Challenger 1

[Maverick966 1,240]

M1 Abrams, Leopard 2AV, T-72, T-80 ecc. in coming!

https://warthunder.com/en/news/5323-development-challenger-1-a-worthy-heir-en

Edited February 15, 2018 by Maverick966

[gaelan@psn 1,951]

I never expected the Challenger, thought we would have gotten one of the upgraded export Chieftains 

[SaekoB 2,053]

Type 90  and JM 33 \o/

[TasteTheTea 3,203]

4 minutes ago, *gaelan said:

I never expected the Challenger, thought we would have gotten one of the upgraded export Chieftains 

I think they would have had the same armour type anyway, just in a different layout.

[*AllahHuAirlines 4,789]

Well xxxx. 

 

Seeing as the armour and the performance data of later APFSDS shells issued to it is classified, I wonder what fantasy specifications Gaijin will give it. 

 

Inb4 it has armour holes that can be defeated by the T-54's APCBC-HE shell )))))) 

Edited February 15, 2018 by *AllahHuAirlines

[Loongsheep 5,339]

British and Japanese tanks have been the underdogs of tier 6. Guess the tide will turn with Chally 1 and STC-1 or Type 90.

 

I wonder which sekrit dokument has the values of Chobham )))))

 

It is the version with 70mm steel LFP though ))))

So hull down or get rekt.

Edited February 15, 2018 by Loongsheep

[FilipAleksanderS 554]

I think Challenger will be well balanced. Lower frontal plate lacks armor upgrades. New Leopard fits meta better I guess.

[Alzoc 367]

Well I just hope that since they are introducing tanks with NERA array they will un-nerf all APFSDS and change the way they handle composite armor (a long rod doesn't react the same way than an APDS or a full bore AP when going into that kind of armor).

 

InB4 modern NERA array get overmatched by a soviet 85 mm shell xD

Edited February 15, 2018 by Alzoc

[Mitchverr 875]

I assume that the challenger 1 will be in the main tree and is not the prior mentioned high tier premium british vehicle thats been mentioned elsewhere?

 

As for stats, yeah, likely to be semi fake, but that could be good too, as it allows for a limited level of balancing, or it could be based of the widely claimed estimates.

 

Kind of a shame they didnt give it the addon armour to the lower plate, oh well.

Edited February 15, 2018 by mitchverr12345

[gaelan@psn 1,951]

7 minutes ago, Time4Tea said:

I think they would have had the same armour type anyway, just in a different layout.

Not for the Khalid or Shir 1

[Soviet_Tetris_Br 864]

13 minutes ago, *AllahHuAirlines said:

Well xxxx. 

 

Seeing as the armour and the performance data of later APFSDS shells issued to it is classified, I wonder what fantasy specifications Gaijin will give it. 

 

Inb4 it has armour holes that can be defeated by the T-54's APCBC-HE shell )))))) 

 

From what I'm seeing on the WT subreddit the Challenger I uses first generation Chobham armor.

Edited February 15, 2018 by Soviet_Tetris_Br

[John_Q_ 1,535]

8 minutes ago, *AllahHuAirlines said:

Inb4 it has armour holes that can be defeated by the T-54's APCBC-HE shell )))))) 

 

Said as a joke, but I expect something like this to happen. Seriously what s up with the classified data about this tank ? How can they depict this tank with the slightest accuracy ?

[FilipAleksanderS 554]

1 minute ago, JohnQ11939ChtBan said:

 

Said as a joke, but I expect something like this to happen. Seriously what s up with the classified data about this tank ? How can they depict this tank with the slightest accuracy ?

The same way they did it last time with Leopard 2 and T-90. Gameplay was nice even if tanks were far from realistic.

[morawets 2,002]

Man, I was worried about classified tanks being in game.. But I always get so excited seeing Challenger, so I do enjoy the feeling, that I will be able to take it for a spin.

[John_Q_ 1,535]

Just now, FilipAleksanderS said:

The same way they did it last time with Leopard 2 and T-90. Gameplay was nice even if tanks were far from realistic.

 

Wait, is nt the point of war thunder NOT to be WOT or armored warfare though ? 

[*AllahHuAirlines 4,789]

7 minutes ago, JohnQ11939ChtBan said:

 

Said as a joke, but I expect something like this to happen. Seriously what s up with the classified data about this tank ? How can they depict this tank with the slightest accuracy ?

 

They can't. It's being put in the game to placate certain members in the community who are continually asking for more modern tanks, and to make Gaijin a bunch of cash when people use GE or premium time to grind to it. 

 

Sure, fantasy stats mean there's some wiggle room for balance- but who's to say that Gaijin manipulate these classified specs to give Soviet tanks the upper hand? 

Edited February 15, 2018 by *AllahHuAirlines

[Loongsheep 5,339]

Sorry our American friends...

[TA4Life 6,520]

Devs have sekrit dokumetzs about Chally armor?

[*AllahHuAirlines 4,789]

Just now, JohnQ11939ChtBan said:

 

Wait, is nt the point of war thunder NOT to be WOT or armored warfare though ? 

 

Most of the marketing campaign made for War Thunder: Ground Forces has always been about it being more realistic than competing games. Now Gaijin have invalidated 4 years of marketing. 

[Soviet_Tetris_Br 864]

2 minutes ago, TA4Life said:

Devs have sekrit dokumetzs about Chally armor?

 

Considering that it's gen 1 Chobham and the modern MBTs used today use gen 2 Chobham... Maybe?

[Loongsheep 5,339]

2 minutes ago, *AllahHuAirlines said:

 

Most of the marketing campaign made for War Thunder: Ground Forces has always been about it being more realistic than competing games. Now Gaijin have invalidated 4 years of marketing. 

Profit from the under-played British tree is not worth to risk it )))))

[morawets 2,002]

3 minutes ago, *AllahHuAirlines said:

 

Most of the marketing campaign made for War Thunder: Ground Forces has always been about it being more realistic than competing games. Now Gaijin have invalidated 4 years of marketing. 

 

Lmao. By adding Challenger 1?
I said it numerous times before and I will say it even now. It doesn't matter if the documents are classified or not, just look at the state of armor of M60. 

Sure, you can argue that at least we have the documents and we can use them against Gaijin's implementation.. But in the end.. As is with case of M60.. That's all you can do about it. Wave the documents in your hand and hope to be heard.

[*Grayfox061 681]

4 minutes ago, *AllahHuAirlines said:

Most of the marketing campaign made for War Thunder: Ground Forces has always been about it being more realistic than competing games. Now Gaijin have invalidated 4 years of marketing. 

I must have missed the dev-blog where they said health bars were being intoduced...

[morawets 2,002]

3 minutes ago, Soviet_Tetris_Br said:

 

Considering that it's gen 1 Chobham and the modern MBTs used today use gen 2 Chobham... Maybe?

 

Take it with a pinch of salt, but first gen is still in use, isn't it? 

Jordanian army.

[*AllahHuAirlines 4,789]

3 minutes ago, Phelpsiee said:

 

Lmao. By adding Challenger 1?
I said it numerous times before and I will say it even now. It doesn't matter if the documents are classified or not, just look at the state of armor of M60. 

Sure, you can argue that at least we have the documents and we can use them against Gaijin's implementation.. But in the end.. As is with case of M60.. That's all you can do about it. Wave the documents in your hand and hope to be heard.

 

I'll quote myself from another thread:

 

Quote

 

At least we can prove them wrong with actual data.

Once Gaijin implement vehicles which we can't find IRL data for, they have free reign to make anything as OP as they like. Look at all the controversy over Russian vehicles- IS-6s hidden armour values, made up ammunition for the Russian 76mm F-34 cannon, the ridiculous bounciness of sloped armour a few years ago which could make a T-34 immune to Tiger Is if they were even slightly angled, the convenient nerf for HESH from an insanely shady source and of course the APDS controversy with T-54s etc being immune to 105mm APDS if they are angled even slightly away from the shell's path (cough cough magical 61 degree modifier cough cough). They've blatantly made Russian tanks better with overperforming APHE slope modifiers, poorly modelled sloped armour, and all sorts of underhand nerfs to NATO tanks and ammunition. The M60's gun mantlet has been 127mm thick since release, despite many bug reports and community members actually going out to tank museums to measure it. 

 

This will be 100x worse if Gaijin start implementing tanks with completely classified armour & gun performance, and we won't even be able to prove them wrong with bug reports since there will be no unclassified data to prove them wrong with.

Players who call for newer classified tanks are naive at best, and completely stupid at worst.
 

 

 

Sure, Gaijin don't listen to bug reports now- but we won't be able to prove that a vehicle didn't perform how they model it once we dive into the realm of classified tanks. 

 

Edited February 15, 2018 by *AllahHuAirlines