I don’t have British tanks
The challenger 2E needs a better shell I don’t have to play it to know that
And the ammo chargers in the hull is worse than the Russian ones
But to be honest the Challenger 3 I In pretty good br and British mains should not complain about it
Its just a challenger 2 with a longer reload realistically, the gun and shell are nice sure, but its a far cry away from being as good or flexible as a 2A7 despite being close in BR (Im not saying the challenger 3 should be 11.3, but BR decompression is needed)
Do not forget it has a bigger breach with less armour
(250mm at the thickest part against KE and HEAT)
in summary its a glass cannon and a slow one at that
Yeah its also slower than a plain Challegner 2 (not the 2F or OES/TES) as far as im aware
Shouldnt the Tanks that recived the smaller front ammo storage such as the 2A7V and Strv 122 B (aka the D) have an even thicker bin?
The challanger 3 is not in a good BR it is factually incorrect as far as the real tech demo goes and really should just be removed.
At this point its no longer a tech demo, they have removed all the tech it demonstrated bar the cannon.
Its reload for the round is pathetic af.
heres a little caveat for you, DM13 from the 2a4 will cause an ammo detonation of the CR3 TD.
admitting you’ve never even used british tanks then saying the CR3 TD is fine at its BR is just ludicrous, realistically now it should probably be removed, id rather take out my CR2F than the CR3 TD , the DM53 just isnt worth all the drawbacks this thing brings
Ok Let’s make it 10.3 because you can go through it with dm 13
No one said that, but to claim its fine at its BR when 9.3 tanks can one tap it through the front of its turret is just ridiculous, I dont want it to go down, id rather see the thing removed.
fun fact.
3bm25 can and does one tap the CR3 TD frontally. its absolutely diabolically bad that the type 90 or ZTZ99II and III can sit at their respective 11.3 and 11.0 while this is 11.7.
You can go through the Abrams Nick with panzer 4 shell
abrams
Type 10 is laughably under armoured as well. However the reason I refer to the CR3 TD is cause HE said its fine at its BR when it infact is a total waste of time and RP.
You can go through a CR2 LFP with a almost any 76mm in the game as well
Spall liner
Laser warning
Strong armor at the turret
L55/dm53
excellent thermals and optics
Good gun depression
Its missing its turret spall liner, and only has a spall liner on the frontal part of the hull that you shouldnt be hsooting anyways still missing all encompassing spall liner.
Being removed from it as of the dev stream
Completely negated by the fact it can literally be one shot through the breach meaning that if you actually play top tier and aim its two small parts on the turret cheeks are irrelevant.
only bonus the tank has, yet it still has pitiful reload any CR2 user will tell you.
THe m829A2 with the 5 second reload is leagues better.
abrams has comparable optics, as do leopard 2a5.6 and 7
WZ 1001 has also good optics.
T80UD and T72B3 have good optics
Useless due to the fact as i said any tank at its BR or even down to 7.0s can and will ammo rack you through the breach.
I firmly believe the CR3 TD should be removed and replaced with the 2006 CR2 that was trialled with the Rheinmetall 120 mm gun as part of the CLIP program
meanwhile this thing sits at 10.7 while having better mobility, firepower and protection
It definitely doesn’t have better firepower.
Don’t think so? All they did was remove the lowest row of ammunition to improve anti-IED performance as far as I know. I’ve heard nothing of the ammo stowage getting thicker.
292 has more pen, while Cr 3 has a shorter reload so it depends
Cr 3 still has to aim for weak spots
While the 292 can pen basically everything everywhere at its BR
You don’t even get 50mm of pen extra but your reload is like 4s longer. That’s not a trade I’d take.
Just because you can pen something everywhere doesn’t mean you shouldn’t aim for OHKs.
It makes it easier to aim for OHK if you don’t have to worry about where the armour is.
