T-80UD/BE (T-80UD 478DU-1) Performance & Inaccuracies

Machinery of War Discussion Ground Vehicle
1

This is a topic discussing the performance and in-game inaccuracies of the new T-80UD/BE introduced in the Winter Tales event

Ongoing/Acknowledged Reports:

The T-80UD/BE in-game is incorrectly designated after the T-80UD 478BE which featured a welded turret, domestic tank gun and possibly improved engine/transmission which can already be found on the MBT2000 or Al-Khalid-I - the actual designation of the vehicle should be the T-80UD 478DU-1 or T-80UD/DU-1 for short.

The T-80UD/BE is also missing the option to carry domestic shells like the Naiza DU APFSDS which would have better performance than both 3BM60 and DTC10-125 if implemented correctly (real life values), it currently has the same C&P munition loadouts as the base T-80UD - it would likely perform similarly to TAPNA.

The T-80UD/BE also uses the wrong tank gun, it should have access to the 125mm HIT Tank Gun produced by Heavy Industries Taxila, it currently uses the 2A46M-1 in-game which is pretty unhistorical.

The T-80UD/BE should also be fitted with the 6DT-II engine which can already be found on both the MBT2000 and Al-Khalid-I, this engine would allow the vehicle to achieve 32km/h in reverse and would produce 1200hp (200hp more than the current 6DT-I).

With the current 10.7 environment of China, there is little to no actual lineup which could match up with the T-80UD/BE in-game, I recommend the adjustment of the vehicle and moving it up to 11.0 to fit neatly with the already established lineup.

Playing the T-80UD/BE can be pretty overwhelming at this BR due to the performance of your team and the God awful reverse speed, it would be best to introduce the 6DT-II engine onto the vehicle which in turn would also make it more distinct from the base T-80UD we’ve already got in-game.

I’m very disappointed with Gaijin, they’ve done little to no research on the actual T-80UD/DU-1 or T-80UD/BE and made a hastily put together C&P vehicle with the only difference between the DU-1 and T-80UD being thermals and slightly better ERA coverage on the turret, changes should be made to make the vehicle unique and fun to play.

  • Keep The Same
  • Introduce Some of These
  • Introduce All of These
0 voters

Use this topic to discuss the performance and inaccuracies of the T-80UD/DU-1/BE or for gathering information on this vehicle and other related things

Same Same

The T-80UD/BE As of Right Now ^^

19 Likes
2

I should also mention that the T-80UD/BE is nearly entirely ahistorical besides the base model and excluding ERA itself, most of these recommendations and requests are a matter of historical accuracy which was caused by Gaijin being lazy.

The T-80UD/BE also has no vehicles to play alongside at 10.7 other than the Mi-35M which is locked behind a paywall (excluding fixed-wing aircraft), improving the vehicle itself to make it more unique and enjoyable to play.

4 Likes
3

No thanks, rather keep my 10.7 tank where it is.

4

The T-80UD 478BE and T-80UD 478DU-1 never used 3BM42 or most likely didn’t at the very least, why would you want it at 10.7 when there is little to no vehicles which would match with the vehicle? It’d be more of a positive change rather than a negative to give it the improved 6DT-II engine and new transmission and to move it up to 11.0 rather than to keep it at 10.7.

6 Likes
5

Its a great lineup

image
image1344×71 78 KB

6

A great lineup consists of vehicles at a similar BR with similar performance, I have the entire Chinese ground TT unlocked and I can confidently say that the ZTZ96A (P) and the base ZTZ96A have no right at 11.7 matches.

I don’t think you understand what the Naiza APFSDS and the 6DT-II engine would do to the T-80UD/BE, it would make it a insanely good CQC tank on par with vehicles like the T-80BVM albeit at a significantly lower BR.

3 Likes
7

They are similar, 0.3 difference is about as similar as you get without being the same BR.

2 Likes
8

So move it up to 11.3/11.7 then?

9

The performance disparity between 10.3 and 11.7 is insane, 10.7 vehicles may have a chance but 10.3 vehicles frankly don’t. The pool of players at 11.7 make for near constant uptiers even if they aren’t always full uptiers.

1 Like
10

The T-80UD/BE wouldn’t be 11.3/11.7 material because of the weakened turret, it would most likely be 11.0 like the Al-Khalid-I and ZTZ99-III (with the improvements of course) - I said that for BR.

1 Like
11

This tank at a higher be would be pretty funny

12

Pretty similar chance in a full uptier actually, the firepower between the ZTZ96A and T-80UD/BE is pretty close.

13

Similar turret protection to the T-72B3

14

Imagine a T-80UD/BE at 11.0 with the same reverse speed as the MBT2000 and Al-Khalid-I and almost entirely superior firepower than its adversaries, that’s what a improved T-80UD/BE would look like (and the sheer amount of people playing it would be goofy).

Similar turret protection to the T-72B3

True but most people never hit you in the turret (my experience with the vehicle so far at least).

15

So a better 11.3 T-80UM-2, but at 11.0?

You want all the buffs in the world, but not the BR increase that would come with it.

3 Likes
16

It would be on par with the Al-Khalid-I or do you think that’s something entirely unbalanced? Unlike the T-80UM-2 vehicles would be able to lol pen you since you’ve only got 510mm of UFP protection (most tanks have at least 520mm of penetration at this BR).

You want all the buffs in the world, but not the BR increase that would come with it

There are drawbacks like the slow turret traverse and insanely slow gun elevation speed, you still have the base T-80UD protection and your engine is loud as f*ck, it’s more like that the T-80UM-2 needs to be moved down or some sort of decompression needs to take place.

You’re just nit picking my sentences lmao

1 Like
17

I mean wrong cannon is a pretty egregious mistake of all mistakes you can make.

18

Sounds like a 11.7 vehicle to me or even a bit higher

19

They have almost identical UFP’s, almost identical armor profile for the entire vehicle.

Slight variation in UFP composition, but very close protection-wise.

Same as the T-80UM-2

Same as the T-80UM-2

Same as the T-80UM-2

But, with thermals and a vastly better shell. Definitely not going to be lower than 11.3.

20

The T-80UD/BE or the actual designation of the vehicle being the T-80UD 478BE should have a welded turret as well but it seems like Gaijin is too lazy to model this and went down the route to redesignate the vehicle instead.

image
image1600×1399 193 KB

7 Likes