This has to be a joke right? For my faith in humanity I will just assume you forgot the /s after this sentence.
CR2 is 10.7 tops remove L27 on the base model and it offers no more protection or fire power than the CR1 MK3 which is 10.7
It is the worst top tier tank
Its efficiency will never change as only a handful play it. To think its forced to face 2A7s and T-80BVMs is what’s really stupid.
11.3 or even 11.0 I can agree. 10.7 and below is pure copium tho
1 Like
11.3 is 12.0 every game, with some deocmpression sure.
CR2 is no better than a Leopard 2 or Vickers Mk 7.
Remov
And 9.7 is basically 10.7. The challenger, however bad it is, is already better than everything at 10.7, let alone all the 9.7 vehicles that get constant 10.7 up tiers. You are just wishing to move compression down with this kind of ideas
Leopard 2A4 is superior to CR2. Thats 10.3
Remove L27 and what does a CR2 have thats better than a 2A4?
Mobility?
Armour is about the same (Turret cheeks are better on CR2) but the rest is a OHK
Fire power = to Leopard 2A4 with L27 removed
Crew layout?
Rate of fire?
Optics
So out of the categories CR2 has superior turret armour and superior Optics.
You’ve had responses, I am taking time away from teh forums mate.
do not use cobra button.
Learn the missiles they are easy enough to deal with, I linked you two extensive guides on radars, ARH, SARHs and DEFYN has one on IRCCM . As well as all this I gave you several well worded, graded and explained messages on pretty much anything you will encounter for that BR.
Do not follow me around the forum chasing me up Ill just block you.
2 i am massively decreasing my time on said forum due to personal life.
good luck out htere.
10.7*
Leopard 2a4, a5 and a6 all have worse hull armour than the CR2.
RoF goes to the cr2 as well, CR2 optics are better.
Crew layout is arguably as bad as each other.
the 2a4 with DM33 could be 11.0 , same as CR2 would be without L27 but still L26 xD
1 Like
That is an evidence of how decompressed 11.7 currently is.
1 Like
this is the issue.
2 Likes
Holy cope. I hate being that guy, but this is pure skill issue.
CR2 easily wins in both armor and survivability over the 2A4.
L26 >> DM23, added bonus with the higher ROF for the first 4 rounds.
Like I said, your nation mainism and somewhat skill issue is clearly showing, but I don’t want to clog the leclerc thread with too much off topic.
3 Likes
Armour effectiveness and this is the big thing (You can look at thickness and front plate but how effective is the armour in game situations?) Lack of mobility and even torque means the CR2 cresting that hill to fire and reverse back down is exposed for much longer compared to a 2A4 that can peek and quickly reverse. Excluding the turret cheeks but then the mantlet is so large on the CR2 hitting the cheeks is a player error.
Out in the open the CR2 cannot move from cover to cover without enhancing the risk of being seen and shot at. Staying staionary to snipe/support also makes you an easy target for CAS/Helicopters. The best armour is avoiding being hit, something the CR2 struggles with.
Leopard 2 all models have a superior sustained fire rate, the larger ready rack is great and many if not all CR2 players would swap a second off their reload of 4.5 to 5 or 6 for a consistent 18+ rounds in the ready rack. Better ammo storage and better crew positioning it is hard to take out the whole turret crew on a Leopard 2 in a single hit from the front (Now I would like to add these observations have been made before the nerf to the FCS systems and turret baskets)
It’s not cope give a 2A4 DM-53 and it would be superior to any CR2…Mobility, acceptable armour, good rate of fire and decent survievability would make it a superior Arriete. (Another tank players consider superior to the CR2)
You forget Britain literally have a 2A4 hull with the Vickers Mk7. We also have a T-90A So while “It’s single nation syndrome” the tanks are literally in the tech tree all be with a weaker turret in the form of the Vickers Mk7.
Can the CR2 do well, of course in the right hands and map. But there are so many variables that go against it.
It is pretty easy to one shot kill leopard 2A4s, no matter if you aim for the turrret or hull.
Weaker turret but with better firepower. So it should actually be just as easy or even easier to do well in as the 2A4.
CR2 with L26 would be worse than 2A4 in terms of mobility, little bit of gun handling and that’s about it.
1 Like
read the topic title and take your convo elsewhere
6 Likes
Any updated onthe MSC armour?
getting nerfed or what? seen some leaks that its getting overhauled n nerfed -.-
Its a T72B series they all suck but im 100 percent with you on this with how gaijin is going about thiis.
Was thinking htat when i bounced on to test it, was hoping this would be something to substitute ny leclerc while i get the S2 and such , obviously not
So tell me exactly how did you get fucked over ?
You really expected to get a 10.7 tank that can withstand a top tier round to it’s hull without any drawbacks attached to it ?
I’m interested at how the armor performs against common 10.7 rounds such as M774, DM23, 3BM42…
To me, this thing looks like a 2A4 side-grade, and that definitely doesn’t deserve the level of bashing you’re dishing out.
That thing is basically a B3 side-grade, literally no one is talking about it and for a RU vehicle it usually means it’s sub-par at best.
2 Likes
Oh boy where to start, NERA is still underperforming massively while Relikt is what Astartes wear…
10.7 tank fair enough so model the armour correctly and push it up, it is only NATO that has to suffer from having underperforming armour, ammunition placement and thermals.
Yet Russia get their hand held all the time, it’s none stop they ignore NERAs actual values because if they modelled them 95% of NATO tanks would be immune to Russias best round
6 Likes
You still haven’t told me what’s wrong with the tank at 10.7 ?
2 Likes