Burden of proof lil’ bud. Can’t prove it? Then don’t talk.
And the the fantasy weapon was a response to the “begleit uses a real VT”.
That’s what it is? It’s an HE-VT round that was originally developed for marine use.
I also can draw something, build it out of wood and say it will carry a laser cannon in battle.
Well, that’s exactly what BMP-2Ms APFSDS is, but suit yourself.
I literally told you why i wont do it. Takes too much time. Do it yourself.
So? I can also say it will carry iglas, still didn’t happen.
I don’t know, remove it then idc, but i am also not the guy crying.
So do like I said, and just don’t talk about stuff if you’re unwilling to back your argument up - much easier to do imo.
So? I can also say it will carry iglas, still didn’t happen.
Sure, lets see if you have any proof of that.
You know what is even easier ? Stop crying about a tank and just acknowledge that it is a skill issue.
The proof is, that the tank never made it to a series production. What tf else you want.
ah so you want to say the gun that the bagel uses is fake ?XD
?
???
its a NAVAL GUN so ofc it would have acces to that round, if they would have purchased it or not is a different case
ye you are the guy saying bla bla half tech tree
And then you won’t list them
Weird
Wait, you’re the guy who came over to the 2A7V thread and started crying about people complaining in regards to the tank’s model, aren’t you?
Pot calling kettle black lmao.
The proof is, that the tank never made it to a series production. What tf else you want.
In other words “trust me bro”. To be fair, you’re putting a stain on the actual Karpov’s name, so just get out of here young man.
I’d rather Gaijin re label this vehicle as a SPAAG like its supposed to be and give it guided projectile (3UO7) then give it a BR raise.
Also, this vehicle is supposed to have a radar of sorts, maybe get that modeled too.
Very interesting what you identify as crying.
Funny, everytime i come in here, i immediatly feel smarter after reading some of your guys diarrhea.
Surely the way of “standing on the high ground and pointing fingers at others" is the best for debate
Its best to think before you expressing, it makes you sounds nothing but a child who has not grown up
Good that i care so much what a stranger on the internet thinks about me.
yeah, make sense.
is your choice anyway
Whatever makes you sleep better at night mate.
Funny, everytime i come in here, i immediatly feel smarter after reading some of your guys diarrhea.
You’re compensating? Alright, should’ve just said so at the beginning.
It is fabrication. There is no evidence that the 2S38, which was shown off as a ANTI-AIR tech demonstrator would receive an APFSDS or APCBC round. Even if the gun CAN fire them, that does not mean it would do so. Therefore, giving the vehicle a dart and filler round is, by definition, fabrication.
That’s an interesting take when the entire Forum was screaming about the 2M and Puma for ages.
It’s also strange that I saw with my very own eyes, a BMP-2M hitting an F-16 flying past mach with a proximity missile.
Yes, most IFV are not all that strong, however, the BMP-2M is an exception. Not only does it have an insane fire rate with really good penetration for the caliber, but it also has 4 ready to go multi-purpose ATGM missiles it can fire on the move. You can say that’s not that strong all you want, but you can’t argue that it’s absurd compared to other IFV at the BR.
People complaining about BMP-2M are just people unfamiliar with IFV playstyles used against them, that’s it.
BMP-2M is as strong as M3A3 and Strf 9040 BILL.
Firing on the move doesn’t matter when the large maps all have cover.
This does not work on my because I’ve used both the Bradley series and BMP-2 series. Although you won’t see the BMP-2M on my profile because it was my friend’s account while I was over at his house.
Here’s the thing about the BILL and M3A3.
The BILL and M3A3 can’t fire their missiles on the move. The BMP-2M can.
The BILL is a pretty good IFV, but it has limitations the same as the Bradley of which there are many.
Comparing the Bradley to the 2M paints an even more damning picture. The 2M has over DOUBLE the fire rate of the Bradley with a higher penetration round AND can fire missiles on the move WHILE moving faster than the Bradley.
They are not equal nor near in performance. One of these vehicles is objectively better than the other.
I’ve used the M3A3 and BMP2M plenty. To compare the two as equal is crazy.
Firing missiles on the move is a gimmick.
BMP-2M is not superior. Russia lied to you.
I genuinely cannot comprehend such a statement. The main killing power of an IFV is the missile, so having it available at all times is a huge advantage.
I see. You’ve lost all reason or ability to think critically.
I’ve given you evidence, and you refuse to accept logic.