ah right, I thought the T72B 1989 had that as well.
it’s not it also has access to the longer rod dart, as well as an upgrade of the FCS apparently to bring it up to modern standards
ah right I see mate
5 second reload for only a handful of shots, they are good 10.7s mate , but the T80UD is pretty close to being an 11.0 tank with all it has going for it overall.
It’s not man you can at 500 meters shoot through the turret face still.
Not aways but it’s now basically immune to it, most other rounds true but 3BM42s on the higher end of 10.7 rounds.
Too many folks try do that just cause the CR2s aren’t great they play down the whole tree.
2 Likes
You really can’t blame the ERA when you hit the track at an angle like that
Tracks do not have good protection values. They are worse than ordinary RHA.
Honestly surprised they actually gave the chally mk2 and 3 their mantlet armour, so yeah its rather scary hull down. But the t80s gun handling is kinda compensated for with its ability to shrug off one shots. Most times ive been flanked in the ud/be ive been able to survive the first shot and have enough time to turn around to finish them off. I would consider them fairly equal with the t80 being alot better in cqb maps but the challenger being scary on long range maps, same for the cent mk10. Its my prefered playstyle as i really cba to play in town when its mainly based on reaction timings compared to low br where i could confidently side scrape no matter the tank.
I got the reaction times of a sea urchin so im not competing in cqb maps against russia in a challenger lol.
I like both platforms and as you explained both excels in different situations.
Tbh I prefer long range engagements because it feels more realistic and authentic rather than COD type of gameplay.
Although Chally 1 is mostly not suitable for CQC it can get the job done pretty well under experienced hands, that first stage 5 second reload saved me quite a lot times against multiple enemy tanks in CQC.
1 Like
Id argue against that. Most earning F2P games (excluding gacha games) are actually p2w.
that game has problems with registering shots to sides. If the shot did as little as touch the “side face” of an armor plate (roof, bottom for example), tracks, wheels ect, its occasionaly gets eaten even without any ERA. And with ERA its just a little worse.
not pay to win incentives time put into the game which doesnt draw in new people. So yeah, most “f2p” games are typically p2w.
As far as I recall CS2 is free to play and makes a bank on skins etc.
But doesnt sell outright better weapons.
Same with LoL or DoTA (which might have champion powercreep but thats entirely different topic)
The thing is, i dont think ive ever had a situation where the era on say a challenger or amx30 brenus has eaten my apfsds spall. Like genuinly, i cant think of a time it was the era and not volumetric that has caused a lack of spall other than russian era.
I didnt see them eating spall, however i had some instances of Brenus eating the 3BM3 apfsds of the 115mm T-62 cannon. And i also had Challenger DS side armor eat the DM33 105mm. From what i can remember at the momen
Well there are exceptions to the rule.
What i meant was the era itself and not volumetric shenanigans. Hitting the edge of a mud guard and so on can be attributed to volumetric. Hitting the era itself flat on (for russian era) can itself cause a huge lack of spall and penetration when most nato era just acts like a normal rha plate.
Im wondering due to how heavy era works, where it increases its ke resistance at specific angles while providing minimal ke protection flat on, is causing the funky characteristics we are seeing. As at the moment it kinda feels like it provides its full ke resistance at all angles when it really shouldnt.
Also doesnt help that no nato era has been given anywhere near their actual ke resistance which could be why we just dont see it in game for them.
That seems youre implying the opposite is true, so pardon me if i want you to give examples then.
Bhishma is 10.7, which is basically the T-90A but only with 3BM42.
1 Like
Does matter with Chinese MBTs, being able to club MBT-2000s and Al-Khalids with 3BM60 (and 3BM46) relatively easily.
Residual penetration also affects spalling, so the more penetration, the more easily you can one-shot NATO MBTs.
Gen 1 thermals can be useful to tell if something in front of you exists (though not to identify the vehicle), but it also prevents you from getting clubbed through ESS.
You also forgot to mention that the UD has much less usable reverse speed than the T-80U’s, so trying to reverse out of a bad situation is impossible.
Top speed is 70km/h for the T-80U, which makes it faster than most MBTs at 11.3 - 12.7 too, unlike the T-80UD’s 60km/h, outmatched by every other country’s MBT besides GB, Israel, and China at 10.3 - 11.3.
All of these attributes explain why a 1.0 BR difference makes sense… and that’s without mentioning the T-80UK variant, which is also 11.7, gets LWS and more smoke grenades.
1 Like
I main China it absolutely does not matter they have massive lower front plates, large weak spots on top of the turret.
In my many years of playing I’ve maybe a handful of people use ESS correctly
You forget the 6 second reload and that any penetrating hit will disable NATO tanks
Poor reverse gear is the norm for Russia you should know how to play them at that point and the top speed is irrelevant due to map size acceleration is far more important it’s also only a 10km/h difference
Also seem to have ignored it’s very good armour
No where have I said it should go up a whole BR but merely to 11.0
1 Like
Chinese MBTs in general are not very well-armoured, that is true, but 3BM46 makes them even more trivial since it can now lower UFP MBTs like the MBT-2000.
So should we balance vehicle BRs with the playerbase’s ignorance in mind?
Both the T-80UD and T-80U have a 6s reload. I’m not sure what you’re trying to suggest here.
Yes, 3BM42 is usually enough to disable NATO MBTs but one-shotting them in the first place is always better.
-4km/h is garbage, and while you can ‘learn to play’ around it, it results with you either having to play very carefully or ending up in difficult situations while you’re on reload where as you could’ve survived if it had a better reverse speed.
No amount of ‘learning to play’ can stop you from getting killed by a second dude after killing the first.
-11km/h is a lot more usable, though still not on par with Western MBTs.
Sure, most maps are quite small, and extra top speeds don’t really come into account while in-combat, but it sure does help early-game, while still travelling to position. I can assure you that most maps allow for its 70km/h top speed to come into play, especially with the better acceleration you mentioned earlier.
10km/h is a substantiable difference, allowing you to take advantage of positions much earlier than what the T-80UD could ever dream of.
Again, the T-80U and T-80UD effectively have the same armour. Not sure why you’re pointing it out.
The T-80UD/BE is 11.0, with the addition of Gen 2 thermals.
Not sure why the regular T-80UD should be 11.0 too.
I believe this part only applies to Al-Khalid due to missing ERA on lower UFP.
1 Like
I thought of that but 3BM46 has ~530mm of penetration while the lower UFP of the MBT-2000 is roughly ~520mm from what I remember.
Though I guess it really depends on the angle and distance.
1 Like