so what does it matter if your reload is 0.6 sec faster if it’s not faster than any of the competition?
T-80UD UFP can’t be penned by any APFSDS within it’s entire BR range.
The T-80UD turret is currently almost fully immune to 10.0 shells, the breech weakspot area is much smaller than on the T-72B’s.
ZTZ99-II and ZTZ99-III would beg to differ, cuz they can easily pen 80UD but not the 72’89
And about the breach weak spot the difference are so miniature that i wouldn’t be surprised if it was actually the other way around…
the only thing in wich T-80UD is better than T-72B(1989) OBJECTIVELY is 0.6 faster reload and 160 more horse power engine
p.s. then again what is the point of having this premium? they just want to rip off our money
False.
DM53 cannot reliable penetrate the UFP of a T-80U(D), so a ZTZ-99-II for sure cannot do it either.
If you think otherwise, provide evidence for it.
Go ahead and take two screenshots using the Armour Analysis tool, one of the T-80UD vs DM23 (120mm) and one of the T-72B vs DM23.
Share those screenshots here, so we can all see how much better the T-80UD’s turret currently is.
Anyway, why does the T-80UD have 50-30-35-30-50 UFP, while T-80U and T-80BV has 50-30-50-30-50 UFP in game?
Does anyone have the source for this?
I have thought that the T-80UD has the same UFP as the T-80U and T-80BV in real.
1 Like
Ukraine didn’t exist as an independent nation when the tank was produced, it was still part of the soviet union
1 Like
I think you qouted the wrong person?
Did you mean to reply to digod instead?
Oh, might be. My bad, I meant the guy, who claims this tank for ukraine instead of the SU.
1 Like
You can’t say the T-80UD has bad armor because it is worse than the T-72B(1989) when the 1989 has the armor of an 11.3 tank.
The T-80UD also has the 6.5s reload which will beat most players you meet because they won’t have maxed out crews.
You have better mobility, practically equivalent armor, better firepower (due to reload), and better FCS than T-72B 1989.
It would be better balanced at 10.3, that way it’s a side grade of the T-80B which has better mobility but worse armor and worse firepower (again due to reload).
1 Like
They’re so not going to put this at 10.3, can already tell.
10.0 must stay broken
1 Like
Could be wrong as these thermals were tested back in 1987 or 1989 (thermals were made in 1987, for sure) on soviet T-80U, they were also on T-80UM’s which were produced since 1992 for some time.
Also it’s Agava-2, not Agava, as Agava was for T-80B, which we have in game. (Agava comes from 1982).
No autoloader modification to fit such shell.
Some early T-80UD’s stated to have inferior armour package, if you still need source for that I can work towards finding it.
2 Likes
My mistake with that part.
1 Like
I’d love the T-80U to be split into a true production U with no thermals and UM with thermals.
So practically (10.7-11.0) T-80U, with BR depending on ammunition given.
2 Likes
Just take off the thermals modification on the T-80U if you want that, no need for an entirely new “vehicle”. The thermals are Gen 1 and I never use them anyway.
The T-80U in my experience is quite strong at 11.3, and I don’t even have it spaded yet. It’s basically a T-80BVM “lite”.
Yes, exactly. A 10.7 U with BM42 only would be interesting.
Yes, it is a 1985 T-80U with the 6TD package and previous generation transmission.
Apart from that it is just a 1985 T-80U, so 3BM42 and 1G46.
As far as I see it was just based off of the 1992 T-80U.
Better autoloader, better gun, Agava-2, GTD-1250.
Why would I artificially gimp the abilities of my vehicle?
The T-80U could be split to be more accurate and you’d lose nothing but collectors would gain something (and the Soviets might get another 10.7).