i feel like talking to him in general is a waste of time he seems so hysteric in proving that russian tanks are bad according to his experience wich isnt much considering his ammount of battles, but the issue lies that russian tanks suffer because of bad survivability wich isnt much of the case the russian tanks not only are really good armored but can survive at times shells directly into the autoloader, wich this is based in my own experience using them and fighting them, russian tanks dont suffer whatsoever they are pretty complete tanks and only issue i have with them its reverse and depression but depression is almost never an issue since i wont go up hills to fight enemy behind them, normally i go around to avoid this
1 Like
Literally the only nation that gets everything modelled right is Russia, its crazy how this guy still thinks they’re suffering while they get Pantsir,SU25SM3,T90M,KA52,SU27SM, which most of these are more modern than anything in this game.
3 Likes
russia is the most complete nations of all not suffering at all whatsoever so far i havent had any other complaint other that is the reverse speed and depression but everything else i’ve had a good experience so far
1 Like
True, anyone that says otherwise is a delusional Russian main.
“Anyone who disagrees with me is delusional” lol
5 Likes
Prove that i’m wrong in anything i just said.
1 Like
I find it especially funny because that person is an American main who only has one Russian MBT.
3 Likes
Ladies_Man and Ark_boi being eccentric aside; I’m not sure where Russias MBTs are performing well below standard win rates, even the mid 10.0 MBTs are still around 50% W/R and top tier is >60%.
Sim is wild tho, the BVM is at <5% in Thunderskill after being 95+% for several years
Saying any of the big 3 suffer is a bad take.
Armour doesn’t matter when everything can easily hit your weakspots, killing or crippling the tank.
All SPAA sucks from what I’ve heard, but the pantsir is just the least bad. Date does not matter at all in WT. If Russia has to get newer stuff to compete with old NATO stuff, that’s fine with me.
“Anyone who disagrees with my personal opinions is delusional”
You do realize that people are allowed to have opinions, and that yours aren’t objectively correct?
3 Likes
Russias MBTs, which are of course the most important aspect of a ground lineup, are just mediocre at the very least compared to everything else and any half decent player can easily exploit their weaknesses.
Every nation besides Japan has Ka-52 equivalent or better heli, especially ones with FnF missiles which Russia will never get.
Ok, I agree Pantsir is the best AA, but I think it’s overstated how good it actually is, any semi decent supersonic jet can easily dodge Pantsir and all SPAA.
SU-27SM is nothing special, especially when compared to F-16C in both CAS and CAP role.
SU-25SM3 has a long range missiles, yes, but supersonic fighters will always be better than subsonic strike aircraft (when they both have actual ordnance). Again, F-16C and its equals outperform SM3 in CAS role because of the versatility and ability to dodge missiles.
4 Likes
i can say the same for the 2A7V in that case, now you see the problem here, you dont depend on everyone hitting your weakspots or not, the weakspots on russian tanks are riddled with volumetric spots due to the nature of its build wich can lead to problems when penetrating and that’s without counting that russia has one of the tiniest weakspots among top tier having the tiniest lfp and a medium sized breach, the russian tanks have no issue as far as my experience goes with them and quite frankly are very solid vehicles
i agree with this having opinions its fine, and everyone’s opinion can be different but if it courses from an opinion to straight up denying a fact that’s different
There’s no ka52 equivalent in game as far as heli v heli is concerned
I can name tanks with worse survivability and also have bad armor, yet people still use them more effective
If You are talking about skills vs obvious toughness the difference is too obvious You aint gonna compare a Challenger to a T80BVM and Say the Challenger 2 is better just cuz someone is doing better in it even worse if it was an ariete, issues is that people have so much skill issue in this vehicle they refuse to acknowledge the obvious
Only kind of people that thinks Challenger2 and Ariete are better thanT-80BVM and 90M because of K/D is Russia main there are total different between
Vehicles carry by players
and
Players carry by vehicles
The OP is a Russian main with only one high tier vehicle from another country.
2 Likes
Massive cope or skill issue (likely just both though)
5 Likes
Swedish mains are also quite good at that. Was arguing with a swedish main this weekend that thought that the Strv 122s were in a pretty balanced spot and that they were pretty on par with the Challenger 3(TD).
I’m fairly certain the T-80BVM has better acceleration than the SEP v2, 2A7V, Strv 122B+, Merkava Mk4M, Challenger 2 and Challenger 3.
The T-80BVM’s mobility is perfectly average for top-tier and it certainly isn’t bad.
It factually does not.
Happens to any tank.
Which is one of the main disadvantages which makes it a average performing MBT at the moment.
Almost everything you encounter will out-reload you.
*Expert crew.
And anyone who’s playing 11.7 should have at least one good crew slot.
The Leopard 2A6 was introduced 4 years ago, of course it’s armour isn’t going to be ultra-competitive any more, that’s what the 2A7V is for.
That’s like complaining that the T-80U isn’t as competitive as a Strv 122 any more.
This statement tells me you’ve never played the T-80BVM, because if you did, you’d know that it’s versatility is very much limited by it’s lack of reverse, reload rate and gun depression.
Plenty of powerpositions across the various maps cannot be effectively used by the T-80BVM.
5 Likes