Speaking about the VOG, I recently killed a 2A7V frontally with the VOG xD
(He prolly just J-Out)
I wish I could play it but I would waste a decent bit of free RP…
Ahem. Have these or have these not been your words over the course of this thread?
" but honestly this thread has sometimes gone too far and fell into cope or skill issues. I’m not necessarily saying it’s you, just that sometimes you simply need to aim better."
“Oh yeah, I must be getting lucky every single time that I face a BMPT.
:clueless:”
“I’ve already scrolled up and seen some stuff that I would have to argue is very much skill issue, not necessarily from you.”
In terms of pure numbers this thread is up to nearly 9,500 replies, the vast majority of them very much saying the vehicle is a problem. That doesn’t include the many, many, many duplicated threads that have been merged or nuked.
If you are in a building and everyone around is telling you it’s on fire - you can by all means dissent and say ‘I can’t smell anything.’ You might even find someone else who agrees with you.
Still doesn’t mean it is the correct answer though…
=)
4 Likes
Well it’s right here i read this and it’s a direct lead in to the good old “just blaming skill or aim better” that many other people defending this vehicle use in this thread.
4 Likes
Highlight the “sometimes”
Referring to my own statement.
Again, where am I saying it’s “everyone” and not just some cases that I’ve seen?
Reality is that I’ve been on this forum for a while. It’s much easier to have overly negative opinions rather than positive here. Therefore calling it broken ONLY due to the amount of people complaining isn’t the right thing to do.
The best is to point at the issues such as the double-standards the vehicle has.
Again, have you missed the parts in which I talk against disconnected belts, the Russian ERA, volumetric and the extremely packed dmg model? Not considering the points we’ve brought in the last 10 minutes.
Selectively reading the room won’t lead to anything but negativeness.
What a lot of people don’t realise is that decompression (which is a universal issue, not a BMPT issue) could further fix this and many other problems. Add that and fix the disconnected belts and this tank becomes extremely balanced.
Those are a completely different vehicle class.
And have their own sets of problems
Well… the Puma is only a light tank in name… considering it should have enough armor to laugh at the BMPT, but Gaijin.
PUMA is an IFV, BMPT is not
BMPT is an AFV
AFV only means Armored Fighting Vehicle, any vehicle with a substantial amount of armor is an AFV, IFVs like the Puma included, even the Boxer is an AFV.
BMPT if anything, is an area suppression vehicle which doesn’t have an official designation. Or an Armored Weapon Carrier like the German Boxer.
Then again, I don’t see why that even matters, Puma as a vehicle has made sacrifices in terms of weight, for an excessive amount of armor - it has the hybrid-CLARA ERA that alone provides STANAG 5 level of protection (25mm APDS), then it has 3 different armor plates on the side of the hull, on top of the actual 20mm steel hull, and these plate combined are meant to provide direct protection versus 30mm APFSDS… couple that, all things combined means the protection simply exceeds BMPTs firepower considerably, this thing is 40 to 45mm APFSDS proof on the sides, much less the front where we have 350mm+ LoS of composite that’s derived from MEXAS-H NERA, the same NERA, when composed into a wedge on the Leopard 2 turret, provides somewhere in the range of ~200mm to ~300mm RHAe KE, and the LFP has enough steel to laugh at 35mm APFSDS, with the NERA plate, likely even 40mm APFSDS is too weak for it.
And then they still have to perforate the engine, the transmission, and the plate separating the crew from all this… i think it’s pretty fair to say Puma should be laughing at any attempt by the BMPT to try and kill it, but this is the War Thunder fantasy where Puma, whose armor ranges from 16 to 20 tons in weight, is barely better protected than things with a simple steel hull construction…
Puma has its own issues sadly. Spikes being the most underwhelming aspect of it.
(any spike vehicle really, Freccia just overpowers by having 10)
I’d say Spikes make up 50% of Puma’s problems, the damage model is 25% of it, and the armor being the way it is (instead of tanking anything below a 75mm long-rod APFSDS even at PB range… cus the front hull has enough armor for that), is another 25%.
any spike vehicle really
Agreed. I still wish Gaijin would give us an option to switch between direct LoS firing mode like with other ATGMs, and the F&F mode.
Only 4 spikes is a pain.
Unfortunately there is no proof as far as I’m aware of it being capable of carrying more.
That’s how the freccia received more spikes, the brochure stated that it could so gaijin gave it that many
The majority of people simply do have skill issue.
Yes, volumetric is a problem (all tanks have it)
All fuel tanks eat spall
Yes, the BMPT’s external ammo rack is complete bs
Still, it’s not an unkillable destroyer of worlds.
In most engagements MBTs like the merkavas, leopard 2 and Abrams will win over the BMPT provided they play with a moderate amount of functioning braincells.
Cough
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/RDkfJAVCsUYC
Irl its 8 Spikes, but we can only prove 6, so 6 it should be
Huh, guess I was wrong on that front.
More spikes would be awesome
The 12.7 vehicles win over the 11.7 one if they play properly is not really a good argument for the BMPT now, is it?
It is definitely one of the takes of all time.
‘You can kill if you are the next BR bracket above it, so long as you shoot first, and hit it in the right spot, and hope that volumetric/RNG doesn’t mess with your hit in the process. So it must be fine?’
(Leaving aside the complete carnage these things cause when downtiered…)
2 Likes
That’s the secret shoot it when it’s not looking at you and maybe you’ll live
So, when did I ever specify 12.7 MBTs?
Don’t put words into my mouth
1 Like