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…
oh nah problems do exist, but some people prefer to stop people when they try to speak about their favorite nation problems, if u gonna say USA lacks armor, and a troll jump and say naah they got mobility, and some other bs that do not benefit the tank in anyway, it’s kinda absurd don’t u agree with me Alvis?
If someone responds to me with that, that’s not a provocative statement, thus not trolling.
That statement would be pointing out positive things which is never a bad thing.
Augmenting statements is always good, and helps with discussions.
Also weird of you to claim that the US military is wrong for considering mobility an important factor…
I play the T-72B3M, T-80BVM, T-90A, T-80U and many others. You said this yourself just a couple of posts back.
The simple fact remains that most of your opponents know to aim for the breech/overmatch side armor/driver’s hatch/lower glacis, thus negating the frontal armour, even when you do have it perfectly head-on.
I have no issues dealing with such vehicles, and to show that being the case I took the time to record my matches, then compiled each and every shot I had taken against a Soviet/Russian MBT to get some decent statistics:
Now, if you for some reason struggle to knock out these vehicles with only 3 crew, exposed ammunition everywhere and fuel tanks with a tendency to detonate, there’s nothing else I can say other than: Skill Issue™.
My M1’s sit on a 6 - 1 K/D ratio, I’ve got around 2700 kills in various M1’s combined, why would I suddenly be of the opinion that Russian tanks are superior dispite all my experience telling me otherwise, and all whilst someone that’s quite poor at the game, hasn’t forwarded a valid argument, and has ZERO top-tier Russia experience telling me otherwise?
important factor yeah irl and sometimes ingame, but absolutely armor play a big part and a BIG YES usa lacks a big part of their armor and gaijin ain’t moving for years bruh
This is a statement that could only be made by someone that plays a single nation, and has no experience playing Russian top-tier tanks.
Indeed, a couple of NATO tanks are missing some armour, but that hasn’t stopped those tanks from being among the strongest vehicles in the entire game.
The Leopard 2A7V is currently among the most underperforming tanks armour-wise, but again: That hasn’t changed it from sitting on a 71% winrate for a couple of months now.
That winrate is also thanks to the fact that it’s got those strong secondary factors I mentioned before.
And just for context, I’ve made numerous bug reports for NATO tanks that have actually resulted in fixes, so don’t strawman me by implying I’m against NATO tanks having their armour corrected.
On my second account i got the whole tech tree of every nation in this game, and if i said something about a nation, that’s considered a fact, and russian mbts are overrated ash and that’s also a fact, if u can tell me a tank from the 70s got more armor and more survivability than a tank that was made up in 2016 that’s copium.
Did i just witness Necrons compare Abrams with a 2a7? lmao
I didn’t see no leclerc doing good ingame, no abrams surviving more than a second, no challenger suffering in top tier, no ariete suffering also, did i?
And why would gaijin copy and paste the whole abrams tech tree for years? u telling me that the sep v2 irl got the old 40 years armor? yes sep v3 is really quite stunning, but will gaijin add it in the near future? hellnaaaah and a big hellnah, they don’t want USA to get some good armor that’s why, u can tell they hate USA just by looking at the tech tree.
