The Challenger 2 (11.7) is a miserable MBT and desperately needs a fix

Machinery of War Discussion Ground Vehicle
,
101

People play vehicles because they’re popular/well-known, it’s why the Tiger H1 remains the most played tank of all time in War Thunder.

The simple fact remains that the Soviets are the largest producer of armoured fighting vehicles across history, the largest tank-on-tank battles ever fought involved the Soviets and the T-34 is possibly the most well-known medium tank in the world, with the T-72 being the most produced and one of the most well-known Cold War tanks ever.

It’s the same reason why Shermans are so popular, and I suspect why there are so many throughout various tech trees too.

The claim that people only play vehicles if they’re strong is completely made up and not supported by anything.

I’ve never claimed the Russian/Soviet tech tree is bad, don’t put words in someone’s mouth.

What I said is that the T-80BVM is very mid and the T-90M is the worst 12.7 right now, that doesn’t mean I don’t find the Object 906, KV-1 ZiS-5, SU-85, T-64A, Object 279, KV-220, T-34 (1940), etc. etc. to be great vehicles.

Generally speaking, the Russian, German and US tech trees are all roughly equivalent, they each have their stronger and weaker BR ranges but are generally well fleshed out and offer lots of competitive vehicles.

The problem with your type of people (those that don’t play Russia) is that you think grass is always greener on the other side.
You’ll pretend to know what they’re like and claim that Russian vehicles are much more powerful (hand-held, easy-mode, OP, you name it) than they actually are, but if that were true the tech tree wouldn’t look like this:

image

1 Like
102

I’m grinding Britain right now so I can have all the Abrams in game and the problem with it in a video game is that the nation is known for APCR, Solid Shot, and Sabot which in my opinion are just trash compared to APHE. I will say the only saving grace at top tier for me to finish is the SepV3 is there other than that I was bored and couldn’t imagine how someone can grind this nation with terrible shells. The compression exists and that already makes this nation just downright the worst so far I’ve touched period.

1 Like
103

Give me the Merkava Mk.3 over the T-72B3 any day of the week.

104

By that logic you wouldn’t be playing Britain either, but yet here we are.

105

Everytime I think of Armata and it’s crew / ammo placement I imagine a reality where you can blow up the carousel and send the turret flying but it just goes driving off to repair.

106

How many CR2 OES premiums do you see vs T-80UE…

Russian premiums always sell well, but if the tanks or premiums were as bad as you make out not even the most staunch commieboo. Would spend money on them.

I play CR2 (well M1 now) and what an upgrade that is. Because that is the payoff from grinding.
I would not pay 60 dollars on a premium CR2 ever and players agree as it is one of if not the worse selling premiums.

Yes a T-80UE is not as good as Click Bait…however you two make it sound like its a massive gap when in reality they are closely matched.

Players will not spend money on or choose to play tanks that are shyte.

1 Like
107

I agree, but the B3 has the same pen, better thermals, and better armor. Taking a hit in the Merkava, especially at 11.3 BR+, is a massive gamble cause of how little protection they have.

108

They are really not evenly matched.

Just like the SEPv3 and T-80BVM or T-90M are also not evenly matched by a longshot.

1 Like
109

Mate I am not being rude, but they are a T-80BVM and M1A2 are closely matched if one is S tier the other is A tier.

T-90 sure the lack of reverse hurts them at top tier.

But the BVM has most of the attrbutes it has good mobility (yes slower than an M1)
Has good armour (but you can kill it with weakspots) yep same with any other top tier tank.
Good optics, good firepower (yes slower rate of fire) excellent HE shell and even the ATGM
Low profile harder to hit, no turret ring, no NATO hump, no turret basket. Death of crew members does not impact the tanks rate of fire.

It is small margins.

110

The SEPv3 is high S-tier while the T-80BVM is lowish A-tier.

The SEPv3, both the US and australian ones, are so unbelievably good at the moment that performing poorly in them is really a massive achievement.

1 Like
111

that’s being incredibly generous

1 Like
112

I want to remind you that this thread is about the CR2, not about Russian tanks, not about which ones are better between: Russian, USA’s, or German… Those are pointless arguments. All three major factions remain superior to the minor ones, especially if they are left in a corner like Great Britain.

113

As much as it sucks as an answer, Gaijin “solved” the British top tier problem in their book by giving them the SEPv3 and AIM.

1 Like
114

Unfortunately, I know… but personally, I don’t consider those tanks part of the British line, nor do I intend to play them. If I want to play M1s, I use the US. If I play the British, I want to use their vehicles.

115

This just in! Man who has never played vehicle ranks said vehicle poorly!

More at 11.

2 Likes
116

Funny how the British top-tier win-rates go up when they get a tank (technically two if you count the SQ one) that ISN’T crippled by Gaijin’s inability to get the CR2 correct…

I suppose all those saying it was just British mains unable to play might need to readjust their thinking…

NOW GAIJIN - FIX THE CHALLENGER PROPERLY!

2 Likes