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
Im sorry, could you rephrase it?
I suspect that your interpretation of my speech is taken out of context
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
1 Like
No, more like its not well translated and i have no clue what are you saying.
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
Ah!
Anyway
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?
1 Like
shell isnt single defining characteristic of vehicle BR.
I ignored nothing, in fact i own TURMS as well 1128, M60 AMBT and i plan to move on 120S eventually.
Yes.
1 Like
No. it is not worth 10.3.
It’s a bad tank that struggles against more armored and much faster and more mobile tanks. It’s one of the worst 10.3 if not the worst.
Only good thing is that it have good thermals.
Would be very happy if ti would lose 3bm42 and were put lower in BR.
Also, T-72AV should be a normal “russian” tech tree
2 Likes
Basically true.
Good things about Turms:
- Thermals
- It looks awesome, arguably the coolest looking T-72 tank.
And thats 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
It’s okay. Universally better than its tech tree counterpart, however.
It could probably go to 10.0, but I’d actually prefer if ground was decompressed to 14.0.
1 Like
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
It’d be much easier if you pointed out that the Sabra is going to be 10.0 and is better.
And I’ll be the first Israeli main to admit it. The Turms-t isn’t very good. It lacks every fundamental principle of a good tank.
2 Likes
I just heard that Sabra is very strong, but I haven’t used it specifically
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
If that’s really the case, then Sabra is really too OP
And two of them have turrets that, when exposed, are nothing more than a spot where APFSDS can spall and subsequently do more damage. It’s also still horrible cherry picking.
Yes, but those vehicles can ONLY snipe. The T-72AV does fairly well in city combat, unlike these vehicles. It’s more of a Jack of ask trades master of none situation here with the T-72AV.
Mobility is hardly an insignificant advantage. Nor is an Autoloader. Nor is the Armor that the T-72AV has that the M60s and M1128 don’t. I’m not covering up the shortcomings of the T-72AV, more just suggesting that the T-72AV is way MORE than it’s shortcomings. Every vehicle has struggle points and problems; the T-72AV is no exception. You all for some reason seem to think however that it’s wholly incapable, which it is not.
1 Like
Are you saying that a tank with almost the same protection as the 8.0 M60 had excellent protection at it’s BR? Or better than the 9.3 T-72A?
I didn’t say it was great. I said it was better than. Which, objectively, is the truth. The T-72A is much better armored than the M60s. It’s much more suitable for shell confrontation than any of the vehicles you mentioned. As said in last thing, the Turms is more of a “Jack of ask trades, master of none” than the three vehicles previously mentioned.
1 Like