Yea pretty much that. To declare russian fuel tanks inside the combat compartment to be ‘external’ tanks (lol^^) is hilarious. But it happened. Its like George Orwell’s 1982: 2 + 2 is not 4^^
3 Likes
lol actually have a real life video of a 190 blowing up from the " external" fuel tank exploding gaijin is full of it.
I am fairly sure that is because they are not physically inside the crew compartment, but rather between the crew compartment and the outside of the tank.
In fact, you can see the exact same “exterior” fuel tanks on the Abrams.
1 Like
Honestly mate, if you are doing bad with the T-90A at 10.7, you are just bad ngl.
6 Likes
You’ve got a below 1 - 1 K/D ratio in the T-90A, barely 50% winrate and you die in 85% of your games played.
As I’ve stated earlier in a different thread, the only people who believe the T-90A is any good are people that:
- A) Never played it, and believe everything Russian must be OP.
or - B) People who play it, but are new/very poor at the game and don’t yet understand what makes a good vehicle.
This rule has turned out to be true across the dozens of cases I’ve come across, and it’s turned out true here as well.
Obviously I’m not expecting great stats from you because as I said, the T-90A is among the worst high tier MBT’s in the entire game.
2 Likes
Bet that he gave up it after try to lift the gun to the target.
People like you, that actually give a fuck about K/Ds and shit ingame, honestly make the community worse. Some people just like to play the game and have some fun.
As I have a personal life, I don’t really have time and nerves to bother with stats and tryharding the shit out of this game.
As you’re a little stats geek you probably think the 90A is bad just because you look at it’s soft stats. However you don’t consider the fact that the BR Range 10.0-11.0 is stacked with new people who just bought their first premium and are therefore completely garbo at the game and just shoot everything centermass. The T-90A comes in handy in this situation because you actually got some armor, which withstands DM23, DM33, M829, M829A1 and all the other rounds that linger around at that BR.
The tank itself may be worse then the other russian tanks like the B3, BVM, 90M and what not, but it definetetly isn’t the worst hight tier tank. Just look at the glass cannon ariete tank.
To conclude it, I just want to say:
How delusional has one to be, to seriously think that the T-90 belongs at the same BR as the 2A4 with DM23 and the base M1 Abrams with M774?
Would be somewhat reasonable if the 2A4 got the round it actually entered service with, DM33, but knowing gaijin that won’t happen.
Have a nice day tho :)
Keep the grind, the tryharding and the coping up.
2 Likes
I would choose to play the Ariete over the T-90A in a heartbeat, every time.
Because it takes 2 braincells to use the ariete’s strengths (compared to the T-90A) to much greater effect than the singular strength that the T-90A has.
1 Like
Dude chill out seriously, if You want to takk a out it do it in DM’s
Let me remind you of your own comment:
‘‘Honestly mate, if you are doing bad with the T-90A at 10.7, you are just bad ngl.’’
You’re the one that brought skill into this conversation. If you didn’t want to discuss playerskill or feel offended when someone turns this argument around on you, you shouldn’t have brought it up in the first place.
A vehicle literally consists of it’s stats. Nothing else.
Whether that be turret traverse, reload rate, armour protection, these are the thing that make up a vehicle.
The overall stats of the T-90A are awful, that’s why it translates into a vehicle that doesn’t suit the META.
That argument doesn’t work because it can be used to make any vehicle seem stronger than it is. Any vehicle performs better when facing newbies.
That’s not what I said.
I said that if the T-90A were to be subjected to a BR change, it’d be more deserving of going to 10.3 than 11.0.
Oh, and penetration isn’t what makes the M1 the best 10.3 tank in the game. You shouldn’t hyperfixate on penetration values as the end-all be-all of stats.
Leopard 2A4 entered service in 1985, DM33 entered service in 1987. DM23 and DM13 are the correct historical loadouts for a Leopard 2A4 at it’s date of introduction.
Now, if you want it to receive improved ammunition, you’d also have to be in favour of other nations receiving improved ammunition, such as 3BM-46 for the T-64BV.
Cant exactly say if its the worst or not apart from other MBTs in the area but its definitely two steps above as a tank and galaxies above in fun had over T-72B, enemies being practically the same due to constant 10.3 Leopard 2 or Abrams premiums.
Good work on getting screenshots of spalling over-performing on Leopard 2s.
the T90 in some ways is worse than the T80uk
collecting opinions if there is anyone interested to read
Thanks a lot for the clarifications!
T-64B (1976), T-64BV (1985) Uses 3BM42 from (1986) and you want to give it 3BM46 from (1991)
Leopard 2A4 entered service in 1985, DM33 entered service in 1987. DM23 and DM13 are the correct historical loadouts for a Leopard 2A4 at it’s date of introduction.
by this definition T-64B can’t use 3BM42 either, since it was introduced 10 years after the B and 1 year after the BV mod.
I said that if the T-90A were to be subjected to a BR change, it’d be more deserving of going to 10.3 than 11.0.
sure if it loses 3BM60 like the Bhishma (3BM42)
and penetration might not be king, but it sure comes in handy when you want to kill stuff.
been grinding JPN 9.3-7 using M735 isn’t fun, unlocking Type 93 on Type 16 was a real joy.
with some exceptions all GER and USA tanks h at 10.3 have lower penetration then most others, would giving them DM33 make them OP? (M833 or M900 for USA) move them to 10.7 then, but dont deny them a round that was surely used in their service life. now GER gets a better round at 11,3 in the leo 2PL
3 Likes
1984*
The in-game T-64B is from 1984.
I didn’t say that.
The M1 Abrams and Leopard 2A4 are already among the strongest MBT’s relative to their BR’s in the game.
And yet people are still not satisfied and constantly ask for improved ammunition, even though they do not need it and it would only result in a BR increase in the long run.
I’m all for a Leopard 2A4 C technologie being added with DM33, Germany still needs a T-80UM2 / M1A1 / IPM1 counterpart, but pointlessly adding DM33 to the existing Leo 2A4 is a terrible idea.
i do not agree to sacrifice the 10.3 lineup and make the leopard 2A4 have DM33 i think a leopard with C tech at 10.7 with DM33 would be a good addition instead, specially if im not sacrificing my current lineup
2 Likes
I think additive 2A4 modifications with DM33 is superior to giving the current one that round and ending the 10.3 lineup.
yeah hence i really dont like suggestions about giving the current 2A4 DM33 since it didnt had it at the start of service and it would mess the lineups