BMPT/72 BR Topic (Part 1)

[Grossaaaa]

@AlvisWisla

If spall liners had an impact on win rate, where’s the evidence of Germany’s higher win rate from spall liners?

Spall liners had such an impact that Gaijin added the turret baskets to nato tanks so that they actually get disabled when shot from the side.

@AlvisWisla

If modules had an impact, where’s the evidence of NATO’s higher notably win rate when they were first added?

What modules are you even talking about? Half the modules of Nato MBTs are in the back of their turrets where they add nothing to general gameplay?

@AlvisWisla

If BMPT is so OP why am I fragging players far more skilled than I am when they’re in BMPT?

@AlvisWisla

While even T-72A will lolpen Challenger 2 with its external armor, M3A3 BMPT etc will struggle to find a spot to deal damage.

The Panzer 4 F2 can LFP and sideshot a chally, therefor Chally to 4.0? Panzer 4 to 12.0???

@AlvisWisla

If BMPT is so OP why am I fragging players far more skilled than I am when they’re in BMPT? Well, this one I’ll tell you: Challenger 2’s anti-HEAT armor add-on does wonders against autocannon-ATGM vehicles.

That is basically the only Nato MBT that doesn’t have a 2m high turret ring with 20mm of armor.

[An_Pigeon]

@SLHavoc

Yes the Abrams and Strv and Leo and XYZ are good vehicles when played by skilled players, I have even said that numerous times in this post and the other bias posts. A single skilled player cannot carry a team of 16. I love the Abrams, it is by far one of my favorite tank lines in the game, and they are very strong tanks IF you have all the right stuff for it.

Lets.not forget when m1 was added it caused the Match maker to get overhauled and reworked.

As it was so stupidly easy to play they completely filled teams

[H_ngma]

@AlvisWisla

Those are the facts.
But what have those facts accomplished?

Nothing.

Even if that was true (which it absolutely isn’t) then there’s still tons of additions to ground rb in general that were not MBTs but affected them nonetheless. More powerful CAS weapons, LDIRCM helis, multi vehicle spaa, all of that stuff impacts the way ground is played and the performance of the tech trees.

[Grossaaaa]

This is another thing. When the M1, Puma or whatever the hell Nato dominated and matchmakers had 150+ players queing for one nation, they got nerfed to shit in weeks.

BMPT casually gets an uptier that does nothing. While getting buffed with said uptier.

[An_Pigeon]

Not to forget just the agility of cas platforms.in general as well.

Like the newer munitions + the flight capabilities of it.
Hence why a su34 was such a leap over the su25.
Or the F16A over the 14

[AlvisWisla]

@SLHavoc
I do not care about being “correct”. I just want the game to be balanced.

It’s why I’m angry at win rates far more than you are. It’s why I’m ignoring nothing, and will continue to ignore nothing.

If a BMPT destroys my barrel, I reverse and repair, because I didn’t over-extend my position.

I didn’t say you said anything, let alone about BMPT survivability.

BMPT-72 is as survivable against Leopard 2A4 as Challenger 2 TES is against BMPT according to armor layouts and weapons involved. BMPT is a durable platform, something I’ve been stating since the beginning of this topic. It’s why I lobbied for a 2.0 - 2.3 BR difference between it at BMP3 based on the BR differences between Jumbo and lower Shermans, KV-122 and IS-4, etc.

That was the only time I ever defended the BMPT was when I was calling for it to move from 10.3 to at least 11.3, with 11.7 being plausible.
That was entirely without considering the MBTs at 11.3 and 11.7 as well.

@Grossaaaa
I didn’t post any anecdotal argument in my post. You responded to a joke question because it was to showcase Challenger 2 TES’s superior capabilities over Ariete at the same BR. The fact some tanks don’t have to worry about BMPT while others are extremely vulnerable is something to consider for.

Not sure why you’re demanding Challenger 2 be moved down… all because I demanded BMPT be moved up in the past?

I will repeat: I am not making claims that BMPT is not OP.

If any of you disagree with me that 11.7 is plausible for BMPT, I’d love to hear the argument of why 11.3 is fine for it.

I’d also love to hear any other arguments why increasing it to 11.7 is fine, cause maybe my own perspective on why moving it up to 11.7 isn’t the best reason.

12.0? I think I’d want some MBTs moved up with it at that stage; After all… the fact that Leopard 2A4 has to deal with rather powerful 11.7s firing only DM23 is the preliminary concern I have as-is.

Edits fixed errors in wording and potential incorrect meanings I want to portray.

[Grossaaaa]

@AlvisWisla

I didn’t post any anecdotal argument in my post. You responded to a joke question because it was to showcase Challenger 2 TES’s superior capabilities over Ariete at the same BR.

This is anecdotal evidence. You making claims without any proof is just that, anecdotal evidence.

I can link you the wikipedia page for that aswell if you’d like.

@AlvisWisla

I will repeat: I am not making claims that BMPT is not OP.

Yes you are. You want another collage of them like the M2K vs 29 post?

@AlvisWisla

If any of you disagree with me that 11.7 is plausible for BMPT, I’d love to hear the argument of why 11.3 is fine for it.

I’d also love to hear any other arguments why increasing it to 11.7 is fine, cause maybe my own perspective on why moving it up to 11.7 isn’t the best reason.

All of the sudden you agree that the BMPT needs to be moved up?! Almost like that other post where you were the only one stating that the Mig is better than the Mirage? To then only try to gaslight everyon into believing that you were with the general opnion and the data that backs it up??

[AlvisWisla]

@Grossaaaa
Questions are not evidence. Questions have never been evidence.

I used cross analysis to show that BMPT vs Challenger 2 shows Challenger 2 has advantage. I never used experience to come to any conclusions and never will.

Thanks for proving I never said “BMPT is not OP”.
Further proof I never said it’s not OP: The only result on the entire forum is me clarifying my post for others.

So yeah, still not saying “BMPT is not OP”.

Slaughtering BMPTs with Merkava Mk3 and Challenger 2 TES does NOT mean “BMPT is not OP”, it just means that if it is that those MBTs might need to be considered for BR movement as well.
Which to be fair, Leopard 2A4 vs Challenger 2 TES is a rather atrocious disparity in capabilities.

I don’t know why you keep inventing fan-fiction about me.
Oh look, here’s me in December saying that it needs to be at least 11.3:

BMPT/72 BR Topic

Okay. I’ve done a cross analysis. M4 Jumbo 75 is 2.0 BRs above 3.7 M4s, and 2.3 above the arguably under-BR’d M4s. M4 Jumbo 76 is 1.3 BRs above M4 76. IS-3 is 2.0 BRs above KV-122 while having 120% more armor. And IS-2 1944 is 1.3 BRs above KV-122 while having 50% more armor. Matlida is 1.3 BRs above A-13, and 1.7 above reserve. KV-220 is 1.0 BR above KV-85 while having ~25% more armor. At minimum I’m seeing 1.3, and at maximum I’m seeing 2.0 or 2.3. With this said… Let’s look at BMPT. B…

@AlvisWisla

BMPT has a massive armor upgrade over BMP-3, and is up to 80% superior to Namer 30 in protection.
1.3 higher is 10.7 where it is currently.
2.0 higher is 11.3.
And at the most arguable BR is 11.7.

And the wording error that was fixed: I accidentally typed “extreme” to mean “BR” instead of “BR”.

[An_Pigeon]

@Grossaaaa

link you the wikipedia page for that aswell if you’d like.

Use oxford dictionary mate always better.

[SLHavoc]

Statshark shows that you have TWENTY THREE (23) games in total in the Challenger 2 TES, only 12 of which have occurred since the BMPT released.

Statshark shows that you have 147 games in total in the Merkava Mk3, only THREE (3) of those have been since the BMPT released.

Statshark shows that you only have like 230 games IN TOTAL playing any nation besides Russia since the BMPT dropped in Rank 7/Rank 8 tanks.

What BMPTs are you “slaughtering”?

Again, you read what you want and ignore everything else to try to make yourself right. “I never said DIRECTLY BMPT is not OP, I only implied it with the things I said” AlvisGaslight, hero of the WT forums.

[AlvisWisla]

@SLHavoc
Me: “BMPT could be 11.7.”
Me: “BMPT could be 12.0 if at least some 11.7 MBTs move up with it.”

How is either of those takes implying BMPT is not OP?

The fact you’re accusing people of malice because we say BMPT can still be moved up is proof enough.

It’s obvious at this stage you’re not here for discussion.

Me: “BMPT can be 11.7 because 2.3 higher than BMP-3 makes sense based on KV-122 to IS-4M. And Challenger 2 TES is easily a good counter to BMPT still.”
“You’re using anecdotes to justify that position!”

Like, argue against my real points.
Don’t argue against strawmen you make up about me.

Either agree with me that BMPT can still be moved up, or actually argue against the real points I made.

And yeah, my KDR in Challenger 2 TES was 0.182:1 prior to me playing it against BMPTs. Shouldn’t have stock ground it in 12.7.

[SLHavoc]

@AlvisWisla

Why would I ever play an 11.7 BMPT when superior tanks are at 11.3 and 11.7: T-80U, T-80UK, T-90A, T-72B3…
Why would I harm the chances of my team winning by bringing a vehicle that is worse than T-80U?

@AlvisWisla

BMPT being able to penetrate pixel hunting spots =/= amazing offensive armament. Even Warrior can do that

@AlvisWisla

At 10.3 I have to face Soviet tanks that are far more powerful than BMPT: T-90A, T-72B3 Arena, T-72B3…

Every time I play 11.3/11.7 I slaughter BMPTs because the MBTs there are vastly superior to it.
Every time I play 10.3, especially USA as it’s stronger than German 10.7, I frag BMPTs easier than T-90A players because the BMPTs weapons are worse than T-90A’s.

@AlvisWisla

BMPT was OP during work hours for a number of days.
EBR was OP during work hours for months.

@AlvisWisla

I have no intent on playing the BMPT for a while personally, because I’m having fun fragging them with superior tanks.

@AlvisWisla

The tank in competent hands loses to a Challenger 2 in equally skilled hands.
And in some cases, BMPT players that are more skilled than I still end up losing to Chally 2 because Chally 2 has a lethality advantage over BMPT.
I can pen more spots on BMPT than it can pen on I.

@AlvisWisla

While Challenger 2 and T-80U are better tanks than BMPT… uhuh.

@AlvisWisla

I’ll talk about what’s better than BMPT: Challenger 2, T-72B3, T-80U [It’s in Sweden too].
And I can tell you effective BMPT hunters with less HEAT protection than the above: M1A1, Merkavas, IPM1, Ariete, MBT-2000…

“BaSeD oN mY CrOsS AnAlYsis” doesn’t mean shit, stat cards are pointless and mean nothing in the actual game. There are over 7600 comments in this thread and 99% of them claim the same thing - The BMPT is extremely annoying to kill in game because of how the vehicle is actually modelled. Gajin can say whatever numbers they want on any statcard they want to, it doesn’t mean anything when the game itself doesn’t line up.

Everyone in this entire section has said that the BMPT needs to be moved up, AT LEAST, if not fully removed (if they can’t fix the model). The sad thing is that moving it up in BR doesn’t actually make the BMPT more balanced, it just saves the tanks it currently has to face from having to stress over seeing it.

Nobody here needs to cross analyze the BMPT to understand that it’s a shitshow of a tank that has ruined the entirety of high-top tier. Even playing as Russia is boring as hell most games now because you just walk over the other team unless you roll the unlucky dice of having 10 people on your team who only bring the T80E1 and 1 death leave.

[AlvisWisla]

The only point of bringing up MBTs was to showcase that a number of them are stronger, that’s all.
T-80U probably shouldn’t be 11.7.
M1A1 most certainly shouldn’t be 11.7 when Leclerc is 12.7 and both tanks are at least 95% similar in defense and offense.

M1A1 HC most certainly shouldn’t be 12.0 when it’s easily a 12.7 tank in capabilities.
Giving M1A1 HC M829A2 was a mistake.

There’s a reason I do not oppose moving BMPT up. The only opposition I made was 12.7 due to 12.7 MBTs specifically just being objectively better on every front.
I’ve made no comment on 12.3, and still have no thoughts on that.

I’ve been supporting 11.7, and today I’m thinking how to support 12.0.

Leopard 2A4 and M1 Abrams are sitting at 10.7 while firing ammo that have notably difficulties dealing with the following vehicles armor:
BMPT, T-80U, Challenger 2?, M1A1, MBT-2000?, T-90A/S, and T-72B3.

Like… that’s not ideal in the slightest. While L27 makes easy work of BMPT, DM23 definitely does not; Even DM33 will have difficulties.
Thinking about it, BMPT vs Leopard 2A4 is arguably worse than an IS-4M fighting a Tiger 2, and is definitely worse than M4A3E2 fighting a Jagdpanzer 38T [which thankfully can’t happen].

I hope this post helps you understand my thoughts better.

[An_Pigeon]

@AlvisWisla

M1A1 most certainly shouldn’t be 11.7 when Leclerc is 12.7 and both tanks are at least 95% similar in defense and offense.

Leclerc is substantially more well defended than the M1A1 mate.
The A1s power lies in it’s firepower not it’s armour.
The M1A2 however has no business being 12.0 same as the HC

@AlvisWisla

Like… that’s not ideal in the slightest. While L27 makes easy work of BMPT,

L27A1 makes easy work of a BMPT? news to me mate, the DCT 10 struggles with it and it’s better than L27A1 so how does that work.

[AlvisWisla]

I shoot BMPTs that same way I’ve been shooting T-series tanks for the last 6 years.
Idler wheel, side armor, LFP… If I can’t see any of those I just move back, choose another flank, or sit around the capture zone I’m protecting.
Because most maps will not force a front-front fight at the high end of BRs. At some point one or both of us will see the other’s side armor.

And while I have bounced off of Abrams SEP2 and BMPT [tech tree] due to server frequency/overlapping plates, things have been consistent.

Maybe front-front fights for you are more common, but I haven’t come across them anywhere common enough myself cause I’m so use to positioning myself in a way that just naturally prevents that.

[luque13]

Well it was a time when the game designers realised what we have always known with Russian tanks.
They are not very good, sitting the crew on unprotected ammo is idiotic, the mobility is not good enough and cramped conditions means a penetrating shot will kill all the crew.

Gaijin then went and did everything they could to make Soviet/Russian tanks competitive.

[Arctic-Fox]

@AlvisWisla

where’s the evidence of Germany’s higher win rate from spall liners?
If modules had an impact

Didn’t spall liners get nerfed after a while? they were considered OP at launch as far as i remember
And while they are still good, they are kinda redudant when there’s a giant turret basket that tends to get hit in most cases, you also can’t aim towards the rear anymore on these tanks as you got some mandatory +5 elevation once you go past like 185° which will completely mess up a lot of your survival chances if someone manages to get within that limit

[AlvisWisla]

Spall liners were nerfed on dev server to only last once, and reduce but not eliminate spall.
IDK about any nerfs that happened on live server.

[Arctic-Fox]

Believe there was atleast a durability nerf on live if i remember correctly, so the liner would take less dmg before being destroyed

[ChickenNuggets5]

i hate bmpt