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.
