48 minutes ago, ANDROMADA said:

Why?

 

 

Because of Leopard 2A5, Ariete and Leclerc.

Btw., T-90MS is export T-90, so not as good as T-90M which could also be included.

 

Don't worry, US should get M1A2 at the same time.

Edited by jackTIGR
medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the M1A2 gets M829A2 and the Leopard 2A5 gets DM53. Only then can I see MS being needed 

Edited by WulfPack
  • Like 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 02/07/2019 at 13:23, jackTIGR said:

 

Because of Leopard 2A5, Ariete and Leclerc.

Btw., T-90MS is export T-90, so not as good as T-90M which could also be included.

 

Don't worry, US should get M1A2 at the same time.

gib back 200mm gun trunion and fix the shot-trap on 2A5 turret, also gib DM53 otherwise no :)

  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, AkaNeumann said:

gib back 200mm gun trunion and fix the shot-trap on 2A5 turret, also gib DM53 otherwise no :)

Sure if MS gets 3BM60

  • Confused 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, WulfPack said:

Sure if MS gets 3BM60

We want 2A7+ then w/DM63 then

Gotta keep the powercreep alive, right? /s

Edited by AkaNeumann
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MuricaxSuffers said:

DM63 says hello  ;)

 

 

32 minutes ago, AkaNeumann said:

We want 2A7+ then w/DM63 then

Gotta keep the powercreep alive, right? /s

That brings MS to an equal level of firepower...

  • Confused 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, WulfPack said:

 

That brings MS to an equal level of firepower...

3BM60 is Svinets-2, right?

I guess L/55 w/DM63 would be needed then. Should be about 30mm more penetration than 3BM-60 if i recall correctly.

Edited by AkaNeumann
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

11 hours ago, AkaNeumann said:

gib back 200mm gun trunion and fix the shot-trap on 2A5 turret, also gib DM53 otherwise no :)

 

5 hours ago, MuricaxSuffers said:

DM63 says hello  ;)

 

DM53, DM53A1 and DM63 are all, penetration-wise, the same. The only change was the different propellant to stop massive pressure spikes in DM53 that would cause significant wear on the gun barrel. 

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, AkaNeumann said:

guess L/55 w/DM63 would be needed then. Should be about 30mm more penetration than 3BM-60 if i recall correctly.

Why should it be with a higher penning 2A6? The 2A5 already has better mobility and similar armor levels.

  • Confused 2
  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, WulfPack said:

Why should it be with a higher penning 2A6? The 2A5 already has better mobility and similar armor levels.

cuz why not ?2a6 is needed.

Edited by MuricaxSuffers
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Mememeist3r said:

 

 

DM53, DM53A1 and DM63 are all, penetration-wise, the same. The only change was the different propellant to stop massive pressure spikes in DM53 that would cause significant wear on the gun barrel. 

Depends on the gun. If shot from L/55 they should have about 10% more penetration than if shot from L/44 because more velocity.

Also DM53A1 and DM63 are the same thing.

Edited by AkaNeumann

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to mention, the last time DM53 and 3BM60 were here, DM53 had about 50 more mm of pen.

55 minutes ago, MuricaxSuffers said:

cuz why not ?2a6 is needed.

Most definitely isn't.

Edited by WulfPack
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, WulfPack said:

Not to mention, the last time DM53 and 3BM60 were here, DM53 had about 50 more mm of pen.

Most definitely isn't.

If Russia "is" to get T-90M/MS w/3BM-60 that gets rid of most frontal weakspots with its ERA placement on the frontal arc (upper glacis), then we most definietly need things like 2A5 w/D-tech armour or Leopard 2IMP configuration to even be capable of matching it with hull armour (and most likely it wouldn't)

The last time 3BM60 and DM53 were here, both Leopard 2A5 and T-90A had made up armour values and both had regenerative steering

Edited by AkaNeumann
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, AkaNeumann said:

If Russia "is" to get T-90MS w/3BM-60 that gets rid of most frontal weakspots with its ERA placement it's on front,

Good. It still has those massive flat areas near the gun, no composite for the drivers optics, and a decent sized turret ring

30 minutes ago, AkaNeumann said:

then we most definietly need things like 2A5 w/D-tech armour

Isn't that what I said?

30 minutes ago, AkaNeumann said:

T-90A had regenerative steering

It shouldn't have had that. Not even M has that.

Edited by WulfPack
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, WulfPack said:

Good. It still has those massive flat areas near the gun and no composite for the drivers optics 

Isn't that what I said?

It shouldn't have had that. Not even M has that.

T-90M/MS turret w/ERA is the equivalent of Leopard 2A5 turret for the first shot depending on the type of ammo that was shot at it. But generally T-90MS turret should have the same weakspots as 2A5 does (under the gun) and slightly to the left and right from where the breach is. But at least its hull wouldn't be "Shot anywhere as you please )))" as it is with Leopards and other western MBTs.

 

If you did say that, i'm sorry but i have must missed it, but i don't think you did say that imo. And Leopard 2A5 and T-90MS armour levels wouldn't be similar at all, T-90MS would outclass 2A5 frontally and be comparable (maybe slightly worse on the turret or slightly better).

 

I agree it shouldn't, but it had because gaijin. I'd love to have my Western MBTs with their special trait, i.e regenerative steering modelled imo.

Edited by AkaNeumann

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AkaNeumann said:

And Leopard 2A5 and T-90MS armour levels wouldn't be similar at all, T-90MS would outclass 2A5 frontally and be comparable (maybe slightly worse on the turret or slightly better).

That's fine if does have better armor for the initial engagement. The 2A5 shouldn't have the D-Tech wedges flying off when hit tho. If the gun hits hard enough to remove them, it probably went through the 2A5 turret and the hull of the one behind it. The 2A5 still has mobility in it's favor. 70kmh vs 65-70kmh forward, 30kmh vs 4kmh reverse, and about 25 hp/t vs 23.5 hp/t

I misremembered the weight of the T-90A being 48.5 when it is actually 46.5 tons. This made me believe the T-90MS/M would actually be 49-50 tons and not 48 tons. My bad. 

1 hour ago, AkaNeumann said:

I agree it shouldn't, but it had because gaijin. I'd love to have my Western MBTs with their special trait, i.e regenerative steering modelled imo.

I think I misunderstood you. I thought you meant neutral steering. My bad. Did they have regenerative steering modeled? Why not bring it here? IIRC, @Choogleblitz mentioned that Soviet tanks have had regenerative steering since the 1950s

Edited by WulfPack
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, WulfPack said:

That's fine if does have better armor for the initial engagement. The 2A5 shouldn't have the D-Tech wedges flying off when hit tho. If the gun hits hard enough to remove them, it probably went through the 2A5 turret and the hull of the one behind it. The 2A5 still has mobility in it's favor. 70kmh vs 60-65kmh forward, 30kmh vs 4kmh reverse, and about 25 hp/t vs 23-22.5 hp/t

I think I misunderstood you. I thought you meant neutral steering. My bad. Did they have regenerative steering modeled? Why not bring it here? IIRC, @Choogleblitz mentioned that Soviet tanks have had regenerative steering since the 1950s

I know, that's the special trait of Russian MBTs and i'm fine with it. But in the current state, 2A5 is bugged beyond saving. Wrong transmission and gear number meaning it's slower than it should be, it loses too much speed (RPMs) when turning and sometimes even stops completely (i have 2A5 spaded and it still happens) while T-80U drives around as if it had arcade settings, same with M1A1. D-tech wedges flying off when hit by HEAT-FS (shouldn't) and even by APFSDS sometimes, they also sometimes let rounds just fly through and phase through composite as if there wasn't any (experienced it at least 2 times. It also lost 200mm trunion (2A4 syndrome) for reasons and the wedges form a shot trap i.e bounce sabots down the hull when they shouldn't and they shouldn't do it at all, they were designed not to be a shot trap in real life but somehow are in the game (experienced this too in my 2A5 even on flat terrain). 

2A5 needs bug fixing ASAP because playing it with all those bugs affecting it feels like masochism (playing 2A4 and 2K feels just so much better even though they're both outlcassed by every new T7).

 

As of now, no tank in the game has regenerative steering modeled, not a single russian MBTs has neutral steering (i recall T-80U should have imo) and if he has documents on regenerative steering for Soviet tanks, he should make a bug report but i don't think T-55/62/64/72 had it. We have videos of them having to lock their tracks in order to do turns while MBTs with true regerative steering doesn't have to do that.

I don't know about T-80U/90A/90M and later variants though.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, AkaNeumann said:

I know, that's the special trait of Russian MBTs and i'm fine with it. But in the current state, 2A5 is bugged beyond saving. Wrong transmission and gear number meaning it's slower than it should be, it loses too much speed (RPMs) when turning and sometimes even stops completely (i have 2A5 spaded and it still happens) while T-80U drives around as if it had arcade settings, same with M1A1. D-tech wedges flying off when hit by HEAT-FS (shouldn't) and even by APFSDS sometimes, they also sometimes let rounds just fly through and phase through composite as if there wasn't any (experienced it at least 2 times. It also lost 200mm trunion (2A4 syndrome) for reasons and the wedges form a shot trap i.e bounce sabots down the hull when they shouldn't and they shouldn't do it at all, they were designed not to be a shot trap in real life but somehow are in the game (experienced this too in my 2A5 even on flat terrain). 

2A5 needs bug fixing ASAP because playing it with all those bugs affecting it feels like masochism (playing 2A4 and 2K feels just so much better even though they're both outlcassed by every new T7).

Yeah it needs fixed

24 minutes ago, AkaNeumann said:

(i recall T-80U should have imo)

I don't know about T-80U/90A/90M and later variants though.

Soviets won't get neutral steering until T-14

 

Edited by WulfPack
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, AkaNeumann said:

Depends on the gun. If shot from L/55 they should have about 10% more penetration than if shot from L/44 because more velocity.

Also DM53A1 and DM63 are the same thing.

Obviously. What I was saying is that they are all the same pen-wise provided they were fired from the same gun. 

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 23/07/2019 at 17:33, Necrons31467 said:

 

Way before that, IS-series had it.

From what i know, even T-72A in game should have regenerative steering. I've watched a few videos of both Polish PT-91s and Czech T-72M4s and all of them turn nicely even at 30kph+ while in game they would come to a dead stop because one track locks itself.

 

This is an example.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i do think if Gayjin wants to keep there game alive, even with powercreep, they will add the T-90 line...  With Leclerc and 2A5 still being the best MBT´s... it would be in order to see later T-90s models,  a hulldown 2a5 is still the best... Ariete cant pen it.. leclerc can be penned.. you could say T80U is good hulldown. but the gundepression takes away most locations it can use..  and the argue about 80s tanks fighting 90s-00s tanks cant be used here... its a game.. if Russian MBT´s is first as competetive in a 00s model vs a 80s Nato tank, so be it...  Abrams will most likely get there H model soon.. 2A5 will maybe get a new round, but its still good... hearing players cry about,, waaaaaa i cant point and click every tank... i want a better round... makes me sick, go play WoT or CoD plz...  if the later T-90s will be almost inpen frontaly, so be it.. i still think, you can snipe trough drivers hatch, or gunbreech like every other. plus those tanks will get 1 shot if even caught in a slight angle..    players who cry about 2A5s being bad now. are players who rush in with the head cut off and gets killed. like every other tank..  

 

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.