Is there any logical answer as to why the Namer (both versions) are the same br as the Bmpt’s? It’s an objective fact that the Bmpts are better than the Namer’s in almost every single way, let’s make a list.
Firstly, mobility. The BMPT’s have a higher top speed, the Namer is the slowest IFV/APC in game at 33 MPH, on the other hand the BMPT has a top speed of 37 MPH which is not the fastest but is still very good. The BMPT also accelerates faster and is more agile than the Namer’s.
Secondly is their armor. The Merkava’s (which the namer’s share a hull with) are not especially well armored… From the front just about any APFS-DS round from a large caliber cannon can easily penetrate it. The sides, like many other vehicles, are also rather weak. However the Bmpt’s have top tier level protection from the front. There are only really two weak spots, them being the lower front plate and driver’s sight. To auto cannons the BMPT is ((almost)) impossible to disable frontally let alone destroy. The sides are no worse, with extremely good ERA to stop both chemical munitions and even standard projectiles and then spal liners in addition. The vehicle is a complete upgrade in protection compared to the Namer’s and the only advantage the Namer Tsrikhon has is the APS which is not especially useful in my experience.
Thirdly, Fire power. In a purely objective way one might say the Namer’s have better weapons because of the fact the Bush Master auto cannon has a higher penetration amount and the spike missile’s are fire and forget. However in real gameplay this is not the case. Having a weapon that fires as fast as the BMPT’s auto cannon is much more useful than the small amount of extra penetration the Bush Master gives. With a higher fire rate vehicles from the front can have their tracks disabled, then their weapons (either order) and from the side it is better to be able to quickly destroy a vehicle which gives the BMPT’s weapons an advantage because of their speed. The extra penetration is also almost never helpful as most vehicles from the front are able to survive the shots from the front without taking damage and the vehicles that have less armor and can be killed can also be killed by the BMPT’s which will do it faster because of their fire rate. (Gun depression is also a factor but since most vehicles are not able to be destroyed frontally by the Namer’s this is irrelevant and the next point also states a reason why.) The ammo amount is also different as the BMPT has lots of ammo and is very hard to ignite while the Namer has all of its ammo stored in the turret which when hit leaves no ammo and makes the gun useless until resupplied. The missiles are both very different missiles, while the Spike missile is inconsistent and only seems to work well on extremely lightly armored vehicles and has a low destruction return rate the 9m120-1 missile for the BMPT is able to kill very heavily armored vehicles quite consistently and is much easier to use.
So in conclusion the Namer’s and BMPT’s currently sit at the same br but one is objectively better than the other in every single way except three, them being pennitration (stated before as being obsolete) a Active protection system and gun depression all of which are obscurities which are in almost every case when in battle useless.
This needs to be resolved, the Namer’s either need a br decrease or the BMPT’s need to continue to raise in br and in my opinion the correct move would be to do both.
I ask the same qustion about puma VJTF like befor the bmpt was 10.3 or 10.7 when the puma is on 11.0 like how?? the bmpt is better the the puma in every single thing name one thing that the puma better then the bmpt
IFV are not worth bringing in your lineup. Most MBTs can either whif their shot, just damage you, or take you out in one shot, while the BMPT will shred you apart. Unfortunately Namer, Puma, and the likes are not viable in the same br. Wait for the BMPT to go up in br soon. If not, just bring MBTs only in your lineup.
BMPT is more mobile than most MBTs, a 10km/hr wont make much difference. And BMPT has ERA and more surviability as modern russian MBTs, doesnt need to reverse most of the times. Puma doesn’t even have level 6 NATO armor it has IRL.
UAV because puma is light class while BMPT is labeled as tank destroyer. It gets an ammo box so 4 spikes vs 8 atakas.
Optics are legit almost the same, 12x is enough on all of the maps.
40mm extra pen barely making a difference in being able to pen spots BMPTS can’t and way slower RPM. BMPT does way more damage frontally and side armor.
Puma’s APS does not work and if it did, not useful at all.
All of your claims on the forum has been garbage I’m not sure anyone is taking you serious anymore.
Ive only seen it work in test drive. Its never once saved my life in game. You have to be looking right at the missile for it to work. I can check to see if there’s a bug report
Its literally a T-72 mobility wise, hates turning, takes a long time to accelerate, the neutral stearing is slow, does not reverse and the top speed is way below most MBTS from 9.7 and above
Atakas are meh, you also need to guide the missile unlike the Spike. Also, reloading the four additional Atakas takes a minute of standing still.
Lol, again. Its not just 40mm of pen (thats just at point blank range, further away its more noticeable) its also a mixed APDS belt vs APDSFS with way better pen characteristics for angled shots. You clearly dont know how to use the german 30mm, you can disable/kill MBTs from the side with a couple of shots.
Yeah, bc the missiles it protects against arent found in its current BR. Blame the german millitary or Gaijin for not having access to current day classified millitary information and having to work with feelings instead of data. BMPT does not have APS.
It does well enough, and no need to reverse with its armor.
Because we can’t guide spikes its horrible. Its still missing its top down attack so most of them hit the UFP and turret cheeks. You can get 4 kills with 4 atakas. Try to do the same with 4 spikes in a row with MBTs.
Yeah and Puma gets 2 and has to reload.
Yeah I quite literally said both can do that? Only the BMPT has a much faster RoF which means it does the job better. The 40mm better penetration doesn’t mean much when BMPT can blind you and hit the barrel and tracks much faster.
You legit said it defends against missiles not found at its br, so a broken APS that doesn’t even face the misiles is protects from is more op than the BMPT with no APS and clearly doesn’t need it with its current armor while the PUMA should technically be able to withstand the BMPT 30 MM auto cannon fire.
So you lied then? It trades mobility for armor and it got moved up a full BR in 2 weeks just for said armor while getting nothing in return, russian bias am i right?
Horrible how? You can do FnF from the safety of cover, does not trigger LWS and you can also shot down helicopers too. What? You want an invincible platform that can deal with every threat while your opponents have no chance to even fire back? Go play a single player game, there are some games that will provide the experience you are looking for.
So, like every autocannon with a slighly fast RoF in the current meta, nothing new or surprising.
And it does, if im facing a PUMA im not shooting its hull first, even if i catch it from the side, because the composite armor withstands the 30mm for quite a while until it breaks, so i target the turret to disable it first. The same thing i do in a PUMA when facing a BMTP. The APS, again, is up to Gaijin in how to balance it, when the PUMA without Spikes came out you could not kill it with the IT-1 because the APS was (and is) working as intended. But really, does it make much of a difference? You will the facing cannon fire while playing top tier, mostly, not missiles.
Again with the accuracy thing… Stop watching YouTube videos of supposed experts talking about modern day weapon systems they have not even seen with their own eyes. Most engagements in this game are considered close range for IRL standars, the 2A42 is innacurate as it can be at just 1 km range. No, really, try it: you will be hitting your target all over the place, not where you aim. Its compensated by a higher volume of fire. Again, what do you want? To miss half its shots at 400 meters so you can get vindicated in your belief that easterns weapons are inferior in every way to the glorious german engineering guided by Evropa herself? Its already sitting at 11.3 with mediocre armament, chill out.
Spikes and ATGMs is just inconsistent anyway, at least with the beamriding/saclos you can aim at weakepots. But HEAT post pen damage is garbage anyway and is a pure coin toss most of the times
Good. That means you can actually hit targets in meaningful areas instead of having them consistently hit tracks, barrels and roof MGs, like the Spikes do (when they hit anyway).
Honestly, both PUMAs and Namers should go down one BR.
Edit, as you pointed out the PUMA is nowhere close to the armor it should have. And while the fire rate is restricted, the weapon overheating is completely made up to artificially nerf it. Couple this with SPIKES having 1/3 the lofting value of the LMUR, aiming for the drivers hatch rather than the turret top for no good reason. Oh and ERA overperforming while tandem just adds a flat pen bonus and you get, this.
