2.9s is a lot of time in higher tiers, it can be the difference between getting a kill and enemy simply passing by while you’re still reloading.
Also, good luck getting back into position with that reverse speed, you’re giving that thing way too much credit.
Same thing 11.0 tanks will do to 292.
At this point you can have 2000mm dart but it won’t change much, since both parties involved can simply lolpen each other, and at that point it comes down to who can see the enemy first (thermals) and get the gun on the target first (gun handling, gun depression).
292 is easily beaten in all those areas.
Are you biased russian main or something? It’s fair to PENETRATE EVERYTHING and be PENETRATED by everything. On 10.0 you lol pen any armour while enemy can struggle to fight your armour, fair ? It’s not fucking glass cannon to begin with l, at is had maybe 100mm less armour than T-80U that is sitting on 11.3. So T-80U doesn’t have armour also? And it faces top tier rounds, not 105mm mid tier apfsds
Thermal 1st gen doesn’t help that much, as I just turn it off to basically see what tank I am facing and pick his weakspots. And gun handling is pretty much the same as T-90A and little worse than T-80B
This immediately told me you have 0 experience with the current closest equivalent vehicle to the 292, the Object 120.
It slings a 400mm pen 8kg (heavier dart even than 292, weight usually correlates with spalling) APFSDS dart, for the longest time it was 7.3, now it’s 8.0.
Given that no vehicle from 6.3-9.0 can resist such a shell, is it a good vehicle? I await you and NoreZi to tell me the truth since you are both highly skilled experts.
Ok. Why would you want to do that? It’s basically impossible to kill 3 crew members through the turret cheek, it’s a waste of a shell. It is imperative you oneshot as quickly as possible, aiming for crippling blows runs the unacceptable risk of return fire which you can’t deal with.
If Gaijin had a single shred of actual Russian/Soviet Bias it would actually do that, instead we get some already nerfed gimmick.
This is mainly a factor of reverse speed and reverse acceleration. All Leopard 2 and Abrams varaints have good enough reverse speed, acceleration and mobility to extricate themselves very effectively from problem situations. 292 or any other Soviet MBT at 9.0-11.0 decidedly cannot do this.
Because of the way APFSDS spalls and the way that crew are laid out in modern MBTs, you have no choice but to aim for weakspots anyway, you simply won’t kill enough crew for a oneshot if you don’t aim at specific areas. Test driving the 292 shows it’s almost exactly the same.
Go in the test drive and shoot the Leopard 2 and Abrams with it, you’ll very quickly find out this isn’t even remotely true.
Meanwhile, none of those are either mobile or particularly good, owing to their reliance on armour and poor reloads combined with lacking optics, decent thermals and any semblence of survivability.
Leopard 2 and Abrams set the tempo at top tier due to their speed, acceleration and mobility. They are the standard that others must compete against, you are either faster or slower.
These are bad vehicles.
T-90A is a bad vehicle, believe it or not.
A vehicle with huge weakspots and low survivability compounded by the fact that 292 has by far the largest autoloader of any soviet tank, you basically can’t miss the carousel.
Basically all Abrams and Leopard 2’s around 9.0-11.0 have such mobility.
Main battle tanks that focus heavily on armour are rubbish. They always have huge weakspots that render the armour basically pointless. They often lose out on the other important traits I mentioned in order to have their BR.
There are bucketloads of vehicles with 4-6 second reloads at the 9.0-11.0 bracket, all of them are quite powerful for that reason alone. 10 seconds is an eternity in comparison, you won’t be beating anything except vehicles with level 1 crew and a dead loader. 6.5 seconds of T-80U are tolerable and 7.1 seconds of T-72 are appaling. 7.5 of Stryker just isn’t even worth talking about.
Ok, if you can’t make PT-16/T14 work then you have a skill issue. Goodness gracious.
I specified a list of criteria which are fundamentally important, good vehicles have all the boxes ticked. Strv 122’s for example have basically everything, then they have some armour which makes them far more difficult to oneshot.
You picked literal terrible vehicles which all struggle at their BR unless they are fighting people who don’t know what weakspots are. They have these traits because they keep getting shunted down in BR due to terrible performance.
T-90A is the prime example, it has 3BM60 at 10.7 but you’d literally rather take anything else because it is so crippled by the weaknesses and the strengths mean nothing.
Abrams and Leopard 2 (plus prototypes of them) set the standard. Other vehicles which don’t have some massive advantage over them are notably defficient.
These tanks are commonly referred to as “severely crippled” and “borderline useless”
They don’t exist at this br. The last vehicle with such a reload is T-62 which is awful, largely precisely because it has a dreadful reload. 10.4 seconds stock vs 8.7 seconds stock, guess who wins almost all the time.
It does a huge amount, no amount of denial will change that.
With your reverse speed and reverse acceleration?
Unfortunately, such situations are extremely common at top tier, largely for map design reasons.
Just like how tanks very rarely engage 1 on 1 in a controllable manner, at least during the opening race to reach important positions.
Reload is absolutely crucial, it cannot be overstated how important it is, so long as you can penetrate weakspots.
This stuff applies very well to War Thunder top tier ground RB.
Let’s go through this.
Does 292:
Offer increased situation awareness to contemporary vehicles?
Offer significany decrease in detectability?
Offer significant mobility to extricate yourself from bad situations or adjust your position to bring strong armour to bear?
Provide meaningful protection against contemporary shells?
Offer meaningful survivability benefits?
It’s a no on all counts.
Conversely.
Offers improvements to detection of enemy vehicles?
Offers fast reaction time to enemy movements?
Offers meaningful negation of enemy protection?
Offers meaningful negation of enemy survivability?
292 as it stands now is shaping up to be a one-trick-pony. No armour can withstand you, but your spalling is barely worth it.
It’s not like 292 can even go down in BR since it’s basically pointless. It’s basically vulnerable to any 105+ APFSDS but immune to APDS.
T-64 - T-90 all have the drivers hatch weakspot which allows all 3 crew to get nuked by literally anyone who knows what aiming is or what weakspots are. All this nonsense about upper plate armour is meaninglesss. Turrets are the same, huge thin breaches and easily penetrated turret roofs, especially with 292 having an even more comically oversized turret roof which is even easier to penetrate than other tanks in this series.
We have situation when M1 Abrams at 10.3 havent got M833 and still have inferior M774 for years but Russia gets railgun on a decent platform with the best armour tier for tier XD cmon guys, russian bias blinded you or what?xD
No it’s not if you have literally everything else subpar.
As I said to you earlier, this also applies to M-51 considering it has 400mm HEAT at 6.0. By using your logic, that thing could easily be at, let’s say 7.7, since it can lolpen everything and also be lolpenned by everything at that BR.
Do you want M-51 at 7.7 ?
If it’s armor can be lolpenned by most things at it’s BR then yeah, it’s a glass cannon.
They do help, end of discussion about that.
T-90A has dreadful gun handling for it’s tier and will get handily beat in that department by most tanks. Thanks for clarification.
M1 has much better reload, amazing gun depression, thermals with top tier mobility and gun handling.
It beats 292 in like half a dozen of stats, so I see no reason why those couldn’t be at the same BR considering all the pros and cons.
This isn’t exactly correct. From the talk I’ve seen (by WT moderators), it depends on the present (short rod vs long rod). Diameter affects spall generation a bit, however it’s for the most part relative to armour performance (i.e how much pen stat is left over from the perforation process).
@FurinaBestArchon
What was the first Rheinmetall 130/140mm platform on? Leopard 2 through A3 or A4?
Cause Object 292 would be like a 140mm Leopard 2A with a 1200HP engine and no smoke grenades.
I played long before 120 was added and yes, my KTH back then was not happy to be pierced anywhere by Object 120. And it was so bad to play against it because no armour best armour( fuses on APHE was like 28mm and it didn’t do much then) and had HEAT-fs that could hull break(yes) and acted like HE for the most part. Still has some sort of PTSD from that experience
Any T-72 can’t, T-90M can’t and there are few NATO tanks that can’t reverse asap from troubles. You just play around it and don’t overpeek too much because of that
Are you played 105mm APFSDS Vs soviet tanks around 10.0 BR? O ve had, many times and many times their armour just ate my shell and I killed maybe only driver or gunner, took a shot then and died. 120mm is another story
You still have tanks, event in russian TT that are just worse in every aspect than this 292, yet still they would have same BR. If T-72B is bad, give it 3BM-60, because they can right? Would be great to have another tank such low with top tier shell?
Bad, situational, what ever, still have the same BR as new Object
No it’s not if you play it right, 3BM-60 and good thermal made a great sniper from this thing. Also play downtiered almost 90% of times
But have worse firepower, rounds, and had bigger weakspots.
You still have eyes
Any tank beside Ozelot and Asu-57 doesnt
Still faster than any T-64/T-72 tank from this BR bracket and has -11 reverse, definitely not the best but not the worst
Weakspots doesn’t matter, every tank has it. Sepv2 also has it, and has UFP from 10.3, still is 11.7. it’s ability to block bad places shot and gave a death blow in return. You doesn’t even care about aiming at weakspots when you have such gun
Every T tank doesn’t, yet they are usable and can kill enemies, wtf are those points?
I can give you my glasses
As a sniper it doesn’t matter, it’s not a casemate
Definitely, in the margin no tank in the game achieve such
As above, with such shell there are more ways to deal with armour than with 105mm f.e
Having 500ish protection on UFP and trolly turret. It’s not. Weakspots are vulnerable to even 30mm bushmaster but it applies to every tank in the game
“Abrams, Leopard all have turret neck issues that can be pierced by Tunguska frontally to get nuked and get killed. All this nonsense about their armour is meaningless. Turret roof are the same, can be nuked bu any HE shell, optics are weakspots on turrets. Abrams also has comically enlarged turret that is even easier to hit.” Don’t wanna even add something to this. XD
Neither… the NKPz-140 was a non-functional mockup based on the PT-19 turret from the Leopard 2AV. The first functional vehicle with a >120mm calibre cannon is the KF 51.
Then again, KF 51 is significantly superior to the 292, and basically everything we have at top tier currently, so next best vehicle is the Pz 87-140 (basically a Leopard 2A4 with RUAG’s 140mm cannon).
CATTB has 64 smoke grenades, more armor than M1A2 SEP, thermals, has superior gun handling to Object 292 BY FAR, and is faster than Object 292.
So no, it wouldn’t be over-BR’d, it’d be correctly 11.7+.
For USA to have an Object 292 equivalent it’d have to be a 140mm XM-1, unironically; only the gun changed.
@FurinaBestArchon
Dang, so it’ll be like CATTB where it’ll be likely above 2A7V.
Fair enough, thanks for the info.
I have no idea what to even say to you, you don’t seem to play the same game.
I’d love to play the War Thunder where flat pen means everything and nobody knows what weakspots are or how to use mobility or gun-handling. Sounds like a dream.
Indeed. Things don’t work like that anymore, nowadays 152mm apfsds disappears into KTH and does nothing.
That’s a huge advantage.
Yes and it is nothing compared to shells being eaten be Leo 1 front turret all day every day, or Panther side plates. No German bias at all, no.
Better to take away 3BM42 and put it to 9.7?
3BM60 isn’t even good anyway.
Proof of BR compression, nothing else.
Playing passive vehicles in an aggressive meta? So in other words a bad vehicle with serious weaknesses. This is like saying Spitfire Mk24 is fine at 7.0. Just dodge the AIM-9B from the (German, of course) Sea Hawk.
HSTV-L would like a word.
Yes… That’s why the pen doesn’t matter… Because the weakspots are where you need to shoot to kill enough crew…
This makes them bad…
TURMS has commanders thermals, that’s a good example.
3 degrees per second gun elevation and depression? Really? WW2 speed? Fine?
It doesn’t make the crew closer together does it.
Weird how Abrams turret neck is actually unlikely to give a oneshot and 30mm AP and APDS barely work against it. Meanwhile Soviet drivers hatch is practically a free kill, also Soviet fuel tanks filled with White Phospherous.
More stuff about how reload doesn’t matter, gun handling doesn’t matter, weakspots don’t matter, crew survivability doesn’t matter, optics don’t matter. Only flat pen matters and armour that fools will click on.
Good vehicles are actually bad, bad vehicles are actually good.
Doubt. Unlike CATTB, everything apart from the cannon was identical to the Leopard 2A4 we’ve already got at 10.3, unless Gaijin throws out the L-O calculator out of the window, and ends up giving the projectile its advertised >1000mm of flat penetration at 2km’s range (extremely unlikely), it would sit below the 2A7V due to all the disadvantages (armour, optics, reload etc). Compared to the CATTB, it’s actually significantly worse.
