I did think it was your list sir but i didnt want to make claims.
Even if we go for the list gaijin provided with tbe roadmap , what 6 months ago? They paid.lip service by changing engine noises, and some other cosmetic and audio changes they didnt fix any of the actual.bug reports.
The challanger 1 tanks at least have decent armour for the br.
The challanger 2s can be breached before you can evem get the commander sight over a crest, the mobility is attrocious comparatively to anything else at the br as you say as well.
Its a poor show that the most defensive mbt for its generation is swiss cheese in game.
Its why I dont really care about the GR4 in GRB. CR2s are so bad that im not even going to touch top tier GRB for a long time. As for Sim though… It sucks to have weapons nerfed to the point of not being really usable, just because of tanks in another gamemode.
I get what you mean, but from my perspective a nerf is a balance decision. I would say that balance and nerf are the same thing but it’s also possible to buff things as part of balance.
I think a lot of frustration in this thread not only comes from the feeling that it’s a nerf but also because any direct comparisons to other ordnance in the game is shot down as too different to be used as an argument.
It also doesn’t help that there has been no budging on the subject matter at all, which leads us to believe that this is just how things will continue to be and the only choice at the end of the day is to just not play Britain - hence why I jumped on the “don’t use it” comment because that’s how we feel about Britain as a whole at the moment.
There’s wider implications that no mmW missiles will be considered for the future either, which means all the helicopter systems that rely heavily on the 114L will continue to be completely outclassed by Russian helicopters or the nations with FnF missiles.
I don’t recall seeing anything saying the TD got Farnham?
The trophy was a mock-up I think, and if gaijin wanted they could specify that it’s the TD as it was during the CR3 announcement.
There’s video footage of the turret interior that (apparently) shows that there’s no spall liners mounted (all CR2s are missing some hull spall liners iirc)
I think its more that we got the TD instead of them fixing the CR2s or adding the full CR3. It just felt like they deliberately gave us a “new top tier” and then made it as bad as possible on purpose.
We didnt need another MBT and realistically speaking, its barely a side-grade to the 2E or BN, especially since the nerfs for it. DM53 are good, but not THAT good.
I’m fairly sure we got the TD before the actual CR3 prototype was revealed?
Edit: the silver lining is that the TD got the 2E and BN foldered, so the grind there was a little faster while the TD remained a more optional end-of-line
i mean man, just took em out a whirl there, HSTVL penned my BN left turret cheek when i was going 59KMPH round a corner, the fact he can hit vaguely near it and pen is a joke.
Or lets talk about how the M1A1 HC and Click bait both get M289A2 at 11.7 which is the second best round in game, 5 second reload, better mobility, far more effective armour due to said mobility.
at a lower BR.
they just do not care about Britain at this stage, i mean look at this, they are moving the ram to britain, due to it being canadian, same as the adats. YET they go against their won word and will not for example add the leopard 2M CAN which i dont want but the hypocrisy is rife, T90A , and mig21 to Britain, due to India, has had very little military relation with Britain for some time.
I would love to see Indigineous British equipment in the tree seeing as how much was actually researched and developed.
APS, Ewar, NATO smoke systems that incorporates materials similar in effect to chaff. Then going broader there are GBAD systems with greater reach that could be considered.
no, when Gaijin started folding more vehicles the fact that the TD was in the tree meant that the BN and 2E had to be folded to maintain the “3 main top rank vehicle” thing
gaijin dont accept videos as evidence for or against things, or at least thats what they say.
The challanger 3 tech demonstrator also did have its system integrated as far as i know and what RBSL say on what little information is there for it.
What it didnt have was the digital fire control system etc that only got revealed earlier this year.
And the two sources ive found which are more reports than evidence so take with a grain of salt say the TD still has the Farham armour.
as it was tested with it on, how can a tech demo not have the tech in it to demonstrate it makes 0 sense.