the Hunter F.1 and Canberras.
So T-90S was a substitute for a more fitting Squadron tank at that BR, because other parts of the tree were higher priority. I see.
That was absolutely not true at that point, there were no Indian vehicles. And even now really? Is there an Indian subtree? Osa is the first Indian tech tree vehicle for Britain. Jaguar and Vijayanta are British vehicles to begin with with Indian decals. The latter of those I am 95% sure is still in a broken state, the ammunition selection seems entirely wrong, the LRF is for some reason missing and when the barrel is shot out the MRF stays floating there (at least it did last I checked.) I’ve seen almost nobody use either of them.
1 Like
Problem: Israel doesn’t have enough domestic vehicles to be a good tech tree on its own, it needs a sub-tree.
Problem The Sequel: Israel has very little sub-tree candidates.
Normally, Turkey would be the single best sub-tree candidate considering Geographic location, the number of Israeli-Turkish joint Defence Projects etc. etc. but as we all know, it’s not exactly an optimal time for that. We kinda missed the window a year ago. Even with Turkey however, Israel would have no real low tier and just start at 6.0~ or so. That’s fine as long as the higher ranks are properly padded out.
2 Likes
Looking forward to seeing Poland, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, etc becoming subtrees because they don’t meet Gaijins new requirements for actual tech trees
4 Likes