yes
Classic assuming what other people play, it’s boring tbh. I haven’t even researched the USSR 11.3 tanks yet, but I have toptier in Germany, Sweden, Japan, China and France.
I mostly play Sweden, Germany, Japan and Italy these days, with some USSR in between, but only at 10.3 and 11.0. I played alot of Sweden toptier shortly before and alot after the the last update dropped, from stock up. Russian tanks are NOT a problem to kill, even with DM33. Get your head out of your butt and learn where to aim for which enemy.
Armor is okay, yet you have the lower plate that’s butter and the gun mantlet that is easy to hit, disabling the breech and killing a crew member, if not two when you’re lucky.
Gun handling is below average. Turret rotation is straight average, vertical targeting angles are bad. That’s for both negative and positive gun elevation. I don’t know how you get the impression that it’s “one of the best”, when it outshines almost noone.
“one of the best thermals” yeah so does anyone else that isn’t a Leopard or Abrams, and even some of those have good thermals. The difference between gen 2 and gen 3 thermals is small, and doesn’t matter on most maps.
Spall liners are good, but for a T-90M, they don’t help as much against well aimed shots as they do on Leopards, for example. With the T-90M, it’s easy to hit 2 crew in the turret from the side with just your dart and no spall, and from the front the spall liner doesn’t help with gun mantlet or lower plate shots much. A Leopard has better spaced crew so the spall liner helps more with getting shot in the side.
They do help alot against badly aimed shots, and it is an advantage over not having them for sure, but it’s not like the T-90M is the only tank with spall liners.
Most toptier shells are really good. I’ve used 3BM60 on the T90A but I like DM53 more. Type 10, m/95 and even OFL 120 F1 or DTC10-125 are still more than you need. And like I said earlier, even DM33 is usually good enough for toptier. The armor on all weakspots is bad enough.
It lacks reload speed.
It lacks reverse speed, which makes you a sitting duck when your shot didn’t disable your target or you get your gun or breech destroyed. Or when you’re getting engaged by multiple enemies. You simply can’t get into back into cover with a measely -3km/h.
It lacks gun depression to make use of its strong turret, or simply good positions on ridgelines in general.
It’s not a terrible tank at all, but its pros don’t “easily exceeds its cons”. It has good armour and spall liners against badly aimed shots, it has one of the stronger rounds, it has nice-to-have subsystems (LWS, gen3 thermals), and it has a low profile.
But it’s mobility and gun handling are average at their best stats and terrible at their worst stats, with the -3km/h reverse being especially debilitating, its post-pen survivability is hindered by having only 3 easy to hit crew, easy to hit and detonate fuel tanks, and ammo that kills the crew on detonation. Yes, it doesn’t always detonate, but it still often does, even if you didn’t aim for it.
It’s pretty much an average tank with more pronounced pros and cons than something like an Abrams. It’s better than Arietes, Merkavas, CR2s, on a comparable level to Leclercs, Abrams and Type99As, but it’s worse than Leopard 2s, Type 10s or even the T-80BVM (which comes with much better mobility and a better reload).
Please try a game in the T-90M and then play a Strv122 or Type 10, see what great tanks are made of. If all you are capable of is pressing W and disregard all tactics like flanking, sniping, retreating if neccessary and so on, yes, the T-90M is probably the best tank for this specific playstyle, I’ll give you that. But it’s a terrible playstyle to begin with and other tanks with better mobility and reload will give you much better options with anything else.
I mean, if I take all the pros you listed and apply “don’t get hit” and “be good at spotting tanks and aiming”, suddenly there are no pros left. I think that is telling alot.
2 Likes
It has worse gun handling than the SEPv2, what are you smoking
2 Likes
Except firepower is not only penetration, you can’t conveniently ignore the 1.8 seconds faster reload that all Abramses have with expert crew.
And reverse being much more useful than any of the advantages that the T-90M has.
1 Like
It doesn’t. Iirc the elevation and vertical speeds are both 40°/s which is slightly better than the SEPv2 in terms of elevation speed.
You mean the same crew that instantly gets vaporized or gets reduced half of its number by single shot? You sound like Abrams are impenetrable fortress while in game 80 percent of the time you will roll on battlefield with 3 crew at best.
According to who, you? Every person who defends Russian vehicles gives the same good old reverse speed excuse while in practise it doesnt even matter that much.
İf you’re in a position where you cant get into cover in 4 seconds then better reverse speed will not matter in that case, since 4 second will not be enough for any tanks most of the time that argument becomes pretty irrevelant in practise for most of the time.
Also i like the part where you purposely ignored T-90M’s all advantages and focused on only 2 cons.
2 Likes
İn terms elevation its 15 degrees faster then SEPV2 which makes a huge difference and since you love those kind of Numbers it becomes pretty funny that you’re ignoring that massive advantage.
2 Likes
You’re more likely to fuel explosion than get an ammo explosion with Russian tanks. So yes but the lower glacis is a tiny target and half the time volumetric fucks you over and makes the round vanish.
1 Like
And thats why there was no new german top tier MBT between new power (end of 2020) and sons of attila, where they added Leopard 2 POS without its beak making it a sidegrade to 2A5 at best.
But sure german vehicles get added 1-2 years earlier than they should.
Leopard 2a5. Leopard 2a6. Try to spin this
Not that it could actually use that much to it’s advantage since both it’s positive and negative elevation are severely limit. -6° to 13° isn’t much room to aim up or down.
1 Like
True, but only because they’re so dang easy to explode via fuel. if you go through the lower glacis, the fuel gets hit first and usually explodes, and if it doesn’t there’s a decent chance it’s either the ammo detonating instead or shrapnell killing one of the turret crew in addition to the driver, destroying the vehicle.
The lower glacis is NOT a tiny target, it’s almost as big as the upper glacis and very easy to hit <500m, which is most engagements in WT. Even at 1km+ it’s still pretty easy with LRFs.
I also have never had a volumetric issue with it since it’s a perfectly flat plate with nothing else nearby to screw with your dart. There’s more volumetric problems with the driver’s port.
Leopard 2A5 was added in 1.87 Locked On together with chally 2, m1a1 ariete pre-serie and t80u. Back then it had some 480mm pen sabot shell (like all top tier MBTs bar i think arietes that had 625mm if i recall correctly). Leclerc and ariete were added next patch. And next patch ariete PSO was added.
M1A2, strv122, merkava mk3D in the US tree (back then it had 625mm pen sabot), cv90-120 (back then it had 625mm pen sabot), challenger 2F, T-72B3 were already in game; T-90A and strv122b plss got added the same patch (new power).
So the Leopard 2A6 didnt really add any capability that wasnt already in game. Still its slightly better 2A4 hull (ie. terrible armor) and 2A5 turret.
So i dont really need to spin anything.
You however need to stop being such massive cry baby with victim complex because people can prove that you are wrong just by opening the damn wiki.
Lucky that people like you have mods here to protect them.
2 Likes
I could tell you the same thing about the T-90M armor and survivability lol. If you are in a position where you need to rely on it’s armor and survivability you already made a lot of mistakes in you gameplay.
If you are in such a position a good player will likely kill you no matter how “good” your armor and survivability is.
1 Like
Except unlike reverse speed armor and survivability on T-90M are not situational.
Both features are consistent elements on T-90M while having better reverse speed becomes pretty irrevelant on most cases.
İf this wasnt the case Abrams wouldnt suffer that much while Leo2A7V and Strv122 was ruling the battlefield.
1 Like
They kind of are in the T-90Ms case. Just because you can’t aim against them doesn’t mean nobody else can as well.
I 1 tap T-90Ms 90% of the time, where is their armor and survivability at?
They rule the battlefield because they combine armor with actual survivability (spall liners and crew spacing) and actually good forward and reverse mobility. This makes them so braindead to play.
1 Like
İf that were true Strv122,Leo2A7V and T-90M wouldnt be that survivable .
İts funny considering T-90M offers same capabilities minus crew space but considering average T-series tanks loves absorbs more shell then regular Nato tanks crew space isnt the problem in that case.
İs that the reason why none of them couldnt rule the battlefield before introduction of Spall Liners? Cause before that Russia was simply ruling the top tier.
1 Like
T-90M is not that survivable.
- spall liners are alot less effective with terrible crew layout
- T-series were NOT absorbing shells, your shots just sucked.
Wrong. Sweden was already the king of toptier even before the spall liners, and Germany was very strong too. There’s a reason a chunk of the community was crying that Germany doesn’t need any more toptier Leopards beyond the base 2A5 and 2A6, back when people were asking for a third toptier Leopard because some other nations had 3-4 toptier tanks already.
1 Like
Simply lie.
Another lie.
And another lie.
Do you have anything other then lies and playing victim card? İts quite boring tbh.
3 Likes
Lmao, just saying “lie” to everything doesn’t support your argument in any way. You’re out of arguments, so I’ve won here it seems.
1 Like