The BMPT shakes in fear at the might of the humble 50cal blowing up it’s missiles.
2 Likes
Let me get this straight: Play super passive, pray its a tank you can pen, and that he is rather dumb. And then you win in BMPT. Cinema honestly.
1 Like
Do you even know what this vehicle is stand for or rather why it was build in the first place? Let me tell you it wasn’t to counter enemy MBT’s directly.
Which is why its considered heavily armored ifv, not mbt.
Gee i wonder why.
Yup, try different apporach.
You shouldn’t even be in the exposed environment, it’s armor is crap.
1 Like
Actually, it was designed to destroy a variety of targets in an urban setting, heavy armour included. You know, to provide support to armoured columns entering a generally dangerous setting to standard armour.
1 Like
Rather ‘’ i prefer to check my surrondings before pushing like headless chicken so i dont get instantly deleted from battlefield’’ which you should do in any vehicle anyway.
Your whole counter argument is rather pointless, you guys acting like this vehicle should be immortal while destroying anything on its sight in fraction of time.
This is WarThunder.
1 Like
Just because it is Russian, doesn’t mean it should be at the whims of chance, instead of sound implementation. It being able to be used in a nonpassive manner is not “It should destroy everything”. It’s “It should be able to be used in a nonpassive manner”.
Main design idea was to support infantry while engaging with armored units and suppress enemy infantries, heavy armor encounters are the last options which is why it has dedicated ATGM’s to deal with it.
BMPT is a heavy tank, clearly.
Except you can do that and someone can still decide, I want you dead. Or you can catch someone out and he still gets a shot off on you.
When did we act like this? We are simply saying BMPT is overhyped and rather bleh, the 72 I am not even gonna mention.
1 Like
Its funny considering you guys always sell the armor protection to last thing we should rely on when it comes to mbts but situation quickly changes when it comes to BMPT, guess double standarts works fine when it suits you.
I did not once complain about the armor. In-fact I actually advocated for ERA to be reworked, which would be rather significant nerf for it.
I am simply complaining about the weaponry being unsuitable for this BR and an unworthy tradeoff for what you get in exchange.
What ?
Armor protection is it’s main selling point.
Mobility ? Meh.
Firepower ? Meh
1 Like
Even assuming they’re stating that, which your current exaggeration of the positions of interlocutors leads me to doubt, when BMPT only has armour as the saving grace then yes it should be able to rely on it. But I have not seen that crop up in an argument about it’s offensive capacity at the relevant rating, which would move it away from only having armour to rely on.
Yet basic rules still applies, should you expect dedicated mbts to perform spaa’s job effectively?
What kind of logic is that?
BMPT is heavily armored supporting vehicle, using warthunder naming logic will not save you in this case.
Not overhyping vehicles = Thinking it should drop down to 1.0.
Loads of people in this forum will actually think this.
1 Like
Which you can if you put some efforts while bein careful rather than pushing like an idiot and expecting to kill everything while relying on your armor.
Do i need to you to remind onion princible?
This topic was automatically closed after reaching the maximum limit of 10000 replies. Continue discussion at BMPT/72 BR Topic (Part 2).