The warrior IFV was obsolescent when it was first introduced. A classic example of misplaced British pride. This will never stop being funny.
>unstabilized gun when earlier IFVs had stabilization
>feeds from a 3 round clip when earlier IFVs had dual feed capability
>no atgms standard when earlier IFVs had fully integrated IFVs that went on to prove invaluable in the gulf war
>bolt on ATGM required the commander or gunner to expose himself to fire the single ATGM.
We get it
warrior bad compared to contemporary nato IFVs
We all know british engineering hit the shitter
>3 round clip
Holy shit bongs wtf r u doin
3 round clip? Damn this tank might be legal to own in Canada
Better K/D than Bradley though, plus looks better, is faster and has a more lethal gun.
Worse gun, k/d doesn’t matter when the Bradley has seen so much more combat, warrior has (0) tank kills kek, and it looks worse than Bradley. Bongs steadily losing
>Worse gun, k/d doesn’t matter
Only people who are on the bad end of a ratio think getting ratio'd doesn't matter. classical amerishart denial.
Few thousand Bradleys deployed vs 200 warriors. Plus the warriors gun is unstabilized with a low actual rate of fire. Huge L for the bongs
>Few thousand Bradleys deployed vs 200 warriors.
So what? Do you know how ratios work? lmao
Yes the Bradley has gotten more things done. Killed more tanks, supported more infantry, performed more armored assaults. The warrior is an APC with a recon gun slapped on
So you don't know how ratios work? AWKWARD!
It implies ratios aren’t important outside of cal of duty. Real world results matter far more. And the warriors lack of heavy combat use is a telling sign of its usefulness
But in the real world ratios are more important in determining effectiveness...
Not that anon, but it only makes sense if both ratios are the result of sameish conditions.
Which definitely is not the case, anon is right, Bradleys pulled most of the weight (i mean would you send an ifv with no integrated atgm, no dual feed, and no good damn stabilizer into the hottest mess?), so it's not surprising its k/d might be worse
Ok but you've pulled this reasoning out of your ass
nta, but would you say that the .25 ACP Walther Model 2 is the deadliest handgun ever because someone used an individual one to kill 7000 dudes during Katyn? same thinking
Pistols and IFVs are completely different things it's not the same thinking unless you're literally moronic.
>And the warriors lack of heavy combat use is a telling sign of its usefulness
Now you're just advertising your limited education.
Bradley has seen FAR more combat.
Don't bother anon, he's a disingenuous shill
This answer implies you don't know how ratios work
Sample size matters, anon.
Are we playing call of duty?
Ask the amerisharts who need aim assist turned on, big skill issue.
>amerishart.
Cope harder, you fricking morons don't know how to make tanks or tank like things right
Did you know that Bradley is even slower than Challenger 2 let alone Abrahams? The primary duty of an IFV is to move troops in conjunction with armour, Bradley can't do this. Big whoopsie.
>Did you know that Bradley is even slower than Challenger 2 let alone Abrahams?
>Big whoopsie.
>Only people who are on the bad end of a ratio think getting ratio'd doesn't matter.
>Ask the amerisharts who need aim assist turned on, big skill issue.
As a neutral the Brits are far more amusing than the troll.
Frick off, Warriortard.
Brits own you.
The filenames are the one an Iphone uses? Is he downloading the picture again and again or does it keep changing them when you upload them?
The latter
Interesting, thanks for clearing it up.
Warriortard thread?
>Warriortard thread
Warrior is a great IFV, from the 80's.
But OP is such a disingenuous shitter, it's not even worth it to discuss it when he's online, we've had the same discussion 500 times already.
have a nice day OP
What is the BEST looking IFV? Nothing else matters
CV90 mkIV
t. bong who hopes we buy them. Bradley is BAE's ugliest IFV.
>mkIV
*mkII
Bradley
For me it’s the Bradley. Just looks mean
Samegay
Huge cope
There’s 6 pro Bradley posters itt and 2 unhinged warrior defenders
There are 6 posters shitting on OP (you) for being a disingenuous shit and then there is you posting from your tablet or computer and your mobile phone with 2 IPs.
>nooooo you’re the samegay
kek add another kill to the Bradley’s impressive record. Seriously not one tank kill from a warrior?
you’re the samegay
Yes.
My sides!
For Cold War era it’s the Bradley. Modern is the puma
I like these 2
absolute glistening glimmering gem
t. 670 hours on squad
It’s sub-par that’s for sure.
Wouldn’t call it obsolescent though, still got decent optics and firepower. For the price it might not be great but if you have them you have them.
Tired of people that always have to be at the extreme end of the spectrum and a piece of equipment is either the best thing in the world or the worst.
Not sure if it’s kids or stupid people, maybe I’m just getting jaded after watching people have the same arguments over and over again.
I personally couldn’t care less about the fricking warrior IFV, have literally 0 skin in the game.
The Warrior is objectively the worst IFV to come from the western world. Doesn't mean it doesn't smack the shit out of BMPs and BTRs though.
What is this nonsense. It was effectively better than all IFV's at the time besides the Bradley when commissioned, and was basically comparible, with better armour, infantry capacity and speed than the Bradley at the expense of the gun. They chose and preferred the 30mm for killing infantry (Higher explosive fill) than a smaller gun with stabilisation, which was its primary job.
Vehicle kills are opportunistic, they're not really what IFV's are for regardless of what OP says, and like Bradley, they used a form of mounted ATGM as those became the norm to fill that capacity, the Bradleys main gun, while having higher penetration, was still anemic.
It's closer to a BTR in design and doctrine, APC in origin with a support gun on top, whereas bradleys were often used as pseudo light tanks despite being slow and high profile. The bongs used a different vehicle entirely, the cheap, small and fast Scimitar for reconnaisance instead. Doctrinal differences really.
Since then the Bradley has continued to have upgrades, whereas the warrior has not really had a whole lot besides sights upgraded on it, since they planned to move to a new IFV dedicated platform that never arrived.
There has been a few attempts to modernise the warrior which would have brought it up in line with other IFV's, but they have only materialised on foreign exports (100+) and concepts since IFV's were not a bong priority in the last 20 years, they have not materialised.
OP should kill himself, as a shill he will never point out the benefits the warrior had because they're unimportant to him, and every flaw from the 80's vehicle is harped on endlessly and compared to modern variants of tanks. He is unwilling to undersand doctrinal gaps and fills, in short he is an idiot. It's a box on tracks meant to move infantry and provide gunner support. It does that.
What's interesting is the desire to modernise them with full automation recently, literally using them as vehiclular "drones" in field.
>The Warrior is objectively the worst IFV to come from the western world.
It's better protected than the Bradley, more mobile than the Marder and Bradley, and while the Marder's 20mm has a higher rate of fire, it's also unstabilised.
Warriortard why do you post this same thread erryday? What is it about this particular vehicle that angers you so much?
he is insane just like the other morons
>koreatard seething about japs and germs
>armatard huffing copium
>Dennis der Untermensch
>peak oil gay
>etc
the common theme is that they are mostly PrepHoleor/misc/ gays in disguise.
You haven't gone far enough. They're all probably the same person
Honestly I could believe it, there's definitely a vein of anti-bong seethe that permeates all of those threads. You can even see it in the Tempest thread that's up now, b***hboy is confidently spouting utter bullshit just to try and make the UK look bad. He's been doing it for years.
I know for a fact that he shills anti-Korean and anti-Bong threads since in the past he has linked the threads from one another while he described in detail why he does it.
His justification at the time was that he was fed up of arrogant bongs, and countering asiaticshilling, but I think his justifications are another front, he uses various shill techniques like samegay narrative building, false flagging etc straight from the shill handbook. He's either a mentally ill moron (Who can't afford a bag) or paid by some state.
Armatard and Dennis definitely get inspired by other idiots threads for their thread spam, so sometimes it's kinda hard to tell all the idiots apart.
^
Yay gay warrior tard is back.
>BRADLEY
>WARRIOR
>BRADLEY
>WARRIOR
>BRADLEY
>WARRIOR
>BRADLEY
>WARRIOR
>BRADLEY
>WARRIOR
>BRADLEY
>WARRIOR
why not both lol
RARDEN is 2x3 clips though? 2 fit in the magazine? 6 rounds of HE or AP or will surely do in whatever 3rd world armor you're having a go at? Still wouldn't choose it personally though.