They do, base armor overperforms around 15% and its been proven multiple times.
NATO armor underperform so much in certain areas its not even funny.
If Leopard2A7V had its true armor protection you would’ve complain about 24/7 buddy.
1 Like
Their tanks doesn’t underperform in any regards, in fact base armor overperforms while ERA always performs on optimal scenarios no matter the angle and the projection which make them stronger compare to real life counterparts.
Enjoy getting penned by 30MM through your driver port because somehow its not modeled volumetric alongside with wrong armor values, transmission ratio’s (on VT-4), lacking spall liners on many tanks and not bein able to ricochet incoming shells with your heavily angled UFP.
Still I like VT’-4’s more than Russian tanks despite their problems tho.
al MBTs get autocannoned tho xD
its been proven with globally avaliable sources within outdated machinery and/or assumptions of “they already tested it frfrfr”.
NATO on the other hand only has documents, by which if we use same “docs only” logic USSR isnt overperforming (well, not much overperforming at least).
I would complain about it anyway, as its the most OP vehicle out there. Then again it doesnt make sense to call it “true protection” if its not proven on the battlefield with real battle and testing, only said by manufacturers in open data.
they sure do. USSR tanks are garbage.
Thanks, i already played T-72 against XM246. I know how that feels.
1 Like
Some get autocannoned frontally more than others. Not talking about sights or cannons, speaking of general armour profile. It’s much easier to autocannon ZTZ’s and Ariete compared to T series, even frontally they’re never safe.
Or how T series eventually start getting rid of their turret humps yet chinese show no change
Nobody is safe at AF… and if a CAS plane/heli is able to rearm more then once… well the enemy team deserve to get farmed.
Everyone is safe at AF, as soon you try to get close to strafe enemy jet you will be attacked by aa’s.
CAS planes can safely circle around by using terrain or their speeds to dodge incoming munitions easily while helicopters equipped with LDIRCM doesnt have to worry about any Sam system except SACLOS ones.
It seems you have no idea what you’re talking about.
This isn’t WW2 era… I don’t need to be 400-700 from a plane/helicopter (oh wait helipads don’t have AA’s) in order to shoot it down.
I guess the LDIRCM on my Mi-28NM is broken, because I keep getting shot down by IRIS-T’s…
Not safe from aam, agm, gbu which can be sent from outside of range of those ww2 era aa. If those were rolands/ito90 from sim then this argument would make sense.
I think you should turn away a bit from them to jam their missiles:
1 Like
I was “belly up” toward the missile… still hit me… not complaining, the Mi-28NM should’ve never got such big coverege to begin with, just pointing out that the it (and other helis with LDIRCM) are not invulnerable to IR missiles.
Your radar guided missiles will simply get multipathed and your ir missiles will not lock on to target that is already landed while its engine already started cool off.
Your only chance is to get close to finish it with either gun or close range fox-2 shot which both cases you will get targeted by AF aa.
My helicopters also gets shots down by BUK while still standing on the air, guess my helicopters are the only helicopters that produces Doppler effect.
Both can play that game.
We’re not talking about taking down enemy planes with A2G missiles in here, in case you didn’t noticed.
That would actually require certain brain activity and effort which most Russian mains lacks on these days.
They are invulnerable in most cases more than they have any right to be or did you expect 100% invulnerability?
Irl you can’t just evade multiple IIR missiles while counting on LDIRCM, thats not how modern IIR missiles works.
This forum is filled with people like you that don’t even bother to read what’s been discussed before replying in their good old “gotcha” style.
I’ll be really kind this time and underline some of the key words regarding this “discussion”.
Relying on your armor to do all the work is far from getting saved by it a couple of times, thus increasing your stats in a given vehicle. Simple, isn’t it ?
3 Likes
Yet Russian tanks rely on their armor completely because they have no other reedeming qualities at top tier compare to most NATO tanks.
Guess this forum also filled people like you who likes to act arrogant and thinks he got everything right while in reality dont even/cant comprehend what they are reading in the first place.
I’m not surprised tho considering how snowflake you get when someone uses your own logic against you.
aaa… ???
…that is you, right? … make up your mind pls…
lol IR/IR or TV guided ATG’s / laser guided ARG’s … glide/dumb bombs… unguided missiles… there are thing beside fox 3’s in the game you know
This is funny coming from you, a guy that can’t even follow a chain that’s three posts long before commenting.
2 Likes
Surprised?
Yeah its me.
You claimed that your MI-28NM gets shot down by IRIS-T constantly while in reality it happens 1/10 cases at most if you know how to position your helicopter properly. I also got the NM never got shot down by IRIS-T that much.
That scenario only works if you didn’t dumped all your A2G munition while in most cases scenarios you will.
Message was pretty clear but I guess you like twisting those post in your reality.
He claimed that armor means everything while you tried to counter him by saying relying on armor only means having huge skill issue, meanwhile the whole reason why T-Series at top tier still holds their ground it’s because their armor.
Guess truths hurt so much you started yap for the sake of yap.
Thanks for proving my point.
If armor meant everything then T-tanks would perform much better than they do right now.
You getting into fights while thinking your armor will save you from all harm is just a skill issue, simple as that.
2 Likes