Despite all the mythical russian bias surrounding soviet tanks I struggle to understand what this tanks have that makes them 10.3 br worthy. They retain all the crippling disadvantages of the soviet design of previous tanks compared to nato stuff, -4 reverse gear, slow turret traverse, incredibly slow gun traverse, bad gun depression, they don’t have acces to thermal vision compared to most vehicles you face, they lack survaivability because of the cramped interior… What do this tanks have? A gun? The armor seem good on paper but their weakspots are obvious to everyone and they can’t survive anything that penetrates the armour, they either get crippled or destroyed. So why is this tank 10.3? The gun is decent yet I find 3bm42 quite disappointing in terms of damage, it’s not bad but despite featuring a huge 125 mm they seem to have less spall and damage than nato 120 mm ammo, am I wrong? I find it ridiculous that this tank is supposed to fight Fujis almost every match. Many call T-80UD op because of the armor, despite that on a closer look this tank is simply aT-72b '89 with a smaller profile and slightly less longer reload, does this make it 10.3? Fine, but what about the T-72b? I think they should have stayed at 10.0
They are mediocre at such BR but not too bad. I can see T-72Bs at 10.0 though. But what we really need is BR decompression.
T-80UD are already in good spot. It could be 10.7 when top-tier has its BR expand to 13.0+ because it clearly has better mobility than T-72B '89 but still lack thermal and has faster reload than Obj292 .
Meh, I don’t think it’s on par with the leopard 2a4, what piss me off is that despite being incredibly mid sometimes straight up bad USSR tree has the reputation of being op or too strong which is simply not true, for every br not just 10.3, even the 8.7 lineup is nothing special imo
T-80UD could get 3BM-46 when it got up tier. Then it would clearly have better fire-power and Armor than Leopard 2A4 with DM23 . Sure Leopard 2A4 would still have better gun handle and mobility.
But that how it is even when you get to T-80U or T-80BVM while Leopard player get into Leopard 2A5/6 , Leopard 2A7s
It is what it is. Some players will judge vehicles just because they only face/hear about them but never really get into them. (i didn’t solely mean you have to playing them but by study/learn more about them. what they can / can’t do , what they lack , which enemy they have to face )
Those are usually words from incredibly bad USA mains which their words has no meaning lol even if you asked them to jump into those vehicles they claimed OP only to find out that they also cannot perform in those OP vehicles
They’re only OP against people that seriously aim for your ERA stacked centre mass and completely forget that your lfp and cannon breech are incredibly easy to hit. I will say driver port is a bit iffy to hit but it’s definitely a good weakspot too.
Tho I will say, autoloader has a DUMB ability to tank shots that should put you out of commission. In my T-90S I have very much survived situations that I just shouldn’t have, after some repairing I am good to go.
If your model has the turret with good amount of ERA on, angling it when you are repairing can stop further penetrating hits to your cannon breech.
your problem is constant uptires… I bet you you rarely play downtire or even same tire… thats the biggest problem in Ground.
I played Leopards up to the 2A5 when it was Top Tier for Germany. I was dying to Russian tanks constantly and decided to give their tech tree a try. After 1 year long grind with the T-55AMD-1 with Talisman up to the T-72B and T-90A + bought the T-80UK. I noticed a trend. I realized Russian tanks are not even remotely close to being as survivable as Leopard 2s. My shots often fly through Leopards (those without spall liners) without doing anything serious.
As the game pans out, you usually shoot a bit side on. Frontally you obviously shoot the left side of the hull where 3 crew are behind eachother in the Leopards.
The recent autoloader model changes destroyed the rest of what was left for Russian tanks, i.e. same reload rate no matter the crew. Your autoloader gets taken out in any penetrating hit, preventing you from reloading at all and retaliating if you missed your shot back or didn’t kill first hit.
But the biggest issue i have with Russian tanks are their AWFUL reaction times. The turret traverse, gun elevation speed, hull traverse and overall mobility is really poor compared to anything Western i played. Top Tier currently is meta of first shot/reload rate so Leopards (especially 2A7s) obviously dominate. Russia doesn’t really have tanks that can be exceptional in such meta.
Safe to say i like USSR vehicles only in down tiers where their armor can work.
Turms doesn’t even have the ability to survive anything shot at center mass lol, still some players have the audacity to call it op lol or even strong lol. It could be 10.0 easily
To be honest, I actually find the T-64B better even when the TURMS was 10.0 and I use them both in the same line up.
Welp irl shot that could reach ammo in autoloader would likely alway result in ammo detonate.
So in my opinion ammo taking direct hit should alway result in catastrophic not just broken auto-loader.
With that aside.
Armor element in war thunder are underwhelming because there are no Infantry around to keep vehicles with high mobility from overextended or flanking you.
In urban combat Infantry would be a perfect pointman leading ahead while the tank follow them around to support them when needed.
When it come to capture objective. Tank should be the one supporting infantry to capture the point not the one who go in and capture the point.
The only thing I know it’s good to over powered in the Soviet Union is the sake of the players. It’s a mediocre tech tree with few vehicles to call actually good.
Taking the most common examples:
T-72AV (Turms-T) — inferior armor to other options in the tech tree, comparable to the T-72A and worse in numbers;
BMP-2M — bad auto cannon, it’s not accurate as it could be plus the damage of the AP round is terrible but this affect all 30 mm auto cannons;
2S38 — bad armor, it’s a SPAAG after all and bad survivability. Despite a 57 mm auto cannon, the damage also isn’t that great plus that shell shattering thing, it’s stupid, but I know this also affects all lower caliber AP rounds.
People tend to say this like “Russian bias” because in reality never played the said vehicle, just watched some biased Content Creator speak or haven’t played enough or during a certain period. Soviet Union tech tree is far from being over powered.
Ammo detonations in the T-72 series are rare with APFSDS hits. The ammo is low down so it’s harder to hit than on the T-80 and T-64. I’ve seen pictures from Ukraine where even a Ukrainian T-64BV survived 2 APFSDS hits into the ammo. What usually happens to the ammo is slow cook-off and resulting ammunition fire, then a detonation. This ammunition fire is extinguishable if not too severe. Top attack missiles are lethal because they detonate secondary ammo, hence why the T-90M has a compartment for it. Though the ammunition in the autoloader is still hit quite often with the HEAT from the top attack missile which creates catastrophic conditions for the ammo…leading to detonations.
Depending on hit location. If ammo taking hit it could still happen. In Chechen war they found out that ammo lying around in crew compartment usually catching fire first even with RPG hit. So with T-90MS , T-90M they put those ammo into separate bin outside tank while for regular tank that doesn’t have separate bin would have to carry only 22round in auto loader.
So the only ammo in crew compartment are lying low in hull. it only lower the change of ammo taking hit.
But usually top attack could get to them more easily and sometime anti tank mine could also cause such things.
Ammunition catch fire and burning speed can be varie. Sometime it brust right away sometime it slowly cook off.
ammunition brust
vs
slowly cook off
And sometime ammo detonetion might not happen at all in some case only burning accure.
No. Ammo catching fire are alway lethal case.
To extinguishable ammunition fire you would need to install fire detect system and then flood entire ammo rack with anti-fire chemical “immediately” before fire from propellant burst out and ignite other propellant .
Last time i see there no such system exist on tank because then you would better off building seperate ammo compartment with blow out penel with cheaper price. And it isn’t perfect solution (see wet ammo storage which has been use since M4A3E8 ww2.)
Can i see your source on that T-64BV case ?
± normal tank
try bushmaster
again, try bushmaster