You might get lucky with someone hitting there, but they’ll normally just shoot your turret ring. From my experience, the Leopard 2A4 is much tankier than the M1 Abrams.
Yes, but they share similar mobility. The problem is that the 9.3 vehicles have no way to realistically win a fight against a T-80UD under normal circumstances.
It’s certainly possible, I’ve killed a ton myself, but the reason why they moved up 10.3 MBTs to 10.7 was to specifically fix this issue. The T-80UD is significantly more capable than the T-72AV in most aspects. The T-80B and the T-80UD should probably be the same BR.
M1’s UFP is an auto bounce zone and if you shoot on the sides of the LFP there’s a high chance external fuel tanks will eat the round completely, so you’re basically left with aiming at the middle in hopes to get his driver + engine.
Gunner’s side of the turret is pretty weak for both tanks, so shooting them there is an option as well.
So I think your experience varies greatly from objective truth, M1 is just as tanky as 2A4.
How ?
You can kill T-80UD the same way you’ll kill stuff like T-64B, T-72Bs, TURMS and even T-72A in many cases. So let’s move them up as well so poor 9.3s don’t suffer ?
Decompression should happen, but moving up single vehicles just because they’re strong in downtiers because of one of their only pros (armor) is a great way to nerf perfectly fine vehicles.
You lose a lot of mobility and thermals for a 0.6s faster reload ? No thanks.
and 11.7 BR armour at 10.3? its better than the turms in every regard bar it has no thermals?
not when you use an auto cannon tank like the tyoe89 or god forbid a CV9030 (i got the 35 and even that side on takes near a full clip to kill one)
The T80UK which is 11.7, shares the same armour, reload, turret traverse, no thermals, and a round which is better but not by much, and marginally better mobility. Why is the UD such a low BR? it has the same gun handling, same armour, same turret traverse etc, good acceleration (better than the turms) all it is missing is the thermals and it would be better than the 80B
It has better reload, armor and a bit of mobility. It loses quite a lot in the spotting department as going from no thermals to gen2 is big difference.
I do think it’s slightly better than TURMS, but I don’t think it deserves to be at 10.7.
T-80UK is not just marginally more mobile, it’s pretty noticeable in both HP/t and top speed.
Better ask why is 80UK at such a high BR, as it’s literally getting clapped in all metrics besides armor by M1A1, which actually sits one BR step below.
lol, lmao even
All Ruski MBTs have the exact same weakspot
The UD lacks thermals, has poor gun handling, slow reload speed, -4 km/h reverse, and a quite poor hp/ton
The only thing the UD excels in is armor coverage* and its Mango round.
Thats 11.7 armour coverage, its also more mobile than the turms in game.
It and -4kmph reverse means nothing if you dont put it in stupid positions.
The UD should be 10.7.
Exactly why its br should go up? Thats not the counter argument you think it is.
If all russian mbts have the same weak spot, then why isnt the object 290 10.3 with the 80B?
Because those weakspots dont equate to it being worthy of being a lower BR.
Thats 11.7 armour coverage, its also more mobile than the turms in game.
Armor isn’t everything. The UD’s only strong point is the armor, which is EASILY counterable. Just shoot its easily hit 3 weakspots. Let me guess, you want to point and click on it just like you can the TURMS-T. Oh yeah and the TURMS-T is about as mobile as a snail.
It and -4kmph reverse means nothing if you dont put it in stupid positions.
Severely hampers your combat capability. If you think otherwise its wrong. You cannot go hull down effectively, you cannot retreat, you cannot peak and retreat, etc.
If all russian mbts have the same weak spot, then why isnt the object 290 10.3 with the 80B?
Object 292 makes a joke of armor. Ideally it should be 10.3, but American mains cried because it was apparently too powerful. The 10 second reload on the 292 isn’t ideal.
The 80UD is under brd by at least one step.
Now compare it to the Leo 2A4 or Abrams. Yeah, that’s what I thought, the UD doesn’t compare.
It shouldnt be lower than 10.7 mate at all bloody hell i love the 292 the 10 second reload while a small hinderance is nothing compared to how great the round is.
no i want it to be balanced seeing as its objectively better than my turms and even T72B 1989 which is 10.3
yes you can you just have to pick the right hull down location, I have russia to top tier mate I know how irritating the reverse is, yet the T90A and all that are higher BR with the same reverse so its not as big a claim as you think.
it does compare ? I have the 2a4 and M1 abrams and all 3 of the big three at top tier, the UD should be 10.7, it is effectively a side grade to the t80B, which funnily enough sits at 10.7
no i want it to be balanced seeing as its objectively better than my turms and even T72B 1989 which is 10.3
This is a compression problem. T-80UD is better than the T-72B 1989 but not better than the Leo 2A4/Abrams.
yes you can you just have to pick the right hull down location, I have russia to top tier mate I know how irritating the reverse is, yet the T90A and all that are higher BR with the same reverse so its not as big a claim as you think.
While I agree with this mostly, its just that these spots are limited. T-90A also has great thermals, a top tier round, IRCM, better armor, etc. with the only sacrifice being the reload and mobility, which is a big thing. T-90A should not be the same BR as the Al-Khalid-I, which is straight better in almost every way.
it does compare ? I have the 2a4 and M1 abrams and all 3 of the big three at top tier, the UD should be 10.7, it is effectively a side grade to the t80B, which funnily enough sits at 10.7
T-80B has the -11 km/h reverse, which makes quite the big difference imo.