thats why so many grinded for it they thought they were gonna get an advantage because of that (personally i wish i knew about it earlier this month so i could sell it for some decals/decor and a premium account)
IMO, the 292 is under BRed but not broken. It should be 10.3 and that’s kind of pushing it.
I’ll try to be objective here:
Cons:
-Awful reload
-Poor targeting speed
-No smokes
-No therms
-Bad reverse speed (better than T-72 but still bad)
Pros:
-Obviously, amazing round that can pen anything it fights easily
-This thing fights Leo A1A1s in downtiers (not that it has been fighting them, lol)
-Good, but not amazing, armor
-Above average mobility
-152mm obviously spalls incredibly well
-Potent HE round
The reason I say it should be 10.3 is because at 10.7 you have the T-90 which has:
-Better reload
-Significantly better protection
-Only slightly worse mobility
-Better gun handling
-Smoke grenades
-Amazing thermals
-Amazing optics
-Better chemical protection
-An APS (though, admittedly, it’s a bit useless)
EDIT: Yes, 3BM60 has less pen than 152mm APFSDS but honestly it doesn’t matter too much since both rounds easily pen anything they fight
So I think 10.3 would be a much better battle rating for it. It’s not “broken” like some would say. I think a lot of the craze is people seeing their favorite YouTuber sensationalize it for clicks and now they think the entire community believes it shouldn’t have been added and that Gaijin has “muh Russian bias”.
4 Likes
To be fair, having hundreds of battles in my T-80B and primarily playing it when Russia got absolutely curbstomped, I still never thought to myself: ‘‘Oh man, if only 3BM-42 had more penetration, then I wouldn’t have felt so helpless’’.
The T-90A isn’t a good comparison because it’s a notoriously awful tank at high tier, you can compare anything at this BR range to the T-90A and make anything seem undertiered as a result.
- The T-90A’s reload rate is still terrible.
- The protection is still unreliable at best.
- The mobility is SIGNIFICANTLY worse than almost anything else, including the Object 292.
- T-90A doesn’t have better gun handling at all.
- Thermals don’t make a tank fantastic, otherwise some 8.0 - 9.0 vehicles with 3nd and 3rd gen thermals would be far higher up.
The T-80B would be a better comparison.
1 Like
My K/D may not be the best with it, but overall I’ve had a favorable experience with the T-90A. Especially once I got Svinets-2. In my experience your armor is more than reliable, you have the standard Russian weakspots but no more than that.
Yes the T-90 has some negatives but they aren’t any worse than any other high-tier Russian MBT.
Not to mention it gets some of the best matchmaking I’ve ever had in a tank, for 90% of games you don’t fight tanks above 11.0, who you’re still more than competitive against. More often than not you’re bullying the 10.0/10.3 premium noobs. I think in all my games I haven’t gotten more than 10 or so uptiers to 11.7.
The reload is absolutely a negative of the T-90 but that’s almost a 50% increase between it and the 292. Sure the 292s round is good amount better but that doesn’t really matter because both tanks will just pen anything they fight, even M1A1 turret cheeks and stuff.
The thermals on their own may not be the biggest thing but the optics are some of the best so when you pair a NASA (or Russian equivalent thereof) telescope, good thermals, and a great round, you are quite good at sniping.
My point in comparing it to the 292 is to show why it (the 292) shouldn’t go to 10.7 and instead 10.3. AFAIK (and I’m probably wrong) the T-90A is the only 10.7 outside of China, which I only have WW2 vehicles in.
It isn’t to anyone with basic weakspot knowledge and basic aiming skills, as you say, the weakspots are the same as any other high tier Soviet/Russian MBT, and you can play the T-72B '89 at 10.0 with virtually identical armor.
Besides, armor is extremely overrated in this community, it’s a passive advantage that only comes into play when you’ve probably made a mistake, active advantages like reload rate, mobility, gun handling, etc. are more important overall.
They are though, that’s why it’s so terrible.
- Gun depression is even worse than the average Russian/Soviet MBT.
- Mobility is even worse than average.
Also, I’ve got a chart that puts into perspective just how poor the mobility of a T-90A compared to a T-80B:
1 Like
Pretty sure the chally 2E gets to 25 km/h faster than 3:50. The HP/ton is also wrong.
Challenger 2 2E, not Challenger 2E.
Can you please have someone with a little bit of common sense re-read your posts before posting, I’m literally cringing while reading this. Just because you have experience doing something, it doesn’t mean you’re particularly good at, because everyone has their skill ceiling and going past that is really hard.
Also, in my starting comparison, which you’re trying to twist, I never said one car is brokenly OP (which is because I don’t believe tanks in question are brokenly OP). Now you have a driver, doesn’t matter if he’s trash or good, that put out similar lap times in both cars and for some reason claims one car is brokenly OP without having a single argument to back it up. That’s if you don’t count personal bias to be a valid argument lol.
I doubt a dude that thinks experience = good player can educate anyone.
Oh no, scouting.
Such a highly skilled mechanic that gets you points for somehow “scouting and identifying” things through multiple rows of houses or looking at antennas. You’ve basically reached the skill ceiling of scouting if you don’t have hearing/vision impairment.
It might look like elitist rubbish to you but it’s a fact kills are much more important than assists in games like WT. You need to carry your own weight buddy, and being a “good” scout simply won’t cut it if you can’t kill stuff on your own.
This is yet another example that’s perfectly transferable to another game, like CS for example. You whiff your shots on someone, leaving him at low HP and dying in the process. Yes, you “scouted” him, you damaged him but he’s still a threat your team has to worry about just because you fumbled hard. Countless of times low HP players have clutched rounds on their own by catching enemies off guard.
People moaned about Abrams’ having bad armor and no spall liners which lead them to claim those vehicles aren’t even competitive at their BR anymore. Look it up yourself, it’s easy to find.
So people that disagree are vatniks and should be ignored, just so you can say that “everyone” is agreeing on 292’s topic lol.
It’s pretty factual that 292 has plethora of cons compared to contemporaries.
Going from a Corsa to F1 car is a much, much bigger step in many areas than going from a 10.0 MBT to another 10.0 MBT lol.
This is why I used your WT experience above in the racing car comparison. You definitely have experience driving both vehicles/classes but you’re now trying to compare things while putting someone in the F1 car for the first time lol.
There is only one challenger 2E, and those stats are wrong:
Thats a modification designation not actual Challenger’s designation.
Not people that disagree, people that disagree in the manner you do. There are more topics about the 292 being undertiered than there are about CAS being OP at the moment. That’s saying a lot.
I made a clearer example so that simpletons might be able to understand. Not to be I’m afraid.
When Michael Schumacher was the best driver in the world at Ferrari, the car was balanced in a way that it was actually harder to control mid-corner. It was objectively the fastest car, as proven by Schumacher destroying the competition, but you needed the best driver to be able to control and harness that instability in corners. As showcased by his teammate regularly finishing outside the podium.
The Dorchester 2E armour pack doesn’t turn the base CR2 into a 2E…
No kidding mate!
Thanks for clarifying! /s
In all seriousness, the Challenger 2 (2E) with that modification installed takes a mobility penalty, that’s why I have to make that clear in the name of the vehicle in the chart. I make that distinction in the same way the Challenger 2 (2F) has it’s name.
If I didn’t have that modification installed I’d just call it the Challenger 2, and if I tested the Challenger 2E, I’d call it a Challenger 2E and not 2 2E.
Genuine question: You don’t actually read replies before replying yourself, do you?
Because this is you right now:
‘‘I dislike apples’’
‘‘Why don’t you like oranges?! They’re great!’’
‘‘No, I said apples, not oranges’’
‘‘What do you have against oranges?!’’
‘‘Sigh… nevermind’’
I read your reply, I’m just telling you I think it’s stupid and more confusing by having the 2E in the name like that.
Firstly, not calling it that way would be me lying about the performance because as I’ve already explained to you, there’s a mobility difference.
Second, it’s not my fault the modification is named that way.
And lastly, also not my fault you probably forgot that modification existed/was named that way.
1 Like
It’s the only challenger 2 in the screenshot. I guarantee most people would assume you’re talking about the 2E, because we don’t normally put the name of armour pack mods in the name of the vehicle…So if anything it is more confusing, not less.
I did forget it was named 2E tbh, but I never play the base challenger 2 as it’s one of the worst tanks in the game.
I’m putting up pros/cons of the vehicle which can’t be dismissed by anything.
I’m clearly disagreeing with some evidence to back up my words, but you’re still trying to ignore what I say.
You’re still ignoring my simple example. I guess you simply can’t understand basic things.
I’m talking about a single person’s performance in two different cars/vehicles, not about performance of multiple people in multiple different cars/vehicles.
And I am saying that the con of a 10 second autoloader is more than outweighed by the penetration and damage the gun has, along with the fact that the armour is exceptionally trolly. It’s very hard to take out the breech, and if you fail to you’re basically a guaranteed kill.
I’m literally giving you a simple example of how your broad generalisation is not applicable. If I’m the type of player who puts on cruise control towards the points in premium vehicles whilst watching TV, my stats in all vehicles are going to be garbage. You’re not going to see any real difference between them regardless of how good the vehicle is. It’s funny how you keep ignoring this example though, which is probably the fairest one in my stat card:
How are you still not getting it. Let’s go back to your csgo examples, as maybe that’s something you’re more familiar with. If a bad player was unable to get any kills with the AWP, they would have dreadful performance on it compared to with other easier to use weapons. That doesn’t mean that the AWP is underpowered, does it? It means that you need a certain skill level to be able to utilise it. The reverse also applies for weapons/vehicles which are OP. It’s possible that you need a certain level of skill to properly utilise them. I cannot believe you need a concept as simple as this explained to you.
How much more damage does it actually have? I have seen poeple say there is not much difference between 3BM42. If that is true, it’s br should be 10.3 max.
I also think most people here need to learn that pen is not everything, look at the M51, or that one swedish tank with HEAT-FS at rank III.