Horrible Cherry-Picking. And also, no. They aren’t better.
The 120S has no maneuverability and terrible hull armor, as well as being larger than the Burj Khalifa. Yes it gets M829A1- at the expense of just about everything else.
The Turkish M60 is a rare event vehicle. It also is an M60. Not good maneuverability and garbage armor for, at best, a good round and a 25mm.
The M1128 has a better round, and a crewless turret, sure. But its so light that 12.7s can pen it from multiple places. Its fast, true; but at the expense of all of its armor. 1 hit and generally speaking it is done.
The T-72AV has something that, generally, all of these don’t. For the 120S and Turkish M60, it has better maneuverability and better armor. As well as an autoloader, meaning that when you are down to two crew your reload isn’t drastically destroyed.
The M1128 has way less armor as well, while maintaining a similar reload. It may seem small, but especially with the idea of Helis, Arty, etc. Having less armor is a significant problem it faces.
TLDR: T-72AV has its benefits compared to vehicles of other nations. Just because it doesn’t fit perfectly doesn’t mean it doesn’t fit at all. I have had no struggle with it; and although I understand personal experience does not define reality, it does speak to the fact that the tank is capable and also has a great lineup to go with it.
It also has giant exposed turret ring, 8.3 hull (not on PC right now but i assume that theres no armor upgrade regarding hull) + bad mobility.
Not only this thing has similiar issue to 120S, that being 8.3 hull, it also has 8.3 turret and dies as soon as someone sneezes in your direction. And its also too tall and slow to be played like light, unlike 120S that can at least sit hulldown.
it needs to be played in extremely specific way.
It has no gun depression and no armor. Again, requires specific playstyle.
Absolutely?
Also i suppose you picked these three previously mentioned vehciles due to them having better pen, and allow me to ask, is there any BLUFOR tank at 10.3 that 3BM42 will struggle with?
Please note that the premise for using these three vehicles as examples is to expose the turret for long-range shooting. And in your previous arguments, you have denied the advantage of the T72AV in conducting armor shell confrontations with the same BR, and said that this vehicle is suitable for sniping. However, since there are better snipers in the same BR, why do you have to use insignificant advantages to cover up the systematic shortcomings of the T72AV?
Please note that the premise for using these three vehicles as examples is to expose the turret for long-range shooting. And in your previous arguments, you have denied the advantage of the T72AV in conducting armor shell confrontations with the same BR, and said that this vehicle is suitable for sniping. However, since there are better snipers in the same BR, why do you have to use insignificant advantages to cover up the systematic shortcomings of the T72AV
If you were to say that the T72AV is suitable for armor shell confrontation, would that be correct? Are you saying that a tank with almost the same protection as the 9.3 T72a has excellent protection in this BR? Don’t be funny, when encountering the T72AV, the 120s will fire first, and in case the T72AV shoots into the 120s turret due to slow steering, it will be over
Some people used to think that the T72AV was suitable for being a sniper, but I gave these three examples（Of course, there are actually more than three） just to prove that there are even better snipers under the same BR, and the T72AV pales in comparison
Vehicle not being best in class at its given BR is no justification in BR drop, id the vehicle is still pretty good.
You also overflew the point me and Cmdr_Vice made, that while all of the three vehicles you mentioned have better shells, they are not without drawbacks when compared to TURMS, nor did you adress which BLUFOR 10.3 tank can reliably withstand 3BM42.
10.0BR Is there a vehicle that can defend the m829a1 for 120s? This is just as funny as the question you raised about whether there is a vehicle that can defend a 3bm42 in 10.3BR, completely ignoring the downward angle of the T72AV, the weakness of the huge turret top, and the terrible reverse.
However, the question is, with the improvement of 3bm42 and high-definition thermal imaging, T72a has increased its own 1BR. Is it really worth it?
That’s because you have absolutely powerful firepower to say that, but the 3bm42 is even difficult to penetrate the Armor on both sides of the front of the l2a4 turret. When you make a mistake, a loading speed of 7.1 seconds means that any enemy has a chance to hit the second round faster than you
Moreover, the huge protrusion on the top of the turret makes the bolt very easy to damage, and the lack of reverse means that it cannot retract into cover. The poor power to weight ratio means that it cannot escape pursuit
Do you know where my confidence comes from? Yesterday, there was a discussion post about t72av on the Chinese social networking site Baidu Tieba. Most of the comments below expressed dissatisfaction with t72av. I think it’s time to come to the forum to reflect on the situation, although my comments do not represent anyone
I think the 600 times I used the T72AV back then can demonstrate my understanding of this vehicle
11.3 BR pen at 9.7 with one of the best platforms at its BR overall. The entire tank is a menace and, while I hate to see it brought up in BR, it’s healthy for it. The tank didn’t deserve being 9.7 lol