Oddbawz made a video on the bmpt
He goes on a rant about how broken it is at 27:55
1 Like
I posted it on the above
The game lasted less than 7 minutes. This is a joke.
The BMPT needs to go to 12.7, and we need more vehicles to fill out these BR’s. Sweden, Germany, China and France have no 11.3 or 11.7 tanks, meaning the BMPT is top tier (not that it matters) almost all the time. Ridiculous.
Already posted.
200 / cos 72 = 647.2mm of thickness.
Me: Penetration on Statcards is the plate thickness, and that plate thickness at different angles.
Exactly what I’ve been saying.
Also superior players playing inferior vehicles is well known.
OP Jagdpanzer IV vs balanced Chi To:
OP P-51H5NA vs balanced/over-BR’d Spitfire Mk24:
This is not a defense of anything, this is pointing out how stats can easily be misread and misused.
If you compare a random person to Defyn, you can make anything seem OP in Defyn’s service history. Which is why you don’t compare different peoples’ stats in different vehicles to each other.
Cross analysis > false equivalence fallacies.
Which is far more than 525 mm of thickness stated by protection analysis which also translates angled plate thickness to effective one. Your formula is either wrong or does not include some important parameters which devs use.
1 Like
Shit is still broken…probably won’t be fixed, y’all are arguing among yourselves with the hope someone will answer our prayers in reality this is a containment thread. they know it’s broken, they ain’t gonna fix it
My man, these are not the stats of a singular person, these are
AVERAGE
statistics across millions of games.
So no, not only “superior” players play that undertiered POS, half the level 20 premium andis have it.
1 Like
Normalization changes the “effective protection”.
The formula is correct, Gaijin does tell us actual thickness of the armor in the protection analysis, only “effective protection” which applies normalization to rounds.
@Grossaaaa
“Statshark/Thunderskill/etc are not to be used in arguments about vehicle capabilities.” - Statisticians, Thunderskill, and Statshark.
It doesn’t matter if it’s 1 or millions if the players are different skill.
Good players control the game, and they have done this previously with Type 90s, Abrams, T-80BVMs, Leclercs, and so on.
Gajin when topic with over 7k comments drops
7 Likes
See ya here 2027
Its only correct if you dont include normalization values. Like “under normal circumstances” text in physics which just excludes some minor factors but in this case factor isnt really minor. Also I think there are more factors than just normalization. Materials of armor and sabot are both included in formula as well. 3bm4 performs bit worse than m735 despite being faster and heavier because 3bm4 is made of steel and doesnt have tungsten alloy core.
1 Like
Right, except they never said that. Should I bring the M2K shitshow back to prove once again that everything you write in this forum is absolute crap?
@Grossaaaa
Me: “Mirage 2000 beats Mig-29 in 1v1s.”
I’ve been saying that since 2021:
Wow, it’s been 5 years since I started doing 1v1s in Mirage 2000.
So, are you going to double down and claim those statements are wrong?
I’d love for you to prove them wrong, but I doubt you will.
You’re not going to “gotcha” a Mirage fan.
Also:
The only proof of something being OP or not will involve cross-analysis.
Otherwise OP vehicles aren’t OP if players universally misuse them, and balanced vehicles are OP if good players use them.
And according to your own argument, Typhoon AESA is the most powerful jet in the game:
And apparently all of these tanks are OP based on player performance:
Please go learn about statistics.
BMP-T is far more survivable you could put it at 17.0 with the super tanks when they are added and as long as the damage model remains the same the tank will be a broken mess. It’s like facing a Falcon at 7.0 that when you shoot it’s turret it smiles and keeps shooting you.
Then with how Gaijin code autocannons (poorly) you will eventually hit something be it a turret basket a barrel maybe the gunner and that tank is dead while it repairs or in most cases is finished off by the BMP-Ts team mate.
1 Like
The damage model isn’t unique.
It’s the identical parameters we’ve been dealing with for years.
Server frequency causing issues with bounces when shooting near two plates.
Overlapping plates.
T-72/90 derivative chassis.
There’s a reason I ammo rack them as easily as all other Soviet tanks on CQC maps.
The only maps I can’t do much to them on are long-range maps, which I find eh cause they can’t do much against myself either due to being too far away.
More distance = more stalemate.
CQC = Clear 11.3+ MBT advantage.
Medium range… Probable 11.3+ MBT advantage.
In a Battle match where tanks don’t really have to move, sure, hull-down tanks are stronger than better tanks in survivability, but most maps don’t allow that, let alone that mode not being as common as-is.
This is what I see in most matches: And yes, server frequency has had me bounce 1 round out of 5+ other successful penetrations of the side ERA.
Or if it’s the premium:
All the ERA does on the premium is guide me where the ammo is stored.
If Gaijin can figure out how to fix server frequency “vibrating” tanks in a manner that has rounds bounce shots, the side shots on the ERA of tech tree BMPT become extremely consistent for any gun firing DM23 and higher. Right now, I think it’s only consistent with DM33 and higher due to that reality.
Yes it is, no other vehicle with a similar ammo layout has a magically separated belt to protect it from ammo racking the crew.
4 Likes
When those tanks came out in December, I quit the game. Today, four months later, I tried playing again to see how things were, and it didn’t matter whether I used Abrams or Challengers—every match was full of BMPs, and they won about 80% of the games. War Thunder is a game that’s over for me; I’m having fun playing other games now.
1 Like
Very standard heavy ERA moment. 40 to 50 degree deflection on darts that should be deflected more like 3 to 5 degrees, at maximum 10 degrees.
There’s so much nonsense with this damage model that really needs fixing.
2 Likes