3BM42 and 3BM42-2

Machinery of War Discussion Ground Vehicle
244

Refer to this topic explaining in detail which textolite overperforms (not all do):

Textolite underperforming as you imply would mean M111 would suddenly become unable to penetrate the T-72A UFP in-game(can already barely do it at 500m without the plate add-on), which we know is factually not possible since the Soviets added the 16mm to prevent M111 going through the T-72A hull at longer range.

On the other hand, Gaijin only using added weight to improve the SEP v3 hull without even considering the reality that composites have advanced since 1979, that better protection can now be achieved for similar weight and that they consider the SEP v3 having exactly the same composite setup as the 1979 M1 other than added weight is absolutely ridiculous.

Though I’m not sure why I even bother replying. You’ve always been one of the most rabid pro-Russian people on this forum and I’m certain nothing productive will come out of this discussion because that’s nearly always the case with you.

2 Likes
245

My SEPv3 is sitting at a 74% winrate iirc. US top tier ground is incredible at the moment.

1 Like
246

Oh yes, the US is great again. This is likely due to the introduction of anti-radiation missiles; the US has finally obtained a HARM missile that is just as effective as the Kh-38MT.

1 Like
247

The bmpt, with the only spot im REALISTICALLY able to pen being the lfp which is real hard when i cant aim down sights.

If im still shocked whenever that actualy happens i dont think its that common, especially when the usual effect is nothing (not even taking out its other missiles). Also having an ammo crate means it doesnt matter half the time.

There is simply no world where im convinced the bmpt shouldnt be 12.7 until russian armour is either fixed or were allowed rounds that are able to ufp them.

248

Ammo crate isn’t infinite.

BMPTs are seemingly doing fine at 11.7.
Their armor getting fixed might actually result in them dropping down in BR, as that’s their biggest selling point.

249

I did have a paragraph but it seems like im barking up the wrong tree, if you struggle with the bmpt thats on you at this point ngl. If you want to have fun in it then be my guest but dont expect me to think highly of you.

250

this is how I know your not playing alot

at least as a solo

1 Like
251

I’m not using BMPTs.
Just saying how they don’t look that scary at 11.7.

252

In my 100 games of top tier US so far after the update I haven’t seen CAS decide the game for the US that often.

It was mostly just Abrams stomping the ever living shit out of the Russian ground teams.

253

Almost 100 games and around a 2.9 K/D in it so far.

Played with 1-2 other players (queued as Britain) for about 20ish of those games from memory.

254

Not due to the tanks.

BMPT ragebaiting people into leaving games after 1 death and Mi-28NM with pre nerf LMUR caused it, partially Kh-38’s but they were getting most of the time shot down by Multi Vehicle SAM’s, russian MBT’s themselves have been mid for the better part of 3+ years now, and that’s me being generous including release T-90M and prenerf spall liners, and even then it was worse than the 2A7’s and 122’s

Russian MBT’s are flawed by design and only do well when being used against bad players or when catching you off guard (in which case any MBT can do that fine), doesn’t help Gaijin artificially buffed their gun handling (via using sight speeds for the 40/40), which if reverted, would add gun handling to the list of things they do badly.

255

K/D doesn’t mean squat. I have a 3 K/D in it with a current W/R of 54% atm with it going down as the day goes on. And thats because my squad got off.

this is completely false now I know your talking poo poo because CAS has 100% decided almost every match I have been in, especially with the SU-30 spam and the amount of MI-28s in almost every game.

1 Like
256

Ah yes so my experiences are invalid because they differ from yours? Most of the games I played were decided by ground in the end.

What server do you play on?

Agreed in this case. It’s easy to farm it by just sitting in the back and farm it. Maybe that is where the winrate difference comes from?

1 Like
257

I think this is due to recent sales and inexperienced players on the USSR side. Right now, when playing as the US, I see a team consisting mostly of SEPV2s, with practically no premium tanks.

258

When your claiming a 74% winrate with US solo yes I will 100% say that is false.

1 Like
259

I can also just as easily claim that your winrates are low for different reasons. Neither of us has any ground to say they are more right than the other anyway.

I’ll play even more solo games today/tomorrow and show you my winrate in those.

2 Likes
260

I agree that US doesn’t win with their CAS. However, they win by preventing RU CAS.

For me, since the patch, every game RU won has been decided by CAS, no actual skill involved. Almost every game they lost, their CAS couldn’t affect the match enough, either because they had like 2 Mi-28NM farming 10 kills but being so stomped in the match that it couldn’t save them, or their CAS was shot down after 1-2 kills.

I will say that I did almost all my matches with 1 friend who play Sweden and make it his duty to spawn a stream of SACLOS AA and cheap jets to deny Mi-28NM. He often ends the match with 6 air kills or more(This is how bad RU CAS is).

Lol, Lmao even.

LMUR is still as good as before. It still has an insane top-down profile compared to JAGM, can still reliably one-tap, and is still probably the most broken combo in the game when combined with Kh-38, Pantsir SM-SV, and ‘Free’ Pantsir S1 backup.

Easily a third(with more to Kh-38) if not more of my death have been to LMURs in the SEP v3. In fact, my last 5 or 6 SEP v3 first spawn deaths have been only to LMUR a few days ago, which led me to take a break from top tier again because being a point pinata to broken RU CAS is only fun for a while.

EU/CIS

1 Like
261

Read again my comment, nowhere in my post i implied textolite was underperforming. I specifically mentioned complex multilayer arrays ( Obj.184 series and such ).

So this is the origin of your confusion ?

Here’s the problem. When you write an equation like 2.67(150X + 60Y) = protection, you’re forcing every effect that isn’t the steel plate into the single variable Y. That variable is not “the effectiveness of textolite.” It’s a residual that absorbs everything the model omits, the actual interaction between layers, spacing effects, the way a composite block defeats a long rod differently than isolated plates, bulging, dwell, the yaw induced in the penetrator, and simple sourcing differences in the in-game values. Calling Y “textolite’s kinetic modifier” bakes in the assumption that textolite contributes identically regardless of what surrounds it, regardless of the state of the projectile before reaching it ( fracture, bending, yaw ) then treats the failure of that assumption as evidence of a bug.

Composite armor is explicitly not a linear sum of its layers. The entire reason composite arrays exist is that the array behaves nonlinearly the same filler between different plate thicknesses, at different total stack depths, against a rod of different L/D and velocity, does not contribute a fixed number of “RHa-equivalent millimeters.” Layer thicknesses differ between the T-64A, T-64B, and T-80U arrays, steel hardness differs, and the total array depth and layering differ. Feeding all of that through a formula that assumes linear additivity guarantees that the leftover Y will vary wildly.

The 540% “swing” is the model breaking down, not the material changing !

See this is the issue , you don’t understand the argument which you are supposedly responding to so instead of countering the actual arguments ( which you can’t ) you resort to name-calling … then you have the nerve to blame the other party because nothing productive comes out of your own wrongdoings …

I could easely return you the favor and call you one of the most rabid anti-Russian ( we are talking about Soviet stuff here but I suppose it’s all just red to you ). I have no need to, though. And you know why? Because I can actually engage with your points and debunk them with valid criticism. I don’t need to guess at your motives.

Take care.

262

I understand it perfectly, and I could respond, but doing so properly would require hours of research to put together a thorough, accurate rebuttal. That’s something I neither have the time nor, especially now that I have a child, the desire to do.

That is particularly true given the kind of discussions we’ve had before on the old forum. You tend to select and interpret data in ways that support your conclusions while dismissing or ignoring information that contradicts them, rather than evaluating the full body of evidence and drawing conclusions from it as a whole.

As a result, your posts often have the appearance of being highly scientific and well-informed. However, when someone takes the time to examine the underlying evidence, what you send frequently comes across as arguments shaped by a pro-Russian view rather than by a balanced assessment of the available facts.

You even use the term ‘SVO’ unironically as a person living in France. The story writes itself.

So yeah, not only do I not want to engage in these technical discussions on the internet lately just to win an empty argument that will be forgotten by next week, but especially not with you.

Yep, take care.

263

Bro all my games are mostly 1 death leavers in the flippin click bait.