So that’s a ‘no’ then. That speaks volumes on it’s own.
Okay, you run off and have a good weekend. Enjoy the new toys.
1 Like
If you interpret that as a no, be my guest.
I’m still waiting for answers buddy, I hope you can get those out before 2026 hits.
Yes, spawn two vehicles and do the same exact thing as others can do with a single one.
Bias confirmed.
Exactly what I mean, my point is that you can switch between 2 playstyles (T-90M and BVM, with B3A for APS option), whereas that’s only possible with japan (oplot) and france (leopard 2), whereas everyone else gets more variants of the same tanks (with the same drawbacks and minimal differences eg, challenger series).
Anyways I’m not a ‘russian bias whiner’ because I play them myself, I simply recognise the patterns here, and those are that russia is consistently strong in ground, regardless of the meta
Why should I need different tanks for different playstyles if my tank is good at each and every playstyle ?
BVM, 90M and B3A combo gets wiped out by 2A7, 2A6 and PSO/A5 combo, or by three 122s.
90M and B3A don’t have different playstyles than BVM, they’re just flat out worse (especially B3A) options and play as such.
1 Like
In a 1v1 or tournament setting maybe, but that’s just blatantly false in matches lmao, people know the weakspots of the uparmoured leos now so their period of being actually OP is long gone, they are now just the meta slop of the month until the next thing comes along
talk about bias do anyone notice that Oplot-T have weak ass armor for some reason?
even it bases on T-80UD yet having less armor.
They are more armoured and survivable than the BVM, especially with volumetric, while the BVM acts as the ‘vanguard’ mbt which has ok armour but plenty of speed, those are 2 stark differences there, you don’t play the T-90 nearly as aggressively as a T-80, and this is true throughout the BRs
Supposedly gaijin has misinterpreted the layers of the UFP but there has been so much discourse that it’s hard to figure out what’s source based and what is speculation
We also have sources that T-90M serving in a certain place have the same base armour composition as the T-72 “89” models without the added Relikt ERA
1 Like
If i was you i would also not like if my bad “arguments” are dismantled…
That’s impossible
Assume it is true, provide an argument why that would be bias!
I don’t have concrete proof however there’s threads discussing that which does have some basis or sense, it was stated in the forums that the T-84BM Oplot has relatively thinner internal armor composite when compared to T-80UD:
Well chances of that being fixed, even with a perfect report, are like zero to none.
Gaijin refuses to buff armour once added, let alone remove it lol
Its an image taken from a destroyed tank from an unknown place in Europe.
This was meant to be complemented with ‘Nizh’ ERA layers instead of said composite, idk how effective it is but it should be more effective than aluminum foil
Said idealic holiday destination also has seen a certain nation’s tanks found with concrete filler in place of ERA
I didn’t try to provide sht just curiosity don’t try to put words in my mouth.
Which is and turns out to be much more effective than Sovietic/Russian counterparts in terms of protection and technology obviously, fact being is relatively expensive and heavier, but still great.
I know, this perfectly describes the russian bias “arguments”. Just list a bunch of things and done, bias proven. Wait its not.
I was under the impression that Nizh is at least as effective as late model Kontakt 5, so between there and Relikt probably, and sandwiching that in between composite and steel seems like a great idea provided it’s KE penetrator degradation capabilities