What about the Merkava? It has constantly been proven to have more armor and actively has acknowledged armor bugs which haven’t been fixed in years. The Armor is modeled incorrectly and can’t stop missiles while the armor can literally get blown off like ERA despite not being modeled as SLERA in game. The Trophy system can’t even stop the Khrizantema’s missile consistently for some reason and the armor can’t stop the missile at all, which was proven blatantly wrong.
Another thing… Why can’t a Merkava stop DM13 frontally?
And frontal armor is obviously tremendously important. Or is all tank design stupid?
The other numbers are important too. however, most of them involve penning the tank in the first place. Which, makes their point minor.
This is about how armor in unfairly implemented in the game.
You mostly play the T-80U for your top tier Russian tank It’s nowhere close to the best Russian Top Tier tank. You ahve only 154 matches in the BVM and zero in any other 11.7 Russian tank. I’m willing to bet that since you don’t reap the full rewards of a full 11.7 Russian lineup you are receiving experienced an unfair comparison. When you have a spaded T-80bvm + T-90M Backed up by the 72b3, 80u, and 80uk you have a deep lineup of easy to play vehicles. This tracks with most other nations in quantity, but in ease of play it is king.
And just because the composite has a chemical focus doesn’t mean it can’t stop APFSDS. It has massive NERA slabs and modern ERA. The old Merkava tanks went head-to-head with APFSDS and did fine, so I don’t see why they would just not armor their vehicle against tanks that they CAN still fight.
And yes, you said NATO, but NATO tanks aren’t the only ones being neglected. It’s everything other than Sweden and Russia.
And as for that missile above, this is what it SHOULD look like.
Sir, that’s a tandem warhead Israel’s not facing nor is under threat of facing; on top of that tandem is poorly simulated in WT in general. Tandem penning is not an indication of poor armor, as that could be tandem over-performing.
War Thunder’s different situations showcase weaknesses that real militaries don’t experience.
Israel does fight Tandem Warheads and that missile has tandem 1200mm of penetration. The missile this tank took was a missile of equivalent force and was accepted by Gaijin with proof on the Issues page.
Sorry but this only work for you!
There are tens of bugs report about Leclerc issues (armor, reload speed…) with tons of proofs and Gaijin isn’t moving an inch
You don’t know that they’re not researching and developing solutions for vehicles.
That and they do major damage model changes on major updates…
Leclerc has issues, yes, and they’re working on the acknowledged ones.
How quickly they finish is a whole host of factors, just know that sometimes it can take a long time.
Roughly 75% of all engagements with Russian/Soviet MBT’s, the frontal armor is completely useless due to the fact that you can overmatch their side armor.
Yet many people in this community act as though the frontal armor of these vehicles is a massive factor in virtually all engagements.
Don’t confuse real life with the META of War Thunder.
Of course a given tank design isn’t stupid purely because it’s armor isn’t very relevant in a video game.
FOX-3’s are barely relevant in Air RB compared to FOX-2’s, that doesn’t negate the fact that FOX-3’s play a massively important role in real life.
Someone with the ASU-57 as their highest rank Russian vehicle is telling me I lack the experience with top-tier Russia to form a complete conclusion?
Well, the issue with the Swedish trial is that they are for exemple the holy grail for the Leclerc according to Gaijin when they actually are about a tank with a different armor layout than the in service French Leclercs. I could go more in depth about this if you want, but the main thing is, that gaijin refuse most buffs because the sources aren’t trustable when even their own sources aren’t any better
But that aside I have more than enough top tier battles where I have to fight against all factions and Russia tanks are substantially harder to cripple/kill. Soooo uh yeah
shrug your history indicates you do not argue in good faith. I don’t really expect you to change your mind.
Nor does anyone else. You are a known quantity and it is that of an unreasonable person. Unless you have something that actually mitigates the argument about frontal armor. (everything you have said to this point does not at all address this issue) then there really isn’t any point.
this adds 0 value to NATO tanks, how’s a superior engineering thought about making their tanks mobility much better than russian engineering that’s literally don’t care about their tanks mobility.
NATO tanks need their realistic armor nothing u can say can deny this fact.
that’s just absolutely a big fat of cap, gaijin is simpely lazy to act, when a russian tank isn’t modeled right i bet they take hours if not minutes to fix it, but WHAT? NATO tank has issues? i ain’t moving a muscle.
Okay and…
So problems don’t exist if people don’t talk about them? lol
Your defense of the Soviets is weird. You claim they’re perfect in spite of the obvious flaws…
