@Smin1080p_WT
I’ve experienced this frustration mainly when reporting about French vehicles so I’ll post it here,
For the love of all that is good in this world, moderators who put “Not enough info” on bug reports that are SPOON FED TO THEM WITH PROOF SO OBVIOUS THAT AN INFANT COULD UNDERSTAND shouldn’t be handling reports, and they should be fired.
What makes this worse is the fact that y’all are blatantly disrespectful to those of us who take the time out of our own days to manually source and make reports.
One of y’all (I 100% know which moderator you are, but mentioning your name directly will probably get me banned here so I’ll just say you are a complete disgrace who will get what is coming to you) loves to leave snarky/disrespectful answers that openly insult the intelligence of the person who submitted the bug report. This is 100% a result of moderators now being anonymous to the submitter, and being emboldened to act heinously because they can’t be directly identified.
My point is none of us are getting paid to take our own time to fix the game for developers who are incompetent and can’t do their own research.
The least y’all could do is not be moderators who make submitting these reports even more of a pain with magical rainbow levels of stupid guidelines or logic, or just plain out being malicious and denying a report and insulting the person who submitted it seemingly for fun.
I give up on any attempts to improve this game; my report about the AMX-40 has been accepted for almost a whole year now while the tank in question has been moved up in BR.
I’ll still play, but this game simply isn’t worth it putting in your spare time to improve.
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.
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’s officialy confirmed: MSC armor’s was nerfed.
It was supposed to either get a 5.0 seconds reload or hull armor.
But guess what? The Ground Devs, in their forever France-hating wisedom, decided to give it neither:
How are the Devs saying they want to give France a decent line-up between the AMX-40 and the Leclerc … And then give us gimped VEXTRA and Leclerc MSC ? It makes no sense.
Yeah so the MSC is another overBRed piece of crap. We got fucked over like the VEXTRA all over again.
Between this and the fact that France got a Leopard 2 Premium before a Leclerc Premium …
I’m getting seriously sick and tired of this shit.
Meanwhile, Russia gets yet another high-performing top tier MBT. All is good in Soviet Wonderland.
See you next Major Update I guess? 🤡
EDIT : LMAO. To add salt to the injury, it has Gen 1 thermals even though there is absolutely nothing indicating that is should get anything shorter than Gen 2 thermals.
