Challenger 2E vs Leopard 2E kekw
Both lose to 2a6Ex :3
his sqaudron is LOSAT to
(same goes for the merkava)
Nah, 2E sees 2A6EX through its sweet, sharp, crispy 2nd gen thermals, while 2A6EX, with its 1st g*n “thermals”, will be seeing 2E like;
3 Likes
2HEL solos both
the merkavas and the uparmoured challengers should just be bunkers on tracks but gaijin doesn’t believe a NATO tank can have armour
2 Likes
Isnt it like really similar to the 2E, iirc also had that same optics
against like 3BM60 the only things that should be green is the LFP Drivers port and a tiny part of the breech but no cause the challenger has 75T of oxygen inside it
I love how the add-on LFP of TES/OES/2F, which is LITERALLY the same, has;
-Different KE effectivenesses
-Different LOS thicknesses
-Despite being even labelled identically
-Somehow the one with lower LOS is the one to have more KE
-In both cases, ridiculous values lower than even a piece of aliminum of the same thickness
And it’s been like this for years… lmao.
5 Likes
lets just list things out quickly with the uparmoured challengers
-
UFP should be 550-600mm+ due to a missing 50mm plate (On all Challengers)
-
breech armour should be around 580mm+ due to it missing a lot of breech armour (On all Challengers)
-
LFP should be around 400mm+ due to Dorchester underperforming (TES,2F,OES)
-
side armour should be completely immune to ATGM and Autocannon fire (TES,OES)
-
the tank should have Spall Liners practically everywhere (On all Challengers
(probably missing a few but whatever)
obviously it cant have any of this because then russian mains would struggle
2E uses a stupit camo so loses instantly
Greek tanks are using one of the best camo
Completely immune even for the oes and tes is a statement of questionable realistically
no they dont
Me when I lie
what leopard has better camo then?
1 Like
The shrimple NATO 3 tone (aka the standard bundeswehr camo since forever and because the NATO standard)