I wouldn’t and an armour plate surviving doesn’t mean the system worked, if anything the threat bypassed the system
yes
Ah yes Oryx, the worlds most reliable source!
1 Like
Or video footage?
Even LESS reliable!
Title of topic: british bias
-Because Fox is annoying
Replies: tons of arguing by US/USSR mains about [They are OP but we aren’t] while pointing each others
Extra info:
- no new top rank SPAA,
- no top rank jet after EFT
- no Historical brimstone upgrade to FnF
- no AIM-120C-5
on british in current dev server.
Conclusion: British Isn’t Biased.
Case closed.
5 Likes
If British bias exists Russia probably on the next level of being BS lol
Skill issue
Hahaha!! Oh that very hurt me so much lol
Person that have ways less K/D than me saying i have skill issue lol
Sht bro if i had skill issue what about you? don’t think that you’re better than me aren’t you?
No, skill issue in referring to Russian Bias.
Wait, so Russian Bias doesnt exist? B-but I thought Russia = hold W = win??? Guess not, huh?
Try do that with Italian and compare to Russian see what give you better results that probably best way you can find answer by your own.
Im gonna say its gonna go poorly either way
We haven’t seen a single frontal destruction of a T-90M, nor any other Relikt protected tank. Side yes, because the sides utilize thinner plates instead of full scale Relikt.
1 Like
But nations are doing it? China uses it, Ukraine uses it. NATO prefers composite armor because it can take more hits, their infrastructure is not optimized for replacing separate ERA plates after every hit. As I said, Bundestag reported DM63 fired from the Rh120 L/55 is not sufficient to engage Relikt-protected vehicles. Mind you, DM63 has your beloved anti-ERA tip. Anti-ERA tips only work by triggering the ERA, which was good enough for Kontakt-5, but not for Relikt or any other similar ERA design.
1 Like
Shh! NATO mains don’t like using logic!
NATO Nations dont need to do it, as NERA and composites provide the perfect level of protection and for different threat areas NATO tanks equip urban style armour packages. Ukraine isnt NATO and they are taking old Leopard 2s and M1s to add some form of protection. Russians have done the same and even mounted logs to provide some protection.
You are happy with Relikt being “realistic” thats great, then would you also be open to NERA and NATO tanks being near immune to 3BM60?
Or are you happy with having your armour seemingly modelled correctly while NERA has the armour protection of rubber in game.
2 Likes
That sentence sounds like both of
[I am ragebaiting as hard as I can]
and
[Pact main only likes throwing insults]
Just like your nickname does.
:/
1 Like
No, my nickname actually triggers Russian Bias cultists when they see it in-game! Since it doesn’t exist, I chose it to troll people :D
Apparently, NATO tanks specialize in carrying extra armor just to make them overweight.
It’s a joke, looking at each NATO tank and seeing how much protection those huge blocks of NERA provide, even different in almost identical models, like the side armor of the Challenger 2 TES and OES. Also the pitiful armor of the Merkava, and the Mexas armor of the Leopard C1A2.
It’s funny because they don’t even model NATO ERAs well, since the Romor lacks about 100mm of CE protection, and the Brenus should be almost the same as the Kontakt, providing 100mm of KE protection.
I mean as far as we’re aware, a solid number of NATO tanks are quite close to realistic values. The late Abrams turret is already immune, the hull is susceptible, which is correct. Challenger 2 armor is overperforming per declassified UK requirements for the CR2 programs. Ariete would not be immune even when fixed. Leopard 2 arrowhead is already immune, 2A7/122B hull is also immune aside from top down shots to the driver glacis.
Despite NATO nations not needing to do it, they still do, they add thick ERA to resist small kinetic penetrators and shaped charges.
1 Like