BMD-4 vs ZBD 04

After playing the ZBD04A I do think it is slightly overtiered, both the 2S38 and BMP-2M are much better and only .3 BR higher while the BMD-4 is .7 lower in BR and is much closer in performance.

In my opinion the main problem is the mediocre mobility (24hp/t but slow acceleration, bad traction characteristics and ~35°/s turret rotation speed compared to 60°/s on the BMD) + a fairly large chassis make it not great as a scout. 9.0 or 9.3 would be more appropriate.


Yeah, 7.3 or something lmao, still doesn’t change they put it at 9.0 so I compare it to other 9.0 vehicles.

Now even the P version is higher than 7.3, with 66mm of pen at the most pointless BR ever.

The ATGM reload is the same on the BMD-4… You’re thinking of the BMP-3…
The armor doesn’t really mean much when it’s a light tank with relatively light tank protection regardless…

The ZBD 04 gets APFSDS, and gets twice as many ATGMs.

1 Like

APFSDS, LWS, commander thermals, twice as many ATGMS, better protection.

How is this even a real question? The ZBD is a lot better overall.

1 Like

When the BMD can be .50 cal’ed, yes armour matters

And you completely disregard the IMPOSSIBLY better mobility on the BMD-4, and its adjustable suspension which allows for extremely high depression angles greater than even 10 degrees…

The BMD is still pretty hard to 50cal frontally, while both the BMD and ZBD04A can be 50cal’d from the side since the lower side armor of the ZBD is only 20mm…

I personally think the ZBD04A could go as high as even 10.0 if it were modeled accurately (spall liners and 670hp) - but currently it’s not a very great 9.7 at all.

“Impossibly”, uh-huh.

Yes it has mobility, but mobility is not the only metric that makes tanks great in War Thunder. The ZBD is not a slow IFV.

1 Like

The ZBD’s considerably lower hp/t, much worse track traction characteristics and 80% slower reverse make it “impossibly” slower than the BMD-4. Impossibly because it isn’t the case in real life, but it is in-game. As the ZBD is severely nerfed from its real life characteristics.

Make a bug report if you think its wrong.

Either way, the ZBD is still better.

It also has worse turret rotation of 20 vs 35, worse reverse of 17 vs 70, worse ATGM of 600 vs 750, worse post pen on APFSDS for some reason, no idea about what gen thermals as Gaijin thinks that not relevant to put on the statcard, 20x zoom on the BMD and 11x on the ZBD, 20 degree targeting vs 34, 20 rounds first stage ammo opposed to almost double at 38.


Bug reports have already been made and acknowledged. It’s not about bug reports - buffs/nerfs (both historical and unhistorical) are delivered on whims.

The ZBD isn’t “better”, it’s a sidegrade trading mobility for “survivability and armor” (in quotations because your “armor” argument is simply wrong). Its main advantage is the APFSDS which is something the BMD could also use IRL - but doesn’t, and is given a very advantageous BR because of that. The ZBD04A at 9.0 (or at least 9.3) would also have a superior lineup to 9.7 - where there’s just one other light tank in the Chinese tree…

You think its armor is anything special but literally any autocannon goes through when spammed at it, as there are weakspots everywhere (for lower caliber weapons, anything larger than 30mm obviously goes through regardless). The only thing that doesn’t go through as easily as it does on the BMD are 50cals - which still don’t go through frontally on either of them.

If the ZBD04A had its (ACKNOWLEDGED) spall liners - you could make the argument that its considerably more survivable, but it has not gotten them.

First we had to hear the whining about how Gaijin wouldn’t possibly make a China IFV better than a USSR one.

Then when it released and it was better, the story changed to how just ‘unfair’ it is the better IFV is at a higher BR.

They didn’t.

It isn’t.

Uh huh.

That ATGM penetration difference of 150mm is also perfectly enough to not go through many notable armors in the game. The 750mm ATGM on the BMD can go through the Abrams and Leopard 2 hulls, for example - the 600mm ATGM is just perfectly weak enough to not go through, even with tandem.

That’s one HUGE downside over the BMD-4 that people haven’t realized yet. You can test it yourself.

This type of narrative is always a good way to look dumb if you pretend that everyone is some sort of hivemind and that the same people that said A are the same people that said B.

1 Like

Didn’t say they were.

You said the story changed, that implies exactly that.

1 Like

The community predominant story. The community goes through these phases every major update.