Project Reality Forums

Hey i have a quick question. I see the addition f the challenger to the map was made and i just ponder a bit on if its actually superior to the APCs... Cuz to be honest, the APCs rate of fire is so much higher than the challenger, although it does take less hits from an rpg to blow it up. It looks amaing and scary to be facing one but it just doesnt seem to give a superior fire power than the APC, less actually, if it werent for the machine guns, it would be rendered totally useless.... am i wrong?

120mm rifled gun > 30mm autocannon

You must be a strange little boy then, tanks are supposed to be a whole lot scarier than IFVs.

I don't really understand the point of your question.

If the tank is used correctly, it's much more lethal than any APC/IFV.

1. Stop using AP against infantry.
2. Splash damage <3
3. Stop using that damn AP against infantry!!

brummy.uk wrote:1. Stop using AP against infantry.
2. Splash damage <3
3. Stop using that damn AP against infantry!!

Point mood today Brummy ?

Deadfast wrote:Point mood today Brummy ?

1. I'm not point moody
2. I r teh brumz0rz and want buttsex with u!
3. Back on topic kthxbai

brummy.uk wrote:1. I'm not point moody
2. I r teh brumz0rz and want buttsex with u!
3. Back on topic kthxbai

1. I disagree with this statement or product
2. I strongly disagree with this statement or product
3. I agree with this statement or product
--------------------------------------------

Anyway, what I wanted to add is the fact, that Challenger will always be completely useless as soon as it's manned only by 1 crewman. The 30 second shoot delay and the lack of situation awareness will get you jihaded or IED'd very quickly.
Get yourself a working gunner/driver and it's an unbeatable monster.

man u guys went somewhere completely off the charts with this thread, lol. Well manning he challenger i just saw that i could take more hits, but i seemed to be a rather good bullet magnet... duno, i find the apc to be much more reliable, fast, and has a better firing rate than the challenger, when firing the main cannon on the challenger to lets say blow up a builidng its gonna take much more time to do so cuz u need a couple of shots to do so. Now for that to happen u gotta wait for it to reload... so in the end u spend too much time on that. Now on an apc its more fast paced, the explosions look about as big as the challngers shots, and i manage to kill, although die faster as well, lol. Take for example ths little story. Sitting in the open cuz my driver was a retard, im in the challenger, and i shoot a building i know a guy just went into. Well the building was damaged so with that first shot i managed to blow up the place. The building was totalled, and and the guy was just layign in hte middle of the ruins. He calmly got up and ran back behind cover like he just got a flue shot, and pretended he just didnt get blown up by a challenger tank, it was a WTF moment for me.

Challenger can take about 7 rpgs and the apc about 2 and the main cannon of the challenger is also very capable of taking out infantry.

brummy.uk wrote:1. Stop using AP against infantry.
2. Splash damage <3
3. Stop using that damn AP against infantry!!

Yeah, what is it? Hit one and 2 to switch ammo types and use the ridiculous splash damage inducing HEAT rounds on insurgents. And the machine gun. And the added armor. That'll put it a bit above APC's in my opinion.

But I see what the OP means if you were only using the AP rounds which wouldnt give much benefit over a faster firing APC...

You dont even need AP shells on Basrah...

Waaah_Wah wrote:You dont even need AP shells on Basrah...

I think there was someone saying youd use HEAT on light jeeps, etc IRL, but I think currently, AP are more effective/just as effective in PR. IRL they would just pierce through and exit, i think?

The tank take out everything... The APC too but you waste to much ammo with it... The Tank is destorying a whole building with 1 shoot the APC need 10 or something like that...

[R-CON]OkitaMakoto wrote:I think there was someone saying youd use HEAT on light jeeps, etc IRL, but I think currently, AP are more effective/just as effective in PR. IRL they would just pierce through and exit, i think?

You can kill eevrything with one HEAT shell on basrah And the splash damage comes in handy

That being said, any competent INS team can essentially nullify the C2's main cannon by keeping civs around.

to the op,
an APC would seem more deadly on basrah than a tank because of the rate of fire. the apc obviously can fire off rounds pretty fast, and with HE rounds an insurgent has a pretty hard time outrunning the splash damage. a challenger has a mighty 120mm main gun that makes a big bang, but it reloads much slower than an apc. also, tanks are designed more for taking out other tanks/armor/ buildings etc, which in basrah is not much of an issue. your main enemy in basrah is little insurgent guys scurrying around all over the place, its more apc territory. still the tank will rock there world if it gets a bead on them, and they use it in real life in basrah, so im glad the devs added it.

If you manage to have a armor squad with the C2 and 2 scimitars and if you use them correctly you can be virtually invincible. And with proper infantry support the insurgents dont stand a chance. Of course this is a perfect world where every body knows what to do but sooner or later ppl will learn how utilize armor correctly and that might ruin basrah for an insurgent team. Hope it takes them a while because jihading a C2 is really satisfying.

To be totally honest, I have not actually seen the C2 on Basrah.

I saw it sitting at base once, but as Insurgents I never come against it, and as British I never see it manned.

here goes...

The IFV is far more effective in basrah, here's why...

IFV can carry a full squad of troops to the city and therefore the Caches. Much more important to the game, less important for individual l33t pwnzors.

IFVs gun is more than enough to kill a few insurgents. the sustained fire from the gun supresses people far easier and dosn't need reloading after every shot, missing a shot dosnt matter as much as the C2

the IFV is faster, so it can get a squad where they need to be quicker. once there the squad are 6 well aimed guns compared to one big sledgehammer for clearing buildings (C2)
The IFV can then extract an move the useful guns where they need to be.

the challenger 2 like most MBTs in urban warfare is more of a tool of fear. one HEAT round can usually clean an entire building. Plus there's nothing quite like a big imposing scarey looking tank sat right insiide your city.

Youl find if the C2 is rolling around that's what insurgents will be obsessed with, directing their efforts towards that instead of the squad in the IFV destroying the cache

No tool is better, each tool has a job to do and if done properly they compliment each other rather well.

The question to answer is what scares you more? IFV or Challenger 2 rolling into basrah?

Which will work better to hunt and destroy Caches IFV or challenger?

and which vehicle will annoy you greatly, is hard to destroy, makes you depressed because (with engineer support) theyre nigh on impossible to destory and will shatter the silence across the city with a 120mm cannon letting everyone know its there...

ralfidude wrote:Now on an apc its more fast paced, the explosions look about as big as the challngers shots, and i manage to kill, although die faster as well, lol.

Are you actually suggesting that because the APC's explosions look big, it's HEAT rounds are as powerful as a tank's shell?