T-55AMD-1 moment
The A can also resist it, same goes for the 72
1 Like
they have around the same mobility as they both got the upgraded engine and weight around the same.
I had completely forgotten the base T-72A actually still existed in game, seldom actually see them in game, and yeah, its even better than the 64B in this regard somehow.
Thinking the protection viewer does not play nice with it for some reason as both rounds can easily penetrate the mantlet into the gun breach, but thats not shown, same with the drivers hatch.
How the fuck did you…
Are you re-
You know what, I think if that’s what you got from my post - I think there’s no reason for this to continue.
Also:
Are you literally braindead?
You keep using THIS CHERRY PICKED IMAGE of the protection analysis (which is well known to be unreliable):
This is the image you keep SPAMMING in order to imply 3BM25 has no trouble going through it. I’m literally debunking this image and showing you that a LARGE area, not a “small select section” (it’s literally the entire top of the breech) of the “green part” IS A NON-PEN.
The UFP (which is ~50% of your entire “green area”) is at the LIMIT of the penetration and is ~270-280mm effective against 3BM25 at that angle. Which pens 307mm. So small angle deviations will cause it to non-pen there, and regardless of anything - the spalling will be decreased because spalling drops off significantly if the armor/penetration are within a close margin.
What is WRONG with you?
Regardless, when you wrote “Is somehow equivalent to this”, it stunned me.
My condolences go out to your family.
1 Like
Protection Analysis in general is unreliable, it can give you an idea of vulnerable zones but it’s weird and tends to show green areas where things would fail through volumetric collision with other armour plates, often fails for ricochets and in the case of composite armour just doesn’t show like above.
unrelated but there was a discussion a while back about the Pz IVG and Chi To, someone was using the PA to show the Type 4 Kou round was better against a Sherman even though in a live game the shot would non-pen or bounce against the UFP 90% of the time, PA would show the whole thing green even at 45 degree angles.
55AM-1 could probably be 9.0 but it would be one of the worst 9.0s, 9.0 is just a horrible BR with too many Thermal race cars in close proximity. (and 3BM25 would suck at 9.0, no the ATGM is not a real suggestion)
2 Likes
As stated you claim the M60A1 is by majority resistant to 3BM25, which the T-64B is, this statment is false.
Prepare for a Image deluge since you cant seem to understand.
Hmm yes maybe if you start angling at a extreme angle, but guess what opens up if you do that.
Thats right, this amazing thing called the side of the tank.
This is some of the best projection I’ve seen in a while, get back to me when you have a actual argument.
Indeed, hence why I have now taken the time to toss projectiles at the entire listed aspects chosen prior.
I dont see much reason to move it around, they are annoying but not crazy, at 8.7 I find it fine.
You do realize I already posted two examples of a shell that didn’t pen? With far less angling?
And all of your hull penetrations clearly show extremely low post-pen damage. As I said.
On top of that - the parts where you’re shooting above the breech are literally pixel spots you cherrypicked.
The breech, too. Like - you’re literally cherry picking areas. Only slightly off all of your “pens” around the turret would be a non-pen.
Hell - some of those images that you picked as a “penetration” show the shell doing literally essentially no damage…
I really am a sick bastard for even giving you the time of the day…
As for your frankly insane comment which makes me worry for your family:
3BM25 cannot penetrate the 6A’s LFP at any range. True. No mention of “majority resistant” or talking about a T-64B yet.
“Give it some range and a bit of angle, and the UFP is also a non-pen/at least most spall reduced.”
Another objectively true statement. Thankfully you even went ahead and proved the latter part yourself.
Yep. Anything to the left/right of the breech is a non-pen. A large part of the breech is a non-pen. Completely true.
And THESE replies were written because YOU wrote this:
Is there anything at 8.3-8.7 that can actually resist either round? Talking as if 3BM25 and M1001A1 are comparable?
So I showed you the 8.0 (EIGHT POINT OH - ZERO) Magach 6A.
8.0 <<< I don’t know how am I supposed to communicate that it’s 8.0 any clearer.
(You don’t seem to understand that the point is the relative armor performance between the 8.0 vehicle and the T-64s which you brought up, which are 9.0-9.7. More than an entire BR bracket higher.
I am now going to block you.
- Kills half the crew or sets off ammo
- low post pen damage
More ad hominem.
Your staunch focus on the LFP is irrelevant to my initial statement on the matter of resistance, goalpost shift all you want, having a single component of your vehicle resist a round does not make a resistant vehicle.
See above damage statement
The only non-pennable part of the breach is the mantlet hole itself and a line of armor across the MG port and gunner’s optic.
That is anything but “Anything to the left/right of the breech is a non-pen. A large part of the breech is a non-pen.” And yes, I have already stated that the turret cheeks are a bounce, fancy that.
See above as I have already explained this to you ad nauseum but of course you choose to deflect the reality of the situaiton.
Cool, irrelevant to the situation.
And I will be here when you have an actual rational argument to level.
T-55AMD-1 is so far my favorite MBT in War Thunder and it is almost because the Chemical ammunition like 3BK17M and BR-412D, I barely uses 3BM25 since the damage is terrible and it is sometimes bad at penetration like you mentioned M60’s LFP (but something we should know is the LFP on this chassis is so far the thickest part, UFP has less armor thickness but at more sloped angle).
And still,
Don’t really matter uptiers or downtiers, I always take BR-412D or 3BK17M against highly armored targets, rarely 3BM25,
The only vehicle that I really use 3BM25 is the Object 685 since it has a 6,0s auto loader so the damage at all doesn’t really matter in such high fire rate for a tank its BR.
But just to note, It’s all my opinion about the vehicle. I mentioned AMD-1 but this applies to AM-1.
t55 am-1 gets a shit apfsds, frustrating to use at times as well
Also, where do T-64B applies for this discussion?
I’m not trying to be mean or argue with no one about this, but T-64B is so far so much advanced than T-55M, AMD-1 or AM-1 and very clearly T-64A.
T-64B uses the standard 125mm caliber and even if it got 3BM25, the damage and performance would something very different.
I’m really lost on this topic by the 16th reply.
It’s russian so some terminally ill butthurt retard has to be seething about everything russian related. Media told him to or something. It’s inorganic at this point and tiresome
Chieftain, M60, Strf 103.
Conqueror at 7.7.
Spoiler
And at 9.3 some tanks more protected than 9.0 Object 279 is vs 8.0 MBTs.
T-72M1 in 3 tech trees, Magach 7C, Merkava Mk2B [Can’t pen beyond engine],
I don’t need to mention the more than half-dozen 10.0s that 3BM25 flat out cannot have a chance of fragging from the front that DM23 has a chance of dealing with.
And note that there’s no limit to how many 9.3s can be in a match against T-55AM-1.
2 Likes
A similar vehicle that is better IMO is the ztz88, and it is just 9.0
It fires a DM23 equivalent round as well.
The T-55M is actually really good, as it has a much, much better round. The Soviet T-55s use steel rod darts that shatter all the time and deal pretty poor damage, but the tungsten dart on the T-55M is great, it deals amazing damage and has good pen even at angles. Between the two I’d prefer the T-55M for uptiers and the T-55AM only for full downtiers
1 Like
Thats the b, the a fires a better round
Only vehicle within the AM’s BR range that can effectively resist the round frontally.
The only thing being compared is what 3BM25 could pen within the AM’s max BR range, not compared capabilities of vehicles and such.
“I did not read anything posted in this thread, but I’m going to call the other party a retard because Russian tank is mentioned.”
That’s a lie.
You even had the time to read the post, so I know your post is a lie.