This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
2 Likes
@Aegis270 I’ll never play the BMP-3. It’s ugly and inferior to what I play already.
1.2:1 KDR is above my IFV average, thanks for admitting it’s a great 9.0
Also you talk about many aspects of skill in your posts to try and praise your precious BMP-3.
You even cite skill [statshark and player records].
Either way, learn respect. CQC front plates are rare.
All you can do is accuse others of having skill issues.
You say, with utter certainty, despite clearly knowing very little about it.
I’m not sure this proves what you think it does.
All I’ll say is that despite being my most played ground vehicle (I played a lot of that lineup back in the day), my performance in it is solidly below my average in all other IFVs near the tier.
It’s still workable, it’s just far from the best IFV at 9.0.
Project, much? I hold the BMP-3 to be generally superior to the Type 89, that hardly means I worship the ground it stands on.
Says the guy who effectively responded to my rebuttal with “Skill issue”.
So ure Arguing with 100% Personal Opinion then, not with Facs.
Like the two guys replied already… maybe u think the BMP-3 is worse… but the facs and alot of arguments that come with these facs are not an Opinion. Thats a matter of fact and denieing it would make any discussion, with you or anyone , pretty pointless.
Sure we can discuss if the given facs are legit… but denieing it in the first place will not bring this discussion forward.
The BMP is overall better. Thats a fact by given stats and arguments.
The Type 89 is better on “longer range/ridgeline” encounters, not always but mostly, due to the much better Pen and Gundepression.
The BMP is better on everythink else. The mobility is better, the gunhandling is better, the ATGM can be fired on the move. U can simply brawl much better with it and in this game you need these benefits more then u need gun depression or more Pen. Especially at those BRs.
If u like one more then the other… fine… but were talking about Performance of a Vehicle on Average here. I like the Type 89 also, even have a tali for it.
1 Like
@Rinhord Aegis using personal opinion and claiming everyone has skill issues instead of facts is why I stopped the posts.
I argued facts and have the facts on my side.
They can keep denying facts all they want.
Edit: Type 89’s getting buffed next major:
This is only useful against soviet mbts like t55/t62. Bmp almost never faces those and its apds is enough for majority of enemies bmp faces. Lets also keep in mind that bmp firerate is almost 2 times better and cannon isnt limited by small ready to fire rack.
Its obvious lie, bmp has better power/weight ratio and difference is noticeable. You will reach firing positions faster on bmp and not on type 89.
Another lie here. Type 89 atgm launchers cant depress and cant fire on move. While bmp can fire atgms on move and isnt limited by lack of depression which saves it in lots of situations. Also how placing launchers on 2 sides of turret is better than having atgm on center? You always have to take into account rocket trajectory from both sides in point blank ranges and lose ability to strike enemy if one of your launchers gets obstructed by random obstacle. Lets not forget about bug which prevents you from firing missile on ifvs with this type of atgms whenever your autocannon meets some object. Bmp doesnt have such flaws and launching atgms from center is more comfortable.
1 Like
@Kievskiy_Minipig
It’s weird how my posts are the primary posts defending Type 89 from posts claiming BMP-3 is the best IFV ever made on planet earth based purely on their feelings.
Mobility:
Speeds:
BMP-3: 70/20
Type 89: 70/43
Traverse:
BMP-3: 8 seconds.
Type 89: 12 seconds
Acceleration to 30/50.
BMP-3: 30: 3.
50: 8.
20: 1.x/1.x
Type 89: 30: 3/4
50: 10.
20: 1.x/1.x
Oh wow, would you look at that, the mobility is equal despite the hp/t being different.
Cause the transmission of the BMP-3 is inferior to that of the Type 89 in shifting and top speeds.
Spoiler
Spoiler
So keep claiming facts are bad and feelings is all that matters.
Oh, by the by… Type 89 has 10 degrees of gun depression vs BMP-3’s ~9 degrees.
Launcher depression doesn’t matter because missiles are guided by the gun depression not the launcher depression, that and ATGMs drop slightly before motors ignite on ALL ATGM launchers in the game, including BMP-3.
Edit: Oh, and missile position is 100% preference. It’s not an objective standard.
Your numbers literally prove bmp3 takes less time to reach speeds and traverse. “Here is 3 and here is 5. Oh wow, would you look at that, those numbers are equal”.
Well at least I dont claim that different things are same. Also I didnt base on feelings, only on vehicle parameters in game.
And bmp has controlable suspension which allows it to have decent gun depression so depression isnt an issue for it.
Are you sure about that? It does matter especially on close ranges and especially when you are on sloped terrain. Even with that slight drop missiles would likely fly to high (or straight to ground if your launchers are looking down) if you dont pick fine launch position. Just like on strf9040bill which suffers from same issue. Bmp, for obvious reasons, doesnt suffer from this on other hand.
Then why did you bring it to this comparison as something “better” earlier?
1 Like
Yes, better is a subjective term.
113 battles on bmp 3 and binded suspension controls for it (and kpz as well) in settings. It can tilt forward and backward to increase its gun depression just like bmd 4 or stryker.
And better isnt only subjective term.
don’t both have controllable suspension?
did you just edit your post to exclude the claim that BMP-3 has no controlled suspension? LMAO
@Zulizia There was a typing error.
It has been fixed to portray my actual thoughts that I’ve had for years.
Sometimes you shouldn’t question old information, and doing so caused me to make a typing error.
Except you used “Edit” before to show your actual thoughts,
But when you are completely incorrect, you edit it and don’t clarify? Weird.
@Zulizia
BMP-3 and BMD-4 have hydro-pneumatic suspension. This has been my position for over 10 years having played them in Arma 3 and researching them.
I was doing 6 things at once and my typing was incorrectly done. If you have issue with people admitting their mistakes, then that’s sad.
Except you didn’t admit to your edit* until called out. You instead had somebody reply to you, then you cut it out with no explanation. Also, I never said I had an issue with you. I’m pointing out the weirdness of using “Edit:” to clarify your true thoughts, but not when being corrected? The fact you immediately try to paint me as a “sad” person is even more weird. Why on the defense?
Hm
Maybe i missed some Argument from your side, i only recall that you claimed that u think the side launched missles are better then one centered missle.
But what about my arguments? I feel like everyone right know ignores the fact that both IFV serve a different purpose and playstyle.
Your Acceleration values are not matching with mine. How did you test it?
I tested also and here my results:
Both with Stock Engine Mods, (cause i dont have the bmp spaced to make it an even playfield)
In testdrive, down the road.
Both with Expert Crew and full lvl Driver and Commander
Made a Video and checked the timestamp in it.
BMP:
0-30 4 sec
30-50 7 sec
50-60 7 sec
60-65 4 sec
65-70 4 sec
Type:
0-30 4 sec
30-50 11 sec
50-60 8 sec
60-65 7 sec
65-70 End of road, didnt made it.
The gab is quiet big. Atleast both with stock engine upgrades.
On Dirt or through terrain the Gap will be a much higher.
Mobility isn’t acceleration to top speed, cause in reality speeds necessary to get around people are slower than you think, and more often than not relative to other tank mobility.
Also I do uncrewed reference [spaded] tests.
I stated both are equal to each other [which is why both are 9.0], and gave evidence to show why.
People responded with their feelings instead.
hp/t was incorrectly used when transmission matters most in mobility.
T-90M has a higher hp/t than Challenger 2, but Challenger 2 is as mobile, cause mobility isn’t just one aspect, in this case raw forward acceleration.
Mobility is a mix of transmission characteristics and acceleration to middle speeds.
No one cares if a tank is slower to top speed than another tank except for early game position, people care if tanks are mobile.
T-90M can be faster to top speed than many tanks, but at the end of the day people will prefer more mobility especially in CQC environments where mobility is king.
IFVs are primarily a scouting playstyle, which is why their good player KDRs sit around 1:1. A support role.
They’re not meant to carry games and can’t carry games.
No amount of skill in BMP-3 or current Type 89 will be as effective at destroying other vehicles and securing points as a Type 74E or T-62M-1.
It isnt accerelation to top speed? Not entirely but if u can accelerate fast you are more mobile an all terrains, u can turn faster u can get to positions faster, you get out of situations faster, u are just faster in all what u want to do… so…
Do you know what a transmission does? It takes the engines output and converts it with a gear ratio into a slower rotation with more torque.
If the Engine suck, or the Tank is heave, u can have the best Transmission in the world, it will not increase the Mobility of the Vehicle magically.
And calling Challengers as Mobile as an T90 is wild…
Maybe u dont care about topspeed… but its still important to have… and yes, mobility is not just topspeeds, its mainly its HP/T ratio. As this will is a very good indicator if smt is more mobile or not.
öhm… no. Go check stats of stuff yourself, this is simply not true.
1 Like
I care about armor, and I love top speed.
I personally don’t care much for mobility.
I left out ALL of my personal preferences when discussing this topic except for missile placement as an example of why arguing that as anything more than personal preference is silly.